State Water Board Considering Revision of Receiving Water Limitations in Municipal Storm Water Permits

by Wendel, Rosen, Black & Dean LLP
Contact

[author: Wendy L. Manley]

On November 20, the State Water Board held a workshop to hear stakeholder concerns with the current receiving water limitation (“RWL”) in municipal storm water permits.  Municipal separate store sewer system (MS4) permittees raised the issue following a 2011 Ninth Circuit decision that held a municipal discharger liable for exceeding receiving water limitations in its (MS4) permit.  Los Angeles County Flood Control District v. NRDC, No. 11-460 (“NRDC”).

Like other NPDES permits, the LA County MS4 permit contained a RWL that prohibited storm water discharges that cause or contribute to an exceedance of water quality standards in receiving waters.  It also contained another provision which prescribed an iterative process of evaluating and improving Best Management Practices (BMPs) whenever a water quality standard is exceeded.  The two provisions were intended to operate together: so long as the permittee was engaged in the iterative process to identify and implement BMP improvements to reduce the pollutant causing the exceedance, the Water Board would not bring enforcement action on the exceedance.  

Focused on the RWL, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found the County liable for the exceedance of receiving water standards at a monitoring station within a channelized portion of the LA River.1  In decoupling the iterative process from the RWL language, the Court placed all MS4s2 immediately in violation and subject to stiff penalties whenever a water quality standard is exceeded.  Municipal permittees are understandably alarmed to realize the iterative process in their permits no longer affords them an opportunity to investigate and correct a problem before facing penalties, which, under the Clean Water Act can be as much as $37,500 per violation per day.  Additionally, in its strict application of receiving water standards to the point of discharge (“end of pipe”), the Court also rendered meaningless the “maximum extent practicable” standard specified for municipal dischargers by the Clean Water Act.

Responding to the outcry of permittees, the State Water Board agreed to consider whether revision of its RWL language might be in order.  Over 60 regulated entities responded with written comments to an issue paper posted by the State Water Board in October 2012.  At the November 20 workshop, many of those municipal dischargers appeared with oral comments as well, relating experiences with third party litigation, and urging the State Water Board to reestablish a mechanism, like the iterative process, that would allow them an opportunity to respond to an exceedance before facing enforcement.  

Such a mechanism, or pathway to compliance, is needed in light of the realities of urban runoff control.  First, pollutants sources are often unknown, difficult to identify, or beyond the municipality’s direct control.  Second, studies are often necessary to more fully characterize a problem revealed by an exceedance, so that appropriate BMPs can be identified.  Once selected, BMPs must be designed, budgeted and installed.  The process takes time, and the money and personnel required to complete it are in short supply almost everywhere.  To find cost effective solutions, municipalities also need the flexibility to evaluate and solve issues regionally, and prioritize projects over time, particularly where multiple pollutants exceed standards at numerous outfalls.  And even then, some receiving water standards are simply not attainable at all times, even with the best BMPs.

Under NRDC, the iterative process no longer provides municipal dischargers a path to compliance.  Instead, they face immediate and unavoidable noncompliance, no matter what they do, how much money they spend, or how stellar their programs.  That immediate noncompliance dramatically increases their vulnerability to third party (citizen) lawsuits, which can easily divert hundreds of thousands of dollars from meaningful pollution control efforts.  And, as revealed at the workshop, the increased risk of litigation has caused some municipalities to cease all sampling not specifically required by their permits, so as to avoid the possibility of generating ammunition for third-party lawsuits.  As a result, progress toward understanding and resolving municipal storm water issues, has slowed.

Notwithstanding the extraordinarily difficult predicament municipalities face, other comments made at the workshop revealed unsympathetic views.  Some water board staff, for example, expressed reluctance to believe that the NRDC decision increases MS4 vulnerability to third party litigation, absent a flood of lawsuits.  And some staff are under the impression that the iterative process is rarely used.  Both views were vigorously refuted by the MS4s.  Permittees sparred gently with water board members about whether MS4s should be absolutely liable for the consequences of individual citizen behavior they can neither detect nor control.  Citizen suers, perhaps partially out of self interest, remain adamant that water quality improvement will only be achieved with severe enforcement, regardless of feasibility or the availability of public funds.  And, there was disagreement about whether any change to the RWL language would violate anti-degradation and anti-backsliding policies, or whether those policies even apply to MS4 permits.

Permittees voiced support for the Option 5 of the State Water Board’s issue paper, which provides a safe harbor to permittees that undertake a specified process of investigating and responding to the exceedance.  The regulated community also supported the approach taken in the new Los Angeles County MS4 permit, which contains the RWL language but provides dischargers relief from immediate liability if they develop and implement a watershed plan.  The environmental community, however, opposed any safe harbor.

If the State Water Board determines to revise the RWL, it will clearly take time to craft a solution that satisfies, or at least minimally offends, the divergent viewpoints.  This is an opportunity to recognize the realities of storm water control that have come into focus since the existing RWL language was drafted, as well as to encourage newer, regional solutions which can provide multiple benefits, such as groundwater recharge, habitat, and recreation.  

Meanwhile, the agency is set to adopt the new Small MS4 General Permit, with the existing RWL language, on February 5, 2013.

1 The decision raises other concerns about characterizing a river in a hardened channel as both a Waters of the U.S. and an MS4.  The case has been taken up to the U.S. Supreme Court on the issues of whether transferring water from one portion of the river into another portion constitutes an addition of pollutants.”  Oral arguments are December 6, 2012.

2 RWL language is standard in MS4 permits (and has been for over a decade).  State Water Board precedential Orders 99-005 and 2001-15.

 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Wendel, Rosen, Black & Dean LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Wendel, Rosen, Black & Dean LLP
Contact
more
less

Wendel, Rosen, Black & Dean LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.