Jump to Content

Weekly Update Volume 30, Issue 23

08/14/2000

LITIGATION

 red bar graphic  CWA, STATE ENFORCEMENT ACTION, COMPARABLE STATE LAW:

The Sixth Circuit reversed a district court decision dismissing riparian landowners' citizen suit action against a Tennessee city for discharging contaminated sewage, sludge, and other toxic, noxious, and hazardous substances into a creek in violation of the CWA. The district court held that because the state environmental agency was involved in an administrative enforcement action against the city, the landowners' suit was precluded by CWA §§505(b) and 309(g)(6)(A). CWA §505(b), however, does not bar the landowners' claim because the agency's administrative enforcement action does not rise to the level of an action in federal or state court. Moreover, the administrative enforcement action, conducted over a 10-year period, was inadequate to address the landowners' concerns. In addition, CWA §309(g)(6)(A) did not preclude the landowners' action because the enforcement provisions of the Tennessee Water Control Act and related state statutes are not comparable to the CWA. The state regulatory scheme does not afford interested and/or adversely affected citizens the safeguard of a meaningful opportunity to participate in the administrative enforcement process. Jones v. City of Lakeland, Tennessee, No. 97-5917 (6th Cir. Aug. 9, 2000) (13 pp.).

red bar graphic  OIL POLLUTION ACT (OPA), CLEANUP COSTS:

The Ninth Circuit upheld a jury verdict finding that a regional rail authority and its contractor were liable to the owner of a pipeline for cleanup costs the owner incurred under OPA in connection with an oil spill that occurred after the pipeline was punctured during the construction of a railway station in Norwalk, California. There was substantial evidence in the record to show that the discharge of oil was caused solely by the acts or omissions of the authority and the contractor, the pipeline owner exercised due care with respect to the pipeline, and the pipeline owner took precautions against foreseeable acts or omissions by third parties and their consequences. The district court, therefore, properly denied the authority's and contractor's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and motion for new trial. In addition, although the district court failed to issue a declaration as required by OPA, it did not err in refusing to declare the rail authority and contractor as the responsible parties for purposes of future litigation or in refusing to declare them as substitutes for the pipeline authority on the hazardous waste manifests for the disposal of wastes and materials generated by the oil spill. In addition, the district court's award of prejudgment interest at a rate of 5.87% was proper, and it properly denied the pipeline owner's request for attorneys fees. Unocal Corp. v. United States, No. 99-55342 (9th Cir. Aug. 7, 2000) (20 pp.).

back to top

red bar graphic  SOIL REMEDIATION, CONTRACT LAW, STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS:

The Seventh Circuit upheld the dismissal of a property developer's breach of contract and willful and wanton misconduct claims against its partner for contaminating previously uncontaminated soil on property they sought to redevelop. The developer claimed that by contaminating uncontaminated soil, the partner breached his duty to remediate existing contamination. The letter of understanding between the developer and his partner, however, clearly and unambiguously allocated the duty to remediate the contamination on the developer, not his partner. Moreover, the letter did not impose a duty on the partner to conduct a due diligence investigation; the partner is only provided with the right to conduct such an investigation. Therefore, while tortious conduct might have occurred on the property, such conduct does not constitute a breach of the letter of understanding. In addition, the district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the partner on the developer's remaining claims for injury done to the property. The developer was put on notice of possible contamination in 1991 but did not file suit until 1998, two years after the statute of limitations period elapsed. McWane, Inc. v. Crow Chicago Industrial, Inc., No. 99-3819 (7th Cir. Aug. 9, 2000) (5 pp.).

red bar graphic  FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT (FTCA), CHOICE OF LAW:

The Third Circuit reversed a district court decision that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over battery manufacturers' FTCA contribution claims against the United States concerning a settlement agreement that arose out of third parties' personal injuries and property damage allegedly caused by the manufacturer's plant in New York. The United States, which was not a party to the settlement, designed, constructed, operated, and owned the plant before it was owned and operated by the manufacturers. Although the manufacturers argued that Pennsylvania law applied, the district court held that New York contribution law, which bars contribution claims by settling tortfeasors against non-settling tortfeasors, controlled the outcome. The district court, however, should have applied the New York choice of law rules before determining which law applied. Here, the manufacturers' headquarters are located in Ohio, and regardless of whether the United States is domiciled in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, or nowhere, New York choice of law rules dictate that Ohio contribution law governs the FTCA jurisdictional inquiry. Because Ohio contribution law allows settling tortfeasors to claim contribution from non-settling joint tortfeasors, the district court's ruling that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the contribution claim was reversed. The district court, however, properly dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction the manufacturers' FTCA indemnification claims. New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and the District of Columbia all bar indemnification where the party seeking indemnification is partially at fault. Gould Electronics Inc. v. United States, No. 99-1893 (3d Cir. July 31, 2000) (37 pp.).

red bar graphic  RESEARCH NATURAL AREAS (RNAs), SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION, EXHAUSTION:

The Seventh Circuit upheld the dismissal of recreational organizations' claims that the U.S. Forest Service lacked authority under the U.S. Constitution and the APA to designate certain areas of the Shawnee National Forest as RNAs. Because roads within the RNAs were subject to easements and rights-of-way that predated the creation of the forest, the organizations claimed that the Forest Service did not own the property rights necessary to make decisions concerning their use. Because this argument represents a challenge to the United States' ownership of the land in question, the organizations should have brought their challenge under the Quiet Title Act rather than under the Constitution. Although the organizations did not seek to quiet title in themselves, the Act still applies. The district court, therefore, lacked subject matter jurisdiction over this claim. In addition, the organizations' claim that the Forest Service violated the APA when it designated certain RNAs within the forest was properly dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because they failed to exhaust their administrative remedies before filing suit in federal district court. Under the circumstances of the case, the district court did not err in refusing to apply the futility exception. Shawnee Trail Conservancy v. United States Department of Agriculture, No. 99-3364 (7th Cir. July 25, 2000) (12 pp.).

back to top

red bar graphic  GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION, LEGISLATIVE SUBPOENA, INSURANCE:

The California Supreme Court held that a city council, pursuant to a legislative investigation of toxic contamination of groundwater, may issue subpoenas to obtain information relating to liability insurance coverage and claims concerning parties believed to be legally responsible for the contamination, where the city will likely use the same information in the course of prospective litigation. The council issued the subpoenas to certain insurance companies to learn about the insurance policies held by businesses that allegedly caused the contamination, which forced the city to shut down three of its municipal wells. A local ordinance clearly authorizes the council to issue a subpoena. Moreover, the council's investigation relates to and furthers the city's legitimate legislative interests. Groundwater contamination is an area over which the council has the authority and responsibility to investigate, and the council had a legitimate interest in learning whether and to what extent potentially responsible parties might be available to contribute to the city's cleanup. Further, the subpoenas are pertinent to the city's legitimate legislative interests. Therefore, because the issuance of the subpoenas is a proper exercise of legislative power, the fact that the city may use the information gained by the subpoenas in future litigation does not render the subpoenas invalid. Connecticut Indemnity Co. v. Superior Court of San Joaquin County, No. S065841 (Cal. July 24, 2000) (20 pp.).

Copyright© 2000, Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D.C. All rights reserved

THE FEDERAL AGENCIES
large red bar graphic

Note: Citations below are to the Federal Register.

red bar graphic  AIR:

  • EPA revised the monitoring requirements for new stationary sources  by clarifying and updating requirements for source owners and operators who must install and use continuous stack or duct opacity monitoring equipment and by updating the design and performance validation requirements for continuous opacity monitoring systems equipment. 65 FR 48914 (8/10/00).
  • EPA received a petition for rulemaking under CAA §109 to promulgate revised secondary NAAQS for pollutants associated with the formation of acid rain, including nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and fine particulate matter. 65 FR 48699 (8/9/00).
  • EPA announced that it received an application for a reference or equivalent method determination from Grimm Technologies, Inc., for its ENVIROcheck Model 107 PM10 air monitoring method. 65 FR 48699 (8/9/00).
  • EPA announced the availability of a Science Advisory Board review draft of the Health Assessment Document for Diesel Exhaust for public review and comment. 65 FR 49241 (8/11/00). 

red bar graphic  DRINKING WATER:

  • EPA issued an interim final rule that codifies the National Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Program Final Guidelines, which were published in February 1997. 65 FR 48285 (8/7/00).

back to top

red bar graphic  HAZARDOUS WASTES AND SUBSTANCES:

  • EPA proposed to enter into a settlement under CERCLA §122(h)(1) in connection with the Old World Trade Center Superfund site in Detroit, Mich. 65 FR 48497 (8/8/00).
  • EPA entered into a proposed administrative agreement under CERCLA §122(i) in connection with the Genzale Plating Superfund site in Franklin Square, N.Y. 65 FR 48995 (8/10/00).
  • EPA entered into a proposed administrative settlement under CERCLA §122(g) in connection with the Geiger (C&M Oil) Superfund site in Rantowles, S.C. 65 FR 49242 (8/11/00). 
  • EPA withdrew its authorization of a revision to Montana's hazardous waste program that was published on May 9, 2000. 65 FR 48392 (8/8/00).
  • EPA proposed to grant a petition submitted by the Tyco Printed Circuit Group to exclude  wastewater treatment sludge generated at its printed circuit board manufacturing processes in Melbourne, Fla., from the list of hazardous wastes. 65 FR 48434 (8/8/00).

red bar graphic  WATER QUALITY:

  • EPA proposed to implement CWA §316(b) for new facilities that use water withdrawn from rivers, streams, lakes, reservoirs, estuaries, oceans, or other U.S. waters for cooling water purposes.  65 FR 49059 (8/10/00).
  • The Coast Guard issued a notice of proposed rulemaking concerning amendments to U.S. regulations for pollution prevention from oceangoing ships and certain vessels in domestic service. 65 FR 48547 (8/8/00).
  • EPA announced that it proposed to modify the NPDES general permit for the eastern portion of the outer continental shelf of the Gulf of Mexico for discharges in the Offshore Subcategory of the Oil and Gas Extraction Point Source Category in accordance with a settlement EPA entered into in connection with Marathon Oil Co. v. Browner, No. Civ. 99-60090 (5th Cir. Oct. 16, 1998). 65 FR 48503 (8/8/00).
  • EPA announced that it approved an amendment to the memorandum of agreement for the Louisiana Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program under CWA §402 pursuant to a court order issued in Sierra Club v. Clifford, No. 96-0527 (E.D. La. Oct. 1, 1999).  65 FR 48501 (8/8/00).
  • EPA announced that it approved Minnesota's submission of criteria, methodologies, policies, and procedures for the Great Lakes System under CWA §118(c). 65 FR 48517 (8/8/00).

back to top

red bar graphic  DOJ NOTICES OF SETTLEMENTS:

  • U.S. v. Mountain Metal Co., No. CV-98-C-2562-S (N.D. Ala. Aug. 1, 2000) (under nine consent decrees, nine settling CERCLA defendants will pay a total of $489,723 to the United States in past response costs incurred at the Interstate Lead Company Superfund site in Leeds, Ala.), 65 FR 48538 (8/8/00);
  • U.S. v. Interstate Power Co., No. C00-1022MJM (N.D. Iowa July 31, 2000) (a CAA defendant that failed to outfit specified boilers at its power plants in Lansing and Dubuque, Iowa, with continuous emission monitoring systems and to apply for acid rain permits (who has since installed the monitoring systems and obtained acid rain permits) must pay a $200,000 civil penalty and must surrender to the EPA Enforcement Surrender Account 1,474 sulfur dioxide allowances), 65 FR 48735 (8/9/00);
  • U.S. v. American Chemical Service, Inc., No. 2:00CV438 (N.D. Ind. July 14, 2000) (39 PRPs must undertake the remedial action for the American Chemical Service Superfund site in Griffith, Ind., at an estimated cost of $45 million, and must pay for any oversight costs that exceed projected costs; approximately $24.5 million of the funds contained in a special account for the site will be disbursed to the settling defendants as reimbursement for construction and operation and maintenance costs as approved by EPA, $3.8 million of the funds will be reserved for EPA's discretionary use for unforeseen response actions at the site until 5 years after the remedial construction is complete, at which point any funds remaining from the $3.8 million will be split equally with the PRP group), 65 FR 49013 (8/10/00);
  • U.S. v. American Shizuki Corp., No. 8:00CV422 (D. Neb. July 28, 2000) (settling CERCLA defendants must finance and perform the EPA-approved remedial action for operable unit 1 at the Ogallala Ground Water Contamination Superfund site in Ogallala, Neb., and must reimburse the United States for past and future response costs), 65 FR 49014 (8/10/00);
  • U.S. v. Lloyd Manufacturing Corp., No. CA-00-363-ML (D.R.I. July 24, 2000) (a CAA defendant that failed to obtain a permit, failed to install pollution control devices, and failed to use low emission coatings in connection with its fabric coating facility in Warren, R.I., must pay a $240,000 civil penalty and must purchase approximately 247 tons of air emission reduction credits as restitution for its past excess emissions), 65 FR 49015 (8/10/00);
  • U.S. v. Motorola, Inc., No. 98-2049 PHX-RCB (D. Ariz. July 25, 2000) (settling CERCLA defendants must pay $682,500 to the Hazardous Substances Superfund to reimburse the United States for past response costs, 80% of interim response costs, and all future oversight costs in connection with operable units 1 and 2 of the Motorola 52nd Street Superfund Site in Phoenix, Ariz.), 65 FR 49015 (8/10/00);
  • U.S. v. Spokane Metals Co., No. CS-00-0255-FZS (E.D. Wash. July 26, 2000) (settling CERCLA defendants must pay $680,000 in past U.S. response costs incurred at the Spokane Junkyard and Associated sites in Spokane, Wash., must implement institutional controls, must provide for the operation and maintenance at the site, and must pay EPA's future oversight costs; three settling federal agencies also are PRPs included in the consent decree), 65 FR 49016 (8/10/00);
  • U.S. v. USX Corp., No. 99CV536JM (N.D. Ind. July 25, 2000) (a settling defendant that violated CAA §112(c) and the NESHAP for benzene waste at its integrated steel plant in Gary, Ind., must pay a $587,000 civil penalty and must remove transformers containing 45,000 pounds of PCBs as a supplemental environmental project), 65 FR 49016 (8/10/00);
  • U.S. v. Ware Shoals Power & Water, Inc., No. 8-99-2346-13 (D.S.C. July 27, 2000) (settling CERCLA defendants collectively must pay $55,000 in past EPA response costs incurred at the Ware Shoals Dyeing and Printing Superfund site in Ware Shoals, S.C., and must convey the site property to the town of Ware Shoals by deed for a purchase price of no more than $10), 65 FR 49017 (8/10/00);
  • U.S. v. Wolf, No. 1:99-CV-01032 (N.D. Ohio July 25, 2000) (under three proposed consent decrees, one settling CERLCA defendant must pay $10,000 in past U.S. response costs incurred at the Lincoln Fields Superfund Removal site in Madison Township, Ohio, and must pledge to the United States 75% of the value of a piece of site property currently valued at approximately $800,000 upon its transfer; a second CERCLA defendant must pay $2,000 in past U.S. response costs; a third CERCLA defendant must pay $5,000 in past U.S. response costs), 65 FR 49015 (8/10/00).

back to top

Copyright© 2000, Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D.C. All rights reserved  

IN THE STATES

red bar graphic ALABAMA

Dept. of Envtl. Management

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • Proposed SIP revisions regarding implementation of the one-hour ozone standard in the Birmingham nonattainment area. Gasoline sulfur content and Reid Vapor Pressure controls, as well as nitrogen oxide emission controls on electric utility plants, are among the proposed control strategies. Public hearing on Aug. 16; comments due Aug. 18. Details at http://www.adem.state.al.us/phdiv3.html

Public Notices–Permit Applications 

back to top

red bar graphic  ALASKA

Dept. of Envtl. Conservation

Water Quality-Performance Partnership Agreement

Cruise Ship Regulation

Proposed Regulations-Air

red bar graphic ARIZONA

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Water Quality-CWA 305(b) Report

Water Quality-Proposed Regulations

  • Proposal will implement the Water Quality Assurance Revolving Fund reform legislation of 1997, including revisions to remedy selection provisions. The rules include standards governing the conduct of preliminary investigations, site "scoring" for placement on the Registry, public information requirements, and the conduct of early response actions. Written comments due Oct. 18; public hearings Sept. 20 (Tucson) and 21 (Phoenix). See http://www.adeq.state.az.us/lead/oac/stat.html and www.sosaz.com/arr for more information. 

Proposed Regulations-Operator Certification

  • Public hearings scheduled for Sept. 11, 14, 15, 19, 21, and 27; written comments due Oct. 4. 

Reopened Proposed Regulations-UST Release Reporting and Corrective Action

Air Quality-Proposed Gas Station General Permit

Superfund Program-Proposed Registry Inclusions, Prospective Purchaser Agreements

red bar graphic ARKANSAS

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Draft Remedial Action Decisions

back to top

red bar graphic CALIFORNIA

Air Resources Board

Diesel Risk Reduction Plan and Permitting Guidance-Stationary Diesel Engines

Proposed Regulations-Conflict of Interest Code

  • 45 day Notice of Public Hearing to Consider the Adoption of Amendments to Regulations Regarding the Conflict of Interest Code of the Air Resources Board. This document and the
    associated "formal" regulatory materials can be accessed at http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/conflict/conflict.htm

Final "Smog Check" Report

Carpool Lane Use-Qualifying Vehicles

Reformulated Gas-Phase 3 Meeting

Zero Emission Vehicle Biennial Review

Dept. of Toxic Substances Control

Proposed Regulations-Administrative Penalty Assessment

  • Proposed Article 3, Chapter 22, Div. 4.5 of Title 22, CCR, would make specific the statutory requirement in Health and Safety Code Section 25187(a)(4) by assessing administrative penalties based on criteria such as the nature and gravity of the violation, the violator's history and ability to pay the penalty, and the deterrent effect of the penalty on both the violator and the regulated community as a whole. Public workshops Sept. 14 and 15. See http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/pdf2html.html

Proposed Negative Declaration

  • Proposed California Environmental Quality Act negative declaration regarding reuse of lead-contaminated soil by the California Department of Transportation. Comments due Aug. 27. See http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/pdf2html.html

Draft Permit

  • For hazardous waste storage and treatment (by incineration, open burning and/or open detonation) at the U.S. Army Sierra Depot. Public hearings Sept. 12 and 13. Comments due Oct. 11. See http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/ (click on "What's New"). 

Integrated Waste Management Board

Proposed Regulations-Enforcement and Compliance Procedures

  • Proposed revisions to Title 14, Division 7 California Code of Regulations will reflect changes in the Public Resources Code brought about by the enactment of AB 59 (Sher). A 45-day public comment period ran through May 8. The public hearing has been postponed until Aug. 22-23. Details at http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/enforcep/

Final Regulations-Farm and Ranch Cleanup

  • New regulations, effective July 29, provide for a grant process that allows qualifying parties to obtain funding for cleanup of solid waste illegally disposed of on farm and ranch properties. Details at http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/RgUpdate.htm

Water Resources Control Board

Proposed General Discharge Requirements-Application of Biosolids to Land

  • Proposed General Waste Discharge Requirements for discharge of biosolids to land for use as a soil amendment in agricultural, silvicultural, horticultural, and land reclamation activities will be considered at a SWRCB meeting on Aug. 17. Details at http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/news/biosolidswrk.htm

South Coast Air Quality Management District

Proposed Fleet Emission Reduction Regulations

  • Public hearing Aug. 18 regarding proposed Rule 1186.1, which will require public and private fleet operators to acquire alternative fueled or otherwise less-polluting sweepers when purchasing or leasing these vehicles for operations undertaken by government jurisdictions or agencies with greater than 15 vehicles. See http://www.aqmd.gov/hb/00072a.html
  • Public hearing Aug. 18 on proposed Rule 1194, which will require airport ground public access services to purchase compliant vehicles when adding or replacing vehicles in an existing fleet or when forming a new fleet. See http://www.aqmd.gov/hb/00072a.html

Proposed Regulations-New Source Review of Toxic Air Contaminants

  • Proposed revisions to Rule 1401, to be considered Aug. 18, will update the list of compounds and effective dates in Table I. Details at http://www.aqmd.gov/hb/00072a.html

Proposed Regulations-Recordkeeping for Volatile Organic Compound Emissions

  • Proposed amendments would streamline existing daily recordkeeping requirements, allow monthly recordkeeping for qualifying sources, and allow sources to implement alternative recordkeeping systems approved by the District. Subject of Aug. 18 public hearing. See http://www.aqmd.gov/hb/00072a.html

Proposed Regulations-BACT/RECLAIM

  • Proposed amendments, to be considered at a Sept. 15 public hearing, will separate BACT for RECLAIM and non-RECLAIM sources into LAER for federal major sources, and BACT for minor sources pursuant to state law. Currently, LAER is required for emission increases from all sources. See http://www.aqmd.gov/hb/000072a.html

Proposed Regulations-Fuel Sulfur Content

  • Proposed amendments will establish an immediate sulfur content for ultra low sulfur diesel fuel and, after Jan. 1, 2004, will prohibit the purchase, sale or burning of diesel fuel that exceeds the sulfur standard. Subject of Sept. 15 public hearing. See http://www.aqmd.gov/hb/00072a.html

back to top

red bar graphic COLORADO

Water Quality Control Commission

Proposed Regulations

red bar graphic  CONNECTICUT

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Request for Proposals

red bar graphic FLORIDA

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Water Quality-Triennial Review Workshop

  • Triennial review of surface water quality workshop on Aug. 16 will address contemplated changes in water quality criteria for cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, silver, and zinc. See http://www.dep.state.fl.us

Proposed Regulations-Contaminant Cleanup Target Levels, Brownfield Cleanup Criteria

New Legislation-Air Quality

General Permit-Temporary Agricultural Activities

  • Proposed rule will develop permitting criteria for horticultural, seasonal crops that are harvested in one growing season. No additional rule development workshops are currently scheduled. 

Proposed Regulations-NPDES Program; Stormwater

  • Proposed regulations would allow completion of NPDES delegation by incorporating standards governing stormwater and federal facilities. The proposed rule includes fees for implementing the NPDES stormwater program. 

Proposed Regulations-Surface Water Classification

  • Proposed rule amendment would reclassify Prospect Lake in Broward County. 

Proposed Regulations-Drinking Water

  • Proposed amendments will incorporate revisions to federal standards. 

Proposed Regulations-Air

  • Correction of technical errors in standards governing sulfur storage and handling facilities.

State Revolving Fund-Drinking Water

  • Proposed rule amendments would enable funding of additional wastewater management systems.

back to top

red bar graphic GEORGIA

Dept. of Natural Resources

Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste

  • Proposed revisions will incorporate changes in U.S. EPA regulations. Public hearing Aug. 25; written comments due same date. Will be taken up at Oct. 25 meeting of Board of Natural Resources. See http://www.ganet.org/dnr/environ

Air Permit Applications

NPDES Permit Applications

red bar graphic IDAHO

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Proposed Rules-Air Quality

  • Proposed rule will replace process weight rule applicable to grain air emissions with a grain loading standard. Comments due Sept. 8; public hearing Sept. 7. For details, see http://www2.state.id.us/deq/rules/0-9903b.htm

  • Negotiated rulemaking will address several issues, including transitioning from permits to construct to permits to operate and clarification of permit requirements prior to construction and operation. Intitial meeting Aug. 30. See http://www2.state.id.us/deq/rules/58-0101-0002.htm

Outstanding Resource Waters-Petitions

Risk Based Corrective Action

back to top

red bar graphic ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

Inquiry Hearings-Peak Load Electric Generating Facilities

  • Series of public hearings has been established regarding recent increase in the number of natural gas-fired peak load electric generating facilities (also known as "peaker plants"). The hearings were requested by Governor Ryan's office and will be held on Aug. 23-24, Sept. 7, Sept. 14, Sept. 21, and Oct. 5-6 at locations to be announced. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/news/news.htm and http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/rules/proposal.htm

Envtl. Protection Agency

Permit Applications

Strategic Planning Process

Clean Lakes Program Grants Available

  • Approximately $750,000 available for distribution. Amy Walkenbach at IEPA is the contact ((217)782-3362). 

red bar graphic INDIANA

Dept. of Envtl. Management

Proposed Regulations-Air

Final Regulations-Air

Proposed Regulations-Water 

Proposed Regulations-Waste

  • Oct. 17 public hearing regarding proposed amendments to 329 IAC 3.1, 329 IAC 12, and 329 IAC 13 regarding rules for secondary containment for used oil containers and underground tanks. The proposal also amends 329 IAC 3.1 to require two paper copies and an electronic copy of groundwater laboratory analytical data and field parameters and revises 329 IAC 127-7-6 to allow flexibility in the timing of training courses for solid waste facility operators. See http://www.state.in.us/legislative/register/August-1-2000.html

red bar graphic  LOUISIANA

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Permit Applications

Proposed Settlement

back to top

red bar graphic MARYLAND

Dept. of the Environment

Public Meetings/Hearings

Water Quality Standard-Triennial Review

red bar graphic MASSACHUSETTS

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Final Regulations-Waterways

Proposed Regulations-Air

  • Proposed design and performance standards for new boilers having an energy input capacity of between 10 and 40 million Btu per hour. Public hearings Sept. 7 and 8; comments due Sept. 18. See http://www.state.ma.us/dep/erp/notice.htm

  • Draft 310 CMR 7.29 standards governing emissions from power plants available for informal public review; no hearing currently scheduled. See http://www.state.ma.us/dep/new.htm

Enforcement Actions

back to top

red bar graphic  MICHIGAN

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Brownfield Law Workshops

  • Workshops scheduled for Sept. 12, 14, 19, and 21 to discuss recent statutory changes to brownfield legislation (2000 Public Acts 143, 144, and 145, enacted June 6). The statutory revisions expand the eligible activities for property tax reimbursement to include infrastructure improvements, structure demolition, lead or asbestos abatement, site preparation, and relocation of public buildings and operations. The legislation also expands eligible property for tax reimbursement and Single Business Tax credit to include blighted or functionally obsolete property. See http://www.deq.state.mi.us/pr/000809B.htm

Management Team Public Meeting

Permit Applications-Air

 Air Quality Division Newsletter

Surface Water Quality Division Bulletin

Surface Water Quality Division-Draft Regulations

Clean Michigan Initiative Grant Funding

red bar graphic MINNESOTA

Pollution Control Agency

Permit Applications, Other Notices

red bar graphic  MISSOURI

Dept. of Natural Resources

Final Regulations-Air

Watershed Protection Conference

Water Pollution Control-Permit Applications

red bar graphic NEW HAMPSHIRE

Proposed Regulations-Wetlands

back to top

red bar graphic NEW JERSEY

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Proposed Regulations-Freshwater Wetlands

Draft Watershed Management Rules

Current DEP Bulletin (Permit Applications; Proposed Regulations)

red bar graphic NEW YORK

Dept. of Envtl. Conservation

Comparative Risk Project

Proposed Regulations-Air Emissions 

Environmental Notice Bulletin (Permit Applications)

Permit Applications

back to top

red bar graphic  NORTH CAROLINA

Dept. of Envt. and Natural Resources

Division of Air Quality-Proposed Regulations

  • Proposed nitrogen oxide (NOx) emission control plan and rules will be submitted to the Environmental Management Commission on Sept. 1 (written comments due that date). See http://daq.state.nc.us/News/noxresponse_00700.html. Will be taken up at Oct. 12 meeting of the Environmental Management Commission. Public meeting Aug. 31 in Raleigh. 
  • Hearing Aug. 16 regarding a number of proposed revisions to air regulations, including revisions to Title V permitting rules, clarification that the visible emissions rule does not apply to engine maintenance facilities where controls are infeasible, to revoke permit exemptions for noncompliant sources, and to change schedules for submitting permit applications. Rule revisions would also change the definition of a Title V facility for fee purposes, extend Title V nonattainment area fees to certain Title V facilities outside nonattainment areas, and adopt a new general standard for the control of odors. Written comments are due Aug. 31. See http://daq.state.nc.us/Rules/Hearing

Air Quality-NOx Emissions

  • Aug. 7 decision by DENR to not appeal D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling requiring North Carolina and 21 other states to adopt rules for reducing NOx emissions from utilities and other sources. Press release available at http://www.enr.state.nc.us/newsrels/mather4.htm

Division of Air Quality Penalty Assessments

DENR Enforcement Data

Water Quality-Basinwide Assessment Reports

red bar graphic OHIO

Envtl. Protection Agency

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality

Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste

OPEA Actions, Notices by County

Pending Air Permits

Proposed Regulations-Air

Permit Applications

red bar graphic OKLAHOMA

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Proposed Regulations-Air

  • Proposed revisions intended to simplify and clarify, but not substantively revise, existing requirements pursuant to DEQ "re-right/de-wrong" initiative. To be addressed at Aug. 16 meeting of the Air Quality Council. See http://www.deq.state.ok.us/calendar/index.html

Draft Source Water Assessment and Protection Program Document

back to top

red bar graphic OREGON

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Water Quality Permit Applications

Proposed Regulations

Public Notices-Cleanup Remedies

red bar graphic PENNSYLVANIA

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Proposed Regulations-Storage Tank Spill Prevention

Proposed Regulations-Coal Refuse Disposal

Final General NPDES Permit-CAFO Operations

Final Regulations-Air

Proposed General NPDES Permit Revision

NPDES Permit Applications

red bar graphic SOUTH CAROLINA

Dept. of Health and Envtl. Control

Permit Application Notices

back to top

red bar graphic  TENNESSEE

Dept. of Environment and Conservation

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality-Fees

Grant Availability-Recycling Marketing

red bar graphic  TEXAS

Natural Resource Conservation Commission

Final Regulations-Solid Waste

Final Regulations-Air

Proposed Regulations

  • Water/wastewater operator certification rules are being reproposed to comport with the SDWA requirements. Public hearing Aug. 24. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rules/propadop.html
  • Preproposal draft of revisions to Surface Water Quality Standards available at http://ww.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/index.html
  • Proposed quadrennial review of Chapter 114 (Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles). See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/whatsnew.html
  • Proposed regulations would create a nitrogen oxide trading program in Houston-Galveston nonattainment area, require an average of 90% reduction in NOx emissions from new controls in the nonattainment area, impose new vehicle emissions testing requirements, implement a seasonal ban on early-morning use of heavy-duty construction equipment, require the sale of low-sulfur gasoline throughout Central and Eastern Texas (including the Dallas-Ft. Worth and Beaumont areas, starting in 2002), ban the use of small gasoline-powered lawn care equipment between 6 a.m. and noon in summer months, implement requirements for new commercial and residential air conditioning equipment, require early retirement and replacement of off-highway diesel equipment, require emission reductions at area airports, reduce speed limits to 55 (starting in 2002), encourage voluntary measures such as telecommuting and stoplight synchronization, and restrict truck engine idling, and reduce the duration of emission reduction credits from ten to five years. Public hearings scheduled for various locations Sept. 18-25. Written comments due Sept. 25. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us

Submitted Report-Air-Protection of Visibility

Permit Hearings

Sunset Advisory Commission

Strategic Plan

red bar graphic  UTAH

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Permit Applications

red bar graphic VERMONT

Dept. of Envtl. Conservation

Permit Applications

back to top

red bar graphic VIRGINIA

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Public Information Forum 

Landfill Closure Proposal

  • Comments accepted through Oct. 13 on reports that propose that certain landfills be closed by 2005, other identified facilities by 2010, and five more by 2020, on the basis of risk of exposure to contaminants. The DEQ has also compiled new data regarding the receipt of out-of-state generated municipal solid waste in 1999. For details, see http://www.deq.state.va.us/news/releases/964019031.html

Permit Application

  • Air permit application submitted by Commonwealth Chesapeake Co. (TECO Power Services), New Church, for installation of turbines and increase of allowed carbon monoxide emissions from existing turbines. Public hearing Sept. 11. See http://www.deq.state.va.us/notice/pn/965653085.html

Proposed Consent Orders

RCRA Program Authorization

Public Meeting Notices

Litter Prevention, Recycling Grants

back to top

red bar graphic  WASHINGTON

Dept. of Ecology

Adopted Regulations

Proposed Regulations

back to top

red bar graphic WEST VIRGINIA

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Proposed Regulations

  • Proposed revisions to air, solid waste, hazardous waste, underground storage tank regulations. Public hearings Aug. 14-21. See http://www.dep.state.wv.us

Public Notice Bulletin (Permit Applications, Proposed Regulations)

red bar graphic WISCONSIN

Dept. of Natural Resources

Public Hearing and Meeting Schedule

back to top

Copyright© 2000, Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D.C. All rights reserved.

INTERNATIONAL
large red bar graphic

red bar graphic CLIMATE CHANGE

red bar graphic ASIA

back to top

red bar graphic EUROPE

  • Italy has decided to impose restrictions on the sale of four variations of genetically modified corn. 

red bar graphic CANADA

  • A large oil spill is affecting the Pine River in northern British Columbia. See "B.C. Town Gets Ready to Close Taps After Oil Spill," Aug. 3, http://cbc.ca

  • Environment Canada will impose restrictions on the manufacture and import of tetradecyl chloride, tin and butyl mixed into complexes, and siloxanes and silicones. See http://canada.gc.ca/gazette/part1/pdf/g1-13431.pdf

red bar graphic LATIN AMERICA

  • According to the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, industrial pollution has increased significantly in the past two decades. The study, which focuses on eight countries, concluded that the increases were often due to significantly enhanced export activity and trade liberalization. See http://www.eclac.org/English/news/Pressrelease/pollution.htm

 red bar graphic AUSTRALIA

  • Australia and New Zealand have approved a standard for labeling genetically modified organisms in food that is weaker than European Union standards. See http://www.dawn.com/2000/07/30/int10.htm. Meanwhile, Val Giddings of the Biotechnology Industry Association says that consumers will support the consumption of genetically modified foods, and that farmers should not assume they will make much money from GM-free "certified" crops. See http://www.smh.com.au/news/0008/08/national.national3.html

red bar graphic AFRICA