Gulf of Mexico OCS Offshore General Permit

1
Gulf of Mexico OCS Offshore General Permit Region
6 NPDES Permit No. GMG290000 40 CFR Part 435,
Subpart A
Sharon Haggard US EPA, Region 6
Presentation for the Gulf Coast Environmental
Affairs Group Dallas, Texas November 8, 2007
2
Overview

• Introduction
• NetDMR
• Region 6 Suggested Forms
• Response to the GCEAGs questions
• Additional Information

3
NetDMR

• Interested in joining the NetDMR Workgroup?
• Conference Calls
• Web sessions to view system design and
  capabilities
• Will need a few participants for Pilot testing
• Summer 2008
• Contact Michael Barrette
• barrette.michael_at_epa.gov

4
Notice of Intent (NOI), page 1
1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200 Dallas, TX 75202-2733
72 Fed. Reg. No. 109, p. 31575, October 1, 2007
Cooling Water Intake Y/N
Do not abbreviate lease area names.
Section E Cooling Water Intake
Modified October 1, 2007
Permit Expires Midnight September 30, 2012
5
Notice of Intent (NOI), page 2
1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200 Dallas, TX 75202-2733
72 Fed. Reg. No. 109, p. 31575, October 1, 2007
NOTE You will only receive SBM and/or Cooling
Water Intake outfall numbers, and corresponding
Discharge Monitoring Report forms, for those
lease areas/blocks so marked as Y for yes on
the NOI form.
6
Notice of Termination (NOT), page 1
1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200 Dallas, TX 75202-2733
72 Fed. Reg. No. 109, p. 31575, October 1, 2007
Modified October 1, 2007
Permit Expires Midnight September 30, 2012
7
Notice of Termination (NOT), page 2
1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200 Dallas, TX 75202-2733
72 Fed. Reg. No. 109, p. 31575, October 1, 2007
8
Notice of Termination (NOT), page 2
Deadline to Submit NOT and its corresponding
final DMRs In accordance with Part I.A.3. Of the
permit Lease block operators shall submit a
Notice of Termination (NOT) to the address above
within 60 days of termination of lease ownership
for lease blocks assigned to the operator by the
Department of Interior. In the case of temporary
operations such as hydrostatic testing, the NOT
shall be submitted within 60 days of termination
of operations. The Discharge Monitoring Report
(DMR) for the terminated lease block shall be
submitted with the NOT, or with the annual DMR
submittal. The NOT shall be effective upon the
date it is received by the EPA.
9
Transfer Agreement (TA), page 1
1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200 Dallas, TX 75202-2733
72 Fed. Reg. No. 109, p. 31575, October 1, 2007
Cooling Water Intake Y/N
Do not abbreviate lease area names.
Section D
10
Transfer Agreement (TA), page 1
If No, please clearly describe the portion of
Operator As coverage to be transferred to
Operator B and that portion to be retained by
Operator A in an attachment to this TA.
Modified October 1, 2007
Permit Expires Midnight September 30, 2012
11
Transfer Agreement (TA), page 2
1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200 Dallas, TX 75202-2733
72 Fed. Reg. No. 109, p. 31575, October 1, 2007
NOTE You will only receive SBM and/or Cooling
Water Intake outfall numbers, and corresponding
Discharge Monitoring Report forms, or those lease
areas/blocks so marked as Y for yes on the TA
form.
12
Transfer Agreement (TA), page 2
Notice to Operator A Operator A, where they are
releasing their coverage in its entirety, are
reminded of Part I.A.3. Of the permit in regard
to the submission of their final DMRs. The final
DMRs shall be submitted with the Transfer
Agreement forms, or with Operator As annual DMR
submission.
Notice to Operator B Operator B must collect and
report their own samples for the lease/block
acquired in the Transfer Agreement. They cannot
utilize samples collected by Operator A.
13
GCEAG question 5

• Question The NOI and NOT on the EPA R6 website
  still reference the old permit and the forms
  still have the expiration date 11/5/07. Will
  operators be able to submit NOI, NOT and
  transfers using these expired forms?

• Answer No. These forms all cite the legal
  references to
• the previous permit and cannot be used. For
  example,
• you cannot ask for coverage under a permit that
  has expired, which is what you are doing when you
  use the
• old forms.

14
GCEAG question 6

• Question If the expired forms are not to be
  used, how
• does an operator request coverage in the interim?

• Answer You can create your own temporary
  document
• and forward the request via a cover letter. You
  can use
• the previous permit form as a guide for
  creating your temporary document to ensure it
  contains all the required elements.

15
GCEAG question 7

• Question When does EPA R6 expect new NOI, NOT
  and transfer forms to be available for use under
  the new GP
• on the EPA R6 website?

• Answer Soon. They have been created and are in
  the process of being added to the offshore
  website www.epa.gov/region6/offshore .
  I anticipate them being on the website
  sometime late this week or early next week. In
  the meantime, and as another interim idea to
  question 6 above, you have before you a hard
  copy as part of todays presentation to use to
  make copies from. Please be aware that the web
  will only be a fill and print version. You
  will have to purchase special software to enable
  you to save and print these forms. So, if you
  find you need to fix it but you have already
  taken it from your screen, you will have
  to re-create it.

16
GCEAG question 8

• Question Does each page of the interim request
  need to have a certification?

• Answer Yes. The accompanying pages need to
  reflect
• the same information as the first page. This
  procedure is no different than signing and
  certifying each page of the DMR or No
  Discharge/No Activity List.

17
GCEAG question 9

• Question Does each page of the interim request
  need to have a original authorized signature?

• Answer Yes. The accompanying pages need to
  reflect
• the same information as the first page. Again,
  as per question 8 above, this procedure is no
  different than signing and certifying each page
  of the DMR or No Discharge/No Activity List.

18
GCEAG question 10

• Question If an operator had authorized
  signatures of individuals other than company
  officials on file, do they need to reestablish
  these signature authority under the new GP?

• Answer No. However, I do want to remind
  everyone that change occurs often with the
  industry in terms of who is doing what, including
  signature authorities, mailing addresses,
  contacts, etc. More times than not, I am the
  last to find out. Failure to provide current
  information creates a domino effect. For
  example, I have an operator who relies on EPAs
  preprinted DMR forms. I, in turn, relied on the
  most recent information provided, only to have
  the Post Office return the package stating
  Forwarding Order Expired. cont

19
GCEAG question 10 cont.

• Since I rarely have a rainy day to spend trying
  to find you, I just have to place the package in
  the compliance file we maintain on you to
  demonstrate I tried to send you information,
  but was not able. The domino effect continues
  when we pursue enforcement action against you
  for failure to report in accordance with the
  permit. So, it is very important to keep
  information on record with the EPA current at all
  times.

20
GCEAG question 11

• Question Does an operator have to file a new
  request to utilize the OOC DMR forms that have
  been or will be developed by the OOC?

• Answer Yes. The previous form represented the
  old permit. The new permit picked up additional
  requirements, as well as dropping some
  requirements from the previous permit.
  Consequently, the DMR form changed. And,
  requiring operators to request authorization to
  use the new OOCs facsimile of the offshore
  general permit DMR form is consistent with EPAs
  policy for all of its NPDES permits that it
  tracks (i.e., wastewater treatment plants).

21
GCEAG question 12

• Question Have those forms been developed by the
  OOC and has EPA approved their use?

• Answer Not yet. Marsha Dupont from
  Environmental Enterprises and I have been in
  constant communication about the status of the
  new DMR form. Marsha will create a facsimile of
  the DMR for EPAs approval, prior to it being
  posted on the OOCs web site for use. A
  few nuts and bolts here...I do have the new DMR
  form in draft, but have to petition to my
  Headquarters to create some new STORET codes to
  reflect the cooling water intake requirements.
  Until then, I cant finalize it to build it into
  the database. But, I do fully expect the form
  to be ready for the first group affected which
  will be operators with a 01/28/08" DMR
  submission deadline.

22
GCEAG question 13

• Question Does EPA expect two sets of DMRs for
  companies that had a DMR date prior to the new
  permit one to cover the old permit time, and one
  to cover the remainder of the year under the new
  permit?

• Answer Yes, in accordance with Part II.D.4. of
  the permit (both the previous and the reissued
  permit).
• This gets a little complicated to explain, but
  bear with me. Three of the groups - the 01/28,
  the 04/28, and the 07/28 groups - will have to do
  what I call split reporting. The 10/28 group
  lucked out as the permit was reissued on the
  first day of their assigned monitoring period.
  cont

23
GCEAG question 13 cont.

• For example, the 01/28 group will have to
  report information on the previous permit DMR
  (for the previous permit), as well as report
  information on the reissued
• permit DMR for the new permit. The monitoring
  period at the top of both sets of DMR forms will
  have to be the
• same, but the operator must use the comment
  field to reflect the split of time. The
  monitoring period at the top
• of the form must remain the same on both sets of
  DMR forms as this is that operators assigned
  monitoring
• period and it is the measurement tool my
• database uses for certain types of violations.
  cont

24
GCEAG question 13 cont.

• So, an 01/28/08" operator will reflect the
  monitoring
• period From 01/01/07 To 12/31/07" at the top of
  the
• DMR form for both permits, but in the Comment
  Field
• they are to state From 01/01/07 to 09/30/07"
  for the previous permit DMR and From 10/01/07 to
  12/31/07"
• on the DMR for the new permit. cont

25
GCEAG question 13 cont.

• This brings up another issue. Some operators
  have elected to continue to use EPAs preprinted
  DMR forms. That is their option. But, it will
  present a problem for those caught up with the
  split reporting. Under my current database
  system, PCS, I cannot have both the old and the
  new permit running current in the system at the
  same time. One must be ghosted, while the
  reissued permit takes the place of the previous
  permit. This means that I cannot go back and
  order preprints under the previous permit. cont

26
GCEAG question 13 cont.

• So, in order for all operators affected by the
  split reporting to comply with their DMR
  submission, they will have to use the OOCs DMR
  form for the previous permit. NOTE Both
  the OOCs web site as well as EPAs will have
  both versions running until the last group
  affected (the 07/28 group) completes their
  annual submission for 07/28/08. After that,
  the previous permit DMR will go away. And, both
  the OOCs web and EPAs will identify which DMR
  is for which permit. cont

27
GCEAG question 13 cont.

• What does this mean for those operators who want
  to continue using EPAs preprinted DMR forms?
  They will have to submit a one-time-only request
  for retro-authorization to use the OOC DMR for
  the previous permit. And, if they want, they can
  continue to use EPAs preprinted DMR form for
  their reporting requirements under the new
  permit. They just need to clarify that fact in
  their written request (signed and certified in
  accordance with Part II.D.10. of the permit).

28
GCEAG question 16

• Question If a toxicity was not taken prior to
  the permit expiration (clarify which date this
  is), will a toxicity taken in the last three
  months under the new GP be acceptable and not be
  a permit noncompliance?

• Answer 1) The previous permit expired early - at
  midnight of September 30, 2007. (It was
  originally set to expire at midnight of November
  5, 2007.)
• 2) This scenario is a permit
  noncompliance. Toxicity test cannot be combined
  for both permits.

29
GCEAG question 17

• Question Are toxicity tests to be taken on a
  report period basis in the new GP or on an annual
  basis? Is the annual basis calendar year?

• Answer The permit requires it to be annual,
  based on the operators assigned monitoring
  period see Part I.B.4.b)vi) and Part I.D.3.j) of
  the permit for Produced Water Toxicity and Part
  I.B.11.b) of the permit for Miscellaneous
  Discharge Toxicity.

30
GCEAG question 31

• Question In the past industry was told that any
  submittal to the EPA R6 should be via some
  traceable means (i.e., certified mail green card,
  federal express, UPS). However, some of these
  submittals, although stamped as received by EPA
  R6, did not reach the appropriate individual at
  R6 and subsequent AO were issued for failure to
  report, when in fact, the reports had been
  submitted, stamped received.
• How best should industry be assured of delivery
  to the EPA R6? What measures is EPA putting into
  place to make sure that the mail room is more
  aware of the importance of documents delivered
  during the end of report period time frames?

31
GCEAG question 31 cont.

• Answer I had suggested operators submit, in
  particular NOIs, via a mail receipt system (USPS,
  FedEx, UPS), due to the large volume of documents
  I receive daily from the industry (I cant always
  get to things the day I receive them). My
  suggestion was for the benefit of the industry
  in order for them to place that mail receipt,
  along with a copy of the NOI (or Transfer
  Agreement), on the rig/platform, to demonstrate
  to inspectors (MMS/Coast Guard) and/or third
  parties that they had applied for NPDES coverage.
  cont

32
GCEAG question 31 cont.

• Then, operators decided they wanted to send other
  documents (i.e., DMRs) via a mail receipt as
  well, in order to track when EPA actually
  received them.
• With any large organization, there is always a
  percentage of mail that gets mis-routed
  unintentionally. But, I have noticed that the
  industry is not always using the proper address
  for their documents. And other times, the
  industry will use the green card as the TO
  label on the package. cont

33
GCEAG question 31 cont.

• The contractor in EPAs mail room signs for a
  large volume of mail every day, so when it comes
  time to run the mail through their process for
  sorting then delivering, the green card that
  was pulled off for return to the sender leaves a
  loss of required information on the envelope.
  The contractor has no idea who the mail should go
  to. On top of that, since 9/11, we have
  implemented stricter mail handling procedures to
  safeguard the employees and staff of the EPA.
  cont

34
GCEAG question 31 cont.

• So, when a package appears suspicious as the
  one with the missing green card that was used as
  a TO label, the package gets placed into
  suspicious mail and procedures are used to
  determine if it is safe to open and to whom it
  should be given.
• So, sometimes mail does not get received properly
  because it is not properly addressed, or green
  cards are used as the TO label.
• In addition, we had a great deal of trouble with
  the Post Office losing our mail. This is why the
  new permit requires operators to send items to
  the physical address vs. the P.O.
  Box address.

35
GCEAG question 33

• Question The NOI, NOT and transfer forms all had
  effective dates as well as date of execution of
  the form. Why then does EPA R6 not honor the
  effective date stated on the form, especially in
  the cast of NOT when the final DMR has been
  submitted and no additional monitoring is
  required? Where is this addressed in the GP?

• Answer The effective date appeared on the old
  forms, because operators wanted to be able to
  state when events occurred on their end.
  However, for EPAs purposes, we do not rely on
  that date. In fact, because it created
  confusion, I had that statement removed from the
  new permit forms. cont

36
GCEAG question 33 cont.

• We use the Postmark date of the NOI as the date
  when coverage begins (we used to say coverage
  began with submission of the NOI, but the
  industry wanted a definition of submission - so
  our management determined submission to mean
  postmark - See Part I.A.2.). But, we use the
  date EPA actually received the NOT as the
  effective date for when coverage is terminated.
  This policy is not in the general permit, but is
  the policy we use for all our NPDES permits.
  cont

37
GCEAG question 33 cont.

• The received date is when EPA officially became
  aware of the request for termination and has
  always been the date we used for termination.
  So, operators need to bear in mind when they
  submit a NOT as it relates to final DMRs. But,
  the permit (Part I.A.3.) gives operators the
  option to submit final DMRs with the NOT thus
  having to avoid reminding themselves to report it
  at their annual submission deadline.

38
GCEAG question 34

• Question How soon will the database be updated?

• Answer Im working on it...

39
Additional Information

• Application Process Questions
• Ms. Sharon Haggard, Environmental Specialist
• [phone], haggard.sharon_at_epa.gov
• Compliance and Enforcement Questions
• Robert Houston, Environmental Engineer
• [phone], houston.robert_at_epa.gov
• Anthony Loston, Environmental Engineer
• [phone], loston.anthony_at_epa.gov
• Permit Questions
• Scott Wilson, NPDES Permit Writer
• [phone], wilson.js_at_epa.gov

40
Additional Information cont.

• Alternative to 24-Hour Hotline
• Send an e-mail to r6genpermit_at_epa.gov
• 24-Hour Hotline
• [phone]