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/OECA/OC ph: (202) 566 1014 johnston.carey@epa.gov DATE: 14 September 2015 SUBJECT: Notes from Technical Meeting with States ( 2 April 201 5 ) [ DCN 02 2 6]

**Overview** This was the twenty-fourth meeting between EPA and individual representatives from authorized NPDES programs. These meetings provided greater clarity regarding public comments on the NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule (eRule). Participants are listed below in Tables 1 and 2. EPA is summarizing the notes from these discussions for the docket in order to provide transparency on EPA’s outreach during the rulemaking process (see Table 3). EPA also met with other stakeholders to discuss public comments. **Meeting Notes** EPA (Mr. Carey Johnston) started the meeting by reminding state participants that in addition to raising quest ions during these meetings, states can email their questions on the proposed rule (including the data elements) to EPA. Questions on all aspects of the proposed rule can be sent to Mr. Johnston. Mr. Johnston also reminded everyone that this outreach does n ot constitute a decision

- making body (see “Quick Reminder” section below). Mr. Johnston started the technical discussion by reading the name of each sewage sludge/biosolids element a long with the corresponding data description and regulatory or policy citation. After reading about five to ten elements at a time, Mr. Johnston asked for input from meeting participants. Below are some questions and comments from the meeting participants.

 A representative from New Jersey noted that they collect biosolids information on their NPDES permit application forms.2



###  Several state government represe ntatives asked EPA to streamline the biosolids data elements that are reported on the NPDES permit application. EPA was able to streamline these data elements and provid ed clarifying language in the data descriptions.

 New Jersey noted that they don’t use the term ‘biosolids’ as it is not defined in the EPA’s biosolids regulations (40 CFR 503). In the final rule EPA add the following note to Appendix A: “ For the purposes of this Appendix, the term ‘sewage sludge’ [see 40 CFR 503.9(w)] also refers to the material that is commonly referred to as ‘biosolids.’ EPA does not have a regulatory definition for biosolids but this material is commonly referred to as sewage sludge th at is placed on, or applied to the land to use the beneficial properties of the material as a soil amendment, conditioner, or fertilizer. EPA’s use of the term ‘biosolids’ in this Appendix is to confirm that information about beneficially used sewage sludge (a.k.a. biosolids) is part of the data collected in this Appendix. ” EPA also changed the title of the annual report to, “Sewage Sludge/Biosolids Annual Program Report .” Following the meeting, EPA received an e- mail from an individual state government re presentative on the data elements reviewed in this meeting. This e- mail is provided in Attachment 1.
**Quick Reminder**

 The technical workgroup is not a decision

- making body. Members of the workgroup provide clarity on their comments and suggest options for consideration by EPA and state senior management.

 There are no formal quorum rules for the workgroup. Scheduled teleconferences will proceed with whichever workgroup members call in to participate.

 There will be no voting or consensus of the workgroup. Instead, members of the workgroup are providing individual input reflecting their various perspectives.

 Summaries of the workgroup’s discussions will be prepared for and reviewed by the workgroup, for presentation to EPA senior management and other states and the rulemaking record

.3



### Table 1: State Technical Workgroup Members
– 2 April 2015

**Main Contact State or** 

**Organization Main Contact**  **Email State/Org.**  **Present? (Yes/No)**  Sean Rolland ACWA srolland@acwa

-us.org Yes Karen Lechner AK karen.lechner@alaska.gov Yes Christy Monk AL cvm@adem.state.al.us Yes Eric Cleckler ecleckler@adem.state.al.us Glenda Dean gld@adem.state.al.us Teresa Marks

AR marks@adeq.state.ar.us

Yes Pat Goff goff@adeq.state.ar.us Mo Shafii shafii@adeq.state.ar.us Karen Bassett bassett@adeq.state.ar.us David Ramsey ramsey@adeq.state.ar.us Ellen Carpenter carpenter@adeq.state.ar.us Wendy LeStarge AZ lestarge.wendy@azdeq.gov No Robin Belley belley.robin@azdeq.gov David Lelsz lelsz.david@azdeq.gov; Darren Polhemus CA dpolhemus@waterboards.ca.gov No Renee Purdy renee.purdy@waterboards.ca.gov Deborah Smith dsmith@waterboards.ca.gov Vicky Whitney vwhitney@waterboards.ca.gov Andy Putnam CO andrew.putnam@state.co.us goff@adeq.state.ar.us Yes Elisa Willard elisa.willard@state.co.us Bob Zimmerman DE robert.zimmerman@state.de.us stephanie.bower@state.de.us No Tom Tyler ECOS ttyler@ecos.org No Chris Klena FL chris.m.klena@dep.state.fl.us Yes Jessica Kleinfelter jessica.kleinfelter@dep.state.fl.us Edward Smith edward.c.smith@dep.state.fl.us Frances Carpenter GA frances.carpenter@dnr.state.ga.us Yes Scott Miyashiro HI scott.miyashiro@doh.hawaii.gov Yes Tom Easterly IN teasterl@idem.in.gov ckoontz@idem.in.gov Yes Jeremy Chenevert jcheneve@idem.in.gov Mark Stanifer mstanife@idem.in.gov Courtney Cswercko IA courtney.cswercko@dnr.iowa.gov No Ed Dillingham KS edillingham@kdheks.gov No Steve Caspers scaspers@kdheks.gov Shelly Shores

- Miller sshoresm@kdheks.gov4



### Main Contact **State or**

**Organization Main Contact**  **Email State/Org.**  **Present? (Yes/No)**  Shawn Hokanson KY shawn.hokanson@ky.gov No Grace Scott MI scottg@michigan.gov Yes Carla Davidson davidsonc@michigan.gov Ruth Wallace MO ruth.wallace@dnr.mo.gov No Walter Fett walter.fett@dnr.mo.gov Christopher Miller epermitting@dnr.mo.gov Tamara Dahl MN tamara.dahl@state.mn.us No Paul Scheirer paul.scheirer@state.mn.us John Murphy NEIWPCC jmurphy@neiwpcc.org No Deborah Gore NC deborah.gore@ncdenr.gov No Bradley Bennett bradley.bennett@ncdenr.gov Jason Lonardo NJ jason.lonardo@dep.state.nj.us Yes Julio Collazo julio.collazo@dep.state.nj.us Robert Wither NY rewither@gw.dec.state.ny.us Yes Joseph DiMura jxdimura@gw.dec.state.ny.us Alan Tinney Dave Gaskin NV atinney@ndep.nv.gov Yes dgaskin@ndep.nv.gov Brian Hall OH brian.hall@epa.ohio.gov No Erin Sherer erin.sherer@epa.ohio.gov Shellie Chard

- McClary OK shellie.chard

- mcclary@deq.ok.gov Yes Roy Walker roy.walker@deq.ok.gov David Pruitt david.pruitt@deq.ok.gov Jim Billings OR billings.jim@deq.state.or.us Yes Sean Furjanic PA sefurjanic@pa.gov No Kent Woodmansey SD kent.woodmansey@state.sd.us Yes Tim Flor tim.flor@state.sd.us Albert Spangler albert.spangler@state.sd.us Lawrence Bunting TN lawrence.bunting@tn.gov Yes Yatasha Moore yatasha.moore@tn.gov Kim Wilson TX kim.wilson@tceq.texas.gov Yes Rebecca Villalba rebecca.villalba@tceq.texas.gov Lynley Doyen lynley.doyen@tceq.texas.gov Kimberly Shepard kimberly.shepard@tceq.texas.gov Jeff Studenka UT jstudenka@utah.gov No Jerome Brooks VA jerome.brooks@deq.virginia.gov Yes Deborah Debiasi deborah.debiasi@deq.virginia.gov Phani Eturu phani.eturu@deq.virginia.gov Stephen Bernath WA sber461@ecy.wa.gov Yes Dave Knight dakn461@ecy.wa.gov Nancy Kmet nkme461@ecy.wa.gov5



### Table **2 :**  EPA Technical Workgroup Members

**Name EPA Office**  **Email Present?**  **(Yes/No)** John Dombrowski OECA/OC/ETDD dombrowski.john@epa.gov No Andy Hudock OECA/OC/ETDD hudock.andrew@epa.gov Yes Rochele Kadish OECA/OC/ETDD kadish.rochele@epa.gov No Carey Johnston OECA/OC/ETDD johnston.carey@epa.gov Yes Jackie Clark OW/OWM/WPD clark.jackie@epa.gov Yes Jan Pickrel OW/OWM/WPD pickrel.jan@epa.gov Yes Ginny Phillips OECA/OCE/WED phillips.ginny@epa.gov Yes Aditi Prabhu OGC/WLO prabhu.aditi@epa.gov No David Apanian Region 4 apanian.david@epa.gov Yes Sandra Chew Region 9 chew.sandra@epa.gov No Glynis Hill OP/ORPM/PRAD hill.glynis@epa.gov No


### Table 3: State Technical Workgroup Discussions to Discuss Public Comments
**DCN Date**  **Topic Data Source**  DCN 0219 02/05/2015 Basic Facility and Permit Data Ind. Permit Applications/NOIs DCN 0220 02/12/2015 Basic Violation and Enforcement Action Data States & Ind. Permit Applications/NOIs DCN 0221 02/26/2015 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Information Ind. Permit Applications/NOIs & MS4 Program Report DCN 0222 03/05/2015 Construction and Industrial Stormwater Information Ind. Permit Applications/NOIs DCN 0223 03/12/2015 CSO & Collection System Information & Sewer Overflow Data Ind. Permit Applications/NOIs & Sewer Overflow Event Reports
DCN 0224 03/19/2015 Pretreatment Data Ind. Permit Applications/NOIs & Annual POTW Pretreatment Program Reports, CIU/SIU Reports When EPA or State is Control Authority DCN 0225 03/26/2015 Cooling Water and Thermal Variance Data Ind. Permit Applications/NOIs DCN 0226 04/02/2015 Biosolids Data States & Ind. Permit Applications/NOIs & Annual Biosolids Reports DCN 0227 04/09/2015 CAFO Data Ind. Permit Applications/NOIs & Annual Biosolids Reports DCN 0228 05/13/2015 Review of Appendix A All NPDES program data DCN 0229 05/27/2015 Review of State Representative Questions to EPA All NPDES program data6 

### Attachment 1 **- Email from Representative from Authorized NPDES Program**  **E -** **mail from Lawrence Bunting**  **< Lawrence.Bunting@tn.gov** **> Thu 4/2/2015 2:23 PM**  Biosolids for our state are handled in Region 4, so TDEC has less of a stake in the data elements for biosolids. I don’t have any comment on the data elements. My biggest question from the call is, “How information will be stored in the ICIS

- NPDES data structure?” If multiple city sewage plants are sen ding biosolids to a third party making land application, there may be one field with loading rates that are a combined loading from separate permits. When the third party reports back to the facility or reports to EPA, how will it tie information back to the generator? If there are 4 facilities supplying biosolids, is the loading parsed out between the four to be reported to ICIS

- NPDES? I presume that a third party may have more than one application site to use. This gets into a many-to
-many database re lationship where it could be difficult to track for a particular permit number in ICIS

- NPDES. If there is a bad actor in the group, the database needs to be structured such that the entity responsible is tagged but the innocent are not held to account for someone else’s problem. **EPA RESPONSE:** EPA has structured the data elements to provide the necessary linkages between NPDES regulated entities. EPA will work with authorized NPDES programs to provide the necessary training and guidance to properly implem ent this final rule. Another question in my mind is how permit application data will be shared between state and EPA. In the case of TN, the state issues the NPDES permit and EPA Region 4 handles the biosolids. The two will probably need to share/coordi nate information. **EPA RESPONSE:** Authorized NPDES programs will continue to collect the biosolids data on NPDES permit applications, as required by existing EPA regulations, and then share these data with EPA’s national NPDES data system through timely data sharing practices as outlined by the final rule.