Jump to Content

Weekly Update Volume 31, Issue 19

07/02/2001

LITIGATION
large red bar graphic

Note: The cases listed are available from the ELR Document Service.

red bar graphic TAKINGS, WETLANDS:

The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Rhode Island Supreme Court's holding that a landowner's takings claim arising from the state coastal protection agency's denial of the landowner's permit to develop coastal wetlands was not ripe, but affirmed the court's holding that the landowner failed to establish a deprivation of all economic value of his property. The Rhode Island Supreme Court erred in finding that the landowner's claim was  unripe because he had not received a final decision from the coastal protection agency. Multiple applications by the landowner to the agency to develop the property were denied. The state court erred in ruling that, notwithstanding those denials, doubt remained as to the extent of development the agency would allow on the landowner's property due to his failure to explore other uses for the property that would involve filling substantially less wetlands. The agency's regulations allow for a special exception to engage in prohibited use when a compelling public purpose is served, however, none of the landowner's proposals qualified for the special exception and there is no indication that the agency would have accepted a proposal that occupied a smaller surface area. To the contrary, the council ruled that the proposed activity was not a compelling public purpose. Additionally, the landowner's claim is not unripe by virtue of his failure to seek permission for a use of the property that would involve development only of its upland portion, which is not wetlands. Further, the landowner's failure to to apply for permission to develop the 74-lot subdivision that was the basis for the damages sought in his inverse condemnation suit did not render his claim unripe. The council informed the landowner that he could not fill the wetlands; it therefore follows that he could not fill and then build 74 single-family dwellings on the wetlands. Moreover, the landowner's acquisition of title to the property after the effective date of regulations prohibiting the development of wetlands did not bar his takings claim. If the Court accepted the state's rule, the transfer of title after enactment of a law or regulation affecting the property would absolve the state of its obligation to defend any action restricting land use. The Rhode Island Supreme Court correctly determined, however, that the landowner was not denied all economically beneficial use of his property because the upland portion of the property may still be developed. A regulation permitting construction of a substantial residence on an 18-acre parcel does not leave the property economically idle or represent a token interest. Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices O'Connor, Scalia, and Thomas joined. Justice Stevens joined part of the opinion, but dissented in part. Justice Ginsburg, joined by Justices Souter and Breyer, dissented. Justice Breyer also filed a separate dissenting opinion. Palazzolo v. Rhode Island, No. 99-2047 (U.S. June 28, 2001) (56 pp.).

red bar graphic  RCRA, OPEN GARBAGE DUMPS, CITIZEN SUIT:

The Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court holding that a city was liable for contributing to illegal dumping at two garbage dumps in violation of RCRA, and that the director of the state environmental agency could not be held liable for RCRA violations. Residents brought a citizen suit against the city for illegally contributing to open dumping at two sites and against the director for failing to classify the dumps on EPA's Open Dumping Inventory (ODI) in violation of RCRA. The district court did not err in finding that the city could be held liable under RCRA §7002(a)(1)(B) for contributing to dumping at the sites. Even after the city's attorneys learned that a demolition company hired by the city was illegally dumping at one of the sites, the city continued to work with the company. Additionally, it was not clear error for the district court to infer that the city's waste went to the dump in question. Further, because §7002(a)(1)(B) applies to both past and present acts, the city can still be held liable under RCRA for continuing violations even though it stopped using the second site in question as a municipal landfill in 1972 and RCRA was not enacted until 1976. Moreover, the district court correctly concluded that the residents did not prove that the director violated RCRA by failing to classify the dumps on EPA's ODI. Contrary to the director's arguments, the residents had standing to bring their suit and were not barred from suing the director by the Eleventh Amendment. The residents failed, however, to prove that the director's actions contravened the statutory provisions and regulations of RCRA. The state's plan, submitted to and approved by EPA, met RCRA requirements to provide for the classification of existing solid waste disposal facilities, the closing or upgrading of all existing dumps, and long-term monitoring and contingency plans. Cox v. City of Dallas, No. 99-11029 (5th Cir. June 26, 2001) (28 pp.).

red bar graphic   NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LANDS, INHOLDINGS, TAKINGS:

The Ninth Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part a district court decision requiring property owners to apply for permits for certain uses of a road traversing their property, which is completely surrounded by federally owned National Forest System lands. The property owners purchased the property, which consists of two tracts of land separated and surrounded by National Forest land, in 1964, pursuant to boundaries established by a 1939 survey and a predecessor in title's grant to the United States of a right of way across the property. Since that time the property owners made numerous changes to National Forest Service land without first obtaining permits. Some of the land damaged by the property owners' activities is accessible only by crossing their property. The property owners brought this case seeking to quiet title to their property based on an alleged discrepancy in the boundary of their property, and seeking to quiet title in an easement for access to their land. On remand, the district court did not err in ordering the property owners to apply for a permit for access to their property that constitutes use of the National Forest System lands beyond the uses made by the general public. The property owners were never vested with a common law easement for access to their property because all common law claims are preempted by federal law where, as here, the United States owns the servient estate for the benefit of the public. Additionally, no taking has occurred by requiring the property owners to apply for a permit. Moreover, the permit, in the form proposed by the government and sanctioned by the district court, reasonably regulates the property owners' access by providing that they must comply with Forest Service regulations if they wish to engage in surface disturbing activities that are beyond those engaged in by the general public. Further, the district court erred in ordering that the United States be entitled access to the property via the right of way conveyed by a predecessor in interest. The United States is entitled, however, to a right of way across the property pursuant to federal law. Adams v. United States, No. 99-15823 (9th Cir. June 25, 2001) (20 pp.).

red bar graphic  OIL POLLUTION, FEDERAL ARBITRATION ACT (FAA):

The Tenth Circuit held that parties could not contractually alter the standard of judicial review for an arbitration panel's award of damages to individuals for an oil company's pollution of a creek on the individuals' property. Therefore, the court affirmed the panel's award of damages. After initially denying any responsibility for the pollution, the oil company submitted to arbitration with the individuals. The arbitration panel granted relief to the individuals, the oil company appealed to a district court, and the district court affirmed the award after applying a limited standard of judicial review. The oil company then appealed to the Eighth Circuit claiming that the parties had contracted for expanded judicial review. However, the purposes behind the FAA, as well as the principles announced in various U.S. Supreme Court cases, do not support a rule allowing parties to alter the judicial process by private contract. The FAA's limited review ensures judicial respect for the arbitration process and prevents courts from enforcing parties' agreements to arbitrate only to refuse to respect the results of the arbitration. Moreover, expanded judicial review places federal courts in the awkward position of reviewing proceedings conducted under potentially unfamiliar rules and procedures. Additionally, the arbitration panel did not exceed its powers or act in manifest disregard of the law in concluding that it had jurisdiction over the case and ordering the cleanup of the individuals' property, awarding damages to the individuals and creating an escrow account for the cleanup of the property, and awarding punitive damages. Bowen v. Amoco Pipeline Co., No. 00-7039 (10th Cir. June 20, 2001) (14 pp.).

red bar graphic CWA, CAA, CITIZEN SUIT, JURISDICTION:

The Ninth Circuit dismissed for lack of jurisdiction a city's interlocutory appeal in a citizen suit brought by an environmental group alleging CWA and CAA violations by the city. The district court signed and entered the city's proposed order for an interlocutory appeal, and the parties filed petitions with the Ninth Circuit seeking certification of their proposed interlocutory appeals. Before the Ninth Circuit accepted the parties' appeals, the district court withdrew its certification order and denied the city certification to seek an interlocutory appeal. The circuit court did not issue an order granting the city permission to bring an interlocutory appeal, and thus did not divest the district court of jurisdiction over the issues to be raised in the interlocutory appeal until more than two months after the district court had entered its rescission of certification for the city's interlocutory appeal. Therefore, the district court's order was properly rescinded. Further, the district court's rescission order did not violate the authority granted to the court under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, did not deny the parties an opportunity to be heard on the issue, and did not violate the law of the case doctrine. City of Los Angeles, Harbor Division v. Santa Monica Baykeeper, Nos. 00-55396, -55397 (9th Cir. June 26, 2001) (7 pp.).

red bar graphic  CWA, TRIBAL REGULATION, MAINE'S FREEDOM OF ACCESS ACT (MAINE ACCESS ACT), RES JUDICATA:

The First Circuit dismissed on res judicata grounds  Native American tribes' claim that they did not have to provide pulp and paper mills with documents concerning the tribes' regulation under the CWA of the mills' wastewater discharge into rivers flowing through the tribes' reservations. After the mills requested the documents from the tribes under the Maine Access Act, the tribes brought suit in federal court to prevent disclosure, claiming that state and federal law precluded state regulation of internal tribal matters and that applying the Maine Access Act as sought by the mills would impermissibly regulate the tribes' internal affairs. The mills brought suit in state court to enforce disclosure. The federal district court responded first and held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the case because the case did not arise under federal law. The state court ruled on the merits of the case and held that the tribes had to provide the mills with the requested documents because the demand for the documents did not contravene the internal affairs limitation. On appeal, the state supreme court held that the internal affairs limit did protect the tribes from having to produce documents reflecting the internal deliberations about the wastewater issue, but not from turning over under the Maine Access Act any correspondence between the tribes and federal agencies on that issue. Whether the tribes' claim arises under federal law is a difficult question, but the answer is now irrelevant because the state supreme court decided the merits of the underlying dispute, and any further proceedings in the federal district court are controlled by res judicata and would be pointlessly duplicative. When pending state and federal court suits involve the same underlying dispute, res judicata principles usually give the race to the first court to decide the merits. Here, the state supreme court decided the case on the merits, and, therefore, precluded the federal court case. Penobscot Nation v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., No. 00-2265 (1st Cir. June 20, 2001) (7 pp.).

red bar graphic CWA, WETLANDS, NON-NAVIGABLE WATERS:

A district court denied individuals' motion to vacate a consent decree regarding CWA violations involving wetlands in an area being developed by the individuals. The individuals argued that the consent decree should be vacated because in light of Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (SWANCC), 531 U.S. 159, 31 ELR 20382 (2001), it is clear that one of the properties involved in the decree did not contain navigable waters subject to regulation under the CWA, and, therefore, the United States did not have authority to regulate the waters or enter into the decree, making the decree an ultra vires act. The government's actions, however, were not ultra vires and the consent decree should not be vacated. Even if the government went beyond its authority in entering the consent decree, it is not a basis to void the decree because it does not go to the court's subject matter jurisdiction. Additionally, the individuals are bound by their stipulation in the consent decree that the wetlands were waters of the United States, and it is now too late to contend that the parties were mistaken as to the wetlands being waters of the United States. Further, another property controlled by the consent decree contains wetlands subject to CWA regulation, and, therefore, the government did not exceed its authority by entering the decree. Moreover, the change of law represented by SWANCC does not warrant modification of the consent decree. United States v. Krilich, No. 92 C 5354 (N.D. Ill. June 22, 2001) (9 pp.).

red bar graphic CWA, FILLING OF WETLANDS:

A district court held that the the ruling in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (SWANCC), 531 U.S. 159, 31 ELR 20382 (2001), did not warrant granting a petition for a writ of error coram nobis or vacating a consent decree in a case involving the illegal filling of wetlands in violation of the CWA. A company placed fill in four parcels of land adjacent to the headwaters of non-navigable creeks. After conviction, the company appealed and the conviction was reversed and the case remanded for a new trial, but a consent decree was reached by the company and the government. Based on the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in SWANCC, the company believed that the parcels of land at issue in the case were outside the government's jurisdiction under the CWA, and that the company was outside the reach of the CWA. In prosecuting the company, the government relied on the adjacent/abutting theory of tributaries impacting on navigable waters, which involved 33 C.F.R. §328.3(a)(1), (a)(5), and (a)(7). In contrast, the SWANCC case is a narrow holding in that only 33 C.F.R. §328.3(a)(3) is invalid pursuant to a lack of congressional intent. Therefore, it would be improper to extend the ruling in SWANCC any further than the Supreme Court intended. Similarly, the company's motion to vacate its consent decree with the government must be denied. In addition to the SWANCC opinion not applying to the present case, the consent decree cannot be vacated because the company has already subjected itself to the court's jurisdiction. Whether the parcels of land were navigable or abutting navigable waters is simply an element of the crime with which the company was charged. Because the government has jurisdiction over the case, the consent decree cannot be attacked on the basis that the government failed to prove an element of the crime; namely that the government did not have jurisdiction to bring the instant case. United States v. Interstate General Co., No. AW-96-1112, 95-0390 (D. Md. June 12, 2001) (13 pp.).

red bar graphic HAZARDOUS WASTE TRANSPORT, PERSONAL INJURIES:

A district court dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction a suit against a trucking company by an individual that alleged he suffered permanent physical injuries as a result of transporting hazardous waste for the company. The individual asserted federal question jurisdiction on the ground that his claims arose under a variety of federal statutes. However, none of the individual's complaints specifically cited any of the statutes; they merely relied on them to establish the standard of care for the individual's state negligence claims. Further, none of the federal statutes the individual relied on provide for a private cause of action. Moreover, federal law is not essential to the state-law causes of action alleged by the individual. Therefore, the court dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Cabana v. Forcier, No. CIV.A. 99-40071-NMG (D. Mass. June 20, 2001) (5 pp.).


  Copyright© 2001, 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 announced the availability of, and opportunity to comment on, a background paper that will be used in the development of EPA's report to the President on the impact of the Agency's new source review program on investment in new utility and refinery generation capacity, energy efficiency, and environmental protection. 66 FR 34191 (6/27/01).

  • EPA entered into a proposed settlement under CAA §113(g) to address a lawsuit, Arizona Mining Ass'n v. EPA, No. 97-70007 (9th Cir.), challenging the Agency's bases for granting interim, rather than full, approval of the Arizona title V operating permits program. 66 FR 33682 (6/25/01). 

  • EPA entered into a proposed settlement agreement under the CAA to address a lawsuit, American Coke & Coal Chemicals Inst. v. EPA, No. 99-1339 (D.C. Cir.), challenging EPA's NESHAPs for pesticide active ingredient production. 66 FR 34631 (6/29/01). 

  • EPA approved a site-specific revision to the pulp and paper industry NESHAP for the Weyerhaeuser Company's Flint River Operations in Oglethorpe, Georgia, to facilitate implementation of the company's XL project. 66 FR 34119 (6/27/01).  

  • EPA announced that the EPA Environmental Appeals Board denied a petition for review of a permit for the proposed Steel Dynamics, Inc., steel mill in Whitley County, Indiana, under the prevention of significant deterioration regulations. 66 FR 34182 (6/27/01).

  • EPA approved Illinois' and Missouri's one-hour ozone attainment demonstration SIPs for the St. Louis moderate ozone nonattainment area. 66 FR 33995 (6/26/01). 

  • EPA proposed to update a portion of the outer continental shelf (OCS) air regulations for OCS sources for which the Santa Barbara County air pollution control district, South Coast air quality management district, and Ventura County air pollution control district are the designated corresponding onshore areas. 66 FR 34394 (6/28/01).

red bar graphic  ENDANGERED SPECIES:



  • FWS and the U.S. Forest Service established regulations for seasons, harvest limits, methods, and means related to the taking of wildlife for subsistence uses in Alaska during the 2001-2002 regulatory year. 66 FR 33743 (6/25/01). 

  • FWS and the U.S. Forest Service announced the Federal Subsistence Board's in-season management actions to protect chinook and chum salmon escapement in the Kuskokwim River drainage and chinook and summer-run chum salmon escapement in the Yukon River drainage. 66 FR 33642 (6/25/01).

  • FWS will reintroduce whooping cranes into historic habitat in the eastern United States with the intent to establish a migratory flock that would summer and breed in Wisconsin and winter in west-central Florida, and designated this reintroduced population as a nonessential experimental population under the ESA. 66 FR 33903 (6/26/01).

red bar graphic  ENFORCEMENT:



  • EPA announced that it is seeking comment on its draft Annual Compliance Assistance Activity Plan Inventory for fiscal year 2002. 66 FR 34190 (6/27/01).

red bar graphic  HAZARDOUS AND SOLID WASTES:



  • EPA entered into a proposed settlement for response costs under CERCLA §122(h)(1) in connection with the Divex site in Columbia, South Carolina. 66 FR 33684 (6/25/01). 

  • EPA entered into a proposed administrative settlement under CERCLA §122(h) in connection with the Rocky Flats Industrial Park site in Jefferson County, Colorado. 66 FR 33684 (6/25/01). 

  • EPA entered into a proposed administrative settlement under CERCLA §122(i) in connection with the Shore Refinery site in Kilgore, Texas. 66 FR 34193 (6/27/01).

  • EPA entered into a proposed prospective purchaser agreement under CERCLA in connection with the Motorola 52nd Street Superfund site in Phoenix, Arizona. 66 FR 34192 (6/27/01).

  • EPA promulgated a site-specific treatment variance from the land disposal restriction standards for wastewater treatment sludge generated at the Dupont Environmental Treatment--Chambers Works Wastewater Treatment Plant in Deepwater, New Jersey. 66 FR 33887 (6/26/01). 


red bar graphic  PESTICIDES:



  • EPA announced the availability of the guidance document Elimination of Phenol Resistance Testing for Antimicrobial Disinfection and Sanitizer Pesticides. 66 FR 34636 (6/29/01). 

red bar graphic  SMCRA PROGRAM APPROVAL:


red bar graphic  TOXIC SUBSTANCES:



  • EPA announced that it received Nebraska's application seeking approval to administer and enforce training and certification requirements, training program accreditation requirements, and work practice standards for lead-based paint activities in target housing and child-occupied facilities under TSCA §402. 66 FR 33685 (6/25/01). 

red bar graphic  WATER QUALITY:



  • EPA developed and is seeking comment on draft technical guidance for managing nonpoint source pollution from forestry. 66 FR 34190 (6/27/01).

Copyright© 2001, Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D.C. All rights reserved. 

THE CONGRESS
large red bar graphic

red bar graphic  CHAMBER ACTION



  • H.R. 645 (Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation), which would reauthorize the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994, was passed by the House. 147 Cong. Rec. H3470 (daily ed. June 25, 2001). 

  • H.R. 2311 (appropriations; energy and water), which would make appropriations for energy and water development for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, was passed by the House. 147 Cong. Rec. H3817 (daily ed. June 28, 2001).

red bar graphic  COMMITTEE ACTION



  • H.R. 2330 (appropriations; agriculture) was reported by the House Committee on Appropriations. H. Rep. No. 107-116, 147 Cong. Rec. H3711 (daily ed. June 27, 2001). The bill would make appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002.

  • H.R. 2131 (Tropical Forest Conservation Act) was reported by the House Committee on International Relations. H. Rep. No. 107-119, 147 Cong. Rec. H3801 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill would reauthorize the Tropical Forest Conservation Act of 1998 through fiscal year 2004.

red bar graphic  BILLS INTRODUCED



  • S. 1006 (Hagel, R-Neb.) (renewable fuels) would provide for the energy security of the United States and promote environmental quality by enhancing the use of motor vehicle fuels from renewable sources. 146 Cong. Rec. S6008 (daily ed. June 8, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

  • S. 1097 (Thompson, R-Tenn.) (Great Smoky Mountains National Park) would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to issue right-of-way permits for natural gas pipelines within the boundary of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. 147 Cong. Rec. S6862 (daily ed. June 25, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

  • S. 1105 (Thomas, R-Wyo.) (land acquisition) would provide for the expeditious completion of the acquisition of State of Wyoming lands within the boundaries of Grand Teton National Park. 147 Cong. Rec. S6920 (daily ed. June 26, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

  • S. 1125 (McConnel, R-Ky.) (animal conservation) would conserve global bear populations by prohibiting the importation, exportation, and interstate trade of bear viscera and items, products, or substances containing, or labeled or advertised as containing, bear viscera. 147 Cong. Rec. S7083 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.

  • S. 1130 (Craig, R-Idaho) (alternative fuels) would require the Secretary of Energy to develop a plan for a magnetic fusion burning plasma experiment for the purpose of accelerating the scientific understanding and development of fusion as a long term energy source. 147 Cong. Rec. S7083 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

  • S. 1131 (Leahy, D-Vt.) (electric power generation) would promote economically sound modernization of electric power generation capacity in the United States, would establish requirements to improve the combustion heat rate efficiency of fossil fuel-fired electric utility generating units, would reduce emissions of mercury, carbon dioxide, nitrogen, oxides, and sulfur dioxide, would require that all fossil fuel-fired electric utility generating units operating in the United States meet new sources review requirements, would promote the use of clean coal technologies, and would promote alternative energy and clean energy sources such as solar, wind, biomass, and fuel cells. 147 Cong. Rec. S7083 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Finance.

  • S. 1136 (Sarbanes, D-Md.) (mass transportation; public lands) would provide for mass transportation in certain federally owned or managed areas that are open to the general public. 147 Cong. Rec. S7084 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

  • S. 1137 (Harkin, D-Iowa) (water resources) would direct the Secretary of the Army to convey the remaining water supply storage allocation in Rathbun Lake, Iowa, to the Rathbun Regional Water Association. 147 Cong. Rec. S7084 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. 

  • H.R. 2301 (Doolittle, R-Cal.) (Folsom Dam; federal lands) would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to construct a bridge on federal land west of and adjacent to Folsom Dam in California. 147 Cong. Rec. H3518 (daily ed. June 25, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources.

  • H.R. 2306 (Norton, D-D.C.) (CWA) would amend the CWA to increase the federal share of the cost of constructing treatment works in the District of Columbia. 147 Cong. Rec. H3518 (daily ed. June 25, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. 

  • H.R. 2318 (Pallone, D-N.J.) (offshore drilling) would amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to permanently prohibit the conduct of offshore drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf in the Mid-Atlantic and North Atlantic planning areas. 147 Cong. Rec. H3618 (daily ed. June 26, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources.

  • H.R. 2323 (Whitfield, R-Ky.) (electricity) would authorize DOE programs to develop and implement an accelerated research and development program for advanced clean coal technologies for use in coal-based electricity generating facilities and would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide financial incentives to encourage new construction and the retrofitting, repowering, or replacement of coal-based electricity generating facilities to protect the environment and improve efficiency and encourage the early commercial application of advanced clean coal technologies. 147 Cong. Rec. H3618 (daily ed. June 26, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Science.

  • H.R. 2324 (Woolsey, D-Cal.) (renewable energy) would establish a balanced energy program for the United States that unlocks the potential of renewable energy and energy efficiency. 147 Cong. Rec. H3618 (daily ed. June 16, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Science.

  • H.R. 2358 (Bartlett, R-Md.) (appropriations; energy) would authorize appropriations for environmental research and development, scientific and energy research, development, and demonstration, and commercial application of energy technology bioenergy programs, projects, and activities of the DOE. 147 Cong. Rec. H3801 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Science.

  • H.R. 2365 (Costello, D-Ill.) (clean coal technologies) would authorize DOE programs to develop and implement an accelerated research and development program for advanced clean coal technologies for use in coal-based electricity generating facilities, so as to allow coal to help meet the growing need of the United States for the generation of clean, reliable, and affordable electricity. 147 Cong. Rec. H3802 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Science.

  • H.R. 2371 (Baldacci, D-Me.) (land conveyance) would authorize the transfer and conveyance of real property at the Naval Security Group Activity, Winter Harbor, Maine. 147 Cong. Rec. H3802 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Armed Services. 

  • H.R. 2372 (Boswell, D-Iowa) (water resources) would direct the Secretary of the Army to convey the remaining water supply storage allocation in Rathbun Lake, Iowa, to the Rathbun Regional Water Association. 147 Cong. Rec. H3802 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. 

  • H.R. 2373 (Brady, R-Tex.) (regulatory reform) would provide for the periodic review of the efficiency and public need for federal agencies and would establish a Commission for the purpose of reviewing the efficiency and public need of such agencies, and would provide for the abolishment of agencies for which a public need does not exist. 147 Cong. Rec. H3802 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Government Reform. 

  • H.R. 2375 (McHugh, R-N.Y.) (land conservation; agriculture) would promote the conservation and preservation of working farms, ranches, and private forests. 147 Cong. Rec. H3803 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Agriculture.

  • H.R. 2376 (Capps, D-Cal.) (fisheries) would expedite relief provided under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act for the commercial fishery failure in the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery, and would improve fishery management and enforcement in that fishery. 147 Cong. Rec. H3803 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committees on Resources, Ways and Means, and Armed Services.

  • H.R. 2385 (Hansen, R-Utah) (land conveyance) would convey certain property to the city of St. George, Utah, in order to provide for the protection and preservation of certain rare paleontological resources on that property. 147 Cong. Rec. H3803 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources. 

  • H.R. 2386 (Hansen, R-Utah) (federal lands) would establish terms and conditions for use of certain federal lands by outfitters and to facilitate public opportunities for the recreational use and enjoyment of such lands. 147 Cong. Rec. H3803 (daily ed. June 28, 2000). The bill was referred to the Committees on Resources, and Agriculture.

  • H.R. 2388 (Hefley, R-Colo.) (national heritage areas) would establish the criteria and mechanism for the designation and support of national heritage areas. 147 Cong. Rec. H3803 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources. 

  • H.R. 2389 (Herger, R-Cal.) (ESA) would provide for the compensation of persons of the Klamath Basin who were economically harmed as a result of the implementation of the ESA. 147 Cong. Rec. H3803 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

  • H.R. 2392 (Inslee, D-Wash.) (alternative energy) would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide, expand, or extend tax incentives for renewable and alternative electric energy, alternative fuels and alternative fuel vehicles, energy efficiency and conservation, and demand management and distributive energy generation. 147 Cong. Rec. H3803 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

  • H.R. 2393 (Israel, D-N.Y.) (energy conservation) would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow individuals a credit against income tax for energy conservation expenditures in residences and for purchases of energy efficient appliances. 147 Cong. Rec. H3803 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

  • H.R. 2404 (Miller, D-Cal.) (water resources) would authorize federal agency participation and financial assistance for programs and for infrastructure improvements for the purposes of increasing deliverable water supplies, conserving water and energy, restoring ecosystems, and enhancing environmental quality in California. 147 Cong. Rec. H3804 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources. 

  • H.R. 2408 (Osborne, R-Neb.) (Native American lands) would provide equitable compensation to the Yankton Sioux Tribe of South Dakota and the Santee Sioux Tribe of Nebraska for the loss of value of certain lands. 147 Cong. Rec. H3804 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources. 

  • H.R. 2409 (Otter, R-Idaho) (ESA) would amend the ESA to vest in the Secretary of the Interior functions under that Act with respect to species of fish that spawn in fresh or estuarine waters and migrate to ocean waters, and species of fish that spawn in ocean waters and migrate to fresh waters. 147 Cong. Rec. H3804 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources. 

  • H.R. 2412 (Rahall, D-W. Va.) (Native American lands; energy development) would establish programs to improve energy development on Native American lands. 147 Cong. Rec. H3804 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committees on Resources, Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, Financial Services, and Agriculture. 

  • H.R. 2418 (Shimkus, R-Ill.) (energy) would amend title X of the Energy Policy Act of 1992. 147 Cong. Rec. H3804 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

  • H.R. 2423 (Thune, R-S.D.) (motor vehicles) would provide for the energy security of the United States and promote environmental quality by enhancing the use of motor vehicle fuels from renewable sources. 147 Cong. Rec. H3805 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

  • H.R. 2431 (Watkins, R-Okla.) (electric utilities) would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that certain amounts received by electric energy, gas, or steam utilities shall be excluded from gross income as contributions to capital. 147 Cong. Rec. H3805 (daily ed. June 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.  

Copyright© 2001, Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D.C. All rights reserved. 

IN THE STATES
large red bar graphic


red bar graphic ALABAMA


Dept. of Envtl. Management


Public Notices–Permit Applications 



Daily Ozone Forecast



Jefferson County Dept. of Health


Daily Air Quality Index


red bar graphic ALASKA


Dept. of Envtl. Conservation


Proposed Regulations-Administrative Procedures Regulations,18 AAC 15



Proposed Regulations-Alaska Clean Water and Drinking Water Revolving Loan Fund
Regulations, 18 AAC 76


red bar graphic ARIZONA


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


ADEQ Air Quality Exceptional and Natural Events Policy PM10 Best Available Control Measures List



Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-Emission Banking



 




Safe Drinking Water Workshops Announced



Drinking Water-Monitoring Assistance Program Current, Proposed Fees



Development of an Aquifer Water Quality Standard for Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE)



Opening of Rulemaking Docket-Drinking Water



  • Purpose of rulemaking is to address statutory changes that will continue the monitoring assistance program until Jan. 1, 2005, and make several changes related to uses of program funds. See http://www.sosaz.com/aar/2001/11/docket.pdf

Superfund Program-Proposed Registry Inclusions, Prospective Purchaser Agreements



Proposed Corrective Action-Remediation of Contaminated Soil/Groundwater



Current Air Quality Readings/Forecasts


red bar graphic CALIFORNIA


Air Resources Board


Notice of Public Hearing to Consider Approval of a Revision to the Ozone SIP for the San Francisco Bay Area



2001 Version of the California Air Pollution Control Laws ("Bluebook")



45-Day Notice of Public Hearing--Adoption of Emission Standards and Test Procedures for New 2003 and Later Spark-Ignition Inboard and Sterndrive Marine Engines



45-Day Notice of Public Hearing--Adoption of Proposed Asbestos Airborne Toxic Control Measure (ACTM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations



Public Consultation Meetings Regarding Distributed Generation



Regulatory and Non-Regulatory Fuel Activities for 2001



Dept. of Toxic Substances Control


CLEAN and ISCP Loan Programs--45-Day Public Notice and Comment Period



Guidance Document Availability



Draft Public Participation Policy Manual



Public Notices



Integrated Waste Management Board


Proposed Regulations-Insurance as a Financial Assurance Demonstration



  • Proposed regulatory amendments of two related financial assurance demonstration requirements under the general term of "insurance." The Board held a public hearing at their regularly scheduled meeting on May 22.  Following the hearing, the Board directed staff to initiate an extended 15-day comment period to allow for review of minor revisions to the regulations and additional stakeholder input. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/Insuranc/

Emergency Regulations-Putrescible Waste Transfer/Processing



  • Board adopted emergency regulations for the transfer/processing of putrescible waste. Previous regulations provided that if an activity only receives material that has been separated for reuse prior to receipt, and the residual amount of solid waste in this material is less than 10% of the amount separated for reuse material received by weight, it is not subject to the Board’s transfer/processing operation and facility regulations. The emergency regulations clarify that all "putrescible waste" received as separated for reuse material counts toward the "residual" amount. Activities that receive materials with a residual amount equal to or greater than 10% will be subject to the Board’s transfer/processing operation and facility regulations. Following this action, the Board received feedback from parties concerned about the potential impacts of the emergency regulations. In response to the feedback, staff brought the regulations back to the Board for re-evaluation and discussion of the issues at its Apr. 24-25 meeting. The Board directed staff to make changes to the regulations and then submit to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) with a request for a delayed effective date (length to be determined) as an emergency rulemaking. Staff is currently preparing the file for submittal to the OAL.

Final Regulations-Enforcement and Compliance Procedures



Proposed Regulations-Waste Tires



  • The Board initiated a 45-day comment period to address revisions to the waste tire regulations. Assembly Bill (AB) 1843 established the waste tire program and required the Board to adopt emergency and final regulations for permitting of waste tire storage facilities. The Board adopted emergency regulations on June 26, 1991, and final regulations on Aug. 25, 1993. On May 9, 1996, the Board’s Waste Tire Hauler Regulations became effective pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 744. On Jan. 29, 1998, the Board adopted emergency regulations to remove certain exclusions from the regulations regarding who needs to acquire a waste tire facility permit. These emergency regulations became final this past year. AB 117 was signed into law in 1998 requiring the Board to prepare a report to the legislature on the current waste tire program and to make recommendations by June 30, 1999, for needed changes. The Board adopted the final version of the report "California Waste Tire Program Evaluation and Recommendations" (Tire Report) at its June 22, 1999, meeting. Since the passage of AB 1843 and SB 744, the Board has been regulating the storage, disposal, and hauling of waste tires. This last year SB 876 was passed by the Legislature to make changes to the tire management statutes in order to better serve the regulated community and to protect public health and safety and the environment. The Board staff has proposed changes in the existing regulations to implement, interpret, and make specific the provisions of SB 876, as well as implementing certain recommendations from the AB 117 Tire Report. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/RuleArchive/2000/Exclusions/

Proposed Regulations-Withdrawal of Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) Designation



  • These regulations establish a procedure for local governing body withdrawal of LEA designation, Board withdrawal of LEA designation approval, partial or full decertification, or temporary suspension of certification. The Permitting and Enforcement Committee approved these draft regulations in July 1998 for public notice. As a result of comments received after the Permitting and Enforcement Committee action the Board did not initiate a public comment period. Revised text is currently under development. The Board discussed the revised text at its Mar. 20-21, 2001, meeting. The Board approved the regulations for a 45-day comment period at its Apr. 24-25, 2001, meeting. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/leadsign/

Proposed Regulations-Nonhazardous, Nonputrescible, Industrial Waste



  • These regulations set permitting and operational standards for hazardous waste disposal facilities that accept for disposal certain nonhazardous, nonputrescible, industrial solid wastes within a hazardous waste management unit. OAL approved emergency regulations July 31, 2000. The emergency regulations became effective on Oct. 1, 2000. OAL approved an extension through May 30, 2001. Board staff has initiated the process to adopt permanent regulations. The Board conducted a public workshop on Jan. 17, 2001, to discuss the proposed permanent regulations. At its March 20-21 meeting, the Board approved the proposed permanent regulations to be noticed for 45-day public comment period. Staff is currently preparing the regulation package for noticing. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/nonhaz/

Proposed Regulations-Compostable Materials



  • Placement of solid waste facilities and operations that handle compostable materials (green material--not composted, woody material--not composted) into regulatory tiers, development of minimum standards, and adjustment of existing regulations to accommodate the above placement. Public workshops in Sept. 1999 were focused on odor monitoring and enforcement at compostable materials handling sites, as well as on regulatory concepts for the revision of the composting regulations. From early July through early Aug. 2000, in eight venues throughout the state, the Board held workshops to discuss proposed changes to the regulations. Staff analyzed the information gathered at the workshops and revised the draft regulations accordingly. In Dec. 2000, Board staff solicited feedback from an external working group and in January 2001, revised the regulations based on this feedback. The Board discussed issues related this package at its Feb. 20-22, 2001, meeting. The Board will consider approval of the regulations for a 45-day public comment period at its June 19-20 meeting. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/organics/default.htm

Proposed Regulations-Tire Monofills



  • Staff is currently working on the permitting of tire monofills under the solid waste regulations. Staff distributed draft regulations for comment on Mar. 7. The Board held a public workshop on Mar. 12 to discuss the draft regulations. The Board approved the regulations for a 45-day public comment period at its May 22-23 meeting. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/Monofill/

Proposed Regulations-Grants-Use of Recycled Material



  • Playground Safety and Recycling Act Grants proposal. These regulations would implement the provisions of the Playground Safety and Recycling Act Grant Program relating to the award of grants to local public agencies and local public educational agencies to upgrade, repair, refurbish, install, or replace public playground facilities to prevent childhood injuries on public playgrounds while developing a market for recycled materials suitable for use in public playgrounds. The regulations will provide guidance to Board staff and to grant applicants in the administration of the grant program. Emergency Regulations for the Playground Safety and Recycling Act Grant Program, adopted by the Board at its Apr. 18-19, 2000, meeting have been extended and are currently in effect. After directing staff to make some minor modifications to the proposed final rule, the Board at its Apr. 24-25, 2001, meeting (agenda item 38) approved the proposed permanent regulations to be noticed for a 45-day public comment period. Staff anticipates that the proposed permanent regulations will be published in the California Regulatory Notice Register in June or July. 

Water Resources Control Board


July 3 Board Workshop Agenda



Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Development Public Notices, Drafts



Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment


Prioritization of Toxic Air Contaminants; Children's Environmental Health Protection Act



  • A revised version of the document "Prioritization of Toxic Air Contaminants Under the Children's Environmental Health Protection Act" is available at http://www.oehha.ca.gov/air/toxic_contaminants/SB25post.html This is the revised draft Scientific Review Panel (SRP) Review Draft. It contains revisions to the Introduction section in response to public comment and comments by the Scientific Review Panel. In addition, 6 of the original 10 summaries have also been revised, also in response to public comment and comments from the SRP. The revised summaries include those for acrolein, diesel exhaust particulate, polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans and  PCBs (all in one summary), formaldehyde, lead, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. In addition, the original versions of the summaries for benzene, glycol ethers, mercury, and vinyl chloride are included. 

Proposed Regulations



  • Amendment to §12705, Specific Regulatory Levels Posing No Significant Risk.

  • Amendment to §12805, Specific Regulatory Levels, Reproductive Toxicants.

See http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/law/Notrev53101.html


Chemical Listing



Request for Information on Cyclohexanol (CAS No. 108-93-0) 2,4-DP (CAS No. 120-36-5), Listed Chemicals to be Considered by OEHHA's Science Advisory Board's Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant (DART) Identification Committee for Possible Removal from the List



South Coast Air Quality Management District


Proposed Regulations-Amended Rule 1122–Solvent Degreasers



  • SCAQMD Rule 1122 – Solvent Degreasers, currently establishes volatile organic compound (VOC) emission reduction requirements for batch-loaded cold cleaners, open-top vapor degreasers, all types of conveyorized degreasers, and air-tight and airless cleaning systems that carry out solvent degreasing operations with a solvent containing VOCs. Solvent degreasing operations that are regulated by this rule include, but not limited to, the removal of contaminants from parts, products, tools, machinery, and equipment.

    The primary changes to Rule 1122 are summarized as follows:

    1. Modify rule applicability to include NESHAP halogenated solvent cleaners, such as methylene chloride, carbon tetrachloride, perchloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, and chloroform;

    2. Lower the material VOC limit for cold cleaners from 50 grams/liter to 25 grams/liter by 2003;

    3. Require stricter controls on the the use of NESHAP halogenated solvents and VOCs in solvent degreasing operations by 2003;

    4. Delay compliance date for cleaning of satellite/space vehicle components to year 2006;

    5. Additional reporting requirement for certain facilities;

    6. Add prohibition on the use of HCFC-141b (1,1-dichloro-1-fluoroethane);

    7. Clarify the rule exemption criteria; and

    8. Add exemption for motion picture film cleaning equipment and cleaning of stereolithography equipment and models, medical devices, and flip chips. Workshop meeting July 11. See http://www.aqmd.gov/pub_edu/notice_r1122_2.html 

Informational workshops for the 2000-2001 Annual Emissions Reporting Program


red bar graphic COLORADO


Air Quality Control Commission


Proposed Regulations-Regulation No.1, Particulates, Smokes, Carbon Monoxide, and Sulfur Oxides



  • Proposal would delete provisions concerning coal fired utility boilers and remove uncertainties and confusion in the regulation; make revisions throughout the regulation to conform it with the credible evidence provisions adopted by the Commission into the Common Provisions Regulation in Apr. 2001; make revisions to clarify that the agricultural exemption does not include the open burning of animal parts and carcasses; add language to provide for the burning of animal parts and carcasses in a public health emergency proclaimed by the state (the Commission will consider what state agencies may proclaim such an emergency); delete provisions concerning livestock confinement operations; clarify that allowable emissions are summed using pounds per hour (because it is not possible to sum the pounds per million British thermal units); delete provisions concerning Alfalfa Dehydrating Plant Drums and provisions pertaining to Wigwam Burners; delete provisions addressing Static Firing of Pershing Missiles at Pueblo Army Depot; delete some provisions pertaining to Emission Standards for Existing Iron and Steel Plant Operations; and delete special regulations for refinery fluid bed catalytic cracking units in carbon monoxide nonattainment areas. The Commission will also consider making revisions to the regulation to address concerns of U.S. EPA regarding the opacity exemption at the Fort Carson Army Station and the deletion of provisions regarding the regulation of activities pertaining to oil shale. Hearing Aug. 16. See http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/op/reg1_08_01.htm

Public Hearing-Requested Reopening of Operating Permit 



Water Quality Control Commission


July 9-10 Agenda



Proposed Regulations



  • Hearing July 9: Supplemental Hearing Notice. For consideration of the adoption of revised water quality classifications, standards, and designations for multiple segments in the San Juan and Dolores River Basins, Regulation #34 (5 CCR 1002-34), the Gunnison and Lower Dolores River Basins, Regulation #35 (5 CCR 1002-35), and the Lower Colorado River Basin, Regulation #37 (5 CCR 1002-37). The original notice for this rulemaking, dated Nov. 22, 2000, called for a Mar. 12, 2001, rulemaking hearing. Since that time, the Commission has decided to bifurcate and reschedule the hearing on the issues to be considered. See http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/op/wqcc/0107lowercolo2.pdf 

red bar graphic CONNECTICUT


Dept. of Envtl. Protection


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-Proposed Revisions to State Implementation Plan for Ozone



Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste Management




  • Proposal would add two sections-the U.S. EPA universal waste rule and EPA standards for the management of used oil. The universal waste rule establishes management requirements for batteries, thermostats, pesticides, and lamps. This rule will facilitate the recycling of these wastes and help in removing them from the solid waste stream. The used oil management standards establish modified requirements for used oil generators, transporters, processors, re-refiners, burners, and marketers. Public hearing July 19, comments due July 24. See http://dep.state.ct.us/wst/hw/hwregs.htm


Permit Hearings-Calendar


red bar graphic DELAWARE


Dept. of Nat. Resources and Envtl. Control


Notices of Violation



Regulatory Update/Public Notices


red bar graphic FLORIDA


Dept. of Environmental Protection


DEP Secretary Signs First Bond Sale of Florida Forever Program



Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP) Plan



Perpetual Conservation Easement In Green Swamp Area Approved 



Public Meeting-Permit Application




  • July 9, in Eustis; to accept public comments and provide status of Department’s Intent to Issue an Air Construction Permit to Duke Energy Lake, LLC (an affiliate of Duke Energy of North America), to construct a nominal 640 megawatt simple cycle electrical power generating plant at to be located approximately 5 miles east of Eustis on State Road 44 in Sorrento, Lake County. The permitting action is subject to the Department’s rules for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality (PSD) and Best Available Control Technology (BACT).


South Florida Water Management District



Lake Okeechobee Sediment Management  Feasibility Study



  • July 19 meeting, the second in a series of four public/interagency meetings being held to solicit input on the Development of Alternatives–the second task of the Lake Okeechobee Sediment Management Feasibility Study. The District has developed a draft document that presents an array of technologies and sediment management alternatives that could be used to address the internal phosphorus loading in Lake Okeechobee. The meeting will focus on the District’s selection of alternatives. 

red bar graphic GEORGIA


Dept. of Natural Resources, Envtl. Protection Division


Permitting of Gas-Fired Power Plants



  • EPD Director Harold Reheis said that a suspension of review of applications for new projects, begun in May and prompted by a significant increase in the number of applications, was ongoing, but that a new strategy for review was being devised and that EPD intends to "be sure that its environmental decisions will be helpful in meeting the electricity needs of Georgians." 

Air Permit Applications


red bar graphic HAWAII


Office of Envtl. Quality Control


Air Quality-Permit Applications



Environmental Impact Notices


red bar graphic IDAHO


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Outstanding Resource Waters-Petitions



Pending Permit Applications


red bar graphic ILLINOIS


Pollution Control Board (PCB)


Proposed Regulations





  • The PCB is considering a proposal by IEPA to update and clarify rules and to make some substantive changes to the Site Remediation Program (SRP). Hearings have been held concerning In the Matter of: Site Remediation Program: Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 740 (R01-27). The Board is also considering a proposal submitted by Citizens for a Better Environment (R01-29), which has been consolidated with R01-027. In R01-27 there are two proposed substantive changes to the SRP. The first is establishment of "soil management zones" that would be used for on-site placement of contaminated soils for structural fill or land reclamation, consolidation of contaminated soils within the remediation site, and removal and re-deposit of contaminated soils following on-site treatment. The second change would require that chemical analyses of soil and groundwater samples be performed by accredited laboratories. In R01-29 the Citizens for a Better Environment are calling for additional public hearing, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements on all SRP sites intended to be used as schools. The original proposal would have applied to all SRP sites intended to be used as a school, playground, or public park, however, it was amended following questions at the first public hearing. The Board tentatively plans to move these rulemakings to first notice in the coming months. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/RULES/R01-027/HearingRecords.htm and http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/RULES/R01-029/HearingRecords.htm.  



  • In the Matter of: Proposed Regulated Recharge Area for Pleasant Valley Public Water District, Proposed Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 617–The Board June 7 adopted a second notice opinion and order in this rulemaking to amend the Board’s public water supply regulations to establish the first regulated recharge area under section 17.3 of the Act (415 ILCS 5/17.3 (2000)). See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Meeting/minutes.htm



  • In the Matter of: Proposed Amendments to Tiered Approach to Corrective Action Objectives: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 742–The Board June 7 adopted a second notice opinion and order in this matter to amend the standards for tiered approach to corrective action objectives (35 Ill. Adm. Code 742). (See also order creating R00-19(C)). See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Meeting/minutes.htm 



  • In the Matter of: Proposed Amendments to Tiered Approach to Corrective Action Objectives
    (TACO) (35 Ill. Adm. Code 742)–The Board on its own motion on June 7 created a third sub-docket. In
    sub-docket R00-19(C), the Board will address the Illinois EPA proposal add clean up standards for methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE). See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Meeting/minutes.htm 



  • Proposed revisions to the nondegradation rules (In the Matter of: Revisions to Antidegradation Rules: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.105, 303.205, 303.206 and 106.990-106.995). The proposed revisions are part of the triennial water quality standards review. Included in the proposal is changing the rules’ name to Antidegradation to conform with federal rules. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/RULES/R01-013/HearingRecords.htm and   http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/RULES/106prop.pdf 



  • In the Matter of: Wastewater Pretreatment Update, USEPA Amendments (July 1, 2000 through Dec. 31, 2000). Proposal for Public Comments adopted May 17, 2001; Illinois Register publication June 1, 2001.   



  • Proposed amendments to UST regulations. The amendments that the agency is proposing are intended primarily to clarify and refine certain provisions, taking into account the experience the agency has gained in administering the UST Program and changes in the law since its adoption. Included in the proposed amendments is the addition of MTBE as an indicator contaminant in gasoline in response to increased national health concerns. The Agency is proposing to recognize the role of licensed professional geologists in UST site evaluations. It is also proposing to let only accredited laboratories perform quantitative analyses of samples for use in UST remediation projects. Second hearing was Apr. 3. In the Matter of: Amendments to Regulation of Petroleum Leaking Underground Storage Tanks: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 732. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/RULES/R01-026/Agency_Proposal.pdf 



Open Regulatory Dockets



Envtl. Protection Agency


Permit Application/Public Hearings



 



red bar graphic  INDIANA


Dept. of Envtl. Management


Proposed Regulations-Indiana Scoring Model



  • Amends 329 IAC 7-2-6, 329 IAC 7-11-1, 329 IAC 7-11-2, 329 IAC 7-11-3 with a new maximum score of 10 to be eligible for deletion from the Commissioner's Bulletin and adds designations that can be attained for consideration for deletion. Senate Enrolled Act 360-1997 required rules be adopted by the solid waste management board to amend 329 IAC 7 concerning the Indiana Scoring Model and assessment of hazardous substance response sites and determine a maximum score to allow sites that either have been the subject of a successful remediation or score at or below the maximum score to be removed from the priority ranking if appropriate. A procedure for deleting a listed site from the priority ranking and a maximum score was established by LSA #98-110(F), which was effective Nov. 27, 1998. A maximum score of 5 was established. The procedures allowed for either a site to petition for deletion or for IDEM to initiate deletion of a site. After consideration of all sites on the list, it was determined by IDEM that this maximum score is inadequate to appropriately delete all the sites that have been the subject of a successful remediation. There are sites that pose no risk to human health or the environment but still accrue a score greater than 5. IDEM would like to again examine the maximum score for a site to be removed from the priority ranking and, in addition, the Department would also like to consider criteria or other approvals (designations) to be applied to a remediated site to determine appropriateness for that site to be deleted from the list. Public hearing Aug. 21.

Proposed Regulations-Drinking Water



  • IDEM is soliciting public comment on a new rule concerning the operation of water treatment plants and water distribution systems for public drinking water systems. Comments were due June 30. 

Proposed Regulations-Wastewater Management



  • IDEM has developed draft rule language for new rules concerning management of wastewater. Cleaning of sewage disposal systems, wastewater transportation, wastewater disposal, and related business activities are included in the scope of the draft rules. The new article, 327 IAC 7.1, will replace 327 IAC 7. The new rule language will allow the agency to meet the requirements of 40 C.F.R. pt. 503 and 40 C.F.R. pt. 257 subpt. A regarding the land application of wastewater. By this notice, IDEM is soliciting public comment on the draft rule language. IDEM seeks comment on the affected citations listed and any other provisions of Title 327 that may be affected by this rulemaking. To reflect the new rules, IDEM will be repealing 327 IAC 7. See http://www.in.gov/legislative/register/Vol24/09Jun/11ID327970007.pdf

Proposed Regulations-USTs



  • IDEM is soliciting public comment on amendments to rules at 329 IAC 9 concerning underground storage tanks. This rule will clarify language in the existing rule without adding new requirements. Several new definitions may be added such as "underground storage tank," "piping run," and "temporary closure." This rule will also consider appropriate changes to make the rule consistent with IC 13-12-3-2 that allows cleanup programs and remediation programs to use either standard default options or a risk assessment (risk-based) approach for determining cleanup levels and methods for cleanups. IDEM seeks comments on the affected citations listed and any other provisions of Title 329 that may be affected by this rulemaking. 

See http://www.in.gov/legislative/register/June-1-2001.html


Pending Permit Applications


red bar graphic  IOWA


Dept. of Natural Resources-Envtl. Protection Commission


Final Regulations-Solid Waste Management



Final Regulations-Changes in the Applicator Certification Program; Gravity Unloading of Above Ground Manure Storage; and Technical Changes to Chapter 65



Final Regulations-Air Quality



Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-General Permits




  • Proposed general permits or permits by rule for hot mix asphalt facilities, concrete batch plants, and aggregate processing plants. These amendments, which are proposed in response to a petition for rulemaking, incorporate three new permits by rule into Chapter 22, Iowa Admin. Code, and allow an eligible facility to seek permit–by–rule coverage in lieu of obtaining an individual construction permit. Permits by rule are proposed for hot mix asphalt facilities, concrete batch plants, and aggregate processing plants. Item 1 adds definitions for the following: aggregate processing plant; concrete batch plant; construction aggregate; hot mix asphalt; hot mix asphalt facility; and Portland concrete. Item 2 identifies the new forms to be used for each permit by rule contained in this Notice. These include three separate forms to be used to notify the Department that a hot mix asphalt facility, concrete batch plant, or aggregate processing plant is covered by a respective permit by rule and a fourth form to be used to notify the Department of the relocation of portable facilities, which is a condition of construction permit or permit–by–rule coverage. Item 3 clarifies that coverage under a permit by rule would satisfy the requirement for a permit. The current language implies that a permit must be obtained and does not address permit coverage under a permit by rule. Item 4 modifies the introductory language for the existing permit by rule for spray booths to make it consistent with the other permits by rule. The existing language is misleading with regard to the need for an operating permit and major source status. The revised language clarifies that the permit by rule may be used to satisfy construction permitting requirements. Item 5 proposes new subrules which contain the permits by rule for hot mix asphalt facilities, concrete batch plants, and aggregate processing plants. The subrules identify who is eligible for coverage under the permit by rule and describe the notification process to the Department. The subrules also include eligibility requirements pertaining to coverage under a permit by rule. These eligibility requirements include operating permit conditions, emission limits, recordkeeping requirements, and material limits. Public hearing July 19, comments due July 27. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/acb010613.html


Proposed Regulations-Animal Feeding Operations




  • Would amend Chapter 65, “Animal Feeding Operations,” Iowa Admin.Code. This amendment would impose a deadline to qualify for the exception allowing an owner of a confinement feeding operation to remove and apply manure from a manure storage structure in accordance with a manure management plan that has been submitted but not yet approved by DNR. Under this proposed amendment, manure management plans must be submitted to DNR prior to August 21, 2001, to qualify for the exception; manure management plans submitted on or after that date would have to be approved by the DNR before manure could be removed from a manure storage structure. Hearing July 3; comments due same date. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/acb010613.html


Proposed Regulations-Solid Waste Disposal




  • Amends Chapter 102, “Permits,” Iowa Admin. Code. Iowa Code section 455B.306(6)“d” requires sanitary disposal projects to file an Emergency Response and Remedial Action Plan in conjunction with the issuance, renewal, or reissuance of a permit for a sanitary disposal project. That provision of the Iowa Code has not previously been implemented. The proposed amendment provides guidance and direction on development of an Emergency Response and Remedial Action Plan. The technical committee of the Iowa Society of Solid Waste Operations provided assistance in development of the proposed rule. Hearing July 5; comments due same date. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/acb010613.html

red bar graphic KANSAS


Department of Health & Environment, Division of Environment


KDHE "Kansas Environmental News"


red bar graphic KENTUCKY


Dept. for Envtl. Protection, Division of Air Quality


Permit Applications/Hearing Notices 



Dept. for Envtl. Protection, Division of Water


Proposed Regulations-401 KAR 5:074 concerning concentrated animal feeding operations



Permit Applications  



Proposed, Draft TMDLs


red bar graphic LOUISIANA


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Final Regulations-Waste Tire Management



Denial of Petition for Rulemaking to List Characteristically Hazardous Waste as Universal Waste 



Permit Applications



Proposed Settlement Agreement


red bar graphic MAINE


Dept. of Envtl. Protection


Proposed Regulations-Siting and Operation of Road Salt and Sand-Salt Storage Areas




  • This rule describes the registration, siting and operational requirements that new sand/salt storage areas and
    some existing state and private sand/salt storage areas must meet in order to be exempt from having to obtain a waste discharge license. The rule also exempts sand/salt piles less than 30 cubic yards in size, establishes a compliance date for existing sites, and describes guidelines for granting a variance from the siting and/or operational requirements of the rule. Comments due July 31; public hearing July 19. See http://www.state.me.us/sos/cec/rcn/apa/notices/062701.htm 

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-Solid Waste Management



Final Guidance Document-Solid Waste Management




  • Interim Risk-Evaluation Guidance Document for Solid Waste Facility Site Assignment
    and Permitting in Support of 310 CMR 16 & 19.000. See http://www.state.ma.us/dep/new.htm 


Enforcement Actions


red bar graphic  MICHIGAN


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Permitting Calendar  



Draft TMDL



 



  • Draft Huron River (Geddes Pond) Pathogen TMDL available for comment. This water body was included in Michigan’s Year 2000 §303(d) list due to elevated E. coli levels. The TMDL is being developed to identify the necessary pathogen reductions to meet water quality standards. Comments on the TMDL may be submitted to Christine Thelen, Michigan DEQ, Surface Water Quality Division, P.O. Box 30273, Lansing, Michigan 48909-7773, by July 18. Copies of the draft report and list are available through Laura Smith at 517-335-4184, E-mail at smithla3@state.mi.us, or on the MDEQ Web Site, at http://www.deq.state.mi.us/swq/gleas/gleas.htm Information contact: Christine Thelen, Surface Water Quality Division, 517-373-6794, or E-mail at thelencf@state.mi.us


Permit Applications-Air Quality



Proposed Enforcement Consent Orders



Air Quality Division Newsletter



Surface Water Quality Division Bulletin


red bar graphic MINNESOTA


Pollution Control Agency


Proposed Regulations-Water Quality-Intent to Reissue NPDES and SDS General Permit for
Metal Finishing Pretreatment



Proposed Regulations-Water Quality-Intent to Reissue General NPDES and SDS Permit for Activities
Conducted At Sand And Gravel Mines, Rock Quarries And Hot Mix Asphalt Plants 



Permit Applications, Other Notices


red bar graphic  MISSOURI


Dept. of Natural Resources




Emergency Regulation-Drinking Water-Grants




  • 10 CSR 60-13.010 Grants for Public Water Supply Districts and Small Municipal Water Supply Systems. DNR has added criteria for providing grants for source water protection under the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP). Applicants for this funding must have a Department-approved source water protection program. It adopts criteria for making grant money available for rental enhancement grant payments under the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP). These grants will help local political subdivisions provide better protection of source water used for public drinking water. The grants will be used to compensate farmers for taking agricultural land out of production in critical source water protection areas. This will protect public health, safety, and welfare by decreasing sediment, nutrient, and pesticide run-off into water sources used for public drinking water purposes. Money is available for CREP grants in state fiscal year 2001. This emergency amendment is necessary to use the money available for this purpose this fiscal year. See http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/moreg/2001/v26n12/v26n12a.pdf 

Final Regulation-Air Quality-10 CSR 10-2.260 Control of Petroleum Liquid Storage,  Loading, and Transfer



Final Regulation-Air Quality-10 CSR 10-6.040 Reference Methods



Final Regulation-Air Quality-10 CSR 10-6.200 Hospital, Medical, Infectious Waste Incinerators 



Final Regulation-Water Quality-Amended 10 CSR 20-6.011 Fees



Final Regulation-Water Quality-Water Quality Certifications 10 CSR 20-6.060



Final Regulation-Water Quality-10 CSR 20-14.010 Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations; 10 CSR 20-14.020 Certification of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation Waste Management System Operators; 10 CSR 20-14.030 Operator Training




Proposed TMDLs



Water Pollution Control-Permit Applications


red bar graphic MONTANA


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality



Permit Application Public Comment Notices


red bar graphic NEBRASKA


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Proposed Regulations-General


red bar graphic NEW HAMPSHIRE


Dept. of Envtl. Services


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality




  • Env-A 607.01, 704.06, 903.06, 907.03, and 3700: NOx Emissions Reduction Fund. Env-A 3700 is a proposed new chapter titled “NOx Emissions Reduction Fund for NOx-Emitting Generation Sources.” Proposed rule Env-A 704.06 is also a new rule, while the remaining proposed rules are amendments of existing rules. All of the proposals are designed to implement HB 649, codified at RSA 125-J:13 and 14. This law requires those who go off the power grid and install high polluting diesel engine generation sources to submit NOx emission data to the Department and to either reduce NOx emissions or pay a fee. Comments due July 9. See http://www.des.state.nh.us/hearings.htm


Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste



Proposed Regulations-Water Quality-Chapter Env-Ws 1900 Rules for the Protection of Instream Flow on Designated Rivers


red bar graphic NEW JERSEY


Dept. of Envtl. Protection


2002 Water Quality Limited Segments List 




  • DEP is requesting submission of water quality related data to support the development of the 2002 Water Quality Limited Segments List under Section 303(d) of the federal CWA and Subchapter 6 of the New Jersey Watershed Management Planning Rules (N.J.A.C. 7:15-6). The Water Quality Limited Segments List is used to establish priorities for implementation of water quality improvement measures including, as appropriate, development of total maximum daily loads.  Data received through this solicitation may be used to: (1) confirm impairment of a waterbody and/or presence of a pollutant that is currently on the 1998 Water Quality Limited Segments List; (2) delist a waterbody and/or a pollutant that is currently on the 1998 Water Quality Limited Segments List; or (3) list a waterbody and/or a pollutant that is not included on the 1998 Water Quality Limited Segments List. Submit material to DEP, Division of Science, Research and Technology, Water Assessment Team, 1st Floor, 401 East State Street, P.O. Box 409, Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0409.  


Current DEP Bulletin (Permit Applications; Proposed Regulations) 


red bar graphic NEW YORK


Legislature


Electric Generation Facility Modification Permitting Bill Passes; Superfund Reauthorization Does Not



Dept. of Envtl. Conservation


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-Oxygenated Gasoline



  • July 30-31 hearings. The U.S. EPA has promulgated rulemakings removing the requirement that oxygenated gasoline be used in both the New York City Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area and the Syracuse Metropolitan Statistical Area during winter months. Being revised is 6 NYCRR, Subpart 225-3, Fuel Composition and Use-Gasoline. Part 200, General Provisions, will also be revised to reflect the changes to Subpart 225-3. The amendments to Subpart 225-3 remove the requirement that oxygenated gasoline be used in the New York City and Syracuse Metropolitan areas during winter months. The use of oxygenated gasoline is currently required in the State Implementation Plan for carbon monoxide for Onondaga County (CO SIP) as a contingency measure. The CO SIP will be revised to substitute the automobile inspection and maintenance program for the oxygenated fuel requirement. In addition, the ozone SIP is being revised to include a document entitled, "RACM Analysis for the New York Portion of the New York Metropolitan Area Severe Ozone Nonattainment Area." The results of this analysis show that there are no reasonably available control measures to advance the ozone attainment date from 2007 to 2006. 

Draft Regulations-Air Quality-Acid Rain Control



  • DEC released draft acid rain standards. The new draft regulations have been forwarded to the Governor's Office of Regulatory Reform, which will review them with stakeholder groups prior to their formal proposal. Once formally proposed, the public will have at least 45 days to review and comment on the draft regulations. After evaluating all public comments, a final regulation will be sent to the State Environmental Board, which will submit its recommendation on whether to adopt the regulation to the DEC Commissioner. The draft regulations are in response to Governor Pataki's direction to DEC to issue regulations requiring electric generators in the state to further reduce sulfur dioxide emissions by 50% beyond federal CAA requirements by 2007, and to expand summertime NOx controls to year-round in 2003. Under the new regulations, SO2 emissions would be reduced by an additional 130,000 tons annually, and NOx emissions would be reduced by 20,000 tons annually. The rules would require that NOx controls, already in place for most facilities in the summertime ozone season, be used year-round beginning in 2004, and that sulfur dioxide controls be in place by 2008. The compliance dates were extended by one year in order to accommodate the additional investment and construction of control equipment. The draft regulations contain a provision which allows an individual facility a temporary exemption from emission requirements if the State Department of Public Service determines that compliance would imperil the reliability of the New York State electric power system. See http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/press/pressrel/2001-100.html

Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste



  • Proposal to amend regulations contained in pts. 370, 371, 372, 373, 374, and 376 (pt. 370 series) and associated changes to pt. 621 of Title 6 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations (6 NYCRR) of the State of New York. The proposed amendments incorporate federal hazardous waste management regulations promulgated during the period Dec. 5, 1997, through July 6, 1999, into the New York state regulations. In addition, typographical errors and inconsistencies discovered in the regulations compared to federal regulations are corrected. Adoption of many of these federal amendments is necessary for the state to maintain final authorization from the U.S. EPA to administer and enforce NYSDEC's hazardous waste management program in lieu of the federal hazardous waste management program. Adoption of the proposed amendments will also eliminate duplicative state and federal regulations of several hazardous waste management activities. Hearing July 19; comments due July 24. See http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/enb/20010516/not0.html

Division of Water-Draft Consolidated Assessment and Listing Methodology



  • Section 303(d) list development. The Methodology consists of three (3) separate parts. The Monitoring Strategy provides an overview of the NYSDEC water quality monitoring program. The Assessment Methodology details the evaluation of monitoring data and information to determine levels of water quality and use support. And, lastly, the Listing Methodology outlines the identification and prioritization of waters that do not meet water quality standards or support designated uses. Comments due Aug. 17. See http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dow/calm303d.html  

Emergency Regulations-Radioactive Waste



  • Effective May 7; to amend 6 NYCRR Part 380 to regulate the disposal of the radioactive wastes generated by the extraction or concentration of uranium or thorium where such waste is not regulated by the U.S. NRC. This emergency rule was proposed for permanent adoption in the State Register on Nov. 15, 2000. It allows for this rule to be in effect while it goes through the rulemaking process for permanent adoption. The purpose of the rule is to control the disposal of wastes contaminated with the radioactive wastes from the extraction of uranium and thorium from ores. The rule requires that these radioactive wastes be disposed of at facilities authorized to accept radioactive waste, and will effectively exclude them from pt. 360 and pt. 373 landfills, unless a variance to pt. 380 is requested and granted. Variances may be granted for slightly contaminated wastes, if the proposed disposal will have no significant adverse impact on the public health and safety or the environment. This emergency rule will be effective for 60 days from date of filing with Department of State (until July 6, 2001).

ALJ Rulings



Environmental Notice Bulletin (Permit Applications) 



Permit Applications



Coastal Management Program Notices


red bar graphic  NORTH CAROLINA


Dept. of Env't and Natural Resources


Proposed Regulations-Laboratories 



 



  • Proposed amended rules will set forth certification criteria for laboratory facilities performing any tests, analyses, measurements, or monitoring required under G.S. 143, Article 21 or any rules adopted thereunder, and to update the fees for certification. The rules apply to laboratory facilities that perform analyses for persons subject to G.S. 143-215.1, 143-215.63, et seq.; the Environmental Management Commission Rules for Surface Water Monitoring and Reporting (15A NCAC 02B .0500); Groundwater rules (15A NCAC 02L .0100, .0200, and .0300); Waste Not Discharged to Surface waters rules (15A NCAC 02H.0200); Point Source Discharges to the Surface Waters rules (15A NCAC 02H .0100), Local Pretreatment Programs (15A NCAC 02H .0900), and the Underground Storage Tank Program of the Division of Waste Management and will be formally proposed this summer. 


Temporary Regulations-Water Quality-Point Source Discharges



 



  • Effective May 11. These temporary amendments are intended to prevent the Division of Water Quality's permitting rules from being an obstacle to the implementation of emergency measures and procedures that could possibly produce wastewater discharges from emergency decontamination operations. Temporary rulemaking is necessary in order to expedite North Carolina's Foreign Animal Disease Strategic Plan in the event of an emergency as described by G.S. 106-399.4.


Proposed Regulations-Coastal Management; Land Use Planning Guidelines



 



  • In November 1998, the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) authorized the appointment of the Land Use Plan Review Team to evaluate the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) land use planning program and make recommendations for improvement. Based on the recommendations submitted in September 2000, the CRC is revising its land use planning guidelines (Subchapter 07B). The revised guidelines aim to improve the quality of local plans by better supporting the purposes and goals of CAMA. The rules include simple, clear requirements for land use plans, improved land suitability analysis, and management topics to tie land use plans to CAMA goals. Will be formally proposed this summer. 

For information on the preceding three notices, see http://oahnt.oah.state.nc.us/intranet/register/Volume15Issue23.pdf



Proposed TMDL-Neuse River



Division of Air Quality Permit Applications, Hearings



Division of Air Quality Penalty Assessments



DENR Enforcement Data



Water Quality-Basinwide Assessment Reports


red bar graphic  OHIO


Envtl. Protection Agency


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality



  • OEPA is in the process of the five-year review of a rule in Chapter 3745-31 of the Ohio Administrative Code, "Permits to Install New Sources." OEPA has reviewed the following rules:

    3745-31-01 Definitions
    3745-31-02 Requirements
    3745-31-03 Permit to install exemptions
    3745-31-05 Criteria for decision by the director
    3745-31-07 Revocation

    The primary purpose of this review is to satisfy the requirements of R.C. 119.032 (five-year review); the review date for this rule is Mar. 30, 2001. OEPA’s Division of Air Pollution Control (DAPC) found this rule to be necessary and with need for revisions. The rule was submitted for interested party review for 45 days on Dec. 5, 2000 and comments were received. Pursuant to Chapter 119.03 of the Ohio Revised Code, a public hearing on this rule review will be conducted on Tuesday, July 10, 2001, at 10:00 a.m. in Conference Room 5A, Ohio EPA, 122 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio. Written comments due same date. See http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dapc/general/pub_hm.html 

  • OEPA has reviewed Chapter 3745-77-01 of the Ohio Administrative Code, Title V Permits-Definitions to satisfy the requirements of R.C. 119.032 (five-year review). The review date for this rule is June 30, 2001. OEPA’s Division of Air Pollution Control (DAPC) found this rule to be necessary with need for revisions. The rule was submitted for interested party review on January 19, 200l. Pursuant to Chapter 119.03 of the Ohio Revised Code, a public hearing on this rule review will be conducted Monday, July 16, 2001, at 10:00 a.m. in the DAPC/SIP Conference Room, 6th Floor, Ohio EPA, 122 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio. Written comments due same date. See http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dapc/general/pub_hm.html 

OPEA Actions, Notices by County



Public Meetings



Pending Air Permits


red bar graphic OREGON


Legislature


Enacted Bills-Energy Development, Tax Credits



Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Air Permit Applications 



Water Quality Permit Applications



Proposed Regulations-General 



Public Notices-Cleanup Remedies



Public Notices-Remedial Actions


red bar graphic PENNSYLVANIA


Dept. of Envtl. Protection


NPDES Permit Applications



Draft Guidance Documents


red bar graphic RHODE ISLAND


Dept. of Envtl. Management


Upcoming Events


red bar graphic SOUTH CAROLINA


Office of the Governor


Hog Farm Executive Order-Moratorium



Dept. of Health and Envtl. Control


Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste




  • Proposed Amendment of R.61-79, Hazardous Waste Management Regulations: U.S. EPA promulgates amendments to 40 C.F.R. pts.124, 260 through 266, 268, 270, and 273 throughout each calendar year. Recent amendments include revised standards for hazardous air pollutants for hazardous waste combustors (MACT standards); technical amendments to Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV; a new rule which allows certain generators of F006 sludges up to 180 days to accumulate without a permit, under specific conditions; the vacating of previous listings for organobromine production wastes; and other minor amendments. In addition, minor typographical errors may be corrected to achieve conformity with federal regulations. These rules and other amendments have been published in the Federal Register between Sept. 30, 1999, and June 30, 2000. DHEC intends to amend R.61-79 to adopt federal amendments through June 30, 2000, to maintain conformity with federal requirements and ensure compliance with federal standards. No preliminary assessment report, preliminary fiscal impact statement, nor legislative review of this proposed amendment is required. A Notice of Drafting was published in the State Register on Sept. 22, 2000; the drafting comment period closed Oct. 27, 2000. Staff was granted Board initial approval on June 14, 2001, to publish a Notice of Proposed Regulation in the State Register on July 27, 2001, to provide opportunity for public comment and to conduct an Informational Forum. For additional information, contact Ms. Suzanne Rhodes, DHEC, Bureau of Land and Waste Management, 2600 Bull St., Columbia, S.C. 29201; Phone: 803/896-4000; E-mail address: rhodessh@columb34.dhec.state.sc.us.



  • DHEC is proposing amendments to R.61-79 to remove state provisions that are not required for federal compliance and which provide financial assurance for restoration of environmental impairment. Removal of these provisions is proposed as a result of an Apr. 4, 2000, decision of the South Carolina Court of Appeals. This amendment will remove the environmental impairment regulations which were published as proposed in the State Register on June 24, 1994, and published as final regulations in the State Register on June 23, 1995, as Document No. 1823. Affected sections are R.61-79.264, subsections .152, and .153 and cross-references at 264.140 and 265.140. Legislative review will be required. A Notice of Drafting was published in the State Register on Oct. 27, 2000. The drafting comment period closed Nov. 27, 2000. Staff was granted Board initial approval on June 14, 2001, to publish a Notice of Proposed Regulation in the State Register on July 27, 2001, to provide opportunity for public comment and to conduct an Informational Forum. For additional information, contact Ms. Suzanne Rhodes, DHEC, Bureau of Land and Waste Management, 2600 Bull St., Columbia, S.C. 29201; Phone: 803/896-4000; E-mail address: rhodessh@columb34.dhec.state.sc.us.



  • Certain waste residues from the production of butyl tins have been demonstrated to be hazardous to marine flora and fauna. Both state and federal laws allow for the promulgation of such regulations, procedures or standards, as may be necessary to protect the health and safety of the public, the health of living organisms, and the environment. DHEC intends to add state listings for solid wastes containing certain organo-tin compounds to R.61-79.261. The intention of this amendment will be to bring certain organo-tin compounds under hazardous waste regulation, since mismanagement of these compounds poses a threat to human health and the environment. Legislative review will be required. A Notice of Drafting was published in the State Register on Dec. 22, 2000. The drafting comment period closed Jan. 22, 2001. Staff was granted Board initial approval on June 14, 2001, to publish a Notice of Proposed Regulation in the State Register on July 27, 2001, to provide opportunity for public comment and to conduct an Informational Forum. Staff was granted Board initial approval on June 14, 2001, to publish a Notice of Proposed Regulation in the State Register on July 27, 2001, to provide opportunity for public comment and to conduct an Informational Forum. For additional information, contact Ms. Suzanne Rhodes, DHEC, Bureau of Land and Waste Management, 2600 Bull St., Columbia, S.C. 29201; Phone: 803/896-4000; E-mail address: rhodessh@columb34.dhec.state.sc.us.


Proposed Regulations-Regulation 61-67, Standards for Wastewater Facility Construction



  • The Department will consider revisions including, but not limited to, the use of vacuum sewer systems and criteria for alternative collection system use. The Department will also consider the consistency of administrative and technical review issues in comparison with the drinking water standards (R.61-58). The Department will evaluate changes in pump and haul criteria, service connection and water supply intake definitions, criteria for sewer design related to infiltration and inflow, rules for application submittal requirements and available capacity at treatment plant determinations. The Department will consider other minor changes and issues needed to clarify the existing regulation. Comments due July 23. 

Proposed Regulations-Drinking Water Quality




  • Proposed Amendment of R.61-58, State Primary Drinking Water Regulations. DHEC proposes to revise the regulations to include requirements promulgated under the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Public Notification Rule, and the Radionuclide Rule. The Public Notification Rule revises current public notification procedures requiring public water systems to notify the public any time a water system violates a primary drinking water regulation or has other situations posing a risk to public health. This rule applies to all public water systems. The Radionuclide Rule revises the monitoring requirements for radionuclides. Monitoring and reporting of radionuclides applies to Community public water systems. This action is mandated by the 1996 amendments to the federal SDWA. Proposed regulations will comply with 40 C.F.R. pts. 141 and 142. The final Public Notification Rule was published in the May 4, 2000 Federal Register, with an effective date of June 5, 2000. Primacy States must adopt this rule by May 6, 2002. The Radionuclide Rule was published in the Dec. 7, 2000 Federal Register, with an effective date of Dec. 8, 2003. Other minor revisions will include, but not be limited to, deletion of the Maximum Contaminant Level for Nickel and the aldicarbs, deletion of the Phase I VOC monitoring for surface water systems and the review of the analytical methodology for coliform. These revisions are to align the State Primary Drinking Water Regulations with federal regulations. The proposed regulations will comply with federal law and are exempt from legislative review; neither a preliminary assessment report nor a fiscal impact statement is required.


Final Regulations-R.61-55. Septic Tank Site Evaluation Fees



  • R.61-55, Septic Tank Site Evaluation Fees, establishes fees for inspection and support activities associated with the septic tank systems and onsite wastewater management. This regulation incorporates a fee increase of the fees previously provided for in annual provisos to the state budget.

Final Regulations-R.61-68. Water Classifications and Standards



  • Amendment of R.61-68 to clarify, strengthen and improve the existing regulation, and make appropriate revisions of the State's water quality standards in accordance with §303(c)(2)(B) of the federal CWA. Section 303(c)(2)(B) requires that South Carolina's water quality standards be reviewed and revised, where necessary, at least every three years for the purposes of considering U.S. EPA's most recent numeric and narrative criteria and to comply with recent Federal regulatory revisions and recommendations. The Department has also included several revisions that will clarify and improve the regulation. Former R.61-68 was replaced in its entirety because of recodification and stylistic changes made throughout the regulation. The new regulations exceed federal standards in scope and stringency in several respects. See http://www.lpitr.state.sc.us/regs/2572.doc. For example, DHEC noted that

    [w]hile the EPA clearly recognizes the importance of physical criteria, they have not recommended a specific criterion for turbidity. Presently the water quality standards include a turbidity standard for the protection of trout waters of the State. It was determined that habitat loss was especially crucial to these species for propagation and well-being. While the turbidity standard included in the regulation for trout waters is appropriate, the Department was concerned that the criterion may be overly conservative for all waters of the State. Trout waters are often clear. Many of the waters of the State are often more turbid due to natural, not anthropogenic, effects. Therefore a single value for turbidity seems inappropriate and hence why the Department is proposing different values for different types of waters of the State. In order to protect our valuable water resources from habitat loss and impairment, the Department affirms that the proposed numeric values for turbidity are necessary and reasonable.


On the clarification of "mixing zone" policy and allowances, DHEC said, in the notice of the proposal, that 

Some concerns have been expressed by both the regulated community and environmental groups over the lack of specificity in the State’s mixing zone policy. These groups have stated that they believe this lack of specificity may result in subjective and inconsistent implementation of water quality standards from site-to-site. Still a certain amount of flexibility is essential when dealing with complex water quality problems on a waterbody, watershed, or basin scale. Explicit requirements for mixing zones need to be addressed in the water quality standards regulation while still providing flexibility so that the Department may be able to use the mixing zone allowance to address all of the multiple, differing, and complex situations that arise in permit development and issuance for the waters of the State.


The present mixing zone language in R.61-68 goes a long way to providing a basis for mixing zone allowances and at the same time, establishing requirements for the protection of the waters of the State. All of the statements expressed in the existing language are essential to this goal. Therefore, the Department does not intend to remove any of the requirements presently stated in the regulation. Rather, we intend to clarify the statements and to add specific requirements dealing with the dynamics of individual mixing zones. This is not an easy task due to the fact that it would be impossible to enumerate every instance and situation where mixing occurs in the waters of the State. Therefore, the Department [notes] that it is appropriate to deal with the issue through statements about the broader categories of both water quality and pollutants and specifically noting when a prohibition or limitation occurs. We believe that leaving the language as general statements will allow enough flexibility to include case-by-case considerations for specific size delineations and mixing zone limitations. The Department is also proposing additional restrictions for the use of mixing zones in an effort to protect aquatic life and human health. The Department affirms that the additional language is both necessary and reasonable in order to resolve concerns related to the allowance and application of mixing zones.


Permit Application Notices


red bar graphic  TENNESSEE


Dept. of Environment and Conservation


Permit Applications


red bar graphic  TEXAS


Natural Resource Conservation Commission


Proposed Regulations-Solid Waste



  • Municipal Solid Waste Permit Modifications; the rule amendments will implement the permit modification process for municipal solid waste facilities regulated by TNRCC, to include registered facilities. TNRCC contends that adoption of the proposed rule amendments would allow for a more expeditious processing of municipal solid waste permit and registration modifications, update the program to current municipal solid waste industry practices, and provide for more public input into the process. Previously delayed until after the 2001 legislative session. [§§305.70, 39.105, 39.403, 39.106]. Comments due July 9; no public hearing. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/pc97186305.pdf and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/pc97186039.pdf

Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste



  • RCRA Updates for Clusters VII, VIII, and IX. The proposed rules would revise the commission's rules to conform to certain federal regulations promulgated by U.S. EPA, in order for Texas to increase its level of authorization to operate aspects of the federal hazardous waste program in lieu of EPA. In addition, the proposal addresses the findings of the Commission's previous rules review of Chapter 335, which revealed a number of inconsistencies and incorrect references and citations. Comments due July 23; no public hearing. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/pc00044305.pdf and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/pc00044335.pdf 

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)--Cross-Border Natural Gas Pipelines



  • This rule will adopt an MOU among the Office of the Secretary of State, the Railroad Commission of Texas, the Texas Historical Commission, the Texas General Land Office, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, and the Texas Public Utility Commission to establish a single point of contact for assisting prospective permit applicants in the permitting of natural gas pipelines that cross the border between Texas and Mexico. Comments due July 30. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/pc01020.pdf  

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality




Proposed Regulations-Water Quality



Permit Hearings



Public Hearings/Proposed Rules



Penalty Assessment


red bar graphic  UTAH


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-Major Source Permitting



  • The current major source permitting rules may require sources of air pollution that make a major modification to install more stringent pollution control equipment. This amendment aligns the Utah rule with a 1992 federal rule revision that adds a new definition for "major modification" and other terms used in the definition of "major modification." The new definition excludes, so long as there is no emissions increase, pollution control projects at existing electric utility steam generating units. Also excluded are the installation, operation, cessation, or removal of temporary clean coal demonstration projects. Finally, the new definition requires that determining whether a modification at an electric utility steam generating unit is major or not is done by comparing present actual emissions to future actual emissions. Comments due July 2; public hearing was June 21. See http://www.rules.state.ut.us/publicat/bulletin/2001/20010601/23759.htm and http://www.rules.state.ut.us/publicat/bulletin/2001/20010601/23760.htm

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance



  • Proposal changes the date of incorporation by reference from October 7, 1998, to August 1, 2001. The rule
    incorporates by reference the SIP for the general requirements of the Vehicle Emissions Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Programs. The I/M programs are in place to reduce vehicle emissions so that federal health standards for ozone and carbon monoxide are not exceeded. On April 5, 2001, U.S. EPA published a final rule postponing implementation of On-Board Diagnostics inspections until January 1, 2002; the only substantive change in the SIP text is to amend the date from 2001 to 2002. Other changes in the SIP remove appendices that are out of date, and move others to the Technical Support Documentation that is submitted to EPA with the change in the SIP text. Comments due July 2; public hearing was June 21. See http://www.rules.state.ut.us/publicat/bulletin/2001/20010601/23756.htm

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance, Salt Lake County



  • Changes the date of adoption from February 5, 1997, to August 1, 2001. The rule incorporates by reference the I/M Program for Salt Lake County. The I/M program is in place to reduce vehicle emissions so that federal health standards for carbon monoxide and ozone are not exceeded. Changes in the SIP text update the county's program improvements, including an updated analyzer and daily downloading of data from each analyzer. Other changes in the SIP include replacing out of date county ordinances in the appendices, and moving other appendices to the Technical Support Documentation that is submitted to U.S. EPA. The Technical Support Documentation also includes the demonstration that Salt Lake County's test and repair network is as effective as a test-only network would be. This will enable the county to claim full credit instead of 50% credit in emissions reduction. Comments due July 2; public hearing was June 21. See http://www.rules.state.ut.us/publicat/bulletin/2001/20010601/23757.htm

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance-Utah County



  • Changes the date of adoption from February 5, 1997, to August 1, 2001. The rule incorporates by reference the SIP for the I/M Program for Utah County. The I/M program is in place to reduce vehicle emissions so that federal health standards for carbon monoxide are not exceeded. Utah County has demonstrated that its program qualifies for full credit in reducing emissions, under provisions of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995. Before U.S. EPA can give full approval to the program, however, the SIP must be amended to include the latest improvements Utah County has made in the program. Utah County has moved to the UTAH 2000 analyzer for emissions, requires that emissions inspectors check the On-Board Diagnostic systems in 1996 and newer vehicles, and now downloads data daily from the emissions analyzers. Other changes in the SIP include replacing appendices that are out of date with the new county ordinances and moving other appendices to the Technical Support Documentation that is submitted to EPA with the SIP. Comments due July 2; public hearing was June 21. See http://www.rules.state.ut.us/publicat/bulletin/2001/20010601/23758.htm

Proposed Regulations-Drinking Water



Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste



  • This proposed rule change eliminates the waste code K160 as an excluded waste due to a federally-required administrative stay. The waste code is no longer listed as hazardous by U.S. EPA. This rule change also adopts a federal rule that will allow Autoliv, ASP Inc. of Promontory, Utah, to implement a project under the federal Project XL program. The principal objective of Autoliv's XL Project is to explore the benefits of more streamlined and flexible regulation of pyrotechnic hazardous wastes from the automobile airbag industry that are treated in industrial furnaces. The proposed rule change provides regulatory flexibility to Autoliv in the form of a conditional exemption from the definition of hazardous waste for the pyrotechnic wastes. Comments due July 2. See http://www.rules.state.ut.us/publicat/bulletin/2001/20010601/23763.htm

  • Proposed rule change corrects incorrect references regarding the state's authority to issue enforceable documents under certain circumstances for post closure activities at hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. Comments due July 2. See http://www.rules.state.ut.us/publicat/bulletin/2001/20010601/23764.htm

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality



  • The Utah Water Quality Act was amended by H.B. 14 during the 2001 legislative session. The proposed amendment updates definitions so that the rule is consistent with the new statutory language. Comments due July 2; public hearing was June 19. One of the proposed amendments implements the requirement that, after January 1, 2002, persons who design, inspect, or maintain underground wastewater disposal systems, and who conduct percolation tests or soil evaluations for these systems, must be certified by the State. The proposed rule outlines procedures for obtaining certification, who is required to obtain certification, training, appeals, qualifications and definitions. See http://www.rules.state.ut.us/publicat/bulletin/2001/20010601/23766.htm, http://www.rules.state.ut.us/publicat/bulletin/2001/20010601/23768.htm, http://www.rules.state.ut.us/publicat/bulletin/2001/20010601/23769.htm, and http://www.rules.state.ut.us/publicat/bulletin/2001/20010601/23767.htm

  • Proposed amendment updates procedural notice requirements for treatment plant bypasses. A recent bypass event at a municipal wastewater treatment plant has brought into question the adequacy of the Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System rule, Subsection R317-8-4(4.1)(13), governing bypasses. Utah was required to adopt the equivalent of federal rules in order to gain primacy of the NPDES discharge permit program. As a result, the bypass rule is identical to the federal EPA rule. The proposed rule has more stringent requirements than the counterpart federal rules. However, the Utah Water Quality Board and the Division of Water Quality have determined that the more stringent rules are necessary in this case in order to protect public health and the environment. The proposed amendment provide specific notice requirements for permittees needing treatment plant bypasses. Prior notice of a bypass is changed from 10 days to 90 days for anticipated bypasses. Notice provisions are added for emergency bypasses and unanticipated bypasses. Comments due July 2. See http://www.rules.state.ut.us/publicat/bulletin/2001/20010601/23780.htm

Permit Applications


red bar graphic VERMONT


Dept. of Envtl. Conservation


Permit Applications


red bar graphic VIRGINIA


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Public Meeting, Hearing Notices


red bar graphic  WASHINGTON


Dept. of Ecology


Final Regulations-Water Quality



State Environmental Policy Act Register


red bar graphic WEST VIRGINIA


Dept. of Envtl. Protection


Public Notice Bulletin (Permit Applications, Proposed Regulations)


red bar graphic WISCONSIN


Dept. of Natural Resources


Air Rules Development



Public Hearing and Meeting Schedule



  • July 11, 12 hearings on revisions to ch. NR 809, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to safe drinking water standards for radionuclides. The final radionuclide rule published by U.S. EPA establishes a new maximum contaminant level (MCL) for uranium, and amends monitoring requirements for radionuclides while keeping the current MCL for combined radium 226 plus radium 228. This rule will affect all community water systems (about 1150 systems) statewide. With repromulgation of the radionuclide rule, DNR must revise its rules to match the revisions U.S. EPA made to the federal regulations for drinking water.

  • Available at http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/caer/ce/news/hearmeet.html


red bar graphic WYOMING


Dept. of Environmental Quality


Coalbed Methane


Copyright© 2001, Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D.C. All rights reserved. 

INTERNATIONAL
large red bar graphic

red bar graphic GENERAL



  • The Liberian Forest Development Authority, in a report covering logging activity in the first half of 2000, reported that Liberia's export earnings due to logging exceeded $20 million, a new high. Much of the logging activity is essentially unregulated. See http://www.oneworld.org/globalwitness/press/pr_040501liberia.htm 

  • A proposed nickel plant in New Caledonia met with opposition from environmental groups. 

  • Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, at a conference in Iran, urged religious leaders to combat degradation of the environment.

  • Russian President Vladimir Putin named Vitaly Artyukhov to head the Ministry of Natural Resources, the closest thing to a federal environmental agency since the separate agency was eliminated. 

  • New Zealand became one of the first countries to ratify the most recent amendment to the Montreal Protocol. "New Zealand wants to maintain momentum on ozone layer protection issues and the Montreal Protocol is a very effective international agreement," its foreign affairs and environment ministers said. "The ozone layer was expected to be fully recovered by 2050. It now appears that global warming may slow the rate of repair by some decades. Providing New Zealand and other signatories follow through with it, the ozone layer should gradually repair itself over the next century. This is a serious issue for the whole world and there is absolutely no room for complacency."

red bar graphic CLIMATE CHANGE



  • Dutch Environment Minister Jan Pronk issued a "compromise" paper on Kyoto implementation, relying heavily on carbon sinks; it was immediately criticized by environmental groups, and by the European Commission. The release of the paper also unveiled serious divisions between countries, both within and outside of Europe, that have criticized the U.S. for its position. See http://www.unfccc.int and http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1407000/1407035.stm 

  • Russia and Japan both argued that they should get more credit for carbon "sinks" under any Kyoto-based plan. Pronk's plan largely agreed, with the EC saying in reply that the plan would hurt EU economies.

  • After four days of talks in the Netherlands, clear divisions between the EU and Russia, Japan, and Canada emerged (or re-emerged). Swedish Environment Minister Kjell Larsson noted that "the differences are huge." One positive voice came from U.K. Environment Minister Michael Meacher, who said that "[t]he degree of commitment and support for the protocol was upbeat everywhere." See http://globalarchive.ft.com/globalarchive/articles.html?id=010629000386#docAnchor010629000386 

  • The German government agreed to a pledge from industry, soon to be codified, to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 45 million tons per year by 2010; 20-23 million tons of reduction would occur through increased utilization of cogeneration plants. 

  • A study confirmed that the United States currently emits about 25% of the world's carbon dioxide. The study also predicts that greenhouse gases will build up quickly while the absorption of carbon dioxide simultaneously slows down. The "carbon sink" of forests and grasslands in the U.S., according to the report, still allows about 800 million to 1.1 billion tons of carbon dioxide, out of about 1.4 billion tons of carbon released from the burning of fossil fuels, to be released into the atmosphere.

  • A professor of atmospheric sciences told a U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources hearing that even if aggressive measures are taken, the average global surface temperature will rise at least 2.5 degrees by the end of the 21st Century, compared with 1990 levels; doing nothing, a 10.5 degree increase is likely.  

  • A new study on transboundary migration was released, showing extensive movement of air pollutants across large areas, including across oceans. "Contrary to received opinion, peaks of summertime smog are not caused by local polluters alone," said Kaj Bärlund, Environment Director at the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, in releasing the report. "Whether air pollution levels in your area comply with air-quality standards or breach them may actually depend on how much pollution it receives from across the ocean." See http://www.unece.org/press/pr2001/01env03e.htm 

red bar graphic ASIA/MIDDLE EAST/AUSTRALIA