EPA Region IV and ADEM NPDES Permit Coordination CMAA Annual Meeting May 28, 2015 Orange Beach, Alabama Glenda Dean Alabama Department of Environmental Management adem.alabama.gov

Presentation Overview Discussion of the EPA and State NPDES permit coordination process and recent issues that in the future have the potential to significantly impact regulated entities

2008 ADEM / EPA Memorandum of Agreement ADEM / EPA Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) Primary Sections are: Review of New or Revised Rules, Regulations or Statutes State and EPA Responsibilities Permit Review and Issuances* Compliance Monitoring and Evaluation Program Enforcement Pretreatment Program Review * Permit Review Section based on Applicable Federal Regulations established at 40 CFR Parts 122 and 123

Permit Review and Issuances EPA “Draft” Permit Review 30 Day Review Timeframe (General Permits 90 Days) EPA may Extend Review to Full 90 Days EPA may Provide Written Comments, Recommendations or Objection If Interim Objection, EPA has 90 Days to provide Specific Grounds for Objection If General Objection, EPA has Remainder of 90 Days to provide Specific Grounds for Objection

2008 ADEM / EPA Memorandum of Agreement EPA “Proposed” Permit Review EPA Review Waived Unless: State proposes to issue a Permit Significantly Different from Draft Permit; EPA has provided Objections to Draft Permit; Significant Comments were Received During Public Hearing and/or Public Notice; or Significant Issues were raised by a State which may be affected by the Discharge. If any of the above, then EPA has 15 Days to Review the Proposed Permit, including Comments and Response to Comments, unless EPA Extends Review to Full 90 Days

2008 ADEM / EPA Memorandum of Agreement General Objections to a “Draft” or “Proposed” Permit Specific Grounds shall Include: Reasons for Objection, Including Sections of CWA or Regulations; and Actions that must be taken to Eliminate the Objection. If State Fails to Either Request a Hearing on the EPA Objection or Resubmit a Revised Permit within 90 Days of Receipt of the Objection, then Exclusive Authority to Issue the Permit Passes to EPA for One Permit Term.

Recent EPA Comments: Coal Mine Permits Prior to Jan 2015, 90 Day Extension for Review of most Draft Coal Permits EPA Comments/Recommendations focused primarily on: Application Data Effluent and/or In-Stream Sampling – Representative and Proximity to Drinking Water Intake(s) Permit Conditions Effluent and/or In-Stream Monitoring Wet Limits (Acute vs. Chronic) Adaptive Management Plans (AMPs) In-Stream Biological-Based Limits Specific Conductance (SC) / Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) Requirements

Adaptive Management Plan (AMP) Incorporates Best Management Practices (BMP)-Based Thresholds Triggers for SC, WET, and In-Stream Biological-Based Limits Failures; and Corrective Action when Triggers are reached. WET and In-Stream Biological-Based Limits would be Independent and Enforceable Conditions of the Permit Separate from the AMP

EPA Rationale EPA Interpretation/Protection of State Narrative Water Quality Standards Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA) for Narrative Standards In-Stream Data for SC, TDS and Macroinvertebrate Data WET Effluent Data

Discussion Outcome Discussions with EPA Resulted in: AMP and Biological-Based Limits would not be required Continue Current Effluent TDS and WET Monitoring Requirements Continue RPA based on Application Data, Available In-Stream Water Quality Data Add Sulfates to ADEM Trend Stations

In Closing On-going issue with Interpretation of State Narrative Quality Standards In future will not be surprised if EPA revisits AMP and Biological-Based Limits Appears EPA still considers SC a “Pollutant”

Contact Information Glenda Dean Chief, Water Division gld@adem.state.al.us 334-271-7823 Jeff Kitchens Chief, SW Management Branch jwk@adem.state.al.us 334-271-7974 Catherine McNeil Chief, Mining and Natural Resource Section CMcNeil@adem.state.al.us 334-271-7835