Environmental News

Volume 9, Issue 11

March 11, 2008

Coming Soon! Search Lion.com for Answers to Your Compliance Issues!

Find regulatory information faster than ever before! An upgraded search engine is coming with the new and improved Lion.com web site! It just keeps getting better.

Question of the Week

Applicability of the EPA Multi-Sector General Permit
Q. Our company is planning to build a new manufacturing facility. The new facility would qualify as “industrial activity” under the Clean Water Act storm water permitting program. We are aware that EPA published a multi-sector general permit. However, we heard that the permit has expired in 2005. Does this mean we will have to obtain an individual NPDES for our storm water discharges?

A. As a component of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, point source discharges of storm water associated with industrial activities must have a permit [40 CFR 122.26]. The EPA's multi-sector general permit (MSGP), which was available to most industrial sectors at 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14) other than construction activities, did expire on October 30, 2005. A proposal for a new MSGP was published in the Federal Register on December 1, 2005, but the EPA has yet to issue a final notice. Facilities that were operating under the 2000 MSGP before October 30, 2005, were allowed to operate under an administrative continuance. All other facilities would be required to apply for an individual permit for their storm water discharges.

There may still be an opportunity for your new facility to operate under a general storm water permit, however. The MSGP is only available to sources that are not within the scope of a state's NPDES program. Section 1.1 of the MSGP-2000 provides a listing of the areas of coverage. The Federal permit applies to:

Region 1 - MA, ME, NH, Indian country lands in CT and RI, and Federal facilities in VT,
Region 2 - Puerto Rico,
Region 3 - Washington, DC, Federal facilities in DE,
Region 4 - Indian country lands in AL, FL, MI, and NC,
Region 6 - NM, Indian country lands and some industrial, agricultural, and silvicultural facilities in OK, and Indian country lands in LA and TX,
Region 8 - Indian country lands in ND, SD, UT, WY, and Indian country lands and Federal facilities in CO,
Region 9 - AZ and Indian country lands in NV and CA,
Region 10 - ID, Indian country lands in AK and OR, and Indian country lands and Federal facilities in WA.

If the state where your new facility will be located is not covered in Section 1.1, your state is the NPDES permitting authority. If this is the case, it is possible that your state has a valid general permit. In these instances, you would follow your state's requirements for operating under a general permit.

It is also important to note that if the construction activity at your new facility disturbs an acre or more, you would be subject to NPDES permitting as well. You would need to submit your Notice of Intent to the EPA or your authorized state before commencing any construction activities.

Join the conversation! Visit the environ-mgmt Discussion Group to post comments, ask questions, and get answers!

Getting More Answers
Lion Members gain access to our extensive online databases of helpful compliance advice, regulatory documents, and resources. E-mail your question to our regulatory experts or open your own hotline account. Membership services are free to workshop attendees for one year. Or, purchase or renew your membership online.

Back–to–top

EPA News

03/05/2008—U.S. EPA Fines Southern California Technology Company $208,000 for “Nano Coating” Pesticide Claims on Computer Peripherals

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has settled with ATEN Technology, Inc., of Irvine, Calif., acting for its subsidiary IOGEAR, for selling unregistered pesticides and making unproven claims about their effectiveness. EPA maintains that IOGEAR made unsubstantiated public health claims regarding unregistered products, and their ability to control germs and pathogens — a violation of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act.

02/29/2008—EPA Reaches Agreement With Dow Corning on Clean-air Violations

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 has reached an agreement with Dow Corning Corp. on alleged clean-air violations at two of its production processes at 3901 S. Saginaw Road, Midland, Mich. The agreement, which includes a $95,000 penalty, resolves EPA allegations that Dow Corning failed to meet several conditions that restrict emissions of volatile organic compounds and particulate matter in the manner required by its state operating permit and state regulations.

02/28/2008—New Hampshire-based Manufacturing Company Faces $125K Fine for Environmental Violations in South Hadley, Massachusetts

A Hudson, New Hampshire-based company that manufactures digital plates for the printing industry faces a combined fine of $125,678 for environmental violations related to a chemical spill at the company's South Hadley, Mass. manufacturing facility. In an administrative complaint filed recently, EPA alleges that Presstek Inc. violated the federal Clean Air Act and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), due to a 2006 chemical release at the manufacturing facility it owns and operates in South Hadley.

02/27/2008—Failing to Provide Community Disclosure Information Yields Penalties for 11 Companies

Eleven companies based in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts and Rhode Island will pay EPA a penalty for failing to submit chemical inventory reports on chemicals present at their facilities, under terms of settlements recently reached. March 1 was the deadline for submitting chemical inventory reports.

02/21/2008—Latest Toxic Release Inventory Shows Small Decrease in Chemicals Released into Environment

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency released today the 2006 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) which provides information on toxic chemicals used and released by utilities, refineries, chemical manufacturers, paper companies, and many other facilities across the nation. The TRI is compiled from data submitted to EPA and the states by industry.

02/20/2008—Martha's Vineyard Oil Company Pays Penalty to Settle Clean Water Violations

A Vineyard Haven, Mass. petroleum storage and distribution company has agreed to pay a $78,000 fine for violating the federal Clean Water Act and Oil Pollution Prevention regulations. RM Packer Inc. failed to adequately implement a “Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure” (SPCC) plan and did not sufficiently maintain proper containment for its tanks and loading rack. Upgrades required by the facility's SPCC plan had not been implemented, including installing high level alarms and level monitors on tanks, installing secondary tank bottoms with corrosion protection, and testing tanks for soundness. Because the facility is located directly across from Vineyard Sound Harbor, these violations presented a significant threat of an oil spill into navigable water.

View more EPA news

Back–to–top

Recent EPA Rules, Standards, and Interpretations

02/21/2008—Draft Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List 3
EPA is publishing for public review and comment a draft list of contaminants that are currently not subject to any proposed or promulgated national primary drinking water regulations, that are known or anticipated to occur in public water systems, and which may require regulations under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). This is the third Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 3) published by the Agency since the SDWA amendments of 1996.

02/07/2008—National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Iron and Steel Foundries
EPA is issuing amendments to the national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for iron and steel foundries. These final amendments add alternative compliance options for cupolas at existing foundries and clarify several provisions to increase operational flexibility and improve understanding of the final rule requirements.

02/05/2008—Notice of Data Availability on the Disposal of Coal Combustion Wastes in Landfills and Surface Impoundments; Reopening of Comment Period
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reopening the comment period for the Notice of Data Availability (NODA) entitled “Notice of Data Availability on the Disposal of Coal Combustion Wastes in Landfills and Surface Impoundments.” This NODA announces the availability of new information and data concerning the management of coal combustion wastes (CCW) in landfills and surface impoundments that will be used by the Agency to inform its decisionmaking regarding its Regulatory Determination for CCW disposed of in landfills and surface impoundments.

View more EPA Actions

Back–to–top