3522 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Notices 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2021–0169; FRL–7877–01– 

OW] 

National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) 2022 

Issuance of General Permit for 

Stormwater Discharges From 

Construction Activities 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of final permit issuance. 

SUMMARY: All ten (10) Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) Regions are 

finalizing the 2022 National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 

general permit for stormwater 

discharges from construction activities, 

also referred to as the ‘‘2022 

Construction General Permit,’’ the 

‘‘2022 CGP,’’ or the ‘‘final permit.’’ The 

final permit will replace the 2017 CGP 

that will expire at midnight on February 

16, 2022. EPA is issuing this permit for 

five (5) years to provide permit coverage 

to eligible operators in all areas of the 

country where EPA is the NPDES 

permitting authority, including 

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New 

Mexico, oil and gas activities within 

Oklahoma, most Indian country lands, 

the District of Columbia, U.S. territories 

and protectorates except for the U.S. 

Virgin Islands, and certain federal 

facilities. This Federal Register 

document summarizes the final permit. 

The final permit and fact sheet can be 

found at https://www.epa.gov/npdes/

2022-construction-general-permit-cgp. 

EPA’s responses to public comments 

that were submitted in response to the 

proposed 2022 CGP may be found in the 

docket for this action (Docket ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OW–2021–0169). 

DATES: The final permit will become 

effective on February 17, 2022. This 

effective date is necessary to provide 

dischargers with the immediate 

opportunity to comply with Clean Water 

Act (CWA) requirements in light of the 

expiration of the 2017 CGP on February 

16, 2022. In accordance with 40 CFR 

part 23, the 2022 CGP shall be 

considered issued for the purpose of 

judicial review on February 7, 2022. 

Under CWA Section 509(b), judicial 

review of this general permit can be 

requested by filing a petition for review 

in the United States Court of Appeals 

within 120 days after the permit is 

issued. Under CWA Section 509(b)(2), 

the requirements in this permit may not 

be challenged later in civil or criminal 

proceedings to enforce these 

requirements. In addition, this permit 

may not be challenged in other agency 

proceedings. Deadlines for submittal of 

a Notice of Intent (NOI) are provided in 

Part 1.4.3 of the 2022 CGP. The 2022 

CGP also provides additional dates for 

compliance with the requirements of the 

permit. 

EPA will host a webinar on February 

24 at 1:00 p.m. (Eastern Time Zone) to 

provide an overview of the 2022 CGP 

and an opportunity for participants to 

ask questions. Those interested may 

register for the webinar at https://

www.zoomgov.com/webinar/register/

WN_DsNwf8dQTzC1pCk0HCyVnQ. 

Further details on the webinar, 

including a post-webinar recording, will 

be made available at https://

www.epa.gov/npdes/2022-constructiongeneral-permit-cgp. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information on the final permit, 

contact the appropriate EPA Regional 

office listed in Section I.F of this 

document, or Greg Schaner, EPA 

Headquarters, Office of Water, Office of 

Wastewater Management at 202–564– 

0721 or email: cgp@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

section is organized as follows: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

B. How can I get copies of these documents 

and other related information? 

C. Who are the EPA regional contacts for 

this permit? 

II. Background of Permit 

A. Technology-Based Effluent Limits 

(TBELs) 

B. Water Quality-Based Effluent Limits 

(WQBELs) 

III. Summary of Final Permit 

A. Final Changes That Improve Clarity of 

the Permit 

B. Final Changes That Add Specificity To 

Permit Requirements 

IV. Provisions Not Finalized in the 2022 CGP 

V. Implementation Assistance 

VI. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

VII. 2022 CGP Incremental Cost Analysis and 

Future Cost-Benefit Considerations 

VIII. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

IX. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

X. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and 

Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

XI. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

1. Entities Covered by This Permit 

This final permit covers stormwater 

discharges to waters of the United States 

from construction activities located in 

areas identified in Appendix B of the 

permit from the following entities, as 

categorized in the North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS): 

TABLE 1—ENTITIES COVERED BY THIS PERMIT

Category Examples of affected entities 

North American Industry 

Classification System 

(NAICS) code 

Industry .................. Construction site operators disturbing one or more acres of land, or less than one acre but part of a larger common plan 

of development or sale if the larger common plan will ultimately disturb 1 acre or more, and performing the following activities: 

Construction of Buildings ......................................................................................................... 236 

Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction .............................................................................. 237 

EPA does not intend the preceding 

table to be exhaustive but provides it as 

a guide for readers regarding the types 

of activities EPA is now aware of that 

could potentially be affected by this 

action. Other types of entities not listed 

in the table could also be affected. To 

determine whether your site is covered 

by this action, you should carefully 

examine the definition of ‘‘construction 

activity’’ and ‘‘small construction 

activity’’ in existing EPA regulations at 

40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(x) and 122.26(b)

(15), respectively. If you have questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, consult one of the 

persons listed for technical information 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Notices 3523 

in the preceding FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

2. Types of Construction Sites for Which 

Operators Are Eligible for Permit 

Coverage 

Coverage under this permit will be 

available to operators of eligible sites 

located in those areas where EPA is the 

permitting authority. A list of eligible 

areas is included in Appendix B of the 

final permit. Eligibility for permit 

coverage is limited to operators of ‘‘new 

sites,’’ operators of ‘‘existing sites,’’ 

‘‘new operators of permitted sites,’’ and 

operators of ‘‘emergency-related 

projects.’’ A ‘‘new site’’ is a site where 

construction activities commenced on 

or after the effective date of the final 

2022 CGP. An ‘‘existing site’’ is a site 

with 2017 CGP coverage where 

construction activities commenced prior 

to the effective date of the final 2022 

CGP. A ‘‘new operator of a permitted 

site’’ is an operator that through transfer 

of ownership and/or operation replaces 

the operator of an already permitted 

construction site that is either a ‘‘new 

site’’ or an ‘‘existing site.’’ An 

‘‘emergency-related project’’ is a project 

initiated in response to a public 

emergency (e.g., mud slides, earthquake, 

extreme flooding conditions, disruption 

in essential public services), for which 

the related work requires immediate 

authorization to avoid imminent 

endangerment to human health or the 

environment, or to reestablish public 

services. 

3. Geographic Coverage 

This 2022 CGP provides coverage to 

eligible operators for stormwater 

discharges from construction activities 

that occur in areas not covered by an 

approved state NPDES program. The 

areas of geographic coverage for the 

2022 CGP are listed in Appendix B, and 

include the states of New Hampshire, 

Massachusetts, and New Mexico, oil 

and gas activities within Oklahoma, as 

well as most Indian country lands, and 

certain federal facilities. Permit 

coverage can also be obtained by 

operators in Puerto Rico, the District of 

Columbia, and the Pacific Island 

territories (i.e., Island of American 

Samoa, Island of Guam, and Johnston 

Atoll, Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands, Midway Island, and 

Wake Island). EPA notes that the CGP 

will no longer provide coverage to 

construction sites in the state of Idaho, 

except for sites located on Indian 

country lands, or to sites located in the 

state of Texas that involve the 

exploration, development, or 

production of oil or gas or geothermal 

resources, including transportation of 

crude oil or natural gas by pipeline, as 

both states are now fully authorized to 

issue permits for construction 

stormwater. Eligible operators in these 

two states will need to seek permit 

coverage for their stormwater discharges 

from their respective state NPDES 

authority. 

B. How can I get copies of these 

documents and other related 

information? 

1. Docket. EPA has established an 

official public docket for this action 

under Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW– 

2021–0169. Although all documents in 

the docket are listed in an index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. Out of 

an abundance of caution for members of 

the public and our staff, the EPA Docket 

Center and Reading Room are closed to 

the public, with limited exceptions, to 

reduce the risk of transmitting COVID– 

19. When the EPA Docket Center and 

Reading Room re-open, publicly 

available docket materials will be 

available in hard copy at the Water 

Docket in the EPA Docket Center, (EPA/ 

DC) WJC West Building, Room 3334, 

1301 Constitution Ave. NW, 

Washington, DC 20460. Our Docket 

Center staff will continue to provide 

remote customer service via email, 

phone, and webform. For further 

information on EPA Docket Center 

services and the current status, please 

visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/ 

dockets. 

2. Electronic Access. You may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the United States 

government on-line source for federal 

regulations at http://www.regulations 

.gov. 

Electronic versions of the final permit 

and fact sheet are available on EPA’s 

NPDES website at https://www.epa.gov/ 

npdes/2022-construction-generalpermit-cgp. 

An electronic version of the public 

docket is available through EPA’s 

electronic public docket and comment 

system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA 

Dockets at http://www.regulations.gov to 

view public comments, access the index 

listing of the contents of the official 

public docket, and to access those 

documents in the public docket that are 

available electronically. For additional 

information about EPA’s public docket, 

visit the EPA Docket Center homepage 

at https://www.epa.gov/dockets. 

C. Who are the EPA regional contacts 

for this permit? 

For EPA Region 1, contact Sania 

Kamran: Email at kamran.sania@

epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 2, contact Stephen 

Venezia: Email at venezia.stephen@

epa.gov, or for Puerto Rico, contact 

Sergio Bosques: Email at 

bosques.sergio@epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 3, contact Carissa 

Moncavage: Email at 

moncavage.carissa@epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 4, contact Michael 

Mitchell: Email at mitchell.michael@

epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 5, contact Krista 

McKim: Email at mckim.krista@epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 6, contact Suzanna 

Perea: Email at: perea.suzanna@epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 7, contact Mark 

Matthews: Email at: matthews.mark@

epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 8, contact Amy Clark: 

Email at: clark.amy@epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 9, contact Eugene 

Bromley: Email at bromley.eugene@

epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 10, contact Margaret 

McCauley: Email at 

mccauley.margaret@epa.gov. 

II. Background of Permit 

The CWA establishes a 

comprehensive program ‘‘to restore and 

maintain the chemical, physical, and 

biological integrity of the Nation’s 

waters.’’ 33 U.S.C. 1251(a). The CWA 

also includes the objective of attaining 

‘‘water quality which provides for the 

protection and propagation of fish, 

shellfish and wildlife and * * * 

recreation in and on the water.’’ 33 

U.S.C. 1251(a)(2)). To achieve these 

goals, the CWA requires EPA to control 

discharges of pollutants from point 

sources through the issuance of National 

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) permits. 

The Water Quality Act of 1987 (WQA) 

added Section 402(p) to the CWA, 

which directed EPA to develop a phased 

approach to regulate stormwater 

discharges under the NPDES program. 

33 U.S.C. 1342(p). EPA published a final 

regulation in the Federal Register, often 

called the ‘‘Phase I Rule,’’ on November 

16, 1990, establishing permit 

application requirements for, among 

other things, ‘‘storm water discharges 

associated with industrial activity.’’ See 

55 FR 47990. EPA defines the term 

‘‘storm water discharge associated with 

industrial activity’’ in a comprehensive 

manner to cover a wide variety of 

facilities. See id. Construction activities, 

including activities that are part of a 

larger common plan of development or 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
3524 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Notices 

sale, that ultimately disturb at least five 

acres of land and have point source 

discharges to waters of the U.S. were 

included in the definition of ‘‘industrial 

activity’’ pursuant to 40 CFR 

122.26(b)(14)(x). The second rule 

implementing Section 402(p), often 

called the ‘‘Phase II Rule,’’ was 

published in the Federal Register on 

December 8, 1999. It requires NPDES 

permits for discharges from construction 

sites disturbing at least one acre but less 

than five acres, including sites that are 

part of a larger common plan of 

development or sale that will ultimately 

disturb at least one acre but less than 

five acres, pursuant to 40 CFR 

122.26(b)(15)(i). See 64 FR 68722. EPA 

issues the 2022 CGP under the statutory 

and regulatory authorities cited in this 

section. 

NPDES permits for construction 

stormwater discharges are required 

under Section 402(a)(1) of the CWA to 

include conditions to meet technologybased effluent limits established under 

Section 301 and, where applicable, 

Section 306. Effluent Limitations 

Guidelines (ELGs) and New Source 

Performance Standards (NSPS) are 

technology-based effluent limitations 

that are based on the degree of control 

that can be achieved using various 

levels of pollutant control technology as 

defined in Subchapter III of the CWA. 

Once a new national standard is 

established in accordance with these 

sections, NPDES permits must 

incorporate limits based on such 

technology-based standards. See CWA 

Sections 301 and 306, 33 U.S.C. 1311 

and 1316, and 40 CFR 122.44(a)(1). On 

December 1, 2009, EPA published final 

regulations establishing technologybased ELGs and NSPS for the 

Construction & Development (C&D) 

point source category, which became 

effective on February 1, 2010. See 40 

CFR part 450 and 74 FR 62996. EPA 

amended the Construction & 

Development Rule, or ‘‘C&D rule,’’ on 

March 6, 2014 to satisfy EPA’s 

agreements pursuant to a settlement of 

litigation that challenged the 2009 rule. 

See 79 FR 12661. All NPDES 

construction permits issued by EPA or 

states after this date must incorporate 

the requirements in the C&D rule. 

A. Technology-Based Effluent Limits 

(TBELs) 

The non-numeric effluent limitations 

in the C&D rule are designed to prevent 

or minimize the mobilization and 

discharge of sediment and sedimentbound pollutants, such as metals and 

nutrients, and to prevent or minimize 

exposure of stormwater to construction 

materials, debris, and other sources of 

pollutants on construction sites. In 

addition, these non-numeric effluent 

limitations limit the generation of 

dissolved pollutants. Soil on 

construction sites can contain a variety 

of pollutants such as nutrients, 

pesticides, herbicides, and metals. 

These pollutants may be present 

naturally in the soil, such as arsenic or 

selenium, or they may have been 

contributed by previous activities on the 

site, such as agriculture or industrial 

activities. These pollutants, once 

mobilized by stormwater, can detach 

from the soil particles and become 

dissolved pollutants. Once dissolved, 

these pollutants would not be removed 

by down-slope sediment controls. 

Source control through minimization of 

soil erosion is, therefore, the most 

effective way of controlling the 

discharge of these pollutants. 

The non-numeric effluent limits in 

the C&D rule, upon which certain 

technology-based requirements in the 

final permit are based, include the 

following: 

• Erosion and Sediment Controls— 

Permittees are required to design, 

install, and maintain effective erosion 

controls and sediment controls to 

minimize the discharge of pollutants. At 

a minimum, such controls must be 

designed, installed, and maintained to: 

1. Control stormwater volume and 

velocity to minimize soil erosion in 

order to minimize pollutant discharges; 

2. Control stormwater discharges, 

including both peak flow rates and total 

stormwater volume, to minimize 

channel and streambank erosion, and 

scour in the immediate vicinity of 

discharge points; 

3. Minimize the amount of soil 

exposed during construction activity; 

4. Minimize the disturbance of steep 

slopes; 

5. Minimize sediment discharges from 

the site. The design, installation, and 

maintenance of erosion and sediment 

controls must address factors such as 

the amount, frequency, intensity, and 

duration of precipitation, the nature of 

resulting stormwater discharge, and soil 

characteristics, including the range of 

soil particle sizes expected to be present 

on the site; 

6. Provide and maintain natural 

buffers around waters of the United 

States. Direct stormwater to vegetated 

areas and maximize stormwater 

infiltration to reduce pollutant 

discharges, unless infeasible; 

7. Minimize soil compaction. 

Minimizing soil compaction is not 

required where the intended function of 

a specific area of the site dictates that it 

be compacted; and 

8. Unless infeasible, preserve topsoil. 

Preserving topsoil is not required where 

the intended function of a specific area 

of the site dictates that the topsoil be 

disturbed or removed. 

• Soil Stabilization Requirements— 

Permittees are required to, at a 

minimum, initiate soil stabilization 

measures immediately whenever any 

clearing, grading, excavating, or other 

earth disturbing activities have 

permanently ceased on any portion of 

the site or temporarily ceased on any 

portion of the site and will not resume 

for a period exceeding 14 calendar days. 

In arid, semiarid, and drought-stricken 

areas where initiating vegetative 

stabilization measures immediately is 

infeasible, alternative stabilization 

measures must be employed as specified 

by the permitting authority. 

Stabilization must be completed within 

a period of time determined by the 

permitting authority. In limited 

circumstances, stabilization may not be 

required if the intended function of a 

specific area of the site necessitates that 

it remains disturbed. 

• Dewatering Requirements— 

Permittees are required to minimize the 

discharge of pollutants from dewatering 

trenches and excavations. Discharges 

are prohibited unless managed by 

appropriate controls. 

• Pollution Prevention Measures— 

Permittees are required to design, 

install, implement, and maintain 

effective pollution prevention measures 

to minimize the discharge of pollutants. 

At a minimum, such measures must be 

designed, installed, implemented, and 

maintained to: 

1. Minimize the discharge of 

pollutants from equipment and vehicle 

washing, wheel wash water, and other 

wash waters. Wash waters must be 

treated in a sediment basin or 

alternative control that provides 

equivalent or better treatment prior to 

discharge; 

2. Minimize the exposure of building 

materials, building products, 

construction wastes, trash, landscape 

materials, fertilizers, pesticides, 

herbicides, detergents, sanitary waste, 

and other materials present on the site 

to precipitation and to stormwater. 

Minimization of exposure is not 

required in cases where the exposure to 

precipitation and to stormwater will not 

result in a discharge of pollutants or 

where exposure of a specific material or 

product poses little risk of stormwater 

contamination (such as final products 

and materials intended for outdoor use); 

and 

3. Minimize the discharge of 

pollutants from spills and leaks and 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Notices 3525 

implement chemical spill and leak 

prevention and response procedures. 

• Prohibited Discharges—The 

following discharges from C&D sites are 

prohibited: 

1. Wastewater from washout of 

concrete, unless managed by an 

appropriate control; 

2. Wastewater from washout and 

cleanout of stucco, paint, form release 

oils, curing compounds, and other 

construction materials; 

3. Fuels, oils, or other pollutants used 

in vehicle and equipment operation and 

maintenance; and 

4. Soaps or solvents used in vehicle 

and equipment washing. 

• Surface Outlets—When discharging 

from basins and impoundments, 

permittees are required to utilize outlet 

structures that withdraw water from the 

surface, unless infeasible. 

The accompanying fact sheet details 

how EPA has incorporated these 

requirements into the final permit. The 

discussion in the fact sheet includes a 

summary of each provision and the 

agency’s rationale for articulating the 

provision in this way. 

B. Water Quality-Based Effluent Limits 

(WQBELs) 

EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR 

122.44(d)(1) require permitting 

authorities to include additional or 

more stringent permit requirements 

when necessary to achieve water quality 

standards. The 2022 CGP contains 

several provisions to protect water 

quality that were retained from the 2017 

CGP. The final permit includes a 

narrative WQBEL requiring that 

discharges be controlled as necessary to 

meet applicable water quality standards. 

Failure to control discharges in a 

manner that meets applicable water 

quality standards is a violation of the 

permit. 

In addition to the narrative WQBEL, 

the 2022 CGP includes related 

provisions that act together to protect 

water quality. For example, the permit 

requires operators to implement 

stormwater controls and to take 

corrective action in response to any 

exceedance of applicable water quality 

standards. In addition, the permit 

requires more stringent site inspection 

frequencies and stabilization deadlines 

for construction sites that discharge to 

those waters that are sediment or 

nutrient-impaired, which are parameters 

typically associated with stormwater 

discharges from construction sites, or 

waters identified by a state, tribe, or 

EPA as requiring enhanced protection 

under antidegradation requirements. In 

the 2022 CGP, EPA also included an 

additional water quality-based 

requirement for dewatering discharges 

to sediment-impaired and high-quality 

waters that requires operators to 

monitor the discharge for turbidity in 

comparison to a benchmark threshold. 

This new requirement is discussed in 

Section III.B. 

Additionally, EPA received CWA 

Section 401 certifications for the final 

2022 CGP. Some of those certifications 

included additional conditions that are 

required by states, Indian tribes, and 

territories, pursuant to relevant 

provisions of the CWA and/or their 

respective legal authorities. These 

conditions were incorporated into the 

permit as legally binding permit limits 

and requirements in the specific 

geographic areas that are located within 

the jurisdiction of the certifying 

authority. 

III. Summary of Final Permit 

This section summarizes the most 

significant modifications that are 

included in the 2022 CGP relative to the 

2017 CGP. The fact sheet for the permit 

explains in more detail each permit 

condition and the rationale for any 

changes to those conditions. The final 

permit and fact sheet can be found in 

the docket for this action and at https:// 

www.epa.gov/npdes/2022-constructiongeneral-permit-cgp. A comprehensive 

list of the final changes, as well as the 

corresponding parts of the permit that 

are modified, is included in a table in 

Section III.B of the fact sheet. 

The types of final changes in the 2022 

CGP generally fall into one of two 

categories: (1) Changes to improve the 

clarity of the permit, and (2) changes 

that added specificity to the permit 

requirements. The table of modifications 

in Section III.B of the fact sheet specifies 

which changes fall under the type (1) 

category and which fall into the type (2) 

category. The following sections briefly 

describe the most significant final 

changes within these two broad 

categories. 

A. Final Changes That Improve Clarity 

of the Permit 

EPA finalized a number of relatively 

minor changes that focus on improving 

the clarity of provisions where 

operators, EPA compliance staff, or 

other stakeholders have raised 

questions. These changes generally do 

not change the underlying requirement 

from the 2017 CGP, but rather attempt 

to make EPA’s original intent clearer. 

These clarifications in the 2022 CGP 

should improve the overall 

understanding of the permit’s 

requirements from all perspectives, 

including the permitting authority, 

permittees, and the general public. 

The final changes to improve clarity 

include the following: 

• Approved stormwater control and 

stormwater pollution prevention plan 

products—EPA includes new language 

in the permit to clearly state that the 

agency does not endorse specific 

stormwater control or stormwater 

pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) 

products or vendors. Industry 

stakeholders suggested that the permit 

include such language to help 

discourage some vendors from 

misleadingly suggesting that EPA or the 

permit approves of specific products. 

See footnotes 13 and 84 in Parts 2.1 and 

7.1, respectively, of the permit. 

• Differentiate between routine 

maintenance and corrective action— 

EPA defines routine maintenance as 

minor repairs or other upkeep 

performed to ensure the site’s 

stormwater controls remain in effective 

operating condition, not including 

significant repairs or the need to install 

a new or replacement control. If a 

stormwater control needs a significant 

repair or a new or replacement control 

is needed, the permit requires that it be 

treated as a corrective action. This 

change addresses feedback provided by 

industry stakeholders who have 

observed that there is considerable 

confusion about which maintenance 

repairs are considered routine versus 

those that should be treated as 

corrective actions. Based on comments 

received on the proposed permit, EPA 

provided further flexibility for routine 

maintenance, which cannot be 

completed by the close of the next 

business day after the condition 

requiring maintenance is discovered, by 

enabling operators to have up to seven 

days to complete this work. The 

additional time is conditioned on the 

operator documenting in the site 

inspection report why it would be 

infeasible to finish the work by the close 

of the next business, and why the 

repairs or other upkeep should still be 

treated as routine maintenance. Where 

the operator finds that the same routine 

maintenance fix must be repeatedly (i.e., 

three or more times) made to the same 

stormwater control at the same location, 

the operator must complete the work for 

any subsequent occurrences of the same 

problem under the corrective action 

procedures in Part 5 of the permit, or 

document in the site inspection report 

why the specific reoccurrence of the 

problem should still be addressed as a 

routine maintenance fix. See Parts 

2.1.4.b, c, and d, and 5.1.1 of the permit. 

• Include additional stormwater 

control design considerations—The CGP 

requires operators to take into account 

several factors in designing stormwater 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
3526 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Notices 

controls that comply with permit 

conditions. The factors include the 

expected amount, frequency, intensity, 

and duration of precipitation. See Part 

2.1.1 of the permit. EPA clarifies that 

the relevant data used must be the most 

recent data available to account for 

recent precipitation patterns and trends. 

EPA also suggests that operators include 

consideration and contingencies for the 

implementation of structural 

improvements, enhanced or resilient 

stormwater controls, and other 

mitigation measures to help minimize 

the stormwater discharge impacts from 

major storms (e.g., hurricanes, storm 

surges, extreme precipitation, or flood 

events) where the site has been exposed 

to or previously experienced such 

storms. 

• Clarify factors where infiltration 

would be infeasible or inadvisable—The 

CGP requires that operators direct 

stormwater to vegetated areas and 

maximize stormwater infiltration and 

filtering to reduce pollutant discharges, 

unless infiltration would be inadvisable 

due to the underlying geology and 

groundwater concerns, or infeasible due 

to site constraints. EPA suggests some of 

the considerations operators should take 

into account in determining whether 

infiltration at a particular site is 

infeasible or inadvisable, such as factors 

relating to the underlying soils or 

geology, hydrology, depth to the 

groundwater table, proximity to source 

water protection area(s), or specific 

contaminant concerns. See Part 2.2.2 

and footnote 19 in the permit. 

• Clarify application of perimeter 

control and natural buffer 

requirements—EPA understands from 

conversations with stakeholders that 

there is confusion about whether 

perimeter controls are necessary on the 

site when the operator is already 

providing a natural buffer pursuant to 

the requirements of the permit. To 

address this confusion, EPA clarifies 

that perimeter controls must be installed 

upgradient of any natural buffers except 

in situations where the perimeter 

control is being used by the operator to 

fulfill one of the buffer alternative 

requirements, in which case the 

operator would not be required to install 

a second perimeter control. See Part 

2.2.3.a of the permit. 

• Clarify the permit flexibilities for 

arid and semi-arid areas—The 2017 

CGP maintained from previous CGPs 

alternative stabilization and inspection 

schedules for arid and semi-arid areas 

that are reflective of the different 

climatic and precipitation conditions 

that exist in those areas. These 

stabilization and inspection schedule 

flexibilities apply during the 

‘‘seasonally dry period’’ of the year 

when there is less risk of a dischargeproducing storm event. The permit did 

not previously define the term 

‘‘seasonally dry period,’’ and EPA has 

received a number of questions from 

construction operators over the past 

several years about what this term 

means. For this reason, the final 2022 

CGP establishes a new definition for 

seasonally dry period to provide clarity 

and includes resources in the form of 

maps and zip code tables to assist 

construction operators located in an arid 

or semi-arid area in determining when 

they may be operating during a 

seasonally dry period of the year. See 

Parts 2.2.14.b, 2.2.14.c, and 4.4.2 of the 

permit, as well as the definition of 

‘‘seasonally dry period’’ in Appendix A. 

See also EPA’s Seasonally Dry Period 

Locator Tool at https://www.epa.gov/ 

npdes/construction-general-permitresources-tools-and-templates. 

• Clarify pollution prevention 

requirements for construction waste— 

The 2022 CGP extends existing 

pollution control flexibilities that apply 

to building materials and products in 

Part 2.3.3.a to certain types of 

construction wastes in Part 2.3.3.e. 

Waste containers are not required for 

the waste remnant or unused portions of 

any construction materials or final 

products where the exposure to 

precipitation and to stormwater will not 

result in a discharge of pollutants, or 

where exposure of a specific material or 

product poses little risk of stormwater 

contamination, provided that these 

wastes are stored separately from other 

construction or domestic wastes that do 

not meet these criteria, are stored in 

designated areas of the site, and are 

described in the SWPPP. See Parts 

2.3.3.e, 7.2.4.i, and 7.2.6.b.ix of the 

permit. 

• Clarify proper handling of washing 

applicators and containers used for 

stucco, paint, concrete, form release 

oils, curing compounds, or other 

materials—The permit includes some 

additional details based on feedback 

provided in the public comments 

regarding how operators should handle 

washout or cleanout wastes. This 

includes not allowing liquid wastes to 

enter site drainage features, not allowing 

such wastes to be disposed of through 

infiltration or to otherwise be disposed 

of on the ground, and complying with 

applicable state, tribal, or local 

requirements for disposal. See Part 

2.3.4.b of the permit. 

• Clarify requirements for inspections 

during storm events—In meetings with 

stakeholders prior to the proposed 

permit, and in comments submitted 

during the public comment period, it 

has become clear that clarification is 

needed to better explain the required 

frequency of inspections during and 

after storm events. For inspections 

required in response to storm events 

producing 0.25 inches of rain within a 

24-hour period, EPA provided 

additional text explaining when 

inspections are required under different 

storm length scenarios. See Part 4.2.2.a. 

For inspections required in response to 

discharges from snowmelt, the permit 

adds a numeric inspection threshold for 

snowfall precipitation that is equivalent 

to the 0.25-inch rain event to help 

operators determine when an inspection 

may be required. This change clarifies 

that where there is a discharge from 

snowmelt caused by an accumulation of 

3.25 inches or greater of snow within a 

24-hour period, an inspection is 

required. Some operators requested this 

change and explained to EPA that 

without a numeric threshold, it is 

difficult for operators to know which 

snow events may trigger the need to 

inspect the site during the winter 

season. EPA relied on information from 

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) to derive the 

3.25-inch snowfall equivalent to the 

0.25-inch rain event. See Part 4.2.2.b of 

the permit. 

• Availability of stormwater pollution 

prevention plan (SWPPP), inspection 

reports, and corrective action log in 

electronic form—The 2017 CGP enabled 

operators to keep their SWPPP, 

inspection reports, and corrective action 

records in electronic form, as long as 

they could be accessed and read by the 

operator and by any EPA, state, or local 

inspection authorities in the same 

manner as a paper copy. EPA heard 

from permittees, however, who were 

uncertain about whether the flexibility 

to keep these documents in electronic 

form was available to them. EPA 

acknowledges that part of the problem 

was that its explanation about retaining 

documents in electronic form was only 

included in a frequently asked question 

section of its construction stormwater 

website, and was not clearly stated in 

the 2017 CGP. For this reason, the final 

2022 CGP includes text to make it clear 

that electronic versions of the SWPPP, 

inspection reports, and corrective action 

logs may be used as long as they meet 

certain minimum requirements. See 

footnotes 76, 78, and 92 to Parts 4.7.3, 

5.4.3, and 7.3, respectively, of the 

permit. 

• Updated process for Endangered 

Species Act eligibility determinations— 

EPA updated Appendix D of the CGP, 

which establishes procedures for 

operators to follow in determining their 

eligibility for coverage with respect to 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Notices 3527 

the protection of endangered and 

threatened species. The changes to 

Appendix D are primarily in the form of 

clarifications to existing procedures or 

updates to resources that operators can 

use to determine whether species are 

located in the ‘‘action area’’ of the 

construction site. EPA finalized similar 

changes as part of the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA) consultation it 

completed as part of its issuance of the 

2021 Multi-Sector General Permit 

(MSGP) for discharges from industrial 

activities (See Appendix E of the 2021 

MSGP at https://www.epa.gov/npdes/ 

stormwater-discharges-industrialactivities-epas-2021-msgp). During the 

ESA consultation on the 2022 CGP and 

based on EPA’s experience with 

consultation for the 2021 MSGP, EPA 

agreed to reformat Appendix D and the 

corresponding Endangered Species 

Protection section of the electronic NOI 

in the NPDES eReporting Tool (NeT) 

into a worksheet-style format. The 

worksheet breaks apart the procedures, 

criterion selection, and required 

supporting documentation into a series 

of individual questions and fillable 

answers, rather than long narrative 

instructions. It is EPA’s intention that 

presenting the ESA procedures in a 

more dynamic, structured way will help 

the operator arrive at the correct ESA 

criterion selection by eliminating ones 

that do not apply to their site and will 

ensure that all required supporting 

documentation is included when 

submitting the NOI. See Appendix D of 

the permit, and related information at 

https://www.epa.gov/npdes/2022- 

construction-general-permit-cgp. 

B. Final Changes That Add Specificity 

to Permit Requirements 

EPA finalized select modifications to 

the permit to address specific problems 

that have come to the agency’s attention 

during the permit term or to incorporate 

enhancements that reflect current best 

practices. These changes are narrowly 

focused on specific topics. The 

following is a summary of these 

changes: 

• Include additional perimeter 

control installation and maintenance 

requirements—Due to the vital role that 

sediment controls installed along the 

downslope side of the construction site 

perimeter play in minimizing sediment 

discharges, it is important for the CGP 

requirements related to these controls to 

reflect best practices that are available, 

effective, and practicable. Reviewing a 

number of state permits and best 

management practice manuals during 

the development of the proposed and 

final permit, EPA concluded that some 

targeted changes to the perimeter 

control requirements in the CGP are 

appropriate and warranted at this time. 

For this reason, EPA finalized 

additional perimeter control installation 

and maintenance requirements that are 

focused on ensuring that these controls 

continue to work effectively. For 

example, under the new provision, if 

there is evidence of stormwater 

circumventing or undercutting the 

perimeter control after a storm event, 

the operator is required to extend the 

length of the perimeter control or repair 

any undercut areas, whichever applies. 

This change is intended to ensure that 

maintenance of these controls is focused 

on fixing problems as soon as they are 

found and making sure they work 

effectively before the next storm event 

occurs. See Part 2.2.3 of the permit. 

• Update pollution prevention 

requirements for chemicals used and 

stored on site—EPA finalized changes to 

the pollution prevention requirements 

for diesel fuel, oil, hydraulic fuels, or 

other petroleum products, and other 

chemicals. These changes respond to 

feedback EPA received from some 

permittees who recommended reframing 

the 2017 CGP permit requirements so 

they are proportionate to the volume of 

chemicals being used and stored on the 

site, and relative to the risk of a spill or 

leak. EPA agreed that the requirements 

in this section could be improved by 

strengthening the linkage between the 

type of pollution prevention control 

needed and the volume of chemical 

containers kept on site. Consistent with 

this principle, the final permit 

establishes control requirements that are 

appropriate for chemical containers 

with a storage capacity of less than 55 

gallons by requiring that the operator 

use water-tight containers, place them 

on a spill containment pallet (or similar 

device) if kept outside, and have a spill 

kit available at all times and in good 

working condition, and personnel 

available to respond quickly to a spill or 

leak. These controls will be effective at 

preventing a discharge from a spill or 

leak, while also having the added 

advantage of being moved more easily 

around the site. The final permit also 

includes controls that are more suitable 

to larger chemical containers with a 

storage capacity of 55 gallons or more, 

such as requiring a temporary roof or 

secondary containment to prevent a 

discharge from a leak or spill. Based on 

public comments, EPA modified the 

requirements so that they are applied 

based on the volume of container at the 

site (i.e., containers with a storage 

capacity of less than 55 gallons, or 55 

gallons or more) versus the proposed 

approach of applying requirements 

based on the total volume of chemicals 

at the site. EPA also added some 

additional specificity to the final 

provisions to require that all containers 

be closed, sealed, and secured when not 

being actively used. EPA also added an 

additional flexibility to allow operators 

with certain site constraints to store 

larger volume containers as far away 

from receiving waters, site drainage 

features, and stormwater inlets as 

possible if it is infeasible to store them 

at least 50 feet away. See Part 2.3.3.c of 

the permit. 

• Specify new dewatering discharge 

requirements—EPA finalized several 

changes to the permit’s dewatering 

requirements to improve compliance 

and further reduce pollutant loads to 

receiving waters. EPA has noted 

violations with the permit’s dewatering 

requirements at sites with controls that 

are improperly installed and 

maintained, resulting in significant 

discharges of sediment and other 

pollutants to receiving waters. Given the 

high rate at which dewatered water may 

be discharged, EPA inspection 

personnel have observed that it is 

possible that a site may discharge more 

sediment in several hours of poorly 

managed dewatering activities than 

might otherwise be discharged from a 

site via stormwater discharges over the 

entire course of the construction project. 

Additionally, EPA has found there to be 

good example provisions from state 

construction stormwater permits and 

standalone NPDES dewatering permits 

that can be used to strengthen the CGP’s 

dewatering conditions. 

The final dewatering revisions to the 

permit add clarity to the existing 

pollutant control provisions, increase 

the number of inspections required 

while the dewatering discharge is 

occurring, establish a tailored checklist 

of problems to review during the 

inspection, and identify specific triggers 

for when corrective action is required. 

For example, one new dewateringrelated inspection provision requires the 

operator to check whether a sediment 

plume, foam, and/or other evidence of 

pollutants such as a visible sheen or oily 

deposit on the bottom or shoreline of 

the receiving water was observed during 

the inspection at the point of discharge 

to any receiving water flowing through 

or immediately adjacent to the site and/ 

or to drainage features. If such pollutant 

indicators are observed, the permit 

requires the operator to, among other 

things, take immediate steps to 

minimize the discharge of pollutants, 

including the possibility of shutting off 

the dewatering discharge depending on 

the severity of the condition and to 

ensure that the dewatering controls 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
3528 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Notices 

being used are operating effectively. 

During an inspection of the dewatering 

operation, the operator would also be 

required to take photographs of (1) the 

dewatering water prior to treatment by 

a control(s) and the final discharge after 

treatment; (2) the dewatering control(s); 

and (3) the point of discharge to any 

receiving waters flowing through or 

immediately adjacent to the site and/or 

to site drainage features, storm drain 

inlets, and other conveyances to 

receiving waters. This documentation 

will help demonstrate how well the 

dewatering controls are working and 

will show where adaptations made after 

any problems have been found have 

resulted in improved pollutant control. 

See Parts 2.4, 4.3.2, 4.6.3, 5.1.5, and 

5.2.2 of the permit. 

• Require turbidity benchmark 

monitoring for sites discharging 

dewatering water to sensitive waters— 

The 2022 CGP requires targeted 

sampling of dewatering discharges to 

sediment-impaired waters or waters 

designated as Tier 2, Tier 2.5 or Tier 3 

waters (referred to in the permit as 

‘‘sensitive waters’’). Under this new 

requirement, operators must collect at 

least one turbidity sample of the 

dewatering discharge each day a 

discharge occurs and compare the 

weekly average of the results with a 

benchmark turbidity value of 50 

Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU). 

EPA derived this benchmark threshold 

based on a review of water quality 

standards for states and certain 

territories where EPA is the permitting 

authority, other NPDES dewatering 

permit conditions, literature related to 

the effects of turbidity on aquatic life, 

and public comments received during 

the comment period on the proposed 

2022 CGP. EPA is also providing 

operators with the flexibility to request 

an alternate benchmark for their site 

that is higher than 50 NTUs if the 

operator has information demonstrating 

that the higher number is supported by 

the receiving water’s water quality 

standard for turbidity. 

For clarity, EPA emphasizes that the 

benchmark threshold for turbidity is not 

an effluent limit. As such, an 

exceedance of the benchmark threshold 

does not itself constitute a permit 

violation. Rather, the benchmark 

threshold acts as a warning sign to the 

operator that changes may be needed in 

the dewatering controls to improve 

pollutant removal and protect water 

quality. Accordingly, if the weekly 

average of the turbidity samples exceeds 

the benchmark (or an alternate 

benchmark based on state WQS), the 

operator is required to conduct followup corrective action designed to lower 

the turbidity levels in the discharge. The 

new corrective action provisions for a 

benchmark exceedance require the 

operator to immediately take all 

reasonable steps to minimize or prevent 

the discharge of pollutants until a 

solution can be implemented, including 

safely shutting off the dewatering 

discharge depending on the severity of 

the condition; determining whether the 

dewatering controls are operating 

effectively and whether they are causing 

the conditions; and making any 

necessary adjustments, repairs, or 

replacements to the dewatering controls 

to lower the turbidity levels or remove 

the visible plume or sheen. Operators 

are also required to report their weekly 

average turbidity results to EPA on a 

quarterly basis either electronically 

using the agency’s NeT or the paper 

form in Appendix K, if EPA grants a 

waiver from electronic reporting. 

For the 2022 CGP, EPA is focused on 

turbidity monitoring for sensitive waters 

because sediment is a major cause of 

impairment of the nation’s waters. 

Excessive sediment can impair 

waterbody uses such as aquatic life, 

navigation, recreation, and sources of 

drinking water. The monitoring 

requirements for dewatering discharges 

to sediment-impaired waters will help 

ensure that such discharges do not 

further contribute excess pollutants to 

waters that are impaired for sediment 

and that existing uses are maintained 

and protected. Turbidity monitoring 

will provide operators with a baseline 

and comparable understanding of 

dewatering discharge quality, potential 

water quality problems, and dewatering 

control measure effectiveness. These 

data will supplement information 

provided through the daily inspections 

during dewatering activities and allow 

EPA to review the pollutant 

concentrations in dewatering 

discharges. See Part 3.3, 5.1.5, and 5.2.2 

of the permit. 

EPA includes an extensive discussion 

of the rationale behind the decision to 

include benchmark monitoring for 

dewatering discharges to sensitive 

waters in this permit and a more 

thorough discussion of the key parts of 

these requirements. See Section VI, Part 

3.3 of the fact sheet. EPA has also 

provided additional technical assistance 

resources for operators to use in 

implementing these provisions. For 

example, EPA has developed a 

Monitoring and Inspection Guide for 

Construction Dewatering, available on 

EPA’s website at https://www.epa.gov/ 

npdes/turbidity-benchmark-monitoringdewatering-under-construction-generalpermit, which provides guidelines on 

how to correctly monitor for turbidity, 

determine if the weekly average exceeds 

the benchmark, and, if so, how to 

proceed with corrective action, as well 

as how to comply with the permit’s 

dewatering inspection requirements. 

EPA has also compiled a list of all the 

current state and tribal turbidity water 

quality standards in effect in areas 

covered by the CGP, in the event that 

operators choose to pursue a request for 

an alternate benchmark. See List of 

State-Specific Water Quality Standards 

for Turbidity, available at https://

www.epa.gov/npdes/turbiditybenchmark-monitoring-dewateringunder-construction-general-permit. 

• Update training requirements for 

personnel conducting site inspections— 

EPA finalized modifications to the 

training requirements for personnel 

conducting site inspections. These 

changes address problems found during 

many of the agency’s own construction 

site inspections, in which EPA observed 

that while some permittees are properly 

conducting inspections and 

documenting their findings in 

accordance with the permit, a large 

number are not. To address this 

problem, EPA strengthened the training 

requirements for inspection personnel 

to ensure their competency to conduct 

such inspections. For this reason, the 

permit specifies that a qualified person 

carrying out inspections must either (1) 

have completed the new EPA 

construction inspection course 

developed for this permit and passed 

the exam, or (2) hold a current valid 

construction inspection certification or 

license from a program that covers 

essentially the same core material as 

EPA’s inspection course. These new 

requirements are an extension of what 

the 2017 CGP (and 2012 CGP) already 

required for the ‘‘qualified person’’ to 

conduct inspections. EPA is in the 

process of developing a free 

construction inspection training 

program that will be made available as 

an option to fulfill this new requirement 

to CGP permittees along with an 

accompanying exam that, if passed, will 

provide the person with documentation 

showing that they have successfully 

completed the EPA course. EPA is 

delaying the implementation of the 

requirement for one year from the 

permit effective date until the EPA 

training is available, which the agency 

anticipates will be in the summer or fall 

of 2022. For this reason, for construction 

projects that receive permit coverage 

prior to February 17, 2023, any 

personnel conducting site inspections 

must, at a minimum, be a person 

knowledgeable in the principles and 

practice of erosion and sediment 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Notices 3529 

controls and pollution prevention, who 

possesses the appropriate skills and 

training to assess conditions at the 

construction site that could impact 

stormwater quality, and the appropriate 

skills and training to assess the 

effectiveness of any stormwater controls 

selected and installed to meet the 

requirements of the permit. Operators 

will be notified via email when the new 

2022 CGP training is available. EPA will 

also announce the training on its 2022 

CGP website (https://www.epa.gov/ 

npdes/2022-construction-generalpermit-cgp). Documentation that the 

relevant personnel has completed the 

EPA course and passed the exam will 

serve as proof that the operator has met 

the new inspection training 

requirements. Alternatively, if the 

relevant personnel elect to obtain the 

required training through a different 

program that covers the same basic 

principles, the operator will need to 

provide documentation that these 

personnel have successfully completed 

the program and are in possession of a 

current, valid certification or license. 

See Parts 4.1, 6.3, and 7.2.2 of the 

permit. 

• Specify requirements for 

documenting signs of sedimentation 

attributable to construction site 

discharges—EPA specifies in the permit 

that during an inspection, operators 

must check for signs of sediment 

deposition that are visible from the site 

and attributable to the operator’s 

discharge, for example sand bars with 

no vegetation growing on top in 

adjacent receiving waters or in other 

constructed or natural site drainage 

features, or the buildup of sediment 

deposits on nearby streets, curbs, or 

open conveyance channels. This change 

is intended to address a frequent 

problem observed during EPA’s 

compliance inspections that the 

permittee does not document obvious 

signs of sedimentation in the receiving 

water or in drainage features that 

convey to receiving waters. The intent 

of this addition is to emphasize that the 

site inspection is an ideal time to 

examine whether there are any obvious 

signs of sedimentation attributable to 

the site’s discharges, and to require 

documentation of such sedimentation. 

EPA notes that the CGP already requires 

operators to check for signs of visible 

erosion and sedimentation (i.e., 

sediment deposits) that have occurred 

and are attributable to the operator’s 

discharge at points of discharge and, if 

applicable, on the banks of any 

receiving waters. flowing within or 

immediately adjacent to the site. See 

Part 4.6.1.e of the permit. 

• Require photo documentation of 

adequate site stabilization—EPA’s 

compliance inspectors have observed 

cases when operators prematurely 

terminate coverage under the CGP 

before the site is properly stabilized. 

The final permit adds a new provision 

requiring operators as part of their 

Notice of Termination (NOT) to take and 

submit photographs showing the 

stabilized areas of the site following 

completion of construction. EPA 

includes this requirement primarily as 

an additional level of documented 

evidence that operators are complying 

with the stabilization requirements prior 

to terminating coverage. Given the 

importance of stabilization to 

preventing continuing erosion and 

sedimentation, EPA views the 

additional photo documentation 

requirement to be a relatively 

inexpensive, effective, and 

straightforward way for the operator to 

show the agency that it has complied 

with the permit’s final stabilization 

requirements. See Part 8.2.1.a of the 

permit. Related to this new requirement, 

EPA added a check box to the NOT form 

to confirm that the operator has attached 

photographs as required by Part 8.2.1.a, 

including the date each photograph was 

taken, and a brief description of the area 

of the site captured by the photograph. 

• Add new Notice of Intent (NOI) 

questions—EPA added new questions to 

the NOI form that construction 

operators will use to obtain coverage 

under the 2022 CGP. One question asks 

operators if dewatering water will be 

discharged during the course of their 

permit coverage. While EPA suspects 

that most CGP-covered projects 

discharge dewatering water during 

construction, it is useful to the agency 

to know what the prevalence of this 

practice is at its permitted sites. This 

question will provide a straightforward 

way of compiling information broadly 

about permittees and enable EPA to 

know which operators may be affected 

by the permit’s new dewatering 

requirements. A follow-up question asks 

operators who indicate that there will be 

a dewatering discharge to identify if 

their site is located on a current or 

former remediation site. This question is 

intended to provide EPA with 

additional information regarding sites 

and their potential for contaminated 

discharge. Another question asks the 

operator completing the NOI whether 

there are other operators who are also 

covered by the CGP at the same site and, 

if so, what their NPDES ID numbers are. 

Because the 2017 CGP NOI did not ask 

the operator to indicate whether there 

are multiple operators permitted for the 

same site, EPA is often unable to easily 

determine who all the permitted entities 

are at larger projects and whether there 

may be some parties that should have 

obtained permit coverage as operators 

but have yet to do so. The NOI form also 

includes a new question that requires 

the operator to confirm that any 

personnel conducting inspections at the 

site will meet the modified training 

requirements in Part 6 of the permit. 

EPA also finalized clarifying edits to 

better explain the types of 

documentation that are needed for 

several of the eligibility criteria. As 

mentioned in Section III.A in the 

summary of the ‘‘Updated process for 

Endangered Species Act eligibility 

determinations,’’ EPA has also 

reformatted the Endangered Species 

Protection section of the electronic NOI, 

which now consists of questions that 

were previously contained in narrative 

instructions in Appendix D along with 

updated links to available mapping 

tools to assist operators in determining 

whether any listed or threatened species 

are known to occur in the action area of 

their site. 

IV. Provisions Not Finalized in the 2022 

CGP 

After further consideration and 

evaluation of public comments received, 

the following changes that were 

considered in requests for comment in 

the proposed permit were not modified 

or finalized in the 2022 CGP: 

1. Modifying the definition of 

operator—In the 2022 CGP, EPA retains 

the 2017 CGP definition of ‘‘operator.’’ 

EPA had requested comment on 

modifying the definition of operator to 

specifically include parties that 

determine acceptance of work and pay 

for work performed. Many public 

comments indicated that such a change 

was not necessary, and other comments 

requested additional details be added if 

the change was made. EPA has some 

concerns about the effects of changing 

the definition of operator and that it 

may become too specific or too 

prescriptive. The agency has 

determined, at this time, that the 

existing definition is broad enough to 

capture those parties intended to be 

addressed by the possible change. Due 

to the highly case-specific nature of 

construction projects, EPA prefers to 

rely on the language of the definition 

alone, rather than including more 

specific examples in the definition, and 

to leave the determination of which 

parties in any particular scenario are 

functioning as operators to a project-byproject evaluation. However, the 2022 

CGP Fact Sheet has been updated to 

describe examples of the types of 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
3530 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Notices 

decision-making activities that EPA 

frequently finds equate to operational 

control within the permit’s definition of 

operator. See Section VI, Part 1.1 of the 

permit fact sheet. 

2. Prohibition of dewatering 

discharges from contaminated sites—In 

the 2022 CGP, EPA includes a 

clarification that discharges of 

construction dewatering water must be 

uncontaminated. In the context of 

authorized non-stormwater discharges, 

this means that the discharge meets 

applicable water quality standards. EPA 

had proposed that dewatering water 

discharged from a contaminated site be 

considered a prohibited discharge under 

the CGP and had requested comment on 

whether additional sites should be 

prohibited from coverage under the 

permit due to the possibility of 

discharging dewatering water that is 

contaminated. Ultimately, EPA decided 

not to finalize this change based on the 

compelling public comments received 

that recommended against this approach 

and focused on the need for the permit 

to only authorize those dewatering 

discharges that are uncontaminated 

because they meet applicable water 

quality standards. Additionally, 

requiring dewatering discharges to be 

uncontaminated to be authorized under 

the CGP, as opposed to focusing 

exclusively on whether the dewatering 

discharge is extracted from a 

contaminated site, is consistent with 

how EPA authorizes other types of nonstormwater discharges that must be 

uncontaminated. 

3. Waiting Period for Discharge 

Authorization—In the 2022 CGP, EPA 

retains the 14-day authorization waiting 

period from the 2017 CGP. EPA had 

requested comment on whether to 

extend the waiting period between the 

operator’s submittal of the NOI and the 

authorization to discharge from 14 days 

to 30 days to facilitate review of the 

site’s eligibility related to the protection 

of endangered or threatened species. 

Almost all public comments opposed 

this change, citing that it would cause 

further delays to already tight 

construction deadlines. Comments also 

pointed out that the permit already 

allows EPA to delay discharge 

authorization (i.e., putting an NOI ‘‘on 

hold’’) if there are issues or concerns 

related to the project’s discharges or the 

impact on threatened or endangered 

species, thereby providing the agency 

and other federal agencies additional 

time where needed to review a 

particular site. 

4. Stabilization deadlines—In the 

2022 CGP, EPA retains the stabilization 

thresholds and deadlines from the 2017 

CGP. EPA had requested feedback on 

whether the 5-acre disturbance 

threshold for stricter stabilization 

deadlines has had the intended effect of 

encouraging the phasing of construction 

disturbances. Some public comments 

recommended keeping the requirement 

as is, while others noted that the 

incentive of an additional seven days to 

stabilize is not enough of an incentive 

to phase disturbances. Other comments 

suggested alternatives to longer 

stabilization deadlines, such as 

increasing the disturbance threshold 

from 5 acres to 25 acres, requiring a 

phasing plan instead of a disturbance 

threshold, or establishing a disturbance 

threshold based on percentage of total 

land being developed. EPA had also 

requested comment on whether there 

was merit to capping total construction 

disturbances for all operators at 10 acres 

at any one time, similar to some state 

CGPs. EPA received mixed comments 

that both opposed and supported this 

approach. EPA did not receive 

sufficiently consistent feedback to 

justify making a change to the existing 

requirement or to remove the 

requirement entirely at this time. In 

future permits, EPA will continue to 

look for opportunities and alternatives 

to incentivize construction site 

sequencing. 

V. Implementation Assistance 

Following issuance of the 2022 CGP, 

EPA plans to provide further assistance 

to construction site operators and other 

interested parties on various aspects of 

this new permit. The following 

activities or documents are planned: 

1. Final permit webinar—EPA will 

host a webinar on February 24 at 1:00 

p.m. (Eastern Time Zone) that will 

provide an overview of the 2022 CGP 

and an opportunity for participants to 

ask questions. Those interested may 

register for the webinar at https://

www.zoomgov.com/webinar/register/ 

WN_DsNwf8dQTzC1pCk0HCyVnQ. 

Further details on the webinar, 

including a post-webinar recording, will 

be made available at https://

www.epa.gov/npdes/2022-constructiongeneral-permit-cgp. 

2. Updated SWPPP, Inspection 

Report, and Corrective Action Log 

templates—EPA provides the following 

updated templates that can be used to 

comply with 2022 CGP requirements: 

Construction Stormwater Pollution 

Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Template, 

Inspection Report Template, and 

Corrective Action Log Template. EPA 

has also developed a new Dewatering 

Inspection Report Template to assist 

operators in documenting information 

required for dewatering inspections in 

Part 4.6.3 of the permit. See https://

www.epa.gov/npdes/constructiongeneral-permit-resources-tools-andtemplates for more details. 

3. eReporting resources—EPA plans to 

update or provide new tutorials and 

training materials for how to submit 

forms and data to EPA via NeT–CGP. 

These materials will be available at the 

NeT Help Center web page under ‘‘EPA 

CGP’’ located at https://

epanet.zendesk.com/hc/en-us. 

4. Small residential lot resources— 

EPA plans to update the Small 

Residential Lot SWPPP template and 

guidance brochure to be consistent with 

the 2022 CGP requirements. 

5. Turbidity monitoring guide—EPA 

has developed a companion guide for 

the permit’s new dewatering inspection 

and turbidity monitoring requirements. 

The document, Monitoring and 

Inspection Guide for Construction 

Dewatering, is available at https://

www.epa.gov/npdes/turbiditybenchmark-monitoring-dewateringunder-construction-general-permit. 

6. List of Tier 2, 2.5, and 3 waters— 

EPA has updated the 2017 CGP’s list of 

Tier 2, 2.5, and 3 waters to assist 

operators in identifying whether their 

discharge may be subject to additional 

inspection, stabilization, and 

dewatering requirements. In past CGPs, 

this list was maintained as an appendix 

to the permit, but has been moved to 

https://www.epa.gov/npdes/ 

construction-general-permit-resourcestools-and-templates so that it is easier to 

find and update. 

7. List of state and tribal water quality 

standards for turbidity—EPA has 

established a list of applicable turbidity 

standards that are currently in effect in 

the states and tribes, as well as the 

citations that can be used for the 

requests. See https://www.epa.gov/ 

npdes/turbidity-benchmark-monitoringdewatering-under-construction-generalpermit. 

8. Seasonally Dry Period Locator 

Tool—EPA developed a tool that 

operators can use to if their construction 

project site is in an arid or semi-arid 

area, and if any months out of the year 

are considered seasonally dry. This is 

important for operators who may be 

subject to different inspection and 

stabilization schedules due to their 

location. The Seasonally Dry Period 

Locator Tool can be found at https://

www.epa.gov/npdes/constructiongeneral-permit-resources-tools-andtemplates. 

VI. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

The information collection activities 

in this permit have been submitted for 

approval to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) under the PRA. The 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Notices 3531 

Information Collection Request (ICR) 

document that EPA prepared has been 

assigned EPA ICR No. 2686.01, OMB 

Control No. 2040–NEW. You can find a 

copy of the ICR in the docket for this 

permit (Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW– 

2021–0169), and it is briefly 

summarized here. 

CWA section 402 and the NPDES 

regulations require collection of 

information primarily used by 

permitting authorities, permittees 

(operators), and EPA to make NPDES 

permitting decisions. The burden and 

costs associated with the entire NPDES 

program are accounted in an approved 

ICR (EPA ICR number 0229.23, OMB 

control no. 2040–0004). Certain changes 

in this permit require revisions to the 

ICR to reflect changes to the forms and 

other information collection 

requirements. EPA is reflecting the 

paperwork burden and costs associated 

with this permit in a separate ICR 

instead of revising the existing ICR for 

the entire program for administrative 

reasons. 

EPA is collecting new information as 

part of the 2022 CGP. The NOI form was 

updated from the 2017 CGP to collect 

new information related to the 

following: Added one new question 

related to whether operators will be 

discharging construction dewatering 

water during the course of their permit 

coverage, and, if so, whether the site 

they are discharging from is a current or 

former federal or state remediation site; 

added questions about whether there are 

other operators who are also covered by 

the CGP at the same site and, if so, what 

their NPDES ID numbers are; added a 

check box for the operator to confirm 

that any personnel conducting 

inspections at the site will meet the 

modified training requirements in Part 6 

of the permit; and added clarifying edits 

to better explain the types of 

documentation that are needed for 

several of the eligibility criteria related 

to endangered and threatened species 

and edits to provide links to updated 

available mapping tools to assist 

operators in determining whether any 

such species are known to occur in the 

vicinity of their project. 

EPA developed new electronic and 

paper turbidity monitoring forms for 

operators subject to the Part 3.3 

requirements for dewatering discharges 

to sensitive waters to use in reporting 

their weekly average turbidity results. 

This reporting will occur on a quarterly 

basis until the dewatering discharge has 

been discontinued. 

EPA added one check box for 

operators who are submitting an ‘‘NOT’’ 

to confirm that the operator has attached 

photographs taken to document 

compliance with the final stabilization 

requirements pursuant to Part 8.2.1.a. 

Respondents/affected entities: 

Construction operators in the areas 

where EPA is the NPDES permitting 

authority. 

Respondent’s obligation to respond: 

Compliance with the CGP’s information 

collection and reporting requirements is 

mandatory for CGP operators. 

Estimated number of respondents: 

EPA estimates that for the duration of 

the three-year ICR period approximately 

7,800 operators will obtain coverage 

under the 2022 CGP, or 2,600 operators 

per year. 

Frequency of response: Response 

frequencies in the 2022 CGP vary from 

once per permit term to quarterly. 

Total estimated burden: EPA 

estimates that the information collection 

burden of the 2022 CGP is 142,511 

hours per year. Burden is defined at 5 

CFR 1320.3(b). 

Total estimated cost: EPA estimates 

that the final information collection cost 

of the 2022 CGP is $9,637,018 per year. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 

CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. EPA 

responded to ICR-related comments in 

the Response to Comments document 

for this final permit. 

VII. 2022 CGP Incremental Cost 

Analysis and Future Cost-Benefit 

Considerations 

The cost analysis accompanying this 

final permit monetizes and quantifies 

certain incremental cost impacts of the 

final permit changes as compared to the 

2017 CGP. EPA analyzed each change in 

the 2022 CGP considering the previous 

permit’s (i.e., the 2017 CGP) 

requirements. The objective of this 

incremental cost analysis is to show 

where or to what extent the final 2022 

CGP requirements impose an 

incremental increase in administrative 

and compliance costs (such as the cost 

to conduct site inspections or to prepare 

compliance reports) on operators in 

relation to costs that are already 

accounted for in the 2017 CGP. 

More broadly, EPA notes that 

additional unquantified costs and 

benefits result from this action. In 

developing the next CGP (or another 

NPDES general permit, as appropriate), 

EPA plans to estimate the broader 

impacts arising from these actions, 

including costs and benefits. Estimates 

under consideration may include: (1) 

Assessing how costs and benefits are 

attributed between the CGP and 

applicable water quality standards 

(including TMDLs) that may be in effect; 

(2) developing a new modeling 

framework to assess how regulated 

entities understand and implement 

pollutant controls related to existing 

and new permit obligations; (3) 

examining whether any underlying cost 

and benefit assumptions need to be 

updated; (4) examining more broadly 

how EPA can analyze benefits when 

developing permits; (5) developing more 

robust approaches to assessing 

uncertainties associated with the 

analytic approaches, including how to 

quantitatively assess uncertainties of 

key assumptions; and (6) developing a 

framework to analyze the effect of 

cooperative federalism. 

EPA expects the incremental cost 

impact on entities that will be covered 

under the 2022 CGP, including small 

businesses, to be minimal. EPA 

anticipates the approximate average 

annual incremental cost increase 

(compared to the 2017 CGP) will be 

$1,292 per year for each permitted 

project, and the total annual 

incremental cost to be $3,979,000 based 

on an estimated 3,080 projects per year. 

A copy of EPA’s incremental cost 

analysis for the final permit, titled 

‘‘Incremental Cost Impact Analysis for 

the 2022 Construction General Permit 

(CGP),’’ is available in the docket 

(Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2021– 

0169). 

VIII. Executive Order 12866: 

Regulatory Planning and Review and 

Executive Order 13563: Improving 

Regulation and Regulatory Review 

This action is a significant regulatory 

action that was submitted to the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review. Any changes made in response 

to OMB recommendations will be 

documented in the docket for this action 

(Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2021– 

0169). 

IX. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

At proposal, EPA made the 

preliminary determination that this 

permit will not have disproportionately 

high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority or 

low-income populations because the 

requirements in the permit apply 

equally to all construction projects that 

disturb one or more acres (or are part of 

a larger common plan of development 

that disturbs one or more acres) in areas 

where EPA is the permitting authority, 

and the erosion and sediment control 

provisions increase the level of 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
3532 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2022 / Notices 

environmental protection for all affected 

populations over the 2017 CGP. EPA 

requested comments on this preliminary 

determination and/or any modifications 

that EPA should make to the proposed 

permit to address environmental 

concerns. EPA received no comments 

directly applicable to the request for 

feedback. Therefore, in the absence of 

comments that contradict the 

preliminary determination, EPA finds 

that this action does not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority populations, low-income 

populations and/or indigenous peoples, 

as specified in Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

X. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action has tribal implications. 

However, it will neither impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

federally recognized tribal governments, 

nor preempt tribal law. With limited 

exceptions, EPA directly implements 

the NPDES program in Indian country 

as no tribe has yet obtained EPA 

authorization to administer the NPDES 

program. As a result, almost all eligible 

facilities with stormwater discharges 

from construction activities in Indian 

country fall under EPA’s CGP or may be 

covered under an individual NPDES 

permit issued by EPA. 

EPA consulted with tribal officials 

under EPA’s Policy on Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribes early in 

the process of developing this permit to 

have meaningful and timely input into 

its development to gain an 

understanding of and, where necessary, 

to address the tribal implications of the 

permit. During this consultation, EPA 

conducted the following activities: 

• August 13, 2020—EPA initiated a 

tribal consultation and coordination 

process for this action by sending a 

‘‘Notice of Consultation and 

Coordination’’ letter to all 573 federally 

recognized tribes. The letter invited 

tribal leaders and designated 

consultation representative(s) to 

participate in the tribal consultation and 

coordination process. The consultation 

period was from August 13, 2020 to 

October 27, 2020. 

• September 9, 2020—EPA 

participated in the National Tribal 

Water Council monthly conference call 

and received written comments in 

response. 

• September 16, 2020—EPA led an 

informational webinar to provide an 

overview of the 2017 CGP and 

information regarding the ongoing 

consultation to the National Tribal 

Caucus. A total of 34 tribal 

representatives attended. 

• June 24, 2021—EPA hosted an 

information webinar for tribal 

representatives on the proposed 2022 

CGP. A total of 41 participants attended. 

EPA received comments providing 

input from tribes. These comments are 

described in EPA’s tribal consultation 

summary, which is can be accessed at 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets in the 

docket for this permit (refer to Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OW–2021–0169). In 

addition, EPA received comments 

during the September 16, 2020 

informational webinar and a September 

9, 2020 National Tribal Water Council 

monthly conference call with EPA staff. 

EPA also received comments on the 

proposed permit, which the agency 

considered as part of the finalization of 

this permit. EPA’s responses to 

comments can be found https://

www.epa.gov/dockets in the docket for 

this permit (refer to Docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–OW–2021–0169). 

EPA also notes that as part of the 

finalization of this permit, the agency 

completed the Section 401 certification 

procedures with all applicable tribes 

where this permit applies (see 

Appendix B). EPA hosted two CWA 

Section 401 pre-filing meetings for 

tribes on the proposed 2022 CGP prior 

to requesting CWA Section 401 

certification, as required. These 

meetings provided certifying tribes an 

opportunity to meet with EPA about the 

proposed permit before completing their 

certification. For the first meeting on 

June 3, 2021, there were 20 tribal 

representatives who signed up to 

participate, and for the second meeting 

on June 17, 2021 there were 24 

representatives who signed up. EPA 

plans to provide email notification to all 

tribes of the final 2022 CGP. 

As required by section 7(a) of the 

Executive Order, the EPA’s Tribal 

Consultation Official has certified that 

the requirements of the executive order 

have been met in a meaningful and 

timely manner. A copy of the 

certification is included in the docket 

for this action. 

XI. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

That Significantly Affect Energy 

Supply, Distribution, or Use 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ because it is not likely to 

have a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution or use of energy. 

This is a renewal of a stormwater 

discharge permit for construction sites 

and was submitted to OMB for review. 

Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 

1251 et seq. 

Deborah Szaro, 

Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

1. 

Javier Laureano, 

Director, Water Division, EPA Region 2. 

Carmen Guerrero-Perez, 

Director, Caribbean Environmental Protection 

Division, EPA Region 2. 

Catherine A. Libertz, 

Director, Water Division, EPA Region 3. 

Jeaneanne Gettle, 

Director, Water Division, EPA Region 4. 

Tera Fong, 

Director, Water Division, EPA Region 5. 

Charles W. Maguire, 

Director, Water Division, EPA Region 6. 

Jeffery Robichaud, 

Director, Water Division, EPA Region 7. 

Darcy O’Connor, 

Director, Water Division, EPA Region 8. 

Toma ́ s Torres, 

Director, Water Division, EPA Region 9. 

Daniel D. Opalski, 

Director, Water Division, EPA Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2022–01258 Filed 1–21–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2021–0951; FRL–9474–01– 

OAR] 

Withdrawal of Broadly Applicable 

Alternative Test Methods 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

withdrawal of broadly applicable 

alternative test method approval 

decisions for Alternatives 125 and 127 

(or ALT–125 and ALT–127) that the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

made in 2018 under Standards of 

Performance for New Residential Wood 

Heaters. 

DATES: The withdrawal of the broadly 

applicable alternative test methods 

ALT–125 and ALT–127 will become 

effective February 23, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Electronic copies of supporting 

documents for both alternative test 

method withdrawals are available at 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2021– 

0951. For questions about this notice, 

contact Mrs. Lula H. Melton, Air Quality 

Assessment Division, Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards (E143– 

02), Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1