We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed reissuance of the General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity (9VAC25-151).  Our comments are as follows:

9VAC25-151-60: Registration Statement and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).

C.5: Not all permit applicants will know if they will discharge to an MS4, or to which MS4.  Prospective applicants should be given some assistance by DEQ in determining if they will discharge to an MS4 along with a list of appropriate local government contacts.

9VAC25-151-70: General Permit.

Part I.A.1.c.4: Facilities discharging to an impaired water without an approved TMDL wasteload allocation:

It is unreasonable to require monitoring without knowing what pollutant must be monitored.  We recommend changing the heading and text in this section to read: “Facilities discharging to an impaired water without an approved TMDL wasteload allocation for which there is an identified pollutant responsible for the impairment.”

Part I.B.7: Discharges through a Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) regulated MS4 to waters subject to the Chesapeake Bay TMDL:

This section inappropriately attempts to shift responsibility for requiring compliance with the Chesapeake Bay TMDL from the state to MS4s.  Industrial stormwater permits, like MS4 permits, are a form of regulated stormwater, and as such, they should have to achieve the same reductions that are being required of MS4s.  These reductions are clearly defined in Virginia’s Phase II WIP: "an average reduction of 9 percent of nitrogen loads, 16 percent of phosphorus loads, and 20 percent of sediment loads from impervious regulated acres and 6 percent of nitrogen loads, 7.25 percent of phosphorus loads and 8.75 percent sediment loads beyond 2009 progress loads for pervious regulated acreage," and are to be achieved over three permit cycles.

Part I.B.8. Expansion of facilities that discharge to waters subject to the Chesapeake Bay TMDL:

The use of “expansion” is not defined.  It is unclear whether it applies to expansion of operations or construction activities at a permitted facility.  If expansion is intended to signify expansion of operations, this should be defined in the regulation. If it is intended to signify construction activities, compliance with the VSMP Permit Regulations (4VAC50-60) should constitute compliance with a “no net increase” requirement.

9VAC25-151-80. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans.

Part III.B.4.a: A permitted facility should not be held responsible for pollutants running onto their site from an adjacent site.  There is, however, value in a facility being aware of runon to their site and of how their industrial materials or activities may be exposed to it.  Pollutants identified in runon to a site should be reported to DEQ.

Thank you for considering these comments as you finalize reissuance of the VPDES Industrial Stormwater General Permit.