Loading (50 kb)...'
(continued)
(3) The information submitted with the claim contains a material error.
(b) An applicant may resubmit an application that has been removed from the priority list pursuant to subdivision (a) of this section if the applicant has corrected the condition that was the basis for the removal. An application that is resubmitted pursuant to this subdivision shall be treated as a new application, and if the Board determines that the applicant has corrected the condition that was the basis for removal, the application's priority ranking shall be based on the date when the Board makes its determination. An application may not be resubmitted to the Board if the information presented about the application contains a material error that was a result of misrepresentation or fraud or other misconduct on the part of the applicant.
Note: Authority cited: Section 25299.77, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Section 25299.50.2, Health and Safety Code.
s 2814.34. Verification of Applications.
Applicants shall verify under penalty of perjury that all statements, documents and certifications contained in or accompanying an application are true and correct to the best of the applicant's knowledge. This shall include all statements and documents submitted during the active life of the application. If an applicant discovers information that creates a material error in any statement, document or certification previously submitted by the applicant, the applicant shall submit the new information to the Board within twenty (20) days of discovering the new information.
Note: Authority cited: Section 25299.77, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Section 25299.50.2, Health and Safety Code.
s 2814.35. Intentional or Reckless Acts; Disqualification of Applications.
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, response costs that result from the gross negligence or the intentional or reckless acts of the applicant or an agent, servant, employee or representative of the applicant, are not eligible for funding from the OSCA.
(b) The Board may disqualify an application and may bar the application and any other application submitted by the applicant from further participation in the OSCA at any time if it is found that any application submitted by the applicant contains a material error that was a result of misrepresentation, fraud or other misconduct on the part of the applicant.
Note: Authority cited: Section 25299.77, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Section 25299.50.2, Health and Safety Code.
s 2814.36. Overpayment; Repayment.
(a) An applicant that obtains payment from the OSCA as a result of a material error in the application or another submitted document shall repay to the Board the amount of funds paid to the applicant.
(b) Any payment made to the applicant to which applicant is not entitled must be repaid to the Board immediately upon knowledge or notice that such a payment has been made and, in any event, not later than twenty (20) days after a written request for repayment by the Board.
(c) Money repaid to the Board pursuant to this section shall be deposited in the OSCA established by Health and Safety Code section 25299.50.2.
Note: Authority: Section 25299.77, Health and Safety Code Reference: Section 25299.50.2, Health and Safety Code
s 2814.37. Appeals.
If the Board denies the application, the applicant shall have no right to administratively appeal the decision, but may reapply at any time. An applicant may not reapply if the previously-denied application or any other information submitted to the Board by the applicant contained a material error that was a result of misrepresentation or fraud or other misconduct.
Note: Authority cited: Section 25299.77, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Section 25299.50.2, Health and Safety Code.
Note: Authority cited: Section 1058, Water Code. Reference: Section 39615, Health and Safety Code.
s 2815. Authority and Purpose.
The standards contained herein are prescribed by the State Board pursuant to Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 775) of Division 3 of the Harbors and Navigation Code. The purpose of these standards is to establish criteria for the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of pumpout facilities for the removal of sewage from vessel sewage retention devices.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 775, 775.5, 776, 778, 783 and 784, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 775), Division 3, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2816. Definitions.
The following definitions shall apply to this subchapter.
(a) "Pumpout facility" means any facility or other means used to transfer sewage from a vessel sewage retention device aboard a vessel to storage and/or disposal facilities.
(b) "Sewage retention device" means any equipment on board a vessel which is designed to receive and retain sewage.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 775.5 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Section 775.5, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2817. Application of Regulations.
s 2819. Pumpout Facility Design and Use.
The pumpout facility must be designed or utilized such that all sewage transferred from vessel marine sanitation devices is stored or disposed of in a manner approved by the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board and in accordance with local ordinances.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2820. Prevention of Leakage and Spillage.
All pumpout facilities shall be designed and constructed in such a manner that there shall be no leakage or spillage of sewage.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2821. Pump Design Requirements.
Pumps provided at the pumpout facility for the transfer of waste from vessel to the pumpout facility and from the pumpout facility to the disposal system shall:
(a) Be of self-priming and non-clogging design.
(b) Be of sufficient size and capacity to complete the transfer operation in a reasonable amount of time when operating against the maximum anticipated head.
(c) Be designed and installed to prevent leakage or spillage.
(d) Be designed and installed to meet all safety requirements.
(e) Be constructed of corrosion-resistant material.
The pumps may be either of fixed or portable type installation.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code
s 2822. Storage Tank Design Requirements.
Storage tanks used to store pumpout waste shall:
(a) Be designed and constructed to allow for complete emptying of contents into a disposal system or waste haulers tank.
(b) Be equipped with a means of determining the amount of sewage in the tank.
(c) Be equipped with a means of preventing backflow from the storage tank into the pumpout system.
(d) Be designed and constructed to prevent overflow or spillage.
(e) Be designed and installed to protect against a 1-in-100 year flood.
(f) Be constructed of material capable of withstanding solar radiation and chemical action of freshwater, saltwater, chemical additives and sewage without excessive deterioration.
(g) Be designed and constructed such that the sewage enters the tank above maximum storage level.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2823. Design Requirements for Piping and Hoses.
All piping/hosing used in the design and construction of a pumpout system shall:
(a) Be designed to withstand any pumping pressure or vacuum encountered without leakage; and
(b) Be constructed of material capable of withstanding solar radiation and chemical action of freshwater, saltwater, chemical additives, and sewage without excessive deterioration.
All fittings shall be of corrosion-resistant material and shall be so constructed and installed as to ensure a water-tight seal. All pumpout systems shall be designed and constructed to have a minimum capability of pumping out vessel marine sanitation devices having 1 1/2-inch fittings. The system shall be designed and constructed to prevent leakage when transferring or when the system is disconnected. This would normally require a minimum of four valves; one on each side of the pump, plus one at the storage tank, and one at the vessel holding tank connection.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2824. Pumpout Facility Water Supply Required.
The pumpout facility shall be designed and constructed such that a water supply is available at appropriate locations for flushing and cleaning of vessel holding tanks and storage tanks. The water supply shall be protected against back-siphonage of waste into the water system by a backflow prevention device meeting the standards established by the State Board of Public Health in Group 4 (commencing with Section 7583), Subchapter 1, Chapter 5, Part 1 of Title 17 of the California Administrative Code.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2827. Operation and Maintenance Instructions.
A set of operation and maintenance instructions shall be prepared and used in the operation of the pumpout facility. The operation and maintenance instructions shall be available for inspection at the pumpout facility and if found to be deficient by the staff of the Regional Board, the instructions shall be corrected within 30 days.
(a) The operation instructions shall have a detailed explanation of valve positions when the system is transferring sewage and when the system is not being used.
(b) The operation and maintenance instructions shall include methods which will be used to isolate portions of the system for maintenance and repair.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2828. Prevention of Leakage and Spillage.
All pumpout facilities shall be operated and maintained in such a manner that there shall be no leakage or spillage of sewage.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Section 777, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2829. Inspection and Maintenance Requirements.
The entire pumpout system shall be inspected by the operator at regular intervals not exceeding six months and any worn components replaced. The Regional Board staff shall inspect the facility at regular intervals not to exceed one yea.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Sections 775, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2831. General.
Pursuant to Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 775) of Division 3 of the Harbors and Navigation Code the State Board shall, as needed for the protection of water quality, require any person lawfully vested with the possession, management, or control of a marine terminal to provide adequate vessel sewage retention device pumpout capability, at locations which are convenient and accessible to vessel users.
It is the intent of these regulations to provide a standard method of determining which marine terminals shall be required to install and operate pumpout facilities.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 776 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Section 776, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2832. Definitions.
s 2833. Regional Board Request.
Each Regional Board, upon determining a need for additional pumpout facilities within its region, shall request the State Board to require specified marine terminals to install and operate pumpout facilities where necessary to protect water quality.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 776 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Section 776, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2833.1. Contents of Regional Board Request for Pumpout Facilities.
Requests for requiring marine terminals to install and operate vessel waste pumpout facilities shall be forwarded to the State Board by the Regional Board. Each request shall be based upon the guidelines contained in Section 2834.1 and shall include the following as well as any other information requested by the State Board.
(a) Designation of the area where additional facilities are needed.
(b) Explanation of the need for additional pumpout facilities within the area including:
(1) An estimate of the number of vessels with sewage retention devices requiring pumpout facilities.
(2) The location of each marine terminal.
(3) The location and capacity of existing pumpout facilities.
(c) Recommendations as to which marine terminal or terminals should install and operate pumpout facilities, the capacity of the facilities which should be installed, and reasons for such recommendations.
(d) The name, owner, and address of each marine terminal recommended pursuant to (c) above.
(e) An appropriate installation time schedule pursuant to Section 2835.
(f) Copies of any comments received as a result of the Notice of Pumpout Facility Need.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 775, 776, 777, 777.5 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Section 776, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2833.2. Notice of Pumpout Facility Need.
Prior to requesting the State Board to require a marine terminal to install and operate pumpout facilities the Regional Board shall prepare a Notice of Pumpout Facility Need and shall forward a copy of the notice to known interested agencies and persons, including each marine terminal owner in the proposed area of pumpout facility need. The Regional Board shall publish the notice at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the proposed area of pumpout facility need. Proof of publication of the notice shall be submitted to the State Board. The notice shall provide a 30-day comment period in which interested persons may comment upon the notice. The notice shall contain:
(a) A designation of the area considered by the Regional Board.
(b) The reason pumpout facilities are believed to be necessary for the protection of water quality in that area.
(c) The names, locations, and addresses (if available) of marine terminals which may be required to install or operate pumpout facilities.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 775, 775.5, 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Section 776, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2833.3. Hearings by Regional Boards.
Upon the request of the State Board, any interested person, or upon its own motion, the Regional Board may hold a public hearing prior to requesting the State Board to require a marine terminal to install pumpout facilities. The Regional Board shall transmit any comments received together with their request to the State Board.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Section 13000, Water Code; and Sections 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2833.4. Hearings by State Board.
Upon the request of any interested person, or upon its own motion, the State Board may hold a public hearing regarding a proposed requirement that a marine terminal install pumpout facilities.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Sections 183 and 13000, Water Code.
s 2834. Further Procedures.
The State Board may require marine terminals to install and operate vessel waste pumpout facilities after consideration of the request of the Regional Board, the record of any Regional Board or State Board hearing and the following guidelines. Copies of the order requiring installation and operation of pumpout facilities shall be sent to the Regional Board, the marine terminal owner, and to other marine terminals within the area of activity.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 776 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Section 776, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2834.1. Guidelines for Marine Terminal Selection.
(a) Upon a determination that an area needs additional pumpout facilities, such need should be met by public marine terminals, if possible.
(b) Upon a determination by any Regional Board that there is no public marine terminal within an area in which additional pumpout facilities are needed for protection of water quality, the State Board shall hold a hearing to determine whether private marine terminals should be designated to provide sewage retention device pumpout facilities.
(c) In addition, the State Board and Regional Boards shall, as a minimum, consider at least the following factors in determining which marine terminals should be required to provide pumpout facilities:
(1) Availability of private marine terminals with pumpout facilities not available to the general public.
(2) Priority consideration should be given to marine terminals with fuel docking capability.
(3) The number of vessels with sewage retention devices berthed at each marine terminal in the area.
(4) The depth of water required for the vessels that will be using the pumpout facility.
(5) The expense of installing a pumpout facility and access to a means of disposing of or treating the sewage.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Section 776, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2835. Installation Time.
Since the time necessary for the installation of pumpout facilities may vary, when the State Board requires a marine terminal to install a pumpout facility, an appropriate time schedule shall be included in the order.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 776, 777 and 778, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Section 776, Harbors and Navigation Code.
s 2836. Design, Construction, Operation, and Maintenance.
Note: Authority cited: Section 1058, Water Code. Reference: Chapter 13, Division 7, Water Code.
s 2900. Nondegradation: Statement of Policy with Respect to Maintaining High Quality of Waters in California
s 2907. Policies and Procedures for Investigation and Cleanup and Abatement of Discharges Under Water Code Section 13304.
I. The procedures Regional Water Boards shall implement in making decisions as to when a person may be required to undertake an investigation related to a discharge or threat of a discharge subject to WC s 13304.
The Regional Water Board shall:
•Use any relevant evidence to identify dischargers;
•Make reasonable efforts to identify dischargers;
•Require identified dischargers to investigate; and
•coordinate with other agencies.
II. The policies Regional Water Boards shall apply in overseeing: (a) investigations to determine the nature and horizontal and vertical extent of a discharge and (b) appropriate cleanup and abatement measures.
The Regional Water Board shall:
•Require a progressive sequence: site assessment; investigation (soil and water); cleanup and abatement action development; cleanup and abatement action; and effectiveness verification;
•Approve concurrent action under site-specific circumstances; emergency, imminent threat, protracted investigation causing delay, and small discharges which can be cleaned up quickly;
•Require cleanup and abatement of all affected locations;
•Name other dischargers as permitted by law;
•Require adequate workplans;
•Review and approve workplans as practicable;
•Require documentation of activities;
•Require reliance on qualified professionals;
•Prescribe consistent standards for similar circumstances; and
•Identify activities that do not require supervision.
III. The procedures Regional Water Boards shall implement to ensure that discharges have the opportunity to select cost-effective methods for investigating discharges or threatened discharges and methods for cleaning up the discharges and abating the effects thereof.
The Regional Water Board shall:
•Require attainment of cleanup and abatement goals;
•Require reasonable technical and monitoring reports;
•Require comparison of alternatives;
•Require consideration of standard and alternative investigative methods;
•Require consideration of standard and alternative cleanup and abatement methods;
•Require consistency with existing water quality control plans and policies; and
•Require best cleanup attainable if restoration of background is not feasible.
IV. The factors for Regional Water Boards to take into account in determining schedules for investigation and cleanup and abatement.
The Regional Water board shall take into account:
•Degree of threat;
•Timely compliance with water quality control plans and policies;
•Discharger's resources; and
•Desirability of avoiding use of public funds.
s 2908. Policy for Regulation of Discharges of Municipal Solid Waste.
On June 17, 1993, the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) adopted Resolution 93-62, entitled Policy For Regulations Of Discharges Of Municipal Solid Waste (Policy hereinafter).
The Policy implements the State Water Board's regulations governing the discharge of waste to land at municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills (which resided in 23 CCR s 2510 et seq., "Chapter 15," and which were moved, in 1997, with slight changes, to 27 CCR s 20005 et seq., "Title 27") and implements those water quality related portions of the federal regulations governing the discharge of MSW at landfills (40 CFR s 258.1 et seq., "federal MSW regulations") that are not addressed by Title 27. The federal MSW regulations apply to all landfills that receive waste on or after October 9, 1991; the majority of the federal provisions became effective on October 9, 1993 (Federal Deadline).
The Policy directed Regional Water Quality Control Boards (Regional Water Boards) to revise or adopt, as appropriate, prior to the Federal Deadline, the waste discharge requirements (WDRs) for each landfill that is subject to the federal MSW regulations. The Policy required the revised WDRs to implement those regulations in the manner described in the Policy and to implement the then-current Chapter 15 regulations as well.
After the Federal Deadline, the discharge of municipal solid waste is allowed only to areas that are lined in accordance with the provisions of the Policy. For dischargers having a landfill within one mile of a source of drinking water, the Policy requires the revised WDRs to contain a water quality monitoring program that, as of October 9, 1994, will comply with the Policy. For landfills further than one mile from a source of drinking water, this monitoring compliance deadline is October 9, 1995.
On July 21, 2005, the State Water Board revised the Policy to provide the Regional Water Boards with authority to implement a new federal regulation (40 CFR s 258.4, entitled "Research, Development, and Demonstration Permits for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills"), which became effective March 22, 2004. Section 258.4 allows temporary variances from certain listed federal standards (that would otherwise apply), for the purpose of demonstrating the viability of new approaches and technology. A Regional Water Board may only grant a section 258.4 variance if it finds that granting such a variance will pose no additional threat to water quality at that landfill and that the landfill is, otherwise, in full compliance with the federal MSW regulations.
s 2909. Concise Summary of Regulatory Provisions Amendment to the Water Control Policy for the Enclosed Bays and Estuaries of California.
Chapter 1: Principles for Management of Water Quality in Enclosed Bays and Estuaries.
The amendment allows an exception to the provision requiring the elimination of wastewater discharges to the San Francisco Bay south of the Dumbarton Bridge for treated ground water from ground water cleanup projects. The exception may be granted by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board when 1) the discharge will comply with all applicable State and Regional Board plans, policies and regulations, 2) reclamation or reuse is not practicable, 3) there is no other feasible location for discharge, and 4) the need to dispose of treated ground water outweighs the need to prohibit the discharge south of the Dumbarton Bridge.
s 2910. Concise Summary of Regulatory Policy on Water Quality Enforcement.
On February 19, 2002, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted Resolution No. 2002-0040, rescinding Resolutions 96-030 and 97-085 and approving the revised Water Quality Enforcement Policy. The primary goal of the Water Quality Enforcement Policy is to create a framework for identifying and investigating instances of noncompliance, for taking enforcement actions that are appropriate in relation to the nature and severity of the violation, and for prioritizing enforcement resources to achieve maximum environmental benefits.
The policy implements and provides guidance regarding the use by the State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Water Quality Control Boards of enforcement powers set forth in Division 7 of the Water Code (commencing at Water Code Section 13000) and related statutes.
The Policy includes the following elements:
w Provisions for more efficient use of standardized permit and enforcement order language.
w An overview of water quality enforcement options.
w A process for identifying enforcement priorities and to assist in choosing the appropriate enforcement response.
w Information to assist in integrated enforcement efforts with other agencies.
w Procedures for response to fraudulent reporting or knowingly withholding data.
w Specific guidance regarding assessment of administrative civil liability, use of supplemental environmental projects and compliance projects, handling of criminal activities, guidance on what constitutes minor violations, standards for violation and enforcement reporting.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 13140 and 13399, Water Code. Reference: Sections 13140 and 13399, Water Code.
s 2911. Summary of Containment Zone Amendment of Resolution No. 92-49: Policies and Procedures for Investigation and Cleanup and Abatement of Discharges Under Water Code Section 13304.
Section H:
The amendment establishes conditions under which Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) may designate containment zones. A containment zone is a portion of a ground water unit where the RWQCB finds it is technically or economically infeasible to cleanup to water quality objectives, and where the RWQCB finds the discharger can contain pollutants within the designated zone so that water quality objectives are not exceeded outside the zone. The discharger is required to monitor to verify on-going containment, and to mitigate significant environmental impacts.
The policy provides:
* Guidance for discharger application;
* Procedures for RWQCB designation;
* Conditions for designation; and
* Administrative procedures for tracking sites, recommending improved procedures, and RWQCB recovery of costs of application review.
Appendix to Section H:
The Appendix outlines information to be included (as appropriate) in an application for designation of a containment zone.
s 2912. Concise Summary of the Water Quality Control Policy for Guidance on Development of Regional Toxic Hot Spot Cleanup Plans.
Resolution No. 98-090, adopted on September 2, 1998, by the State Water Resources Control Board, created the Water Quality Control Policy for Guidance on Development of Regional Toxic Hot Spot Cleanup Plans (Policy). The Policy is intended to be used by the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) to develop consistent regional toxic hot spot cleanup plans pursuant to Water Code Section 13394. The Policy provides guidance on:
• the contents of the regional cleanup plans;
• a specific definition of toxic hot spot;
• criteria to rank sites;
• toxic hot spot remediation methods;
• costs and benefits of remediation;
• prevention of toxic hot spots; and
• site-specific variances from the Policy.
The Policy contains a template to be used by the RWQCBs in developing the cleanup plans. The Policy also lists several issues to be considered in the development of the statewide consolidated toxic hot spot cleanup plan.
s 2913. Concise Summary of the Consolidated Toxic Hot Spots Cleanup Plan.
Resolution 99-065, adopted June 17, 1999, by the State Water Resources Control Board, created the Consolidated Toxic Hot Spots Cleanup Plan (Plan). As required by Water Code Sections 13392 and 13394, the Plan requires the Regional Water Quality Control Boards to implement remedial actions at identified known toxic hot spots to improve and protect the quality of the enclosed bays, estuaries and coastal waters of the State from discharges of hazardous substances in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 5.6 of the Water Code. The Plan was adopted as Policy for Water Quality Control. The Plan contains the following elements:
• A list of known toxic hot spots;
• The priority of each known toxic hot spot;
• Procedures for removing toxic hot spots from the Plan;
• Guidance on the reevaluation of waste discharge requirements;
• The scope of remedial actions and costs;
• Policy on remediation if potential discharger is identified;
• Policy on remediation in the absence of potential discharger;
• Policy for prevention of toxic hot spots:
• Special provisions for remediation in San Diego Bay;
• The toxic hot spot definition, ranking criteria, and benefits of remediation;
• Mitigation necessary to avoid the potential environmental impacts of remediation; and
• Regional Toxic Hot Spots Cleanup Plan developed pursuant to Title 23, California Code of Regulations Section 2912.
s 2914. Policy for Implementation of Toxics Standards for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California.
On March 2, 2000, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopted Resolution No. 2000-015, creating the Policy for Implementation of Toxics Standards for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California (Policy). On April 26, 2000, the SWRCB adopted Resolution No. 2000- 030, which amended Resolution No. 2000-015 by modifying the conditions for the effective date of the Policy with respect to its application to certain standards. The goal of the Policy is to establish a standardized approach for permitting discharges of toxic pollutants to non-ocean surface waters in a manner that promotes statewide consistency. The Policy applies to discharges of toxic pollutants into the inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries of California subject to regulation under the State's Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Division 7 of the Water Code) and the federal Clean Water Act. Such regulation may occur through the issuance of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, the issuance or waiver of waste discharge requirements, or other relevant regulatory approaches. The Policy does not apply to discharges of toxic pollutants from combined sewer systems or to the regulation of storm water discharges.
The Policy establishes: (1) implementation provisions for priority pollutant criteria promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) through the National Toxics Rule (NTR) (40 C.F.R. s 131.36) and through the California Toxics Rule (CTR) (40 C.F.R. s 131.38), and for priority pollutant objectives established by Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) in their water quality control plans (basin plans); (2) monitoring requirements for 2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalents; and (3) chronic toxicity control provisions. In addition, the Policy includes a description of the State's existing nonpoint source management approach, procedures for initiating site-specific objective development, and exceptions provisions. Terms are defined in Appendix 1 of the Policy. The specific, regulatory Policy provisions are summarized as follows:
(a) Establishing Water Quality-Based Effluent Limitations for Priority Pollutant Criteria/Objectives
(1) Specifies the priority pollutant criteria and objectives, and their general application to beneficial uses designated in basin plans, to which the Policy applies.
(2) Addresses data requirements and adjustments; specifies that the RWQCBs shall issue letters to all NPDES permittees requesting the data necessary to determine whether water quality-based effluent limitations are needed and to calculate the limits; authorizes a time schedule of not to exceed three years from the Policy's effective date for submittal of data; states that it is the discharger's responsibility to provide the necessary data; requires that criteria/objectives, and pollutant and flow data, are properly adjusted, applied, and expressed for the purposes of establishing water quality-based effluent limitations pursuant to the Policy.
(3) Establishes provisions to determine whether a water quality-based effluent limitation for a priority pollutant is required in a discharger's permit (flowchart is provided in Appendix 2 of the Policy).
(4) Establishes four methods for calculating water quality-based effluent limitations for priority pollutants to be included in permits: derive from a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL); use a steady-state model; apply a dynamic model, and consider intake water pollutants; detailed procedures are established for the steady-state model method; specifies that more restrictive water quality-based effluent limitations (e.g., discharge prohibition) are required if necessary to protect beneficial uses or are otherwise required by law; establishes method for calculating effluent limitations where pollutants are so diluted by cooling water as to make monitoring impractical.
(5) Establishes procedures for applying translators to metals and selenium criteria/objectives; requires that the U.S. EPA conversion factor (listed in Appendix 3 of the Policy) be used as translators unless the discharger completes a site-specific translator study and proposes a site-specific translator within two years of permit issuance or reissuance; establishes general procedures for conducting the study and specifies interim permit requirements.
(6) Authorizes RWQCBs to consider granting mixing zones and dilution credits to be used in calculating water quality-based effluent limitations; establishes procedures for deriving a dilution credit; establishes conditions to be met in allowing a mixing zone and factors to be considered in determining whether to deny or significantly limit a mixing zone and dilution credit.
(7) Establishes procedures for determining the ambient background concentration of a priority pollutant for use in determining whether a water quality-based effluent limitation is required and in calculating a limit; specifies that the observed maximum of individual reported values be used, except that an arithmetic mean shall be used in the case of calculating a water quality-based effluent limitation for a priority pollutant that is intended to protect human health from carcinogenic effects.
(8) Establishes conditions under which a credit for intake water pollutants may be considered in calculating a water quality-based effluent limitation for a priority pollutant.
(b) Determining Compliance With Priority Pollutant Criteria/Objectives and Water Quality-Based Effluent Limitations for Priority Pollutant Criteria/Objectives
(1) Authorizes the RWQCBs to grant compliance schedules up to five years from permit issuance, reissuance, or modification to comply with water quality-based effluent limitations for CTR priority pollutants, and up to 15 years to develop and adopt a TMDL, and accompanying Waste Load Allocations and Load Allocations, for CTR priority pollutants; establishes conditions, including discharger justification, under which a compliance schedule may be granted for an existing discharger; requires compliance with CTR criterion-based effluent limitation within 10 years from the effective date of the Policy; requires compliance with TMDL-derived effluent limitations within 20 years from the effective date of the Policy; requires that a compliance schedule be accompanied by interim requirements in the permit.
(2) Establishes provisions for interim requirements under a compliance schedule, including a requirement for numeric interim limitations if the compliance schedule exceeds one year; establishes provisions for interim requirements under a schedule to submit data sufficient to establish water quality-based effluent limitations.
(3) Establishes a requirement for dischargers to conduct self-monitoring programs and a requirement for RWQCBs to specify monitoring requirements in permits; lists options for analytical methods for priority pollutants to be used; requires that laboratories monitoring samples be certified by the Department of Health Services in accordance with Water Code Section 13176.
(4) Establishes that the discharger shall report with each analytical sample result two reporting levels, the Method Detection Limit (MDL) and the applicable Minimum Level (selected in accordance with the Policy); establishes procedures for selecting and using an ML from among the MLs established in Appendix 4 of the Policy; establishes conditions under which an ML that is not in Appendix 4 may be included in the discharger's permit; establishes protocols for reporting analytical sample results in relation to the required reporting levels (the MDL and the ML); establishes provisions for determining compliance with water quality-based effluent limitations for priority pollutants based on the reporting protocols, including a requirement to conduct a Pollutant Minimization Program under specified situations.
(c) 2,3,7,8-TCDD Equivalents : Directs RWQCBs to require all NPDES permittees to monitor their effluents for the presence of the 17 congeners of 2,3,7,8- TCDD (dioxin) for specified periods; states that the results of this statewide monitoring effort will be assessed for the purpose of developing a multi-media control strategy for these chemicals in the future.
(d) Toxicity Control Provisions : Establishes minimum toxicity control provisions for implementing the narrative toxicity objectives for aquatic life protection in basin plans that supplement, not supersede, existing RWQCB toxicity requirements.
(e) Special Provisions
(1) Establishes a procedure for the RWQCBs to follow in considering the initiation of site-specific objective development for priority pollutants.
(2) Establishes provisions for granting categorical exceptions to meeting priority pollutant criteria/objectives determined to be necessary to implement control measures for resource or pest management conducted by public entities, or regarding drinking water, to fulfill statutory requirements; establishes provisions for granting case-by-case exceptions to meeting a priority pollutant criterion/objective or any other provision of the Policy where the exception will not compromise protection of enclosed bay, estuarine, and inland surface waters for beneficial uses and the public interest will be served.
(f) Definition of Terms : The Policy defines "acutely toxic conditions", "arithmetic mean", "average monthly effluent limitation", "best management practices", "bioaccumulative", "biologically-based receiving water flow", "carcinogenic", "coefficient of variation", "completely-mixed discharge", "dilution credit", "dilution ratio", "dynamic models", "effluent concentration allowance", "enclosed bays", "estimated chemical concentration", "estuaries", "existing discharger", "four-day average of daily maximum flows", "harmonic mean", "incompletely-mixed discharge", "infeasible", "inland surface waters", "load allocation", "long-term arithmetic mean flow", "maximum daily flow", "maximum daily effluent limitation", "median", "method detection limit", "minimum level", "mixing zone", "mutagenic", "new discharger", "objectionable bottom deposits", "ocean waters", "persistent", "pollutant minimization", "pollution prevention", "process optimization", "public entity", "source of drinking water", "standard deviation", "teratogenic", "toxicity reduction evaluation", "use attainability analysis", "1Q10", "7Q10", and "90th percentile of observed data".
s 2914.5. Policy for Implementation of Toxics Standards for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries.
The amendments for the Policy for Implementation of Toxics Standards for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California (SIP) consist of:
(1) Discharger-Specific Water Effect Ratios (WERs):
The language of the SIP has been amended to allow Regional Water Quality Control Boards (Regional Water Boards) to use discharger-specific WERs in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting process. The development of WERs would still have to use U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) guidance or other scientifically defensible protocols, but the approvals of WERs by the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) and USEPA through the adoption of a Regional Water Quality Control Plan provision would not be required. The State Water Board and USEPA would still be involved in the development of the WER through the public review process of the NPDES permit containing the proposed Site-Specific Objective and associated effluent limit.
(2) Modify the language ofStep 6of reasonable potential analysis:
The language of the SIP has been amended to allow the reasonable potentialStep 6trigger to apply only to situations where ambient background concentrations are greater than the water quality criterion or objective, and the pollutant is detected in the effluent. Language would also be added to require monitoring in situations where ambient background concentrations are greater than the water quality criterion or objective, and the pollutant is not detected in the effluent.
(3) Modify language to improve clarity:
The SIP has been amended to incorporate changes that improves clarity and provides a better understanding of how SIP provisions are to be applied in permits. The changes also reduce inconsistencies in permits written by different Regional Water Boards.
Note: Authority cited: Section 13140, Water Code. Reference: Sections 13142 and 13143, Water Code.
s 2915. Policy for the Implementation and Enforcement of the Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program.
On May 20, 2004, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopted Resolution No 2004-0030, adopting the Policy for the Implementation and Enforcement of the Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program(NPS Implementation Policy) in accordance with California Water Code section 13369.
A nonpoint source (NPS) pollution control implementation program is a program developed to comply with SWRCB or RWQCB waste discharge requirements (WDRs), waivers of WDRs, or basin plan prohibitions. The policy provides a framework for developing NPS pollution control programs throughout the state. NPS pollution control programs may be developed by the SWRCB, a RWQCB or a third-party entity. The policy defines "third-party entities" as entities that are not actual dischargers under RWQCB/SWRCB permitting authority.
All NPS pollution control programs endorsed or approved by a RWQCB as sufficient to meet RWQCB obligations to protect water quality are required, at a minimum, to meet the requirements of the following key elements, thus providing consistent program requirements throughout the state.
1. A NPS control implementation program's purpose must be explicitly stated, and must be designed to achieve and maintain water quality objectives and beneficial uses, including any applicable antidegradation requirements.
2. The NPS program shall include a description of the management practices to be implemented and the process to ensure and verify proper implementation.
3. Where a RWQCB determines time is necessary to achieve water quality requirements, a time schedule and corresponding quantifiable milestones to measure progress are required.
4. Feedback mechanisms must be included in the implementation program so that the RWQCB, dischargers and the public can determine whether the program is achieving its stated purpose(s), or if additional or other actions are required.
5. In addition, each RWQCB shall make clear, in advance, the potential consequences for failure to achieve a program's stated purposes and make clear that any enforcement action that needs to be taken will be taken against individual dischargers, not the third parties.
Investigation, identification, and enforcement of NPS discharger noncompliance with State water quality control laws, regulations, policies and plans shall be consistent with the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Water Quality Enforcement Policy(Title 23, California Code of Regulations section 2910).
s 2916. Water Quality Control Policy for Developing California's Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List.
On September 30, 2004, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopted Resolution No. 2004-0063 adopting theWater Quality Control Policy for Developing California's Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List(Policy) in accordance with California Water Code section 13191.3(a).
The Policy describes the process by which SWRCB and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) will comply with the listing requirements of section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act. The objective of the Policy is to establish a standardized approach for developing California's section 303(d) list in order to achieve the overall goal of achieving water quality standards and maintaining beneficial uses in all of California's surface waters. Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) will be developed as needed for the waters identified under the provisions of the Policy.
The Policy outlines a weight of evidence approach that provides the decision rules for different kinds of data; an approach for analyzing data statistically; and requirements for data quality, data quantity, and administration of the listing process. Decision rules for listing and delisting are provided for: chemical-specific water quality standards; bacterial water quality standards; health advisories; bioaccumulation of chemicals in aquatic life tissues; nuisance such as trash, odor, and foam; nutrients; water and sediment toxicity; adverse biological response; and degradation of aquatic life populations and communities. The Policy also requires that situation-specific weight of evidence listing or delisting factors be used if available information indicates water quality standards are not attained or attained and the other decision rules do not support listing or delisting. The Policy requires schedules for TMDL development.
The Policy also provides direction related to:
1. The definition of readily available data and information.
2. Administration of the listing process including data solicitation and fact sheet preparation.
3. Interpretation of narrative water quality objectives using numeric evaluation guidelines.
4. Data quality assessments.
5. Data quality assessments including water body specific information, data spatial and temporal representation, aggregation of data by reach/area, quantitation of chemical concentrations, evaluation of data consistent with the expression of water quality objectives or criteria, binomial model statistical evaluation, evaluation of bioassessment data, and evaluation of temperature data.
s 2917. Water Quality Control Policy for Addressing Impaired Waters: Regulatory Structure and Options.
Regional Water Quality Control Boards (Regional Water Boards) have wide latitude, numerous options, and some legal constraints that apply when determining how to address impaired waters. Irrespective of whether Clean Water Act section 303(d) requires a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), the process for addressing waters that do not meet applicable standards must be accomplished through existing regulatory tools and mechanisms. This policy outlines those tools and mechanisms, and explains how the federal requirement to establish TMDLs fits within those confines. This policy also establishes a certification process whereby the Regional Water Boards can formally recognize regulatory or nonregulatory actions of other entities as appropriate implementation programs when the Regional Water Boards determine those actions will result in attainment of standards.
s 2919. A Site Specific Exception to the Sources of Drinking Water Policy for Old Alamo Creek.
State Water Board Resolution No. 2006-0008 provided a site specific exception to State Water Board Resolution 88-63, Sources of Drinking Water Policy, for Old Alamo Creek in Solano County.
s 3000. Inland Surface Waters, Amendments.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 1058 and 13170, Water Code. Reference: Sections 13160, 13170, 13241, 13242, 13370 and 13372, Water Code.
s 3001. Enclosed Bays and Estuaries. Amendments.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 1058, 13170 and 13391, Water Code. Reference: Sections 13160, 13170, 13241, 13242, 13370, 13372 and 13391, Water Code.
s 3002. Summary of revised Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary.
On May 22, 1995, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopted Resolution No. 95-24, entitled Adoption of the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary (Bay-Delta Plan). The Bay-Delta Plan supersedes the Water Quality Control Plan for Salinity for the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta adopted May 1991 (1991 Plan) and the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Marsh adopted August 1978 (1978 Plan). (continued)