National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
According to the Sixth Circuit Court, the application of pesticides at, near, or over waters of the United States that results in discharges of pollutants requires coverage under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. In response to the Sixth Circuit Court’s decisions and previous decisions by other courts on pesticide regulation, the State Water Board has adopted four Pesticide Permits. Below are links to the Pesticide Permits; current fee schedules; NOIs, PAPs, and NOTs; the Sixth Circuit Court decisions, etc.
- Adopted Weed Permit - Order 2013-0002-DWQ
- Weed Permit Clarifications
- Draft Amendment to Order 2004-0009-DWQ, March 28, 2013
- Notice for June 4, 2013 Meeting
- Weed Permit Changes
- EX PARTE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS FOR PENDING GENERAL ORDERS
This item is subject to the ex parte communication disclosure requirements of Water Code section 13287, as explained here. Any communications between interested persons and board members (other than at a noticed board meeting or submitted as a comment letter in compliance with the public notice) must be disclosed by the interested person within seven days of the communication. Sample disclosure forms are available here.
Beginning February 5, 2013, ex parte communications between interested persons and board members concerning this item are prohibited.
- Water Quality Order 2011-0002-DWQ - Amended by Order 2012-0003-DWQ
- Water Quality Order 2011-0003-DWQ - Aquatic Animal Invasive Species Control
- Water Quality Order 2011-0004-DWQ - Spray Applications
- Water Quality Order 2004-0009-DWQ - Weed Control
- List of Enrollees »» Use Order Numbers (ex. 2011-0002-DWQ) listed above to Run Report
- Fee Schedules
The Fee Schedules contain the current filing fees for the Aquatic Animal Invasive Species Control, Spray Applications, Vector Control, and Weed Control Permits. Section 2200(b)(6) of the schedules specifies a one-time fee of $183 for the Vector Control Permit. The other three permits fall under Category 3 of Section 2200(b)(9) which specifies an annual fee of $1606 plus an ambient water monitoring surcharge of 21 percent. Thus, the total annual fee for each of the other three permits is $1943.26.
Please Note: The Water Code requires the State Water Board to adjust the fees each fiscal year to conform with the revenue levels set forth in the Budget Act. Thus, the above fees could change every year.
Aquatic Animal Invasive Species Control (AAIS Control)
- Vector Control PAP Elements | Vector
Control NOI | Vector Control NOT
- Pesticide Application Plans (PAPs)
Agency Comments Due by Noon on Rancho Murieta Community Services District June 13, 2013
The following PAPs refer to:
- Comments on the PAPs
- The following PAPs contain individual monitoring plans:
Topic Comments Due by Noon on Ventura County Environmental Health Division April 22, 2011
- Phase 1
- Phase 2
- The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Decisions
- The Sixth Circuit Court Decision on March 28, 2011 (Extension of Stay)
On March 28, 2011, the United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, granted a motion to extend the stay currently in place in the matter of National Cotton Council of America v. U.S. EPA,553 F.3d 927 (2009). The stay of the Court's 2009 decision is now effective until October 31, 2011. As a result of this extension, the federal regulation exempting pesticide discharges in compliance with FIFRA from the requirement to apply for an NPDES permit continues in effect through October 31. Until that time, persons applying pesticides have no affirmative duty to apply for an NPDES permit, in accordance with federal law.
Those who have previously applied for coverage under the three pesticide discharge permits adopted by the State Water Board on March 1, 2011 and the Weed Control Permit (Water Quality Order No. 2004-0009-DWQ), must submit a notice of termination if they do not intend to comply with the applicable permit. Once the stay expires, a new application for coverage will be required.
- The Sixth Circuit Court Decision on June 8, 2009 (Two-Year Stay)
On June 8, 2009, the Sixth Circuit granted the motion for a two-year stay of the effect of the National Cotton Council of America v. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The USEPA exemption will remain in effect until April 9, 2011.
- The Sixth Circuit Court Decision on January 7, 2009
On January 7, 2009, the Sixth Circuit Court decided that the USEPA Final Rule is not a reasonable interpretation of the CWA and vacated the Final Rule.
- U.S.EPA Final Rule and (memorandum)
On November 20, 2006, the U.S.EPA issued its final rule on aquatic pesticides. This rule would eliminate the need for a NPDES permit for the application of pesticides to waters, if the application is made in accordance with Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) labels.
- Draft Spray Applications Permit
- Draft Aquatic Animal Invasive Species Control General Permit
- Draft Vector Control General Permit
- Draft Amendment Vector Control Permit
- Draft Aquatic Weed Control Permit
- Preliminary Draft Adulticides Permit - Notice of Opportunity to Provide Informal Comments
- Aquatic Weed Control Permit Reopener Hearing
- Rescission of the NPDES permit for the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) Silver King Creek Rotenone Project
- Regulation of Aquatic Pesticides Following the Ninth Circuit Decision in Fairhurst v. Hagener
- Aquatic Weed Control Permit Reopener Hearing
- The Ninth Circuit Court Decision in Fairhurst v. Hagener
- Water Board comments on USEPA draft rule regarding permit requirements for pesticide applications in compliance with FIFRA
- Aquatic Weed Control Permit Reopener Hearing
- The Ninth Circuit Court Decision in League of Wilderness Defenders v. Forsgren
- Discharges of Aquatic Pesticides for Vector Control
- Discharge of Aquatic Pesticides for Aquatic Weed Control
- Previous Aquatic Pesticide Permit
- Regulation of Discharges of Aquatic Pesticides
- Memorandum from Craig M. Wilson, Chief Counsel, April 8, 2002 - Discusses an interpretive statement by the USEPA
- The Ninth Circuit Court Decision in Headwaters, Inc. v. Talent Irrigation District
- CEQA Documents
- Application of Copper to the State Water Project to Control Aquatic Weeds and Algal Blooms - Department of Water Resources (DWR)
- Aquatic Herbicide NPDES Permit - Application for Categorical Exception for Acrolein - Byron-Bethany Irrigation District
- Aquatic Pesticide Application Program for the Oakdale Irrigation District
- Aquatic Pesticide Application Program for Unlined and Partially Lined Canals - Turlock Irrigation District
- Draft NPDES permit for the application of aquatic pesticides - CEQA Documentation and other State Implementation Plan Section 5.3 Requirements - Friant Water Users Authority
- Modesto Irrigation District CEQA Document Submission for 2004 Statewide General Permit for Aquatic Pesticides
- Nevada Irrigation District Request for Administrative Extension of Statewide General Permit No. CAG 9900 03, Aquatic Pesticides General Permit
- Notice of Intent To Comply with the Terms of Water Quality Order No 2004-__DWQ - Marin Municipal Water District
- Placer County Water Agency General NPDES Permit No. CAG990003
- Solano Irrigation District Application of Aquatic Herbicides - NPDES Permit
- South Feather Water & Power Agency Request for Administrative Extension Statewide General Permit No. CAG 990003, Aquatic Pesticides General Permit
- Statewide General NPDES Permit for Discharge of Aquatic Pesticides for Aquatic Weed Control in Irrigation Systems, Drinking Water Canals, and Surface Water Impoundments that are Waters in the United States - Contra Costa Water District
- The Application of Copper Sulfate to Lake Mathews, Lake Skinner, and Diamond Valley Lake to Control Algal Blooms - Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
- The Control of Algae in Lined Channels - Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
- The Control of Aquatic Weeds in Irrigation Canals Using Copper and Acrolein - Provident Irrigation District
- The Use of Copper and Acrolein to Control Aquatic Weeds in Irrigation Canals - Tehama Colusa Canal Authority
- The Use of Copper and Acrolein to Control Aquatic Weeds in Water Conveyances - Princeton-Codora-Glenn Irrigation District
- The Use of Copper and Acrolein to Control Aquatic Weeds in Water Conveyances - Reclamation District 1004
- The Use of Copper and Acrolein to Control Aquatic Weeds in Water Conveyances - South Sutter Water District
- The Use of Copper to Control Aquatic Weeds in Irrigation and Storm Water Canals and Ditches - Yolo County Flood Control & Water Conservation District
- The Use of Copper to Control Aquatic Weeds in Loch Lomond Reservoir - Santa Cruz Water Department
- The Use of Copper to Control Aquatic Weeds in Water Conveyances - Potter Valley Irrigation District
- The Use of Copper to Control Aquatic Weeds in Stafford Lake - North Marin Water District
- Turlock Irrigation District Aquatic Pesticide Application Program
- Use of Acrolein and Copper-Containing Herbicides To Control Aquatic Weeds in Water Conveyances - Glen Colusa Irrigation District
- Use of Acrolein and Copper-Containing Herbicides To Control Aquatic Weeds in Water Conveyances - Maine Prairie Water District
- Use of Copper To Control Aquatic Weeds in Antioch Municipal Reservoir - City of Antioch Dept. of Public Works
- Woodbridge Irrigation District: Algae/Aquatic Weed Control Program
- DFG Silver King Creek Rotenone Project
- Aquatic Animal Invasive Species Control and Vector Control General Permits: Please contact Phil Isorena.
- Spray Applications and Weed Control General Permits: Please contact Jenny Chen