Hazardous Metals in Stormwater – Texas (TCEQ) Requirements

As general permits for stormwater discharges are revised, States will attempt to address requirements for impaired waters into the permit requirements. How these requirements are expressed in the permit varies widely from State-to-State. Some States have developed requirements which promote pollution prevention measures.

As one example, the State of Texas has detected levels of selected heavy metals in surface waters which are of concern, and has promulgated numeric discharge standards for “hazardous metals” into the industrial stormwater permit. However, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) approach is to allow facilities to do a self-assessment for sources of hazardous metals and implement pollution prevention measures to avoid the higher costs of hazardous metal sampling and testing. To be exempted, facilities must certify that:

• Facility does not use a raw material, produce an intermediate product, or produce a final product that contains one of the listed hazardous metals, or


• Any raw materials, intermediate products, or final products which contain a hazardous metal are never exposed to stormwater or runoff, or


• Facility collects and analyses stormwater samples from the facility and the results indicate that hazardous metal(s) are not present in detectable levels.
  

Waivers may be obtained on a metal-by-metal basis, or on an outfall-by-outfall basis. A waiver from hazardous metals monitoring does not exempt the facility from other benchmark monitoring requirements which may apply. [Read more about benchmark monitoring]

Caltha LLP provides support to facilities nationwide on meeting State stormwater permit requirements and developing effective stormwater pollution prevention programs, including SWPPP training and stormwater compliance training programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

EPA Proposed Stormwater Eflluent Limits - Comparison To Benchmark Concentration

In December 2008, US EPA published proposed effluent limits for stormwater discharges from construction sites. [Read more about proposed limits] The proposed rules included a numeric effluent limit of 90 NTU. NTUs are a standard measurement of turbidity in water. Turbidity is a measurement of suspended material in the water.

Benchmark values and previous stormwater effluent limits have always been expressed as Total Suspended Solids (TSS). Turbidity is related to TSS, however the relationship between turbidity and TSS is not always direct, and will be affected by a number of different factors.

Stormwater benchmark concentrations for TSS usually range from 100 to 250 mg/L. Using a few typical conversions between NTU and TSS, it is predicted that an effluent limit of 90 NTU will be roughly equivalent to 45 to 65 mg/L expressed as TSS. Therefore, it is projected that the proposed stormwater effluent limit is about one-half the lowest current benchmark concentration for TSS.

Caltha LLP provides expert technical support to dischargers subject to State and EPA stormwater discharge permit, including permitting, SWPPP training, stormwater monitoring, site inspections, and overall compliance program development.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Knowledge Based SWPPP Training – Texas (TCEQ) Construction Permit Example

Stormwater training requirements in most general permits are prescriptive and require specific documentation to demonstrate compliance. If documentation can be produced that shows an employee received appropriate training, the permit requirement is considered to be met. Most often, training rooster sign-in sheets are used as documentation.

An alternate requirement for SWPPP training is “knowledge-based”, meaning that compliance or noncompliance is determined by what the employee knows and not what training courses the employee has attended.

An example of knowledge-based training requirements is found in the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) general permit for construction stormwater discharge (Permit # TXR150000). In this permit, “training” is only required for personnel responsible to conduct site inspections. No specific training needs to be documented. However, inspectors must be “knowledgeable of [requirements of the] general permit, familiar with the construction site, and knowledgeable of the SWPPP for the site”. Regardless of any specific training inspectors can show, if they can not meet these performance criteria, they may not be considered qualified to conduct inspections.

Although knowledge-based training requirements have the advantage that no specific training documentation is needed, they also require a higher standard for actual knowledge. Employers need to assure that their employees know what they need to know.


Caltha LLP has several training programs created to help Texas contractors meet the performance standards of the TCEQ construction site discharge permit, including several customized programs to meet the requirements of small and medium size contractors in all States.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Infiltration Basins - Draft Requirement for Retrofit of Existing Basins

UPDATE: On July 6, 2009, MPCA is scheduled to release its proposed Multisector Industrial General Stormwater Permit. In July, Caltha LLP will be hosting seminars in several cities across Minnesota to provide information on the proposed permit and rule changes, and steps facilities can take to reduce their impact.

For more information, go to:

MPCA SWPPP Permit - Industrial Stormwater Permit Reissue Seminars

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

On December 18, 2008, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency released a redraft of the Multisector Industrial General Permit (MSGP) currently being written. This version of the permit provides some additional requirements on the design of infiltration basins. [Read more about the regulatory aspects of infiltration basins]


As discussed previously, MPCA has included specific design and monitoring requirements for infiltrations basins. These include several situations and industrial sectors for which infiltration basins are forbidden.

One on the key elements of the MPCA requirements for infiltration basins is the RETROFIT of existing infiltration basins which do not currently meet the new design criteria. Existing infiltrations basins must be upgraded to meet the new requirements within one year of promulgation of the MSGP.

The MPCA MSGP is a work in progress; revisions and additions to the permit continue to be made. Once a draft is completed, the permit will be issued for public comment. Because of the size and complexity of the draft permit (especially compared to the current permit, written in 1997), it is expected that there will be significant public comments.

Caltha LLP provides expert technical support to industrial facilities nationwide subject to stormwater permitting requirements.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Stormwater Training – Do I Need To Train Contractors?

The question is often asked – does a permitted facility need to provide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Training (“SWPPP training”) to contractors working on-site?

The answer is in the form of another question – Can the contractor’s actions result in violation of permit conditions and/or non-conformance with the stormwater pollution prevention plan? If yes, then providing some level of training to contractors will be in the facility’s best interest. This training may not necessarily be the same SWPPP Training given to employees. [Read more about contractors and maintaining compliance] [What kind of SWPPP Training is required?]


Requirements for training in State general permits typically refer to employee training only and do not expressly address contractors. However, as the permit holder, the facility has the ultimate responsibility to meet requirements of the permit. Whether violations are caused by the facility employees or by contractors working on site, the result may be the same and the facility could ultimately be held responsible.

Some form of contractor training is likely already occurring. Other regulatory programs, such as the OSHA hazard communication standard, require some level of contractor training. Facilities with an environmental management system (EMS) conforming to the ISO 14001 standard are required to provide training to contractors. Therefore, incorporating SWPPP Training into existing contractor training procedures can be done with very little additional effort.

Caltha LLP provides technical support to develop all required SWPPP Training programs, as well as other environmental training and contractor training programs.

Click here for more information on State-specific SWPPP - Stormwater Training Resources.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

MPCA Stormwater Antidegradation Requirements – Draft Requirements

UPDATE: On July 6, 2009, MPCA is scheduled to release its proposed Multisector Industrial General Stormwater Permit. In July, Caltha LLP will be hosting seminars in several cities across Minnesota to provide information on the proposed permit and rule changes, and steps facilities can take to reduce their impact.

For more information, go to:

MPCA SWPPP Permit - Industrial Stormwater Permit Reissue Seminars

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

On December 18, 2008, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) released a redraft of the Multisector Industrial General Permit (MSGP) currently being written. Similar to previous drafts, this version is incomplete. [Read about previous draft of MPCA permit]

One of the important elements of this draft is the proposed antidegradation requirements for stormwater [Read further information on Antidegradation Policies].

Two overall categories are presented to determine potential antidegradation policy status:

All waters of State (Statewide). Any facility that requires an NPDES permit for stormwater discharge AND after January 1, 1988 increased the area of industrial activities by more than 91 acres (by expansion or new construction) must implement specific additional stormwater controls listed in the permit. As currently drafted, this requirement appears to apply retroactively, meaning that a facility that expanded by more than 91 acres anytime after January 1, 1988 could be required to retrofit stormwater controls to meet the new requirements.

Sites Near “Special Waters”. This requirement applies to facilities located within 1-mile of listed special waters, including Lake Superior, upper Mississippi River, lake trout lakes and other outstanding resource value waters. This requirement, as currently drafted, applies to all facilities within 1-mile of these waters, regardless of a “new or expanded” discharge. Facilities currently permitted and in compliance with the MPCA general permit would need to meet all permit requirements, including the listed additional stormwater controls. These permittees could be required to retrofit existing stormwater controls to meet the new requirements.


The MPCA MSGP is a work in progress; revisions and additions to the permit continue to be made. Once a draft is completed, the permit will be issued for public comment. Because of the size and complexity of the draft permit (especially compared to the current permit, written in 1997), it is expected that there will be significant public comments.

Caltha LLP provides expert technical support to Minnesota facilities subject to stormwater permitting requirements.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Stormwater Effluent Limits On Construction Site Discharges

On November 28, 2008, US EPA published its proposed revision to the federal requirements on stormwater discharges from construction sites. The key departure in the current proposal from existing requirements is the establishment of New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and numeric effluent limit guidelines (ELG) that will apply to construction sites.

[Read more about the difference between "effluent limit" and "stormwater benchmarks]

[Read more about typical concentrations in stormwater compared to limits]

In June 2008, US EPA published its final general stormwater discharge permit for construction sites. US EPA’s intent is to issue a revised general permit once these new effluent limits are promulgated.

The current proposed rule addresses controls based on size of the construction site:

1. Less than 10 acres. Controls are similar to current approaches.
2. Greater than 10 acres. Sites greater than 10 acres will need to install temporary sediment basins meeting specific design criteria.
3. Greater than 30 acres. For large sites, discharges will need to monitor stormwater discharges and must meet a turbidity effluent limit of 13 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU). The effluent limit of 13 NTU is based on the determination that the Best Available Technology (BAT) has been demonstrated to meet this limit. In this case, the BAT is active treatment on-site using injection of polymer into the stormwater to improve precipitation of smaller particles.
   

Does this mean that all large construction sites will need to install active stormwater treatment systems? Not necessarily. Large sites subject to the effluent limit of 13 NTU will need to meet that limit. Sediment basins alone may not be capable of meeting this limit, and if so active treatment, including enhanced precipitation using chemical addition, may be required.

Once the US EPA finalizes the effluent limits for large construction sites, State general permits will likely include these permit limits as they are reissued. US EPA is accepting comments on the proposed Rule through February 26, 2009.


Caltha LLP assists dischargers as they evaluate and address regulatory obligations under State and Federal stormwater permits.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

EPCRA 313 Facility Requirements Under Stormwater Discharge Permits

When initially drafted, the US EPA general discharge permit for industrial stormwater discharges contained additional requirements which applied to selected facilities that stored and used larger quantities of chemicals. These requirements applied to a subset of EPCRA (also referred to as SARA) Section 313 reporting facilities; because a facility was required to submit a Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) report did not necessarily mean that these additional requirements had to be met under their stormwater discharge permit. The additional requirements included:

• Specific containment/diversion requirements
• Additional inspections
• Material compatibility requirements
• Site security
  

Over time, as “sector specific” or “multi-sector” general permits became more common, the need for additional requirements for Section 313 facilities became less critical. These requirements could be inserted into the requirements for individual industrial sector that typically used Section 313 chemicals.

Currently, only about one-third of States have general industrial permits that include additional requirements for EPCRA 313 facilities.

Caltha LLP provides technical support to facilities nationwide to meet their State-specific stormwater permitting requirements. Caltha maintains a library of SWPPP templates, Monitoring Plan templates, and SPCC templates to meet individual State requirements.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Iowa (IDNR) Antidegradation Policy - Potential Impacts on Stormwater Permits

The Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) is proposing changes to its “Antidegradation Policy”. The changes can impact any wastewater discharger in Iowa, but especially new permittees or existing permittees that may wish to increase their discharge in the future. The changes being proposed include:

• Incorporate by reference the document entitled “Iowa Antidegradation Implementation Procedure,” which proposes an approach to assessing and minimizing degradation of Iowa’s surface waters,
  
• Update antidegradation policy language with four tier approach,


• Remove High Quality (Class HQ) and High Quality Resource (Class HQR) designated uses and add several waters to the newly proposed Outstanding Iowa Water (OIW) category.
  
  

Antidegradation policies can potentially have a significant impact on stormwater permitting requirements. Adding new stormwater discharge points, or increasing impervious area could be viewed as “new or expanded” discharge. This could result in extensive antidegradation reviews before proposed projects are allowed permit coverage. However, currently the IDNR is proposing to conduct antidegradation reviews for discharges authorized by general permits will occur for the entire class of general permittees when the general permit is issued. Although additional requirements may have to be met, individual projects would not need to conduct their own antidegradation review under the IDNR proposal.

The purpose of the antidegradation policy is to set minimum requirements to conserve, maintain, and protect existing uses and water quality for water bodies that currently meet their water quality standards. The department is required by Clean Water Act to develop and adopt a statewide antidegradation policy and to identify procedures for implementing the policy. Comments on the draft policy are being accepted through January 29, 2009.

Caltha LLP provides technical support to dischargers needing to evaluate and address their State's antidegradation requirements.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

No Exposure Exemption - Maintaining Compliance with NEC

Many industrial and “industrial-like” municipal facilities can avoid stormwater permit requirements by submitting and complying with No Exposure Certifications (NEC) which provides a conditional exemption from the requirement to obtain a stormwater permit. States differ in their exact requirements for this NEC exemption [read example of NEC differences], however, in general to meet the NEC requirements, no materials and industrial activities can be exposed to precipitation or stormwater run-off.

The important point regarding the NEC is that it creates a conditional exemption – as long as the facility meets the conditions, it is exempted. At any time the facility does not meet the conditions, the exemption does not apply and the facility may technically be discharging without a permit. Therefore, having systems or procedures to assure continuous compliance with the NEC requirements is important.

Caltha has found several areas at typical operations present a significant challenge to maintaining NEC compliance:

• Waste handling
• Loading/unloading
• Equipment maintenance activities
• Construction and renovation activities

Assuring that contractors that may be working on-site for short periods also meet NEC requirements is a important element of NEC compliance. Contractor materials and wastes, such as temporary roll-off containers, need to meet NEC requirements in most States.

Caltha LLP provides technical guidance to dischargers nationwide to meet NEC requirements and develop procedures to maintain compliance.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

New North Carolina (NCDENR) Stormwater Rules for Discharges to Sensitive Water

New Division of Water Quality stormwater rules became effective October 1, 2008 in North Carolina for coastal areas which drain to shellfishing areas or other high value water resources. The new rules regulate new development and redevelopment projects. The major areas for change are 1) coverage (non-residential), 2) low density thresholds, 3) design storm requirements, 4) wetlands and impervious surface calculations, and 5) vegetative buffer size.

In areas within one-half mile of shelling fishing areas, percent impervious cover must be <12%>MS4 stormwater discharge permits as they are reissued.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Municipally-owned Industrial Facilities – Requirement for Separate Stormwater Permit

With the exception of power plants, airports, and uncontrolled sanitary landfills, stormwater discharges associated with specific industrial activities at facilities owned or operated by municipalities with populations of less than 100,000 had been temporarily exempted from the need to obtain coverage under an NPDES industrial storm water permit.

However, under the provisions of the NPDES Stormwater Program Phase II Final Rule, these industrial facilities now may require permit coverage. These permit requirements are separate, and are in addition to, the requirement for designated municipalities to obtain coverage for their storm water discharges under the general permit for stormwater discharges from regulated small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) (i.e., Phase II or MS4 Permit).

Some municipalities may own or operate one or more industrial facilities that are likely to require permit coverage for their storm water discharges. Some examples include:

• Sand and Gravel Operations
• Landfills, Land Application Sites, and Open Dumps
• Recycling Facilities
• Steam Electric Generating Facilities
• Marinas
• Waste Collection and Hauling
• Motor Freight Transportation and Warehousing
• Municipal Airports
• Wastewater Treatment Works

As more small municipalities become subject to MS4 permits, they are reviewing operations to determine if additional permit coverage under an industrial stormwater permit is required. Regardless of the requirement for additional coverage under an industrial permit, these municipal operations need to be evaluated and addressed under the MS4 stormwater pollution prevention program.

Caltha LLP provides technical support to MS4 permitees and/or their municipal engineers nationwide to assess operations and determine permit applicability. Contact Caltha LLP for further information on assessing municipally-owned industrial operations to determine applicability.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Pennsylvania DEP PPC Plan Requirements Compared to SWPPPs

The general permit for industrial stormwater discharges in Pennsylvania requires dischargers to prepare and implement a “Preparedness, Prevention and Contingency (PPC) Plan. This plan is unique to Pennsylvania dischargers; however, other States and the US EPA refer to a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to fill the same planning function.

Corrosive Liquid Leaking Into Containment

The PPC Plan is equivalent to a typical SWPPP in many respects. Both PPC Plans and SWPPP include:

• Stormwater Management Practices
• Erosion and Sedimentation Control Practices
• Control of Non Stormwater Discharges
• Site Inspections
• Stormwater Monitoring
• SWPPP Training
• Special Requirements Applicable to SARA 313 Facilities

However, the PPC Plan has some unique requirements that are not typically part of SWPPP compliance requirements. One of the key differences includes the specific requirements for stormwater controls to be included in the PPC:

• Specific Best Management Practices (BMPs) or stormwater controls need to be “considered” by all dischargers (e.g., “Consider installing spill and overfill prevention equipment”)
• Specific Best Management Practices (BMPs) or stormwater controls required for all dischargers (e.g., “Install oil/water separators or oil and grease traps in fueling area storm drains.”, “Do not dispose of oil filters in trash cans or dumpsters”)
• Specific Best Management Practices (BMPs) or stormwater controls required for individual industrial sectors (e.g., “use drip pans when loading or unloading liquids”, “eliminate the use of chlorine products”, “install and use dust control/collection systems”)

Contact Caltha LLP for more information on PPC templates for industrial sectors in Pennsylvania.

Fuel Loading Station Without Secondary Containment

UPDATE:
The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity (PAG-03) expired on December 5, 2015.

The Department published a draft revised permit on October 18, 2015. The PAG-03 General Permit is intended to provide NPDES permit coverage to facilities discharging stormwater associated with industrial activity to waters of the Commonwealth that are not considered High Quality or Exceptional Value. If a facility is not eligible for coverage under the PAG-03 General Permit because it is located in a High Quality or Exceptional Value watershed, it may apply for an individual NPDES permit.


Click here for a Summary of the Requirements Under the New PDEP Industrial Permit


To request further information of PPC Plans or to request a quote, go the Caltha's EHS Compliance Plan | Pollution Prevention Plan | Spill Plan page


For recent news and Caltha project examples for Pennsylvania, click here.

SIC and NAICS Systems – Use in Stormwater Permit Rules

Industrial stormwater discharge permit requirements are largely driven by the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code assigned to the site. The stormwater regulation is one of the few environmental regulatory programs that use SIC codes. In 1997, the use of the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) adopted by the US to replace the SIC code system. Both the SIC and NAICS systems were developed to organize and track information the US economy.

The basic difference in approach to the two systems is that the SIC system classifies establishments based on their economic output (i.e, what they produce or provide), and the NAICS classifies establishments according to the processes used to produce goods and services (i.e., what they do).

The basis for stormwater permitting rules remains the SIC code system. The only US EPA environmental regulatory program that had adopted the NAICS system is the Emergency Preparedness and Community Right-to-know Act (EPCRA) Section 313, commonly referred to as Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) reporting. The most significant difference between the two systems from a regulatory perspective is how they address “auxiliary” or “ancillary” facilities. [read more about auxiliary facilities]

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

New Jersey (NJDEP) No Exposure Industrial Stormwater Permit

In June 2007, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) reissued its general permit for stormwater discharges from industrial sites. The reissued permit did not include stormwater monitoring or sector-specific requirements, which are common in many general stormwater permits being reissued recently around the US.

Rather than including many detailed requirements in the general permit, NJDEP has opted to include a significant performance requirement - once the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SPPP) is implemented, there must be no exposure of source materials and/or industrial activity to stormwater. This requirement is in contrast to other States where exposure to stormwater should be “minimized”. New Jersey permittees must be in compliance with the no exposure requirement by the end of 2008.

NJDEP does offer a conditional exemption from obtaining a discharge permit through a No Exposure Certification; however, the requirements for no exposure are more stringent. In this case the requirement is for Permanent No Exposure – all industrial materials are stored and/or all industrial activities are performed (with limited exceptions) inside a permanent building or permanent structure that is anchored to a permanent foundation and is completely roofed and walled.

Contact Caltha LLP or more information on SPPP templates that meet NJDEP permit requirements.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Incorporating Stormwater into TMDL – Recent EPA Guidance

Stormwater discharges can contribute to the impairments to lakes and rivers. Once a waterbody is listed as impaired (i.e., identified in State 304(d) list), States are required to develop a Total Maximum Daily Load analysis (“TDML study”) to determine the maximum load of the pollutant to the waterbody which will still result in the water body meeting it water quality standards. Nonpoint pollution sources, such as stormwater discharges, are one element of this analysis. The point sources, which are primarily NPDES permitted discharges of wastewater are the second element of this analysis.

Stormwater sources which are regulated under NPDES permits require special consideration. Although generally considered part of the nonpoint pollution source category, they are also subject to the requirements of an NPDES permit.

On November 17, 2008, US EPA made available a DRAFT guidance document “TMDLs to Stormwater Permits”. EPA developed this handbook to address challenges that are unique to TMDL development and implementation involving permitted stormwater discharges from municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s), industrial facilities, and construction activities. The 211-page handbook is intended for federal and state TMDL writers and NPDES stormwater permit writers responsible for addressing waterbodies impaired by discharges from stormwater sources.

The draft handbook provides:

• General regulatory information on stormwater NPDES permits and TMDLs
• Discussion of opportunities to coordinate TMDLs and stormwater permits
• Guidance on evaluating stormwater contributions to impairments
• Guidance on development of TMDLs with significant stormwater sources
• Guidance on implementing coordinated TDML and stormwater permit programs
  
  

The handbook also includes excerpts from regulatory programs from ten different States that relate to the coordination between TMDL and stormwater permitting programs.

The draft handbook was released for public review and comments. Interested parties can submit comments on the handbook until February 17, 2009.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

California Stormwater Permitting Program Temporarly Shut Down By Court Order

In July 2008, court actions in California effectively shut down a large portion of the State's stormwater permitting program, leaving many new dischargers without a viable means of obtaining a stormwater discharge permit. This impacted new industrial dischargers; however the most significant impact was on new construction sites.

On July 2, 2008, the Orange County Superior Court issued a Writ of Mandate ordering the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) to a cease, desist and suspend all activities relating to the implementation, application, and/or enforcement of the Standards in the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board's Basin Plan, as applied or to be applied to Stormwater. This injunction prohibited the approval of Notices of Intent (NOIs) in the Los Angeles Region under the Statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Construction, Small Linear Utility, and Industrial Storm Water General Permits.

The State Water Board and Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board immediately stopped enrolling dischargers, processing NOIs, and assigning Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) numbers for activities in the Los Angeles Region. Applications (NOIs) received in July were rejected. This action did not eliminate the regulatory obligation to obtain a stormwater discharge permit. Therefore, new dischargers who were not already covered under the permit were not able to obtain coverage under the general permit.

On August 1, 2008, the Orange County Superior Court issued an order limiting the effect of a Writ of Mandate, and allowing the processing of Notices of Intent (NOIs) and Notices of Termination (NOTs). Dischargers with rejected NOIs were instructed to resubmit their NOI to the State Water Board with the applicable fee and a WDID Number would be assigned as soon as possible.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website