1



### MEMORA **NDUM** TO: Public Record for the NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule

EPA Docket Number EPA

- HQ

- OECA

- 2009

- 0274 (www. regulations.gov ) FROM: Carey

A. Johnston, P.E. USEPA/O ECA/OC ph: (202) 566 1014 johnston.carey @epa.gov DATE: 1 November 2011 SUBJECT: Example EPA Uses of NPDES Information [DCN 0015]
This memorandum documents some of EPA’s uses of NPDES program data and the benefits of switching from paper

- based to electronic reporting of these data. Better availability and consistency

of NPDES information through electronic reporting will enhance the important uses o f th e s e data. **Inform national program decisions and rulemaking** Access to facility

- specific permit, compliance, and enforcement information in a nationally consistent format is critical for EPA to be able to identify significant environmental and noncompliance problems and patterns, set appropriate national CWA priorities, and develop measurable goals, and strategies. The data is also critical in supporting the development of national environmental regulations, policy , and guidance. More complete NPDES information will result in the ability of EPA, states, and the public to quantify

and characterize the entire regulated universe, to identify environmental and noncompliance problems at the national, regional, and local levels, to monitor NPDES program implementation, and to make better informed decisions regarding activities that need to be undertaken to protect the environment. With the transition to electronicall y - reported DMRs directly from facilities into the national data s ys tem, the need to maintain separate reporting formats and definitions for majors (QNCR) and non

- majors (ANCR) may no longer be relevant to the program. Both reports use identical numeric calculations to place violations into two categories, Category I and Category II describe d in 40 CFR § 123.45. Furthermore, the rule allows EPA to remove the burden of producing these reports from the states, and instead, will be able to automatically produce the reports for state and public use. **National and state program management** As indicated previousl y, EPA has the primary responsibility

of ensuring that the NPDES program is effectivel y and consistently implemented across the country

. EPA and the NPDES

authorized need reliable facility

- specific NPDES information to ensure that the program is2

implemented effectivel y. The availability and utilization of information helps EPA and states to identify particular problems that need to be addressed through regulation, guidance or enforcement, allows better distribution and targeting of resources, i dentifies opportunities for cooperative efforts, and improves oversight capabilities, whether internal or in the context of EPA’s State Review Framework process. **L evel the playing field between dischargers**  Some of the data required under this rulemaking is already being provided to EPA by some of the states. This data, including compliance status, is then readil y available to the public. Consequently , regulated facilities in those states providing data may receive disproportionate scrutiny compared to facil ities in states where the data are not provided. By requiring that all states provide these data, facility

- specific data will be equall y available across the states. In addition, the NPDES national data s ys tem was originall y designed to focus on the most significant point sources of pollution at the time

– NPDES “major” industrial and municipal facilities. All of EPA’s data sy stem policies, guidance, and compliance screening and evaluation tools were geared toward the NPDES major universe. The availability of electronicall y - reported NPDES data, as required in this proposed rule, would “level the playing field” between dischargers b y including facility

- specific data on both major and nonmajor point sources in all NPDES program areas including storm water, CS Os, SSOs, and CAFOs. Consistent data entry

and reporting would also level the playing field among authorized states by providing EPA with better information in its oversight responsibilities to evaluate the status of NPDES program implementation. Authori zed states providing EPA with more complete data regarding their program implementation efforts and therefore more accurate program performance indicator results

-- such as rates of permit issuance, rates of noncompliance, inspection coverage rates, and numbers of enforcement actions

-- may receive disproportionate scrutiny as compared to authorized states with incomplete data and therefore inaccurate results such as artifici ally

lower noncompliance rates. By requiring that all states provide the same data, performance indicator results would be more accurate across the NPDES program. **Provide performance indicators** Self

- monitoring data is one of the foundations of the NPDES program, and a large amount of self

- reported data is periodicall y received by EPA and the states from a universe of facilities with point sources currently regulated under the CWA. EPA has the pri mary responsibility

of ensuring that the NPDES program is effectivel y and consistently imp lemented across the country

. This proposed rule would provide a standardized framework for reporting and tracking NPDES facility

- specific permit, compliance, and enfo rcement data on a timely , accurate, complete and nationally

- consistent basis. Improved and more complete NPDES data, as required in this proposed rule, will better allow EPA and the states to track performance indicators such as: permit issuance and re

- iss uance, inspection coverage and frequency , enforcement actions, compliance schedule status, grant numbers and status; and to automatically screen for effluent violations and determine compliance statistics, and to generate required reports
. The data collect ed is critical to evaluate the effectiveness of national and state NPDES program s and to identify

program areas needing additional work.3

**Develop trend data** More complete facility

- specific historical NPDES information can be used to identify and address p ossible trends, whether nationall y, in a particular state, in a particular watershed, or for a particular compan y. NPDES data are used to conduct trend anal ys es such as permit issuance and backlog rates, permit compliance rates, numbers and ty pes of inspec tions conducted and enforcement actions, implementation of pretreatment, biosolids, and general permits programs, and amounts of pollutant loadings from various types of point sources to receiving waters or watersh e ds

. **Reports to Congress, GAO, IG, and OMB** NPDES data allow EPA and states to generate required reports such as the QNCR under the federal regulations at 40 CFR §123.45, and surface water quality inventories under Section 305(b) of the CWA; respond to inquiries from the Executive Branch, Congress, General Accounting Office, Office of Inspector General, state legislatures, and the public on the overall status of the NPDES program (e.g., OECA’s compliance and enforcement annual results) or on a particular aspect of the NPDES program (e.g., EPA’s 2004 Report to Congress on the Impacts and Control of CSO and SSOs); and to answer specific program implementation questions and Freedom of Inf

ormation Act (FOIA) requests. EPA needs NPDES data to demonstrate that it effectivel y us es its resources to meet NP DES program goals, including the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) measures and the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) measures reported to Congress annually

. Under GPRA, EPA and other agencies are required to develop long

- range strategic pl ans, annual performance plans with measures and targets, and Annual Performance Reports describing how well targets are met. Examples of GPRA measures for the NPDES program include the percent of permits that are current, the tracking of schedules for comb ined sewer overflow (CSO) long

- term control plans, the percent of concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) covered b y an NPDES permit, and estimated annual reduction in pollutants discharged to water bodies from NPDES permits. PART measures include e nvironmental outcomes, program outputs and efficiencies. For example, a PART efficiency measure is pounds of pollutants reduced per dollar spent in the surface water program. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is linking Agency budgets, including funding for state grants under Section 106 of the CWA, directly

to each program’s strategic plans and targets. **Provide emergency response** The availability

of NPDES electronic data can be critical when emergency situations occur. For example, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the data were used to identify water and wastewater treatment facilities impacted by the hurricane and to identify the potential human health impacts of the failed treatment sy stems. Subsequently , EPA was asked b y Congress to report estimates of damage to wastewater and drinking water treatment facilities. EPA relied, in part, on data maintained in the NPDES program’s national databases for this information. Data are similarly needed on a more routine basis as a result of more localized emergency

situations such as those that result from floods, tornados, ice storms, and chemical4

spills. The immediate availability of outfall

- level, parameter

- specific monitoring results is critical to providing timely responses in such emergency situations

.