In Synagro-WWT, Inc. v. Rush Township, 229 F. Supp. 2d 410 (M.D. Pa. 2003), the federal district court considered an ordinance that imposed numerous requirements on the transport and application of sewage sludge within the township, which Synagro challenged on preemption grounds. In considering this preemption claim, the federal court stated that "when the land use in question is the management or disposal of solid waste, most local ordinances are preempted by SWMA." Id. at 419. The court further explained that certain local regulations may be permissible but they "cannot impose onerous requirements that stand as obstacles to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of the legislature." Id. In accordance with this analytical framework, the court held that the provisions of the ordinance that mandated groundwater tests to be performed by qualified hydrologists and the hours for trucking activities were not preempted. On the other hand, the court found the ordinance's permit requirement and enforcement provisions, which duplicated the Department's permit system, were preempted. The district court explained that the township had two available remedies: it could inform the Department of any possible SWMA violations so that the Department could inspect the site and take enforcement action pursuant to its regulations, or the township could bring an action in equity for an injunction to restrain violations of the SWMA as provided for in Section 604 of SWMA. Id. at 422.