Watermark.
Lima BOSC
Switch site 38 sites · 11 basins 8 open

Each site is one Watermark investigation. The page color says what opens; the campus line is the build on the ground — two different clocks.

MAU Maumee Basin 9 sites
2MI The Two Miamis 9 sites
SE Southeastern Basins 12 sites
NE Northeast Basins 8 sites
The page — what opens on Watermark Open · Draftfull record Queued · Watchingpreview page Restrictedrequest access
The campus — the build on the ground Investigating Confirmed Under construction Operational
All 38 sites — the network index →
Building
The record
Record · Enforcement

correspondence

edoc-453773
[verified]
Fields
agency
Ohio EPA
instrument
correspondence
case_no
respondent
City of Lima
facility
City of Lima Wastewater Treatment Plant
permit_no
issued_date
2016-06-10
effective_date
supersedes
penalty_usd
stipulated_penalties
status
active
summary
This is a June 10, 2016 correspondence letter from Mike Caprella, Deputy Director of Utilities for the City of Lima, Ohio, addressed to Ms. Peggy Christie at the OEPA-NW District. The letter formally requests that the Ohio EPA Director approve Eric Markley (EPA license # WWW3-1014947-96, Class IV) as the new operator of record for the City of Lima Wastewater Treatment Plant, per OAC 3745-7-02.
note
obligations
    • requirement Formal request for the Director to approve Eric Markley (EPA license # WWW3-1014947-96) as the operator of record for the City of Lima Wastewater Treatment Plant, in accordance with OAC 3745-7-02.
    • deadline
    • status
⚠ Gaps in the record
  • ⚠️ permit_no NULLED — it held 'WWW3-1014947-96', which is not an NPDES permit number and does not appear in the source in that form. The page carries only the fragment 'WWW3-1' in a badly degraded text layer; the rest was not read from this document. Confidence lowered to low: a one-page letter that produced one invented identifier should not have any field cited without the page image.
  • This letter is filed under permit 2PE00000 by the portal, but states no permit number of its own that could be read. `permit_no` is null rather than back-filled from the drawer — custody is not classification.
  • This is a correspondence/request letter, not a formal enforcement instrument such as a consent decree, DFFO, NOV, or extension letter.
  • Secondary ID on the routing slip appears to read 'ALL-00000' but handwriting makes exact value uncertain.
  • OCR layer was unreliable; all key fields verified against the page image.
Where it connects
oepa/lima/edoc-453773.order.yaml · p.1 · oepa