Jump to Content

Weekly Update Volume 31, Issue 25

09/10/2001

 LITIGATION
large red bar graphic

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

red bar graphic  CAA, NAAQS, SIP, NEW SOURCE REVIEW (NSR) PROGRAM:

The Ninth Circuit vacated EPA's approval of a county's NSR program because EPA did not adequately assess whether the revised program would meet current attainment requirements. Before EPA approved the county's revised NSR program in 1999, the program consisted of rules last approved by EPA in 1981, and parts of the county had been in nonattainment for particulate matter and carbon monoxide since that time. EPA approved the county's revised program on the theory that if there was no relaxation of air quality regulations, the SIP revision incorporating the revised NSR program would not exacerbate the existing situation by allowing increased emissions, and, consequently, would not interfere with reasonable further progress or attainment. However, EPA's "no relaxation" rule, as applied in this case, was not a persuasive interpretation of CAA §110(1). Under §110(1), for EPA to determine that the SIP as revised can meet attainment requirements, EPA must be able to conclude that the particular plan revision is consistent with the development of an overall plan capable of meeting the CAA's attainment requirements. Here, however, EPA employed a false baseline when it concluded that the 1981 rules were the measuring stick for determining non-interference with the CAA's current attainment requirements. The 1990 CAA amendments set new deadlines for attainment, established other new requirements for incremental progress towards attainment, and are the baseline from which non-interference should be measured. Given the past failure of the county to achieve attainment under the 1981 rules, there is no necessary correlation between maintaining the stringency of the 1981 rules and meeting the CAA post-1990 attainment requirements. Additionally, the individual challenging the EPA's approval of the county's program had adequate opportunity to comment on the program. Hall v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, No. 99-70853 (9th Cir. Aug. 29, 2001) (25 pp.).

red bar graphic  CWA, TMDLs, CONSTRUCTIVE SUBMISSION:

The Tenth Circuit affirmed a district court's dismissal of individuals' CWA and APA claims alleging that Oklahoma failed to submit TMDLs to EPA for review and that EPA failed to fulfill its nondiscretionary duty to develop TMDLs after Oklahoma's constructive submission of no TMDLs. The individuals' theory, that Oklahoma's failure to submit TMDLs resulted in a constructive submission of no TMDLS that triggered EPA's nondiscretionary duty to approve or disapprove of the TMDLs, is not supported by the evidence. The theory of constructive submission only applies when the state's actions clearly and unambiguously express a decision to submit no TMDL for a particular impaired waterbody. Here, the uncontradicted evidence is that Oklahoma submitted a number of TMDLs and is making progress toward completing about 1,500 TMDLs over a 12-year period. Additionally, the individuals' APA claim, that EPA failed to fulfill its nondiscretionary duty to develop its own TMDLs after Oklahoma's constructive submission of no TMDLs, duplicates the one the individuals brought under the CWA and should be dismissed. Further, because the arguments the individuals advanced in their complaints differed from arguments advanced in their brief, the district court properly declined to consider the complaint without a formal amendment. Moreover, the district court correctly denied the individuals' leave to amend the complaint because it came more than 2 years after the initial complaint and 18 months after the administrative record had been filed. Hayes v. Whitman, No. 00-5113 (10th Cir. Aug. 29, 2001) (8 pp.).


red bar graphic  CERCLA, COST RECOVERY:

The Sixth Circuit upheld a district court decision that a previous owner of property is not liable under CERCLA for any cleanup costs. The district court correctly found that there was no evidence that any release that occurred during the previous owners' ownership of the property caused any increase in the response costs incurred by the current owners. Additionally, there is no evidence that any active human conduct on the part of the previous owners resulted in any additional contamination to the property. Further, the failure of the previous owner to prevent passive migration of hazardous substances during their ownership does not constitute a disposal and does not make them liable under CERCLA. Bob's Beverage, Inc. v. Acme, Inc., No. 00-3045 (6th Cir. Sept. 4, 2001) (6 pp.).

red bar graphic  TAKINGS, DUE PROCESS, MUNICIPAL LIENS:

The Third Circuit affirmed a district court decision that municipal liens placed on individuals' property did not constitute a taking or violate the individuals' due process rights. In 1992 and again in 1993, the town imposed municipal liens on the property for municipal improvement. In 1999, the individuals brought suit against the town. The district court was correct in concluding that the individuals' takings claim was not ripe because the individuals had not yet availed themselves of the state procedures for seeking just compensation. The individuals claim that they were not required to file an inverse condemnation petition because the town did not have legal authority to impose the liens and that they exhausted state remedies by raising the merits of the two liens in bankruptcy court. However, the individuals' ability to file an inverse condemnation petition in state court in order to obtain just compensation was not related to the town's right to impose the liens. Additionally, adjudication in federal bankruptcy court is not an appropriate alternative to the state inverse condemnation procedures. Further, even if the individuals' takings claim were ripe, the town's actions do not amount to a taking because a municipal lien does not deprive the landowner off all economically viable use of the property. Moreover, the individuals are barred by the statute of limitations from asserting their due process rights claim, and the continuing violation doctrine does not apply. The mere existence of the liens does not amount to a continuing violation, and the individuals knew about the wrongfulness of the liens when they were imposed and could have brought a claim at that time. Cowell v. Palmer Township, No. 00-1075 (3d Cir. Aug. 27, 2001) (13 pp.).

red bar graphic  ESA, INTERVENTION, ADEQUACY OF REPRESENTATION:

The First Circuit upheld a district court decision denying environmental groups the right to intervene in a suit concerning the listing of the Atlantic Salmon as an endangered species. In 1999, the groups sued the National Marine Fisheries Service and the FWS, challenging their decision not to list the Atlantic Salmon as a threatened species. While that litigation was underway the Services proposed to list the salmon as an endangered species. The groups and the Services entered a court-ordered stipulation agreeing to stay the litigation until the Services made a final decision on the listing of the salmon. Ultimately, the Services decided to list the Atlantic Salmon as an endangered species, which triggered the current lawsuit brought by the state and various business people in the state. The groups now contend that they should be allowed intervention of right in the current suit because the Services, formerly the groups' antagonists, cannot be trusted to defend fully the endangered species designation because they will not argue, as the groups would, that they should have protected the salmon earlier. The district court, however, was correct in determining that the groups should not be allowed intervention as of right. The argument they wish to advance is better thought of as a supplement to the Services' argument, rather than a separate argument. Whether the Services should have designated the salmon earlier may be a building block in an argument, but it is hardly a necessary one to the defense. Additionally, there is no evidence that the case requires presentation of evidence only available through the groups' participation as intervenors. Further, the former adversarial relationship of the groups and the Services may raise questions about adequacy, but does not answer the questions. The Services designated the salmon as endangered on their own accord, not as the result of litigation, and the Services' endangered species designation goes beyond what the groups sought in earlier litigation. Moreover, in the prior litigation, the groups won a stipulation that the Services would decide what to do on listing the salmon by a particular date. That bargain was kept, the decision was made, and there is no risk to that completed bargain in this litigation. Maine v. Director, United States Fish & Wildlife Service, No. 01-1770 (1st Cir. Aug. 24, 2001) (21 pp.).

red bar graphic  OIL AND GAS LEASES, NATIVE AMERICANS, JURISDICTION:

The Fifth Circuit held that a Native American tribal court was not created in accordance with federally mandated procedures, that the illegitimately formed tribal court could not exercise jurisdiction over a tribal oil and gas lease dispute, that oil companies, therefore, were not required to exhaust their tribal remedies, and that the tribal council members were not entitled to sovereign immunity against the oil companies' declaratory judgment action in federal court. Between 1979 and 1993, the tribe entered nine oil and gas exploration leases with the companies. In 1998, the tribe filed suit against the companies claiming that certain leases were void because they had not been approved by the Secretary of the Interior. On that same date, the tribe filed suit in a tribal court that was formed after the tribe had filed suit in federal court. Subsequently, the companies sought a declaratory judgment of the nonexistance of the tribal court. The district court correctly concluded that the tribal council members were not entitled to sovereign immunity against the oil companies' declaratory judgment action because in the Fifth Circuit tribal officials are not immune from suits for declaratory and injunctive relief. The district court erred, however, in determining that the tribe was entitled to sovereign immunity against the oil companies' claims for equitable relief. Additionally, the district court properly exercised its jurisdiction to determine the tribal court's existence and jurisdiction of the tribal court and in ruling that the oil companies were not required to exhaust their remedies in the tribal court before seeking a declaratory judgment in federal court. The tribe's constitution and bylaws do not provide for the creation of a judiciary, and no evidence supported a finding that the tribe's constitution was properly amended to allow for the formation of a tribal judiciary. Thus, because no tribal court properly existed, exhaustion was imprudent in the present dispute. Further, the district court properly exercised its jurisdiction over the oil companies' declaratory judgment action. The federal regulations and statutes governing tribal oil and gas leases are adequate to invoke federal question jurisdiction over the instant dispute. Comstock Oil & Gas, Inc. v. Alabama and Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas, No. 00-40088 (5th Cir. Aug. 27, 2001) (9 pp.).

red bar graphic  CLASS ACTION, METHYL TERTIARY BUTYL ETHER (MTBE), GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION:

A district court denied most of oil companies' motions to dismiss in a class action suit brought by individual well owners claiming that the companies knowingly caused MTBE contamination of their groundwater. The claims of several of the class participants, who did not allege MTBE contamination but rather threat of contamination, were dismissed for lack of standing because they failed to demonstrate a clearly impending harm. However, the pervasive scheme of federal clean air laws and regulations does not bar the remaining claims under either conflict or express preemption. The well owners' claims are not brought for the purposes of regulating motor vehicle emissions control. Instead, they concern groundwater contamination caused by spills and leakage of gasoline containing MTBE, and are therefore outside the scope of the preemption provision. Additionally, the well owners' claims are not within the primary jurisdiction of environmental agencies, thereby necessitating dismissal from the district court. The well owners' claims are grounded in state tort law and do not require the specialized technical or policy expertise of any governmental agency. Further, the failure of the participants to identify which specific company or companies caused their injury does not warrant dismissal of their claims because a theory of collective liability may be applied for the well owners' state-law claims. Moreover, the well owners satisfied their burden to sustain their strict liability for design defect and negligence claims. In re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether Products Liability Litigation, No. 00 Civ. 1898 (SAS) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 20, 2001) (95 pp.).

red bar graphic  ESA, ENDANGERED SPECIES, TAKE PROVISION:

A district court held that the take provision of the ESA, as applied to landowners, does not violate the U.S. Commerce Clause. After purchasing property the landowners sought to develop it, but were prevented from doing so because of the restrictions placed on the land under the ESA due to the presence of endangered species on the property. The landowners brought suit claiming that the take provision of the ESA was unconstitutional as applied to all takes of the endangered species on their property. The landowners, however, relied on an overly-broad definition of the regulated activity at issue. The case involves the regulation of one specific alleged take of an endangered species by the landowners' proposed commercial development of the property, not the take of all of the endangered species on the property. Additionally, the application of the take provision in this case is a constitutional exercise of the Commerce Clause power because the activity being regulated, both standing alone or under the aggregation principle, would easily be classified as substantially affecting interstate commerce. Moreover, the application of the take provision here is a valid regulation of an activity that substantially affects interstate commerce and, therefore, is a valid exercise of the Commerce Clause power. Therefore, the landowners' motion for summary judgment is denied, but the government's is granted. GDF Realty Investments, Ltd. v. Norton, No. A 00 CA 369 SS (W.D. Tex. Aug. 30, 2001) (25 pp.). (Counsel for the government included Mark A. Brown of the U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC.)

red bar graphic  ESA, CONSTUTUTIONALITY:

A district court held that the ESA's application to private lands in order to protect an endangered species that lives entirely within one state does not violate the U.S. Commerce Clause. The regulated activity in question, construction of a housing development, is economic in nature. Additionally, regulation of the endangered species itself is economic in nature because extinction of a species would substantially affect interstate commerce by foreclosing any possibility of several types of commercial activity. Further, the ESA is explicitly connected to interstate commerce. Moreover, legislative history contains express congressional findings regarding the ESA's effect on interstate commerce. Finally, the relationship between the regulated activity and interstate commerce is not attenuated. Rancho Viejo, LLC v. Norton, No. 1:00-CV-02798 (ESH) (D.D.C. Aug. 20, 2001) (20 pp.). (Counsel for the government included Mark A. Brown of the U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC.)

red bar graphic  RIPARIAN ESTATE LAW, PUBLIC MARINA, PUBLIC TRUST DOCTRINE:

A state court reversed the granting of a permit to a public marina owner who sought to convert the marina from rental properties into privately owned units, known as dockominiums, which are similar to condominiums. The state environmental agency maintained that the marina owner had to apply for a new permit before conversion of the marina could occur. The owner applied for the new permit but claimed that, pursuant to an agreement entered by the marina owner and the state environmental agency, the environmental agency did not have jurisdiction to require the marina to apply for a new permit. However, the marina owner waived this argument by applying for the permit in the first place. Additionally, the marina owner's dockominium development violated the public trust doctrine by attempting to convey a perpetual exclusive right to a portion of the lake. A dockominum removes a portion of the public trust area from free availability for the citizens, which directly conflicts with the underpinning and careful limitations of the public trust doctrine. The state environmental agency may allow individuals to place docks in the water for access and reasonable use of the water by issuing permits but may not allow the passing of title to the water. ABKA Ltd. Partnership v. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, No. 99-2306 (Wis. Ct. App. Aug. 22, 2001) 20 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 removed an amendment concerning opacity monitoring published as part of a final rule entitled "Amendments for Testing and Monitoring Provisions" on October 17, 2000 (65 Fed. Reg. 61744), because it inadvertently established substantive new requirements for facilities that are subject to the new source performance standards requiring the installation of continuous opacity monitors on effluent streams even though the amendments were explicitly intended to be minor in nature and not substantive. 66 FR 44978 (8/27/01). 

  • EPA announced the availability of its decision to deny three petitions challenging three separate rulemakings concerning compliance procedures for new motor vehicles known as "CAP 2000" (64 Fed. Reg. 23906); emission standards and compliance procedures for new heavy-duty gasoline engines (65 Fed. Reg. 59896); and the use of on-board diagnostics for vehicle inspection and maintenance programs (66 Fed. Reg. 18156).  66 FR 45777 (8/30/01). 

  • EPA proposed to approve operating permit programs of the Alabama Department of Environmental Management, the City of Huntsville's Division of Natural Resources, and the Jefferson County Department of Health. 66 FR 45253 (8/28/01). 

  • EPA approved the operating permit programs of the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the Mecklenburg County Department of Environmental Protection, and the Western North Carolina Regional Air Quality Agency. 66 FR 45941 (8/31/01). 

red bar graphic  DRINKING WATER:



  • EPA amended its unregulated contaminant monitoring regulation (UCMR) by adding a correction that will automatically approve laboratories of public water systems that are certified to conduct compliance monitoring using Method 515.3 to also use Method 515.4 for UCMR analyses, and by delaying requirements for the electronic reporting of unregulated contaminant monitoring results until its electronic reporting system is ready to accept data. 66 FR 46221 (9/4/01). 

  • EPA proposed to revise the public notification rule and the consumer confidence report rule by making specific changes to the health effects language for di(2-ethylhexyl) adipate (DEHA) and di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP). 66 FR 46927 (9/7/01). 

  • EPA decided to tentatively approve revisions to Maryland's public water system supervision primacy program. 66 FR 46460 (9/5/01). 

red bar graphic  HAZARDOUS WASTES & SUBSTANCES:



  • EPA entered into a proposed administrative settlement under CERCLA §122(i) in connection with the Antifreeze, Inc., Superfund site. 66 FR 45306 (8/28/01).

  • EPA entered into a proposed administrative settlement under CERCLA §122(h) in connection with the Ewan Property Superfund site in Shamong Township, New Jersey. 66 FR 45306 (8/28/01).

  • EPA entered into a proposed prospective purchaser agreement under CERCLA in connection with the Sanitary Landfill Company Superfund site in Moraine, Ohio. 66 FR 46630 (9/6/01). 

red bar graphic  NATIONAL FORESTS:



  • The U.S. Forest Service issued an interim directive to provide internal administrative direction to guide its employees in the processing of proposals and applications for fiber optic cable uses on National Forest System lands.  66 FR 46431 (9/5/01). 

red bar graphic  PESTICIDES:



  • EPA announced that it forwarded to the Secretary of Agriculture a draft final rule under FIFRA §25(a) that makes several minor revisions to the pesticide labeling and program regulations. 66 FR 45661 (8/29/01).

red bar graphic  RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL:



  • EPA announced the availability of DOE documents on waste characterization programs applicable to certain transuranic radioactive waste at the Savannah River Site proposed for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Program. 66 FR 45679 (8/29/01).

  • EPA, along with the Department of Defense, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Commerce, DOE, the DOI, and the NRC, announced the availability of a draft manual entitled the Multi-Agency Radiological Laboratory Analytical Protocols, which provides guidance for the planning, implementation, and assessment phases of those projects that require laboratory analysis of radionuclides. 66 FR 45972 (8/31/01).

red bar graphic  RECORDKEEPING:



  • EPA proposed to allow electronic reporting to the Agency by permitting the use of electronic document receiving systems to receive electronic documents in satisfaction of certain document submission requirements in EPA's regulations. 66 FR 46161 (8/31/01). 

red bar graphic  RECYCLING:



  • EPA proposed to designate 11 new items that are or can be made with recovered materials to its Comprehensive Procurement Guideline. 66 FR 45256 (8/28/01).

  • EPA issued a draft recovered materials advisory notice that provides guidance to procuring agencies for purchasing certain items containing recovered materials. 66 FR 45297 (8/28/01).

red bar graphic  TOXIC SUBSTANCES:



  • EPA received a petition by the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation under TSCA §21 to initiate a rulemaking to prohibit the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, and improper disposal of Burkholderia cepacia complex, a group of naturally occurring microorganisms. 66 FR 46459 (9/5/01).

red bar graphic  WATER QUALITY:



  • EPA proposed to amend the "Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants" under CWA §304(h) by adding several analytical test procedures for enumerating the bacteria, Escherichia coli (E. coli) and enterococci, and the protozoans, Cryptosporidium and Giardia, in ambient water to the list of Agency-approved methods. 66 FR 45811 (8/30/01).

red bar graphic  WILDLIFE:



  • FWS and the U.S. Forest Service proposed to establish regulations for hunting and trapping seasons, harvest limits, methods, and means related to taking of wildlife for subsistence uses during the 2002-2003 regulatory year. 66 FR 45081 (8/27/01). 

  • FWS added seven national wildlife refuges to the list of areas open for hunting and/or sport fishing, along with pertinent refuge-specific regulations for such activities, and amended certain regulations on other refuges that pertain to migratory game bird hunting, upland game hunting, big game hunting, and sport fishing for 2001-2002. 66 FR 46345 (9/4/01). 

  • The National Marine Fisheries Services issued a rule clarifying its interpretation of the Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention Act of 1984, which prohibits the import in to the United States of Patagonian toothfish, Antarctic toothfish, and products from such fish harvested in violating of a conservation measure in force with respect to the United States. 66 FR 46740 (9/7/01).

red bar graphic  U.S. DOJ NOTICES OF SETTLEMENTS:



  • United States v. Tropical Fruit, S.E., No. 97-1442-DRD (D.P.R. Aug. 21, 2001). Settling CERCLA and FIFRA defendants that applied pesticides to agricultural crops, including bananas and mangos, at a farm in Guayanilla, Puerto Rico, in a manner that caused the pesticides to drift or migrate outside the farm in violation of pesticide labeling requirements must pay $35,000 in penalties and CERCLA response costs and must comply with extensive injunctive relief, including the creation of a buffer zone at the farm. 66 FR 45058 (8/27/01). 

  • United States v. American Scrap Co., No. 1:99-CV-2047 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 17, 2001). Settling CERCLA defendants must pay $1,736,977.10 in past U.S. response costs incurred at the Jack's Creek/Sitkin Smelting Superfund site in Mifflin County, Pennsylvania. 66 FR 45325 (8/28/01).

  • United States v. CVS Corp., No. 01-314-B (D.N.H. Aug. 15, 2001). Settling CERCLA defendants must pay $197,612 for past and oversight costs incurred and to be incurred by EPA at the Somersworth Landfill site in Somersworth, New Hampshire, and must pay $1,119,796 in contribution to the parties that are implementing the remedial design and remedial action at the site pursuant to a previous consent decree. 66 FR 45325 (8/28/01).

  • United States v. Tesoro Hawaii Corp., No. 01-00560 SOM LEK (D. Haw. Aug. 23, 2001). A settling CWA and OPA defendant that owns a single-point mooring facility offshore of Oahu, Hawaii, that spilled oil and caused injuries to natural resources in and around Kauai must carry out a net removal project, must pay $500,000 for natural resource restoration projects compensating injuries to wildlife and habitat, must pay $10,000 for restoration projects compensating for lost human use, must pay a $15,000 penalty to Hawaii, and must pay $55,000 for a state supplemental environmental project. 66 FR 46287 (9/4/01).

  • United States v. City of Boonville, No. EV 84-187-C-Y/H (S.D. Ind. Aug. 20, 2001). Under a proposed second amendment to its original 1991 consent decree, a settling CWA defendant that violated the Act and an NPDES permit at its publicly owned treatment works must provide a modified schedule for the completion of certain remaining remedial work and must pay $61,000 as stipulated penalties to the United States and the state of Indiana. 66 FR 46811 (9/7/01).

  • United States v. Desmond, No. 01-CV-11425-RGS (D. Mass. Aug. 20, 2001). A settling CWA defendant that unlawfully discharged dredged or fill materials into U.S. waters in Taunton, Massachusetts, failed to comply with an administrative order requiring the completion of a restoration plan, and failed to comply with an administrative consent agreement requiring him to pay $12,500 civil penalty by July 31, 1998, must pay a $10,000 civil penalty and must pay $48,478.47 in payments owed to the United States under the previous consent agreement unless the defendant proves that he paid $12,500 to the United States by the agreement's deadline. 66 FR 46811 (9/7/01).

  • United States v. Mallory Creek Developers, Inc., No. 7:01-CV-163-F (E.D.N.C. Aug. 22, 2001). A settling CWA defendant that unlawfully discharged pollutants into U.S. waters in Brunswick County, North Carolina, must pay a $100,000 civil penalty and must complete site restoration activities. 66 FR 46812 (9/7/01). 

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

THE CONGRESS
large red bar graphic

red bar graphic  COMMITTEE ACTION



  • S. 703 (Atlantic salmon) was reported by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. 147 Cong. Rec. S9197 (daily ed. Sept. 6, 2001). The bill would extend the effective period of the consent of Congress to the interstate compact relating to the restoration of Atlantic salmon to the Connecticut River Basin and would create the Connecticut River Atlantic Salmon Commission.

  • H.R. 434 (Stanislaus National Forest) was reported by the House Committee on Resources. H. Rep. 107-201, 147 Cong. Rec. H5454 (daily ed. Sept. 6, 2001). The bill would direct the Secretary of Agriculture to enter into a cooperative agreement to provide for retention, maintenance, and operation, at private expense, of the 18 concrete dams and weirs located within the boundaries of the Emigrant Wilderness in the Stanislaus National Forest, California.


red bar graphic  BILLS INTRODUCED



  • S. 1403 (Cantwell, D-Wash.) (electric power) would amend the Federal Power Act to promote energy independence and diversity by providing for the use of net metering by certain small electric energy generation systems. 147 Cong. Rec. S9123 (daily ed. Sept. 5, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

  • H.R. 2864 (Mink, D-Haw.) (Haleakala National Park) would provide for an educational center in Haleakala National Park in Hawaii. 147 Cong. Rec. H5455 (daily ed. Sept. 6, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources.

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


Tuscaloosa Property is the First Project of the Alabama Land Recycling and Economic Redevelopment Act



Proposed NPDES General Permits


 



Public Notices–Permit Applications 



Daily Ozone Forecast



Jefferson County (Birmingham) Dept. of Health


Daily Air Quality Index


red bar graphic ALASKA



Development of Spill Regulations for Non-tanker Vessels and Railroads 




  • New legislation passed this spring requires certain non-tank vessels and the Alaska Railroad to prepare contingency plans that demonstrate their ability to clean up an oil spill. Plans will be required of all self-propelled nontank vessels exceeding 400 gross registered tonnage operating in Alaskan waters and of the Alaska Railroad. The Department will hold a meeting Sept. 12, 2001, the second in a series of scoping meetings, to discuss issues associated with the Department's drafting of regulations to implement the law. The goal of these meetings is to assist the Department in developing a formal public review draft of the proposed regulations by Nov. 15, 2001. It is expected that a draft will be released by the Department in Jan. 2002 for formal public review, and that final regulations will become effective June 30, 2002. At that time, affected parties will have 180 days to comply with the new requirements. Workshops Sept. 12, Oct. 12, and Nov. 13. See http://www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/ENV.CONSERV/dec_cal.htm#agenda 



Proposed changes to air quality control regulations, 18 AAC 50, and the State Air Quality
Control Plan





ARIZONA


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Proposed Regulations-Water Quality



  • Impaired Water Identification (18 A.A.C. 9, arts. 9, 10). Hearings Sept. 25 and 27 and Oct. 2; comments due Oct. 5. This rulemaking establishes a new Article dealing with the methodology required under A.R.S. §49-232(C) to identify impaired waters and specify the factors required under A.R.S. §49-233(C) for prioritizing navigable waters that require development of total maximum daily loads. See http://www.adeq.state.az.us/lead/osc/draftrules.html#Impaired 

  • Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) (18 A.A.C. 9, arts. 9, 10). Hearings Sept. 17, 18, 19; comments due Sept. 20. This rulemaking establishes a state program, authorized by the legislature under H.B. 2426 (2001 legislative session), that governs all facilities that discharge pollutants from a point source into navigable waters (waters of the United States). The AZPDES program incorporates by reference certain Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.s) relating to the federal NPDES program, and revises certain C.F.R.s for clarity and to reflect conditions in the arid southwest environment. See http://www.adeq.state.az.us/lead/osc/draftrules.html#Arizona 

  • Water Infrastructure Finance Authority (18 A.A.C. 15). The Water Infrastructure Finance Authority of Arizona (WIFA) is a self-supporting public financing agency that provides financial and technical assistance to drinking water and waste water facilities. WIFA pays administrative costs from either income or a maximum of four percent of federal capitalization grants. This rulemaking will allow for more timely processing of applications for financial or technical assistance, and will streamline the process used by WIFA to determine which systems have the greatest need. Hearing Sept. 18; comments due Sept. 20. See http://www.sosaz.com/aar/2001/33/contents.shtm 

  • Safe Drinking Water: Filtration, Disinfection, and Public Notice (18 A.A.C. 4). Hearings Oct. 9-12. ADEQ intends to promulgate new rules for public notice, filtration, disinfectants and disinfection byproducts. The rules will prescribe new timeframes and delivery methods for public notice, additional monitoring for disinfection byproducts and filtration, and establish new maximum contaminant levels and maximum disinfectant residual concentrations. These new rules are being added to retain primary enforcement authority for the national primary drinking water rules in Arizona. See http://www.sosaz.com/aar/2001/32/contents.shtm 

Proposed Regulations-Underground Storage Tanks



  • This proposed rule is the latest in a series of rulemakings that implement the UST program. A.R.S. § 49-1014(A) requires the director of ADEQ to "adopt" rules to provide for the administration of the UST program and secure approval of the program from the EPA. The UST program regulates, as specified in statute, persons responsible for activities associated with UST systems. This proposed rule will complete the technical requirements for the management of aUST found at 18 A.A.C. 12, Article 2 (18 A.A.C. 12, Articles 1-8, contain most of the basic UST elements.) It will fulfill the statutory requirement to develop rules to implement the reporting and investigation of suspected releases and taking corrective action on confirmed releases of regulated substances from UST systems. These statutory requirements are found at A.R.S. §§49-1004 and 49-1005. In order to implement these statutory requirements, the proposed rule also adds several definitions to those currently codified. The proposal also provides a general clarification of the compliance requirements of owners, operators, and other persons subject to regulation under the UST program as provided in 18 A.A.C. 12. Hearing Oct. 12; comments due Oct. 19. See http://www.sosaz.com/aar/2001/34/contents.shtm 

Air Quality Exceptional and Natural Events Policy



  • In Apr. 1999, the Air Quality Division finalized an Air Quality Exceptional and Natural Events Policy based on U.S. EPA guidance, "Areas Affected by PM10 Natural Events," and stakeholder input. The policy is applicable in areas that violate a PM NAAQS and the violation is shown to be the result of an exceptional or natural event such as unusually high winds or wildfires. The applicable air pollution control agency may utilize ADEQ's policy to develop a natural events action plan (NEAP) in lieu of becoming designated as a nonattainment area by EPA. The NEAP must contain documentation and analysis showing a causal relationship of the ambient air quality monitored exceedance(s) and the natural event, details of public notification and education programs, descriptions of best available control measures (BACM), and area of applicability for the BACM. 

  • ADEQ Air Quality Exceptional and Natural Events Policy, see http://www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/air/plan/download/adeqpolicy.pdf 

  • Comments related to ADEQ's Draft Best Available Control Measures List, see http://www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/air/plan/download/bacmcom.pdf 

  • Responsiveness Summary for ADEQ Air Quality Exceptional and Natural Events Policy PM10 Best Available Control Measures List, see http://www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/air/plan/download/bacsum.pdf 

  • ADEQ Air Quality Exceptional and Natural Events Policy PM10 Best Available Control Measures List, see http://www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/air/plan/download/bacmlist.pdf 

Water Quality-Opening of NPDES Update Rulemaking Docket



  • Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) (18 A.A.C. 9, Articles 9 and 10). This rulemaking establishes a state program, authorized by the legislature under H.B. 2426 in the 2001 legislative session, that governs all facilities that discharge pollutants from a point source into navigable waters (waters of the United States). The AZPDES program incorporates by reference certain Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.s) relating to the federal NPDES program, and revises certain C.F.R.s for clarity and to reflect conditions in the arid southwest environment. Draft rules available. See http://www.sosaz.com/aar/2001/26/docket.pdf 

Air Quality-Opening of Rulemaking Docket



  • San Manuel Copper Smelter (18 A.A.C. 2, Art. 7). The rule would propose source-requested reductions in emission limits applicable to a copper smelter that has been shut down and is considering resuming operation. See http://www.sosaz.com/aar/2001/26/docket.pdf 

  • Regional Haze SIP development. ADEQ has been working with stakeholders to develop a revision to the SIP to address visibility impairment that may be caused by specific categories of stationary sources built between 1962 and 1977 (40 C.F.R. §51.300-.307). The SIP will replace the federal implementation plan imposed by the EPA in 1985 for this type of visibility impairment. A major component of the SIP is a rule that details the process that ADEQ will follow when a major industrial source is identified as a potential contributor to visibility impairment in a specific Class 1 area. Meetings scheduled through Nov. See http://www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/air/plan/haze.html 

Intel Ocotillo Project XL Renewal Update



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)



Superfund Program-Proposed Registry Inclusions, Prospective Purchaser Agreements



Current Air Quality Readings/Forecasts


red bar graphicARKANSAS


Dept. of Environmental Quality


Proposed Regulation Repeal-Safe Drinking Water




  • Public hearing Sept. 18 regarding proposed repeal of Commission Regulation No. 10, the Arkansas Revolving Loan Fund for wastewater treatment plant construction assistance loans. Act 459 of the 2001 Arkansas General Assembly transferred the authority for operating the Revolving Loan Fund program from the Pollution Control and Ecology Commission and DEQ to the Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation Commission, effective July 1, 2001. To enable continued operation of the Revolving Loan Fund, the Soil and Water Conservation Commission has already adopted a regulation nearly identical to the Pollution Control and Ecology Commission's Regulation No. 10, thus making the PC&E Commission regulation moot. Comments are due Oct. 3. See http://www.adeq.state.ar.us/custsvs/pa/default.htm 


Self-Audit Form for Arkansas USTs and ASTs


red bar graphicCALIFORNIA


Air Resources Board


Public Hearing to Consider Adoption and Amendment to the Vapor Recovery Certification and Test Procedure Regulations



Public Hearing to Consider Amendments to the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Fee Regulation for Fiscal Year
2001-2002



Public Hearing to Consider Amendments Adopting More Stringent Emission Standards for 2007 and Subsequent Model Year New Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines



Bay Area Ozone Attainment Plan Delayed



Fleet Rule & Reporting Requirements/Urban Bus Transit Agencies



Proposed Automotive and Mobile Equipment Coatings ATCM 



Voluntary Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Proposed Regulation Update-Draft Regulations



Dept. of Toxic Substances Control


Unified Program Administrative Authority-Workshop Sept. 13



The Secretary's and the California United Program Agency's Responsibilities Regarding the State Surcharge--45-Day Public Notice and Comment Period



Emergency Regulations-Cathode Ray Tubes



Guidance Document Availability



Draft Public Participation Policy Manual



Public Notices



Extension to the 90-Day Hazardous Waste Storage Limit for Generators--Application and Instructions



Integrated Waste Management Board


Sept. 11-12 Board Meeting Agenda



Emergency Regulations-Permit Enforcement Policy



Proposed Regulations-Playground Safety and Recycling Act Grants



  • Published in the California Regulatory Notice Register for 45-day public comment period on June 29, 2001. 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. Comments due Aug. 13. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/Playground/  

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. The Board considered adopting the regulations at its Aug. 14-15, 2001, meeting. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/Insuranc/ At the meeting, the Board directed staff to initiate a second 15-day comment period. 

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. At its Sept. 11-12, 2002 meeting, the Board will consider approving the permanent regulations for a 45-day public comment period. 

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-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 Mar. 20-21, 2001, 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 Jan. 2001, revised the regulations based on this feedback. The Board discussed issues related to this package at its Feb. 20-22, 2001, meeting. The Board considered approval of the regulations for a 45-day public comment period at its Aug. 14-15, 2001, meeting. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/Organics/ At the meeting, the Board directed staff to initiate a 45-day public comment period. 

Proposed Regulations-LEA Grants



  • New regulations for the local enforcement agency (LEA) grants program. The Permitting and Enforcement Committee approved these draft regulations for public notice in Sept. 1997, however, LEA outreach staff workload forestalled the public notice period. The Board approved the regulations for a 45-day public comment period at its June 19-20, 2001 meeting. Staff is currently preparing the regulation package for noticing. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/leagrant/ 

Draft Regulations-Construction & Demolition Materials



  • Placement of facilities and operations handling inert and construction and demolition debris into regulatory tiers, and setting minimum standards. In Dec. 2000, the Board approved a two-phase approach to this rulemaking. Phase I will cover the transfer and processing of construction and demolition debris. Informal workshops for this Phase I are expected in summer 2001. Phase II will follow and will cover the disposal of construction, demolition, and inert debris. At the Aug. 14-15, 2001, meeting staff presented to the Board a proposed schedule with major milestones, as well as a copy of the initial draft proposed regulations for Phase I. Board and public input will be received during the agenda presentation. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/cdmater/ 

Draft Regulations-Closure and Post-closure Maintenance Plans



Water Resources Control Board


TMDL Development Public Notices, Drafts



Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment


Final Technical Support Documents for Public Health Goals for Tetrachloroethylene in Drinking Water



Final Technical Support Documents for Public Health Goals for Uranium and Nickel in Drinking Water



Update on Proposition 65 Activities



South Coast Air Quality Management District


Proposed Rule 1133–Emission Reductions from Composting Facilities and Related Operations



  • The objective of PR 1133 is to reduce ammonia (NH3), volatile organic compound (VOC), and PM10 emissions from composting and related operations, such as chipping and grinding facilities for wood and green waste. The proposed control strategies include enclosure, aerated static or in-vessel compost pile, biofilter or equivalent emission control equipment, and compliance plans. PR 1133 would implement control measure WST-02 "Emission Reductions from Composting" from the 1997 Air Quality Management Plan and the 1999 Amendment to the 1997 Ozone SIP. The proposal would: (1) require composting and chipping/grinding facilities to submit compliance plans; (2) by Jan. 1, 2003 or Jan. 1, 2005, depending on the type and size of the operation, provide that active composting at all facilities must occur in enclosed aerated static or in-vessel piles with contaminated air vented to an emission control equipment with overall control efficiency of 75% for NH3 and 90% for VOC; (3) require enclosure of the compost feedstock preparation, curing, and storage areas; (4) require operation, monitoring, testing, and recordkeeping; and (5) exempt all backyard, nursery, and community composting of on-site materials, as well as small composting or wood/green waste chipping/grinding facilities. Workshop was Sept. 5; comments due Sept. 11. See http://www.aqmd.gov/pub_edu/notice_pr1133.html 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 102-Definitions of Terms



  • AQMD is considering amendments to Rule 102-Definition of Terms to add a definition for Clean Air Solvent
    Certification, a voluntary program for cleaning materials that meet or exceed the VOC content limits that do not contain toxic or ozone depleting compounds, and make a change to the definition of Clean Air Solvent. The current maximum VOC content requirement of 50 grams per liter is proposed to be changed to 25 grams
    per liter in order to assure that Clean Air Solvents certify materials that reflect the advancement in solvent cleaning technology and improved accuracy of test methods. Public hearing Sept. 21. See http://www.aqmd.gov/pub_edu/nph102.html 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 1124-Aerospace Assembly Component Manufacturing Operations



  • Sept. 21 public hearing. The objective of the proposed amendment is to adjust the VOC limits and compliance dates for several aerospace coating, sealant, and adhesive categories to reflect the state of the technology. In addition, an industry-specific alternative to the risk-reduction plan requirements of Rule
    1402 will be established. Other minor improvements and clarifications are also included. The proposed amendments will forgo emission reductions of approximately 50 pounds of VOC emissions per day in 2003, but are potentially offset by 2005. See http://www.aqmd.gov/pub_edu/nph1124.html 

red bar graphicCOLORADO


Water Quality Control Commission


Rulemaking Hearings



  • Nov. 13 hearing regarding a proposal by the Cripple Creek & Victor Gold Mining Company to revise the pH standards for Arequa Gulch, segment 22a of the Upper Arkansas, in the Classifications and Numeric Standards for the Arkansas River Basin, Regulation #32 (5 CCR 1002-32). See http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/op/wqcc/0111arequaph.pdf 

  • Nov. 13 hearing regarding revisions to: (1) the Procedural Rules, Regulation #21 (5 CCR 1002-21), and (2) the Colorado Discharge Permit Regulations, Regulation #61 (5 CCR 1002-61), to address concerns identified by the Office of Legislative Legal Services. See http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/op/wqcc/wqwcrnot.html 

  • Oct. 9 hearing for consideration of (1) approval of a proposed Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund Intended Use Plan for FY02, Regulation #52 (5 CCR 1002-52); (2) approval of a Domestic Wastewater Treatment Grant Program Intended Use Plan for FY02, Regulation #54 (5 CCR 1002-54); and (3) approval of revisions to Regulation #53 (5 CCR 1002-53) to incorporate changes to expand the program to comply with H.B. 01-1246. See http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/op/wqcc/wqwcrnot.html 

red bar graphicCONNECTICUT


Dept. of Envtl. Protection


Compost Erosion Control Study



Permit Hearings-Calendar


red bar graphicDELAWARE


Dept. of Nat. Resources and Envtl. Control


Notices of Violation



Regulatory Update/Public Notices


red bar graphicFLORIDA


Dept. of Environmental Protection


Governor, Cabinet Approve Land Acquisition



  • Governor Jeb Bush and the Florida Cabinet approved a land purchase that connects the Lake Wales Ridge Wildlife and Environmental Area with the Lake Istokpoga Fish Management Area. This $6.4 million parcel, located in Highlands County, was purchased jointly by DEP and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. See http://www.dep.state.fl.us/comm/releases/2001/01-150.htm 

Arrest for Illegal Disposal of Biomedical Waste



Proposed Regulations-Air Quality



  • Rule 62-204, federal regulations adopted by reference. Proposed ruleamendments change the rule chapter name, correcttypographical errors and update through June 30, 2001, theadoptions by reference of air pollution regulations promulgatedby the U.S. EPA at 40C.F.R. pts. 60, 61, and 63. Comments due Aug. 31. 

Rule Development Workshop



  • Sept. 20 public meeting, West Palm Beach, on rule development for the establishment of a phosphorus water quality criterion for the Everglades Protection Area pursuant to the Everglades Forever Act. A copy of the agenda may be obtained by contacting: Kristi Mader, Department of Environmental Protection, Everglades Technical Support Section, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS #3560, Tallahassee, Fla. 32399-2400, (850)921-5213.

red bar graphicGEORGIA


Dept. of Natural Resources, Envtl. Protection Division


Air Permit Applications


red bar graphicHAWAII


Office of Envtl. Quality Control


Air Quality-Permit Applications



Environmental Impact Notices


red bar graphicIDAHO


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Outstanding Resource Waters-Petitions



Pending Permit Applications


red bar graphicILLINOIS


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: UIC Corrections, U.S. EPA Amendments (July 1, 1999, through June 30, 2000)–Adopted Rule, Final Order, Opinion and Order issued Aug. 9



  • In the Matter of: Wastewater Pretreatment Update, U.S. EPA Amendments (July 1, 2000, through Dec. 31, 2000)–Adopted Rule, Final Order, Opinion and Order issued Aug. 9. 



  • 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 July 26 adopted a final 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 (TACO): 35 Ill. Adm. Code 742–The Board July 26 adopted a final opinion and order in this matter to amend the standards for tiered approach to corrective action objectives (35 Ill. Adm. Code 742). See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Meeting/minutes.htm 



  • In the Matter of: Proposed MTBE Groundwater Quality Standards Amendments: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620– Proposed Rule, First Notice, Opinion and Order issued July 26. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Meeting/agenda.htm 



  • In the Matter of: Provisional Variances from Water Temperature Standards: Proposed New 35 Ill. Adm. Code 301.109. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/rules/proposal.htm  



  • In the Matter of: SDWA Update, USEPA Amendments (July 1, 2000, through December 31, 2000; Radionuclides)–The Board June 21 adopted a proposal for public comment in this “identical-in-substance” rulemaking to amend the Board’s public water supply regulations. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Meeting/minutes.htm 



  • In the Matter of: Petition of Rhodia, Inc. and Thorn Creek Basin Sanitary District for an Adjusted Standard from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.208 and 304.105–The Board July 26 found the petition deficient in this request for an adjusted standard involving a Cook County facility, and ordered petitioner to file an amended petition to cure deficiencies no later than Sept. 14, 2001, or the petition would be subject to dismissal. 



  • In the Matter of: Petition of Dixon Marquette Cement Company for an Adjusted Standard from 35 Ill. Adm. Code Parts 811 & 814–The Board July 26 granted parties a motion for leave to file a response instanter and for extension of time to file a reply to the response. 



  • 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 and cleanup 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. The Board adopted a first notice opinion and order June 21. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/RULES/R01-013/HearingRecords.htm and   http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/RULES/106prop.pdf and http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Meeting/minutes.htm  



  • 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.   


Open Regulatory Dockets



Envtl. Protection Agency


Permit Applications/Public Hearings


red bar graphic  INDIANA


Dept. of Envtl. Management


Final Regulations-Air Quality



  • Amends 326 IAC 20-23-1 concerning off-site waste and recovery operations. Adds 326 IAC 20-33 concerning pulp and paper production (noncombustion). Adds 326 IAC 20-34 concerning phosphoric acid manufacturing and phosphate fertilizers production. Adds 326 IAC 20-35 concerning tanks level 1. Adds 326 IAC 20-36 concerning containers. Adds 326 IAC 20-37 concerning surface impoundments. Adds 326 IAC 20-38 concerning individual drain systems. Adds 326 IAC 20-39 concerning closed vent systems, control devices, recovery devices, and routing to a fuel gas system or a process. Adds 326 IAC 20-40 concerning equipment leaks control level 1. Adds 326 IAC 20-41 concerning equipment leaks control level 2. Adds 326 IAC 20-42 concerning oil-water separators and organic-water separators. Adds 326 IAC 20-43 concerning storage vessels (tanks) control level 2. Adds 326 IAC 20-44 concerning generic maximum achievable control technology standards. Adds 326 IAC 20-45 concerning pesticide active ingredient. Adds 326 IAC 20-46 concerning mineral wool production. Adds 326 IAC 20-47 concerning wool fiberglass manufacturing.

  • Adds 326 IAC 20-30, 326 IAC 20-31, and 326 IAC 20-32, national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for oil and natural gas production, natural gas transmission and storage, and publicly owned treatment works.

Final Regulations-Water Quality



  • Amends drinking water standards rules concerning analytical methods for radionuclides, variance and exemption rules, electronic reporting of drinking water monitoring data, clarification of reporting requirements, analytical methods for chemical and microbiological contaminants, and repeals outdated turbidity requirements and unregulated monitoring requirements. Repeals 327 IAC 8-2-6, 327 IAC 8-2-6.1, 327 IAC 8-2-23,
    327 IAC 8-2-25, 327 IAC 8-2-26, 327 IAC 8-2-27, and 327 IAC 8-2-28.

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality



  • Amends 326 IAC to change any incorporation by reference of the Federal Register to its CFR citation published in the July 1, 2000, edition of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.). Amends 326 IAC 1-1-3 concerning references to the C.F.R. to update any references to the C.F.R. in Title 326 to mean the July 1, 2000, edition. Adds 326 IAC 1-1-3.5 and 326 IAC 1-2-20.5 to establish references to and definition of the
    Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors AP-42 and Supplements. 

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. 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-Water Quality



  • Draft rule language available for amendments to rules concerning 327 IAC 15 that affect stormwater run-off associated with construction activity, and stormwater discharges associated with industrial activity.

Proposed Regulations-Solid Waste Management



  • Comment requested regarding possible amendments to rules in 329 IAC 10 through 329 IAC 13 to remove references to industrial waste and special waste as required by Public Law 218-2001 (HEA 1830).

  • Draft rule language development for amendments to rules concerning the hazardous waste management permit program and related hazardous waste management. This rulemaking will incorporate the following amendments to the federal hazardous waste management regulations at 40 C.F.R. pt. 260 through 40 C.F.R. pt. 270, published in the Federal Register from July 10, 2000, through May 16, 2001:

Federal


Register

Publication Date

Subject

65 FR 42292

July 10, 2000

NESHAPS: Final Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants For Hazardous Waste Combustors; Final Rule, Technical Correction

65 FR 67068

November 8, 2000

Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Chlorinated Aliphatics Production Wastes; Land Disposal Restrictions for Newly Identified Wastes; CERCLA Hazardous Substance Designation and Reportable Quantities, (K174/K175) Final Rule

5 FR 81373

December 26,2000

Deferral of Phase IV Standards for PCB’s as a Constituent Subject to Treatment in Soil; Final Rule

66 FR 24270

May 14, 2001

NESHAPS: Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Hazardous Waste Combustors; Final Rule; Implementation of Court Order

66 FR 27218

May 16, 2001

Storage, Treatment, Transportation, and Disposal of Mixed Waste; Final Rule

66 FR 27266

May 16, 2001

Hazardous Waste Identification Rule (HWIR): Revisions to the Mixture and Derived-From Rules; Final Rule





  • Public Law 143-2000, SECTION 3, repealed provisions of IC 13-22-4 relating to the Indiana Hazardous Waste Manifest and required hazardous waste generators to use the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest Form adopted by EPA rather than the version of those forms currently provided by IDEM to generators for a fee. The 2000 Hazardous Waste Annual Update (LSA Document #00-180(F)) repealed those sections of 329 IAC 3.1-7 relating to the Indiana Hazardous Waste Manifest. However, 329 IAC 3.1-9-2(6) and 329 IAC 3.1-10-2(8), that required permitted treatment, storage and disposal facilities to sent copies of the manifest to IDEM were not repealed. This rulemaking would repeal those provisions. 329 IAC 3.1-7-2 would be amended to remove a provision that requires generators to enter waste handling codes on the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest, because this requirement conflicts with IC 13-22-4-3.1. This amendment simplifies the manifest provisions. Finally, the 2000 Hazardous Waste Annual Update (LSA Document #00-180(F)) repealed the Indiana requirements for universal waste lamps at 329 IAC 3.1-16 and incorporated by reference the federal universal waste lamp regulations in 40 CFR 273. The 2000 Update did not repeal the definitions of "electric lamp" and "mercury-containing lamp" in 329 IAC 3.1-4. Because those terms are defined in 40 CFR 273, the definitions in 329 IAC 3.1-4 are not needed and would be repealed in this rulemaking. Public hearing Oct. 16. 


See http://www.state.in.us/legislative/register/September-1-2001.html 


Pending Permit Applications


red bar graphicKANSAS


Department of Health & Environment, Division of Environment


KDHE "Kansas Environmental News"


red bar graphicKENTUCKY


Dept. for Envtl. Protection, Division of Air Quality


Permit Applications/Hearing Notices 



Dept. for Envtl. Protection, Division of Water


Permit Applications  



Proposed Regulations-Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations



Proposed 401 KAR 8:022. Sanitary surveys




  • Subject of Sept. 25 hearing. KRS 224.10-100 and 224.10-110 authorize the Cabinet to promulgate administrative regulations for the regulation and control of the purification of water for public and semipublic use. This administrative regulation contains the requirements of a systematic program for conducting sanitary surveys by the cabinet and requirements on the public water system subject to a sanitary survey. The expected benefits from the administrative regulation are: Kentucky will have an approvable program for conducting sanitary surveys of public water systems as is required by 40 C.F.R. §§142.12(b)(2) and 142.16(b). Thus, Kentucky will be able to maintain its primacy of the enforcement of the federal regulations for public water systems pursuant to 40 C.F.R. Part 141. The public hearing will be held if it is requested by at least ten calendar days prior to Sept. 25. The request must be in writing, by five persons or by an administrative body or an association having at least five members, provided that a minimum of
    five persons, or one person representing an administrative body or association, agree to be present at the public hearing. See http://water.nr.state.ky.us/dow/hrgnots.htm#DW 



  • In addition, and in accordance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 and the National Pretreatment Program, the Louisville and Jefferson County Metropolitan Sewer District has developed and submitted for approval by the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, Division of Water, a modification to the pretreatment program for its publicly owned treatment works (POTW). KNREPC, Division of Water, has made a preliminary determination that this POTW pretreatment program modification meets the requirements of 401KAR 5:057, Section 6 and 40 C.F.R. Part 403. The modification consists of a revision to the Wastewater Discharge Regulations to incorporate the Project XL Final Project Agreement (FPA) and revisions to the local discharge limitations for the Morris Forman, Hite Creek, and Jeffersontown Wastewater Treatment Plants. Hearing Sept. 27; comments due same day. See http://water.nr.state.ky.us/dow/hrgnots.htm#DW 


Proposed, Draft TMDLs


red bar graphicLOUISIANA


Dept. of Environmental Quality


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-Control of Nitrogen Oxides Emissions (LAC 33:III.Chapter 22) 



Final Regulations-Asbestos-Containing Materials in Schools and State Buildings (LAC 33:III.2707 and 2721) 



Draft Five-Year Strategic Plan



Permit Applications


red bar graphicMAINE


Dept. of Envtl. Protection


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality




  • The Department is proposing to amend the following Chapter 100 definitions: fuel burning equipment, fugitive emissions, general process source, and Part 70 major source. The amendments clarify that rock crushers and asphalt plants are general process sources, Presque Isle is no longer classified as nonattainment for fine particulate matter, and fugitive emissions include emissions from buildings, material transfer, housing material, and processing equipment. The definitions of recovery boiler, six minute block average for non-continuous opacity monitors, and six minute block average for continuous opacity monitors have been added. The U.S. EPA  address has been deleted under that definition. Some of these definitions are being amended because of proposed changes to the Department's Ch. 101 Visible Emissions Regulation. Comments due Oct. 5. 



  • Chapter 101, Visible Emissions. The Department is proposing to repeal and replace this regulation which establishes opacity limits for several types of air emission sources. Opacity is the measure of the density of smoke emitted from a stack. The proposed changes make the opacity limits more stringent for certain types of sources, including recovery boilers, rock crushers, and large oil-fired boilers. Incinerators, permitted open burning, and municipal waste combusters are not regulated by this rule. Comments due Oct. 5. See http://www.state.me.us/sos/cec/rcn/apa/notices/081501.htm 


Final Regulations-Air Quality




  • Chapter 145, NOx Control Program. This new rule requires affected sources to install selective non-catalytic reduction or a control technology determined by the Board to achieve essentially equivalent NOx reductions on each unit by May 1, 2003. In addition to a control technology requirement, the rule establishes interim emission limitations for the period from June 15, 2003, through Dec. 30, 2004, and final emission limitations thereafter. The final emission limitations, which become effective on Jan. 1, 2005, require electric generating units with a maximum heat input capacity of less. than 750 million Btu per hour to meet a 0.22 lb./mm Btu emission limit. Electric generating units with a maximum heat input capacity of 750 million Btu per hour or greater must meet a 0.15 lb./mm Btu emission limit. Finally, indirect heat exchangers, primary boilers and resource recovery units with a maximum heat input capacity greater than 250 million Btu per hour must continue to meet the 0.20 lb./mm Btu emission limit. The rule also establishes provisions for an alternative emission limitation in the event a source cannot achieve the final emission limitations after installing and optimizing an approved control technology. Any source seeking an alternative emission limitation must apply to the Board before the Jan. 1, 2005, final emission limitation deadline, and has the burden of proof in demonstrating that achieving the final emission limitations is technically infeasible. Effective July 22.



  • On July 5, 2001, the Board of Environmental Protection adopted amendments to the following federal regulations by reference: Ch. 143, New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and Ch. 144, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS). The chapters are applicable statewide. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 offer states the option of accepting delegation for NSPS and NESHAPS federal requirements for incorporation into the states regulatory programs to reduce dual regulatory reporting requirements on industry and streamline the air emission licensing processes. All standards are implemented through the air emission licensing process. Through this action, the DEP has incorporated additional source categories of NSPS and NESHAPS that have been delegated to the state since the 1970's as well as the newer NESHAPS requirements, in accordance with the Maine Administrative Procedure Act (MAPA) process, to ensure the state has full implementation and enforcement authority through the state's Title V licensing process. The promulgated chapters incorporate standards for a variety of air emissions source
    categories (both large and small businesses) that are subject to the federal standards. Effective Sept. 2. See http://www.state.me.us/sos/cec/rcn/apa/notices/090501.htm  

red bar graphicMARYLAND


Dept. of the Environment


Public Meetings/Hearings     



Update No. 1 to the Cleanup Standards for Soil and Groundwater



Water Quality Standard-Triennial Review



Ozone Forecast


red bar graphicMASSACHUSETTS


Dept. of Envtl. Protection


Draft Amendments to 310 CMR 27.00, Underground Injection Control Regulations



Guidelines for Private Drinking Water Wells



Enforcement Actions


red bar graphic  MICHIGAN


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality



  • DEQ intends to formally adopt proposed revisions to the air pollution control rules (ORR 1998-036EQ) revising R 336.1210 through R 336.1215 and R 336.1299. These proposed rules include changes intended to address outstanding regulatory issues identified in the U.S. EPA’s Title V Interim Approval notice for Michigan’s Renewable Operating Permit Program. The proposed rules also include several provisions intended to increase operational flexibility at a permitted facility. See http://www.deq.state.mi.us/aqd/rules/rules.html. Following formal adoption, the rules will be submitted to the Office of Regulatory Reform and the Secretary of State. The proposed rules will take effect seven days after filing with the Secretary of State.

  • DEQ intends to develop a proposed revision to the air pollution control rules (ORR 2001-059EQ). The proposed amendments to R 336.1101, R 336.1105, and R 336.1113 define the words used in the proposed new rules for start-ups, shutdowns, and malfunctions that are being processed in ORR 2001-040EQ. The remainder of the changes are to bring the Part 1, General Provisions, of the Air Pollution Control Rules up to date with existing statutes and executive orders.

  • DEQ intends to formally adopt proposed revisions to the air pollution control rules (ORR 2001-001EQ) rescinding R 336.1913 and R 336.1914. This rescission is being proposed because the start-up, shutdown, and malfunction rules are not acceptable to the U.S. EPA and prevent EPA's approval of Michigan's Renewable Operating Permit Program. The proposed rescission can be viewed at http: www.deq.state.mi.us/aqd/rules/proposed%20Amendments.htm. Copies of the proposed rescission may also be obtained by contacting the Air Quality Division, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, 106 West Allegan Street, P.O. Box 30260, Lansing, Michigan 48909-7760. Following formal adoption, the rescission will be submitted to the Office of Regulatory Reform and the Secretary of State. The proposed rescission will take effect seven days after filing with the Secretary of State.

Proposed Regulations-Part 201, Environmental Remediation, of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, 1994 PA 451, as amended



  • These rules bring the rules for the state cleanup program under Part 201 up to date with statutory amendments enacted in 1995 and 1996. The rules provide for land use-based cleanup criteria; set forth algorithms for calculation of generic cleanup criteria; explain requirements for remedial action plans and other stages of response activity; clarify which types of response activity require DEQ approval; clarify affirmative obligations of liable persons; and update rules that deal with program administration, such as the inventory of contaminated sites, public funding for the cleanup program, and alternate water service. Comments due Sept. 11. See http://www.deq.state.mi.us/erd/ 

Permitting Calendar  



Corporate Clean Citizen Applications



  • Application for Clean Corporate Citizen (C3) designation from Unified Industries, Inc., 1033 Sutton Street, Howell, Michigan (Livingston County), as provided for under Administrative Rules R324.1507 to R324.1511: Clean Corporate Citizen Program. A decision on the C3 designation approval or disapproval will be made by Sept. 16. The C3 program provides incentives for improved environmental protection. Regulated establishments that have demonstrated environmental stewardship can receive C3 designation and public recognition for their efforts and are entitled to certain regulatory benefits. 

  • Application by Ford Motor Company-Engine Manufacturing Development Operations, Allen Park. A decision on the C3 designation approval or disapproval will be made by Sept. 18.

Permit Applications-Air Quality



Proposed Enforcement Consent Orders



Air Quality Division Newsletter



Surface Water Quality Division Bulletin


red bar graphicMINNESOTA


Pollution Control Agency


Proposed Amendment to Rule Governing Wastewater Treatment Assistance, Minnesota Rules Chapter 7077-
Notice of Intent to Adopt Expedited Rules without a Public Hearing



Permit Applications, Other Notices



Minnesota 2001-2005 Nonpoint Source Management Plan



Flame Metals Processing Agrees to Install Pollution Control Equipment, Pay Penalty to Resolve Air Quality Violations 


red bar graphic  MISSOURI


Dept. of Natural Resources


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality



  • 10 CSR 10-6.280 Compliance Monitoring Usage. The Air Conservation Commissionproposes to add new section (1), renumber original section(1), renumber and amend sections (2) and (3), and add new section(4). If the Commission adopts this rule action, it will not besubmitted to U.S. EPA for inclusionin the Missouri State Implementation Plan because this ruleonly establishes methodology and does not establish requirements. Sept. 26 public hearing; comments due Oct. 3. See http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/moreg/2001/v26n16/v26n16a.pdf  

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality-Preliminary Proposed Changes to the Missouri §303(d) list



Final Regulations-Air Quality



Final Regulations-Hazardous Waste



Emergency Regulation-Drinking Water-Grants



  • 10 CSR 60-13.010 Grants for Public Water Supply Districtsand Small Municipal Water Supply Systems. DNR has added criteria for providing grants for source water protection under the Conservation ReserveEnhancement Program (CREP). Applicants for this funding musthave a Department-approved source water protection program. It adopts criteria formaking grant money available for rental enhancement grant paymentsunder the CREP. These grants will help local political subdivisions providebetter protection of source water used for public drinking water.The grants will be used to compensate farmers for taking agriculturalland out of production in critical source water protectionareas. This will protect public health, safety, and welfare bydecreasing sediment, nutrient, and pesticide run-off into watersources 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 availablefor this purpose this fiscal year. See http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/moreg/2001/v26n12/v26n12a.pdf 

Proposed TMDLs



Water Pollution Control-Permit Applications


red bar graphicMONTANA


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Permit Application, Public Comment Notices


red bar graphicNEBRASKA


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Proposed Regulations-General


red bar graphicNEW HAMPSHIRE


Dept. of Envtl. Services


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality




  • Sept. 11 hearing on proposed rule that would require that any heavy-duty diesel engine in a motor vehicle manufactured for model year 2005 or 2006 be certified to meet the California standard for such engines before it can be sold in New Hampshire. The purpose of the rule is to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides and particulate matter by filling a 2-year gap in the federal standard and, thus, preventing any backsliding by manufacturers. Manufacturers are currently required to meet this standard and will be required to meet it after model year 2006, so this rule will not cause them to change their manufacturing process. See http://www.des.state.nh.us/ard/prpsdrul.htm 

red bar graphicNEW JERSEY


Dept. of Envtl. Protection


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality




  • Proposed rules address emissions from heavy-duty diesel engines. The new rules were proposed in an effort to address the gap in time between the expiration of existing emissions standards in 2004 and the adoption of federal emission standards beginning in 2007. The proposed regulations would reduce the emissions from heavy-duty diesel engines manufactured during model years 2005 and 2006. The new laws are part of a multi-state initiative led by the Ozone Transport Commission. To date, 20 states have committed to
    adopt these standards. The new regulations will compel heavy-duty diesel engine manufacturers to adhere to strict standards for emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx), two years before federal standards take effect. "New Jersey has shown great progress in our efforts to reduce air pollution, and the proposed regulations continue our aggressive strategy," said DEP Commissioner Bob Shinn. "As a corridor state in the industrial Northeast, New Jersey will benefit as more states adopt these regulations and help us meet our clean air goals." See http://www.state.nj.us/dep/aqm  


Freshwater Wetlands Regulations; Final Regulations, Proposed Regulations 




  • Final regulations become effective Sept. 4. The rule package includes the following: Special protection for small wetland vernal habitats that are crucial to the breeding of several amphibian species, some of which are threatened or endangered; limits on the placement of new homes near transition areas, or "buffers," to avoid creating backyards that cannot be used because it is a regulated area; stronger penalties for failure to promptly perform required mitigation; more efficient application and permitting procedures including combined general permits and transition area waivers, and combined freshwater wetlands and floodplain permits for some activities that occur in wetlands located in floodplains; stricter limits on the use of the general permit for isolated wetlands in certain waters; new general permits for landfill closures, stream cleaning by local governments, tree cutting for airport safety, livestock watering troughs, and brownfields redevelopment; and standard operating procedures to protect wetlands during dam removal, brownfield redevelopment, and landfill closure. The rule provides new protection for vernal habitats which are isolated wetlands recently found to be key breeding grounds for numerous amphibian and plant species. See http://www.state.nj.us/dep/landuse/announce/announce.html#fwwadoption and http://www.state.nj.us/dep/newsrel/releases/01_0092.htm 



  • Three additional proposed changes are the subject of Sept. 27 hearing. See http://www.state.nj.us/dep/landuse/announce/announce.html#fwwadoption 


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 §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 TMDLs.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 1998Water Quality Limited Segments List; (2) delist a waterbody and/or a pollutant that is currently on the 1998 Water Quality LimitedSegments List; or (3) list a waterbody and/or a pollutant that is not included on the 1998 Water Quality LimitedSegments 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 graphicNEW MEXICO


Environment Department


Proposed Solid Waste Management Regulations, 20 NMAC 9.1



Proposed TMDLs


  red bar graphic  NEW YORK


Legislature


Superfund Cleanup Reappropriation Funding Bill Passed in Special Session



Dept. of Envtl. Conservation


Proposed Regulations-6 NYCRR Part 638, Green Building Tax Credit



  • The Green Building Tax Credit provides for tax credits to building owners and tenants of eligible buildings and tenant spaces that meet certain "green" standards. Public hearings were Oct. 9 and 10. Comments due Oct. 18. See http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/enb/20010815/not0.html 

Emergency Regulations-Air Quality



  • Amendments to the following parts and subparts of Title 6 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations of the State of New York: Part 200, General Provisions, Part 201, Permits and Registration, Subpart 225-1, Fuel Composition and Use- Sulfur Limitations and Subpart 227-2, Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx). The New York State Public Service Commission, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, the New York Independent System Operator (the NYISO), and the New York State Reliability Council have expressed concern about the ability of the electricity generation, transmission and distribution system (the electric grid) in New York State to accommodate increasing loads without additional generation. These parties, all of whom share some responsibility for assuring the reliability of the electric grid in New York State, are concerned that, during the summertime peak electricity demand periods, existing generation capacity in New York State may be insufficient and power outages may occur. This potential supply shortfall is expected to disappear when the first new central electricity generating plants, currently being sited pursuant to the Public Service Law Article X process, begin operating. This should happen prior to the summer of 2003.

  • In response to the above-described concerns, the NYISO developed an Emergency Demand Response Program (EDRP) for the 2001 and 2002 peak demand periods. The EDRP is meant to encourage certain electricity customers to reduce electrical demand during emergency situations to help assure that demand will not outstrip supply and the need for load shedding (rolling blackouts) will not arise. Much of this demand reduction potential will come from the availability of emergency generation capacity. Previously, the DEC’s regulations only allow emergency generators to operate when the usual source of power is actually interrupted rather than when interruption is imminent. These amendments will permit emergency generators that are part of the EDRP to operate for up to 200 hours per year when called on by the NYISO in situations where load shedding is imminent. The emergency generators that take part in the EDRP will be defined as "centrally dispatched emergency power generating units" and the emergency generators that may be used when the primary source of power is actually unavailable will be defined as "facility specific emergency power units." "Centrally dispatched emergency power generating units" must refuel with fuel having a sulfur content of no more than 30 parts per million sulfur unless deemed unavailable. These units, "centrally dispatched emergency power generating units" and "facility specific emergency power generating units," will retain their exemption from the NOx RACT requirements of Subpart 227-2 provided they operate within the parameters of their Part 201 exemptions. 

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 that 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

Draft Enforcement Directive



  • Final draft of the Enforcement Directive entitled Management of Coal Tar Wastes and Soils and Sediments Contaminated with Coal Tar from Former Manufactured Gas Plants (MGPs). The main purpose of this directive is to facilitate the permanent treatment of soil contaminated with coal tar from the sites of former MGPs. This guidance outlines the criteria wherein coal tar waste and soils and sediment that have been contaminated with coal tar waste from former MGPs only exhibiting the toxicity characteristic for benzene (D018) may be conditionally excluded from the requirements of 6 NYCRR Parts 370 -374 and 376 when they are destined for permanent thermal treatment. Copies of the final draft of the Enforcement Directive and Responsiveness Summary are available from Eric Obrecht, Division of Environmental Remediation, DEC, 625 Broadway, Albany, NY 12233-7012.

ALJ Rulings



Environmental Notice Bulletin (Permit Applications) 



Permit Applications



Coastal Management Program Notices


red bar graphic  NORTH CAROLINA


Legislature


Compromise Likely on Utility Air Emission Legislation



Dept. of Env't and Natural Resources


Hearings On Proposed Coastal Area Management Act Land-Use Planning Improvements 



  • Through Sept. 12. The Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) requires the 20 coastal counties to develop land-use plans and update them regularly. The practice is optional for cities and towns in those counties. CAMA gives the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) authority to approve the plans. The CRC is considering needed improvements in the planning guidelines and the way the state helps local governments pay for coastal land-use plans. The new guidelines have several goals, including:

    · Giving local governments more flexibility to tailor planning to meet local needs;

    · Improving coastal water quality by requiring local governments to adopt policies that prevent or control stormwater runoff;

    · Strengthening public education requirements to ensure that all segments of the community, including non-resident property owners, have the opportunity to take part in the development of the land-use plan; and

    · Encouraging the implementation of plans by providing financial incentives to local governments and requiring them to submit periodic reports about the status of their plan. See http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us/ and http://www.enr.state.nc.us/newsrels/long4.htm 

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. 

Proposed Regulations-Coastal Management; Land Use Planning Guidelines



  • In Nov. 1998, the CRC authorized the appointment of the Land Use Plan Review Team to evaluate the 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 and will be formally proposed this summer. 

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


Division of Air Quality Permit Applications, Hearings



Division of Air Quality Penalty Assessments



DENR Enforcement Data



Water Quality-Basinwide Assessment Reports



Draft Air Quality Regulations


red bar graphic  OHIO


Envtl. Protection Agency


Preliminary Response of OEPA to Draft U.S. EPA Report Regarding State's Delegated/Authorized Environmental Programs



  • The EPA report, available for review and comment at http://www.epa.gov/region5/ohioreview/ , was prepared in response to a request by several groups that EPA withdraw OEPA's approval to conduct several delegated programs. The EPA report is particularly critical of the state's Clean Air Act program. For the state's reply, see http://www.epa.state.oh.us/pic/nr/2001/sept/usepa.html "Because of this ‘unprecedented' review, Ohio EPA's programs have withstood more scrutiny than any other state environmental program," said Ohio EPA Director Chris Jones. "I am gratified that the report represents an endorsement of the hard work and dedication of Ohio EPA staff. In addition to many positive comments about our work, U.S. EPA did not find a reason to begin a more intensive investigation as part of a formal process to withdraw programs. The report does contain  suggestions for improvement, as would be expected in any review of this nature, and Ohio EPA looks forward to working with U.S. EPA to clarify and address those issues." According to OEPA, the draft report notes the following: (1) Ohio EPA and the Ohio Attorney General's office initiate, prosecute and conclude a significant number of environmental enforcement cases. In particular, Ohio's criminal environmental enforcement program is considered among the best in the nation. (2) U.S. EPA believes that Ohio's environmental crimes prosecutions have created a credible deterrent to future criminal conduct. (3) Ohio's audit privilege law does not create a barrier to enforcing environmental regulations. This issue, the focus of the original petition filed in 1997, was resolved when changes were made to the audit law in 1998. U.S. EPA denied that portion of the petition in December 2000, affirming that Ohio EPA is able to obtain information necessary to enforce pollution control requirements. (4) There is no evidence to support petitioners' claims that Ohio EPA has abandoned enforcement efforts by allowing facilities to enter the state's voluntary cleanup program (VAP). Furthermore, the VAP statute does not conflict with hazardous waste program requirements. (5) Ohio runs an effective enforcement program for hazardous waste (as noted in annual U.S. EPA audits of the program from 1995-2000.) Hazardous waste permits are properly issued, sufficiently detailed, and consistent with federal permits. (6) Many provisions in Ohio's solid waste regulations are significantly more stringent than the federal criteria. (7) Ohio EPA has implemented a very expansive and successful Continuous Emission Monitoring (CEM) program for air pollution sources. CEM monitors measure emissions from facility smokestacks, and the results are transmitted to Ohio EPA. (8) Ohio EPA posts all Title V permits on its web page and provides on request a weekly email listing permits being released for public comment. 

OEPA Actions, Notices by County



Public Meetings



Pending Air Permits


red bar graphicOREGON


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Statewide Waste Recovery Rate Increases to 38.9%, Latest Recycling Statistics Show



Proposed Regulations-Air Quality



  • Amendment and Clarification of and Housekeeping revisions to Asbestos Rules. The proposed rule changes include a proposed nonfriable disposal rule, a demolition and renovation project survey requirement, the addition of a negative pressure enclosure requirement, and several punctuation, form, reference, and omission corrections that are considered housekeeping changes. The proposed rules also extend responsibility for proper abatement to those who "provide for" an asbestos abatement project. The proposed rules listed above also include the following proposed definitions that are intended to enhance the scope of the asbestos requirements: "accredited inspector," " negative pressure enclosure," "owner or operator," "shattered," and "survey." There are also additions to the following existing definitions, that will clarify their meaning and possibly expand their scope "asbestos abatement project," "asbestos-containing material," "friable asbestos-containing material," and "nonfriable asbestos-containing material."

    The proposed effective date of the proposed rule revisions is Jan. 01, 2002 following adoption by the EQC on Dec. 7, 2001. The start date of formal enforcement actions for the survey rule (OAR 340-248-0270(1)) will be delayed for 6 months so that the DEQ can ensure the regulated community knows about the survey rule and to give them time to adjust to the survey requirements. Existing staff in Medford, Coos Bay, Salem, Bend, Pendleton, and Portland will implement these rule revisions. Hearing Sept. 18; comments due Sept. 25. See http://www.deq.state.or.us/aq/asbestos/rule_notice816.htm 

Final Regulations-Underground Injection Controls



  • The rules prohibit the use of large capacity cesspools and systems that dispose of motor vehicle waste or hazardous materials such as petroleum products, anti-freeze, and solvents. They also require that injection system owners contact the DEQ prior to constructing new injection systems. The revised rules give more direction on the kinds of stormwater injection systems that are allowed. After Sept. 2001, owners of some kinds of injection systems will be required to have stormwater management plans to keep pollution out of stormwater before it is injected. See http://waterquality.deq.state.or.us/wq/groundwa/uichome.htm and http://www.deq.state.or.us/news/releases/255.htm 

Air Permit Applications 



Water Quality Permit Applications



Proposed Regulations-General 



Public Notices-Cleanup Remedies



Public Notices-Remedial Actions


red bar graphicPENNSYLVANIA


Dept. of Envtl. Protection


NPDES Permit Applications


red bar graphicRHODE ISLAND


Dept. of Envtl. Management


Draft Environmental Equity Policy



Upcoming Events


red bar graphicSOUTH CAROLINA


Office of the Governor


Plutonium Shipment Restrictions Sought



  • Governor Hodges called upon Department of Public Safety to, if necessary, evaluate options such as "highway roadblocks or other measures" to keep out-of-state plutonium waste from entering the state in transit to the U.S. Department of Energy Savannah River Site. See http://www.state.sc.us/governor/pressrelease.html 

Dept. of Health and Envtl. Control


Emergency Regulations--Swine Facilities with 1,000,000 Pounds or More of Normal Production Animal Live Weight at Any One Time; Proposed Regulations



  • Filed Aug. 8, effective for 90 days. On April 23, Governor Jim Hodges issued Executive Order No. 2001-11 which declared a State of Emergency due to the threat of a disaster within the State due to additional larger swine facilities proposing to locate in South Carolina. The Executive Order also ordered the "Board of Health and Environmental Control to meet at the earliest possible time to consider an administrative moratorium on the issuance of permits for swine facilities, lagoons and associated waste management plans or other appropriate action that will allow sufficient time for exploration of and analysis of the issues associated with the handling, storage, treatment and final disposal or utilization of wastes created by these facilities."The Board of Health and Environmental Control, as directed by the Governor, met and imposed a moratorium on issuance of permits for swine facilities until Aug. 9, 2001. While the Department is proposing revisions to S.C. Regulation 61-43, Standards for the Permitting of Agricultural Animal Facilities, the new emergency rule will address the emergency until Regulation 61-43 can be permanently amended, anticipated to take place by approximately June 1, 2002. The time period between the moratorium expiration date and probable legislative approval of the proposed regulation includes hurricane season. The regulation does not create a new permit, but ensures that appropriate requirements are applied to swine facilities permitted for 1,000,000 pounds or more of normal production animal weight at any one time until Regulation 61-43 can be permanently amended. See http://www.scdhec.net/co/regs/ 

  • For background, on the emergency rule issued Apr. 23 (with a maximum 15-day limit), but extended by DHEC until Aug. 9, see http://www.scdhec.net/eqc/water/html/agmorat.html and http://www.scdhec.net/eqc/water/pubs/agmotion.pdf. See also http://www.scdhec.net/news/releases/2001/html/nr05brd01.htm

  • To satisfy the requirements of the 1996 Act No. 460, the Department is proposing to amend R.61-43, Standards for the Permitting of Agricultural Animal Facilities. The amendment will: (1) establish a new Part 50 where all definitions are now found; (2) rewrite Part 100 (Swine Facilities) in its entirety which will be the separate and distinct regulation for swine facilities as required by 1996 Act No. 460, which included the Confined Swine Feeding Operations Act; (3) add new requirements to Part 100 which address a new class of large swine facilities; (4) modify Part 200 (Other Animal Facilities) and Part 300 (Innovative and Alternative Technology); (5) add a new section that specifically outlines requirements for manure broker operations, as well as a section that addresses integrator registration, and a section for severability; and (6) incorporate recommendations made by a Regulation Development Committee which was organized to review the regulation for issues and concerns. Among other things, the proposal will add new setbacks for the new class of large swine facilities as follows: the setback required between a large swine facility, lagoon, treatment system, or manure storage pond and waters of the state (excluding ephemeral and intermittent streams) located down slope from the facility is 2,640 feet (½ mile); if the waters of the state (not including ephemeral and intermittent streams) are designated Outstanding Resource Waters, Critical Habitat Waters of federally endangered species, or Shellfish Harvesting Waters, the setback required between a lagoon, treatment system, or manure storage pond and waters of the state is 3,960 feet (3/4 mile); the setback required between a large swine facility (including the lagoon, treatment system, and manure storage pond) and real property owned by another person or a residence (excluding the applicant’s residence) is 1,750 feet; and the setback required between a swine facility (including a lagoon, treatment system, or manure storage pond) and a potable water well (excluding the applicant’s well) is 1,750 feet. Similarly, manure treatment/storage structures must be designed for the 50 year-24 hour storm event and provide at least two (2) feet of freeboard; lagoons and manure storage ponds shall be lined with a geomembrane liner such that the vertical hydraulic conductivity does not exceed 5x 10-7 cm/sec; large swine facilities are prohibited from utilizing open lagoons or manure storage ponds and must be designed with airtight covers; facilities shall utilize new technologies for the manure treatment and storage; air pollution control devices utilizing the best available technology must be installed on all lagoon cover vents and openings to remove ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, methane, formaldehyde, and any other organic and inorganic air pollutants; air pollution control devices must meet all the requirements of the Department and the Bureau of Air Quality, and an appropriate air quality control permit must be obtained; quarterly monitoring of groundwater monitoring wells will be required; and the use of automated lagoon level monitoring devices will be mandated. Informational meeting Sept. 24; interested persons are also provided an opportunity to submit written comments on the proposed amendment by writing to Joy Shealy at Bureau of Water, S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control, 2600 Bull Street, Columbia, S.C. 29201; Fax (803) 898-4095; Comments may also be sent by E-mail to agcomments@columb32.dhec.state.sc.us. Additionally, the Department is asking the public to provide specific comments on: (a) changing the maximum four acre swine lagoon size restriction to a volume restriction of 1,000,0000 cubic feet; (b) when a closed facility’s permit should be considered invalid; (c) phasing out lagoons at existing agricultural facilities (swine and other animal facilities); and (d) adding more specific restrictions on manure utilization areas based on depth to seasonal high water table. All comments must be received no later than 5:00 p.m., Sept. 24, 2001.

Revised Air Modeling Guidelines Available



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. A Notice of Proposed Regulation appeared in the State Register on July 27,  regarding public comment and 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 that 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. A Notice of Proposed Regulation appeared in the State Register on July 27. 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. A Notice of Proposed Regulation appeared in the State Register on July 27, 2001. 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-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.


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality




  • Pursuant to S.C. Code §48-1-10 et seq., DHEC is proposing to amend Regulation 61-62, Air Pollution Control Regulations and Standards, to incorporate recent federal amendments to air quality regulations. The Department is also making corrections and clarifications to the existing regulations to improve ease of use of the regulations by the regulated community. In addition, the Department proposes to amend 61-62.5, Standard 7, Prevention of Significant Deterioration, and the South Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP), to maintain conformity with federal requirements pursuant to 40 C.F.R. Parts 51 and 52 and ensure compliance with federal standards. Public meeting Sept. 24; comments due same date. 


Permit Application Notices


red bar graphic  TENNESSEE


Dept. of Environment and Conservation


Board Meeting Agendas, Schedules



Permit Applications



Metropolitan Nashville and Davidson County Health Department, Pollution Control Division


Air Quality Data


red bar graphic  TEXAS


Natural Resource Conservation Commission


General Permit-Stormwater Discharges from Industrial Facilities



  • The Commissioners of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission approved issuance of TPDES General Permit No. TXR050000, covering eligible stormwater and certain non-storm water discharges from industrial facilities, on Wednesday, May 23, 2001. The permit was signed on Monday, Aug. 20, 2001 and is therefore issued and effective on that date. Facilities that were covered under the 1995 NPDES permit have 90 days from the issuance date to submit their Notice of Intent for permit coverage. This 90-day period expires on Monday, Nov. 19, 2001. All other facilities must prepare and implement a stormwater pollution prevention plan and submit an NOI as soon as possible. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/permitting/waterperm/wwperm/txro50000.pdf and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/permitting/waterperm/wwperm/industry.html 

Texas Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP), Senate Bill 5--Draft Implementation Guidelines for Incentive Funding Programs



Proposed Regulations-Underground Injection Wells



Proposed Regulations-Procedure



Proposed Regulations-RCRA Cluster Rule



  • RCRA Cluster Rules-Phase II. The rulemaking would revise TNRCC rules to conform to certain federal
    regulations as part of the on-going RCRA authorization process. It would lead to a completion of the required RCRA cluster rules by adding certain hazardous waste air emission interim status and permitting standards to other requirements of Cluster's VII-X in Rule Log No. 2000-044-335-WS. In addition, inconsistencies and errors such as statutory citations and rule references identified in a previous review of Chapter 335 will be edited along with editorial and administrative corrections to improved the readability of the chapter. Comments due Sept. 24. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/00044a305_pro.pdf (Ch. 305 revisions), http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/00044a335_pro.pdf (Ch. 335 revisions). 

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality



  • HB 2134: Chapter 114, Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program. Includes revisions that will implement portions of House Bill 2134, related to test on resale and waivers. Also includes a proposal to increase fees for the El Paso area should the county opt into LIRAP (low-income vehicle repair assistance, retrofit, and accelerated vehicle retirement program). Additionally, §114.52 will be deleted from the chapter and will be adopted by the Texas Department of Public Safety. Separate from HB 2134, the proposed rules revise the I/M testing network design; adjust administration fees; and provide incentives for inspection stations for early participation in the I/M program. Sept. 13, 14 hearings; comments due Sept. 14. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/hearings/01035114_phn.pdf (notice), http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01035114_pro.pdf (proposal). 

  • HB 2912, HB 2947, and SB 688: Notice Requirements. Relating to the issuance of certain permits for the emission of air contaminants. This proposal would establish insignificant levels for agricultural facilities, de minimis levels for all other facilities, and criteria for the meaning of net increase, for the purpose of public notice. This addresses the notice and other requirements in Article 2 of HB 2912, HB 2947, and SB 688.688. This bill project has been identified as a project with a short timeline for implementation, because it affects applications for permit amendments pending before the commission on 9/1/01 or filed with the Commission on or after 9/1/01. Hearing Sept. 20, comments due Sept. 24. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/hearings/01028a039_phn.pdf (notice), http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01028a039_pro.pdf (proposal).

Proposed Regulations-Miscellaneous



Permit Hearings



Public Hearings/Proposed Rule Tracking Log



Implementation of Laws Passed During the 77th Texas Legislative Session


red bar graphic  UTAH


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Proposed Regulations-Water Quality



  • R317-6, Ground Water Quality Protection. Proposed amendment updates the ground water standards listed in Table 1 to include new parameters that have had new primary or secondary maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) enacted under the Safe Drinking Water Act since the last ground water protection rule revision. The proposed amendment would change the "permit by rule" section of the rules for agricultural facilities in Subsection R317-6-6(2)(A)(17). The new language would eliminate the permit by rule provisions for the volume criteria for the 4 million gallon lagoons and go to a strict animal unit numbers only criteria. References to guidance documents and C.F.R. dates are being updated to the most current versions. The "probable out of compliance" criteria has been modified so that when a protection level is exceeded, the permittee only has to go to monthly monitoring when the results exceed both the protection level and the two standard deviation criteria. Public hearing Sept. 20; comments due Oct. 5. See http://www.rules.state.ut.us/publicat/bulletin/2001/20010901/23986.htm 

Permit Applications


red bar graphicVERMONT


Dept. of Envtl. Conservation


Permit Applications


red bar graphicVIRGINIA


Dept. of Envtl. Quality


Public Meeting, Hearing Notices; Other Regulatory Notices



  • Available at http://www.deq.state.va.us/public/permits.html and http://www.deq.state.va.us/cgi-bin/deq/prweb/BrowseIndex.cgi?URL_NAME=CALENDAR

  • Pursuant to § 62.1-44.15:5 D of the Code of Virginia and 9 VAC 25-210-115 E, the State Water Control Board (board) is giving notice of its intent to approve use of the Virginia Wetlands Restoration Trust Fund (the fund) as an acceptable form of compensatory mitigation for permitted impacts to state waters, including wetlands, after considering public comment for a 30-day period starting August 27, 2001. The Norfolk District Corps of Engineers (the "corps"), in their letter of August 7, 2001, has requested that the board approve use of the fund as meeting the requirements set forth in 9 VAC 25-210-115 E, including: dedication to the achievement of no net loss of wetland or stream acreage and function; consultation with the board on site selection; provision of annual reports detailing contributions by watershed; and a mechanism to establish fee amounts. In addition to their letter, the corps has provided a report on fund activities as they meet the above stated requirements. Comments due Sept. 26. See http://www.deq.state.va.us/cgi-bin/deq/prweb/BrowseRecord.cgi?URL_NAME=NOTICE&ID=214 

  • Oct. 4 Water Control Board meeting. See http://www.townhall.state.va.us/meeting/viewMeeting.cfm?MEETING_ID=1262 

  • Air Pollution Control Board; Proposed NOx SIP Call Implementation. See http://www.deq.state.va.us/pdf/air/planning/D9805PC.pdf and http://www.deq.state.va.us/pdf/air/planning/D9804TP.pdf for background information. In general, DEQ is seeking comment regarding how to redraft the proposed regulation to meet the federal requirements. However, there are specific issues relative to the changes required by the new legislation on which DEQ is seeking comment. The department is also seeking comment on how to redraft the proposed regulation to address the EPA comments in combination with a June 8, 2001, decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia remanding the growth factors that EPA used for the electric generating unit emissions budgets in the NOx SIP Call Rule for reconsideration. In addition, there are specific issues on which DEQ is seeking comment, as noted in the background document. See generally http://www.deq.state.va.us/air/planning/noxsip.html.

  • Sept. 26 hearing to receive comments on the proposed revision to the Regulations for the Control and Abatement of Air Pollution, concerning minor new and modified source review (9 VAC 5 Chapter 80, Revision YY) and the State Implementation Plan. On Feb. 15, 1999, the Board published a proposal (hereafter called the original proposal) to amend its regulations concerning new and modified new source review. In response to that request, comments were submitted that resulted in several changes being made to the original proposal. Because of the nature of the changes, the Board is not seeking comment on the additional changes. See http://www.townhall.state.va.us/meeting/viewMeeting.cfm?MEETING_ID=1276 

  • Sept. 20 Air Pollution Control Board meeting. See http://www.townhall.state.va.us/meeting/viewMeeting.cfm?MEETING_ID=1261 

  • Waste Management Board, Advisory Committee Meeting-Solid Waste Amendment 3. See http://www.townhall.state.va.us/meeting/viewMeeting.cfm?MEETING_ID=1274   

  • Advisory Committee Meeting-Regulation for Reuse of Reclaimed Wastewater, Sept. 11. See http://www.townhall.state.va.us/meeting/viewMeeting.cfm?MEETING_ID=1199   

  • The Virginia Waste Management Board is proposing to amend the Hazardous Waste Management Regulations, 9 VAC 20-60-10 et seq., in Amendment 15 A. Changes proposed include:

    (1) The removal of analogous text in Part XI and its replacement with language incorporating federal text from Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is a major change to the regulations proposed in Amendment 15 A. 

    (2) In 9 VAC 20-60-262, the requirement is removed for generators to give a 15 day prior notification before creating a new accumulation area. 

    (3) In 9 VAC 20-60-264 B 16 & 17, the use of “hazardous constituent” as used in 40 CFR 294.93 is expanded to include 40 C.F.R. pt. 294, Appendix IX constituents, and 40 C.F.R. §264.94(a)(2) is changed to include current primary drinking water standards rather than an out-dated table included in the federal text. U.S. EPA is examining its policy regarding state programs for universal waste that allow crushing of the waste lamps (mercury containing bulbs). In its own universal waste rules for used lamps (incorporated by reference in the proposed regulations), it does not allow crushing; however, many state programs, including Virginia’s, allow crushing. The proposed regulation, in a separate provision, allows crushing under controlled conditions. Hearing was Aug. 15; Sept. 14 comment deadline. See http://www.deq.state.va.us/cgi-bin/deq/prweb/BrowseRecord.cgi?URL_NAME=NOTICE&ID=172 

red bar graphic  WASHINGTON


Dept. of Ecology


Final Regulations-Air Quality



Proposed Regulations



State Environmental Policy Act Register


red bar graphicWEST VIRGINIA


Dept. of Envtl. Protection


Public Notice Bulletin (Permit Applications, Proposed Regulations)



See http://129.71.240.41/pio/pubinfocalendar.cfm 

red bar graphicWISCONSIN


Dept. of Natural Resources


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-Mercury Emissions From Coal-Fired Power Plants



  • Sept. 11 informational meeting; formal hearings follow Sept. 26-Oct.3. The proposed rule would cut mercury emissions by 30% within 5 years, 50% in 10 years, and 90% in 15 years from four electric utilities in the state with significant mercury emissions. Chapters NR 400, 405, 406, 408, 439, 445,and 446 would be revised and a new subchapter subch. II of ch. NR 446, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to the control of the atmospheric deposition of mercury, promulgated. The proposed rule contains a phased mercury reduction schedule for four major electric utilities covering a 15-year period. Five years after promulgation, a 30% reduction in baseline mercury emissions must be achieved by each major utility. A 50% reduction in baseline emissions is
    required after 10 years, and a final reduction of 90% is to be achieved after 15 years. In addition to the emission reductions by large electric utilities, the proposed rules include an emissions ceiling on mercury emissions for other utilities and large stationary sources that annually emit 10 pounds of
    mercury or more. See http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/caer/ce/news/on/index.htm#art1 

Air Rules Development



Public Hearing and Meeting Schedule



red bar graphicWYOMING


Dept. of Environmental Quality


NPDES Permit Applications



Draft Regulations-Water Quality


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

INTERNATIONAL
large red bar graphic

red bar graphicGENERAL



  • According to the BBC, Cambodia's relative political and economic stability has a downside--increased influx of traders and hunters. As  one conservationist noted, "Cambodia is in a unique situation right now, rebounding from decades of civil war and civil unrest. Surprisingly what that has done is leave intact many forests and conservation of wildlife. There is quite a biodiversity here. It's a double-edged sword, however, because it becomes the source of choice for Asian markets, such as China. We're just seeing an overabundance of wildlife leaving this country." 

  • The International Oceanographic Commission conducted a symposium, "Oceanic Science at the Dawn of a
    New Millennium," in Seoul. See http://www.hk.co.kr/times/200108/t2001082416110240110.htm 

  • Hans Kornberg, a professor at Boston University, in an op-ed piece in the Boston Globe, said that genetically modified foods hold significant promise and accused opponents of denying "this promising technology to those who need it most." See http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/233/oped/Food_fights_can_t_feed_the_hungryP.shtml 

  • Forestry experts met in Semproniano, Italy, to discuss how to manage forest resources to fight poverty
    and food insecurity. 

  • Governors of New England states and representatives of Canada agreed to jointly work toward a 75% reduction in mercury emissions by 2010.  

  • U.S. and Vietnamese scientists are expected to meet in Hawaii later this month to begin testing soil samples from Vietnam for ongoing agent orange contamination. 

  • The governor of Russia's Astrakhan voiced concerns regarding the impact of a total moratorium on commercial sturgeon fishing in the Caspian Sea, saying that the ban could adversely affect breeding efforts by reducing needed income from caviar export. 

  • The Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection (GESAMP) should be more proactive in addressing issues related to marine environmental quality, according to a report. See http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2001/sea1727.doc.htm 

  • South Africa's Marine and Coastal Management Authority is seeking increased action against poachers in the St. Lucia Nature Reserve, according to the Los Angeles Times. See http://www.latimes.com/news/ 

  • Namibia and South Africa announced plans for a transboundary conservation park. See http://www.namibian.com.na/2001/August/news/01B0E2BAD.html  

  • German car manufacturers plan on increasing prices to pay for a new European Union car recycling requirement. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_1516000/1516666.stm The manufacturers are upset about the mandate and believe it could have significant adverse economic consequences for the industry. Britain plans to implement the mandate prior to other EU members. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_1497000/1497191.stm and http://www.smmt.co.uk/news/pressreleasedisplay.asp?articleid=308. Meanwhile, Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry said it was accelerating plans to implement new fuel cell technologies. 

  • Activists in France destroyed genetically modified (GM) crops in August; they were not stopped or arrested for doing so until early September. Meanwhile, scientists in Germany announced, in the journal Nature Biotechnology, the development of GM tomatoes with higher protein content and safeguards against transmission of the genes to other crops. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1517000/1517387.stm and http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/dynapage.taf?file=/nbt/journal/v19/n9/index.html  And researchers in Scotland developed GM trees resistant to Dutch elm disease. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/scotland/newsid_1512000/1512210.stm New Zealand extended a moratorium, voluntarily agreed to, on the processing of applications for release and testing of GMOs, through Oct. 31, 2001. A Canadian commission study took a "middle of the road" approach on the issue. 

  • Scientists warned that "El Nino" climate effects, probably less intense than in 1997-98, could occur next year. See http://www.elnino.noaa.gov/forecast.html   

red bar graphicASIA



  • The World Wildlife Fund issued a report critical of China's planned large-scale water transfer project. See http://www.panda.org/news/press/news.cfm?id=2460 

  • Japan submitted a proposed program to the U.N. Environment Program for chlorofluorocarbon reduction and destruction. See http://www.env.go.jp/en/topic/ozone.html New emission standards applicable to certain heavy-duty vehicles also went into effect. 

  • India's Supreme Court asked the federal government and Delhi to discuss a compromise in Delhi's challenge to a Sept. 30 deadline for the conversion of commercial vehicles to compressed natural gas. 

red bar graphicEUROPE



  • German car manufacturers plan on increasing prices to pay for a new EU car recycling requirement. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_1516000/1516666.stm The manufacturers are upset about the mandate and believe it could have significant adverse economic consequences for the industry. Britain plans to implement the mandate prior to other EU members. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_1497000/1497191.stm and http://www.smmt.co.uk/news/pressreleasedisplay.asp?articleid=308 In a separate matter, the German chamber of commerce opposed a planned ordinance that would increase the amount of wastes diverted for recycling. 

  • Members of the European Parliament issued draft revisions that would toughen proposed mandatory waste reporting requirements. See http://www.europarl.eu.int/plenary/default_en.htm 

  • Prime Minister Lionel Jospin said he would not support new taxes, including a proposed carbon tax. He faces a tough re-election bid against President Jacques Chirac in next spring's election. 

  • Switzerland toughened its hazardous waste disposal standards, imposing a joint-and-several liability scheme. 

  • Regulations have been proposed in England that could reduce the number of oil-related water pollution incidents by up to 2,500 by the year 2005 through new plans to clean up water pollution from oil storage tanks. Environment Minister Michael Meacher said the new regulations will seek to ensure that oil cannot escape from oil tanks, through the use of secondary containment methods; save those storing oil up to £30,000 for every oil pollution incident avoided; protect wildlife and rivers from harm and damage; ensure water supplies are not disrupted; and guarantee that all new and existing oil tanks meet the minimum standards within four years. He said that "[o]il-related water pollution incidents in England accounted for 17% of all water pollution incidents in 1999, mainly due to leaks from unbunded oil storage tanks. The new regulations will reduce the number of such oil-related incidents in England by about half by the year 2005. This will be achieved by setting design standards for all above ground oil stores and requiring that secondary containment, such as a 'bund' (a surrounding wall) or 'drip tray' is in place to prevent oil escaping into controlled waters." Mr Meacher added: "Oil pollution of fresh waters has grown in recent years, causing harm to wildlife, damage to our rivers, and disruption to water supplies. These new Regulations are a cost-effective measure that will help to protect the environment." Those mainly affected by the regulations would include anyone storing oil on industrial, commercial, or institutional (residential and non-residential) premises. There are exceptions in certain circumstances, for example, where other controls exist (e.g. on farms and for underground tanks). See http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2001/010830a.htm 

  • A new expert panel will help the U.K. government address air pollution by examining sources and levels of pollution. Professor Mike Pilling of Leeds University will chair the group. The group will help with future reviews of the government's Air Quality Strategy by improving understanding of levels and sources of pollution. The government published a new Air Quality Strategy last year, which set health-based objectives for eight important air pollutants; it is currently completing a first partial review of the strategy. The Air Quality Expert Group's main functions will be: to advise the government on levels, sources and characteristics of air pollutants in the U.K.; to assess the extent of excedences of Air Quality Strategy objectives and proposed objectives, EU limit values and proposed or possible objectives and limit values, where monitoring data is not available; to analyse trends in pollutant concentrations; to assess current and future ambient concentrations of air pollutants in the U.K.; and to suggest potential priority areas for future research aimed at providing a better understanding of the issues that need to be addressed in setting air quality objectives. Environment Minister Michael Meacher said: "It is essential to get a better understanding of air pollution, to help us assess the impacts of any strategies for reduction we may propose. Assessing the levels and sources of pollution is especially complex, since the levels found in the U.K. typically come from a range of sectors, including industry, transport and the natural environment, not to mention pollutants which have come from other countries. This new expert group will be an enormous help." See http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2001/010817a.htm 

  • The Czech government has moved closer to ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. 


red bar graphicCANADA



  • New Sulphur Recovery Guidelines for the Province of Alberta-Grandfathering of Sour Gas Plants Ends in
    2016. The Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (EUB) and Alberta Environment (AENV) have completed a review of the sulphur recovery guidelines for sour gas plants in Alberta. As a result of this review, all “grandfathering” of sour gas plants in Alberta will end within 15 years. Further, both the EUB and AENV expect that the industry will make significant strides in voluntary emissions reductions from grandfathered plants within the next few years. “Grandfathering “ refers to a number of existing sour gas plants in the province, which were not required to meet revised sulphur recovery guidelines issued by the EUB in 1988. This decision was made by the EUB in 1988 based on perceived environmental benefits relative to the associated costs of emissions reduction modificaitions, and because of the then believed-to-be short life expectancy of many of these plants. See http://www.eub.gov.ab.ca/bbs/new/newsrel/2001/nr2001-33.htm and http://www.eub.gov.ab.ca/bbs/ils/ids/id2001-03.htm   

  • Proposed regulations to dry cleaning operations under the new Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) will significantly reduce the release of tetrachloroethylene (PERC), according to Environment Canada. The proposed Tetrachloroethylene Regulations, Used in Dry Cleaning, will require dry cleaners across Canada to meet new national performance requirements. "These proposed regulations will bring cleaner air, less toxic contamination in our communities and promote recycling of used solvent, as well as improve the quality of the workplace environment," said Environment Minister David Anderson. "While many dry cleaners are already greening their operations through new technologies and improved waste management, these regulations accelerate that trend, create a level playing field for the industry and ensure that public health and safety standards are met across Canada." The use of new technology by the dry cleaning industry has reduced releases of PERC by about 50% from 1994, according to a 1998 study carried out by Environment Canada. The proposed regulations will mean a further 20% reduction. Other regulations under CEPA to reduce environmental releases from solvent degreasing operations, the other major source of PERC, are being developed. The proposed regulations, published in the Canada Gazette, Part 1 for a 60-day public comment period, contain the following key provisions: the phase out of old technology dry cleaning machines by 2002; the use of cleaning machines that consume less toxic solvent by 2002; a stewardship provision for solvent suppliers to collect contaminated waste and waste water from dry cleaners; and an option for dry cleaners to manage and treat their own contaminated waste. The new regulations can be found on Environment Canada's website at http://www.ec.gc.ca/CEPARegistry and at http://canada.gc.ca/gazette/part1/pdf/g1-13533.pdf . They are expected to be in force in early 2002.


red bar graphic  CLIMATE CHANGE



  • Papua New Guinea Minister for Provincial and Local Government Iairo Lasaro warned that global warming will cause increased numbers of and more severe flooding and other events, noting that "[n]ext year we are expecting even worse disasters and we must look at finding a long-term plan. We will be appealing to the international community to help with this plan."

  • The Czech government has moved closer to ratification of the Kyoto Protocol.

  • Another round of bilateral talks involving the U.S. and Japan will take place in September, according to Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Japan will again seek to convince the U.S. to return to the Kyoto process.

  • Meanwhile, Japanese Deputy Cabinet Secretary Teijiro Furkukawa has ordered government agencies, including the Ministry of the Environment, to develop additional measures for greenhouse gas reduction.

  • German Environment Minister Juergen Trittin said he expected that his country would have a ratification bill ready for the Bundestag to discuss by December. He also said he expects Japan to ratify this year and that Russia will do so by 2003. The European Parliament overwhelmingly recommended prompt E.U. action towards development of an emissions trading regime.