1

MEMORANDUM

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 (26 March 2015) [DCN 0225]

Overview 

This was the twenty-third 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 questions 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 

not constitute a decision-making body (see “Quick Reminder” section below).

Mr. Johnston started the technical discussion by reading the name of each cooling water 

and thermal variance data element along 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 Virginia asked if the annual report comes from the NPDES regulated 

entity. EPA added the following note to the final rule to provide clarification: “Where the 

Director requires additional measures to protect Federally-listed threatened or endangered 

species or critical habitat pursuant to 40 CFR 125.94(g), the Director shall require reporting 

associated with those measures [see 40 CFR 125.97(g)]. The following data elements 

correspond to this reporting requirement. These data elements are only required for 
2

facilities that are required to report on their additional measures to protect Federally-listed 

threatened or endangered species or critical habitat.” The final NPDES Electronic Reporting 

Rule converts this report from a paper to an electronic processing system.

 A representative from New Jersey stated that the CWA Section 316(b) biological reports are 

very hard to breakdown into data elements. EPA clarified that the final rule only requires 

the CWA Section 316(b) Annual Report to be electronically reported. EPA’s CWA Section 

316(b) regulations require other reporting, which is not covered by this final rule. 

 Several state government representatives asked EPA to use the exact language from CWA 

Section 316(b) regulations for the following data elements: Design Intake Flow for Cooling 

Water Intake Structure(s), Actual Intake Flow for Cooling Water Intake Structure(s), and 

Actual Through-Screen Velocity. In the final rule EPA matched the data element descriptions 

with the language in its CWA Section 316(b) regulations.

 Several state representatives asked EPA to streamline the CWA Section 316(b) data and 

thermal variance elements. In the final rule EPA was able to eliminate several of these data 

elements. For example, EPA eliminated the “Thermal Variance Granted” data element from 

the final rule as EPA can use values in the “Thermal Variance Granted Date” data element to 

identify permittees with active thermal variances.

Following the meeting, EPA received an e-mail from an individual state government 

representative on the data elements reviewed in this meeting. This e-mail is provided in 

Attachment 1.
3

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.
4

Table 1: State Technical Workgroup Members - 26 March 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

Eric Cleckler ecleckler@adem.state.al.us No

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

Robin Belley belley.robin@azdeq.gov No

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 No

Scott Miyashiro HI scott.miyashiro@doh.hawaii.gov No

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

Steve Caspers scaspers@kdheks.gov No

Shelly Shores-Miller sshoresm@kdheks.gov
5

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

No

Carla Davidson davidsonc@michigan.gov

Ruth Wallace

MO

ruth.wallace@dnr.mo.gov

Walter Fett walter.fett@dnr.mo.gov No

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

Roy Walker roy.walker@deq.ok.gov Yes

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

Tim Flor tim.flor@state.sd.us Yes

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

Deborah Debiasi deborah.debiasi@deq.virginia.gov Yes

Phani Eturu phani.eturu@deq.virginia.gov

Stephen Bernath

WA

sber461@ecy.wa.gov

Dave Knight dakn461@ecy.wa.gov Yes

Nancy Kmet nkme461@ecy.wa.gov
6

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 data

Attachment 1 - Email from Representative from Authorized NPDES Program

E-mail from Lawrence Bunting <Lawrence.Bunting@tn.gov>

Thu 3/26/2015 3:37 PM
7

TN has not historically designated cooling water intakes subject to 316(b) as permitted features in ICIS, 

so this is additional reporting for TN. The ICIS designation “intake structure” is indeed generic. If we 

identify these intake structures, it would be good to distinguish between other intakes and those intake 

structures under 316(b) when querying for the permitted feature. It may be good to include both in the 

dropdown on the type of permitted feature.

EPA RESPONSE: EPA will work with authorized NPDES programs to ensure that states and EPA can 

distinguish between cooling water intake structures and other intake structures (e.g., drinking water 

intake structures).

Design Intake Flow for Cooling Water Intake Structure(s) – There may be situations where cumulative 

intake flow may be coming from different water sources. Does this matter to EPA?

EPA RESPONSE: Appendix A includes location information (e.g., latitude, longitude) for each permitted 

feature, which includes cooling water intake structures. EPA can use this location data to identify the 

source waterbodies for the cooling water.

Actual Intake Flow for Cooling Water Intake Structure(s) – I would agree that “intake flow capacities” 

should be “intake flows.” It would be good to specify that the averages for the year should include 

those days where there is no intake flow to get consistency from all states. (In some cases, average may 

be understood to mean the average of flow for days water is withdrawn from the source. If the 

withdrawals are seasonal or depend upon some operational constraints, an intake may be used with a 

high flow rate, but at other times not be used at all. There may be some facilities that have multiple 

sources of water, including 3rd party suppliers and may switch between their options.) 

Also the draft document mentions “flow” in MGD (rate of withdrawal) but later uses “average volume of 

water withdrawn”. Flow rates and volumes are not the same thing. If it is a volume, I assume that is the 

volume of water used for the year. Subject matter experts need to decide what is really 

wanted/required for this actual flow to be reported in applications.

EPA RESPONSE: EPA has matched the description for this data element with its CWA Section 316(b) 

regulations.

Location Type for Cooling Water Intake Structure – The proposed dropdown choices do need some 

definition or else everything will end up in the “Other” category. I have an intake channel off a manmade embayment in a reservoir. Hmm; is this an intake “canal” or maybe an embayment? I’ll just put it 

in as “Other”. 

EPA RESPONSE: EPA included “Other” as an option for this data element.

Actual Through-Screen Velocity – Again this begs the question. Is this the average velocity when intake 

operating at “normal” conditions? The average that includes days when there is no velocity? The 

measured velocity for a particular time period across a screen when a study is done? The calculated 

value based on operational flow measurement and screen area over time? I’m not sure what is wanted 

nor how it will be determined.
8

EPA RESPONSE: EPA has matched the description for this data element with its CWA Section 316(b) 

regulations.

Cooling Water Intake Chosen Compliance Method – This needs definition on what the dropdown list will 

be for the compliance methods chosen for the compliance options to be reported on the applications. I 

understand from the call that the compliance method chosen is the overall compliance method. But to 

clarify what parent record this is going to be a child to, is “overall” applicable to permit level, permitted 

feature(s), or at a lower level in the hierarchy? 

EPA RESPONSE: EPA modified the description of the “Cooling Water Intake Structure Chosen 

Compliance Method” data element to read as: “The unique code/description to indicate the one or 

more compliance method selected for each cooling water intake structure based on EPA’s CWA Section 

316(b) regulations or based on BPJ. For new facilities for example, Track I, Track II, alternative 

requirements, etc. For existing facilities, which of the 125.94(c) compliance options were chosen and 

reported as part of 122.21(r)(6), whether the facility has chosen to comply on an intake basis or facility 

wide, or whether alternative requirements were requested. Facilities have the option to comply on a 

facility wide or on an intake basis. Each cooling water intake structure will have its own “Permitted 

Feature ID.” Therefore there is no parent-child relationship as the “Cooling Water Intake Structure 

Chosen Compliance Method” data is at the permitted feature level and not at the facility level. 

For the 316(a) variance data elements:

 Thermal Variance Granted will be changed to Thermal Variance Granted Flag and will be a 

Yes/No.

 Thermal Variance Date will be changed to “Thermal Variance Granted Date” and will be defined 

as the latest approval date for the variance.

EPA RESPONSE: EPA streamlined the thermal variance data elements in the final rule and also clarified 

in the description of the “Thermal Variance Granted Date” data element that, “[t]his is the most recent 

date when the NPDES permitting authority granted or renewed a CWA Section 316(a) variance for the 

controlling NPDES permit.”

TDEC should be OK with removal of the following data elements.

316(b) application/ NOI data elements:

 Cooling Water Information Submitted

 Alternative Requirements Provision Request Date

 Existing Facilities – Request for Reduced Information in Application Submittal

 Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data: Species Name

 Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data: Species Number

 316(b) report data elements (should not be required for all facilities, only applicable to T&E 

situations):

 Biological Monitoring – Request for Reduce Monitoring Approval Date

 Velocity Monitoring - Compliance with the Velocity Requirements
9

316(a) application data elements:

 Thermal Variance Study Date (multiple dates would often apply)

 Thermal Variance Value

 Non-Variance Thermal Standards and Limitations

 Thermal Variance Unit

EPA RESPONSE: EPA streamlined the CWA Section 316(b) data elements in the final rule.