Virginia Regulatory Town Hall View Comments

Department of Environmental Quality

State Water Control Board

Guidance Document Change: This document provides guidance to maintain consistency with the requirements found in § 2.2-4006 A 14 of the Administrative Process Act (APA) for waste load allocations adopted, amended, or repealed by the State Water Control Board pursuant to the State Water Control Law (§ 62.1-44.2 et seq.). The procedures outlined in this guidance set forth the process to provide the public and stakeholders with an adequate opportunity to participate in the development and modification of TMDLs and Implementation Plans, 305(b)/303(d) Integrated Reports, non-TMDL waste load allocations, and TMDL priorities. This guidance memo replaces and revises Guidance Memo No. GM14-2016. The revisions clarify the steps the TMDL program must follow when initially announcing a new TMDL study to meet the APA exemption requirements. The revision provides additional clarity regarding the establishment of a formal advisory group. Where no advisory group is requested by the public, the document establishes that DEQ will still hold community engagement meetings to solicit public feedback. The document is also revised to include more detailed steps about public notice procedures and changes to clarify language and procedures to reflect current agency processes. The document includes additional explanation for processing non-TMDL WLAs and outlines the public notice procedures to meet the APA exemption and FOIA requirements. The procedures were modified to reflect the 2022 Act of the General Assembly to transfer certain SWCB authorities to DEQ. Also, appendices were removed to streamline the document.

1 comments

All comments for this forum

Back to List of Comments

10/25/23 1:58 pm

Commenter: Frank Dukes

make user friendly

This reads like something intended to gain legal approval and avoid litigation rather than promote authentic engagement. For anyone who is not an attorney or agency staff already deeply involved with the program, it is hard to imagine this guidance actually being able to help encourage and gather the views of community members and others who may have important knowledge as well as questions to contribute to the formation of TMDLS and Implementation Plans. Could you not at least place the legal clauses and references at the end of the document? Why not have an explanation in ordinary language that can be understood by community members who might really like to engage, but would be intimidated if referred to this document? Why not have language that articulates the values of engagement that are intended by the document? Are transparency, inclusion, responsiveness, and legitimacy important to the agency, and if so, why not state that?

CommentID: 220454