40 C.F.R. § 122.6

Continuation of expiring permits

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) EPA permits. When EPA is the permit-issuing authority, the conditions of an expired permit continue in force under 5 U.S.C. 558(c) until the effective date of a new permit (see § 124.15) if:

(1) The permittee has submitted a timely application under § 122.21 which is a complete (under § 122.21(e)) application for a new permit; and

(2) The Regional Administrator, through no fault of the permittee does not issue a new permit with an effective date under § 124.15 on or before the expiration date of the previous permit (for example, when issuance is impracticable due to time or resource constraints).

(b) Effect. Permits continued under this section remain fully effective and enforceable.

(c) Enforcement. When the permittee is not in compliance with the conditions of the expiring or expired permit the Regional Administrator may choose to do any or all of the following:

(1) Initiate enforcement action based upon the permit which has been continued;

(2) Issue a notice of intent to deny the new permit under § 124.6. If the permit is denied, the owner or operator would then be required to cease the activities authorized by the continued permit or be subject to enforcement action for operating without a permit;

(3) Issue a new permit under part 124 with appropriate conditions; or

(4) Take other actions authorized by these regulations.

(d) State continuation. (1) An EPA-issued permit does not continue in force beyond its expiration date under Federal law if at that time a State is the permitting authority. States authorized to administer the NPDES program may continue either EPA or State-issued permits until the effective date of the new permits, if State law allows. Otherwise, the facility or activity is operating without a permit from the time of expiration of the old permit to the effective date of the State-issued new permit.

[48 FR 14153, Apr. 1, 1983, as amended at 50 FR 6940, Feb. 19, 1985]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1981–2023 · leading case: Voices of the Wetlands v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 257 P.3d 81 (Cal. 2011).
United States v. S. Coal Corp., 64 F.4th 509 (4th Cir. 2023). “40 C.F.R. §§ 122.6 (a), 122.21(d)(2). A lapse in permit coverage renders any subsequent discharges violative of the CWA.”
Seneca Lake Guardian v. Greenidge Generation LLC (W.D.N.Y. 2023). · cites it 3× “” 40 C.F.R. § 122.6 (d) (emphasis added). Federal regulations provide that all state permit programs “must have legal authority to implement [certain enumerated Clean Water Act regulations] and must be administered in conformance with each, except that States are not precluded…”
Sierra Club, Inc. & Conservation Law Found., Inc. v. Granite Shore Power LLC; GSP Merrmack LLC; & Pub. Serv. Co. of New Hampshire d/b/a Eversource Energy, 2023 DNH 149P (D.N.H. 2023). “”22 See 40 C.F.R. § 122.6 . 18 2011 Determinations Document (Pls.”
S. Appalachian Mountain v. Red River Coal Co., Inc., 992 F.3d 306 (4th Cir. 2021). “” 40 C.F.R. § 122.6 (d)(1). And Virginia state law allows that continuation under conditions that both parties agree Red River has satisfied.”
S. Appalachian Mountain v. Red River Coal Co., Inc. (4th Cir. 2021). “” 40 C.F.R. § 122.6 (d)(1). And Virginia state law allows that continuation under conditions that both parties agree Red River has satisfied.”
Sierra Club, Inc. v. Granite Shore Power LLC (D.N.H. 2020). “3 40 C.F.R. § 122.6 . 4 2011 Draft Filing (doc.”
City of Taunton v. U.S. Env't Prot., 895 F.3d 120 (1st Cir. 2018). “While the 2001-issued NPDES permit for the Facility expired in 2006, it was administratively continued pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 122.6 . The permit did not require the City to give immediate effect to its nitrogen limit, but rather set out a 10-year staged compliance schedule for…”
Ctr. for Env't Law & Policy v. United States Fish & Wildlife Serv., 228 F. Supp. 3d 1152 (E.D. Wash. 2017). · cites it 2× “§ 558 (c); 40 C.F.R. § 122.6 . B. The Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery Icicle Creek originates in the Cascade Mountains and is a tributary to the Wenat-chee River, which is a tributary to the Columbia River.”
Voices of the Wetlands v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 257 P.3d 81 (Cal. 2011). · cites it 2× “(See 40 C.F.R. § 122.6 (2011).) [5] The EPA had previously issued regulations governing BTA for the cooling systems of new powerplants (Phase I regulations).”
Nat. Resources Def. Council v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 526 F.3d 591 (9th Cir. 2008). · cites it 2× “at 58033 (codified at 40 C.F.R. § 122.6 (b)(10)). [9] EPA concluded that the language in Section 402( l )(2) did not justify excluding oil and gas construction from permit requirements that applied to all other types of construction.”
Nat. Resources v. Epa (9th Cir. 2008). “at 58033 (codified at 40 C.F.R. § 122.6 (b)(10)). NRDC v. USEPA 5957 tion must not be burdened with the requirement to obtain a permit.”
— 40 C.F.R. § 122.6(a) — 1 case
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.