Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tpdes Contested Case Referral topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
TCEQ refers Douglas T. Harrison TPDES permit application to contested-case hearing
Summary
The commission granted multiple hearing requests and referred Douglas T. Harrison's application for a new TPDES permit (WQ0016211001) to the State Office of Administrative Hearings on issues including water-quality protection, odor, siting, application completeness, compliance history and floodplain protection.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality voted Jan. 16 to refer the application by Douglas T. Harrison for a new Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) permit, WQ00162 11001, to a contested-case hearing at the State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH).
TCEQ staff explained the proposed permit would authorize a final-phase average daily discharge of up to 600,000 gallons per day of treated domestic wastewater. The commission applies a two-step analysis in these matters: first determining which hearing requesters are "affected persons" entitled to a contested-case hearing and then whether those persons raised relevant and material issues within the agency's jurisdiction.
Staff recommended granting the hearing requests of Dry Comal Creek Neighbors and several individual requesters who live near the proposed discharge and who raised issues tied to the agency's jurisdiction. "Taking into consideration that this proposed TPDES permit has a final daily average flow of 600,000 gallons per day, the issues that these individuals raise in their hearing requests and their proximity to the proposed discharge point and discharge route, I believe that they have shown that they may be personally affected by this application in a manner that is not common to the general public," a commissioner said on the record.
The commission voted to send six issues to SOAH: whether the draft permit protects water quality and existing uses, whether it adequately addresses nuisance odor under 30 TAC 309.13(e), whether the draft permit complies with siting requirements in 30 TAC 309.12, whether the application is complete and accurate, whether the applicant's or operator's compliance history warrants denying or altering the draft permit, and whether the proposed facility within a floodplain would be adequately protected from inundation as required by 30 TAC 309.13(a).
The commission also set a maximum hearing duration of 180 days from the preliminary hearing to issuance of a proposal for decision. The motion to grant the listed hearing requests, deny the remaining hearing requests and refer the six specified issues to SOAH carried on an affirmative voice vote.
