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 ( 26 March 2 01 5 ) [ DCN 02 2 5 ]
**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 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 cooling water and t hermal variance d ata 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 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 for2



### 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 ele ctronic 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 ele ctronically reported. EPA’s CWA Section 316(b ) regulations require other reporting, which is not covered by this final rule
.
 Several state government represe n tatives asked EPA to use the exact language from CWA Section 316(b) regulations for the followin g 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 manageme nt 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 No 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 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 No Steve Caspers scaspers@kdheks.gov Shelly Shores
- Miller sshoresm@kdheks.gov5

**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 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.gov6



### 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 whe re 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 man
made embayment in a reservoir. Hmm; is this an intake “canal” or maybe a n embayment? I’ll just put it in as “Other”. **EPA RESP ONSE:**  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 veloc ity? 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 opti ons 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 fe ature(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), whethe r 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 ow n “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 streamline d 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 Requirements9

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.