![]() A NPDES permit must contain effluent limits if the permitting authority determines that a discharge has the reasonable potential to violate water quality standards. 4 The State has established water quality standards based on the water’s designated use. See OCGA §§ 12-5-23 12-5-30 Upper Chattahoochee Riverkeeper, 318 Ga. The EPD administers the NPDES program within the State. OCGA § 12-5-30 (a) Upper Chattahoochee Riverkeeper, 318 Ga. The Georgia Water Quality Control Act, OCGA § 12-5-20 et seq., requires any person operating a facility that discharges a pollutant from a point source into the waters of the State to obtain an NPDES permit before any such discharge. See 33 USC § 1313 Upper Chattahoochee Riverkeeper v. Under the Federal Clean Water Act, individual states are permitted to enact and administer their own water quality programs, subject to certain federal minimum standards. , that there is a genuine issue of material fact for determination, or that the moving party is not entitled to prevail as a matter of law.” Ga. A party opposing summary determination “may not rest upon mere allegations or denials, but must show, by affidavit or other probative evidence. 3 “A party may move, based on supporting affidavits or other probative evidence, for summary determination in its favor on any of the issues being adjudicated, on the basis that there is no genuine issue of material fact for determination and the moving party is entitled to prevail as a matter of law.” Ga. Columbus contends that the ALJ erred by granting summary determination despite a genuine dispute about material facts, including whether the Columbus CSO has a “reasonable potential” to cause or contribute to a water quality excursion. ![]() “When the final administrative decision at issue is an ALJ’s grant of summary determination, we review de novo the law and evidence.” Couch, 276 Ga. In this case, the ALJ’s decision constituted the final agency decision for purposes of judicial review. “When reviewing the affirmance of an administrative agency decision, our duty is not to review whether the record supports the superior court’s decision but whether the record supports the final decision of the administrative agency.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) City of Rincon v. This Court granted Columbus’s application for discretionary review, and this appeal followed. Columbus then petitioned the superior court for judicial review, and the superior court affirmed the decision of the ALJ. Following oral argument, the ALJ granted summary determination to the EPD. The EPD moved to 2 dismiss the amended petition in part and for summary determination. Columbus subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment as to Count I of its amended petition, which challenged the new limit on fecal coliform. Chattahoochee Riverkeeper, an environmental organization, intervened. Columbus filed a petition for hearing, which it later amended, challenging the new provisions in the 2020 permit before the Office of State Administrative Hearings. In 2020, the EPD issued the most recent permit, which imposed new limits for fecal coliform bacteria and total residual chlorine. In 1998, the EPD issued a NPDES permit to Columbus which allowed it to discharge water into the river. In the early 1990s, Columbus overhauled its combined sewer system and spent more than $100 million to design and construct a new treatment system pursuant to a longterm control plan approved by the EPD. Because wet weather events may result in storm surges that exceed the capacity of the treatment facilities, the system was designed to include relief outlets, or combined sewer overflows (“CSO”), that discharge into the Chattahoochee River. The record shows that Columbus operates a combined sewer system which uses a single set of pipes to transport both stormwater and sanitary wastewater to treatment facilities. For the following reasons, we reverse the superior court’s judgment and remand the case with direction. Columbus contends, inter alia, that the ALJ erred by granting summary determination, and the superior court erred by affirming the ALJ, despite a genuine issue about material facts. In this dispute over Columbus Water Works’s most recent National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permit, Columbus appeals from the superior court’s order affirming an administrative law judge’s (“ALJ”) decision to grant summary determination to Richard Dunn in his capacity as the director of the Environmental Protection Division (“EPD”) of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources. OctoIn the Court of Appeals of Georgia A23A0857. NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |