Jump to Content

Weekly Update Volume 31, Issue 30

10/29/2001

LITIGATION
large red bar graphic

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


red bar graphic  CWA, TRANSFER OF WATER, "ADDITION" OF A POLLUTANT:


The Second Circuit reversed a district court decision that water that was diverted from a reservoir through a city-operated tunnel and then released into a creek is not the "addition" of a pollutant to the creek, thereby triggering the CWA's permit requirement. The transfer of water was necessary to provide drinking water to the city. An organization that used the creek for recreational purposes argued that the process caused pollutants in the form of suspended solids, turbidity, and heat to be discharged into the creek in violation of state water quality standards for turbidity and temperature.  The city argued that the release of water from the reservoir into the creek is not an "addition" that requires a permit and relied on two cases in which the courts accorded substantial deference to EPA's position that the CWA's discharge permit requirement does not apply to discharges from dams. However, the courts in those cases accorded too much deference to EPA's position, as it was based on a series of informal policy statements and litigation stances in the 1970s and 1980s. Moreover, the cases involved the recirculation of water without anything added from the outside world. According to EPA's position, for there to be an addition a point source must introduce the pollutant into navigable water from the outside world. In the present case, however, the transfer of water containing pollutants from one body of water to another, distinct body of water is plainly an addition and thus a "discharge" that demands an NPDES permit. Further, when the water and the suspended sediment therein pass from the tunnel into the creek, an "addition" of a "pollutant" from a "point source" has been made to a "navigable water," and the terms of the CWA are satisfied. The district court, therefore, erred in dismissing the organization's claim.  In addition, the organization's notice-of-intent-to-sue letter's inclusion of "suspended solids" and "settleable solids" was sufficient to notify the city of claims of turbidity but not thermal discharges. Notice of discharges of suspended solids is sufficient to notify of an eventual claim based on discharges of "turbidity" because each logically depends on the other. The presence of suspended solids, however, does not inevitably raise water temperature. The organization's thermal claim was therefore dismissed without prejudice. Catskill Mountains Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Inc. v. City of New York, No. 00-9447 (2d Cir. Oct. 23, 2001) (11 pp.).

red bar graphic  CERCLA, "NECESSARY" RESPONSE COSTS, "DISPOSAL":


The Ninth Circuit reversed a district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of a petroleum company and the federal government in a suit filed against them for cleanup costs incurred by the current owner of a mobile home park, but affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of prior owners of the park. The prior owners of the park also used it as a mobile home park. Before their ownership, a petroleum production company owned the site. After cleaning up contamination at the park, the current owner sued the prior park owners, the petroleum company, and the government under CERCLA, state nuisance law, indemnity, and various other statutes. The district court dismissed all claims, and the owner appealed. The district court erred in granting summary judgment to the government and the petroleum company on the CERCLA claim. Genuine issues of material fact preclude summary judgment on whether the response costs were "necessary." The touchstone for determining the necessity of response costs is whether there is an actual threat to human health or the environment; that necessity is not obviated when a party also has a business reason for the cleanup. Here, the district court erroneously focused on the ulterior business motive for remediation. As to the prior park owners, however, the district court properly granted summary judgment in their favor on the CERCLA issue. Based on the plain meaning of the statute, there was no disposal during their ownership. Of the terms defining "disposal," the only one that might describe the passive soil migration during their ownership is "leaking," but there was no leaking under the plain and common meaning of the word. Congressional intent further supports this interpretation. Therefore, they are not PRPs and are not subject to liability. However, the district court erred in granting the prior park owners' motion for summary judgment on the current owner's indemnity claim based on the sales agreement because there are genuine issues of material fact as to the necessity of the owner's response costs. In addition, the district court properly dismissed the owner's state nuisance claim against the government for water contamination because the claim is precluded by state law. Carson Harbor Village, Ltd. v. Unocal Corp., Nos. 98-55056 et al. (9th Cir. Oct. 24, 2001) (56 pp.).

red bar graphic  RCRA, FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT, AUTHORIZED STATE PROGRAMS, RESTITUTION:


The Ninth Circuit upheld the conviction of a fertilizer company owner who allowed hazardous waste to be disposed of without a permit while knowing that his actions placed others in imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury, but the court vacated a district court order requiring the owner to pay a $6.3 million restitution award. On appeal, the owner argued that Idaho's authorized hazardous waste program displaced the federal program, leaving no federal crimes and ousting the federal court of jurisdiction. RCRA's criminal enforcement powers, however, are meant to apply within states having authorized programs. In addition, there was sufficient evidence for the jury to convict him of disposing hazardous waste. Moreover, the hazardous waste regulations are not so vague as to deprive the owner of notice that his acts were prohibited, rendering the convictions unconstitutional. A reasonable person in the owner's position would have known of the hazardous nature of the substances without a numerically quantified, test-based standard. Further, although a jury instruction was unclear as to the mens rea applicable to his offenses, it was not clearly erroneous. Nor did an evidentiary hearing inquiring into the owner's alleged tampering of the jury warrant a new trial. The district court, however, erred in ordering the owner to pay $6.3 million in restitution to an injured employee. Restitution may be imposed only for violations under Title 18 of the U.S. Code, whereas here, the owner's crimes were violations of Title 42. United States v. Elias, No. 00-30145 (9th Cir. Oct. 23, 2001) (34 pp.).

red bar graphic  MAGNUSON-STEVENS MIGRATORY FISHERIES ACT, HIGHLY MIGRATORY SPECIES FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN:


The D.C. Circuit denied recreational fishers' challenge to the Secretary of Commerce's regulations implementing the final 1999 Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan. The fishers argued that regulations placing recreational retention limits on yellow fin tuna and on large coastal, small coastal, and pelagic sharks violated national standards set forth in the Magnuson-Stevens Act. However, the record demonstrates that the Secretary duly considered the fishers' arguments and comments and acted within his discretion when he promulgated the regulations. The fishers also argued that the yellow fin tuna retention limit violates the Magnuson-Stevens Act's international parity requirement because the limit will disadvantage U.S. fishers. Yet the fishers did not show that the Secretary failed to evaluate the likely effects, if any, on participants in the affected fisheries, or failed to minimize any disadvantage to the fishers in relation to foreign competitors. Similarly, the fishers failed to show how the yellow fin tuna retention limit violates the Regulatory Flexibility Act. In preparing a final regulatory flexibility analysis, the National Marine Fisheries Service has broad discretion in defining the "small business entities" for purposes of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The fishers' motion for summary judgment was therefore denied in its entirety. Recreational Fishing Alliance v. Evans, No. 99-2628 (RWR) (D.D.C.  Sept. 20, 2001) (40 pp.) (Defense counsel included Mark A. Brown of the U.S. DOJ in Washington DC).

red bar graphic WATER LAW, RECLAMATION ACT, RIO GRANDE VALLEY IRRIGATION PROJECT:


The Tenth Circuit affirmed a district court grant of summary judgment in favor of two Rio Grande Valley irrigation project water districts who claimed that they were owed revenues under §4-I of the Reclamation Act notwithstanding a 1939 amendment to the Act. The government argued that the amendment terminated all of the water districts' rights to revenues arising under §4-I except for those revenues covered by the amendment's saving clause, i.e., those revenues to which water districts had a preexisting legal or contractual right. The plain language of the amendment, however, does not purport to repeal §4-I. The legislative history demonstrates that the congressional intent behind the amendment was merely to deposit power revenues into the Reclamation Fund and then the general treasury, rather than to recapture all the profits to which the water districts were entitled under §4-I. The amendment does not mention the two other sources of revenue in §4-I: the leasing of project grazing and farm land, and the sale or use of town sites. Furthermore, even if the amendment's wording is confusing, that fact would cut against finding repeal by implication, which must be clear and manifest. Thus, the district court correctly held that the amendment did not repeal §4-I in its entirety. The district court also properly analyzed the scope of the amendments' modifications to §4-I, and correctly ruled that if the water districts are entitled to credits under §4-I, they are also entitled to credits from the entire Rio Grande Project. In addition, the water districts challenged the validity of the lease agreement between the Bureau of Reclamation and the Bureau of Land Management for management of grazing lands within the water districts. They argued it was not in the best interest of the project beneficiaries since the lease agreement provided no consideration to them. The federal government, however, owes no fiduciary duty to the water districts. Further, the DOI has no obligation to generate profits for the water districts, and the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to administer public lands is broad and unfettered. Elephant Butte Irrigation District of New Mexico v. United States Department of Interior, Nos. 99-2291, -2295 (10th Cir. Oct. 25, 2001) (13 pp.).

red bar graphic  SMCRA, RES JUDICATA, JURISDICTION: 


The Sixth Circuit affirmed a district court judgment upholding the Interior Board of Land Appeals' (IBLA's) decision that a mining company violated federal SMCRA regulations requiring the elimination of cliff-like rock walls known as "highwalls" at its surface coal-mining site in Kentucky. The company argued that it had initially backfilled the site properly and that the subsequent re-exposure of highwalls does not violate SMCRA. The company's interpretation of SMCRA, however, is contrary to the statutory provisions requiring the establishment of the approximate original contour and the elimination of highwalls, contrary to clear legislative intent, and unsupported by any precedent. The company also argued that the federal action was barred by res judicata because the Commonwealth of Kentucky had already decided not to hold the company responsible for any alleged violation. The IBLA, however, has consistently ruled that the principles of res judicata and collateral estoppel do not apply to the Office of Surface Mining (OSM). Finally, the company maintained that the OSM lacked jurisdiction to order the reclamation action because it does not have unlimited jurisdiction to pursue violations in primacy states, such as Kentucky. However, although Kentucky had the primary responsibility to enforce mining regulations, the OSM maintains oversight jurisdiction to enforce those regulations if the state fails to do so. Appolo Fuels, Inc. v. Babbitt, No. 00-5376 (6th Cir. Oct. 24, 2001) (6 pp.).

red bar graphic  NEPA, NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT (NHPA), DE MINIMIS IMPACTS:


The First Circuit denied a petition to review an FAA decision that authorized an airline company to provide scheduled passenger service to New York's LaGuardia Airport from a general aviation airport located in the vicinity of numerous historic parks and sites 15 miles northwest of Boston. Petitioners argued that the FAA violated NEPA and the NHPA in concluding that the additional flights--up to 10 new round trips a day--would have a de minimis environmental impact and in failing to consult further with the government agencies concerned with historic preservation. The FAA directly studied the three types of potential effects from the additional flights: noise, fuel emissions, and surface traffic from passenger travel to and from the airport. It found each to be de minimis, and petitioners provided no basis for serious doubt as to those findings. Moreover, the FAA's failure to prepare an EA or to consult further with historic preservation agencies was at most harmless error. The FAA made specific findings that the effects on the environment and on historic properties from 10 or so daily flights, against the backdrop of nearly 100,000 flights a year, would be de minimis. If the question were at all close and if plausible doubts had been raised, requiring a more elaborate assessment with more extensive consultation might serve some useful purpose. But neither is the case and, in these circumstances, the error (if there was one) is harmless. Save Our Heritage, Inc. v. Federal Aviation Administration, No. 00-2340 (1st Cir. Oct. 23, 2001) (30 pp.).

red bar graphic  PUBLIC LANDS, RIPARIAN OWNERSHIP, DREDGING:


The New York Court of Appeals held that a riparian owner may dredge public underwater lands if dredging is necessary to provide reasonable access to navigable waters and does not unreasonably interfere with the rights of the owner. A petroleum storage facility that operates on a bay sought to dredge the basin near its dock to maintain adequate depth for its barges. The facility received permission from the federal and state government but failed to seek permission from the town that owned the underwater land. The trial court denied the town's request for an injunction, but an appellate court reversed, holding that an upland owner has no riparian right to dredge public underwater lands in the absence of the public owner's permission. However, neither a riparian owner nor an underwater landowner has an unfettered veto over reasonable land uses necessary to the other's acknowledged rights. Moreover, common law adjudication has established the riparian owner's right to reasonable access, and nothing in those cases would preclude the facility in this case from dredging to preserve such access if the dredging was necessary and did not unreasonably interfere with the rights of the town. Because this standard was not applied below, the court reversed the appellate court order and remanded the case to the trial court. Town of Oyster Bay v. Commander Oil Corp., No. 122 (N.Y. Oct. 18, 2001) (15 pp.).

red bar graphic  INSURANCE, DAMAGES, KNOWN LOSS DOCTRINE:


The Wisconsin Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgments dismissing a city's claim that its insurer breached its duty to indemnify and defend the city in a state action filed against it for damages and remediation of a landfill that was leaching contaminants into the groundwater and a nearby stream and dismissing the insurer's claim that its umbrella policy does not provide coverage for a settlement between the city and the state. Under the settlement, the city agreed to pay one-third of the cost of remediation, and the state agreed to forego collection of damages. The trial court correctly concluded that the primary liability policies do not provide coverage for expenses the city will incur complying with the stipulation because the policies only cover sums payable "as damages," and the judgment includes no damages. Likewise, the insurance companies did not violate their duty to defend the city merely because the city's attorney represented the insurance company in other litigation. The trial court also properly held that the insurer's umbrella policy provides coverage for remedial expenses arising out of the stipulation. Unlike the primary insurance policies, the umbrella policy contains no language limiting its coverage to damages. Further, the trial court properly denied the insurer's motion for summary judgment based on the known loss doctrine. Whether the city knew that leachate from the landfill contained unacceptable levels of contaminants and whether it knew its remedial efforts to reduce leachate failed are matters for a jury to decide. Wisconsin v. City of Rhinelander, No.  00-2666 (Wis. Ct. App. Oct. 2, 2001) (6 pp.).

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

THE FEDERAL AGENCIES
large red bar graphic

Note: Citations below are to the Federal Register.

red bar graphic  AIR:



  • EPA announced the availability of draft guidance entitled Source Determinations for Combined Heat and Power Facilities Under the CAA New Source Review and Title V Programs. 66 FR 52403 (10/15/01). 

  • EPA partially withdrew its amendments to regulations for hazardous waste burning cement kilns, lightweight aggregate kilns, and incinerators that it promulgated on July 3, 2001 (66 Fed. Reg. 35087). 66 FR 52361 (10/15/01). 

  • EPA approved Illinois' cap-and-trade program designed to reduce VOC emissions in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area below levels required by reasonably available control technology and other regulations. 66 FR 52343 (10/15/01). 

  • EPA withdrew a final rule updating the outer continental shelf (OCS) air regulations as they apply to OCS sources off the coast of Alaska because it received adverse comments. 66 FR 53533 (10/23/01).

  • EPA approved Vermont's negative declaration under CAA §§111(d)/129 that there are no small municipal waste combustors located within its boundaries. 66 FR 52534 (10/16/01). 

  • EPA determined that the Imperial Valley PM10 moderate nonattainmnet area in California  would have attained the NAAQS for PM10 by the CAA's December 31, 1994, attainment date but for emissions emanating from outside the United States, ie, Mexico; Therefore, the area will not be subject to a finding of failure to attain and reclassification to serious. 66 FR 53106 (10/19/01). 

  • EPA determined that the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley moderate ozone nonattainment area in Pennsylvania has attained the one-hour ozone NAAQS by its extended attainment date. 66 FR 53094 (10/19/01). 

  • EPA determined that the Louisville moderate one-hour ozone nonattainment area in Indiana and Kentucky attained the one-hour ozone NAAQS. 66 FR 53665 (10/23/01). 

red bar graphic  HAZARDOUS WASTES & SUBSTANCES:



  • EPA announced the availability of the Handbook of Groundwater Protection and Cleanup Policies for RCRA Corrective Action. 66 FR 52762 (10/17/01). 

  • EPA announced the availability of two draft guidance documents: Guidance on Demonstrating Compliance With the Land Disposal  Restrictions Alternative Soil Treatment Standards, and Interpretive Memorandum on the Stabilization of Organic-Bearing Hazardous Wastes. 66 FR 52918 (10/18/01). 

  • EPA entered into a proposed administrative order on consent under CERCLA §122(h) in connection with the Economy Products Superfund site in Shenandoah, Iowa.  66 FR 53608 (10/23/01). 

  • EPA entered into a proposed administrative settlement under CERCLA §122(i) in connection with the Double Eagle Refinery site in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.  66 FR 53417 (10/22/01). 

  • The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) announced the availability of one update and one new draft toxicological profile of priority hazardous substances, completing the second set developed for the Department of Energy, for review and comment. 66 FR 53610 (10/23/01). 

  • ATSDR announced the availability of the 15th set of toxicological profiles of priority hazardous substances, which consists of 3 new drafts and 2 updated drafts, for review and comment. 66 FR 53611 (10/23/01). 

  • ATSDR announced the availability of 6 updated final toxicological profiles of priority hazardous substances comprising the 13th set prepared by agency. 66 FR 53612 (10/23/01). 

  • ATSDR announced that it and EPA have developed and are making available a revised CERCLA priority list of 275 hazardous substances based on the most recent information available. 66 FR 53014 (10/25/01).

  • EPA codified Indiana's authorized hazardous waste management program in the Code of Federal Regulations.  40 CFR pt. 272, 66 FR 53724 (10/24/01). 

red bar graphic  SMCRA PROGRAM APPROVALS:



  • OSM proposed to approve revisions to Alabama's regulatory program under SMCRA. 66 FR 52879 (10/18/01). 

  • OSM proposed to approve an amendment to West Virginia's regulatory program under SMCRA.  66 FR 53749 (10/24/01).

red bar graphic  TOXIC SUBSTANCES:



  • EPA revised the definition of "municipal solid waste landfill unit" in both the classification criteria for solid waste disposal facilities and practices and for municipal solid waste landfills in order to help accelerate the pace of lead-based paint removal from residences. EPA also added two new definitions for "construction and demolition (C&D) landfill" and "residential lead-based paint waste." 66 FR 53535 (10/23/01). 

red bar graphic  WATER QUALITY:



  • EPA established April 30, 2003, as the effective date of the revisions to its TMDL and NPDES program regulations published on July 13, 2000, and revised the date on which states are required to submit the next list of impaired waters from April 1, 2002, to October 1, 2002. The July 2000 rule amended and clarified existing regulations implementing CWA §303(d) and set forth specific time frames under which the Agency will assure that lists of waters not meeting water quality standards and TMDLs are completed as scheduled and that necessary point and nonpoint source controls are implemented to meet TMDLs.  66 FR 53043 (10/18/01). 

  • EPA proposed a Class II administrative penalty  under CWA §309(g) of $72,000 against the South East Regional Reclamation Authority for preparing and applying improperly treated sewage sludge. 66 FR 52920 (10/18/01). 

  • EPA announced the availability of the administrative record file for 45 TMDLs and the calculations for these TMDLs prepared for waters listed in the Mermentau and Vermilion/Teche river basins under CWA §303(d). 66 FR 52403 (10/15/01). 

  • EPA tentatively approved Maryland's request that adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are reasonably available for the navigable waters of Herring Bay and northern Coastal Bays. 66 FR 52763 (10/17/01). 

  • NOAA previously announced a consistency appeal under CZMA §307(c) from Puerto Rico's objections to an appellant's consistency certification for a permit to install 50 helix-screw anchor moorings at Guania Bay, Guanica, Puerto Rico; however, the appellant has since died, and, therefore, NOAA invites any persons or entities who believe they have some right to continue the consistency appeal in the deceased's place. 66 FR 52893 (10/18/01). 

red bar graphic  WILDLIFE:



  • The National Marine Fisheries Service completed a status review of the Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy stock of harbor porpoise and determined that listing this stock of harbor porpoise as threatened or endangered is not warranted at this time. 66 FR 53195 (10/19/01). 

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



  • United States v. American Scrap Co., No. 1:99-CV-2047 (M.D. Pa. Oct. 1, 2001). A settling CERCLA defendant must pay $210,000 in past U.S. response costs incurred at the Jack's Creek/Sitkin Smelting Superfund site in Mifflin County, Pennsylvania. 66 FR 52447 (10/15/01). 

  • United States v. Chevron U.S.A. Production Co., No. 01-D-1921 (D. Colo. Sept. 28, 2001). A settling CWA defendant must pay a $750,000 civil penalty and must perform work over the next few years at its Rangely Weber Sand Unit in Rangley, Colorado, to achieve compliance with the CWA for spilling produced water and oil from pipelines at its sand unit and its oil exploration and production unit. 66 FR 52448 (10/15/01). 

  • United States v. Chrysler Corp., No. 5:97CF00894 (N.D. Ohio Sept. 25, 2001). A settling CERCLA defendant must perform the longterm remedial action at the Krejci Dump site in Summit County, Ohio, with financial support from a second settling defendant, and the U.S. Department of Defense must reimburse the DOI $594,000 in response costs and $66,000 in natural resource damages relating to the site. 66 FR 52448 (10/15/01). 

  • United States v. Honeywell International Inc., No. C-3-00-536 (S.D. Ohio Sept. 28, 2001). A settling CERCLA defendant must pay $900,000 in past U.S. response costs incurred at the AlliedSignal/Ironton Coke Superfund site in Ironton, Ohio, and must pay future U.S. response costs related to the site, and a second settling CERCLA defendant must pay $41,016 in past U.S. response costs incurred at the site. 66 FR 52448 (10/15/01). 

  • United States v. Hoosier Calcium Corp., No. IP 00-0977-C-T/G (S.D. Ind. Sept. 27, 2001). A settling CAA defendant must pay a $20,000 civil penalty, must undertake a number of injunctive measures at its limestone crushing facility in Stinesville, Indiana, and must comply with the Indiana SIP and all permits. 66 FR 52449 (10/15/01). 

  • United States v. Knauf Fiber Glass GmbH, No. IP-01-1445-CV-B/S (S.D. Ind. Sept. 27, 2001). A settling CAA defendant that violated the Indiana SIP at its fiber glass manufacturing facilities in Shelbyville, Indiana, must pay $70,000 in civil penalties and must develop and implement a supplemental environmental project providing for the installation and operation of equipment that will decrease particulate matter, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen oxide emissions. 66 FR 52449 (10/15/01). 

  • United States v. Lee Brass Co., No. 01-B-2422-S (N.D. Ala. Sept. 26, 2001). A settling RCRA defendant that allegedly violated the Act at its brass foundry in Anniston, Alabama, must come into permanent, consistent compliance with RCRA and must pay a $350,000 civil penalty. 66 FR 52450 (10/15/01). 

  • United States v. Dingwell, No. 88-0101 B (D. Me. Sept. 21, 2001). Settling CERCLA defendants must implement the remedy in the Amended Record of Decision for the McKin Superfund site in Gray, Maine, must pay $650,000 in EPA response costs, must pay $45,000 to the state for activities to protect the Roay River and its watershed, must pay for conservation easements along the river, and must purchase an insurance policy in case of continued contamination of the river. 66 FR 52450 (10/15/01). 

  • United States v. Mountain Metal Co., No. CV-98-C-2562-S, -2886-S (N.D. Ala. Sept. 28, 2001). A settling CERCLA defendant must pay $470,000 in U.S. and private response costs incurred in connection with the ILCO battery cracking site in Leeds, Alabama. 66 FR 52450 (10/15/01). 

  • United States v. City of New Albany, No. NA-90-46-C-B/G (S.D. Ind. Sept. 27, 2001). A settling CWA defendant that violated the terms of a 1993 consent decree addressing CWA violations at its wastewater treatment plant must pay $180,000 in civil penalties, and must, among other things, develop and implement a capacity assurance plan to address the bypasses and sanitary sewer overflows at its plant and in the sewer collection system. 66 FF 52451 (10/15/01). 

  • United States v. Sequa Corp., No. 01-CV-4784 (E.D. Pa. Sept. 20, 2001). Settling CERCLA defendants must pay $3.2 million in past U.S. response costs incurred in connection with the Dublin TCE site in Dublin, Pennsylvania. 66 FF 52451 (10/15/01). 

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

THE CONGRESSlarge red bar graphic

red bar graphic CHAMBER ACTION



  • S. 423 (national memorial), which would amend the Act entitled "An Act to provide for the establishment of Fort Clatsop National Memorial in the State of Oregon," was passed by the Senate. 147 Cong. Rec. S10799 (daily ed. Oct. 17, 2001).

  • S. 491 (national recreation area), which would revise the boundaries of the Gold Gate National Recreation Area in California to extend the term of the advisroy commission for the recreation area, was passed by the Senate. 147 Cong. Rec. S10800 (daily ed., Oct. 17, 2001). 

  • S. 1057 (national parks), which would authorize the addition of lands to Pu'uhonua o Honaunau National Historical Park in Hawaii, was passed by the Senate. 147 Cong. Rec. S10800 (daily ed. Oct. 17, 2001).

  • S. 1097 (natural gas; national parks), which would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to issue right-of-way permits for natural gas pipelines wihin the boundary of the Great Smokey Mountains National Park, was passed by the Senate. 147 Cong. Rec. S10800 (daily ed. Oct. 17, 2001).

  • S. 1105 (land acquisition; national parks), which would provide for the expeditious completion of the acquisition of state of Wyoming lands within the boundaries of Grand Teton National Park, was passed by the Senate. 147 Cong. Rec. S10801 (daily ed. Oct. 17, 2001).

  • H.R. 146 (national parks), which would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of designating the Great Falls Historic District in Paterson, New Jersey, as a unit of the National Park System, was passed by the Senate, clearing the measure for the President. 147 Cong. Rec. S10801 (daily ed. Oct. 17, 2001).

  • H.R. 182 (Wild and Scenic Rivers Act), which would amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate a segment of the Eightmile River in the state of Connecticut for study for potential addition to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, was passed by the Senate, clearing the measure for the President. 147 Cong. Rec. S10801 (daily ed. Oct. 17, 2001).

  • H.R. 1000 (land exchange), which would adjust the boundary of the William Howard Taft National Historic Site in the state of Ohio to authorize an exchange of land in connection with the historic site, was passed by the Senate, clearing the measure for the President. 147 Cong. Rec. S10801 (daily ed. Oct. 17, 2001).

  • H.R. 3061 (appropriations), which would make appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, was passed by the House. 147 Cong. Rec. H6568 (daily ed. Oct. 11, 2001).

  • H.R. 2272 (coral reefs), which would amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to provide for debt relief to developing countries who take action to protect critical coral reef habitats, was passed by the House. 147 Cong. Rec. H6799 (daily ed. Oct. 16, 2001).

  • H.R. 2330 (appropriations), which would make appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, was passed by the Senate. 147 Cong. Rec. S11060 (daily ed. Oct. 25, 2001).

red bar graphic  COMMITTEE ACTION



  • S. 1536 (appropriations) was reported by the Committee on Appropriations. Rep. No. 107-84, 147 Cong. Rec. S10640 (daily ed. Oct. 11, 2001). The bill would make appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes. 

  • H.R. 2217 (appropriations) was reported by the Committee of Conference. Rep. No. 107-234, 147 Cong. Rec. H6696 (daily ed. Oct. 11, 2001). The bill would make appropriations for the Department of the Interior and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes.

red bar graphic   BILLS INTRODUCED



  • S. 1537 (Bingaman, N.M.) (water resources) would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a hydrogeologic mapping, modeling, and monitoring program for the High Plains Aquifer and would establish the High Plains Aquifer Coordination Council to facilitate groundwater conservation in the High Plains. 147 Cong. Rec. S10640 (daily ed. Oct. 11, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

  • S. 1538 (Bingaman, N.M.) (water resources) would further continued economic viability in the communities on the High Plains by promoting sustainable groundwater management of the Ogallala Aquifer. 147 Cong. Rec. S10640 (daily ed. Oct. 11, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. 

  • S. 1547 (Shelby, R-Ala.) (tax credits; fuel) would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend and modify the credit for producing fuel from a nonconventional source. 147 Cong. Rec. S10693 (daily ed. Oct. 15, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Finance. 

  • S. 1560 (Akaka, D-Haw.) (biological agents) would strengthen U.S. capabilities in environmental detection and the monitoring of biological agents. 147 Cong. Rec. S10794 (daily ed. Oct. 17, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. 

  • S. 1566 (Reid, D-Nev.) (tax credits, electricity) would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify and expand the credit for electricity produced from renewable resources and waste products. 147 Cong. Rec. S10835 (daily ed. Oct. 18, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Finance. 

  • S. 1569 (Hatch, R-Utah) (hazardous materials) would amend title 49, United States Code, to regulate the issuance of licenses to operate motor vehicles transporting hazardous material. 147 Cong. Rec. S10835 (daily ed. Oct. 18, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.  

  • S. 1571 (Lugar, R-Ind.) (agriculture) would provide for the continuation of agricultural programs through fiscal year 2006. 147 Cong. Rec. S10835 (daily ed. Oct. 18, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. 

  • S. 1577 (Hutchison, R-Ariz.) (water resources) would amend the Lower Rio Grande Valley Water Resources Conservation and Improvement Act of 2000 to authorize additional projects under that Act. 147 Cong. Rec. S11104 (daily ed. Oct. 25, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

  • H.R. 3075 (Dingell, D-Mich.) (food quality) would amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to the safety of food from foreign countries, including detecting the intentional adulteration of food.  147 Cong. Rec. H6504 (daily ed. Oct. 10, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

  • H.R. 3089 (Terry, R-Neb.) (electricity) would amend the Federal Power Act to promote energy security, environmental protection, electricity price stability, and electric reliability by providing for the use of net metering by certain small electric energy generation systems. 147 Cong. Rec. H6700 (daily ed. Oct. 11, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

  • H.R. 3095 (Delahunt, D-Mass.) (wildlife protection) would coordinate and expand U.S. and international programs for the conservation and protection of North Atlantic Right Whales. 147 Cong. Rec. H6701 (daily ed. Oct. 11, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources and the Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure. 

  • H.R. 3099 (Kaptur, D-Ohio) (biofuels) would provide for a Biofuels Feedstocks Energy Reserve and would authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to make and guarantee loans for the production, distribution, development, and storage of biofuels. 147 Cong. Rec. H6701 (daily ed. Oct. 11, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Agriculture. 

  • H.R. 3148 (Young, R-Alaska) (Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act) would amend the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act to provide equitable treatment of Alaska Native Vietnam Veterans. 147 Cong. Rec. H7127 (daily ed. Oct. 17, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources.

  • H.R. 3170 (Andrews, D-N.J.) (tax incentives; brownfields) would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand the incentives for the environmental cleanup of certain contaminated industrial sites designated as brownfields. 147 Cong. Rec. H7333 (daily ed. Oct. 25, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.

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

IN THE STATES
large red bar graphic



red bar graphic ALABAMA


Department of Envtl. Management


Emergency Regulations-Solid Waste Management



  • Regulations, approved Oct. 9, available at www.adem.state.al.us/pands. The regulations are necessary to clarify ADEM’s responsibilities and legal authority to issue permits for solid waste disposal facilities. A permit issued by ADEM for a landfill in Lowndes County was appealed to the Montgomery County Circuit Court last year. The court issued a stay of the permit on Nov. 29, 2000. In its ruling, the court stated that the permit should be stayed because ADEM had not adopted the State Solid Waste Management Plan as a regulation. ADEM took the position that it has no statutory authority to implement parts of the plan, and some of the plan’s recommendations have been ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court (e.g., flow control and differential disposal fees). In addition, ADEM has appealed the Circuit Court decision and concluded that it should not issue any solid waste disposal permits until the appeal was adjudicated, reasoning that the nature of the ruling had applicability to other solid waste permits. 

    Governor Don Siegelman, in a letter to the Environmental Management Commission Chairman Dr. Richard A. Thigpen, concluded that an emergency exists with reference to the issuance and reissuance of solid waste permits in the state. "If you adopt this emergency rule at your October 9, 2001, meeting, the rule will be in effect for 120 days, giving the court time to rule and bringing us into the new legislative session. If either the court or the legislature acts promptly, the situation will be resolved," Governor Siegelman wrote.

    ADEM will also pursue a final rulemaking regarding the State Solid Waste Management Plan.

    As of Sept. 29, some 58 solid waste permits around the state have expired and are pending renewal. Permit applications for two new landfills have also been received. 

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality



  • Revisions to the Division 3 Code are being proposed to incorporate by reference changes to the new source performance standards (NSPS) and national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPs) from April 10, 2000, to Aug. 27, 2001, inclusive. The Consolidated Federal Air Rule (CAR) is being proposed to be incorporated by reference into the Air Code as Chapter 335-3-11A. Other key revisions include the state plan required under §§111(d) and 129 of the federal CAA, which will incorporate the Emission Guidelines for Existing Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incinerator Units into Chapter 335-3-3; correction of a numbering inconsistency in Chapter 335-3-14; correction of a citation error in Chapter 335-3-16; and Chapter 335-3-18 is being revised to incorporate by reference changes to the federal acid rain regulations pertaining to the removal of the industrial utility units exemption and also a revision to a definition. The Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Gas Emissions (MSWLF) regulations are being revised in Chapter 335-3-19. Also, Appendix G is being revised to amend the definition of glycol ethers. Chapters 335-3-10 (NSPS), 335-3-11 (NESHAPs), 335-3-11A (CAR), 335-3-16 (major source operating permits), 335-3-18 (acid rain), and 335-3-19 (MSWLFs) are not considered as a part of the federally enforceable SIP. As such, any revisions to these Chapters/Rule are not proposed to be incorporated into Alabama's SIP. Hearing Dec. 5; comments due Dec. 18. See http://www.adem.state.al.us/RegsPermit/PropRules/proprule.htm 

Proposed Regulations-General Administration



Proposed Regulations-Drinking Water Quality



  • Proposed revisions to Division 7, Chapters 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 11, 13, and Appendices A and D. Hearing Nov. 7; comments due Nov. 9. These amendments are being proposed to conform to recent changes to federal drinking water regulations. The proposed amendments: (1) modify monitoring requirements for lead and copper, (2) modify public notification requirements for water systems that incur drinking water violations, and (3) add a new category of water system that includes apartment complexes and trailer parks that purchase water from an existing water system and resell to their tenants. Specifically, 335-7-1 and 335-7-4 are being revised to add a new classification of water systems to be known as "Segmental Water System." This class of water system will include apartment complexes and trailer parks that purchase water from a permitted public water system and submeter and resell the water to their tenets. The definition for "Segmental Water System" and "Consecutive Water System" has been added to 335-7-1 and the requirements for these types of systems has been added to 335-7-4. 335-7-2 is being revised in response to changes in the U.S. EPA's public notification rule. The major changes include requiring water systems to notify their customers within 24 hours of an acute maximum contaminant level (MCL) violation, 30 days for any non-acute MCL violation and to allow water systems to utilize their consumer confidence report for monitoring violations if they meet certain criteria. These changes also include minor revisions to the required content of the public notices. Rule 335-7-10 is being revised to include the requirement for water systems to develop a disinfection byproduct monitoring plan that was omitted the previous time that drinking water regulations were modified. 335-7-8 and 335-7-11 are being modified in response to changes in EPA’s lead and copper monitoring requirements. Water systems will be required to collect the minimum number of samples regardless of type of plumbing materials, samples can be invalidated and monitoring waivers can be given to systems that meet certain criteria. Some current reporting requirements are also being eliminated and water systems will be allowed to monitor every three years after completion of the initial monitoring requirements if lead and copper levels are low. The method for determining compliance with water quality parameters is also being modified. 335-7-13 is being modified to eliminate the maximum loan amount and to establish minimum load amounts for EPA direct funds and state bond funds. 335-7-14 is being modified to remove the appendixes from the chapter. The appendix is being modified to add the appendixes from 335-7-14 and in response to changes in EPA’s required language for public notifications for drinking water violations. See http://www.adem.state.al.us/EduInfo/Calendar/hearings/9drink.htm and http://www.adem.state.al.us/RegsPermit/PropRules/proprule.htm 


Proposed Regulations-Water Quality



  • ADEM proposes to revise Administrative Code Rule 335-6-10-.11 to establish nutrient water quality criteria for Lake Martin, Yates Lake, Thurlow Lake, Guntersville Lake, Wheeler Lake, Wilson Lake, Pickwick Lake, Little Bear Creek Lake, and Cedar Creek Lake and to revise the existing nutrient water quality criterion for Walter F. George Lake. ADEM also proposes to amend Rule 335-6-11-.02 to revise the water use classifications for the other stream segments identified above. The criteria establish allowable levels of chlorophyll a, which provides a measurement of the amount of algae in the water. Nutrients such as phosphorous and nitrogen are linked to the production of algae, which at excessive levels can cause depletion of dissolved oxygen and thereby impact fish and aquatic organisms. 

    Two segments of the Coosa River (from the Southern Railroad Bridge to Logan Martin Dam) are proposed for upgrades by adding the "Swimming and Other Whole Body Water-Contact Sports" classification. The Limited Warmwater Fishery classification is proposed for the following stream segments: Shirtee Creek (from Tallasseehatchee Creek to its source), Valley Creek (from Blue Creek to its source), Village Creek (from Bayview Lake Dam to its source), and Five Mile Creek (from Newfound Creek to Ketona). The Fish and Wildlife classification is proposed for Pepperell Branch (from Sougahatchee Creek to its source) and Valley Creek (from the head of backwater above Bankhead Lock and Dam to Blue Creek). 

    Other changes include more accurately identifying water body boundaries, correcting typographical errors, and adding common stream names. See www.adem.state.al.us/RegsPermit/PropRules/proprule.htm. Hearing Oct. 30. See http://www.adem.state.al.us/RegsPermit/PropRules/hearing.htm 


Proposed General NPDES Permits




Public Notices–Permit Applications 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 



 




Daily Ozone Forecast



Jefferson County (Birmingham) Dept. of Health


Daily Air Quality Index


red bar graphic ALASKA


Department of Environmental Conservation



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 on 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. Workshop Nov. 13. See http://www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/ENV.CONSERV/dec_cal.htm#agenda 



Proposed Regulations-Oil and Gas Drilling and Testing Operations




  • DEC has proposed regulations exempting portable oil and gas drilling and testing operations from needing permits if they comply with a new "permit by rule." This is a supplemental notice adding to the notice of proposed changes that was issued on Nov. 21, 2000, and the supplemental notice of proposed changes issued on Feb. 22, 2001. This supplemental notice is being issued because although the fees associated with the project were outlined in the proposed regulations, the fees were not mentioned in either notice of proposed changes. DEC will be accepting comment only on the fee portion of the project. If you submitted comments in either of the two previous comment periods, you do not need to comment again. Comments due Oct. 29. See http://www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/ENV.CONSERV/dec_cal.htm#exemptoilandgasdrilling  

red bar graphic  ARIZONA



Department of Envtl. Quality



Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste



  • The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) is amending the state's hazardous waste rules to incorporate the text of federal regulations for the purpose of obtaining reauthorization of the state's hazardous waste management program by U.S. EPA. The state's hazardous waste rules are generally comprised of the federal regulations authorized by Subtitle C of RCRA, as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, which are incorporated by reference. The hazardous waste rules are well established and have been effective since 1984. This year's amendments cover changes in the federal regulations promulgated between July 2, 1999, and July 1, 2000. Hearing Nov. 14; comments due same date. See http://www.sosaz.com/aar/2001/39/contents.shtm 

Draft UST Program Policy for MTBE Investigation and Cleanup



  • The UST Program has drafted a policy for the implementation of the narrative aquifer water quality standard (AWQS) for methyl tertiary-butyl ether. This policy was written to allow the UST Program the ability to assess leaking UST (LUST) sites for closure using a consistent method in the absence of a numeric AWQS or federal maximum contaminant level. This policy is only for use by the UST Program. Comments should be forwarded to Joseph Karl Drosendahl by Oct. 31, 2001 at ADEQ, UST Program Corrective Action Section, 3033 N. Central Ave., T-4014A, Phoenix, AZ 85012. See http://www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/waste/ust/download/mtbepolicy.pdf 

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 PM10 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-Proposed Regulations/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 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 

Safe Drinking Water Workshops Announced



Voluntary Users of Tier 2 and Tier 3 Nonroad Diesel Equipment in Area A and Area B 



Development of an Aquifer Water Quality Standard for MTBE



Superfund Program-Proposed Registry Inclusions, Prospective Purchaser Agreements



Current Air Quality Readings/Forecasts


red bar graphic ARKANSAS


Department of Environmental Quality


Proposed Regulations-Water Quality




  • Public hearing at Magnolia Nov. 29 to receive comments on a third-party proposal by Albemarle Corporation to change the Arkansas Water Quality Standards (PC&E Commission Regulation No. 2) for two streams affected by Albemarle's wastewater discharge. The hearing will begin at 7:00 p.m. in Room 208 of the Business-Agribusiness Building on the campus of Southern Arkansas University at 100 Military Lane. Albemarle operates a bromine extraction facility, commonly referred to as the "West Plant," off U.S. Highway 371 about three miles west of Magnolia. The facility discharges wastewater to Dismukes Branch of Big Creek. The discharge consists of stormwater runoff, non-contact cooling water, treated sanitary wastewater, and boiler blow down from an artificial wetlands constructed as part of the plant's treatment system. Dismukes Branch of Big Creek flows into Big Creek, which, in turn, flows into Dorcheat Bayou. Regulation No. 2 designates both Dismukes Branch of Big Creek and Big Creek for domestic drinking water supply use, although neither stream currently is being used as a drinking water source. The Albemarle petition seeks to remove the domestic drinking water supply designation from Dismukes Branch of Big Creek, and from Big Creek, beginning with its confluence with Dismukes Branch and continuing to its confluence with Dorcheat Bayou. In addition, the petition seeks to change the current water quality standards for chlorides and total dissolved solids (TDS) for both streams. Under the proposal, the chloride standard in Dismukes Branch would be increased from 14 milligrams per liter (mg/l) to 26 mg/l, and the chloride standard for Big Creek would increase from 14 mg/l to 20 mg/l. The TDS standard in Dismukes Branch would increase from 123 mg/l to 157 mg/l, and the TDS standard for Big Creek would increase from 123 mg/l to 200 mg/l.


Proposed Penalty Assessments




  • Comments due Nov. 10. CONSENT ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS: Al Richards (Alrite Septic Tank Service), Alexander Water Division, $2,000 penalty; B B & B Construction Company, Inc., Hot Springs Mining Division, $250 penalty; C. J. Horner Company, Inc., Arkadelphia NPDES/Water Division, $2,000 penalty; Cooper Tire & Rubber Co., El Dorado Air Division, $6,667 penalty; Eaton Moery Environmental Services, Inc., Wynne Solid Waste Division, $15,000 penalty, Escrow $5,000; Edie Construction Company, Malvern Air Division, $250 penalty; Hillcrest Camshaft Service, Inc. (Original CAO) and (Amendment No. 1 to CAO), Little Rock Hazardous Waste Division, $16,125 penalty; International Paper Camden Mill, Camden NPDES/Water Division, no penalty; City of Marshall, Marshall NPDES/Water Division, $2,000 penalty; Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company (Amendment No. 1 to CAO), Little Rock NPDES/Water Division, no penalty; Pulaski County SID #221, Wrightsville NPDES/Water Division, no penalty; Ward's Asbestos Removal, Inc., North Little Rock Air Division, $675 penalty; Willamette Industries, Inc. (Amendment No. 2 to CAO), Malvern Air Division, no penalty. NOTICE OF VIOLATION: Falcon Jet Corporation (Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation), Little Rock Regulated Storage Tank Division, $500 penalty; D. B. Hill (D. B. Hill Contractor), Little Rock Regulated Storage Tank Division, $500 penalty; North Little Rock Water Department (Crystal Hill Pump Station), North Little Rock Regulated Storage Tank Division, $500 penalty; North Little Rock Water Department (Montgomery Pump Station), North Little Rock Regulated Storage Tank Division, $500 penalty. 

red bar graphic CALIFORNIA


Air Resources Board


Nov. 1 Board Meeting Agenda



Bay Area Ozone Attainment Plan; Hearing Set for Nov. 1 



  • Was postponed due to Board concerns about inadequate public notice and participation. See http://www.arb.ca.gov/sip/basip01.htm. In anticipation of the Bay Area agencies adopting the Plan, ARB has set a hearing on the Plan for 6:00 p.m. on Nov. 1, 2001, in the Elihu Harris Building, 1515 Clay Street, Oakland. The Plan is a revision to the California SIP and includes updated emissions inventories; an assessment of the emissions reductions needed to attain the ozone standard by 2006; a control strategy; a new transportation conformity budget; and contingency measures.

45-Day Notice of Public Hearing to Consider Amendments to Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations, §94006 - Defects Substantially Impairing the Effectiveness of Vapor Recovery Systems Used in Motor Fueling Operations



  • Hearing Nov. 15. See http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/vrdef01/vrdef01.htm. ARB is required to identify and list defects in the vapor recovery equipment that impair the effectiveness of the vapor recovery system in collecting the gasoline vapors. The list is contained in §94006, title 17, California Code of Regulations. Simply stated, the specified defects in the specified vapor recovery equipment components substantially increase emissions by not functioning as certified. Health and Safety Code §41960.2(c)(2) requires the ARB to periodically update the list contained in §94006 after reviewing the list at a public workshop. Previously, some of these equipment defects were listed in the individual executive orders. However, ARB staff believe that amending §94006 to include all of the defects in one regulatory document will enhance the ability of enforcement personnel and GDF operators to identify and repair those defects that could significantly impact the effectiveness of the vapor recovery system. When a component on the §94006 list is found by an inspector to contain a listed defect, the equipment must be removed from service until it has been replaced, repaired, or adjusted and reinspected by air pollution control district personnel (HSC §41960.2 (d)). If a component is not in good working order but does not contain a listed defect, the local air pollution control district has other enforcement options (HSC §41960.2(e)). Being on the list requires that the defective component be "tagged out" (removed from service).

45-Day Notice of Public Hearing to Consider Amendments to the Low-Emission Vehicle Regulations, including Particulate Standards for Gasoline Vehicles, More Stringent Emission Standards for Fuel-Fired Heaters, and Administrative Revisions



  • Hearing Nov. 15. See http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/levii01/levii01.htm. The new emission standards being proposed are:

    1. Establish a particulate matter (PM) standard for Otto-cycle vehicles. Currently, California requires only diesel vehicles to meet a PM emission standard, while U.S. EPA requires both diesel-cycle and Otto-cycle (gasoline) vehicles to meet a PM standard. While the health effects of PM emissions from gasoline vehicles have not been defined at this time, staff is proposing alignment with the federal standard to provide an additional measure of protection for public health. Therefore, staff is proposing that light- and medium-duty Otto-cycle vehicles be required to meet the same PM standard required for diesel-cycle vehicles to ensure that any new direct injection gasoline engines exhibit low PM emissions.

    2. ZEV fuel-fired heater requirements. The emission requirements for fuel-fired heaters used in ZEVs were first adopted in the original LEV I program. At that time, they were required to certify to the most stringent emission standard available, the ULEV standard. With the adoption of the LEV II regulations, the most stringent exhaust emission standard became the SULEV standard, which is 75% cleaner than the ULEV standard. Since allowing fuel-fired heaters used by ZEVs to emit at a level greater than a partial zero-emission vehicles (PZEV) is inconsistent with the purpose of the ZEV program, staff is proposing that fuel-fired heaters certify to the SULEV standard. Furthermore, since fuel-fired heaters are not permitted to operate above 40F ambient temperature, manufacturers would be required to meet the emission standard at 40F rather than at 68F-86F as is now the case. The new standards would be effective beginning with model year 2005 to provide manufacturers with sufficient lead time to develop product plans.

    3. PZEV Alternative Fuel Vehicle Standards. Currently, a natural gas or alcohol bi-fuel, flexible fuel, or dual-fuel vehicle may certify to two emission standards–the lower standard when operating on the alternative fuel and the next higher emission standard when operating on gasoline (e.g., the SULEV standard on compressed natural gas and ULEV on gasoline). As part of the LEV II rulemaking, the ZEV requirement was modified to allow a manufacturer to meet a portion of its ZEV obligation by producing extremely clean PZEVs. The granting of partial ZEV credits for PZEVs is premised on the assumption that PZEVs provide emission benefits beyond those achieved by vehicles certifying to the standard SULEV standard. Therefore, staff is proposing that any bi-fuel, flexible fuel, and dual-fuel vehicle that certifies to the PZEV standard must certify to the SULEV emission standard regardless of the fuel on which it is operated. If a manufacturer does not wish to earn partial ZEV credit from a bi-fuel, flexible fuel, or dual-fuel vehicle certifying to the SULEV standard, then the manufacturer would still be allowed to certify to the ULEV standard when operating on gasoline.


  • The proposed administrative amendments include:

    1. Establishment of a non-methane organic gas (NMOG) certification factor. This proposal would allow a manufacturer to apply a factor of 1.04 to the measured non-methane hydrocarbons in lieu of measuring carbonyls when determining compliance with the NMOG standards for gasoline and diesel vehicles. A manufacturer using the factor would also be allowed to demonstrate compliance with the formaldehyde emission standard by including a statement of compliance in their application for certification. Similar to the federal requirements, the statement must be based on previous emission tests, development tests, or other appropriate data.

    2. Extending the applicability of generic reactivity adjustment factors (RAFs). Compliance with the NMOG standard is determined by multiplying the measured NMOG emission level by the applicable RAF. The availability of RAFs, therefore, provides manufacturers with an incentive to produce clean alternative fuel vehicles. Manufacturers can use either the generic RAFs provided in the California light- and medium-duty vehicle test procedures, or generate their own test group specific RAFs. Currently, the RAFs contained in the California test procedures are effective only through the 2003 model year. Accordingly, staff is proposing to extend the generic RAFs indefinitely for alternative fuels. Beginning in the 2004 model year the generic RAF for gasoline–now 0.94–would be eliminated.

    3. Revisions to the emission offset requirements for AB 965 vehicles. Recognizing that manufacturers may be required to limit product selection because of the stricter California emission standards, in 1981 the California legislature enacted a statute that allows manufacturers to introduce dirtier federal vehicles in California as long as their emissions are offset by cleaner California vehicles. In response to this directive, the Board adopted "Guidelines for Certification of 1983 and Subsequent Model-Year Federally Certified Light-Duty Motor Vehicles for Sale in California" (AB 965 Guidelines) in June 1982. The staff proposes amendments to these guidelines to calculate available emission credits based on each manufacturer’s fleet average NMOG level compared to the required fleet average NMOG level.

    4. Implement additional intermediate in-use compliance standards. Even though a manufacturer must certify a vehicle to a set of 50,000 and 120,000 mile standards, the LEV II regulations establish slightly less stringent in-use standards for vehicles certifying to LEV II, ULEV II, and SULEV standards for the first three years that a new model is introduced. This was done to provide manufacturers with a temporary in-use compliance margin when they first introduce vehicles to the new standards. Currently, there are no intermediate in-use standards for light-duty trucks engineered for heavier duty cycles that have a base payload capacity of 2,500 lbs. or higher or for vehicles certified to the optional 150,000 mile standards for LEV, ULEV, or SULEV. Accordingly, staff is proposing that intermediate in-use standards be added for these emission categories, equal in stringency to the existing intermediate in-use standards for other emission categories.

    5. Proposed revisions to the California NMOG test procedures. Because of innovations and advancements in the measurement of automotive exhaust, the NMOG test procedures have periodically been updated to reflect these improvements. The staff is proposing a number of additional technical revisions. The most notable proposed amendments would change the maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) values for the various organic compounds found in NMOG. The proposed new values reflect the new MIR values which the ARB recently adopted in a rulemaking on consumer products. 

45-Day Notice of Public Hearing to Consider the Adoption of a Regulation to Establish a Distributed Generation Certification Program



  • Hearing Nov. 15. See http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/dg01/dg01.htm. After Jan. 1, 2003, new electrical generation units to be sold, leased, or used in California, and that are exempt from district’s permit requirements, must be certified by the ARB to defined emission standards. The ARB staff will assist the manufacturers with determining exemption levels for each district. If a proposed unit is subject to the district’s permit requirements, it need not be certified by the ARB before it is sold, leased, or operated in that district. Equipment operating before Jan. 1, 2003, will not be subject to the proposed standards.

    The proposed regulatory action also includes labeling requirements, testing procedures, record keeping requirements, recertification requirements, and payment of fees for technologies subject to the certification program. In accordance with Government Code §§11345.3(c) and 11346.5(a)(11), the ARB’s Executive Officer has found that the recordkeeping and reporting requirements of the proposed regulation are necessary for the health, safety, and welfare of the people of the state. Lastly, the proposed regulatory action provides for the denial, suspension, or revocation of certificates and creates an administrative appeals process for review of denials, suspensions, or revocations of certificates issued under the program. The types of technologies that will be subject to the emission standards include microturbines, reformer-based fuel cells, small reciprocating engines, external combustion engines, or any combination thereof.

Clean Air Plan (CAP) Implementation Schedule



  • One of the goals of the CAP is to define the new state and federal measures needed to attain the federal one-hour ozone standard in the San Joaquin Valley and to identify strategies to achieve a portion of ARB's existing long-term commitment in the ozone SIP for the South Coast. The expected benefits from the strategies in the working draft of the CAP make further progress on the long-term obligations for South Coast, but fall far short of the reductions needed for the San Joaquin Valley. In response, ARB staff is reassessing potential emission reduction opportunities in all source categories through regulations, incentives, and voluntary programs. The release of the working draft of strategies identified has been delayed. The release date is uncertain. See http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/caplan/schedule.htm 

Advanced Variance/Hearing Board Workshop



Voluntary Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Proposed Reglation Update-Draft Regulations



Department of Toxic Substances Control


Final Regulations-Administrative Penalty Standards



Department Receives Additional RCRA Authorization



Proposed Regulations-Mercury-Containing Waste



Fact Sheet: SB 271 Consolidated Manifesting-New Legislative Program



Emergency Regulations-Cathode Ray Tubes



Notice of Public Workshops for Portable Tank Regulations



Guidance Document Availability



Draft Public Participation Policy Manual



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



Proposed Permit Renewal for the Kettleman Hills Facility of Chemical Waste Management, Inc.



Integrated Waste Management Board


Emergency Regulations-Rigid Plastic Packaging Container Recycling Rates 



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 were due Aug. 13. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/Playground/  

Final Regulations-Insurance as a Financial Assurance Demonstration



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 directed staff to initiate a 45-day public comment period. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/Putrescible/  

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--45-Day Rulemaking Period



  • 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. The comment period runs from Sept. 28 through Nov. 11. 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, 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


Emergency Regulations-Electronic Submission of Laboratory Data for UST Reports



Draft UST Cleanup Fund Cost Guidelines



TMDL Development Public Notices, Drafts



Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment


Notice of Intent to List Chemical: Naphthalene



Prioritization of Toxic Air Contaminants-Children's Environmental Health Protection Act-Final Draft



Draft Hazard Identification Documents for Allyl Isovalerate and N-Carboxymethyl-n-nitrosoure



Final Technical Support Document for a Public Health Goal for Simazine in Drinking Water



OEHHA Lists 5 Toxic Air Contaminants of Concern for Children



Scientific Review of Toxicological and Human Health Issues Related to the Development of a Public Health Goal for Chromium VI



South Coast Air Quality Management District


Final Regulations-Amended Rule 1122--Solvent Degreasers



  • The amendments will reduce emissions of smog-forming volatile organic compounds (VOCs) some 3.2 tons per day when fully effective in 2006. (The rule reduces the maximum VOC content of solvents used from 50 grams/liter to 25 grams/liter.) The changes also will require use of airless/air-tight systems when using toxic solvents beginning in 2003, resulting in a toxic emissions reduction of 0.81 tons per day. SCAQMD staff will perform a technology assessment in 2005 to reaffirm the feasibility of the 2006 VOC limit for vapor degreasers. See http://www.aqmd.gov 

red bar graphic COLORADO


Air Quality Control Commission


Rulemaking Hearings



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 

  • Dec. 10 hearing regarding new ground water quality classifications and standards proposed by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, Regulation #42 (5 CCR 1002-42). See http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/op/wqcc/0112OGCCgwq.pdf 

red bar graphic CONNECTICUT


Department of Envtl. Protection


Compost Erosion Control Study



Permit Hearings-Calendar


red bar graphic DELAWARE


Department of Nat. Resources and Envtl. Control


Notices of Violation



Regulatory Update/Public Notices


red bar graphic FLORIDA


Department of Environmental Protection



Air Quality Regulations-Rule Development Update



Draft General Water Quality Permit-Animal Feeding Operations



  • Generic Permit for Animal Feeding Operations 62-621.300. Generic permits for certain animal feeding operations that will provide state groundwater and NPDES surface water discharge permit coverage for qualifying facilities as applicable. The generic permit is intended to streamline the existing permitting process for animal feeding operations. Poultry, dairy, swine, and other animal feeding operations that may impact ground or surface waters of the state and that may be subject to permitting by DEP will be affected. The Department will be taking public input on the types of animal feeding operations that may be affected, the size of the operations, and operational practices. Rule development workshop Oct. 30. Contact: Vincent Seibold, P.E., Industrial Wastewater Section Administrator, 2600 Blair Stone Road, M.S. #3545, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400, (850) 488-4522.

Everglades Forever Act Implementation



  • Nov. 1-2,  9:00 a.m., Sheraton West Palm Beach, 630 Clearwater Park Road, West Palm Beach, FL, (561) 833-1234. To discuss revisions to Rules 62-302.530 and 62-302.540, F.A.C., pertaining to the establishment of a phosphorus water quality criterion for the Everglades Protection Area pursuant to the Everglades Forever Act.

Southwest Florida Water Management District


Proposed Regulations-Environmental Resource Permits (Mining)



  • In 1996, the Governing Board initiated rulemaking to repeal Chapter 40D-45, F.A.C., Surface Water Management For Mining Materials Other Than Phosphate. During the repeal process, in 1999, the Legislature amended Section 120.536, F.S., requiring agencies to submit a list to the Joint Administrative Procedures Committee of the rules that the agencies had determined exceeded their rulemaking authority. The District listed Chapter 40D-45, F.A.C. in its entirety. Because no authorizing legislation was enacted by the 2000 Legislature, the District was again required to begin proceedings to repeal Chapter 40D-45, F.A.C. During this second repeal process district staff has been working with representatives of the mining industry to address some of their concerns regarding the regulation of mines under the environmental resource permitting (ERP) rules. District staff and the representatives of the mining interests have developed several proposed amendments of the ERP rules that address the industry’s concerns while ensuring consistency with the ERP rules as required by subsection 373.414(9), F.S. Staff has discussed the proposed revisions with the Florida DEP and the other water management districts. A public workshop will be scheduled.

red bar graphic GEORGIA


Department of Natural Resources, Envtl. Protection Division


Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste



  • The proposed rule amendments include revisions to Rules -.07 “Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste”; -.10 “Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities”; -.11 “Hazardous Waste Facility Permits”; -.16 “Land Disposal Restrictions.” Hearing Oct. 30; comments due same date. See http://www.ganet.org/dnr/environ/ 

Permit Applications


red bar graphic HAWAII


Office of Envtl. Quality Control


Air Quality-Permit Applications



Environmental Impact Notices


red bar graphic IDAHO


Department of Envtl. Quality


Water Quality-Draft Permitting Guidance for Rapid Infiltration Wastewater Treatment Systems



Water Quality-Watershed Assessment




  • Under the federal CWA, DEQ is required to analyze state waters to determine whether they meet state water quality standards. Based on a recent study of the physical, chemical, and biological conditions of the Boise River and current pollution control measures, DEQ is proposing to remove Blacks, Fivemile, Tenmile, Mason, and Sand Hollow Creeks from the list of impaired water bodies. The study determined that these creeks meet state water quality standards for nutrients, sediment, and dissolved oxygen. DEQ is also proposing to develop a management plan to control sediment in Indian Creek. DEQ’s study demonstrated that Indian Creek meets state water quality standards for nutrients and dissolved oxygen, but contains excess sediment. Comments due Nov. 30. See http://www2.state.id.us/deq/news/oct22_01b.htm 


Groundwater-Draft Plan to address groundwater concerns in Twin Falls County



Outstanding Resource Waters-Petitions



Pending Permit Applications


red bar graphic ILLINOIS


Pollution Control Board (PCB)


Proposed Regulations




  • In the Matter of: Enhanced Vehicle Inspection and Maintanence (I/M) Regulations: Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 240.191-240.193. Rulemaking proposal filed by IEPA 8/20/01; Proposal for public comment adopted 8/23/01; Illinois Register publication 9/7/01. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Archive/dscgi/ds.py/GetRepr/File-14412/html. In Illinois, two areas do not meet the NAAQS for ozone: (1) the Chicago metropolitan nonattainment area, which is a severe nonattainment area; and (2) the Metro-East St. Louis nonattainment area, which is a moderate nonattainment area. Under Illinois’ Vehicle Emissions Inspection Law of 1995 (Vehicle Emissions Law (625 ILCS 5/13B-1 et seq. (2000)), the agency has proposed, and the Board has adopted, as amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 240, an enhanced I/M program for these two nonattainment areas. See Enhanced Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Regulations: Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 240 (July 8, 1998), R98-24; (Dec. 1, 1994), R94-20; (Dec. 1, 1994), R94-19. The agency currently proposes to further amend the enhanced I/M program. 



  • 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. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Archive/dscgi/ds.py/GetRepr/File-14327/html 



  • 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/Archive/dscgi/ds.py/GetRepr/File-14272/html



  • In the Matter of: Proposed Amendments to Tiered Approach to Corrective Action Objectives: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 742 (MTBE)–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). On Sept. 6, the Board adopted a first notice opinion and order in this rulemaking. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Archive/dscgi/ds.py/Get/File-14492 



  • 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. On Sept. 6, the Board adopted a first notice opinion and order in this rulemaking to amend the Board’s public water supply regulations. 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: Amendments to Livestock Waste Regulations: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 506–The Board on Sept. 6 adopted a second notice opinion and order in this rulemaking to amend the livestock waste regulations. The Part 506 amendments seek accomplish two objectives. First, the rules delete provisions from Part 506 that are now superseded by the Department of Agriculture's Part 900 rules. Several sections of Subparts A-C are deleted, and Subparts D-G are deleted in their entirety. The Board did not receive any comment regarding the deleted language; thus, those changes are not discussed in this opinion. Second, the rules establish or enhance new design and construction standards for livestock waste lagoons and livestock waste handling facilities other than lagoons (Subparts B and C). Subpart A sets forth general provisions applicable to Part 506. Section 506.101 refers to §§506.201 and 506.301 for the applicability of these amendments to new facilities, and requires the public to use Part 506 in conjunction with the Dept. of Agriculture’s Part 900 rules. Section 506.103 defines terms used in Part 506, and §506.104 lists the documents incorporated by reference into the proposal. The proposal prescribes procedures for requesting alternatives, modifications, and waivers to the new design and construction standards in §506.106. Subpart B establishes or enhances design and construction standards for livestock waste lagoons. These standards apply to designs not approved prior to the effective date of these amendments (§506.201). The site investigation requires determining the presence of aquifer material, and determining whether the lagoon will be located in a floodway, floodplain, or karst area (§506.202). Sections 506.204 and 506.205 specify lagoon design and liner standards. Groundwater monitoring requirements operate in conjunction with the Dept. of Agriculture’s Part 900 rules (§506.206). The proposal establishes new standards for constructing lagoons in karst and flood fringe areas (§§506.207, 506.208). Section 506.210 establishes new requirements for secondary containment features. Subpart C establishes design and construction standards for livestock waste handling facilities other than lagoons. These standards apply to designs not approved prior to the effective date of these amendments (§506.301). The site investigation requires determining the presence of aquifer material, and determining whether the livestock waste handling facility will be located in a floodway, floodplain, or karst area (§506.302). The proposal prescribes waste storage volume requirements in §506.303. Section 506.304 specifies general design and construction standards. Additional standards are established for concrete, metal, earthen material, synthetic material, and wooden material (§§506.305-506.309). The proposal includes new standards for constructing livestock waste handling facilities in areas with shallow aquifer material, flood fringe areas, and karst areas (§§506.310-506.312). Board adopted Second Notice 09/06/01; Rulemaking scheduled for 10/16/01 JCAR meeting. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Archive/dscgi/ds.py/GetRepr/File-14449/html 



  • In the Matter of: SDWA Update, USEPA Amendments (July 1, 2000, through Dec. 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. Illinois Register publication July 13, 2001. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Archive/dscgi/ds.py/GetRepr/File-14152/html 



  • 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. 



  • 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. Board adopted Final Order Aug. 8, 2001. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Archive/dscgi/ds.py/GetRepr/File-14323/html 



  • In the Matter of: Provisional Variances from Water Temperature Standards: Proposed New 35 Ill. Adm. Code 301.109–The Board Sept. 6 granted the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s motion to withdraw its Apr. 13, 2001, proposal and closed this docket.    


Open Regulatory Dockets



Environmental Protection Agency


Pending Permit Applications


red bar graphic  INDIANA


Department of Envtl. Management


Final Regulations-Air Quality



  • Amends 326 IAC 2-3-1, 326 IAC 2-3-2, and 326 IAC 2-3-3 for incorporating nitrogen oxide emission threshold revisions and pollution control project exemptions. Adds 326 IAC 10-3 for the control of nitrogen oxide emissions from specific source categories. Adds 326 IAC 10-4 for the establishment of a nitrogen oxides budget trading program.

  • 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, and 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 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.

  • IDEM is soliciting public comment on amendments to rules for the application of biosolids, industrial waste products, and pollutant-bearing water in 327 IAC 6.1. The purpose of this rule change is to amend and clarify sections of the article that are creating problems for the regulated community and IDEM staff. 

  • IDEM is soliciting public comment on amendments to 327 IAC 8-2 concerning interim enhanced surface water treatment, disinfectants/disinfection byproducts, and filter backwash. 

  • IDEM has developed draft rule language to amend rules concerning water quality standards by incorporating wetland water quality standards and to add a new article to establish procedures and criteria for reviewing federally permitted or licensed activities that require a water quality certification under §401 of the federal CWA. These activities include those regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under §404 of the CWA and by FERC, such as licenses for hydroelectric facilities. Also included in the new article are procedures and criteria for issuing a state surface water modification permit for wetlands not regulated under §401 of the CWA but that are, nonetheless, waters of the state. 

Proposed Regulations-Solid Waste Management



  • Proposal amends and readopts under IC 13-14-9.5: 329 IAC 1-1, 329 IAC 12-2, and 329 IAC 13-3. This rulemaking is required pursuant to IC 13-14-9.5, which provides for the expiration and readoption of administrative rules. A rule that was adopted under a provision of IC 13 and was in effect on Dec. 31, 1995, expires not later than Jan.1, 2002. All rules adopted after that date under IC 13-14-9, with some exceptions listed in IC13-14-9.5-1, expire on Jan. 1 of the seventh year after the year in which each rule takes effect. The First Notice of Comment Period and Continuation of First Notice of Comment Period opened all rules required to be opened in Title 329 for readoption, regardless of their initial effective date. Other comments received were included and considered within other currently existing rulemakings. (See Summary/Response To Comments from the First Comment Period, 24 IR 169). 

  • 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).

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


Pending Permit Applications


red bar graphic IOWA


Environmental Protection Commission


Proposed Regulations-Mercury Removal-Discarded Appliance Demanufacturing





  • Regulatory analysis of the proposed rule, prepared upon request, available at http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB011017.html. DNR notes that "scrap metal processors are concerned that persons who are currently accepting discarded appliances and who are located next to bordering states that do not have similar rules will take the discarded appliances out of state rather than pay the costs to demanufacture them. This may be a legitimate concern, but experience in eastern Iowa, where there are several discarded appliance demanufacturers in operation who are basically in compliance with the proposed rules, shows that this is not the case. In one situation, appliances are coming into Iowa to be demanufactured. Once scrap dealers understand the proposed rules it is anticipated that more will become permitted discarded appliance demanufacturers. The proposed rules would have little impact on appliance service/repair shops. Such shops would not be required to have a discarded appliance demanufacturing permit unless the shop actually demanufactures appliances. Any appliances discarded by a service/repair shop would have to be properly demanufactured before they could be recycled. Shop owners may have to pay a fee to send discarded appliances to a permitted demanufacturing facility, but it would be expected that this cost would be passed on to the the person discarding the appliance. The proposed rules may impact appliance retailers. When a retail store delivers a new appliance, the store usually charges a fee that covers pickup of the old appliance. The appliance store may put the old appliance out on the dock in back for anyone to pick up for the scrap value. Since the proposed rules require discarded appliances to be demanufactured, it is unlikely that scrap metal dealers will continue to take discarded appliances for only the scrap value. Appliance retailers may have to pay a fee to discard an appliance. However, it is assumed the retailers will pass that cost on to the customer through the delivery and pickup fee. The proposed rules may have an impact on waste haulers who pick up discarded appliances from homeowners. Many haulers use mechanical means, such as a grapple, to pick up the appliance and place it into a truck. When the truck is full, it is taken to the drop–off location and the appliances are dumped out. Such handling can damage the appliance and cause a release of refrigerant, PCBs, or mercury into the environment or it may make the appliance difficult to demanufacture. The proposed rules prohibit haulers from using such practices; however, the proposed rules do not prohibit the use of mechanical means of handling discarded appliances and there may be a way to handle appliances mechanically that would not cause damage. There is also a concern that the proposed rules will result in more illegal dumping of discarded appliances because of the increase in the cost of handling the appliances. Experience at landfills that started charging or increased the fee for taking appliances shows that the number of appliances received after a change went into effect did not decrease. Experiences of other states that have similar rules show that a significant increase in illegal disposal of appliances is not likely."



Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste




  • Would amend Chapter 119, “Waste Oil,” Chapter 144, “Household Hazardous Materials,” Chapter 211, “Grants for Regional Collection Centers of Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators and Household Hazardous Wastes,” and Chapter 214, “Household Hazardous Materials Program,” and would  rescind Chapter 210, “Grants for Solid Waste Comprehensive Planning,” and Chapter 212, “Loans for Waste Reduction and Recycling Projects,” Iowa Administrative Code. The rules to be amended describe limitations and programs designed to protect the public health and the environment by regulating disposal of household hazardous materials, and provide for collection of household hazardous materials, hazardous materials generated by conditionally exempt small quantity generators, and provision of educational materials to increase public awareness of household hazardous materials and proper management and disposal of such hazardous materials. Comments due Nov. 27; hearing same date. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB011017.html 


Proposed Regulations-Groundwater




  • Will amend Chapter 134, “Certification of Groundwater Professionals,” Iowa Administrative Code. Subrule 134.2(3) is being replaced and subrule 134.3(3) is being rescinded. These subrules were used to implement a transition period from the groundwater professional registration program to a certification process. Subrule 134.3(3) is no longer needed. Subrule 134.3(5) is being amended to clarify that 12 hours of continuing education are required during each 2–year certification period in order to receive recertification. The continuing education hours cannot be carried over to the next certification period. Subrule 134.2(3) is being changed to require professional engineers exempted from the certification examination to take the risk–based corrective action (RBCA) instruction course offered by the Department before certification is granted. Previously, the course was required in the first year of certification as part of the engineers’ continuing education. DNR believes attending the course prior to certification is needed to ensure acceptable work is performed from the beginning of certification. The Iowa RBCA procedures and software are not part of normal engineering training. Applicants who fail to pass the certification examination a second time will be required to complete a regular RBCA course of instruction before retaking the exam. Failing the exam the second time shows a need for a better understanding of the RBCA process. The purpose of certification is to have some assurance the person is competent to perform a RBCA investigation for the petroleum–contaminated site owner. Retaking the RBCA instruction course is required of applicants rather than allowing them to take the exam over and over again. Hearing Nov. 6; comments due Nov. 9. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB011017.html 


Proposed Regulations-Underground Storage Tanks




  • Will amend Chapter 135, “Technical Standards and Corrective Action Requirements for Owners and Operators of Underground Storage Tanks,” Iowa Administrative Code. These amendments incorporate the changes made by 2001 Iowa Acts, House File 636, sections 1 and 2, effective July 1, 2001. 2001 Iowa Acts, House File 636, removed the requirement for the person depositing a regulated substance in an unregistered UST to notify the owners or operators of their duty to register tanks. Also, the person is not required to report the unregistered tank to DNR or provide the owner or operator with a tank registration form. However, it still remains unlawful for both the depositor and the person accepting the regulated substance to deposit a regulated substance into tanks that have not been registered and issued permanent or annual tank tags. 2001 Iowa Acts, House File 636, makes it unlawful for a person to deposit a regulated substance in a UST after being notified by DNR that the tank is not covered by an approved form of financial responsibility such as insurance. Item 2 incorporates this requirement. The depositor and person accepting the substance remain subject to fines and penalties for depositing a regulated substance under these conditions. The $25 additional registration fee for failing to register a tank has been increased to $250. Also, the additional $250 fee now applies for failure to obtain annual tank tags. A major change is the requirement for a person who installs USTs and the owner or operator to notify DNR in writing of the intent to install a tank. A person selling, installing, modifying, or repairing a tank used or intended to be used as a UST now must notify both the purchaser and owner or operator of the tank of the tank registration requirements. 2001 Iowa Acts, House File 636, section 2, gives DNR authority to deny registration and annual tank tags for USTs for which the owner or operator has not provided proof of financial responsibility coverage to DNR. Item 3 of these amendments requires owners and operators to provide such proof as a condition of receipt of tank registration and annual tank management fee tags without which the owners and operators cannot lawfully obtain products. The amendments provide DNR authority to give written authorization to fill untagged USTs for purposes of testing the tanks or when there is a delay in getting tank tags to the owner or operator. Hearing Nov. 6; comments due Nov. 9. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB011017.html 


Proposed Regulations




  • Will amend Chapter 1, “Operation of Environmental Protection Commission,” Chapter 9, “Delegation of Construction Permitting Authority,” and Chapter 11, “Tax Certification of Pollution Control or Recycling Property,” Iowa Administrative Code. Comments due Nov. 8; hearing same date. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB011017.html 


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality




  • The purpose of this rulemaking is to establish a definition of certain air emission units as “small units” and list those emission units as being exempt from the requirement to obtain an air construction permit. The rulemaking also establishes a definition of “indoor units” for which no air construction permits are required. The proposal is the result of a negotiated rulemaking process between DNR and representatives of the Iowa Association of Business and Industry (ABI). Hearing Nov. 26; comments due Nov. 30. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB011017.html 



  • Proposed amendments to amend Chapter 22, “Controlling Pollution,” Iowa Administrative Code. Item 1 seeks to revise the deadline for which an application for a significant modification of a Title V permit is due. Currently, subparagraph 22.105(1)“a”(4) requires an application at least 6 months prior to any planned significant modification of a Title V permit. While 40 C.F.R. Part 70 does not specifically address a deadline for significant modification application, Subpart 70.5(a)(1)(ii) states that a complete application to obtain a Title V permit or permit revision is required within 12 months after commencing operation or on or before such earlier date as the permitting authority may establish. This rulemaking seeks to change the deadline for application submittal to no later than 3 months after commencing operation of the changed source. DNR has received two requests from the regulated public that this subparagraph be revised or deleted. This rulemaking is an attempt to address concerns over permit timing issues. Three months is considered adequate time to prepare an application for modification of a Title V permit so that the permit remains consistent with current operations at the facility. Item 2 reiterates the deadline for which an application for a significant modification of a Title V permit is due. New subrule 22.113(4) is intended to make clear when the application for a significant modification is due. Hearing Nov. 15; comments due Nov. 30. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB011017.html 


Final Regulations-Water Quality




  • The amendments as adopted by the EPC on Aug. 20 establish the Class A (primary contact recreation) use designations for eight waterbodies or waterbody segments; establish a Class C (drinking water supply) use designation for Mystic Reservoir (Appanoose County); and establish numerical criteria for endosulfan, bromoform, chlorodibromomethane, chloroform, and dichlorobromomethane. Comments were received from 36 persons and organizations and a petition was received with 48 signatures. One respondent, the Iowa Environmental Council, endorsed all the changes while the remainder objected to one or more changes. Most objected to the removal of the drainage ditch maintenance exemption to the antidegradation policy. The only difference between the adopted amendments and the proposed amendments as published for comment is the proposed change to the antidegradation policy. The Commission did not take any action to remove, as proposed, or to otherwise revise a provision in the antidegradation policy that exempts the repair and maintenance of drainage district ditches from the policy. The Commission directed Department staff to have the Water Quality Standards Technical Advisory Committee address this provision and make recommendations for future rule revisions. These amendments are intended to implement Iowa Code chapter 455B, division III, part 1 and became effective Oct. 24. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB010919.html 


Final Regulations-Animal Feeding Operations




  • Amends Chapter 65, “Animal Feeding Operations,” Iowa Administrative Code. The amendment incorporates by reference the Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation Registration Program as set forth in Environmental Protection Division Policy Procedure No. 5–b–15. Effective Oct. 24. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB010919.html 


Final Regulations-Sanitary Disposal Projects




  • Amends Chapter 102, “Permits,” Iowa Administrative Code. This amendment implements Iowa Code §455B.306(6)“d” to require sanitary disposal projects to file an Emergency Response and Remedial Action
    Plan (ERRAP) in conjunction with the issuance, renewal, or reissuance of a permit for a sanitary disposal project. That provision of the Iowa Code had not been previously implemented. The amendment adopts new rule 102.16(455B), which provides guidance and direction on development of an ERRAP. The technical committee of the Iowa Society of Solid Waste Operations (ISOSWO) provided assistance in development of the rule. Effective Oct. 24. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB010919.html 

red bar graphic  KANSAS


Department of Health & Environment, Division of Environment


KDHE "Kansas Environmental News"


red bar graphic KENTUCKY


Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, Division for Air Quality


NOx SIP Call Budget Demonstration and Initial Source Allocations



Proposed Amendments-Parts 61-63




  • Hearing Nov. 29 regarding amendments to 401 KAR 57:002, 40 C.F.R. Part 61 national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants; 401 KAR 60:005, 40 C.F.R. Part 60 standards of performance for new stationary sources; 401 KAR 63:002, 40 C.F.R. Part 63 national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for sources categories. See http://www.nr.state.ky.us/nrepc/dep/daq/pubinfo/calendar.html


Permit Applications/Hearing Notices 



Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, Division of Water


Permit Applications



Proposed Regulations-Sanitary Surveys



Proposed Regulations-Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations



Proposed, Draft TMDLs


red bar graphic LOUISIANA


Department of Environmental Quality


Proposed Regulations-Waste Tire Fee Collection Methodology (LAC 33:VII.10505, 10507, 10519, 10525, 10533, and 10535)



Withdrawal of Proposed Rule AQ219, Control of Emissions of Organic Compounds-Calcasieu Parish Area 



Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-Revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Baton Rouge 



 




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



Draft Five-Year Strategic Plan



Proposed TMDLs



Permit Applications


red bar graphic MAINE


Department of Envtl. Protection


Proposed Regulations-USTs




  • Ch. 691, Amendment To Rules For Underground Oil Storage Facilities: Siting Restrictions For New Facilities. This rule amendment would establish restrictions on the siting of future underground oil storage tank facilities on mapped significant sand and gravel aquifers, and thereby reduce the risk of costly discharges of oil to these geologically sensitive locations and important future sources of public drinking water. The proposed amendment prohibits the siting of new underground oil storage facilities on significant sand and gravel aquifers mapped by the Maine Geological Survey. Exempt from the rule are on-site consumptive use heating oil facilities, replacement tanks and facilities and the conversion of aboveground oil storage facilities to underground facilities. Variances from the prohibition are available from the Commissioner, upon application, for sites where their potential as a future drinking water supply resource are low because of low yield or existing pollution, or only of moderate yield. New facilities on high potential public drinking water supply aquifers are prohibited. Hearing Nov. 15; comments due Nov. 27. See http://www.state.me.us/sos/cec/rcn/apa/notices/102401.htm 


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality




  • DEP is proposing to amend Ch. 127 to reflect changes to the California LEV II program to include heavy-duty diesel new engine standards for vehicles having a gross manufacturer's weight over 14,000 pounds. This amended rule would add standards for new diesel engines referred to as Not-To-Exceed (NTE) and Euro III European Stationary Cycle (ESC) emission test procedures for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines. In addition, the Department is proposing to adopt the latest California heavy-duty gasoline engine standards that align certain California standards with the more recent Tier 2 federal standards. Some of these include setting a NOx fleet average requirement rather than a non-methane Organic Gas (NMOG) fleet average. Hearing Nov. 1; comments due Nov. 13. See http://www.state.me.us/sos/cec/rcn/apa/notices/101001.htm 


Proposed Regulations-Water Quality




  • Ch. 585, Dissolved Oxygen Requirements for Rivers and Streams. This rule does three things. First, it adopts federally required dissolved oxygen criteria for the support of indigenous fish. Second, the rule clarifies the procedures for identifying and designating fish spawning areas in the wastewater discharge licensing process. Third, the rule specifies that compliance with dissolved oxygen levels will not be measured in the bottom waters of certain riverine impoundments. Upon adoption, the proposed rule will repeal and replace the existing Ch. 585 rule titled "Identification of Fish Spawning Areas and Designation of Salmonid Spawning Areas." Hearing Nov. 1; comments due Nov. 30. See http://www.state.me.us/sos/cec/rcn/apa/notices/101001.htm 


Final Regulations-Air Quality




  • Ch. 519, Interim Effluent Limitations and Controls for the Discharge of Mercury. Originally approved in Feb. 2000, Ch. 519 establishes procedures for setting interim effluent limits and controls for the discharge of mercury to surface waters of the state. Consistent with provisions of law applicable at the time, the original Ch. 519 expired on Oct. 1, 2001. A change in the law enacted by the 120th Legislature continues the need for interim controls for mercury after Oct. 1. Consistent with the new law, an amendment to Ch. 519, adopted on Sept. 6, 2001, eliminates the sunset provision from the original rule. Effective Oct. 6. 



  • 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 CAA Amendments of 1990 offer states the option of accepting delegation for NSPS and NESHAPs 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 1970s as well as the newer NESHAP requirements, in accordance with the Maine Administrative Procedure Act 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  



  • Ch. 100, Definitions Regulation (Amendments); Ch. 115, Major and Minor Source Air Emission License Regulations (Amendments); Ch. 140, Part 70 Air Emission License Regulations (Amendments). The Department has amended Ch. 100, 115, and 140 of the Department's regulations to address remaining requirements for federal approval of Maine's Title V Operating Permit Program. These changes include enhancing EPA and public participation review process for minor license revisions, incorporating provisions in Ch. 140 whereby a facility may make changes with a simple 7-day advance notice if the changes do not result in an increase in emissions, removing certain activities from the list of insignificant (exempt) activities contained in Appendix B to Ch. 115 and Ch. 140, incorporating the latest federal air quality modeling requirements, and amending the Ch. 100 definitions to include definitions consistent with federal requirements for the construction or reconstruction of hazardous air pollutant sources and maximum available control technology determinations. The amendments also establish provisions in Ch. 115 and Ch. 140 requiring an applicant to notify federal land managers of all major modifications or new major source license applications and provide at least 30 days for comment. Effective Sept. 22. 


Final Regulations-Ch. 375, No Adverse Environmental Effect Standard of the Site Location Law, Ch. 375.9, Buffer Strips




  • To ensure consistency between regulatory programs, the proposed rule eliminates the discrepancies between gravel pit performance standards. Specifically, the rule repeals the gravel pit buffer standards required under the Site Location Law and replaces them with the buffer standards contained in the Performance Standards for Excavations, 38 MRSA §490-D. Effective Sept. 22. 

red bar graphic MARYLAND


Department 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 graphic MASSACHUSETTS


Department of Envtl. Protection


Draft TMDLs-Phosphorus Levels in Selected Chicopee Basin Lakes



Proposed Regulations-Air Quality




  • Nov. 13 hearing on proposed amendments to 310 CMR 7.40, The Massachusetts Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) Program. The purpose of the public hearing is to solicit comments on the proposed amendments to 310 CMR 7.40, which would require "Not-to-Exceed" (NTE) testing and California certification of all new model year 2005 and subsequent model year heavy-duty diesel engines prior to being sold or registered in Massachusetts. The proposed amendments to 310 CMR 7.40 would also align the Massachusetts LEV program with recent revisions to the California LEV program regulations (Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations). See http://www.state.ma.us/dep/bwp/daqc/files/lev/hearing.htm and http://www.state.ma.us/dep/bwp/daqc/daqcpubs.htm#lev 


Draft Indoor Air Sampling and Evaluation Guide



Guidelines for Determining Closure Activities at Inactive Unlined Landfill Sites




  • Draft guidelines available at http://www.state.ma.us/dep/bwp/dswm/files/c&dguid.htm. The purpose of this document is to clarify the closure provisions of 310 CMR 19.000 by providing guidance on the procedures and criteria the Department will use when reviewing requests to close inactive unlined landfills where use of alternative grading and shaping materials is proposed. Specifically, these guidelines address permitting requirements and evaluation procedures for determining the types and quantities of materials used during closure and the length of time for closure activities. 


Proposed Regulations-Industrial Wastewater Holding Tank and Container Construction, Operation and Recordkeeping




  • Proposed draft regulation, technical support, background document, and cost-benefit analysis for 314 CMR 10.00 available at http://www.state.ma.us/dep/bwp/iww/iwwpubs.htm. Sets minimum construction, operation, and recordkeeping requirements for owners or operators of industrial wastewater holding tanks and containers used to store non-hazardous non-domestic industrial wastewater. 


Draft Amendments to 310 CMR 27.00, Underground Injection Control Regulations



Testing and Reporting Requirements Guidance for Facilities Applying Under 310 CMR 7.28 "NOx Allowance Trading Program"



Guidelines for Private Drinking Water Wells



Enforcement Actions


red bar graphic  MICHIGAN


Department of Envtl. Quality


New Address, Location



  • The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is relocating in downtown Lansing. Starting Nov. 6 and ending Feb.14, 2002, all of the various DEQ divisions will relocate their administrative offices in phases to one new location at 525 W. Allegan Street in downtown Lansing. The new building will be called "Constitution Hall"–it sits on the site where the state’s 1963 Constitution was drafted. Approximately 920 DEQ employees will have their offices there. All telephone numbers, including fax numbers, will remain the same except for: (a) Geological Survey and (b) Drinking Water and Radiological Protection, which will receive new telephone and fax numbers. For mailing purposes, specific Post Office Box numbers will remain the same.

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.

  • The Department intends to develop a proposed revision to the Air Pollution Control Rules (ORR 2001-072EQ). The proposed amendment to R336.1122(f) for the definition of volatile organic compound will delete references to photochemical reactivity and vapor pressure of materials in surface coatings to make the definition as stringent as the federal definition. Information Contact: Jerald Trautman, Air Quality Division, 517-335-4855, or E-mail at trautmaj@state.mi.us

  • 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.

  • Pursuant to Act 451, the Air Quality Division is operating a work group to assist in the revision of rules regulating the new source review (NSR) program for rules packages 2000-077EQ and 2000-078EQ. The proposed NSR rule revisions will address program approval issues raised by U.S. EPA, findings of the Office of the Auditor General, and possible new exemptions from the requirement to obtain a Permit to Install. The eighteenth work group meeting will be held Oct. 9 at 9:30 a.m. in the AQD Conference Room, Hollister Building, 4th Floor, 106 West Allegan Street, Lansing Michigan. Information Contact: Jerald Trautman, Air Quality Division, 517-335-4855, or e-mail at trautmaj@state.mi.us.  

Final Regulations-Oil Spills



  • Part 5, Spillage of Oil and Polluting Materials, administrative rules. The Office of Regulatory Reform filed the rules, denoted by ORR 1996-161EQ, with the Office of the Great Seal on Aug. 23, 2001, and the rules are effective as of Aug. 31, 2001. The rules are available via the Waste Management Division’s web page at www.deq.state.mi.us/wmd or directly from the Waste Management Division’s Lansing Office. 

Permitting Calendar-Pending Permit Applications; Consent Orders  



Permit Applications-Air Quality



Proposed Enforcement Consent Orders



Permitting Calendar (Permit Applications)



Air Quality Division Newsletter



Surface Water Quality Division Bulletin


red bar graphic MINNESOTA


Pollution Control Agency


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality



  • Planned New Rules Governing the Sale of Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines to be Codified in Minnesota Rules Chapter 7023. Comments through Nov. 23. MPCA is considering adopting rules promulgated by the state of California that require more stringent testing procedures for heavy-duty diesel engines beginning with the 2005 model year. The MPCA is considering proposing to (1) require that all heavy-duty diesel engines sold in Minnesota are certified as complying with applicable exhaust emissions standards under Title 13, section 1956.8 of the California Code of Regulations for engines manufactured in model years 2005 and 2006; and (2) establish requirements for vehicle registration and transactions for heavy-duty diesel engines in model years 2005 and 2006. On Dec. 8, 2000, the California Air Board adopted rules governing the test procedures used to certify HDDEs sold in California, beginning in model year 2005. The test procedures adopted in the CARB rules are the “Not-To-Exceed” test and the “Euro III Stationary Cycle” test. These test procedures are broader and more closely reflect actual driving conditions than the current federal test procedure for HDDEs used by U.S. EPA. The MPCA is considering adopting the CARB’s rules for model years 2005 and 2006 to close the gap between the use of new test procedures under the consent agreement and their use under EPA rules in 2007. See http://statsbox.pca.state.mn.us/pca/news/newsRelease.cfm?NR=3015&type=1 

Permit Applications, Other Notices



Minnesota 2001-2005 Nonpoint Source Management Plan



red bar graphic  MISSOURI


Department of Natural Resources


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality




  • 10 CSR 10-5.300 Control of Emissions From Solvent Metal Cleaning (St. Louis area). The commission proposes to amend section (2) and subsection (3)(B), add new subsection (3)(C) that includes original sections (4) and (5), add new subsection (3)(D) that includes original section (6), amend sections (4) and (5), and delete sections (7) and (8). If the commission adopts this rule action, it will be submitted to U.S. EPA to replace the current rule in the Missouri SIP. This rule amendment will exempt paint spray gun cleaning except remote open top paint spray gun cleaning machines. All remote paint spray gun cleaning machines will be required to be operated per the manufacturer’s operating instructions and to be closed or covered when not in use to help eliminate fugitive emissions. The evidence supporting the need for this proposed rulemaking, per section 536.016, RSMo, is correspondence from industry that resulted in this change. Hearing Dec. 6; comments due Dec. 13. See http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/moreg/2001/v26n20/v26n20b.pdf 

  •  10 CSR 10-6.060 Construction Permits Required and 10-6.065. The commission proposes to amend subsection (1)(B) and amend subsection (1)(D). If the commission adopts this rule action, it will be submitted to U.S. EPA to replace the current rule in the Missouri SIP. This amendment provides an exemption for non-commercial incinerators recommended by the University of Missouri extension service for disposal of dead animals and removes the reference to asphaltic concrete plants from the applicability section of the rule. The evidence supporting the need for this proposed rulemaking, per section 536.016, RSMo, is the May 28, 2000, memorandum from the Missouri Attorney General’s Office identifying the discrepancies between state statute requirements and state permit rule requirements. Hearing Dec. 6; comments due Dec. 13. See http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/moreg/2001/v26n20/v26n20b.pdf 


Proposed Regulations-Water Quality




  •  Aboveground Storage Tanks (ASTs), 10 CSR 20-15.010 Applicability and Definitions et seq. The Missouri Clean Water Commission is responsible for adopting rules necessary to prevent, control, and abate potential discharge of contaminants to the waters of the state. Releases of petroleum and other regulated substances from ASTs and associated piping, primarily from ASTs located at service stations, marinas, bulk plants, and fleet fueling facilities, have been documented throughout the state. While the applicable Department of Agriculture regulations focus on prevention of such releases, there are currently no specific requirements for release response measures that must be taken to protect the environment and the waters of the state. The commission has determined release response measures to be necessary because, once a release has occurred, the nature of the contaminants is such that, without appropriate release response measures, there is a substantial threat that the discharged contaminants will pollute the waters of the state. The intent of the release response measures required by the rules in this chapter is to prevent any discharged contaminants from polluting the waters of the state. This rule specifies which ASTs must comply with the technical requirements set forth in this chapter and defines specific words used in this chapter so that the meaning of these terms, and their application in the rules of this chapter, is easily understood. Hearing Nov. 28; comments due Dec. 5. See http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/moreg/2001/v26n20/v26n20b.pdf 

  • 10 CSR 20-6.200 Storm Water Regulations. The commission proposes to amend sections (1)–(5). U.S. EPA promulgated rules effective Nov. 1999 requiring storm water permits on construction sites between one (1) and five (5) acres in size and on municipal storm water sewer systems in urbanized areas serving populations of less than one hundred thousand (100,000). The federal rule also allows for permit exemptions on industrial facilities, which protect their operations from storm water. Missouri must develop a Phase II program and issue permits within three (3) years of the final federal rule. This amendment will expand these rules to include a broader group of activities. The evidence supporting this proposed rulemaking per section 536.016, RSMo, lies in the federal rule that mandates this amendment in delegated, state storm water programs. Hearing Nov. 28; comments due Dec. 5. See http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/moreg/2001/v26n20/v26n20b.pdf 


Proposed Regulations-Drinking Water Quality




  •  Division 60-Public Drinking Water Program; 10 CSR 60-7.020 Reporting Requirements for Lead and Copper Monitoring; 10 CSR 60-10.040 Prohibition of Lead Pipes, Lead Pipe Fittings, and Lead Solder and Flux; 10 CSR 60-15.020 Applicability of Corrosion Control Treatment Steps to Small, Medium-Size, and Large Water Systems; 10 CSR 60-15.030 Description of Corrosion Control Treatment Requirements; 10 CSR 60-15.050 Lead Service Line Replacement Requirements; 10 CSR 60-15.060 Public Education and Supplemental Monitoring Requirements; 10 CSR 60-15.070 Monitoring Requirements for Lead and Copper in Tap Water; 10 CSR 60-15.080 Monitoring Requirements for Water Quality Parameters; 10 CSR 60-15.090 Monitoring Requirements for Lead and Copper in Source Water. This amendment adopts changes to the federal rules published in the Jan. 12, 2000, and June 30, 1994, Federal Registers. These changes are required in order to maintain delegation of the federal program. Public hearing was Oct. 17; comments due Nov. 15. See http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/moreg/2001/v26n18/v26n18b.pdf 


Final Regulations-Air Quality



Final Regulations-Hazardous Waste



Emergency Regulation-Drinking Water-Grants



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

Proposed TMDLs



Water Pollution Control-Permit Applications


red bar graphic MONTANA


Department of Envtl. Quality


Proposed Regulations-USTs



Proposed Regulations-Major Facility Siting



Proposed Regulations-Water Quality



Proposed Regulations-Air Quality



Final Regulations-Air Quality



Permit Application, Public Comment Notices


red bar graphic NEBRASKA


Department of Envtl. Quality


Proposed Regulations-General



DEQ Air Quality Program Workshops To Be Held Across State



Comprehensive Study Of Water Quality Monitoring; LB1234 Phase II Report


red bar graphic NEVADA


State Environmental Commission


Final Regulations




  • Were approved at Sept. 18 hearing. Petitions 2001-02, 2001-03, 2001-04, 2001-05, 2001-06, and 2001-07 were previously adopted as temporary regulations by the Environmental Commission on Dec. 5, 2000, or on May 10, 2001. These temporary regulations expire Nov. 1, 2001, and were before the Commission for permanent adoption. 



  • Petition 2001-02 (LCB R-037-01) permanently amends NAC 444.842 to 444.960, the hazardous waste regulations. See http://ndep.state.nv.us/sec/p2001-02.pdf The amended regulations update the state's adoption of federal regulations by reference by amending NAC 444.8427, 444.84275, 444.850, and 444.9452 to refer to the federal regulations as they existed on July 1, 2001, and modify 444.8632 to adopt 40 C.F.R. Parts 2, Subpart A, 124, Subparts A and B, Parts 260 to 270, and Part 279 as those parts existed on July 1, 2001.  



  • Petition 2001-03 (LCB R-038-01) permanently amends NAC 444A.005 to 444A.470 to extend programs for separating, at the source, recyclable material from other solid waste to include public buildings in counties with populations greater than 100,000. See http://ndep.state.nv.us/sec/p2001-03.pdf The amended regulations add for public buildings the minimum standards that were previously established for the source separation of recyclables at residential premises. Definitions for public building, paper and paper product are added. NAC 444A.120 was amended to add public buildings and 444A.130 was amended to provide for a municipality to make available a source separation of recyclable materials at public buildings.



  • Petition 2001-04 (LCB R-039-01) permanently amends NAC 444A. The proposed permanent regulation prescribes the paper and paper product recycling procedures for state agencies. See http://ndep.state.nv.us/sec/p2001-04.pdf The regulation provides criteria for exemption from the recycling requirements, provides for clearly labeled containers, establishes reporting criteria by state agencies, and requires a building recycling plan to be submitted to the Division of Environmental Protection.



  • Petition 2001-05 (LCB R-040-01) permanently amends NAC 445B.001 to 445B.395, the state air pollution control permitting program. The proposed permanent regulation amends NAC 445B by creating and defining a new classification of operating permits. See http://ndep.state.nv.us/sec/p2001-05.pdf The new Class III permit will provide eligible sources (those emitting 5 tons or less of specific pollutants) a streamlined permitting process, which includes accelerated permit review and issuance and lower permitting fees. This regulation will provide regulatory relief for small quantity sources. NAC 445B.320, dealing with operating permit changes is amended to include additional language to require a detailed description of how increases and decreases will comply with the permit.



  • Petition 2001-06 (LCB R-041-01) permanently amends NAC 459.952 to 459.95528, the chemical accident prevention program. The regulation adds new provisions to incorporate explosives manufacturing into the program, to add construction permit requirements for new chemical and explosive facilities, and other minor technical amendments to the regulations to reflect statutory amendments to the list of regulated chemicals. Facilities that manufacture explosives or ammonium nitrate/fuel oil for sale will be subject to the requirements of the program. A fee structure to regulate explosive facilities is established. 



  • Petition 2001-07 (LCB R-043-01) permanently amends NAC 445A.810 to 445A.925, the underground injection control program. See http://ndep.state.nv.us/sec/p2001-07.pdf The amended regulations provide that "other Sensitive Groundwater Areas" can be determined to meet compliance with the proposed regulations. The regulations revise outdated Nevada Revised Statute references, expand minor permit modification criteria and logistics, expand criteria for a temporary permit, outline methods to establish permit limits in the absence of specific standards, and repeal the prohibition of injection of treated effluent. New definitions for cesspool, Class V Rule, delineation, drywell, groundwater protection area, improved sinkhole, other sensitive groundwater area, motor vehicle waste disposal well, point of injection, sanitary waste, septic system, source water assessment and protection program, and subsurface fluid distribution system are defined. Restrictions are imposed on Motor Vehicle Waste Disposal wells. Fees for renewals in NAC 445A.872 are reduced, repealed, and incorporated into the existing annual fee. This fee category is expanded to included major modifications.  



  • Petition 2001-08 (LCB R-089-01) permanently amends NAC 519A.350, reclamation of land subject to mining operations or exploration projects. See http://ndep.state.nv.us/sec/p2001-08.pdf The amended regulations provide minor changes regarding surety bonding by allowing up to 75% of the required surety to be satisfied by the corporate guarantee, based upon periodic review by the administrator. The amendments also require that the financial information submitted comply with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and that the financial statements submitted be audited.



  • Petition 2002-01 (LCB R-096-01) permanently amends NAC 445A.070 to 445A.348, the water pollution control program by amending 445A.100, the definition for "point source," by adding language that defines earth moving equipment, and 445A.309, the definition for "diffuse source," to incorporate runoff in various subsections of the definition. See http://ndep.state.nv.us/sec/p2002-01.pdf In addition, the definition for "diffuse source" clarifies provisions regarding urban area runoff and earth moving activities. The regulation will assist regulated communities in determining when water pollution control permits are necessary.  

red bar graphic NEW JERSEY


Department of Envtl. Protection


Proposed Regulations-Water Quality




  • New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, N.J.A.C. 7:14A, Amendments and repeal. Hearing Nov. 13; comments due Nov. 14. The proposed repeal of N.J.A.C. 7:14A-11, Appendices A and B, will remove the text of the "basic industrial" and "construction" stormwater general permits from the NJPDES rules; however, these general permits will remain fully effective and enforceable. The proposed amendment to N.J.A.C. 7:14A-6.13(c) will establish a list, for informational purposes only, of all general permits issued under N.J.A.C. 7:14A.

    The proposed amendments to the NJPDES fee rules at N.J.A.C. 7:14A-3.1 will address minimum fees and fee calculations, and make various revisions to improve organizational structure and clarity. The proposal seeks to amend the fee rules to provide an expedited and more efficient means for adopting new or revised minimum permit fees, to improve fee equitability, to codify current Departmental practices, and to make other administrative changes. See http://www.state.nj.us/dep/dwq/rules.htm#proposals and http://www.state.nj.us/dep/rules/notices/101501a.html 


Freshwater Wetlands Regulations; Final Regulations and Proposed Regulations 




  • Final regulations became 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 that 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 were the subject of Sept. 27 hearing. See http://www.state.nj.us/dep/landuse/announce/announce.html#fwwadoption 


Upcoming Proposed Regulations (Rulemaking Agenda)




  • N.J.A.C. 7:7A. Rule Title: Freshwater Wetlands Rules--Landscape Project, Takings Provisions, Water Allocation Provisions. The proposal will amend the freshwater wetlands rules to add the Landscape Project as the method of determining the size and shape of endangered species habitat and will include provisions governing the issuance of water allocation permits for projects that may drain wetlands. The proposal will also include amendments to these rules and to the coastal permit program rules required by the Appellate Division of the Superior Court in its decision in East Cape May Associates v. State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection, A-1000-99T5, July 25, 2001.



  • N.J.A.C. 7:7E. Rule Title: Coastal Zone Management Rules (Readoption). Proposed readoption including various amendments related to special areas, general water areas, general land areas, use, and resource rules. Amendments are also proposed to reflect Department's current organizational structure, terminology, and definitions. Amendments are also proposed to the Coastal Permit Program rules, N.J.A.C. 7:7, which focus on notice requirements for coastal permit applications, modification requests for coastal permits, and specific coastal general permits. In addition, as part of the readoption of the 90-Day Construction Permits rules,
    N.J.A.C. 7:1C, the Department indicated that it would be reorganizing N.J.A.C. 7:1C to relocate certain provisions specific to the coastal permitting programs from the 90-Day Construction Permits rules to the Coastal Permit Program rules. Amendments are also proposed to the 90-Day Construction Permits rules to relocate provisions applicable to coastal permits to N.J.A.C. 7:7-10.



  • N.J.A.C. 7:26. Rule Title: Solid Waste Regulations (Readoption). Proposed readoption with amendments to update technical requirements, add conditional exemptions, and clarify certain provisions of the rules. These amendments include new regulatory exemptions, streamlined reporting requirements, and new technical standards for liquid waste transfer stations and commercial medical waste facilities. The rules will also propose the entering of voluntary covenants between sanitary landfill owner/operators and the Department under the Department's Silver and Gold Track Program for Environmental Performance.



  • N.J.A.C. 7:27-16. Rule Title: Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution By Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC). Proposal to amend VOC (RACT) rules to incorporate the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) model rules for "Mobile Equipment Repair and Refinishing," "Solvent Cleaning Operations," "Portable Fuel Container Spillage Control," and some provisions from CARB's model rule concerning "Enhanced Vapor Recovery." These rules are intended to reduce VOC emissions. The OTC model rules are being used by the OTC states to assist them in meeting ozone attainment shortfalls. 


See http://www.state.nj.us/dep/rules/calendar.html 


Current DEP Bulletin (Permit Applications; Proposed Regulations) 


red bar graphic NEW MEXICO


Environment Department


Proposed TMDLs


 


 



 




  • For the San Francisco and Gila watersheds, including the following draft TMDL waterbodies: Centerfire Creek (plant nutrients), San Francisco River (plant nutrients), Whitewater Creek (aluminum), Mangas Creek (plant nutrients), Canyon Creek (plant nutrients and turbidity), and Sapillo Creek (turbidity and total organic carbon). The draft de-list letter is for Sapillo Creek (biological impairment). Comments were due Sept. 28, but comments will be accepted at a Nov. 13 meeting of the Water Quality Control Commission. See http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/OOTS/Public%20Notices/Gila%20SanFransisco%20Pub%20Notic.PDF and http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/swqb.html


  red bar graphic  NEW YORK


Department of Envtl. Conservation


Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) for Water Pollution Control; Final FFY 2002 Intended Use Plan (IUP)



  • The IUP includes a list of projects that could receive low interest financing between Oct.1, 2001, and Sept. 30, 2002. New projects may be added to the IUP Annual and Multi-Year Project Priority Lists as they are identified by municipalities interested in CWSRF financing. Notification of additions to the Project Priority Lists will be made through quarterly updates to the final IUP.

Emergency Regulations-Radioactive Waste Disposal 



  • An Emergency Adoption was filed with Department of State and became effective on Sept. 4, 2001, to amend 6 NYCRR Part 380 to regulate the disposal of the radioactive wastes generated by the extraction or concentration of uranium or thorium where such waste is not regulated by the U.S. NRC. This emergency rule was proposed for permanent adoption in the State Register on Nov. 15, 2000. It allows for this rule to be in effect while it goes through the rulemaking process for permanent adoption. The purpose of the rule is to control the disposal of wastes contaminated with the radioactive wastes from the extraction of uranium and thorium from ores. The rule requires that these radioactive wastes be disposed of at facilities authorized to accept radioactive waste, and will effectively exclude them from Part 360 and Part 373 landfills, unless a variance to Part 380 is requested and granted. Variances may be granted for slightly contaminated wastes if the proposed disposal will have no significant adverse impact on the public health and safety or the environment. This emergency rule will be effective for 60 days from date of filing with Department of State; until Nov. 3, 2001.

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 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, sulfur dioxide (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 SO2 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



Office of State Comptroller


Vehicle Zero-Emission Goal Will Not be Met


red bar graphic  NORTH CAROLINA


Legislature


UST Legislation Enacted



  • S.L. 01-442 signed into law Oct. 15; requires UST contractors to comply with previously set cleanup protocols and cost estimates in order to obtain reimbursement from the state fund. See http://www.ncga.state.nc.us 

Department of Env't and Natural Resources


Isolated Wetland Regulations Promulgated



 



  • Temporary regulations, effective for 270 days while permanent rules are prepared, proposed, and promulgated, approved by Environmental Management Commission Sept. 13. They became effective Oct. 22 despite a judicial challenge brought by a coalition of business groups. See http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/emc/committees/wq/2001/2001-07-07.pdf. The provisions of this rule shall apply to Division of Water Quality (Division) regulatory and resource management determinations regarding isolated wetlands and isolated classified surface waters. The rule shall only apply to discharges resulting from activities that require state review after the effective date and that require a Division determination concerning effects on isolated wetlands and isolated classified surface waters. For the purpose of this rule, discharge shall be the deposition of dredged or fill material including but not limited to fill, earth, construction debris, and soil. If the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or Natural Resources Conservation Service determines that a particular water is isolated and not regulated under §404 of the CWA, then discharges to that water shall be covered by these rules (15A NCAC 2H. 1301 to .1305). For the purpose of this rule during field determinations made by the Division, isolated wetlands are those waters that are inundated or saturated by an accumulation of surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions and under normal circumstances have no visible surface water connection to downstream waters of the state. Visible surface water connection includes but is not limited to a connection to other surface water via (1) continuous wetlands, (2) intermittent or perennial streams, and (3) ditches with intermittent or perennial flow. The litigants argue that the Commission lacks authority to regulate isolated wetlands in the absence of a statutory change or, at a minimum, a change in the wording of 15A NCAC 2B. 0202(71) (defining wetlands). 


Proposed Coastal Area Management Act Land-Use Planning Improvements 



  • Were conducted 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 there under, 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.

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 Sept. 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. 

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


Environmental Protection Agency


Proposed Regulations-Sewage Sludge Management



  • The proposed rules establish requirements for: sewage sludge disposal at sanitary landfills; sewage sludge storage lagoons; the transfer of sewage sludge to another facility; and prohibiting sewage sludge surface disposal. Under the proposed rules, the director would have authority to establish standards for volume, weight, quality, and pollutant concentration of sewage sludge, and the manner and frequency of sludge management. 

    The proposed permit rules would regulate disposal, use, storage, and treatment of sewage sludge, which is the solid material left over from the wastewater treatment process. Sludge can be landfilled, incinerated, or applied to the land for agronomic benefit. The proposal includes requirements to authorize a land application site. Land application of sewage sludge would require posted notices on land where sludge is to be applied. Authorization for land application would be revoked for repeated nuisance odors. 

    On Mar. 17, 2000, Ohio House Bill (HB) 197 went into effect, giving Ohio EPA authority to manage a sewage sludge program. The bill directs Ohio EPA to write rules that reasonably protect public health and the environment, encourage beneficial reuse, and minimize the creation of nuisance odors. The proposed rules were created to follow the requirements set up in HB 197. While Ohio EPA had a sludge management program in place prior to HB 197, the agency did not have permitting or compliance authority. Once rules are in place to implement this authority, Ohio EPA will seek delegation of the federal sludge management program in Ohio, currently under the authority of U.S. EPA. 

    Copies of the proposed sewage sludge rules are available at Ohio EPA's Division of Surface Water by contacting Chris Bowman at (614) 644-2134, or at http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/rules/draftrules.html.  Written comments can be mailed to Ohio EPA, Division of Surface Water, Lazarus Government Center, Attention: Chris Bowman, P.O. Box 1049, Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049, or e-mailed to chris.bowman@epa.state.oh.us.  All comments received by Oct. 30 will be considered.

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality



  • Ohio EPA has proposed changes in rules governing water quality standards, and is accepting written public comments through Nov. 5. In addition, a public hearing will be held in two sessions Oct. 29, to take verbal comments on the rules. The proposed changes would change or create beneficial use designations for 185 water body segments in 14 drainage basins including: Hocking, Scioto, Grand, Maumee, Sandusky, Little Miami, Huron, Rocky, Chagrin, Portage, Muskingum, Mahoning, Cuyahoga, Black, Vermillion, and Wabash Rivers, and Fields Brook (Ashtabula River); Little Beaver and Mill Creeks; and Central Ohio, Southeast Ohio, and Southwest Ohio tributary basins. The proposed changes also convert the rules from appendix format to text format. 

    Water quality standards are state rules that protect lakes, rivers, streams, and other surface water bodies from pollution. The rules contain beneficial use designations that are water quality goals for water bodies; uses include aquatic life habitats, recreation, and water supplies. Specific water quality criteria are associated with each beneficial use. Together, the uses and criteria may be the basis for pollutant limits in wastewater discharge permits. 

    State and federal laws require Ohio EPA to periodically update the water quality standard rules to reflect the latest scientific information. Ohio EPA has new information that supports making the proposed changes. The new information came from water body sampling conducted by Ohio EPA scientists. This sampling includes a scientific assessment of the biological condition of the waterbody and evaluations of habitat and water quality. This data is used to determine the present health and uses of water bodies and predict the potential health and use of water bodies if more pollution controls are imposed. 

    Public hearings will be held in Columbus and will begin at 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. on Monday, Oct. 29, at Ohio EPA's Central Office, conference room 5A, Lazarus Government Center, 122 South Front Street, Columbus. All interested parties can present written or verbal comments on the proposed revision of the rules. Written comments may be provided to the presiding officers at the hearings, or mailed to Ohio EPA, Attention: Chris Skalski, Ohio EPA Division of Surface Water, P.O. Box 1049, Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049, by the close of business, Nov. 5. 

    Copies of the proposed rules and supporting documentation are available on Ohio EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/rules/draftrules.html,  or by contacting Chris Skalski at (614) 644-2144, or writing to the address above. Proposed rules also are available for inspection at Ohio EPA's district offices in Twinsburg, Bowling Green, Logan, Dayton and Columbus. 

Ohio EPA Responds to Portions of U.S. EPA Program Review



  • Ohio EPA submitted its response to U.S. EPA's draft program review report covering surface water, solid waste, and hazardous waste. The state's response to the air portion of the draft report will be submitted later this month. U.S. EPA released its draft report on Sept. 4, and provided 30 days for Ohio EPA to comment. On Sept. 28, Ohio EPA received approximately 200 pages of additional information from U.S. EPA related to their review of the state air program. Ohio EPA requested an additional 15 work days to review that information before finalizing a response to that part of the report. The information submitted to U.S. EPA, including a brief executive summary, is posted on Ohio EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dir/ohresp.html. When the air report response is completed, it will be added to the Web site. 

    Ohio EPA's preliminary response to the draft federal report, including air issues, is available at http://www.epa.state.oh.us/pic/nr/2001/sept/usepa.html

OEPA Actions, Notices by County



Public Meetings



Pending Air Permits



Campbell Soup Company Agrees to Pay $104,571.50 for Hazardous Waste Violations


red bar graphic OKLAHOMA


Air Quality Council


Proposed Regulations




  • OAC 252:100-4, New Source Performance Standards. These amendments will incorporate by reference any new or amended NSPS promulgated between July 1, 2000, and June 30, 2001. OAC 252:100-5-2.2(b). Registration, Emission Inventory, and Annual Operating Fees [AMENDED]. The proposed revision will provide for an increase in annual operating fees. OAC 252:100-41. Control of Emission of Hazardous and Toxic Air Contaminants. The proposed amendments to Subchapter 41 will incorporate by reference the maximum achievable control technology standards for hazardous air pollutants in 40 C.F.R. Part 63 promulgated between July 1, 2000, and June 30, 2001. Hearing was Oct. 24. See http://www.deq.state.ok.us/air1/current.html 

red bar graphic  OREGON


Department of Envtl. Quality


Proposed Regulations-Water Quality



Air Permit Applications 



Water Quality Permit Applications



Proposed Regulations-General 



Public Notices-Cleanup Remedies



Public Notices-Remedial Actions


red bar graphic PENNSYLVANIA


Department of Envtl. Protection


Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-Heavy Duty Diesel Emissions Control Program



  • Comments due Nov. 9. The proposed rulemaking establishes a new heavy-duty diesel emissions control program designed to primarily reduce emissions of carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, volatile organic compounds, particulate matter, and air toxics from new heavy-duty diesel engines and trucks. The proposed amendments adopt and incorporate by reference certain requirements of the California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 1985 and Subsequent Model Year Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles as authorized under the CAA §177 (42 U.S.C.A. §7507). See http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol31/31-35/1600.html&n bsp;

Proposed Regulations-Safe Drinking Water Amendments (CCR & PN Rules)



  • Comments due Nov. 7. The amendments include new requirements for community water systems to prepare and provide to their customers an annual consumer confidence report, major revisions to the public notification requirements, minor revisions to the regulation of lead and copper to improve implementation, and minor revisions to Chapter 109 to retain primary enforcement authority (primacy) and to clarify existing requirements. See http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol31/31-36/1640.html 

Acceptance of applications for Technical Assistance Grants through the Growing Greener Program



Temporary Emergency Permit Modifications; Municipal Waste Processing and Disposal Facilities



  • The DEP has modified municipal waste processing and disposal facility permits on an emergency and temporary basis, as necessary, to manage the municipal waste backlogs and demolition waste generated by the terrorist attacks of Sept.11, in order to prevent a public health or environmental emergency. These modifications are limited to the temporary extension of operating hours, operating days, and increases in maximum and average daily volume at the facilities and were made in response to written request by the permittee.

NPDES Permit Applications



Draft Technical Guidance



Approved Wetland Replacement Projects 


red bar graphic RHODE ISLAND


Department of Envtl. Management


Draft Environmental Equity Policy



Upcoming Events



Draft TMDL


red bar graphic SOUTH CAROLINA


Department 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 Apr. 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

Revised Air Modeling Guidelines Available



Final 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 that 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. Was submitted to Board Oct. 11. 



  • 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 that 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. Was submitted to Board Oct. 11. 



  • 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 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 was Sept. 24; comments were due same date. 


Permit Application Notices


red bar graphic  TENNESSEE


Department of Environment and Conservation


Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste



  • Hearing was Oct. 17; comments due Oct. 31. This rulemaking includes multiple and various additions, deletions, and modifications to Rule Chapter 1200-1-11 Hazardous Waste Management. Many of these changes are proposed in response to revisions and additions published in Federal Registers that U.S. EPA made between Nov. 8, 2000, and July 3, 2001, to the corresponding federal regulations. These amendments are intended to make the state’s regulations equivalent to their federal counterparts. They include certain technical corrections, definitions, housekeeping changes, clarifications, reference changes, typos, and other corrections. Two wastes, K174 and K175, generated by the chlorinated aliphatics industry are being listed as hazardous and prohibited from land disposal. Generators are being required to treat PCBs if the total concentration of halogenated organic compounds in the soil equals or exceeds 1,000 parts per million (ppm). A PCB treatment requirement is being temporarily deferred under certain conditions. Certain court vacated parameter limits of baghouses and electrostatic precipitators and the Notice of Intent to Comply provisions relating to the standards for hazardous waste combustors are being removed. The amount of dual regulation of certain low-level mixed wastes and technologically enhanced naturally occurring and or accelerator-produced radioactive material containing hazardous waste is being reduced. Both are also being exempted from hazardous waste manifest, transportation, and disposal requirements when certain conditions are met. Certain improvements to the implementation of the emission standards of Hazardous Waste Combustors are being made. Housekeeping amendments include clarification of the Used Oil Program certification requirements and language, the Farmer exemption, and certain used oil transporter requirements. Certain Hazardous Waste Program public notice and meeting requirements are being clarified. Two Permit Modification Classes are being changed. Rules pertaining to the requirements for waste streams conglomerating (mixing) in a pipe going to an on-site treatment facility or to a POTW are also being clarified. The Closure and/or Post closure Insurance financial assurance document is being modified and the Corrective Action Activity fees are also being clarified. See http://www.state.tn.us/environment/swm/swmppo/vnotice.htm 

Proposed Regulations-Storm Water Multi-Sector General Permit for Industrial Activities



Proposed Amendments-Regulations for Public Water Systems and Drinking Water Quality Chapter 1200-5-1 





Board Meeting Agendas, Schedules



Permit Applications



Report-Development of Regionally-Based Interpretations of Tennessee’s Narrative Nutrient Criterion



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 (NOI) 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 

Proposed Regulations-Miscellaneous



  • HB 2912 Art 3.07: Public Health Services Fee Equity Issues. House Bill (HB) 2912, 77th Legislature, 2001 mandates the commission to consider equity in the establishment of the public health drinking water fee rates. The proposed amendment to this chapter is intended to consider equity while generating overall revenue at the current revenue stream. The revenue generated from the new fee assessment does not exceed the amount appropriated by the legislature for fiscal year (FY) 2002, nor is it greater than the revenue generated under the previous assessment in FY 2001. Hearing Nov. 8; comments due Nov. 12. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/hearings/01099290_phn.pdf and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01099290_pro.pdf 

  • "Not to Exceed" (California HD diesel standards). This rule extends supplementation test procedures and certification standards applicable to heavy duty diesel engines in the 2004 model year to the 2005 and 2006 model years. (Chapter 114). Hearing Nov. 12; comments due same date. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/hearings/01007a114_phn.pdf and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01007a114_pro.pdf 

  • The Designation of a Groundwater Management Area. In response to a petition for rulemaking filed by Save Our Springs of North East Texas on Behalf of 57 landowners of Wood County, the commission instructed staff to initiate rulemaking to designate a groundwater management area in northeast Texas to include all of Wood County. Commission conducting a rulemaking to decide if a groundwater management area should be designated, and if so, to determine the most suitable boundaries. The commission plans to designate a groundwater management area with the objective of providing the most suitable area for the management of all groundwater resources by a groundwater conservation district. Hearings Nov. 12 & 13; comments due Dec. 10. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/hearings/01012294_phn.pdf and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01012294_pro.pdf 

  • Quadrennial Review of Chapter 216 (Water Quality Performance Standards for Urban Development and Concurrent Repeal of Subchapter A). The Chapter 216A Quad Review was on hold pending issuance by the Attorney General of an opinion on the constitutionality of the statute on which 216A is based (26 TWC, Section 179). The request for the opinion was submitted by the General Council on March 5, 2001. The Quad Review is now active again. Comments due Nov. 26. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/00038216_pro.pdf and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/00038216_prr.pdf 

  • MOU - Natural Resource Planning. This rule will adopt an MOU between the Texas Department of Transportation and the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission by addressing transportation planning issues, specifically including processing of documents required by NEPA. (Chapter 7). Hearing Nov. 27; comments due Dec. 3. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/hearings/01102007_phn.pdf  

  • HB 3121: Ad Valorem Tex Exemptions. HB 3121 amends §11.31 of the Texas Tax Code by requiring that the Commission adopt rules establishing specific standards for determining property qualifying for tax exemption. In addition, HB 3121 provides for notice to the affected appraisal district of an application and Executive Director decision, plus authorizes appeals to the Commission. Hearing was Oct. 23; comments due Oct. 29. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/hearings/01045017_phn.pdf and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01045017_pro.pdf 

  • HB 2912 Art 4: Compliance History Definition; Chapter 281, Applications Processing. Adds a new chapter or subchapter, Compliance History, where all information related to compliance history would be located. This rulemaking covers only the definition portion of the compliance history issue, which has been divided into two parts, definition and use. Hearing Nov. 12; comments due same date. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/hearings/01070060_phn.pdf (notice) and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01070060_pro.pdf (proposal)

  • HB 2912 Art 3.07: Public Health Services Fee Equity Issues. House Bill (HB) 2912, 77th Legislature, 2001 mandates the Commission to consider equity in the establishment of the public health drinking water fee rates. The proposed amendment to this chapter is intended to consider equity while generating overall revenue at the current revenue stream. The revenue generated from the new fee assessment does not exceed the amount appropriated by the legislature for fiscal year (FY) 2002, nor is it greater than the revenue generated under the previous assessment in FY 2001. Hearing Nov. 8; comments due Nov. 12. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/hearings/01099290_phn.pdf (notice) and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01099290_pro.pdf (proposal)

  • SB 688: Direct Referral Requirements. Rules to address the direct referral requirements of SB 688: applications are to be referred directly to the State Office of Administrative Hearings for a contested case hearing upon request by the applicant or the executive director; and the commission by rule shall provide for public comment. Rule must be effective by Jan. 1, 2002. Hearing was Oct. 25; comments due Oct. 29. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/hearings/01028b055_phn.pdf 

  • HB 2912, SB 2 and SB 1339: CAFO Rules. Relating to water quality permit applications for certain facilities located near a sole-source drinking water supply. Hearings were Oct. 23, 25; comments due Oct. 29. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/hearings/01041321_phn.pdf (notice) and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01041321_pro.pdf (proposal)

Permit Hearings



Public Hearings/Proposed Rule Tracking Log



Implementation of Laws Passed During the 77th Texas Legislative Session


red bar graphic  UTAH


Department of Envtl. Quality


Proposed Regulations-Water Quality



Permit Applications


red bar graphic VERMONT


Department of Envtl. Conservation


Proposed Regulations-On-Site Wastewater and Water Supply



Vermont Solid Waste Plan



  • The Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules has given final approval to the revised Vermont Solid Waste Management Plan. The plan, available at http://www.anr.state.vt.us/dec/wmd.htm, will have an effective date of Nov. 1; the 18-month clock for municipalities and districts to submit complete implementation plans will start on that date.  For further information about the solid waste plan, contact Andrea Cohen at (802) 241-2368.

Permit Applications


red bar graphic VIRGINIA


Department of Envtl. Quality


Public Meeting, Hearing Notices; Other Regulatory Notices



TMDL Development


red bar graphic  WASHINGTON


Department of Ecology


2001 Legislative Implementation Plan



Final Regulations-Air Quality



Proposed Regulations



State Environmental Policy Act Register; Miscellaneous


red bar graphic WEST VIRGINIA


Department of Envtl. Protection


Public Notice Bulletin (Permit Applications, Proposed Regulations)



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

red bar graphic WISCONSIN


Department of Natural Resources


Air Rules Development



Public Hearing and Meeting Schedule



red bar graphic WYOMING


Department of Environmental Quality


NPDES Permit Applications



Draft, Proposed Regulations



  • Proposed air quality regulation amendments; will be considered by Environmental Quality Council on Dec. 7. See http://deq.state.wy.us/aqd.htm#Proposed 

  • Draft water quality amendments available at http://deq.state.wy.us/wqd/events/10695-doc.pdf 

  • Changes to rules on identification of interests, placement of spoil outside the mined-out area, self-bonding; permit revisions, incremental bonds, incidental changes to permits, and termination of jurisdiction (this package contains changes approved by the Land Quality Advisory Board on Apr.12, 2001). This revised package now requires approval by the Environmental Quality Council. A public hearing to receive comments on this rule package will be held Dec. 7 at 1:00 p.m. in the Medicine Bow Room of the Outreach School, 1731 Fraternity Row, Laramie, WY. See http://deq.state.wy.us/lqd/Events/1-Osoprtoeqc5-22.pdf2.pdf 

  • Draft Voluntary Remediation Program guidance documents available at http://deq.state.wy.us/volremedi/info.htm 

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

INTERNATIONAL
large red bar graphic

red bar graphic GENERAL



  • An international meeting was held in Sri Lanka to guide international efforts for phasing out chlorofluorocarbons and other ozone-depleting substances under the 1987 Montreal Protocol. The review of developing countries' national consumption and production data shows that most developing countries are complying with the protocol, but 25 of 136 increased their consumption in 1999, while one increased its production. The attendees at the meeting agreed on terms of reference for a study that will help governments determine the Multilateral Fund's future replenishment levels for 2003-5. The countries also agreed to conduct an evaluation of the fund's performance. Illegal trade in controlled substances, through India and elsewhere, was also discussed.  

  • A new quasi-governmental organic farming agency began work in France. Meanwhile, the French Council of State rejected an appeal from environmental groups. The groups wanted the Council to rule that the government had to apply the precautionary principle in addressing the use of genetically modified (GM) crops. Meanwhile, China is said to be working on a set of guidelines to deal with GM crops. 

  • A study published in Science says that deforestation on the coastal plains of Costa Rica is inhibiting the formation of rain clouds around forested peaks 65 miles away. The change is threatening diverse plant and animal ecosystems. See http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-000083422oct19.story?coll=la%2Dheadlines%2Dworld 

  • The National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research in New Zealand said that this year's ozone layer hole over the Antarctic is slightly smaller than last year's, but may be lasting longer. See http://www.niwa.cri.nz/mr/2001-10-17-2.htm 

  • Scientists at the University of Wisconsin and other institutions, writing in Nature, reported that many global ecosystems such as coral reefs, tropical forests, and northern lakes and forests are vulnerable to sudden catastrophic change as a result of many years of pressures caused by human activity. "Even the slightest disturbance can make them collapse," said one of the authors.

  • The Environment Committee of the European Parliament said it would support a phasing-out of all hazardous chemicals by 2020. An industry group said it was "shocked." The matter will come up for a vote in November. 

  • Clean air, clean water, and steps to alleviate the impact of drought top the priorities in a 5-year, $43 million programme launched this week by Pakistan and the U.N. Development Program. The initiative supports the national environmental action plan approved in February by Gen. Pervez Musharraf, and is linked to strategies to reduce poverty. Omar Asghar Khan, minister of environment, local government, and rural development, said the new programme comes at a "critical juncture" when the country greatly needs donor support to meet development challenges. The program will be a "major contributor" to meeting the targets of Pakistan's 10-year national development plan, said Shahid Amjad Chaudhry, deputy chairman of the Planning Commission. Onder Yucer, UNDP Resident Representative, said: "The focus of the programme is broad-based in order to help implement the national environmental action plan, while supporting efforts to achieve poverty reduction targets." The  initiative will strengthen policy coordination and environmental governance and help Pakistan to meet commitments under various international treaties, including the Convention on Biodiversity, the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the U.N. Convention to Combat Desertification. See http://www.undp.org/dpa/frontpagearchive/2001/october/18oct01/index.html 

  • African environmental ministers, meeting in preparation for the Rio + 10 summit, said poverty alleviation and environmental regeneration will be important priorities for the summit, and that African nations will urge attendees "to adopt concrete measures to provide a solid foundation for an immediate and focused international assault on some of the worst aspects of global poverty and hence environmental degradation." They also said Africa would be seeking increased development assistance, debt reduction, a fairer multilateral trading system and access to environmentally sound technology. Meanwhile, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan appointed Dutch Environment Minister Jan Pronk as his special envoy for the summit. 

  • The 2002 budget drafted by Sweden's government calls for significant increases in spending on environmental protection and enforcement efforts. 

red bar graphic  CLIMATE CHANGE



  • U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change Executive Secretary Michael Zammit Cutajar said he believes the Kyoto Protocol will be ratified by next September. He called the Marrakech meeting a chance to "seal the package" arrived at in July at a conference in Bonn, adding that it is also "an occasion to look at the African dimension of climate change." Africa is the most vulnerable region to the effects of global climate change, he said. "I'm optimistic that there will be a good result," Zammit Cutajar declared. "Most of the controversies have been settled" and all that remains is to tie up loose ends, he said. "Certainty about the Kyoto Protocol's rules will further motivate businesses and other economic actors to create the low-carbon economy of the future," he said. "It will also clear the way for governments to ratify the protocol and bring it into force. Marrakech should be the turning point that enables the protocol to move into high gear." "I very much hope it is going to be ... the last meeting for concluding work on the decisions that are now on the table," Zammit Cutajar said. He cautioned, however, that "the process goes on forever; climate change does not go away."

  • The European Commission took action on a significant package of proposals to combat global warming, rejecting lobbying from firms concerned that the plan, which includes a carbon dioxide emissions trading component, would put them at a competitive disadvantage. It called on member nations to ratify the Kyoto Protocol by June 14, 2002, to ensure that the European Union presents its formal adoption of the protocol to the United Nations ahead of the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg next September. The Commission also approved proposals yesterday to reduce EU emissions by 8% by 2012 in accordance with the agreement. The Czech Republic moved forward with a proposed domestic trading program. See http://www.env.cz

  • Carbon dioxide emissions rose in Japan, up 1.1% in fiscal year 2000 over the previous year. Emissions are predicted to increase even more over the next several years.