SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_CASE 2

Home Browse Search

REGIONAL WATER BOARD RESPONSE (SWRCB/OCC File A-1 d4b(a) ana A-121vo(D)) -co- PETITIONS FOR REVIEW OF Wi DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER NO. R5-2007-0036 (NPDE„ NO. CA0079154) AND TIME SCHEDULE ORDER NO. R5-2007-0037 CITY OF TRACY, WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT schedule complies with the Basin Plan and NPDES compliance schedule requirements, as discussed under CSPA — Contention U. 3. Monitoring frequency for settleable solids and oil and grease reduced. The monitoring frequency was reduced due to. removal of effluent limitations, as discussed in item 1 , above. 4. Modification to final effluent limitations for electrical conductivity (EC). Based on testimony at the May 2007 Board hearing, minor modifications were made to the final effluent limitations for EC. There were no objections to the changes by the interested parties present at the hearing. CSPA did not attend the May 2007 Board hearing. 5. Clarifications and grammatical/spelling/consistency corrections. Late revisions were also made to provide minor clarifications, based on comments received, and to make grammatical and spelling corrections. In addition, a consistency error was corrected as a late revision by changing the interim performance-based effluent limitation for aluminum in the permit to be consistent with the Fact Sheet (i.e. changed from 140 Ng/L to 266 pg/L). Three separate statutory and regulatory provisions address public comment requirements for NPDES permits. First, the Regional Water Board must provide a 30-day notice and comment period under CWC section 13167.5. This section explicitly states that it "does not require the state board or the regional board to provide more than one notice or more than one public comment period prior to the adoption of waste discharge requirements ..." (Id., subd. (c).) Second, the Open Meeting Act requires ten days notice of agenda items. The item description generally need not exceed twenty words in length. (Ca. Gov. Code § 11125(a), (b).) The information need only be sufficient to allow interested parties to determine whether to attend the meeting. (See, e.g., Carlson v. Paradise Unified School Dist. (1971) 18 Cal.App.3d 196, 200.) Finally, the Clean Water Act requires a 30-day notice and comment period. (33 U.S.C. §§ 1342(a)(1), 1342(b)(3); cf 33 U.S.C. § 1251(e) (requiring public participation); 40 CFR § 124.10(b).) EPA's NPDES regulations are more specific for EPA-issued permits than for States; many of the procedural requirements apply only to EPA-issued permits. However, the regulations provide guidance on what EPA views as adequate to comply with CWA requirements. The regulations allow the Administrator to reopen the comment period when comments raise "substantial new questions concerning a permit." (Id., subd. (b), (c).) EPA views these provisions as largely discretionary, and does not require the Administrator to reopen public comment when the Administrator changes its analysis based on public comments. (See, e.g., In re Dominion Energy Brayton Point, L.L.C. (February 01, 2006) NPDES Appeal 03-12, 2006 WL 3361084.)