C.F.R. » Title 40 » CHAPTER I—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY › SUBCHAPTER D—WATER PROGRAMS › PART 123—STATE PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS › Subpart A—General

40 C.F.R. § 123.1

Purpose and scope

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) This part specifies the procedures EPA will follow in approving, revising, and withdrawing State programs and the requirements State programs must meet to be approved by the Administrator under sections 318, 402, and 405(a) (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System—NPDES) of the CWA. This part also specifies the procedures EPA will follow in approving, revising, and withdrawing State programs under section 405(f) (sludge management programs) of the CWA. The requirements that a State sewage sludge management program must meet for approval by the Administrator under section 405(f) are set out at 40 CFR part 501.

(b) These regulations are promulgated under the authority of sections 304(i), 101(e), 405, and 518(e) of the CWA, and implement the requirements of those sections.

(c) The Administrator will approve State programs which conform to the applicable requirements of this part. A State NPDES program will not be approved by the Administrator under section 402 of CWA unless it has authority to control the discharges specified in sections 318 and 405(a) of CWA. Permit programs under sections 318 and 405(a) will not be approved independent of a section 402 program.

(d)(1) Upon approval of a State program, the Administrator shall suspend the issuance of Federal permits for those activities subject to the approved State program. After program approval EPA shall retain jurisdiction over any permits (including general permits) which it has issued unless arrangements have been made with the State in the Memorandum of Agreement for the State to assume responsibility for these permits. Retention of jurisdiction shall include the processing of any permit appeals, modification requests, or variance requests; the conduct of inspections, and the receipt and review of self-monitoring reports. If any permit appeal, modification request or variance request is not finally resolved when the federally issued permit expires, EPA may, with the consent of the State, retain jurisdiction until the matter is resolved.

(2) The procedures outlined in the preceding paragraph (d)(1) of this section for suspension of permitting authority and transfer of existing permits will also apply when EPA approves an Indian Tribe's application to operate a State program and a State was the authorized permitting authority under § 123.23(b) for activities within the scope of the newly approved program. The authorized State will retain jurisdiction over its existing permits as described in paragraph (d)(1) of this section absent a different arrangement stated in the Memorandum of Agreement executed between EPA and the Tribe.

(e) Upon submission of a complete program, EPA will conduct a public hearing, if interest is shown, and determine whether to approve or disapprove the program taking into consideration the requirements of this part, the CWA and any comments received.

(f) Any State program approved by the Administrator shall at all times be conducted in accordance with the requirements of this part.

(g)(1) Except as may be authorized pursuant to paragraph (g)(2) of this section or excluded by § 122.3, the State program must prohibit all point source discharges of pollutants, all discharges into aquaculture projects, and all disposal of sewage sludge which results in any pollutant from such sludge entering into any waters of the United States within the State's jurisdiction except as authorized by a permit in effect under the State program or under section 402 of CWA. NPDES authority may be shared by two or more State agencies but each agency must have Statewide jurisdiction over a class of activities or discharges. When more than one agency is responsible for issuing permits, each agency must make a submission meeting the requirements of § 123.21 before EPA will begin formal review.

(2) A State may seek approval of a partial or phased program in accordance with section 402(n) of the CWA.

(h) In many cases, States (other than Indian Tribes) will lack authority to regulate activities on Indian lands. This lack of authority does not impair that State's ability to obtain full program approval in accordance with this part, i.e., inability of a State to regulate activities on Indian lands does not constitute a partial program. EPA will administer the program on Indian lands if a State (or Indian Tribe) does not seek or have authority to regulate activities on Indian lands.

Note:

States are advised to contact the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, concerning authority over Indian lands.

(i) Nothing in this part precludes a State from:

(1) Adopting or enforcing requirements which are more stringent or more extensive than those required under this part;

(2) Operating a program with a greater scope of coverage than that required under this part. If an approved State program has greater scope of coverage than required by Federal law the additional coverage is not part of the Federally approved program.

Note:

For example, if a State requires permits for discharges into publicly owned treatment works, these permits are not NPDES permits.

[48 FR 14178, Apr. 1, 1983, as amended at 54 FR 256, Jan. 4, 1989; 54 FR 18784, May 2, 1989; 58 FR 67981, Dec. 22, 1993; 59 FR 64343, Dec. 14, 1994; 63 FR 45122, Aug. 24, 1998]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1980–2024 · leading case: Michigan Farm Bureau v. Department of Environmental Quality
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Michigan Farm Bureau v. Department of Environmental Quality (2011) michctapp · cites it 4× “40 CFR 123.1(i)(l); West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, Inc v Huffman, 625 F3d 159, 162 (CA 4, 2010); see also 40 CFR 123.”
Matter of Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (2015) ny · cites it 6× “2 Those EPA regulations allow states to issue general permits through their SPDES programs, in accordance with federal regulatory provisions (see 40 CFR 123.1 [c] ["The (EPA) Administrator will approve State programs which conform to the applicable requirements of this part"]).”
Karr v. Hefner (2007) ca10 “” 40 C.F.R. § 123.1 . Similarly, part 124 (“Procedures for Decisionmaking”) “contains EPA procedures for issuing, modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating” permits.”
District of Columbia, a Municipal Corporation v. Jack J. Schramm, Regional Administrator, Region Iii, U. S. Epa (1980) cadc “§ 1342(b); 40 C.F.R. § 123.1 -.62 (1979), 4 the Agency approves the program and suspends its own NPDES licensing program in that state.”
Atlantic States Legal Foundation, Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Company (1994) ca2 “40 C.F.R. § 123.1 (i)(2). Cf. United States Dep’t of Energy v.”
Friends of Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc. (1995) scd “” 40 C.F.R. § 123.1 (f). 14 . The Plaintiffs argue that DHEC's action against Laidlaw was collusive and, therefore, that the lawsuit should have no preclusive effect under section 505(b)(1)(B).”
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Texaco Refining & Marketing, Inc. (1998) ded · cites it 2× “§ 1342 ; 40 C.F.R. § 123.1 (d)(1). In Delaware, the authority to issue NPDES permits has been vested in DNREC.”
Glazer v. American Ecology Environmental Services Corp. (1995) txed “This is significant, because the court’s conclusion rested on 40 C.F.R. § 123.1 (i)(2), which states that state programs broader in scope than the federal requirement are not a part of the federal program.”
Connecticut Coastal Fishermen's Ass'n v. Remington Arms Co. (1991) ctd “Both the plaintiff’s and the defendants’ motions for summary judgment with respect to target debris under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act are denied, factual disputes rendering summary judgment inappropriate.”
Maine v. Johnson (2007) ca1 “§ 1342(b); 40 C.F.R. § 123.1 (c). The EPA’s order insofar as it cedes permitting authority over the nineteen dis *49 puted sites not in Indian territory is affirmed; as to the two disputed Indian-owned sites, the order is vacated and that aspect of the case remanded so that the…”
Psa v. Port of Tacoma (2024) ca9 “1993) (quoting 40 C.F.R. § 123.1 (i)(2)), as amended (Feb.”
Long Island Soundkeeper Fund, Inc. v. New York City Department of Environmental Protection (1998) nyed “at 359 (quoting 40 C.F.R. § 123.1 (i)(2)). The court explained, “States may enact stricter standards for wastewater *386 effluents than mandated by the CWA and federal EPA regulations.”
Show all 27 citing cases →
— 40 C.F.R. § 123.1(i)(1) — 1 case
Atlantic States Legal Foundation, Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co. (1992) nywd
— 40 C.F.R. § 123.1(i)(2) — 2 cases
Atlantic States Legal Foundation, Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co. (1992) nywd
Puget Soundkeeper Alliance v. APM Terminals Tacoma LLC (2020) wawd
— 40 C.F.R. § 123.1(i)(l) — 1 case
Michigan Farm Bureau v. Department of Environmental Quality (2011) michctapp “40 CFR 123.1(i)(l); West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, Inc v Huffman, 625 F3d 159, 162 (CA 4, 2010); see also 40 CFR 123.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.