Oregon DEQ 1200-Z Industrial Stormwater Permit Renewal Informational Webinar

Oregon DEQ 1200-Z Industrial Stormwater Permit Renewal Informational Webinar

Show Video

We have this recording. Okay before we get  into the meat of things, we are now recording.   So we renewed the 1200-Z per federal regulations  we have to renew every five years all NPDES   permits must be renewed every five years.  We renewed the current permit in August of   2017 and then shortly thereafter  we had we received a lawsuit to   reconsider the permit and then a reconsideration  petition and those parties intervened together and   we went through about seven I think it was seven  months or ten months of settlement talks with   the parties and we came to a settlement agreement  on August 17th of 2018. The settlement agreement   had short-term conditions that we had to re-issue  the 2017 permit and include all these short-term   conditions which we did in October of 2018 and  then there were long-term conditions that we had   to consider and so we began our rulemaking in  February of 2019 to consider all the long-term   changes to the industrial permit based on  a consent decree and the settlement terms.

The settlement terms included timelines for us  to re-issue the permit early so the draft permit   had to be issued by October 2020 and we needed  to issue or adopt a final permit by March 2021. So the rule making timelines   we have authority under our administrative  rules to adopt these permits by rule or order.   The agency decided to issue this iteration  of the permit by rule which means   a very long process of advisory committee  meetings and Environmental Commission   adoption so we started our meetings in  May of 2019 and we ended in June of 2020. We started the public hearing a little  before the consent decrees deadline for us   to submit a draft permit for public notice due to  the March date deadline of having a final permit   in order to address the comments and in order to  make the timeline of issuing by the March 30th,   we issued the draft permit early on August 17th  and we held the public notice period open until   October 30th 2020. Permit was adopted by our  Environmental Quality Commission on March 21st   and in order to have great webinars like  this and to get assignment letters out   and in order to start the permit at  the beginning of a monitoring year,   we decided to make the permits  effective date July 1 2021. These are the members that served on our  advisory committee. Really appreciate all  

their efforts and input. Each meeting  was about six, six and a half hours and   our last few meetings because of the pandemic did  go virtual so we used Microsoft Teams and Zoom. I will pause here because  there is another question   about eligibility for the permit. I  will let Blair read at this time. Sure. Once again another anonymous attendee  asks if stormwater industrial wastewater   and community runoff all combined into  a holding structure prior to discharge   can the facility have an individual permit instead  of a 1200-Z permit to deal with all discharges That's a great question and yes uh if you do have  industrial wastewater you are ineligible for the   1200-Z the 1200-Z is strictly for stormwater  discharge industrial storm water discharge. And even if you have a construction  activity you must get the 1200-C   for construction stormwater  discharge so again the 1200-Z   is uh is for industrial discharge  with some authorized non-storm water   discharges that are listed in the permit such  as groundwater but not industrial wastewater.

We have a couple more questions that  we will hold until we get to those   slides one about mass reduction and one about  monitoring letters and impairment assignment. So again we had six meetings focused on the  settlement terms so the settlement terms   required DEQ to review the national academies of  science report on the EPA's permit so prior to   our lawsuit and our settlement terms  EPA issued the federal permit which is   an industrial stormwater permit that applies  to pretty small area in our nation most uh most   states have been delegated the authority and most  states write their own iteration of the stormwater   industrial permit. However the MSGP which is the  multi-sector general permit is EPA's overarching   federal industrial stormwater permit and  they had their own lawsuit and under their   settlement terms they were required to pay for  and consider many conditions in their permit and   to solicit and to take the recommendations from  this very um this it was a consensus report   and it was very very robust so this national  academy is a science report again was on the   federal permit and we were required in our  settlement to consider many of the conditions   and recommendations in in that report we  also were required to consider Washington   State Ecology's methodology for water quality  numeric effluent limits so Washington State   does have some water quality numeric limits also  applicable to 303 d listed or category 5 impaired   waters and um we had some good conversations  and uh presented on their methodology and the   way that they came about um putting those limits  into their permit we were required to consider   numeric effluent limits both water quality and  technology limits for water quality limits we   were required to look at the 303-d listed  impaired waters and for technology-based   limits we were required to consider copper  lead zinc and total suspended solids.

Also um once we were able to kind of hone down the   where we were going to land in the 1200-Z  applicable to these we were required   to draft related monitoring and reporting  requirements based on benchmarks or limits. So the rulemaking record can be found at  this link. This is our industrial stormwater   discharge permit rulemaking webpage. You  can see there is the draft permit there,   there is presentations that we presented an  informational presentation we had during the   public notice period we had a couple present we  had an informational presentation and we also had   a couple presentations we gave to the  Environmental Commission so those are there   and then we have the whole rule packet and the  staff report which is staff report just includes   a bunch of background and really good information  on how we got to where we are these are   drop downs here so the 1200-Z permit rulemaking  advisory meetings you'll find all the meeting   presentations all the meeting summaries and  just a whole bunch of information if you   would like to dig into where we've been and how  we got here we also have an industrial stormwater   permits page hopefully most of you have seen  this and there we include the permit that was   renewed on March 25th by rule  becoming effective on July 1st 2021. 

The final permit evaluation report which is the  rationale and some in the background of how we   came to the permit conditions you'll find the  response to comments and a summary of changes   we also created a map to help people figure out  what geo region you're in and which impaired   and and if you discharge to an impaired waterway  and then there's the 2021 revised checklist so you   will need to fill that out and submit that with  your revised plan which is due the end of August. I will pause here for a minute to see how we're  doing on questions. Blair yeah I'm glad you did   we're getting quite a few I think one that is uh  relevant to what you're talking about currently   is from an anonymous attendee why are changes to  the 1200-Z permit program being driven by judicial   action other than legislative action by lawmakers  in Salem it seems that any environmental group   can bring a lawsuit against DEQ to change and  influence regulatory programs. Yes great question. It's just the nature of how permitting  and federal and state regulations   go. Like i mentioned um the federal regulations  which are mandated by Clean Water Act and federal   legislation on and congress's authority on the  federal side those come down to the states to   to implement so there is a lot of uh there's  a lot of um I guess participation on the   federal level as far as Clean Water Act and  federal regulations as far as the state mandating   how we regulate facilities.  There's less of that because we  

are a delegated authority we are a delegated state  agency that implements federal rules that are are   made on more you know executive  levels so um I will say   us doing this by rulemaking has enhanced hopefully  people participated in the rulemaking process   they were the all the advisory committee meetings  are open to the public obviously the litigants   participated and were part of the advisory  committee and having this permit adopted in   to our administrative rules  Oregon's administrative rules um   limits the litigation that can happen  going forward because our policy board our   Environmental Quality  Commission adopted this permit. Great thanks Chris uh we're  getting a few more questions about   guidance and fact sheets so I'll ask those and  we have quite a few questions about tier two   requirements and checklists so  we can hold off on those until   we hit the appropriate slide but Maul Foster,  someone an employee from there would like to know   will DEQ issue a fact sheet or guidance outlining  the details of the methodology of the evaluation   so um that is available in the permit evaluation  report we do talk about how we came to uh include   water quality-based effluent limits in the permit  in addition the rules the rulemaking webpage. We discussed technology based  and water quality based limits in   you know very complete or you know  we went very deep into federal rules   and state rules and Oregon's  water quality standards and how to   implement these and how to regulate affluent  limits in a general industrial stormwater permit   so all that is also available  to you in the rulemaking record. The meeting three and four were kind of the  meat of the methodology and the limit discussion and this is not really a question but Justine  Miller had a comment about the previous question   about environmental groups being able to bring  forth a lawsuit and she says it's because   of the structural design of administrative  law and the role of agencies being a quasi   branch of government environmental groups  can have the privilege of participation   under the terms of standing at hand so that  might augment the answer to the previous   question um let me look quickly  for more in this particular area.

Will a red line of the permit be issued,  wants to be known by an anonymous attendee. Unfortunately due to the structural changes  all the monitoring tables have been moved to   Schedule B and there were just too many  changes to make an a red line that would really   not be a complete mess plus as any  of you that have worked in a word doc   document template of sorts when you do a  track changes even if you do it at the end   of the final documents it just really didn't  show well and it was just extremely messy and not   something that we'll be able  to provide at this time. Hopefully,   if you you know if you can do a compare  your yourself if you've ever been able to   do that you know if you have Adobe you can  convert the pdfs to Word and do a compare   through the word function. It's just  it's just not something we'll be able   to provide because of the multiple changes  in the structural changes to the permit.

And with that Krista the rest of the questions are  general that we can pretty much answer at the end   I think or very specific to pollutant  parameters benchmarks numeric limits   and tier twos as I said so we can hold off  on those until you hit the appropriate slide. Perfect thank you Blair. Sure. Right so the draft permit went out we received  390 comments from 37 different entities. We made  

modifications from the draft to the final permit  based on 143 comments of course all comments were   considered one of the advantages of doing the  rulemaking is we are bound by the administrative   procedures acts so there are um besides all  the federal rules for NPDES permitting and   federal regulations we are also during this  process were bound by a whole rule making   set of rules rules and guidelines and again like  I said all the advisory committees were open   under public meetings law and all the  comments needed to be considered which we do   all the time anyway but there was another set of   factors that we considered under  the administrative procedures act. Of course some of the proposed permit conditions  that were in that draft were not finalized   and one of the factors that played into that  were some of the conditions in the 1200-Z draft   were based on the EPA's draft multi-sector  general permit and as the timing of their renewal   and the timing of our renewal we were able  to have a final federal permit prior to   excuse me prior to our final permit so some of  the conditions that were in the draft permit   were based on the draft federal permit and when  they didn't finalize some of those conditions we   also did not finalize some of those conditions. Some of the conditions that were not  finalized in the permit that was adopted   at the end of March was tier 1.5 and Appendix  B so those no longer are in the permit and were   a couple of the conditions that were formulated  after EPA's permit and they didn't finalize   their it was called Appendix Q and therefore  we also did not finalize Appendix B which was   a checklist of many source and operational  controls based on certain industrial sectors.

Another item that was in the draft permit  that didn't make it into the final permit was   changing the sampling frequency in  between when you take a sample to 72 hours   that continues to be in the permit at a 14 day. 14 days between sample collection there  was also based on the federal permit   additional sector specific benchmarks  for Sector O which is the oil   and gas industry Sector P which is let's  see I have my permit here, why can't I   just, transportation come on. And Sector R which  is the ship building sector um those at this time   don't have any additional sector specific  benchmarks. Sector P is the land transportation  

and warehousing sector so in the draft permit  there were some additional sector-specific   benchmarks for those but those were not finalized  because EPA did not finalize those and our   Schedule E our sector-specific section of the  permit which is pretty much the bulk of our permit   it starts on page 46 and continues to  page 144. Those pages of the permit   are adopted directly from EPA  from the multi-sector permits so   we have yet to expand on any additional  benchmarks that are not in EPA's federal permits. And then again the federal permit was adopted in  between our draft and final permit so that was   nice to have that finalized and we  could adjust our 1200-C accordingly. So I'm just going to go through quickly kind of  how the assignment procedures differ this time   because we have issued a permit sooner than the  five-year term so everyone that is an existing   permit holder got a letter that basically said  you'll continue to operate under the 2018 permit   until July 1st when the new permit is effective  and this is basically just a little bit of the   letter so hopefully everyone received that and  that is your formal coverage letter that says you   are covered under the new iteration of the permit  which goes from July 1 2021 to June 30 2026. You will not receive the first page of  the permit that you're used to with your   specific facility information on it. There was no renewal application  required again because the current permit   didn't expire so therefore the federal rules  that require a renewal application are based on   you know prior to expiration  so because we issued early   there was no renewal application and you will  not receive a formal first page of the letter   saying that you're covered under the permit.  I will pause here Blair before I go into  

the assignment letters which we  will still be identifying all   the monitoring requirements  specific to each existing facility. All right Sarah asks how do we update our  facility contact information since there is no   renewal application. Good question Sarah. Of  course, everyone's question is a good question.   But, in the letters that everyone received shortly  after the permit was adopted by the Environmental   quality Commission there was my email and  my cell phone number and I have been getting   emails and calls from facilities saying  that the contact information was incorrect   so we did update when I got those you  know I updated them all in our database   we are using the same database obviously to do  mailing for the monitoring assignment to identify   what your monitoring will be for the next five  years and hopefully those have been those of   you that have asked me to change the database  hopefully those will be corrected you can contact   either your local regional office or your agent  you should certainly contact if you're in an agent   jurisdiction you could contact your agent  but even the agents facilities information is   held within our database so just contact me either  by email or phone and I will get that changed.  

I can't guarantee that the next mailing  will have the correct information but   every mailing from here on out should and we're  actually moving to electronic reporting so   everything will change once that happens. And Tabitha would like to know if the new permit  requires an updated stormwater control plan that   can be done by someone from our company can  they make those updates or do they need to   be done by an engineer anyone can update your  stormwater pollution control plan and yes every   existing facility must update your plan to  include um the new provisions in the permit   we will go through that in a little more detail  later a couple more questions before we move on   anonymous would like to know if they lease  property at the Aalem airport and fall under   the city of Salem's 1200-Z permit is there a  list of responsibilities available for leases? There's a little information in the permit  if you search for the word tenet there's some   specifics around specific to these type of  facilities, airports or large industrial parks,   it is the responsibility of the permit holder  to ensure they are compliant with the permit   conditions so you would just coordinate with  them and you know ensure that you're controlling   industrial storm water and any  materials that you have on site. And Johnny Levy would like to know he's curious  to know that if flows through an industrial site   are rerouted around the facility through a  joining an industry-owned property but they   do not come into contact with industrial  activities is a 1200-Z still required And I can repeat that or I don't know if  you have access to that Krista. I see it   and no you don't need to repeat it. The industrial  storm water permit is again for storm water that  

comes into contact with industrial activity that  discharges into any surface waters and origins so   if there is no industrial activity coming in  contact with the stormwater leaving your site   you do not need an industrial stormwater permit  there are if you do have the applicable SIC codes   so the standard industrial classification code  like I talked about those 29 larger sectors and   those again are listed in schedule e of our permit  from federal coming down from federal regulations   starting at page 46. So if you do have one  of those industrial standard codes and your   stormwater, Ii mean there is a provision called no  exposure certification that allows you to certify   every five years that your industrial site that  has an industrial code that's eligible for the   1200-Z has no industrial stormwater exposure to  materials or contaminants and then you fill out   the no exposure certification every five years  that certifies that your site doesn't need an   industrial permit and that you're certifying  that there is no industrial exposure so that's   what would be required if you do have a standard  industrial code as required under the 1200-C. So we have it's not really a question  it's a statement that the map does not   seem to be working right it does not list the  impairments in the waterways from the legend   and I guess I could say that obviously DEQ  will correct any broken links but would you   like to add anything to that Krista about  the impairment or impaired waterway map.

Sure yeah I spent about a  month determining impairments   and you know on this slide you can see the arrow  there for the new assessment unit id this is a new   identifier a new code of your receiving stream  based on the new methodology and changes that   went into the 2018-2020 integrated report  which outlines the impaired waters in Oregon   and so we and we know that the maps  are not working completely well and   we are working on it we just updated our memory   and our IT team is working really  hard to get those to function better. Great and a couple more just came in and we'll  answer these and I think we have about 10 that   are with tier 2 triggers or benchmarks or certain  pollutant parameters so we can hold off on those   but anonymous would like to know when  will assignment letters be issued. Those should be going out very shortly for  DEQ sites most of them have been drafted   and it varies on what which region you're in   all the agent sites I believe have already  sent all their letters but you should get them very soon. Okay and anonymous again when  should we expect to receive our permit letter   with monitoring requirements if we do not receive  it by a certain date how can we get another copy? How can we get another copy? Correct.  So again hopefully most of the existing facility folks know maybe the regional person  you can always contact me however I will be   gone most of June so u your letters should  be coming should be you know being mailed out   there is a way to contact the regional  facilities from our industrial web page.   There's contacts on the right-hand side so you can  use that if you don't know your regional contact   but certainly contacting your  regional staff is the best way.

Right we answered quite a few so we  can move on if you'd like and then   answer the rest at the relevant  time. Great thanks so much Blair. So as we did in the last couple iterations  of the permit ever since we've required   impairment monitoring we will  be sending you each of you the tables of your required monitoring  this is what they will look like   and because we've expanded the geo regions  again that's another um granularity that we will   you know certainly help you identify which geo  region you're in um there are some nuance to the   permit that um are a little different  than what we had last time and that is um   if you do have impaired waters if you do discharge  into a 303 d impaired receiving water for copper   lead zinc or pH because those also are statewide  benchmarks you will only be assigned impairment   concentrations and impairment monitoring for  any of those pollutants so in the past we have   assigned statewide benchmarks sector specific  benchmarks and impairment monitoring for the same   parameters and we will not be doing that this  time around so again if you have an impairment   for those pollutants those four pollutants you  will not also be sampling on a statewide benchmark   you will follow kind of the corrective action for  any exceedance under the impairments in the permit   which we'll go through in depth later but I just  want to point out that very important fact and um   excuse me you can read the specifics of  that in um schedule b six I believe um   in the permit that talks about um pollutant  parameters that section schedule b6 kind of   outlines when and uh when you'll get a kind  of the hierarchy of when you'll get assigned   certain benchmark or impairment monitoring if  it's the same pollutant so again for the sector   specific if you have been identified under the  sector requirements to have a benchmark that's   the same as your statewide benchmark you will  just be sampling under the statewide benchmark   and then under the impairment tables we are  now identifying again that assessment unit id   which we'll go through later as well but when you  have kind of an idea and figure out how to use   the maps or the new assessment database which  is the database that outlines the category 5   pollutants based on our EPA  approved 2018-2020 integrated report   again the integrated report is the um is is our is  the way that we um outline the impaired waters and   their status throughout the state so um you will  have on your letters and in your monitoring tables   a sixth digit assessment unit ID and that six  digit which the assessment unit IDs are much   longer than that but the sixth digit is how you  can search the database the assessment database   and how you can search the maps and  hopefully that will help you determine   you know your impairments you can double check  on those uh we did our best with the tools   available to us to accurately um identify  impairments based on your receiving stream   for those of you that have more than one receiving  stream or sector specific co-located co-located   industrial classification codes so more than  one sic code these monitoring tables won't   won't identify more than one receiving stream  or more than one standard industrial code but   we do we do talk about the co-located industrial  codes if you've identified those for us but we   won't break out the co-located monitoring per  monitoring location so that's what the tables   don't do so there is more information  needed and and um we will get those   letters out soon and hopefully  you'll have um around a month to   to um identify any discrepancies that might be  in the letter and and the letters will give you   your regional uh contact and you  can contact those people and we can   revise any of the monitoring tables that we need  to but hopefully most of them will be accurate. I'll pause there. Blair do you have any questions  on monitoring assignments? We do and specific to   impaired water bodies. Jason would like  to know please verify that only category 5  

303 d listed parameters for a water body trigger  impairment monitoring for example sorry if copper   is a cat four for a water body then no  impairment monitoring. Correct, correct.   Great and there's another one actually our first question somebody  uh was prophetic and asking this   quite a while ago does a letter outlining  monitoring requirements in form as to   whether discharge is to a 303 d listed  water body for an impairment parameter. Yes so again it will be that third table down  there it will list your receiving water your   llid which is just a different identifier your  auid which is the uh consistent identifier   for the effective assessment database and map so  you'll use that six digit instead of your llid   to search the map in the assessment database  and again the receiving water is based on your facility's location and the nearest receiving  water so if you co-mingle and you discharge to   through ms4 you know there could be some errors  in your receiving water um so it's important that   you really look at these tables and verify  that they are accurate when you get them and   like i said hopefully you'll have them at least by  June or so um so you'll have you know at least a   few weeks before the permit is effective to  um to identify and remedy any discrepancies and one more krista specific to this topic by  anonymous so if a facility isn't paired for copper   a tier one report would not be required for one  exceedance as it would be if it were a statewide   statewide benchmark is that correct that's  correct no more tier one for impairment exceedance right here ones do apply to statewide  and sector specific benchmark accedences here's another one from somebody's  galaxy phone also have the amount   of impairment monitoring concentration  pollutants been reduced from sampling yes and we'll go into that in depth later   okay so i think that is it for this  particular topic we can move on great so let's move on from kind of this  assignment procedural stuff into   where we are today so existing facilities um  are currently operating under the uh permit that   was reissued based on those short term settlement  agreements in October 22nd 2018 and um will begin   to be regulated under the reissued permit on July  1 2021 so this expiration date of July 31 2022 um   doesn't have any relevance anymore  again that was the five-year term   expiration based on the  effective date august 1 2027   2017 and a lot has happened since then and we  have reissued the current permit a year early so   the existing permit will cease to you will cease  to be regulated under that starting July 1, 2021.   So moving into the specifics of the new  permit um we're going to go through the   different kinds of monitoring and what's  changed um and I will again pause after um   each of the slides or every couple  slides to make sure we're addressing any   applicable questions so the statewide  benchmarks we expanded the geo regions   in the 2018 permit there was the Columbia  River geo region the Columbia Slough region   and the Portland Harbour region and and the  rest of the state we've expanded those to be   in line with our water quality standards that has has basically determined geo regions  which is a which are developed   from again EPA's eco regions so these  are based on geography and um and   topographic and ecosystems and  all sorts of determinations to to assess the five main geo regions throughout the  state of Oregon. So um we in the 1200 z have seven   geo regions because the Columbia Slough has a TMDL  for industrial water and the Portland Harbor is under a Superfund site based on contamination so  that's why our permit has expanded to seven geo   regions we decided to ensure that the seven geo  regions uh were used this permit cycle because   of um you know you can see in the benchmarks if  you have those open there's a lot of differences   when we do the modeling based on the ambient  the actual water quality in the geo regions   so that's how we do the benchmark work we  look at the monitoring stations and all the   water quality data that is available to us  and we run those through models and we develop   different benchmarks based on the different  water quality throughout those geo regions   so since we are expanding to have water  quality impairment water quality possibly   water quality based effluent limits  based on water quality and the impairment concentrations we wanted to make sure that  the concentrations um were applicable to   these geo regions so that was one  reason why we kind of expanded into   the seven geo regions to make sure that the  concentrations were as accurate as possible   we removed oil and grease from the statewide  benchmarks we recalculated the metals including um   including uh creating marine waters geo  regions so that actually made eight geo regions   and we developed regional translators these are um   is are are done by using the dissolved  to total ambient again water quality data   in the receiving streams and comparing those and  then coming up with a translator that is more   representative of the receiving stream and the  aquatic life in it so basically when you compare   dissolve to total you can translate from  water quality to a benchmark by using these   regional translators that are still protective of  the aquatic life and develop a translator that is   that shows how the dissolve fraction of of the  discharge will will impact the water quality so   it's a little complicated and I certainly am able  to go into any details on that if you would like   but we did that evaluation so again the monitoring  table for the statewide benchmarks indicates   which areas and which pollutant we calculated a  we use the calculation for a regional translator   backing up I will state why a translator is needed  federal regulations require our permit monitoring   to be in total and our water quality standards is  in dissolved so again when we model the modeled values that come out for the benchmarks  are in dissolved and EPA has created or has   developed translators to help permitting authorities to translate from that dissolved  either in a water quality or your modeled output   into total which are required to be sampled for  in an NPDES permit so you need that translator   the the EPA translators have been used in the  past and they are certainly fairly conservative   they're almost one to one so therefore  we have where the paired data was   robust enough and we had enough data we did  evaluate regional translators and use those   when we were calculating from dissolve to  total to create the benchmarks in those areas we also moved E-coli for the treatment  works and the landfill sectors those   benchmarks we move those into sector e so those  are no longer statewide benchmarks for those two   industrial sectors there are some  chats are you seeing those Blair   there's anything we need to address um a couple of  questions in the Q&A that are pertinent to this.

So Kelly would like to know does this mean that  the Portland Harbor geo region is remaining the   same area as before that's correct okay  the boundaries for the Portland Harbor   the Columbia Slough and the Columbia River geo  regions have not changed and since you mentioned   e coli here's a question about e coli from lance  if a water body like akina bay did i say that   right is listed for e coli and you require testing  but the site can show that it is a natural issue   such as goal goals defecating on the  surface what do you require to get a waiver um will you repeat that um if a water body is  listed for e coli and you require testing but   the site can show that is that it is a natural  issue such as goals defecating on the surface   what does DEQ or what do  you require to get a waiver. So that's um we're talking about statewide  benchmarks right now we'll go into   great depth of impairment monitoring but  I will address that question right now   and for impairment monitoring we did a  rule making water quality rule making in   2011 for bacteria so our bacteria standard  does include wildlife so regardless if it is um if the if the contaminant of E-coli  is discharging from some industrial   activity operation or from birds on  your site those are regulated the same   under our water quality standards to protect our  receiving waters so the waiver condition would   be based on your sample results meaning  that 406 organisms per 100 milliliters   and it would be based on the monitoring  waiver condition for impairment monitoring and another question for this slide has  oil and grease been removed to be sampled   in the new permit our facility does not have to  sample for this compared to the current permit   that's correct no more sampling of oil  and grease under a statewide benchmark great i think there's one more  question or a couple that maybe were answered earlier so we  should answer those now again   um so what is the next permit  expiration date if not 2022 so the current permit will no longer be the  permit existing facilities are registered under   starting July 1 2021 so that expiration date of  2022 no longer has any relevance because we have   reissued the permit early the permit that will be in  effect in July 1 of 2021 all existing facilities will  become regulated under that   on that date you don't have to do anything  you are you will continue to be um   to you know have industrial storm water  permitting regulation or um coverage you   will continue to have coverage and the existing  permit expires June 30 2026 another five-year term   we've never had to cut a permit  term short this is the first time so   we're working through this the best we can  and again the reason we cut it short was due   to the lawsuit and the consent decree filed in  Multnomah court requiring DEQ to issue early and another question from anonymous having to do  with the permit being issued early would we be   able to waiver out based on prior years numbers  because of this permit being changed early no and I have some slides on  monitoring waivers coming up but all monitoring waivers will be revoked and  the federal regulations that we implement   as a delegated state require that every  permit cycle monitoring must begin   until you're eligible for a  waiver under that reissued permit and that should cover this portion of the  presentation so you can move on Krista.   Great thanks Blair. Thanks for all the thoughtful  questions so here's the statewide benchmarks   um again uh the two footnote there is um  well the two superscript superscript i think   is a footnote in the current permanent that I  didn't include but that shows you when there   was a regional translator used and then for the  Columbia Slough E-coli has a statewide benchmark   monitoring requirement and that footnote 1 refers  to an error we identified in the integrated report   for the Columbia Slough assessment units so  basically the Columbia Slough is broken up into   two assessment units and one had no e coli  impairment for category 5 303 on the real   3d list no impairment for e coli the other  assessment unit did have e coli identified as a 303 d listed parameter however that was an  error so since that was um identified prior to   the permit being issued we were able to catch  that and um denote it in the actual permit that   Columbia Slough dischargers will only be  sampling for e coli as a statewide benchmark   and will not be assigned any  impairment monitoring for e coli so now I'll kind of go through this tiered system  here of what happens if you have a statewide   benchmark exceedance so again um talking about if  your sample results come in over your benchmark   so the statewide benchmarks include copper  lead zinc pH and total suspended solids   and then the Columbia Slough have the additional  benchmarks of biological oxygen demand   phosphorus and e coli based on the  total daily maximum load or the TMDL   so your exceedance response for a statewide  benchmark is a tier one or and or uh or I   guess not or sorry and the industrial specific  checklist so these industrial specific checklists   are mentioned in the permit they are not on  the website yet we are still working on them   and they are similar to the draft permits appendix  b i talked about earlier and EPA's appendix   q that was in their draft permit but was not  finalized so uh EPA did a lot of work to identify   certain source and operational controls specific  to each sector we wanted to you know use that or   build on that as a technical assistance tool for  facilities that trigger tier one so we're still   working on it and it will get up on the website  hopefully prior to anyone sampling and receiving   monitoring results and and needing  to do a tier one corrective action   so what that's going to look like is excuse me  still a checklist it's it's in the checklist   format and it will have universal source  control and and and as operational control um bmps so things you can look at to help a facility  that in doing their tier one investigation   any of you that looked at appendix b it was 630  some pages i think it was over 600 pages based on   EPA's checklists so and a lot of those were repeat  throughout the sectors so what we've done is we've   we've made one universal checklist for all sectors   so it is up it is a facility's choice if  they would like to use the checklist that   will be made available to help them maybe  determine some bmps to uh you know reduce   their pollutant loading and get the next sample  of industrial storm water under the benchmarks   and then in addition you will do the universal and  you will do the sector specific that is applicable   to your standard industrial classification codes  so that's what this industrial checklist is   it's just we didn't want to just trash the whole  idea of having a additional technical assistance   document to help people identify pollutant  sources so we're continuing with that but it is an   optional checklist so a tier one report will be  required and the checklist is optional continue   to monitor at least for one full year which is  july 1 through june 30 until eligible for a waiver and then each year you need to evaluate your tier  2 geometric mean based on the previous year's   samples so in the current permit you do it one  time per permit cycle during the second year of   coverage in the permit that becomes effective  July 1 2021 the next iteration of the permit   the tier 2 evaluation is required  for each discharge point based on   each full monitoring year's data every year so   each august 15th you will report your  geometric mean based on your sample results and   you will reevaluate your geometric mean annually  unless you trigger tier two so if you trigger   tier two then you no longer need to report the  geometric mean nor do you continue to have to do   any tier ones or do any additional controls  above your tier two corrective action and any tier two corrective  action needs to be installed   something appropriate at all your substantially  similar discharge points so if you're exempt from   monitoring based on your discharge  points being substantially similar   you need to address your tier 2  corrective action for those non-monitored discharge points that are associated with  the monitoring point that triggered tier two so Ii will pause again because  that's a lot of information   yes and a lot of questions are coming in based  on that uh the first one from Johnny speaking of   waivers why was the eligibility requirement  for a monitoring waiver increased from four   consecutive samples to five how does this increase  in monitoring improve receiving water quality well uh again we looked at a lot of   reports we looked at EPA's permit there was  a lot that went in to the decisions that   were finalized in the next iteration of the  permit the national academies of sciences report   recommended that four sample results are not  appropriate to grant a waiver EPAs permit also   increased the amount of samples needed in order  to discontinue monitoring and a geometric mean   really the appropriate amount of samples to  evaluate a geometric mean are five so those are   some reasons why we increased it to five samples  again there's more information later specific to   monitoring waivers and we are requiring every  facility to reinstate monitoring the last   year and um depending on your facilities discharge  it you know it could impact water quality correct okay and Jessica would like to know do you need  to monitor at substantially similar points after   putting in the tier two treatment yes okay um can't or Sarah would like to know  can you clarify and I think she's   talking about the previous slide with the  table this table indicates total zinc at   fourteen hundredths of a milligram per  liter but the draft permit indicates   12. and that's for the Willamette Valley. I  don't know if there's a discrepancy there.

So the change for the Willamette Valley  zinc was based on the regional translator   being used to calculate from the modeled  dissolved values to the total benchmark bruce would like to know so any waiver  based on substantial similarity expires now   and then what is needed to  re-establish substantial similarity you're substantially similar determination that's been approved on your site  based on your stormwater pollution control plan   and that being reviewed by DEQ or your agent  does not expire now you will continue to   work off of you know you will continue to only  have to monitor your monitoring points based on   any substantially similar determination that's  been approved based on your plan going forward if you're in tier two now the  current permit requires you to address your substantially similar discharge  points if you've triggered tier two   in the current permit cycle or  previously you were to put um   appropriate treatment on all those discharge  points and therefore you would be sampling   those if you had triggered tier 2 and  you've already installed and you need to you can discontinue sampling if that is the  case once you meet the monitoring conditions so   once a facility has triggered tier two for your  substantially similar determination is revoked   basically and you have to install treatment  because the substantially similar determination   is based on monitoring your discharge at  one location and exempting the rest of those   discharges because the site has similar bmps and  similar industrial materials and you know the   the determination is based on that  similar effluent the similar discharge   for those discharge points being similar  to the monitored so under that rationale   if you trigger 2 2 for the monitored point the  substantially similar discharge points also   need to have tier two addressed and monitoring has  to resume and if you and then those substantially   similar discharge points become monitoring  points and are eligible to be discontinued   to be sampled based on the waiver  condition but no longer are eligible   to be discontinued to be sampled based on  the substantially similar discharge condition that was a lot let me know  if you have a follow-up Bruce there are quite a few questions about waiver  eligibility and conditions so i think you can   refine that a little more by answering  these um anonymous would like to know my   company has had a waiver accepted every year  since participation starting 2012 and 13.   that should create enough history to justify  a continuous waiver that's a question again we're required as a  delegated authority to reinstate   monitoring the first year of a reissued permit great um Danielle asks can we submit our five  samples in one year to trigger the waiver   as long as we have the 14 days  in between the samples or do   we have to wait until the second  year to submit that fifth sample you can you can sample five times within the  first full monitoring year which is July 1   through June 30. as long as  you make 14 days and again well so that means you can't get it in the  first six months you can't sample five times   in the first six months you have to wait till  the January 1 to June 36 months to get your   additional samples and then you  can be eligible for a waiver yes a couple more questions on waivers just to  clarify waiver eligibility over consecutive years   doesn't create a history of being below benchmarks it probably does and it certainly shows  that you are meeting the waiver condition   the waiver criteria has changed and   because we're reissuing the permit you  need to establish that baseline again   did the requirements change from waiting 14 days  to 72 hours between sample events the draft had   72 hours it did not get finalized in the permit  that was adopted by the EQC the permit currently   and the permit for the next five years starting  July 1 2021 has 14 days in between samples thanks and the last one I see on  monitoring from anonymous can you   collect five samples in the same monitoring  year to qualify for a waiver during that year   yes again you cannot collect five  samples in the first six months   you can collect um you know two or three  but uh you need to uh wait till the second   six months to get to um apply for a waiver  and we do talk about waivers i'm happy to re i'll hold off on those then um here's a more  general question what is the difference between   geo region and receiving water receiving water is the stream that your  industrial storm water discharges into   so depending on your facility location  it's generally the nearest stream   to your site just depends on your conveyance or  if you are on a waterway or you your stormwater   enters into a pipe system through the municipal  system but your receiving stream is the water body   that actually takes your industrial storm water  discharge you know where it enters into the uh   stream your industrial storm water enters into  the stream a geo region is the larger geographic   areas that DEQ uses for water quality standards  and we use in this permit to distinguish   like areas where we break the state up into  larger areas that are the same type of ecosystem and Johnny asks what is the purpose of  reestablishing baseline after permit   reissuance if industrial activities  have not changed substantially again we have no leeway to change  federal rule as a delegated npds permit regulating authority we must follow  federal regulations and federal rules   federal rules require each five years  facilities must reinstate monitoring so there are quite a few questions about tier 2   requirements are you going to expand on  that or talk more about that Krista or   would you like to hear those questions now we  do go into corrective action a little later okay this is simply um you know  kind of the overview of what happens   if you exceed a statewide benchmark okay  then we can ask a couple of those now um gwen wants to know what if they triggered a tier  two this past year under the old permit and now   higher marine water benchmarks have negated  exceedances what do we design mass reduction to it depends when you triggered tier two so if you  are still developing your tier 2 corrective action   and your a pacific ocean discharger those  are the facilities that will be assigned   a marine water steel region  you may adjust your tier 2 plan and i think this goes right in line with that   if a facility has tier two  exceedances in previous permit terms   how does that affect monitoring and corrective  action requirements for this new permit term all facilities must implement and adhere to any  deadlines or tier 2 corrective action that was   triggered in the 2018 permit those don't really  change if you are one of the facilities that   was required to submit a plan or implement or  is still implementing a tier 2 corrective action   and have yet to put things in the  ground and your benchmarks have changed   um you can talk to your regional staff and you  are able to adjust your tier 2 corrective action   to those benchmarks deadlines and the tier 2 corrective  action that was triggered   in the current permit those don't change right i have quite a few questions  that were answered by that   are you going to clarify which parameters  are benchmarks and which are numeric limits so these are your statewide benchmarks again your  monitoring tables that each facility will receive   will outline if you have an impairment  for the same parameters where you have a   statewide benchmark you will be assigned  impairment monitoring only you will not   be assigned a statewide benchmark so your  exceedance response will follow schedule a   13 under the permit the exceedance based on  impairment monitoring and one last question   before we move on it appears that if we exceed  certain parameters such as ph copper lead or   zinc and discharge to a cat53o3d water this  would escalate to a reduced limit is this correct   it could and i will go in depth in that yes okay great i think that's all i have  for you now Krista thanks Blair all right so let's go over the sector specific  benchmarks real quick um again we recalculated   all of the sector specific benchmarks  based on Oregon's water quality standards   so as I mentioned at the beginning of  the presentation we adopt that schedule e   the sector-specific requirements from  EPA therefore previously we've never we've never analyzed the benchmark concentrations  um because they well they were based on federal   water quality standards so we've never analyzed if  our oregon's water quality standards are different   um than the federal water quality standards  and we did that this time so a lot of the   benchmarks changed um based on that body of work  so now um you know our water quality standards are   our foundation for protecting our water quality  and now all the benchmarks listed in schedule e   are um in line and derived from oregon's water  quality standards instead of the federal water   quality standards as i mentioned  earlier e coli was moved to schedule   sector e schedule e um for the treatment works  and landfills out of the statewide benchmarks   we have included saltwater benchmarks in schedule  e and no additional benchmarks were added based on   the EPA permit discontinuing to finalize the  additional benchmarks for sector o p and r so a sector specific benchmark exceedance so again  many of the revised many of the concentrations   have been revised um all the metals have been  uh calculated based on the mean of hardness of   the geo region so when we model the benchmarks  we you we one of the outputs is the um   the hardness for that geo-region area and   we use that calculation which is  needed in order to in order to calculate you need the hardness in order to  calculate based on our water quality standards   um you need hardness in order to calculate the  metals so those were done and that is um that's   at the beginning of schedule e in table 10.  those medals we haven't done that in the past   again you won't be assigned  a sector specific benchmark   for the same pollutant that has a statewide  benchmark and if you exceed it's a tier one   report a tier one corrective action response and  again the industrial checklist is optional to you   and then you continue to monitor at a minimum  one full year until eligible for a waiver so let's get into impairment monitoring  there was a lot of changes here   and hopefully we can clear some things up so  again impairment monitoring is only applicable   to discharges into category 5 303t listed waters  so category 5 is just another way of saying 303d   list the 303d list is the list of impaired waters  for parameter that has yet to develop a TMDL   we narrowed the pollutant list to  six pollutants copper lead zinc   pH e-coli and iron and that was based on a  substantial amount of work done by our contractor   pg environmental pg environmental was  hired to help us in the rule making   with a lot of technical expertise and um  and work i mean they really um they really   performed a lot of technical work for us so one  of the technical scopes that they performed for us   was to evaluate all the monitoring  data from from 2000 to 2018 and to see   based on a 10 threshold what parameters  were the industrial stormwater discharge   exceeding and that's how we narrowed the  pollutant list for impairment monitoring those pollutants showed that we were exceeding 10 or more so we recalculated the impairment concentrations  again using the median hardnessIi think the   last slide was incorrect so we used median not  mean those are slightly different and again if   you exceed going forward after July 1 2021 if  you exceed sampling for an impairment pollutant   you no longer have to perform a  tier one because we have a whole new   framework for exceedance based on triggering and  escalating to a water quality based affluent limit then all this work was done based on the new 2018  2020 integrated report and the new 303 d list um   that very large effort of evaluating and re-doing  the 303-d list and all the impaired water   designations throughout the state that  that they went through a huge methodology   change and that resulted in a  lot of d listings for the metals   that industrial stormwater have sampled for in the  past and just a whole new way of looking at how we how we assess impaired waters and so that was a  huge effort that kind of went what went um went   on while we were doing the effort of renewing  the permit so I'll pause there for any questions yes jean would like a clarification um  your response earlier was to exceedances of   tier 2 on the current permit term and what he  wants to know if there are currently installed   tier 2 measures in place from a previous  permit can they be removed or bypassed   if the facility feels it can  meet the new applicable limits because a lot of the benchmarks went  up due to using regional translators   a lot of these questions of what we do with  the treatment we have on site need to be   addressed between you and your  agent or your regional staff   tier 2 corrective action becomes part of  your stormwater pollution control plan   and is enforceable um we will need to  evaluate each of those type of situations   between you know you'll need to evaluate  that with your regional staff or your agent   um i i just can't answer that on a broader scale and someone from malfoster is the tier 2  checklist required for all infiltration   facilities not installed as part of  the tier 2 action or is that evaluation   optional to avoid having to sample overflows let me read this one for myself   just a minute please it's pretty  much right in the middle of the q a so um let's hold that question until we get to  the new condition which is schedule a6 which is   the mass reduction measures certification  and um let's talk about that then Blair   okay I would think the next or the top  three questions would fall under the same   category so we can hold off on those as well so  we're probably good to move on Krista thanks again all right so again we've narrowed the list   and there's a new framework in the permit for  extenses based on two consecutive exceedances you your facility and based on that discharge   point that discharges into a 303 d  receiving stream will neat will be will escalate to a numeric water quality based  effluent limit for copper lead zinc and ph or a   narrative water quality based effluent limit for  two consecutive exceedances of iron and e coli   so we go into more detail on this this is the  big big change um that i'm sure uh folks that   discharged to a category 5 water have a lot  of questions about again a lot of the listings   and a lot of the pollutants that you  may discharge now may have changed   based on the 2018-2020 integrated report and um  the rationale for this is an impaired water on the   303-d list has no capacity to take more pollutant  that it's impaired for so if it's impaired for   copper it's already degraded to the extent of  having too much copper already in that water body   so as a regulated entity you must not be allowed  to add more of that pollutant into it already impaired water that has no more  assimilating capacity for that pollutant   so just some more schematics and some  more information on how this will work   so um you'll be identified in your uh impair  you'll be notified in your monitoring table   identification that you discharge to a 303  d listed water body you'll be given the   assessment unit id so you'll be able to put that  into the assessment database or into the map   you'll be able to see what receiving water  we say you discharged to if any of these   seem inaccurate to you please contact us so  that we can we can look at it again for you   so once you've been identified that you're  receiving stream is a category five receiving   stream and you have a two consecutive sample  exceedances then your concentration will   or your type of monitoring will change  from an impairment monitoring to a limit   you will have up to two years to adjust your site  as needed so a two-year compliance schedule is   available to you to make changes and again um this  is a new framework for copper lead zinc and ph   i'm going to do one more slide and  then i will um actually probably   it's already 11. i want to take just a  five minute break for the webinar um so i'm   gonna do one more slide we'll answer a couple  questions and we'll take a five minute break um so this is a shift too so  for i i mentioned earlier about   us going through rule making for water quality  standards for our bacteria indicators so in conjunction with the upgra uh the  changes in the methodology and the um integrated report that should have  accurately used the maps and the   bacteria indicators from the rule making  to assess the correct bacterial impairment we are asking that facilities mostly  on the coast and in the bays that have   fecal coliform and enterococcus sampling we're  asking that you sample that bacterial indicator   there is no concentration for that you sample  four times a year and report on the dmr   because there's no concentration that  you're eligible for a waiver for you   will likely sample for the five-year term  unless you have non-detects because the   waiver eligibility for impairment will  allow you to discontinue monitoring   for fecal coliform and enterococcus  if you have two years of non-detects   we currently use e coli as a surrogate we're  discontinuing that practice because it's   not really an appropriate surrogate  for the other bacterial indicators   and when you're sampling these depending on your  sample results you could be required to have a   narrative water quality base limit similar  to or the same as e coli in the permit   if we identify that you know your  discharge is is causing a health impact   so because fecal coliform and  enterococcus are related to   shellfish harvesting and public recreation  swimming we will look at those um as we need   to for those facilities that discharge to a 303 d  listed receiving water that's impaired for those   in bacterial indicators but what we're  really trying to do is get data for   the correct bacterial indicator for the  correct impairments based on these bacterias um i am going to go one more actually so  here's the the list of the concentrations   this is the concentrations you will  monitor for based on your geo region and the concentration for your limit   will be the same as for your  impairment monitoring if you trigger a numeric limit and i will pause there and  then we'll go through kind of the exceedance   response and we will go through in depth about  the compliance schedule and what that means   for facilities do you want to take a couple  questions krista before we pause sure okay   can two consecutive exceedances of a  statewide benchmark lead to a numeric limit   no again if you have if you're re if your  industri

2021-05-30 03:45

Show Video

Other news