SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FOR TENTATIVE ORDER NO. R5-2002-XXX NPDES NO. CAS083470 CITY OF STOCKTON AND COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN MUNICIPAL SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEM PERMIT On 12 July 2002 the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) staff circulated the Tentative Order for the City of Stockton(hereafter City) and the County of San Joaquin (hereafter County)Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)NPDES permit(hereafter Tentative Order) for public review and comment. Interested parties were requested to submit comments on the Tentative Order no later than 16 August 2002. Comments were received from the following parties: • City of Stockton • County of San Joaquin • DeltaKeeper This memorandum provides responses to these comments and,where appropriate, identifies and explains revisions that were made to the Tentative Order in response to these comments. Responses are provided below. City of Stockton Comments and Regional Board Responses 1. Comment: The Tentative Permit is unlawfully prescriptive under Section 13360 of the Water Code and does not provide the flexibility envisioned by the CWA and its implementing regulations. The Clean Water Act requires the Regional Board to employ flexibility when developing MS4 permits. The MS4 permit requirement originates in section 402(p) of the Clean Water Act. (33 U.S.C. § 1342(p).) This section requires that"permits for discharges from municipal storm sewers . . . shall require controls to reduce the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable." (33 U.S.C. § 1342(p)(3)(B)(iii).) MEP is intended to be a flexible, site-specific standard. (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System—Regulations for Revision of the Water Pollution Control Program Addressing Storm Water Discharges, 64 Fed. Reg. 68722, 68732, 68754 (Dec. 8, 1999).) "The pollutant reductions that represent MEP may be different for each [municipal storm water discharger] given the unique local hydrological and geological concerns that may exist and the differing possible pollutant control strategies." (Id. at 68754.) USEPA has also determined that permit requirements "should be developed in a flexible manner to allow site-specific permit conditions to reflect the wide range of impacts that can be associated with these discharges." (55 Fed. Reg. 47990, 48037-48038 (Nov. 16, 1990).) The State Board has stated "an effective and cost-effective storm water program requires an analysis of the specific area subject to regulation." (In the Matter of the Petition of Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., SWRCB Order No. 91-04(May 16, 1991), citing 53 Fed. Reg. 49456.) California Environmental Protection Agency Co Recycled Pope, The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For a list of simple ways you can do to reduce demand and cut your energy costs,see our Website at http://www.swmb.ca.gov/mgcb5.