1 / 7

Antideg and OSRWs

Antideg and OSRWs. 327 IAC 2-1-2 Maintenance of surface water quality standards . . .

edan
Télécharger la présentation

Antideg and OSRWs

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Antideg and OSRWs 327 IAC 2-1-2 Maintenance of surface water quality standards . . . (3) The following waters of high quality, as defined in subdivision (2), are designated by the board to be an outstanding state resource and shall be maintained in their present high quality without degradation

  2. Antideg and OSRWs IC 13-18-3-2Adoption of rules; designation of outstanding state or national resource waters . . . (l) For a water body designated as an outstanding state resource water, the board shall provide by rule procedures that will: (1) prevent degradation; and (2) allow for increases and additions in pollutant loadings from an existing or new discharge if: (A) there will be an overall improvement in water quality for the outstanding state resource water as described in this section; and (B) the applicable requirements of 327 IAC 2-1-2(1) and 327 IAC 2-1-2(2) and 327 IAC 2-1.5-4(a) and 327 2-1.5-4(b) are met.

  3. Antideg and OSRWs IC 13-18-3-2(m)(2) (A) Implementation of a water quality project in the watershed of the outstanding state resource water or the exceptional use water thatwill result in an overall improvement of the water quality of the outstanding state resource water or the exceptional use water. (B) Payment of a fee, not to exceed five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) based on the type and quantity of increased pollutant loadings, to the department for deposit in the outstanding state resource water improvement fund established under section 14 of this chapter.

  4. Antideg and OSRWs IC 13-18-3-2(m) (6) Criteria for using the watershed improvement fees to fund projects in the watershed that result in improvement in water quality in the outstanding state resource water or exceptional use water.

  5. Antideg and OSRWs 327 IAC 2-1.3-3 Antidegradation standards . . . (C) the person proposing the increased discharge pays a fee, not to exceed five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) based on the type and quantity of increased pollutant loadings, to the department for deposit in the OSRW improvement fund established under IC 13-18-3-14,that will pay for an approved water quality improvement project that results in an overall improvement in water quality in the OSRW or EUW within a reasonable time, not exceeding one year, of the initiation of the activity causing the increased discharge.

  6. Antideg and OSRWs 327 IAC 2-1.3-10 Commissioner’s determination on antidegradation demonstration application . . . (e) The commissioner may approve some or all of an application for a new or increased pollutant loading to an OSRW or EUW only if the following have occurred: (1) The commissioner has approved a water quality improvement project that will offset the proposed increased pollutant loading and result in a net water quality improvement for the OSRW. The commissioner’s approval must identify how the project will offset the proposed pollutant loading and include a schedule for completion of the project that does not exceed a year from the initiation of the proposed pollutant increase.

  7. Antideg and OSRWs 327 IAC 2-1.3-10 Commissioner’s determination on antidegradation demonstration application . . . (2) The commissioner has presented a tentative decision on the application to the board along with the comments received during the public comment period and during the public hearing on the application. (3) The board has held a public hearing on the tentative decision and, having considered the criteria in subsection (b), made a recommendation to the commissioner approving or disapproving of the decision. (4) The commissioner has reviewed the board’s recommendation before making a final determination on the application.

More Related