APPENDIX A 
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON D.C. 20460 

OFFICE OF WATER 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Federal Register (FR) Publication Requirements for 

Draft Final General NPDES Permits 

TO: Water Management Division Directors. 

Regions I, II, III, IV, VI, VIII, IX and X 

FROM: Martha G. Prothro, Director 

Permits Division (EN-336) 

review of EPA issued general permits on November 3, 1983, the 

Permits Division used OMB’s review period to correct FR format 

problems in any pending permits. We can no longer provide that 

service without delaying permit publication and issuance. 

Until the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) waived 

The Office of Standards and Regulations has prepared a 

checklist for all FR submissions and has advised us that documents 

will be returned to our office if they are not properly prepared 

and submitted. Therefore, we are requesting that your staff 

ensure that each notice is complete and correct before it is 

submitted to us. 

Executive Order 12291 

With the waiver of Executive Order review, all general permit fact 

sheets and/or FR notices should contain the following statement: 

The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action 

from the review requirements of Executive Order 12291 pursuant 

to Section 8[b] of that order. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

All notices and/or permit fact sheets should contain the 

following statement: 
- 2- 

After review of the facts presented in the notice printed 

above, I hereby certify pursuant to the provisions of 5 

(U.S.C. 605(b) that this (these) general NPDES permit(s) do 

(will) not have a significant impact on a substantial number 

of small entities. Moreover, the permit(s) reduce(s) a 

significant administrative burden on regulated sources. 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

In most cases, all of the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements in a general permit are covered under existing generic 

information collection clearance requests (ICRS).* Where the 

requirements are already covered by our generic ICRs, the general 

permit should contain the following statement: 

EPA has reviewed the requirements imposed on regulated 

facilities in this (these) draft (final) general permit 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 

et. seq. The information collection requirements of this 

(these) permit(s) have already been approved by the Office 

of Management and Budget in submissions made for the NPDES 

permit program under the provisions of the Clean Water 

Act. 

should the Region be aware of or should Headquarters identify a 

permit requirement(s) that is not covered by an existing ICR, an 

estimate of the burden hours associated with the provision(s) 

must be prepared by the Region and submitted with each general 

permit. The Permits Division will prepare the required material 

for OMB review under the PRA at the time of publication of the 

draft permit in the FR. OMB is required to comment on paperwork 

issues during the public comment period. In such cases the 

required language is: 

For draft permits: 

EPA has reviewed the requirements imposed in regulated 

facilities in this (these) draft general NPDES permit(s) 

* Generally, information collection requirements provided for 

specifically in the NPDES regulations have been covered by the 

Permits Division in its generic ICR submitted to OMB. However, 

these clearances basically cover only routine information 

collection. Activities such as underwater diving inspections, 

monitoring required pursuant to section 403(c) guidelines, etc. 

would not be covered. (Please feel free to consult with US on 

any specific requirements for which the status of a clearance 

request is unclear.) 
undo? the Pap~~ork ROdUCtion Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 

eJ sa 

-f 

l The information collwtion rqUiromants of the 

pena t(s), vtth the 8xc8ption of P8rt(rJ (inrett s*ctio;t 

n&a= and tttlor frau uamit)r ham ban approvad by tfia 

Offic8 at Management and Budget (O!lB) in Submissiong mada 

for the NPDCS pornit program under 0. provisions of the 

Clean Water Act. EatimataS Of the burden hours associ&ted 

with thesr excoptod provisiOn have been prrprrrd and 

submittad to OMB for reviw at the time of publication of 

this notice. 

For final parztftfl: 

No comments from OH8 or the public wore tocrived on tha information collwtion raquirw8ontr in thir (those) pemit( s) . 

Of 

Any couuuonts to EPA from OMB or the public on the Lnfotmatlon collection requfromonts in tha (these) parmit(s) 

appaar fn tha public comment, smction of this notic at 

. 

Plea80 bo advised that clearance of now requirwwnts not covorod 

by the genaric rmquasts could dolry potnit iasuanc~ duo to OHB 

r8viw. Clovevar, 

priato, 

vh+ra such roquiramonts arm necessary or l pprothey should &a imporod and the rnticfprtod mall incrmaso 

in overall burdens of the program should be d@fonriblm. Major 

delays for this reason ara unlikely in my judgment, 

General Adminfstrativ8 Rwuir8mnts 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

The document should ba cotractly classffird as a propoaod or 

final permit in tha title. 

Tha document rhould contain each of the praambla elmants. 

AGtNCY, ACTION, SUHMARY, DATES, ADDRCSSES, FOR FURTEER 

INFORMTION CONTACT, AND SUPPLEMNTARY INFORNATION 

The SWMARY shou/d statm in a sontmco or two what you’re 

doing, and the fntendod e-t of tha 

action. 

vhy you’r8 doing it, 

The pager should ba numbwad rt the top. 

The document should be double spacod and printad in L2 pitch. 

All signatures should ba IolloWd by 8 Sign8tUre block. (IF 

SOPmono signs for the Rogionrl Admhhtr8tO? or the W&tar 
yanag@ment Division Directorr include both names in the 

sianatura block (a.Q., L. Edvin Coat@ Acttng Cm, eraesta 

Bakmsr Regional Administrator)+ 

7. Thm subnission should contain an S.F. 2340-M 

Yygosottinp Form with the roqufred rignaturos 

8. The cost OF- gublirhin Q tha document should be 

ar follows: 

Federal RI ittefn phceL 

. 

ertfpatrd 

2 pages - 1 fl column - 5136.00 

- 4 - 

photocopfod sgor l 5350.00 ( i.*. , mapr or reprinted 

ef f lurnt limitat ions pag0S) 

If YOU or your staff have Curther quortions on there mattorg 

please contact Michelle Hiller of my staff (426-4793). Your efforts to ensum that these documncs arm properly prop&rod uiL1 

elfminaco unnocossary delays in Fedora1 Rwistor submissions. 

cc: Water ?lanagamont Division Directors 

Ragions V and VI7 

DLractor, Entorcmont Divts ion, OUEP 
APPENDIX B 
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL AGENCY 

WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460 

SUBJECT: Continuance of NPDES the APA 

FROM: Bruce R. Barrett, 

Office of Water Enforcement and Permits (EN-335) 

OFFICE OF WATER 

MEMORANDUM 

Gereral Permits Under 

TO: Regional Water Management Division Directors 

Regional Counsels 

We have received a number of inquiries as to whether 

continuation of expired general permits is allowed under the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and the NPDES regulations. 

A recent Office Of General Counsel (OGC) Opinion (attached) 

indicates that such continuance is legally permissible. However, 

there are important reasons for EPA not to rely on APA's continuance except in extreme cases where permit reissuance is delayed 

for unexpected or unavoidable reasons. This memorandum addresses 

the general permit reissuance process in light of 

review of the continuance issues. 

SUMMARY 

NPDES general permits may be continued under 

vhero the Agency has failed to reissue the permit 

the APA 

prior to 

expiration. Although continuance is legally permissible, 

permits should be continued only as a last resort and continuance 

should be avoided by timely reissuance of general permits 

wherever possible. 

OGC’ recent 

Because of the geographic scope of general permits and the 

number of raise facilities questions covered continuance co

as to weather EPA has adequately considered long-term cumulative 

environmental impacts, l xrcetSrt8 the permit issuance backlog, 

and create new issues or workload problems associated with new 

facility permits since new facilities cannot be covered by l 

continued permit. Continuance is generally avoidable given 

adequate planning. Where continuance is unavoidable, it should 

be for the shortest possible time. Upon determining that a 

general permit will not be reissued prior to expiration, the 
-2- 

Regional water Management Division Director should inform the 

Permits Division Director and provide a specific schedule for 

completing reissuance. 

IMPLEMENTATION 

The following requirements govern the continuance of 

general permits: 

• 

• 

• 

Only those facilities authorized to discharge under 

the expiring general permit are covered by the 

continued permit. 

Where the notification requirements of a general 

permit provide permit coverage prior to the actual 

commencement of operations at a site (e.g., mobile 

seafood processors and oil and gas drilling vessels) 

facilities providing such notice prior to expiration 

arm covered by the continued permit. 

At least six months prior to the expiration date of a 

general permit, the Regional Water Management Division 

Director should submit a draft general permit and a 

schedule for permit issuance of reissuance to the 

Permits Division Director. If a draft general permit 

is not ready at that time, an explanation of the reasons 

for delay and a schedule for permit development and 

reissuance, should be submitted instead. The Permits 

Division Director will expedite permit issuance and 

reissuance processes at headquarters as much as possible 

and will inform upper management in the Office of 

Water of any significant delays. 

DISCUSSION 

As with individual NPDES permits, it may become necessary 

to administratively continue a general NPDES permit when reissuance of the permit of issuance of a new permit is impossible 

before permit expiration. The APA allows for continuance of a 

Federal license or permit when a permittee has made a timely 

and complete application for a new permit. Until OGC's recent 

review of the issue, OWEP had advised the Regional Offices 

that general permits could not be continued under the APA 

because the NPDES regulations do not require applications for 

general permits. OWEP requested that OGC review and provide a 

written opinion on this issue since a number of parties had 

questioned our legal position. On November 17, 1983, OGC informed 

OWEP that general permits can legally be continued under the 

APA. 
- 3 - 

:>etr are d 3uzber of scron; 

5~~:e tamely rekssuance 

JOlAcY and ?rOSraiU reasons 

tacher than r¶lYaW on A?.4 CO~:~&: 

any g8nerrL 3emLts cove: several dozans Of l ven hundradr ot l 

;9CLvitual frcilaier. The large nmbrc of facLlLtier covered 

and the broad g8ographic coverage tan4 to focus ~~durtry and 

?ualic l tt0ntion on Agency inaction vh.n C>@ PemrC 13 alloyed 

:o expire, especially in the aatly stages Of ~~~?Lemntatlon of 

::a general pomlt program. 

.Stdny ganaral ;smft~tr are controwrslal a’, t-ha t:na qf 

Lniti’al parmr~ rssuance. 

gatad during r@isruanco. 

Smrlrr controvefsL~s cm ba antaclEPA eannqt l llov Ch@ publfc Co prcaiva Chat va at8 avoiding there iSSUmS C?lrOUgh adniniStra=lv9 

continuance of rxpirad parrnits. For rxam3Le, CUI%lrtiva en- vironmental impact assossmnts hinge on the nwabmr and volw~ 

of Ctschargas. Information gather8C durang tha tam of the 

orrgiarl parmft may justify nrv ;rermit LimLtrtFons, terms and 

conditions at the time of :aissurnce. Pot mrino dischargers, 

dotarminrtionr pursuant to E403k) of th@ Clean Water ACT l ra 

usually depandant on tha l stamatas of the nubat of frcilitiar 

that wall discharge during the cm8 of the p8mit. Delay in 

updating therm dacarzuinations rau8s questron about potmtial 

environmntrl impacts and thr efficacy of permit condftionr. 

~Fmflrz issues arise wham thora hrvm bwn nev standard8 or 

effluent lfmltatton guidelinar promulgated during tha course 

* the pmni’: 0: changes in tha CWA or rpplkabh r@qUiramantS 

rdaf other rgplic&la statutes bg., Coastal Zone Hanrgomnt 

Act, Endangerad Spacfer Act). 

Finally, i rnqtnr ao81 of the uenerrl e IS to ;r 

:educ* the Aqancy’s NPbES mrrait issurnco backi- Alloving 

general p8ra~cr to axpfra rggrrvrtos tha backlog iroblmr. 1n 

addition, new dLscha:murrlr’)rl_rllr* qr s il EVA ra 

Assued the m wrmiq. Sinea there facilitrrs vould belx%-for dfschargo without a pamit, they vould Likely raquest 

an individual pamat and be rquired co submit a full application 

and do rppropriaca tasting. ThFa creates l pamit issuance 

workload deea.?< chat vould be avoidad by timely rehsuance ot 

the ~enerrl gm~f~, as war1 IS putting burdens on pamit ipplican:3 :ha: vc~ld % rwnovad by roissurncm of tha gen@rd permit. 

Given the dgaubaeki and problam, administzativm continumca 

of ganarrl permits should 50 tha l xcagtion rrthar than tha rule. 

Ahqurta glrnning and timely pamit prrparruon will rllov ua 

to avoad the nocor8ity to us0 l dminirtratiw comrnurno l xcrpt 

as a stop sap, short tom nmasur@. The Oftica of Xacer Snforconenc and pem~cs ~~11 uork vath Cha SagiOnS CO avoid Continumx 

-dh*revar possible. 
NOV 17 1983 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Continuance of NPDES General Permits Under 

the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) 

FROM: Margaret B. Silver 

Attorney 

Water Division (LE-132W) 

THRU: Colburn T. Cherney 

Acting Associate General Counsel 

Water Division (LE-132W) 

TO: Bruce Barrett 

Director 

Office of Water Enforcement 

and Permits (EN-335) 

This memorandum responds to your request for a legal 

opinion on several issues related to the expiration, reissuance, 

and continuance of general permits under the APA. 

(1) Issue: Can a general permit be continued under 

the APA in the absence of a renewal application requirement? 

Response: A good legal argument can be made that a general 

permit may be continued under the APA, even though there is 

no specific requirement for a renewal application. 

Discussion: 

Section 9(b) of the APA, 5 U.S.C. §558(c), provides that: 

When the licensee has made timely and sufficient 

application for a renewal or a new license in 

accordance with agency rules, a license with 

reference to an activity of a continuing nature 

does not expire until the application has been 

finally determined by the agency. 

This provision allows a licensee (i.e., permittee) to 

lawfully continue its licensed activity after its license 

has expired when the issuing agency has failed to act on the 

licensee's renewal application. 
-2- 

The purpose of this provision is clearly set out in the 

legislative history of the APA: 

[This provision is] necessary because of the very 

severe consequences of the conferring of licensing 

authority upon administrative agencies. The 

burden is upon private parties to apply for 

licenses or renewals. If agencies are dilatory 

in either kind of application, parties are subject to irreparable injuries unless safeguards 

are provided. The purpose of this section is 

to remove the threat of disastrous, arbitrary, 

and irremediable administrative action. 

92 Cong. Rec. 5654 (1946) (remarks of Representative Walter). 

The courts have consistently relied on this statement 

of legislative intent in construing the purposes of this 

provision. In Committee for Open Media v. FCC, 543 F.2d 861 

(D.C. Cir. 1976) the D.C. Circuit described the purpose of 

as the "protection of licensees from the uncertainties stemming from protractad administrative consideration 

of applications for license renewals." Id. at 867. In 

County of Sullivan v. CAB, 436 F.2d 1096 (2nd Cir. 1971), 

Judge Friendly agreed that section 9(b) was intended to 

protect licensees from an agency’s failure to act: "(t)he 

valuable rights conferred by a license for a limited term 

shall not be lost simply because the agency has not managed 

to decide the application before expiration of the existing 

license.” Id. at 1099. The court in Banker’s Life & Casualty 

Co. v. Calloway, F.2d 625 530 (5th Cir. 1976) quoted Judge 

Friendly's language and added that "the kind of case that the 

statute was meant to cover was that in which time exigencies 

within the agency prevent it from passing on a renewal a applicatlon, where an activity of a continuing nature is involved.” 

Id. at 634. 

Section 9(b) of the APA requires the licensee to make 

“timely and sufficient application for a renewal ... in 

accordance which agency rules” to qualify for continuance of 

its permit. The issue that has been raised is whether the 

APA continuance provision applies to NPDES general permits 

since there is no renewal application requirement for such 

permits. In the case of an individual NPDES permit, the 

permit holder must submit an application to renew its permit, 

so the issue does not arise. 1/ Persons who wish to be 

1/ The NPDES regulations recognize that the APA continuance 

provision applies to individual NPDES permits. 40 CFR 

122.6(a). 
covered under a gcnerrl permit, however+en*reUy need only 

submit a "notice of intent co ba covered b the geaerr~ 

prrmit, after tha genetrl pemit fa ~~mmd* 21 Neither tha 

cerm8 of the grnetrl permit not tha NPD&S P*miC re@rtiona 

dircw8 raquirrmancr f0t c0vuaa* after 1 8-=A panic 

cxpirer . fB Other vords, in cha cue Of UI iadlvtdt,iel p-it, 

the renewal procerr 18 inLtirt*d by the pemit holder who 

must submit & rrneurl applfc~tioa, merear the Agency m8t 

Fnitlaee the renewal prOCar for 1 general pernit becaure 

the Agency dolce not provide rn 

hoLdar to submLt a renewal rpp 1 

opporcmlcy for ehe permit 

Lcatlon. 

Based on the Were11 purpo8e Of s8CtiOn 9(b), Le., 

LLmLc concFnuenc8 to sltuatfon8 where the Agency, aiiiinot 

to 

the permictra, hrr failed to we, We believe ic is rea8On&le 

co conclude that conttnurnce of gqnerrl permit8 L8 pefPDi88ible 

when rhe Agency hr8 no= provided &n OppOrtuttity to 8ubmtt a 

renwrl eppllc~tioa. 3/ The APA- raquirer tha permittea to 

8ubmFt aa rpplkatioa-" la accordance with raency ruleem u l 

condicioa for continuance. Howewr, 8Lnce the current 

rules do not provide a dircharger covered uader a sanera ‘f ==7 

permit the opportuafty to laiti~ta renew&l, the dlrchrger 

he8 in e88enca done l ll tt cm Co l a8ure continued paraiC 

coverage. Therefore, uhrre “time l xigencter” hwa praveatad 

AQIllC 

I 

actLon, 

aL ow 

it La l reuonabla Lntwpramtion of tha APA 

to I di8chu&er cha protection of the continuaac~ 

provfrioa whara cha permit ha8 not baen raaavad thrCOU#& no 

fault of tha dircharger. We baliave thir poritton ir fait, 

u well; it doer not make 1en8a for contlnumca to ba wailable 

co Fndivfdurl’ pumit hOldar8, but not gauarrl permit holdera, 

8Lo 

app E 

ly bacaure the Agancy ha8 noc provided for A ranaw~ 

lcrtFon for ganarrl pemFt8. Aho, not 8llouin~ continuaace 

would 8rfiOUS1y undermine the urefulae88 of 8ener81 permftr, 

which uera de8tgnad co reduce both the regulrto~ burden 

on dl8ckrger8 l d the l tmFnL8trrtive burden 0x1 EPA. 

Although ~a balieva tha porklou chat genar&l pernit 

my ba continued uades the APA i8 LegelQ defen8ibh we 

stroagly recommend that the ~anarrl pU@iC proVf*ion~ Of 

the UPDES rule8 be mandad to cbrl thi8 i88Ue. The -188 

rhould explain how md whan a Pe-it =Y ba cof=~~ue& 

2/ i s 

rLt8A51 '9 

uirament lopoaed by the term of the 8anrrrl 

, nof tha HPDES reguhctonr. 

i/ f&alp di8chaqua covered under the Ori&inal genurl 

permit would ba entitled to o eata under cha coatinuad 

permit l New d$rcb&r~U8, who you P d othuulse q~llfy for 

covetqp uadas tba ganarrl puait, could LIOC ba covuad by 

cha ganard pumft until EPA hd rei88Ued it. 
ad who ma7 dbcherge undet th8 continued PamiC. At that cfma, we may wux to cOn8ldU UPoeh *OQ@ sort of rppl~~~t~~~ 

requiranU% l uch l e l nau notiC@ of intent to ba Covered when 

l general permit ir about CO +xpir@ (this Provi8ion hrr 

appeued in dr&t menbent to She NPDES rule8). 

2) I88U8: If the ~gmcy conducted en asse88meat \mdat 

Sectlou 40m Of ehe Cleru Meter Act before it f88Ued 8 8en,tal 

prrmic, can the generrl permit be conc:inued without I mu 

b88888Plnc unJ8r the Oceea Dirchrrsa Criteria Cu~de~ine87 

IS continueace affected by the 8imFlrt requirement8 of the 

Endurgered 

Act (CZMA)? 

Specie8 Act (ESA) urd the COr8ta1 Zone Mumgameac 

FF 

A ganarrl pasmLt iay be continued w&&out 

8ddLt ona evaluation8 undet Section 403(c), the hdansered 

Spacier Act, or the C0a8Cal Zone kfUUg8ment Act. 

Df8cu88fonr 

Aa explained above, the APA contiau8aca provirioa i8 a 

rtop-gap mae8ura darianed co protect the pemitt88 uh8a the 

k~ency h88 frilad to raF88ur ui expired permit. There 18 no 

requiresant chat cha eaacy have even be- the renewal 

procare fot continurnca to eccuzm Since the 403(c), ES& 

uad CLMd datarmin~cFonr ua conducted II put of the parnit 

i8ruaaca (of ralr8uance) pfoca88, it la clau tit the A$ancy 

need nof complete &ny of there datarmin~tiom before a amerr 

p-i= i8 COUtt~Urd. Ia fact, failuse to m&a on0 oz moxa 

of chara datarmin~ciona may be pracirely the rduon for the 

delay La rai88uing the permit. 

(3), f88U8: ktmt i8 the effect of f88lUlC8 of & general 

permit oa moue17 h8Uad iadividUL perah coverias the 

same type of di8Chr~@? 

Ra8Wn88: Pataoar who hold a curreat tndividurl permit 

remain covered by chrt parmtt uatil they raqueat covarrge 

under the general permit (~anarrlly b 

incenc to be coverad uadag the genera I 

rubmitting a notice of 

permit) l d EPA revoke8 

cha iadividrul permit. Parrron v&o hold expired, APA-continued 

individual -it8 ua coveted 07 the ~enaral pemit u loon 

Q8 EPA i88W it. 

Di8CU88imt 

Saction 122.18 of the UPDES ragulrtioar 8twaa tha Iftex 

EPA f88U88 l g888s81 Pam&t, 4 dlrchrrge? wlch en individwl 

permit F8 not covered by the guard permit ua~ll &PA revoker 

the iadivldrul permit. To data, each genard permit hu 

included chic provirion. Lt i8 not cleu whether thir provision 
applies only co current indivtdual P@rmiCs, Or co expired 

MA-concinuca Lndivldual ptrmiCS as ~11. Me think the ’ 

batter reading La to 1fmFt chig Provision Co curr8nc FndLvtdual 

permitr. S/ In ch* case of an exPiredI APA-concinucd individual 

PCZldC, vz balirue that FssuanC* of a general pcrmle that 

covers ehm diachargr should be considered “Agency actlon” on 

the pcr~1Ic:tee'8 rcqucsr for termaL of the Lndlvldual per~~c 

(unlesr tha terms of chr general PemiE ScaCe otherwise) and 

that the dlscharqcr Fa covered by the general pcrmlc as of 

tha effective date of the general permx. In addFcLon; ~a 

believe a new notFcr of Fntcnc vould be unnecessary in this 

caaa since the aischarger ha8 already SubmFtcrd an application 

for rcncval of its individual permit (both the nocfcr of 

Intent and renewal applFcrcion serve a sfmilu function, 

i.e., co inform the Agency vho is discharging undrr thm 

Getal permie) . 

Once again, ft 18 i!llpOttaKlt CO 8pd1 OUt thera prOVisiOn8 

ln future general pWmfC8, or better y8c, in chr NPDES ruler. 

By aF8tinguirhFng between currcnc Inaividual pwmitr and 

expired, APA-continued permits, and the effect of frrufng a 

general permit on each, FE vi11 be clear vhich permit 

(.Fndividual or general) is Fn effect for each discharge l c 

any given time. 

>/ For -0 8&r OS l triciancy, w my want to conriaer 

revok- 811 ou’c8tandFng Fnaividual permxt a8 part 0: 

the general parmtc irruance procreding, rather than revokFn8 

tnem inaLvtdu&ly. 

Prcpurd by: LlSLLVtR:krl:U-132S:Rm. S39U:382-7706:9/27/83: 

9/28/83:10/28/83:11/1/83:1~/3/83:11/4/83:11/10/03: 

11/16/83:11/17/83 
APPENDIX C 
Office of Water 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Final Procedures for the Review Of Draft and Final 

General NPDES Permits 

FROM: Bruce R. Barrett, Director 

Office of Water Enforcement and Permits 

TO: Water Management Division Directors 

Regional Counsels 

Rebecca W. Hanmer, Acting Assistant Administrator 

for Water 

Colburn Cherney, Acting Associated General Counsel 

Water Division 

Louise Jacobs, Associated Enforcement Counsel 

for Water 

C. Ronald Smith, Director 

Off fee of Standards and Regulations 

Richard D. Morgenstern, Director 

Office of Policy analysis 

Steven Schatzow, Director 

Office of Water Regulations end Standards 

This memorandum the final review procedures 

for draft and final general NPDES permits. These procedures 

have been reviewed and accepted by the affected program offices 

in Headquarters and the Water Management Division Directors. 

The new procedures outlined below should significantly reduce 

the problems that have occurred in developing, reviewing, and 

processing general permits. 
- 2 - 

• The attached general permits status report prepared by 

the permits Division, OWEP represents a list of all 

general permit currently in development. Copies of 

the status report will be sent to the water Management 

Division Directors and Headquarters Program offices on 

a monthly basis. Headquarters program of offices are 

requested to identify those permits which they consider 

important to review each month. 

• Regional offices must submit all draft and final 

general permits to the Office Of Water Enforcement and 

Permits, to the attention of the Permits Division 

Director. The Water Management Division Director and 

the Regional Counsel must review and sign all draft and 

final general permits submitted for Headquarters 

review. By so signing, these official are certifying 

the programmatic, technical, and legal sufficiency 

of the general permit. General permits not duly signed 

will be returned to the Region. 

• Headquarters review of general permit for concurrence 

wall be limited to issues of national significance and 

consistency with regulations, national guidance, and 

relevant case law. Any other comments regarding 

provisions generally within the discretion of the 

permit writer (such as technical adequacy, identified 

water quality standards, or general clarity, quality or 

enforceability) will be suggestions only. 

• Formal communications on general permit issues and 

Headquarters' concurrence will occur between the 

Director of the Permits Division and the Water Management 

Division Director. However, we continue to encourage 

staff Level discussions concerning permit development 

so that issues can be resolved, to the maximum extent 

possible, before review for headquarters concurrence. 

• The Permits Division Director is to receive all comments 

from other Headquarters offices on draft general permits 

in ten working days. In the review of draft general 

permits, the Permits Division will identify to the Regional 

office any issues which could lead to non-concurrence 

on the final. Generally, further processing of the draft 

permit will not be delayed while Headquarters' comments are 

being addressed by the Region prior to final promulgation. 

However, there may be occasions involving an issue significant enough to require modification of the fact sheet or 

draft permit before publication. If Headquarters review 

identifies a need for a change in the draft permit, the 

Permits Division Director will notify the Water Management 

Division Director by phone within the next two working days 
af :er :nt deddllne for su5m:‘-tal of ail Headq;a::ert 

comments to the Pernuts DLvLSlon* ;Jrxten comnt~ ylll br 

sent from the Permits DiviSion Director to the Wdcer y 

ment Division Director within five =kin9 days after ' dcaged@adlin@ for submittal of all ~-Wart- corzents to 

tha 

PI& t8 Diviafon. If the Water Manrg@mnt Drvision && 

&@a not h@@r frm the permits Divmon Doctor wrthzn & 

days of the end of the Headquyters rWicw pcrl&, be -ay 

assum8 th8t the PermatS DLvLslon 1s processing tke perlt, 

0 The procedures for the review of final ?emral ?eclzs 

wrll be 2.~ same as those for drak ?er?nlcs except c:a= 

Headquarters review trme wall be shorter. 2e Jqly 

1982 streamlined review process provrdes that thr 

review period is five wodcinq days unless the final 

permit doffers rignrfrcancly tram the draft. (In such 

cases the review period LS specrfied as tan days.) 

On August a, 1983, the Office of Policy and Resource 

Management and the Office of w8ter requested an exemption 

for general NPCES permits from the revlew requFrement8 of 

the Executive Order 1229J from the Office of M8nrgement and 

8udget (OHB). Km understand thrt Staff recouuaend8tiam h8v8 

been prep8trd for Robert Bedell, Deputy AdminiStr8tOr, 8nd 

we expect a written response soon. We wrll m8ke every 

effort to keep you informed on the request and OMB’S response. 

Thrnk you for your positive coment8 on there procedures, 

your efforts to follow them in the interim, and your continued 

support for the generrl permit progrrm. u3:il an exemption is 

granted, both draft and final general penxts must be submitted 

to OHB for review prior to publicrtfon in the fader81 

R8g8rdleSSr progrerr has been made. Thare =a8 d tme F=* w en 

a general permit strtur report included only pertnitS for 

offshore oil and gas 8nd l nim8l feedlOtS. 

Attachment 
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, DC. 20460 

JUL 3 1985 

OFFICE OF WATER 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Transmittal of General Permitting Strategy for 

OCS Oil and Gas Activities Under EPA/MMS MOU 

FROM: Martha G. Prothro, Director 

Permits Division, OWEP (EN-336) 

TO: William Dickerson, Director 

Federal Agency Liaison Division, OFA (A-104) 

Attachad is a copy of the guidance document regarding the 

NPDES permitting process for offshore oil and gas activities. 

The Permits Division has prepared this as our action under 

Part IV.A. and Part IV.B. of the Memorandum of Understanding 

with the Minerals Management Service, signed on May 31, 1984. 

I hope that this will prove useful to the EPA and MMS staff as 

they coordinate activities under the MOU. 

Please call me if you have any questions regarding this 

document, or have your staff call Edward Ovsenik (FTS 426-7035) . 

Attachment 
June 18, 1985 

The NPDES Permitting Process 

Cot 011 and Gas Activities on the 

Outer Continental Shelf 

Prepared by the Permits Division 

Office of Water Enforcement and Permits 

United States Environmental Protection Agency 

under the 

Memorandum of Understanding between EPA 

and the Minerals Management Service 

of the Department of the Interior 
A. 

B. 

C. 

D. 

E. 

F. 

G. 

H. 

I. 

J. 

K. 

L. 

Table of Contents 

TOPIC PAGE 

Introduction .......................................... 1 

Covered Facilities and Permit Areas ................... I 

provisions for Permits Modifications and Revocation .... 3 

Provisions Cot Individual Permits ..................... 3 

Existing Sources, New Dischargers, and New Sources . . . . 4 

Effective Dates ....................................... 4 

Stats Certification ................................... 4 

Fact Sheet ............................................ 5 

Technology Based Effluent Limitations ................. 6 

Ocean Discharge Criteria Guidelines ................... 7 

Oil Spill Requirements ................................ 8 

Other Lega1 Requirements cements ..................... ........ . 9 

1. Endangered Species Act ............................. 9 

2. Coastal Zone Management Act .................... 9 

3. Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act .... 11 

4. Economic Impact (Executive Order 12291) ............ 12 

5. Paperwork Reduction Act ............................ 12 

6. Regulatory Flexibility Act ......................... 12 

APPENDICES : 

A. Decision Logic for 403(c) Determinations 

B. States with Approved Coastal Zone Management Programs 
A. Introduction 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates 

discharges associated with offshore oil and gas exploration, 

development and production on the outer continental shelf (OCS) 

under the Clean Water Act's (the Act) National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) permit program 

issue permit to facilities discharge 

EPA Regional Offices 

into ocean waters beyond 

the three mile limit of the territorial seas and may also issued 

permits to facilities in the territorial seas if the adjoining 

Stats does not have an approved NPDES program. Section 403 of 

the Act requires that NPDES permits for discharges into the 

territorial seas, the contiguous zone, and the oceans be issued 

in compliance with EPA’S guidelines for determining the dagradation of marine waters. The NPDES Regulations are found in 

40 CFR Parts 122, 124 and 125. 

8. Covered Facilities and Permit Areas 

The traditional NPDES regulatory framework requires that an 

owner or operator file an application to begin the permit process. 

The NPDES regulations also authorize the issuance of a general 

permit for a category of point sources located in the same 

geographic area if their discharges warrant similar pollution 

control measures. 40 CFR §122.28. The regulations for general 

permits provide that sufficient information may be available to 

the Agency to determine permit conditions without application 

information. Therefore, general permits are issued without l 

named party and without application requirements. 

The first stop in the issuance of a general permit is the 

Director’s determination that a category of point sources meets 

the requirements of §122.28. The Director is authorized to issue 

a general permit if there are a number of point sources operating 

in a geographic arm that: 

1. Involve the same or substantially similar types of 

operations: 

2. Discharge the same types of wastes: 

3. Require the same effluent Limitations or operating 

conditions: 

4. Require the same or similar monitoring requirements; 

and 

5. In the opinion of the Director, are more appropriately 

controlled under the general permit than under individual 

permits 
-2 - 

changes to the NPDES regulations on September 1, 1983 

(48 FR 9619) also provide chat the Regional Administrator (RA) 

shall issue general permits covering discharges from offshore 

oil and gas facilities within the Region's jurisdiction. 

Interested persons, Including prospective permittees, may 

petition the RA-to issue a general permit and the RA must 

promptly established a project decision schedule for permit 

issuance. The project decision schedule provides final permit 

issuance no later than the final notice of sale or 6 months 

after the petition, whichever is later. 

The decision to issue a general permit is dependent upon 

EPA having sufficient information to determine permit conditions 

and address the factors in the ocean discharge guidelines. With sufficient information, general permits may be issued tar entire 

tracts or groups of tracts offered in OCS lease sales. Geographic 

or political boundaries defining the area to be covered are 

specified in each permit. These boundaries nay be OCS lease 

sale areas defined in lease sale EISs, specific lease parcels, 

or isobaths surrounding areas of biological concern. 

EPA may issue a general permit covering all lease sales 

occurring within the geographic scope of the permit during its 

five-year term. EPA 8180 issues general. permits only covering 

specific lease sales which have already occurred or are about 

permit to 

to occur. Currently, EPA Regions IV and VI are issuing one 

cover all Lease sales activities within the Gulf of 

Mexico. EPA Regions IX and X usually issue general permits for 

only specific lease sales. However, any general permit could 

be modified to include new lease sale areas during the permit 

term. 

Areas of biological concern (ABCs) are areas which may 

require special permit conditions and/or effluent limitations 

which differ from those containad in a general permit for a 

broador area. In such cases separate general permits may be 

necessary. If a lease sale contains several ABCs which require 

Widely different permit terms and conditions, these areas may 

be more appropriately controllad by individual permits. EPA 

may also issue one general permit for the entire lease sale 

area. with one set of effluent limitations established for the 

broad area; and a second set of limitationa for the ABCs. 

General permits may be issued for all discharges in the 

geographic area of the permit (ie. exploratory, development, 

and production facilities). However, EPA may also issue a 

general permit authorizing discharges only from exploratory 

facilities, with a separate general permit for the development 

and production Facilities. EPA Regulations will issue general 

permits tot exploratory facilities first, and wait to determine 

the interest in the area for development and production, and 

the possible number of development and production’ facilities 

before issuing a development and production general permit. 
- 3 - 

C. Provisions for Permit Modification and Revocation 

The NPDES regulations provide for modifications of a general 

permit for any of the causes in §122.62, including information 

which indicates unacceptable cumulative impacts (§122.62(a)(2).). 

The results of any testing required by Section 403(c) may 

indicate that the general permit should be modified or revoked. 

If on-site monitoring indicates that an individual Permit should 

be required, §122.28(b)(2)(iv) provider that a general permit 

terminates on the effective date of an individual permit. All 

permit modifications or revocations are handled in accordance 

with §124.5, and requests for modifications revocation, or 

termination must be in writing and contain facts or reasons 

supporting the requests. The RA may deny the request (§124.5(b)) 

or prepare a new draft permit incorporating the proposed changes. 

the procedures for processing the new permit are the same as 

for all draft permits (§l24.6). 

D. Provisions Cot Individual Permits 

Any owner or operator authorized to discharge by a general 

permit may apply for an individual permit any interested person 

may petition the Director to require a facility to obtain an 

individual permit and the Director may require an owner or 

operator to apply for and Obtain art individual permit on his own 

initiative. The criteria in §122.28(b)(2) define cases which 

may require an individual NPDES permit: 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

The discharge(s) is a significant contributor of 

pollution: 

the discharger is not In compliance with the terms and 

conditions of the general permit: 

A change has occurred in the availability of demonstrated 

technology or practices for the control or abatement 

of pollutants applicable to the point sources: 

Effluent guidelines are subsequently promulgated for 

the point sources covered by the general permits: 

A Water Quality Management Plan containing requirements 

applicable to such point sources is approved; or 

The requirements listed in §122.28(a) are not met 

(See A. and B. above). 

However changes in pollutant control or abatement technology, 

Effluent guidelines, or water quality standards may more appropriately be addressed through permit modification, or revocation 

and reissuance if the changes affect a large number of point 

sources operating under a general permit. 
E. Existing Sources, New Discharge, and New Sources 

General permits for offshore oil and gas activities authorize 

discharges for "existing sources" 

122.29(a).). Current general 

and "new discharges’ (40 CFR 

§§ 122.2, 

discharges from 

permits do not authorize 

as the Agency has not promulgated 

new SOUrce performance standards (NSPS) for the oil and gas 

extraction point source category, and therefore no new sources 

are currently operating (12.2, 122.29(b).). When NSPS are 

promulgated, EPA will have an Independent obligation under 

the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to complete an 

environmental review for EPA issued oil and gas NPDES permits. 

Therefore, NEPA compliance will be required for general permits 

covering Federal waters and the territorial seas of the states 

that do not have NPDES permit Authority. States issuing NPDES permits for their territorial seas have no such NEPA compliance 

obligations. See 40 CFR 122.29(c)(ii). 

Mobile drilling units used in exploratory operations -- 

operations to identify and determine the extent of oil and gas 

reserves-- are existing sources except In environmentally 

sensitive areas. Mobile drilling units in areas of biological 

concern (ABCS) are considered new dischargers after each move 

within an ABC. The fact sheet of each general permit describes 

the RA's determination of ABCs affecting new discharger status 

for mobile drilling units. in determining if an area is an ABC, 

the RA considers the factora specified in the 403(c) guidelines 

at 40 CFR 125.122(a)(1) through (10). (See page 7.) 

F. Effective Dates 

Section 124.15 provides that permits are effective 30 days 

after final issuance unless 1) a later date is specified in the 

permit or 21 no comments requesting a change in the draft were 

received during the comments period. General permits are issued 

as rulemaking proceedings under the AdmInistrative Procedure 

Act (APA; 5 U.S.C. §551 et seg.). The APA requires 30-day 

notice of final rules to allow for administrative appeal and 

review. because NPDES general permits are not administratively 

reviewable, this provision doer not apply. thereforer EPA normally 

writes general permits to be effective on the date of final 

publication in the Fedral Register. Section 122.46 provides 

that NPDES permits are effictive for a fixed term not to exceed 

5 years. 

G. State Certification 

Under section 401(A)(l) of the Act, EPA may not issue l 

permit until certification is granted or waived by the State in 

which the discharge originates. State certification of general 

permits covering federal waters is not mandated by statute or 

regulations. Federal waters are defined as all waters on the 

Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) beyond any State's Territorial Seas 

(as defined at Section 5O2 of the Act). However, the Director 
- 5 - 

of a permit program may determine that State review of a federal 

waters Director, permit is appropriate. pursuant The to §l24.53, 

then must send the certifying State agency: 

1. A Copy of the draft permit; 

2. A statement that EPA cannot issue or deny the permit 

until the certifying State agency has granted or 

denied certification or waived its right to certify: 

and, 

3. A statement that the State will be deemed to have 

waived its right to certify unless. that right is 

exercised within a specified reasonable time, not to 

exceed 60 days. 

State certification of a permit requires that the State 

agency identify more stringent conditions which the State finds 

necessary to moat applicable conditions of section 208(a), 301, 

302, 303, 306, and 307 of the CWA and other requirements of State 

law. The State must also provide a statement of the extent to 

which each condition can be made less stringent without violating 

State law, including the appropriate State water quality standards. 

Even though 401 State certification may not be required for 

federal waters, State participation In the permitting process 

is l ensured under §l2410(c)(l) which requires that public notice, 

§403(c) determination, draft permits and fact sheets be provided 

by mail to affected States and State agencies with jurisdiction 

over fish, shellfish, and wildlife resources and over coastal 

zone management plans. 

H. Fact Sheet 

Section 124.6(c) and (d) requires the Director to prepare 

a draft of each general permit. The Fact sheet for the draft 

permit also sots forth the significant factual, legal, and 

policy questions considered in preparing the draft permit. 

Under 5121.8 a fact sheet must include: 

1. A brief description of the type of facility or activity? 

2. A discussion of the type and quantity of pollutants 

to be discharged 

3. A brief summary of the basis for the draft permit 

conditions including: 

a. applicable statutory and regulatory requirements such 

as applicable l effluant guidelines and the basis for 

l effluent limitations and permit conditions imposed 

under 403(c); and, 

b. supporting references to the administrative record. 
- 6 - 

4. Reasons why alternatives to required standards do or do 

not appear justified: 

5. A description of the procedures for reaching a final 

decision on the draft permit including: 

a. the beginning and ending dates of the comment period 

and the address where Comments will be received: 

b. procedures for requesting public hearings on a draft 

general permit and an explanation that the regulations 

do not provide for evidentiary hearings and 

c. procedures by which the public may participate in 

the final permit decision including notice of public 

hearings it they have already been scheduled. 

6. Name and telephone number of a person to contact for 

additional information. 

7. The provisions of 40 CFR 124.56. 

I. Technology based effluent Limitations 

The Clean Water Act requires all discharge to meet 

effluent limitations based on the technological capacity of 

discharges to control the discharge of their pollutanta. Section 

301(b)(1)(A) requires the application of best practicable control 

technology currently available (BPT) no later than July 1, 1977, 

On April 13, 1979 EPA promulgated final effluent limitations 

guidelines establishing BPT for the Offshore Subcatagory (40 

CFR 435). Sections 301(b)(2)(A) and (B) requires the application 

of the best available technology economically achievable (BAT) 

and best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT) to 

control the discharge of toxic and conventional pollutants by 

July 1, 1984. Effluent limitations establishing BAT and BCT 

for the subcategory have not been promulgated, therefore 

permits issued after June 30, 1984 are based on best professional 

judgement (BPJ) under Section 402(a)(l) of the Act. The factors 

considered in BPJ determinations are described in 40 CFR Part 

122.44(a) and Part 123.3(d) (as amended September 26, 1984, 

49 FR 38052). These factors are similar to the factors used in 

establishing the BAT/BCT Effluent limitations guidelines. 

Section 306 of the Act requires the application of best 

available demonstrated technology for new sources or new sources 

performance standards (NSPS) in NPDES permits applicable to now 

sources. NSPS are based on the best available demonstrated 

technology toe the industrial category. Since new sources have 

the opportunity to design the best and most efficient wastewater 

treatment technologies, the Agency considers the best demonstrated 

process changes and and-or-pipe treatment technologies that 

reduce pollution to the maximum extent feasible in the development 

of NSPS. 
- 7 - 

J. Ocean Discharge Criteria Guidelines 

The final 403(c) ocean discharge Criteria guidelines 40 

CFR Part 125 (45 FR 65952, October 3, 1980) set forth criteria 

for determinations of unreasonable degradation and irreparable 

harm which must be addressed prior to the issuance of a NPDES 

permit. The 403 decision logic is outlined in Appendix A. 

The factors considered in a determination of unreasonable 

degradation are: 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10.. 

The quantities, Composition and potential for bioaccumulation or persistence of the pollutants to be 

discharged; 

The potential transport of such Pollutants by biological, 

physical or chemical processes; 

The composition and vulnerability of the biological 

camunities which may be exposed to such pollutants 

including the presence of unique species, communities 

of species, the presence of species identified as 

endangered or threatened pursuant to the Endandered 

Species Act, or the presence of those species critical 

to the structure or function of the ecosystem such as 

those important for the food Chain 

The importance of the receiving water area to the 

surrounding biological community, including the presence 

of spawning sites, nursery/forage area, migratory 

pathways or areas necessary for other functions or 

critical stages in the life Cycle Of an organism 

The existence of special aquatic sites including, but 

not limited to, marine sanctuaries and refuges, parks, 

national and historic monuments, national seashores, 

wilderness areas and coral reefs; 

Potential impacts on human health through direct and 

indirect pathways; 

existing or potential recreation and commericial 

fishing, including fin-fishing and shell-fishing 

Any applicable requirements of an approved Coastal 

zone Management Plan; 

Such other factors relating to the effects of the 

discharge as may be appropriate; and 

Marine water quality criteria developed pursuant to 

Section 304(a)(l) of the Act. 
-8- 

The Agency’s technical evaluation of drilling fluids discharged by oil and gas operations has identified certain operating 

conditions which could be incorporated in the NPDES permit in 

addition to BPT and BAT technologies to address water quality 

impacts. These conditions may include combinations or the 

following: 

d. discharge of authorized drilling muds and additives 

for which the Agency has bioassay test data: 

b. use of a 'buffer zone' around areas of biological 

concern in which the discharge of drilling fluids nay 

be Limited of restricted; 

c. operational requirements-such as predilution, discharge 

rate limitations, 

drilling fluids, 

adequate dilution and dispersion of 

and bulk discharge restrictions; 

d. use of shunting to minimize water column impacts; and 

e. use of a surface or near surface discharge requirement 

to minimize sediment impacts. 

Permits may also include notification requirements for sitespecific survey information to aid the Agency in determining the 

appropriateness of general permit coverage. This measure may 

be taken, for example, when the nature and extant of an area 

of biological concorn in a frontier area has not been adequately 

defined. It site-specific information submitted with notification should indicate that the provisions of a general permit 

would not provide adequate protection of the site, the Director 

may than require the facility to apply for and obtain an 

individual permit. 

K. Oil Spill Requirements 

Section 311 of the Act prohibits the discharge of oil and 

hazardous materials in harmful quantities. Routine operating 

discharges are usually specifically controlled by a NPDES permit 

and arm excluded from the provisions of Section 311. A NPDES 

permit does not preclude the institution of legal action of 

relieve permittees from any responsibilities, liabilities, or 

penalties for unauthorized discharges of toxic pollutants, 

hazardous materials, or oil spills which are covered by Section 

311 of the Act. Permittees may have a duty to report such 

unauthorized discharges to the Minerals Management Service, the 

United States Coast Guard, and/or the Environmental Protection 

Agency . EPA regulations codifying Section 311 are found at 

40 CFR Parts 110, 112, 113, 114, 116, and 117, Amendments to 

the Part 110 regulations were proposed on March 11, 1985 (50 FR 

9776 et seq.). 
- 9 - 

L. Other Legal Requirements 

1. Endangered Species Act 

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires that each federal 

agency shall ensure that none of its actions, including permit 

issuance, jeopardies the continued existence of any endangered 

or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse 

modification of their habitat. 

Par OCS general permits, the Agency follows the consultation 

procedures described in section 7 of the ESA. Formal consultation begins at the time of public notice of draft permits when 

EPA submits a written request to the Director or Regional 

Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or the National 

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Once a request for consultation 

has been received NMFS has 60 days to submit a formal response 

to EPA. Since the Department of the Interior has 60 days to 

issue a biological opinion, 

icantly delayed. 

final permit issuance can be signifIn addition, a determination by NMFS that 

insufficient information exists or that the permitting action 

may jeopardize endangered or threatened species would requiem 

EPA to obtain additional information, potentially requiring the 

Agency to repropose draft permits. 

Since the 403(c) guidelines require, an evaluation of 

information on endangered species, informal requests and/or 

staff meetings are used to identify effected endangered species 

before permit proposal. A notice of intent to develop a general 

permit may include requests for identification of endangered 

species in the permit area, a description of critical life 

stages or activities affected, and potential impacts on critical 

habitat. Copies of the Information used to complete the 403(c) 

determination, permit fact sheets, and draft permits may also 

be provided to the Service with a request for review prior to 

public notice. With sufficient information FWS and NMFS may be 

able to provide EPA with recommendations for the draft permit. 

The final biological opinion is placed in the administrative 

record for final permit issuance. 

2. Coastal Zone Management Act 

The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) Section 307(c)(3)(A) 

and its implementing regulations at 15 CFR Part 930 Subpart D 

require that consistency determinations be made for my federally 

licensed or permitted activity affecting the coastal zone of a 

State with an approved Coastal Zone Management Program. For 

permits covering federal waters, a decision to require CZMA 

consistency requires a demonstration that the permitted activity 

will affect the territorial seas or coastal waters of the 

approved State. Since there is no applicant for a general 

permit, the Agency, in effect, because the applicant and submits 

a general permit for consistency certification to the appropriate 

State agency. When EPA is the permit issuing authority within 
-10- 

the territorial seas, consistency determinations are required. 

For States with approved NPDES programs no CZM Consistency is 

required for permits issued for territorial seas dischargers. 

If it is determined that a consistency certification is 

required for a general permit, a notice of intent to develop a 

permit may request assistance and solicit recommendations from 

the State agency regarding the means for ensuring that the 

proposed activity will be conducted in a manner consistent with 

the State’s management program. EPA provides the State with 

written certification that the proposed activity complies with, 

and will be conducted in a manner consistent with, the State’s 

approved management program. The consistency certification is 

made at the time of public notice of draft permits and includes, 

in addition to the requirements described in the next paragraph, 

the 403(c) determinations, the fact sheet, and proposed draft 

permits. 

With the consistency certification, EPA provides the State 

agency with the following data and information: 

a. A detailed description of the proposed activity and 

its associated facilities to allow an assessment of 

their probable coastal zone effects. 

b. A brief assessment relating the probable coastal zone 

effects of the proposed activity and its associated 

facilities to the relevant elements of the management 

program. 

C. A brief set of findings, derived from the assessment, 

indicating that the proposed activity, its associated 

facilities and their primary effects are all consistent 

with the provisions of the management program. 

d. Any additional information required under the State 

management program. 

Formal review of EPA’s consistency certification begins at 

the time the State agency receives a copy of the certification 

along with the information and data described above. The State 

agency must provide public notice of the proposal activity in 

accordance with State Law. At a minimum, this notice must be 

sent to States significantly affected by the proposed activity. 

At the discretion of the agency, public notice may include 

announcement of one or more public hearings. 

State agencies must notify EPA "at the earliest practicable 

time" whether they concur or object to the consistency certification. However, concurrence by the State is not presumed until 

six months passes without an agency objection. The only other 

time limit imposed on the State is that, if a decision has not 

boon issued within three months, the State must notify EPA of 
tha statua OC the matter and the basis for furthw dolay. thus, it is clear that th+ CZMA regulations allow cons’derabla delay, 

in permit irruanch and those delays maY b* beyond EPA’s control, 

lt the Strto agency concurs with EPA’s consfstency 

cettieicationt EPA may issue the permit. If the Stat. agency 

objects, Lt wst describe how the proposed activity 1s lnconslstent with S~OCIFIC l lommntr of the management program, and 

what rltarnrtivo mo~suros would 8110~ tha permit to be issued. 

In tha avant OC l State rgoncy objection rnd fatluro to rrsolve 

tha issums bmtweon the two Agencies, EPA my not tssuo thm 

pa-it ~nlers the Sacrotary of Cumarca finds that thr pemittrd 

activity may bm Wdorally approved becruro th@ activity la 

conairtont with the objactiv88 oc purp08a8 Of tha Coatal tona 

klanrgetuont Act, or ia necosrary in the intaro8t of national 

IoCUCity. ProCrdurm8 tot apporls arm sat forth 'at 15 CtR Part 

930, Subpart R. 

Appendix 8 contain8 a li¶t of Statrs with rpprovad Coastal 

tono Wanagemant Programs by EPA regions. 

3. Tha Rarfna Protection, Rormrch and Smctuario8 Act 

The Plarinm Protection, Raaortch and Smctumiam Act (HPRSA) 

of L972, 16 U.S.C. 1431-1434 rogulatar tha dumping. of all type8 

of matotial8 into acorn watorm and l trbllrhaa l pa-it progru 

for ocom dumping including a cumprohanaive and continuing 

progru of monitoring and rarwrch ragardfng the l ffOct of 

dumping mterlrls. Tha HPRSA al80 l atrbfirh.8 tha HrciIW 

Sanctuaries Pcogru which ia inplomont8d by tha Nltional Ocarnic 

and Atnoaphertc Adain; rtration (NOM). MESA 13 applicable 

to goneral ponnits uhon the pornit arm lncluda8 proposed or 

dasignatod ocean dump 8itor and/or marine rancturrifl8. 

whata propoaad and doaignated acorn duaping rites lie within 

propored gome pamitfl ~088~ tha dirchrrgas authorized by the 

NPOES poemit nu8t be rovfmmd for conrirt8ncy or incon8irtmcy 

with tha dump site 8CtfVitba. Con~1r811yr pmai ttoor antaring 

1a88a b-LOCk8-.8l80 Cont8tning OCarn dumping l CtiViti.S 8m 

roquira&~g~~mnotify the WA Rogionrl officar dieacting, ocean 

dumping l cttritfom e the aovownt of mobtlo dtilling,vosrolr 

or the ccncaaont df drilling opar8tion8. 

Titlr ttL OC the WRSA (Saction 302(C)) roquirar thrt the 

S*crat8cy of Camme~cmr aftor da8ignatiOn of 8 matino rmcturcy, 

conrult with other fodaral agoncior, and 188ua nacrraary t8guLrtiona to control any rctivltsr poraitt8d within tha boundrrier 

of tha m8rina rmctu8ry. Th. SsCrMrty tW8t Cartity th8t any 

poemit, licm80, or other authorimtion i8rum-i pursusnt to any 

other 8uthority im con8iatant with the putgo8a ot tha amino 

smctuatfaa pregtu l d cm ba crrriod out wIthin ita prarulgatod 

cegulations. The authority of the Sacrrtrry to l dmlnirtor the 

proviriona of the Act ha8 bean dolwrtrd to the A88istmt 

Administrator for Coastal Zone ?!mrgomontr National Oceanic rnd 
Atmo8ohori c Administration (NOM)* The rule8 ObVerning oil and 

ga# &tivity within a designrtad S-ctuw l r-SP@Cific to each 

designation-and arm publirh8d in th@ Federal R@Qitter at the 

time sanctuariaa arm designated* 

- 12 - 

Factor S of the 403(c) guldelin*9 wecifkaHy requires 

the Identification of marine sanctuaries and an dSse3sment of 

the impact of the proposed permit on the cesources of the 

sanctuary. NCAA’S ottlce of coastal Zone Hanagement, ?!+rlne 

Sanctuaries Program, receiver notiCe of the Agency’s intent t3 

develop a goneral permit and i3 requested to identify both 

proposed and dorignated mrrino SanCtUariN witq\fn tha mmit 

area, a8 well as corresponding marino reSO~cCoa and NOM regulationr which may bo affected by the permit docislfln. 

4. Econoraic ImDSCt (EXOCUtiVO Order 12291) 

The Office of Mnagemont and Budgot (ORB) h’a8 l xompted 

ganaral NPDES parmitr fran the reVi8w rqUimont8 of Exacutiw 

Order 12291 pursuant to Saction 8b of that order. Under the 

exemption the Oirmctor of OH8 cotrinr dfrcrationrry authority 

to requart that a partfculrr ganoral poemit ba rubnitted for 

~8Vi.W. the Dirmctor may alro, at any time, withdraw the 

ex8mption. 

5. PaDomOrk Roductlon Act (PM) 

tn generrl, the information collaction requiramontr of 

general NPOES permits have bmen approved by the Office of 

Managommt and Budget (OI¶B)- in- rubaisrton8 mada -for tha NPOES 

permit progrlar unbar the provision8 of the c1aSW’w8tOr Act. 

Should l general pamlt contain nau monitoring and/or raportfng 

requiremont8 not approved by OMb, the permit t8 rubmitted to 

OWB Cor raviaw under the PM during tha public comment period. 

6. Reaulatow ?lmxibllitu Act (Ream Plox.1 

Bec8use genar81 NPDdS pernit rro conaidorad rulomakinq8 

under the APA, thay 8ra rubfect to the Rag. ?lex Act. Under 

thi8 Act, 8 Fadar81 Agency must 8CrUtinite the impact of any 

tulmrkfng OCI anal&-- bus~no88. Gonarrl NPDIS pWRit8 for Off shota 

Oil and & 8otfVtti+8 8c@ gonardly fOUnd t0 hav8 n0 impact 

On l Sim#f’cmf: nwhr Of 8M11 l ntiti.8 bocrura COSt Of 

oporatiorrq$& tha’ OCS prohibit8 8~11 buSin fraw mtating 

the rnarkM!-.. ‘WA h88 concluded, in racantly irruad genarrl 

p8mitS. that ~a 8mall bu8in.88 would be rffoctad by tha qOnW8l 

pO=i LS. 

APPENDIX 6 

REGION 

I 

II 

III 

IV 

VI 

IX 

X 

STATES WITH APPROVED COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PLANS 

LISTED BY EPA REGION AS OF JANUARY 6, 1984 

STATE COMMENTS 

Connecticut 

Maine 

Massachusetts 

Now Hampshire 

Rhode Island 

New Jersey 

New York 

Puerto Rico 

Virgin Islands 

Delaware 

Maryland 

Pennsylvania 

Virginia 

Alabama 

Florida 

Mississippi 

North Carolina 

South Carolina 

Louisiana 

California 

Hawaii 

Alaska 

Oregon 

Washington 

Ocean, Bay Segment 1985 

1984 [in development] 
APPENDIX D 
Non-Oil and Gas General Permits 

9/8/87 

CATEGORY PROPOSAL FINAL LIMITS 403(c) 

Region I 

Non-contact cooling water 

and uncontaminated storm 

water 

Region II 

Navy weapons training 

(Vieques) 

Sanitary & domestic 

wastes (PR) 

Region VI 

Petroleum storage, 

transfer & marketing 

Correction notice 

Hydrostatic testing 

Private domestic 

discharges (LA) 

Region VIII 

Construction activities (UT) 

Construction activities (SD) 

08/16/83 

48 FR 37071 

06/15/84 

49 FR 24785 

BPJ/Water 

Quality 

Yes 

06/24/81 

46 FR 32669 

04/08/85 

50 FR 13871 

10/30/84 

49 FR 43585 

10/02/85 

50 FR 40228 

BPJ/Water 

Quality 

BPJ/Water 

Quality 

Yes 

Yes 

09/13/83 

48 FR 41084 

07/12/84 

49 FR 28446 

02/21/85 

50 FR 7216 

09/13/83 

48 FR 41084 

07/29/87 

52 FR 28337 

05/20/83 

48 FR 22791 

12/20/83 

48 FR 56268 

05/20/83 

48 FR 22791 

10/19/84 

49 FR 41104 

BPJ/Settlement Agmt 

BPJ/Water 

Quality 

BPJ/Water 

Quality 

BPJ/Water 

Quality 
Non-Oil and Gas General Permits 

Page 2 

9/8/87 

CATEGORY PROPOSAL FINAL LIMITS 403(c) 

Region VIII continued 

Feedlots (UT) 

Feedlots (SD) 

Region IX 

Feedlots (AZ) 

Deep seabed mining 

Region X 

Log transfer facilities 

Seafood processors 

Conc. animal feeding 05/09/86 

operations (ID) 51 FR 17236 

Extension comment period 06/13/86 

51 FR 21617 

08/04/81 

46 FR 39670 

05/22/81 

46 FR 28008 

07/18/84 

49 FR 29141 

08/29/83 

48 FR 39144 

02/23/84 

49 FR 6788 

12/17/83 

48 FR 56107 

04/28/83 

48 FR 19201 

07/29/82 

47 FR 28127 

10/16/84 

49 FR 40441 

10/05/84 

49 FR 39442 

06/18/84 

49 FR 

04/14/87 

52 FR 12052 

Pt. 412 

Pt. 412 

Pt. 412 

BPJ/Water 

*Quality 

Yes 

BPJ/Water 

Quality 

Yes 

BPT/BCT/Water Yes 

Quality 

Pt. 412/BMP 

08/14/86 

51 FR 29156 
HudiburghrD-27rdoc-lltgwhr6/30/8 

revt9/8/87 
WC&Oil and Gas 

RExXN IV L VI SALEI 

9-04-87 

HEARItG/ EFFEXTtVE/ 

EXPIRATICN F.INAL PEWIT EXPNiTION 

IXTES I- WTls LIMITS 403(c) 

0 c#Jlf of nexim All new L 

bw, dfw C prwiars 

Prod) 

07/26/85 08/27-29/85 07/09/86 

50 FR 30564 09/O&06/85 - 51 E 24897 

10/07/85 

extedon of 

mmmnt perhd 

toxicity suepenaial 

mtic~, errata sheet 

7bmnal Dynmics 

matice 

DRIP extension 

10/08/85 

SO pR 41020 

ATR explanation 

09/18/86 

51 FR 33130 - 

03/3 l/87 

52 pR 10263 04/30/87 

07/06/87 

52 FR 25303 - 

07/l 3/87 

52 E 26181 

o Inland Tidal Haters 12/27/%3 

48 pR 57001 

0 k3h3u8d ms 

OOCS 

or/or/83 09/15/83 

48 pR 40 E 4194 

prederal Haters 08/15,030 04/03/m 

Texas e I4mislana 46 pR 20284 

07/02/86 BPJ/BAT 

07/01/91 Bcr Yes 

DisRateLim 

@l/29/86 Yes 12/31/86 short term 

07/02/87 

09/30/87 

10/17/83 

06/30/85 

04/28/81 

04/30/83 

Part 435 

BP-r 

Part 435 
-2- 

OEi Oil and Gat3 

RSION IX 

9-04-87 

HEARING/ EFFECTIVE/ 

fXPIRATICN FINAL PfWIT EXPIRATION 

SAL!3 I DATES ISSUANCE LIMITS 403(c) 

0SOCa.l 

(ew) 

OSOCd 

MeN c prod) 

8Xt8dm of 

cummt period 

0 R8ism.m 

socal 

0 mdification 

socal 

OSQCdCCS 

35,40,53,60*73 

8O#l?~,rsrse 

08/22/sS 09/26/85 

10/07/85 

BPJ/BAT 

5OpR 34036 Yes DisRatLh 

09/19/8s 

50 E 38029 

06/21/B3 

48 pR 20394 

06/21/83 

48 E 28394 

09/14/m 

46 E 45672 

10/22/85 

11/15/85 

12/03fi3 12/03/83 BF'T yes 48 FR 55029 Part 435 - 06/30/84 

12/03/83 12/03/83 w'r Yes 48 FR 55029 - 06/30/84 Part 43s yes 

02/18/82 12/31/83 BPT 

47 E 7313 yes 

Part 435 Yea 
-3- 

CXS Oil and Gas 

REGxcN x 

9-04-87 

HEARING/ EFFE%XLVE/ 

EwIRATIcN FINAL PEWIT EKPIRATION 

SAUI ISSUANCE mm LIMITS 403(c) 

0 Beaufort sea 

mpl 

0 Bering Sea 

bx.p) 

response to 5th oa/19/85 

Circuit r-rd 51 E 29600 

0 Mxton salnd 

bp) 

0 Cock Inlet 5Sl 60 07/17/85 

(exp, dev c p-w AK- any 50 pR 28974 

sxtension of 

mmmnt period 

exterrsion of 

cunmnt period 

0 Rerirq !&a II 

St. George Basin 

bXQ1 

extervr ion of 

ccqment period 

exten6ion of 

cxnment period 

wi tMrawa1 

71, 87 

AK- 36,39, 

43, 4s. BP 

70, 03 

57 

89 

97 

03/14/84 

49 Ff? 9610 - 

03/14/84 

49 pR 9610 

02/15/85 

5056385 

09/03/85 

50 pi 35598 

10/07/85 

so pR 40893 

07/22/85 

50 E 29928 

09/03/85 

50 5 35598 

10/07/85 

5opR40893 

07/08/86 

51 pR 24745 

%I?' - 

04/16/84 06/07/84 05/30/84 

or/la/s4 49 pR 23734 05/29/89 

06/07/84 

49 pR 23734 

09/ /87 

52 E 

06/04/85 

50 pi 23578 

10/03/66 

51 E 35460 

05/30/84 

OS/29/89 

06/04/85 

05/29/90 

10,'10/86 

10/10/91 

Ziidrabal 

53 E 

Yes 

M’JiBAT yes 

No diesel 

dtscharge 

Yes 

yes 

RPJ/BAT Yes 

NJ/BAT yes 
ATTACHMENT A 

NPDES Attorney General's Statement 

for General' Permits 

I hereby certify, pursuant to Section 402(b) of the 

Clean water Act as amended (33 U.S.C. §1251 et. seq.) and 

40 CFR §123.25(c) that in my opinion the laws of the State 

(Commonwealth) of provide adequate legal authority 

to issue and enforce general permits in accordance with the 

general permit program outlined in 40 CFR §122.18. The 

specific authorities provided, which are contained in lawfully 

enacted of promulgated statutes or regulation in full force 

and effect on the date of this statement include the followings 

1. Authority to Issue General Permits 

State law provides authority to issue general permits for 

the discharge of pollutants from specified categories 

of point sources to the same extent as required under the 

general permit program administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA") pursuant to Section 402 

of the Clean Water Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C. §1251 et. 

seq., and 40. CFR §122.28. 

(a) Federal Authority: CWA §402(a) 40 CFR §l22.28, §123.23. 

(b) State Statutory Authority: 

(c) State Regulatory Authority: 

(d) Remarks of the Attorney General: 

(e) Judicial Decisions Demonstrating Adequate Authority: 
2. Authority to Enforce General Permits 

State law grants to the 

STATE NPDES PERMITTING AUTHORITY 

the authority enforce to general permits pursuant to the 

implementation of a general permit Program under 40 CFR §122.28, §123.23 

(a) Federal Authority: CWA §402(a), 40 CFR §122.28, §123.23 

§123.27. 

(b) State Statutory Authority: 

(c) State Regulatory Authority: 

(d) Remarks of the Attorney General 

(e) Judicial Decisions Demonstrating Adequate Authority: 
APPENDIX F 
Model MOA 

General Permits 

AMENDMENT 

TO THE 

NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM 

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT 

BETWEEN 

(State Agency) 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, REGION 

The Memorandum of Agreement between the United States Environmental 

Protection Agony, Region 

(hereafter 

(hereafter EPA) and the (State Agency) 

) is hereby amended to include (State Agency) and 

EPA responsibilities for the development, issuance and enforcement 

of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (hereafter 

NPDES) general permits as follows: 

The (State Agency) has the responsibility for developing and 

issuing NPDES general permits. After identifying dischargers 

appropriately regulated by a general permit, the (State Agency) 

will collect sufficient effluent data to develop affluent 

limitations and prepare the draft general permit. 

Each draft general permit will be transmitted to the following 

EPA offices: 

Water Management Division Director 

U.S. EPA, Region 

(Address) - 

Director, Office Water Enforcement and Permits* 

U.S. EPA (EN-33S) 

401 M Street SW 

Washington D.C. 20460 

EPA will have up to ninety (90) days to review draft general 

permits and provide comments recommendations and objections 

to the (State Agency). Each draft. general permit will be 

accompanied by a feet sheet rotting forth the principal facts 

and methodologies considered during permit development. In 

the event EPA does object to a general permit it will provide, 

in writing, the reasons for its objection and the actions 

necessary to eliminate the objection. The State had the 

right to a public hearing on the objection. Upon receipt 

1 General permits for discharges from separate storm sewers 

need not be sent to EPA Headquarters for review. 
-2- 

of EPA’s objection, the State may request a public hearing. 

If EPA’s concerns are not satisfied and the State has not 

sought a hearing within 90 days of the objection, exclusive 

authority to issue the general permit passes to EPA. 

If EPA raises no objections to a general permit it will be 

publicly noticed in accordance with (insert State requirements), 

and 40 C.F.R. §124.10, including publication in a daily or 

weekly newspaper circulated in the area to be covered by the 

permit. The (State Agency) will issue general permits in 

accordance with (insert citations to State regulations) and 

40 C.F.R. §122.28. 

The (State Agency) may require any person authorized by a 

general permit to apply for, and obtain an individual NPDES 

permit. In addition, interested persons, including dischargers 

otherwise authorized by a general permit, may request that a 

facility be excluded from general permit coverages Dischargers 

wishing exclusion must apply for an individual NPDES permit 

within ninety (90) days of publication of the general permit. 

The applicability of a general permit will automatically 

terminate upon the effective data of the individual permit. 

Finally, a discharger with an effective or continued individual 

NPDES permit may seek general permit coverage by requesting its 

permit to be revoked. 

The (State Agency) also has the primary responsibility for 

conducting compliance monitoring activities and enforcing 

conditions and requirements of general permits. 

All specific State commitments regarding the issuance and 

enforcement of general permits will be determined through 

the annual 106 workplan/SEA process. 

This Amendment to the Memorandum of Agreement will be 

effective upon approval of the (State Agency's) general 

permits program application by the Administrator of EPA 

Region . 

FOR (State Agency): 

Director (Date) 

FOR UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY: 

Regional Administrator 

U.S. EPA, Region 

(Date) 
APPENDIX G 
FEDERAL GENERAL PERMIT REGULATIONS -- CITATIONS 

Topic 

Definitions 

Substantive Regs. 

Coverage 

Administration 

Offshore Oil & Gas 

Applications 

Draft Permits 

Fact Sheets 

Public Notice 

EPA Review State Permits 

Individual Permits 

Special Procedures for EPA Permits 

Evidentiary Hearings 

Attorney General Statement for 

State Program Approval 

Reg. Cite 

§122.2 

§122.28 

§124.3(a)(1) 

§124.6(c) 

§124.8(a) 

§124.10(c)(1) 

.10(c)(2)(i) 

.10(d)(1)(ii-iii) 

.10(d)(1)(vii) 

§123.24(d)(3) 

.43(b) 

.44(a)(2) 

.44(b)(2) 

.44(i) 

§124.52(a) 

§124.58 

$124.71(a) 

§123.23(c) 
APPENDIX H 
Code (GPCT) Description (GPCD) 

01 

04 

07 

10 

13 

16 

19 

22 

25 

28 

31 

34 

37 

40 

43 

46 

49 

50 

52 

55 

58 

61 64 

67 

70 

99 

Agricultural Production Livestock 

Coal Mining 

Construction 

Deep Seabed Mining 

Fish Hatcheries and Preserves 

Landfill Runoff 

Laundry, Cleaning, and Garment Services 

Meat Products 

Non-Contact Cooling Waters 

Offshore Oil and gas 

Oil and gas Extraction 

Petroleum and Bulk Stations and Terminals 

Placer Mining 

Private Households 

Processed Fruits and vegetables 

Salt Extraction 

Sand and Gravel 

Sand and Gravel 

Seafood Processing 

Sewerage Systems (commercial) 

Sewerage Systems (municipal) 

Storm Water Runoff 

Water Supply 

Hydrostatic Testing 

Log Transfer 

Not Yet Defined 

Standard Industrial Category Codes 

for General Permits