All permits shall specify:
(a) Requirements concerning the proper use, maintenance, and installation, when appropriate, of monitoring equipment or methods (including biological monitoring methods when appropriate);
(b) Required monitoring including type, intervals, and frequency sufficient to yield data which are representative of the monitored activity including, when appropriate, continuous monitoring;
(c) Applicable reporting requirements based upon the impact of the regulated activity and as specified in 40 CFR part 3 (Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation), § 122.44, and 40 CFR part 127 (NPDES Electronic Reporting). Reporting shall be no less frequent than specified in § 122.44. EPA will maintain the start dates for the electronic reporting of monitoring results for each state on its Web site.
[48 FR 14153, Apr. 1, 1983; 50 FR 6940, Feb. 19, 1985; 80 FR 64098, Oct. 22, 2015]
Notes of Decisions
Maryland Dep't of Env't v. Anacostia Riverkeeper, 134 A.3d 892 (Md. 2016).
· cites it 5× “Under 40 C.F.R. § 122.48 (b), “[ajll permits shall specify [Required monitoring including type, intervals, and frequency sufficient to yield data which are representative of the monitored activity including, when appropriate, continuous monitoring.”
Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc. v. Cnty. of Los Angeles, 725 F.3d 1194 (9th Cir. 2013).
“” 40 C.F.R. § 122.48 (b) (emphasis added). In fact, EPA regulations require permittees, like the County Defendants here, to propose a “monitoring program for representative data collection for the term of the permit that describes the location of outfalls or field screening…”
Food & Water Watch, Inc. v. Usepa, 20 F.4th 506 (9th Cir. 2021).
· cites it 2× “Under 40 C.F.R. § 122.48 (b), permits must specify “[r]equired monitoring including type, intervals, and frequency sufficient to yield data which are representative of the monitored activity including, when appropriate, continuous monitoring[.”
Del Ackels v. United States Env't Prot. Agency William K. Reilly, 7 F.3d 862 (9th Cir. 1993).
“§ 1318 ; 40 C.F.R. § 122.48 . Petitioners contend that the Administrator erred by upholding the permits’ requirement that discharge be monitored for settleable solids once per day of discharge instead of once per day of sluicing.”
Food & Water Watch, Inc. v. Usepa, 13 F.4th 896 (9th Cir. 2021).
· cites it 2× “Under 40 C.F.R. § 122.48 (b), permits must specify “[r]equired monitoring including type, intervals, and frequency sufficient to yield data which are representative of the monitored activity including, when appropriate, continuous monitoring[.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.