ELI Primary Menu

Skip to main content

Weekly Update Volume 31, Issue 22


large red bar graphic

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


The D.C. Circuit remanded EPA- promulgated HAPs emission standards for hazardous waste combustors to the Agency because they failed to reflect the emissions achieved in practice by the best performing sources as required by the CAA. Acting pursuant to CAA §112(d)(3), EPA set emission floors for new and existing sources using maximum achievable control technology (MACT). However, EPA violated CAA §112(d)(3) by setting the floors using MACT technology. While standards achievable by all sources using the MACT control might also ultimately reflect what the statutorily relevant sources achieve in practice, EPA may not deviate from §112(d)(3)'s requirement that floors reflect what the best performers actually achieve by claiming that floors must be achievable by all sources using MACT technology. Additionally, the MACT approach does not measure what the best performing sources actually achieve. Further, because factors other than MACT technology affect emissions, emissions of the worst performing MACT source may not reflect what the best performers actually achieve. EPA did not err, however, in relying on worst case data to derive the standards and did not violate the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition v. Environmental Protection Agency, Nos. 99-1457 et al. (D.C. Cir. July 24, 2001) (20 pp.).


The Second Circuit reversed and remanded a district court decision and held that counties' flow control ordinances, which require that all waste generated within the counties be delivered to one of five publicly owned facilities, are not unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause. In-state waste haulers challenged the regulations, claiming that they discriminate against interstate commerce. However, a municipal flow control law does not discriminate against an out-of-state interest in violation of the Commerce Clause when it directs all waste to publicly owned facilities. A local law discriminates against interstate commerce when it hoards local resources in a manner that favors local business, industry, or investment over out-of-state competition. In contrast, a local law that favors a publicly owned facility is less likely to be protectionist and is equipped with a built-in check: namely, that municipal legislators are accountable to citizens, many of whose interests are likely to be aligned to some degree with the interests of private business. Additionally, the principal burden of any economic inefficiency imposed by the counties' ordinance falls on the residents of the counties; there is no evidence that any out-of-state business or individual is paying more for waste collection or disposal as a result of the ordinances. While it is true that private waste processors both in-state and out-of-state are prevented by the ordinances from competing to perform and receive payment for the operations performed at the mandatory transfer station, that disadvantage does not fall more heavily on out-of-state concerns than on local ones. Therefore, the case is reversed and remanded to the district court to consider whether the ordinances impose burdens on interstate commerce that are clearly excessive in relation to the local benefits. United Haulers Ass'n v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Management Authority, Nos. 00-7593 et al. (2d Cir. July 27, 2001) (40 pp.).

red bar graphic  CERCLA, RESPONSE COSTS:

The Fourth Circuit reversed and remanded a district court decision that improperly relieved previous owners of any liability under CERCLA for the cleanup of a parcel of land contaminated with trichloroethylene (TCE). After purchasing the property, the current owner discovered a waste dump on the site with 55-gallon drums, most of which contained a mixture of asphalt and TCE. The individual reported his findings to the state environmental agency and, under their supervision, cleaned up the site. The district court found the previous owners not liable for any of the response costs because the current owner failed to establish that the previous owners had placed the TCE on the property. The district court, however, incorrectly interpreted CERCLA's requirements by holding that liability could not attach under CERCLA §107(a) unless the current owner showed that the previous owners placed or dumped TCE on the site, and unless there was evidence linking the TCE used by the previous owners and the TCE buried in drums at the site.  These legal assumptions overlooked the strict liability imposed by CERCLA for any owner or operator of land at which hazardous waste is in fact leaking into the environment. The uncontroverted evidence showed that TCE was routinely used at the site beginning in 1979, that a waste mixture of asphalt and TCE was placed in 55-gallon drums at the site, and that TCE was found in the soil and groundwater at the site, thereby easily supporting the liability of the previous owners. Crofton Ventures Limited Partnership v. G & H Partnership, No. 00-1517 (4th Cir. July 24, 2001) (21 pp.).


The Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court decision that the Secretary of Commerce abused his discretion and acted in contrivance of the law when he issued a finding that triggered a change in the dolphin-safe label standard for tuna sold in the United States. Through the IDCPA, Congress amended the DPCIA and required the Secretary to make initial and final findings as to whether the intentional deployment on or encirclement of dolphins with purse sein nets is having a significant adverse impact on any depleted dolphin stock in the Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean. After a study conducted by the National Marine Fisheries Service, the Secretary issued an initial finding, concluding that there was insufficient evidence that chase and encirclement by the tuna purse sein nets was having an adverse impact on depleted dolphin stock. However, the Secretary misinterpreted the requirements of the IDCPA by concluding that there was a default to a less protective label standard if he failed to find evidence of significant adverse impact, and that he was not required to find affirmatively that there was not a significant adverse impact. This interpretation is at odds with the statute's structure, which requires the Secretary to make a finding whether or not the fishery-related activities were adversely impacting the dolphins, and would lead to absurd results. Additionally, Congress rejected language in an international agreement that sought an immediate change in the dolphin safe label. Further, the Secretary's failure to incorporate any stress studies in his initial finding was in clear contravention of the IDCPA, which required stress studies to be conducted and included in the finding. Moreover, by failing to obtain and consider preliminary data from any of the mandated stress research projects before the initial finding, the Secretary unreasonably delayed action, abused his discretion, and acted arbitrarily and capriciously and not in accordance with the law. Brower v. Evans, No. 00-15968 (9th Cir. July 23, 2001) (26 pp.).


The Ninth Circuit reversed a district court decision and held that the DOI's decision to withdraw the proposed rule recommending the flat-tailed horned lizard for ESA protection was arbitrary and capricious. The lizard was identified as a candidate for listing under the ESA in 1982, and in 1993 a proposed rule was published listing the lizard as a threatened species. In 1997, the DOI was ordered by a district court to issue a final decision on the lizard. That same year a group of federal and state agencies signed a conservation agreement (CA) implementing a recently completed rangewide management strategy to protect the lizard. Subsequent to the CA's adoption, the DOI issued a notice withdrawing the proposed rule that had earlier recommended the lizard for listing as a threatened species. However, in the notice, the DOI did not consider the issue of the lizard becoming extinct throughout a significant portion of its range. The habitat on private land may constitute a significant portion of its range demanding enhanced protections not required on public lands, alternatively, the inverse may be true. Additionally, the lizard may face unique threats in either California or Arizona, or in major subportions of either state. Further, the DOI failed to address the lizard's viability in a site-specific manner with regard to the putative benefits of the CA. Thus, it is unclear how the benefits assertedly flowing from the CA affected any portion of the lizard's habitats, and accordingly unclear how the CA could have mitigated threats to the lizard throughout a significant portion of its range. Defenders of Wildlife v. Norton, Nos. 99-56362, 00-55496 (9th Cir. July 31, 2001) (21 pp.).


The Eighth Circuit held that a county zoning board's denial of an existing nonconforming use certificate to a strip miner that also wanted to operate a landfill on its property did not violate the strip mining company's due process or equal protection rights or constitute a taking without just compensation. The company sought to operate a landfill at the same site where it had previously been conducting strip mining. While the company was developing a plan for the operation of a landfill, the county was developing an ordinance that would prohibit landfills in the area the company was located. After the company had applied for a landfill permit, the county passed the ordinance prohibiting landfills in the company's area and denied the company's permit. The board subsequently denied the company's application for an existing nonconforming use certificate. There is no dispute that the company had not begun operation of the landfill before an ordinance prohibiting landfills on the company's property was enacted. Therefore, the county zoning board's denial of an existing nonconforming use certificate was reasonable. Additionally, the board's denial of the certificate did not constitute a taking or deprive the company of its due process or equal protection rights. The fact that the ordinance deprived the company of the most beneficial use of the property does not render the rezoning an unconstitutional taking. Iowa Coal Mining Co. v. Monroe County, No. 00-2880SI (8th Cir. July 23, 2001) (13 pp.).


The Eleventh Circuit affirmed in part and vacated in part a district court's holding that a dredge and dock company is liable under the NMSA for damages to the Florida Keys Marine Sanctuary caused by a grounded tugboat and a dredge pipe. A towing company hired by the dredge and dock company ran a towboat aground and left a pipe scar on the sanctuary seabed, which ultimately healed on its own. The district court correctly held that the dredge and dock company's conduct gave rise to strict liability under the NMSA. The dredge and dock company was responsible for helping the towing company maneuver the tows and the pipe rafts and preparing the pipe rafts and making sure they were safe and seaworthy; failed to test the pipes before the trip or send a welder or crane operator with the flotilla to make repairs; and failed to provide the towing company with any direction once notified about the sinking pipes. These facts are supported by the record evidence, are not clearly erroneous, and are sufficient to demonstrate causation and to impose liability under the NMSA. Additionally, the district court correctly denied the dredge and dock company a third party defense. The district court erred, however, in holding that the government's no action plan was appropriate for the grounding site. The court misinterpreted evidence before it, specifically that natural recovery without any interference would take approximately 70 years. The evidence clearly indicated that this 70- year period upon which the district court relied is the amount of time the grounding site is expected to achieve full biological recovery after implementing the government's primary restoration plan. Therefore, that portion of the district court's decision is vacated and remanded. United States v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co., No. 00-12002 (11th Cir. July 30, 2001) (20 pp.).


The Ninth Circuit vacated and remanded a district court's decision issued after an ESA case brought by an environmental group against a lumber company had been declared moot. The district court granted the lumber company's motion to dismiss the case as moot and then issued an opinion outlining the court's reasons for granting a preliminary injunction when the case was still active. Although the lumber company's appeal does not qualify for prudential standing in the most used settings, reformation of judgment, future economic loss, or collateral estoppel, the lumber company still suffered an injury. Article III  prohibits federal courts from taking action on the merits in moot cases. The district court's decision to flout the dictates of Article III and render an opinion in spite of knowing the case was moot rendered the lumber company an aggrieved party. Therefore, the order is remanded and the district court is ordered to vacate its post-dismissal order. Environmental Protection Information Center, Inc. v. Pacific Lumber Co., Nos. 99-16042, -16915 (9th Cir. July 24, 2001) (12 pp.).


A district court granted Illinois' request to remand to state court its case against the U.S. Department of the Army for improperly releasing pollutants from its Joliet Army Ammunition Plant into wastestreams and outfalls that ultimately ended up in Prairie Creek, a tributary of the Kankakee River. The state initially filed its complaint in state court, but the Army removed the case to federal court on grounds that the state court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. The Army clearly is a federal agency acting under color of federal law. Nevertheless, it lacks a colorable federal defense. The complaint seeks damages under state water law to coerce future compliance, and the United States has specifically waived its sovereign immunity for this type of action. Thus, the Army failed to establish federal jurisdiction. Illinois v. United States Department of the Army, No. 00-C-8121 (N.D. Ill. July 20, 2001) (Marovich, J.) (10 pp.).


The Connecticut Supreme Court held that a trial court erred in not evaluating evidence of environmental contamination and remediation costs related to a company's property that a regional economic alliance, acting for a town, took by eminent domain. Excluding contamination evidence, as a matter of law, is likely to result in a fictional property value - - a result that is inconsistent with the principles by which just compensation is calculated. Additionally, the company's arguments, which seek to exclude the evidence, improperly rely on fault allocation and liability. The admissibility of evidence of environmental contamination and remediation costs does not impose a fictional value on the property by virtue of the personal liabilities of the condemnee, specifically the potential liability under environmental statutes. Instead, it permits the trier to take into account the effect, if any, such contamination and remediation costs had on the property's fair market value on the date of the taking. The condemnation proceeding does not, however, adjudge the condemnee as the party responsible for the contamination or its cleanup. To exclude evidence of environmental contamination and remediation costs could result in the condemnee receiving an inflated and fictional value for the property. Therefore, the trial court's decision is reversed and the case is remanded. Northeast Connecticut Economic Alliance, Inc. v. ATC Partnership, Nos. SC 16245, 16246 (Conn. July 24, 2001) (30 pp.).


The Vermont Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part a trial court decision holding on motions for summary judgment that the insurance policies of the Vermont Department of Corrections (DOC) did not provide coverage for an administrative proceeding brought against it by the state environmental agency for contamination at a former prison site, but that the insurance policies covered the DOC in a civil suit brought against it by a state school district. The trial court held that the administrative proceeding was not a suit and, thus, not covered under the policies. The policies, however, do not define "suit," and, therefore, any ambiguities must be interpreted in favor of the insured. Here, the proceedings were sufficiently coercive and adversarial in nature to constitute a suit. Moreover, the state's hazardous waste statute was intended to be enforced by the environmental agency against other state agencies. The fact that both entities are state agencies does not violate any notion of separation of powers or transform the proceeding into a collusive first-party claim. In addition, although the trial court properly held that, for purposes of the civil suit, there was property damage and that any damage was covered by an "occurrence," it erred in holding that the damages occurred during the policy periods. There is no evidence as to what happened at the prison site when the policies were in effect. The record, therefore, does not support the conclusion that there was no dispute as to material fact on this issue. State v. CNA Insurance Cos., No. 99-276 (Vt. July 20, 2001) (13 pp.).


A Florida appellate court held that a trial court improperly granted an individual stigma damages in his breach of contract case against a termite company. The individual and the company entered a contract whereby the company promised to repair termite damage and to retreat the house to prevent or control a re-infestation as long as the individual paid his premium. The individual sued the termite company for breach of contract and was awarded $300,000 in stigma damages for the reduced value of his house. However, stigma damages were not contemplated by the terms of the parties' contract and were, therefore, improperly before the jury. The contract specifies that the exclusive remedy for a breach of the contract is retreatment and repair. Stigma damages could have been before the jury if evidence had been presented that the cost of repair was substantially greater that the diminution in value. The individual, however, did not demonstrate that it would constitute economic waste to have existing termite damage repaired and to have the termite company retreat to prevent or control a re-infestation. Neither a showing of impracticability nor of economic waste was made, and, therefore, the individual's remedy was limited to that specified in his contract: retreatment and the repair of damage caused by termite infestation subsequent to issuance of the guarantee. Thus, the case was reversed and remanded. Orkin Exterminating Co. v. DelGuidice, No. 5D00-1997 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. July 13, 2001) (9 pp.).

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

large red bar graphic

Note: Citations below are to the Federal Register.

red bar graphic  AIR:

  • EPA amended the NESHAPs for pharmaceuticals production. 66 FR 40121 (8/2/01).

  • EPA proposed NESHAPs for new and existing reinforced plastic composites production facilities. 66 FR 40323 (8/2/01). 

  • EPA announced the availability of its data on growth rates for seasonal heat input by electric generating units in response to the D.C. Circuit Court's remands of the Agency's nitrogen oxide SIP Call and §126 rule. 66 FR 40609 (8/3/01). 

  • EPA entered into a proposed partial consent decree in Sierra Club v. Whitman, No. 1:00CV02206 (D.D.C.), that concerns EPA's alleged failure to determine whether various identified areas that are designated as nonattainment for either the one-hour ozone or PM10 NAAQS attained these NAAQS by their applicable attainment dates. 66 FR 38673 (7/25/01). 

  • EPA entered into a proposed settlement agreement in a case, Fertilizer Institute v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 99-1317 (D.C. Cir.), involving a challenge to the NESHAPs for phosphoric acid manufacturing and phosphate fertilizers production, published on June 10, 1999 (64 Fed. Reg. 31358). 66 FR 39755 (8/1/01).

  • EPA approved Alaska's operating permits program. 66 FR 38940 (7/26/01).

  • EPA proposed full approval of Indiana's operating permits program for all major stationary sources and certain other sources. 66 FR 39293 (7/30/01). 

  • EPA determined that the Oakridge, Oregon, nonattainment area attained the NAAQS for particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10) as of December 31, 2000. 66 FR 38947 (7/26/01).

  • EPA determined that the Lakeview, Oregon, nonattainment area attained the NAAQS for PM10 as of December 31, 1999. 66 FR 38948 (7/26/01).


  • EPA entered into a proposed prospective purchaser agreement under CERCLA in connection with the Twin City Casting Site in St. Paul, Minnesota. 66 FR 38689 (7/25/01).

  • EPA proposed to modify an exclusion from the lists of hazardous waste previously granted to Geologic Reclamation Operations and Waste Systems, Inc., in Morrisville, Pennsylvania. 66 FR 38969 (7/26/01).

  • EPA entered into a proposed administrative settlement under CERCLA in connection with the Access Road to Old 141 Highway Superfund site near Arnold, Missouri. 66 FR 39166 (7/27/01).

  • EPA proposed to enter into three administrative settlements under CERCLA §122 in connection with the B&H Transformer Superfund site in Yorkville, Tennessee. 66 FR 39313 (7/30/01). 

  • EPA entered into a proposed administrative settlement under CERCLA §122(h) in connection with the Bel-Fab Manufacturing Corp. Superfund site in the Town of Halfmoon, New York. 66 FR 39313 (7/30/01). 

  • EPA proposed a rule to implement a pilot project under the Project XL program that would prove site-specific regulatory flexibility under RCRA for the Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc., facility in Spring House, Pennsylvania. 66 FR 38395 (7/24/01). 

  • EPA proposed to grant two site-specific treatment variances from the land disposal restrictions standards for wastes generated at U.S. Ecology Idaho, Inc., in Grandview, Idaho, and CWM Chemical Services, LLC, in Model City, New York. 66 FR 38405 (7/24/01). 

red bar graphic  NATIONAL FORESTS:

  • DOE issued its floodplain statement of findings for the implementation of individual projects using mechanical and manual thinning methods to treat the forests at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in an effort to reduce fuel loading and wildlife hazards and to improve the overall forest health. 66 FR 38419 (7/24/01). 

red bar graphic  OIL POLLUTION:

  • NOAA issued a proposed rule addressing issues remanded to the agency by the D.C. Circuit Court in General Electric Co. v. Commerce, 128 F.3d 767 (D.C. Cir. 1997), regarding regulations for the assessment of natural resource damages under the OPA. 66 FR 39464 (7/31/01). 

red bar graphic  TOXIC SUBSTANCES:

  • EPA amended the preliminary assessment information reporting rule under TSCA by requiring manufacturers and importers of the 41 substances identified in the 46th Interagency Testing Committee Report to report certain production, importation, use, and exposure-related information to EPA. 66 FR 38955 (7/26/01).

red bar graphic  WATER QUALITY:

  • EPA announced the availability of data and comments pertaining to its April 11, 2000 (65 Fed. Reg. 19440), proposal to amend effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the coal mining point source category. 66 FR 39300 (7/30/01). 

  • EPA announced the availability of its draft National Beach Guidance and Performance Criteria for Recreation Waters for comment. 66 FR 39510 (7/31/01). 

  • EPA Region 9 issued an NPDES general permit for discharges from concentrated animal feeding operations in Arizona. 66 FR 38266 (7/23/01). 

  • EPA Region 10 reissued the NPDES general permit for operators of seafood processing facilities in Alaska.  66 FR 39166 (7/27/01).

  • EPA proposed to establish a no discharge zone for state waters within the boundaries of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. 66 FR 38967 (7/26/01).

  • EPA proposed to withdraw the federal criteria for nutrients applicable in Arizona because the state has adopted its own numeric and narrative water quality criteria for nutrients, which the Agency has approved. 66 FR 39295 (7/30/01). 

  • EPA announced its intent to disapprove New Jersey's omission of six waters from its 1998 CWA §308(d) list and is instead proposing to add them to the list. 66 FR 40282 (8/2/01). 

  • EPA and NOAA announced their intent to fully approve the Massachusetts and New Hampshire Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Programs. 66 FR 39399 (7/30/01). 


  • United States v. Texaco California Inc., No. CV-F-01-5923 REC DLB (E.D. Cal. July 16, 2001). Settling CAA defendants that allegedly removed vapor control equipment from 5,000 wells at the Kern River Oil Field, failed to comply with the California SIP's lowest achievable emission rate and offset requirements in operating an additional 700 wells at the oil field, failed to install control equipment at certain storage tanks in the Midway-Sunset Oil Field, and failed to maintain records, must undertake significant injunctive measures designed to limit the emissions of volatile organic compounds from front line surge tanks, oil storage tanks, and shipping tanks at their oil fields and must pay a $568,000 civil penalty. 66 FR 39199 (7/27/01).

  • United States v. Chua, No. 01-CV-811 (E.D. Pa. July 23, 2001). Settling CERCLA defendants must pay $107,000 in past U.S. response costs and penalties in connection with the Belfield Paint Superfund site in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 66 FR 39334 (7/30/01). 

  • United States v. Dayton Power & Light Co., No. C-3-98-451 (S.D. Ohio July 24, 2001). Eleven settling CERCLA defendants and the DOE must pay $303,971 and $5,335, respectively, in past U.S. response costs incurred in connection with the Sanitary Landfill Superfund site in Moraine, Ohio. 66 FR 40723 (8/3/01).

  • United States v. Montrose Chemical Corp. of California, No. CV 90-3122-R (C.D. Cal. July 19, 2001). Settling CERCLA defendants must allow materials excavated from residential properties located in certain parts of Los Angeles County to be placed on their property in storage cells, must pay $250,000 plus the actual costs of constructing the on-property storage cells, and must operate and maintain the storage cells for four years. 66 FR 40724 (8/3/01).

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

large red bar graphic

red bar graphic  CHAMBER ACTION

  • H.R. 2620 (appropriations; EPA), which would make appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development and for sundry independent agencies, including EPA, for the 2002 fiscal year, was passed by the House, 147 Cong. Rec. H4815 (daily ed. July 30, 2001), and the Senate, 147 Cong. Rec. S8629 (daily ed. Aug. 2, 2001).

red bar graphic  COMMITTEE ACTION

  • S. 1215 (appropriations; Department of Commerce) was reported by the Senate Committee on Appropriations. S. Rep. No. 107-42, 147 Cong. Rec. S8014 (daily ed. July 20, 2001). The bill would make appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and related agencies for the 2002 fiscal year.

  • H.R. 2587 (energy conservation) was reported by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rep. No. 107-162, 147 Cong. Rec. H5124 (Aug. 1, 2001). The bill would enhance energy conservation and would provide for security and diversity in the energy supply for the American people. 

red bar graphic  BILLS INTRODUCED

  • S. 1267 (Crapo, R-Idaho) (conservation) would extend and improve conservation programs administered by the Secretary of Agriculture. 147 Cong. Rec. S8323 (daily ed. July 27, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.

  • S. 1293 (Craig, R-Idaho) (climate change) would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives for the voluntary reduction, avoidance, and sequestration of greenhouse gas emissions and to advance global climate science and technology development and deployment. 147 Cong. Rec. S8575 (daily ed. Aug. 1, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Finance. 

  • S. 1294 (Murkowski, R-Alaska) (climate change) would establish a new national policy designed to manage the risk of potential climate change, ensure long-term energy security, and to strengthen provisions in the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and the Federal Nonnuclear Energy Research and Development Act of 1974 with respect to potential climate change. 147 Cong. Rec. S8575 (daily ed. Aug. 1, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

  • S. 1309 (Domenici, R-N.M.) (water resources) would amend the Water Desalination Act of 1996 to reauthorize that Act and to authorize the construction of a desalination research and development facility at the Tularosa Basin, New Mexico. 147 Cong. Rec. S8704 (daily ed. Aug. 2, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.

  • S. 1310 (Reid, D-Nev.) (land conveyance) would provide for the sale of certain real property in the Newlands Project, Nevada, to the city of Fallon, Nevada. 147 Cong. Rec. S8704 (daily ed. Aug. 2, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

  • S. 1312 (Nelson, D-Fla.) (Virginia Key Beach) would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of Virginia Key Beach, Florida, for possible inclusion in the National Park System. 147 Cong. Rec. S8704 (daily ed. Aug. 2, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

  • S. 1314 (Breaux, D-La.) (sport fishing) would protect the public's ability to fish for sport. 147 Cong. Rec. S8704 (daily ed. Aug. 2, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. 

  • S. 1318 (Murkowski, R-Alaska) (land conservation) would provide Coastal Impact Assistance to state and local governments and would amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Amendments of 1978, the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, the Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Act, and the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act (commonly referred to as the Pittman-Robertson Act) to establish a fund to meet the outdoor conservation and recreation needs of the American people. 147 Cong. Rec. S8704 (daily ed. Aug. 2, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

  • S. 1325 (Murkowski, R-Alaska) (land exchange) would ratify an agreement between the Aleut Corporation and the United States to exchange land rights received under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act for certain land interests on Adak Island. 147 Cong. Rec. S8704 (daily ed. Aug. 2, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

  • S. 1326 (Lugar, R-Ind.) (agricultural conservation) would extend and improve working lands and other conservation programs administered by the Secretary of Agriculture. 147 Cong. Rec. S8704 (daily ed. Aug. 2, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. 

  • S. 1328 (Landrieu, D-La.) (land conservation) would provide for the passage of the Conservation and Reinvestment Act. 147 Cong. Rec. S8704 (daily ed. Aug. 2, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

  • S. 1333 (Jeffords, I-Vt.) (renewable energy) would enhance the benefits of the national electric system by encouraging and supporting state programs for renewable energy sources, universal electric service, affordable electric service, and energy conservation and efficiency. 147 Cong. Rec. S8704 (daily ed. Aug. 2, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

  • H.R. 2673 (Faleomavaega, D-Am. Sam.) (fisheries) would amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to prohibit offering for sale, selling, or purchasing in interstate or foreign commerce certain shark fins. 147 Cong. Rec. H4862 (daily ed. July 27, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources.

  • H.R. 2694 (Horn, R-Cal.) (EPA) would redesignate EPA as the Department of Environmental Protection. 147 Cong. Rec. H5124 (daily ed. Aug. 1, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Government Reform. 

  • H.R. 2710 (Sessions, R-Tex.) (property rehabilitation) would authorize public-private partnerships to rehabilitate federal real property. 147 Cong. Rec.; to the Committee on Government Reform.

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

large red bar graphic

red bar graphic ALABAMA

Dept. of Envtl. Management

Proposed NPDES General Permits

Public Notices–Permit Applications 

Daily Ozone Forecast

Jefferson County Dept. of Health

Daily Air Quality Index

red bar graphic ALASKA

Dept. of Envtl. Conservation

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • Proposed changes to regulations for standard permit conditions and visible emission limits for stationary sources. 18 AAC 50. Hearings Aug. 21-22; comments due Aug. 24. DEC is proposing to amend Chapter 50 to comply with AS 46.14.010(e). The Department is proposing to adopt into regulation requirements to be incorporated into more than one permit and that it foresees to be generally applicable, or generally applicable to individual source or facility types. DEC is also proposing to change state visible emission standards for stationary sources to six minute average standards so that the emissions standards and monitoring method will be consistent. Any facility needing an air quality permit and any source subject to a numerical visible emission (opacity) limit will be affected. DEC is also proposing to amend the regulations to clarify what contaminants are subject to emission fees and how to calculate emission fees, adopt additional standard methods by reference, including methods for fuel qualities, soils, and opacity monitoring, clarify recordkeeping and reporting, and correct inconsistencies or errors. DEC will also be making other changes necessary to improve the regulations, including those changes that appear necessary after reviewing public comments. See http://www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/ENV.CONSERV/dawq/aqm/stdreg.htm 

red bar graphic ARIZONA

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between ADEQ and U.S. EPA Region 9 Regarding Proposed NPDES Program Authorization

  • Comments due Aug. 13. The MOA establishes provisions for transfer of permit documents, specifying classes and categories of permit applications that ADEQ will send to EPA Region 9 for review, specifying the frequency and content of ADEQ reports to Region 9, ADEQ's compliance and enforcement program, and modification of the MOA. See http://www.sosaz.com/aar/2001/28/pubinfo.pdf Comments may be sent to Jane DeRose-Bamman, ADEQ, 3033 N. Central Ave. (M0401A), Phoenix, AZ 85012 or to  jdb@ev.state.az.us

Proposed Regulations-Safe Drinking Water

  • Operator Certification Amendments (18 A.A.C. 5, Art. 1). The primary purpose of the rulemaking is to make a few minor amendments to the operator certification rules, which were recently amended, effective Feb.16, 2001. The changes are being implemented primarily in order to satisfy primacy requirements of the U.S. EPA, which interprets several of the recent changes to be less stringent than the previous rules. By making the changes, Arizona's continued primacy of the operator certification program will be ensured. DEQ is also taking advantage of the opportunity to clarify the language in several other sections of Article 1.  Comments due Aug. 8. See http://www.sosaz.com/aar/2001/26/proposed.pdf 

  • Safe Drinking Water: Technical Assistance (18 A.A.C. 4, Art. 8). The primary purpose of the federal SDWA is to ensure that drinking water supplied to consumers by public water systems is safe to drink and does not exceed prescribed maximum contaminant levels; that consumers are confident that their water is safe to drink; and that public water system operators are trained, certified, and knowledgeable regarding the public health reasons for drinking water standards. This rulemaking is intended to further these goals by establishing an Arizona program to assist water systems in complying with standards imposed by federal and state laws, rules, and regulations. Specifically, the program will provide information and technical assistance in managerial, accounting, engineering, and other technical areas to owners and operators of public water systems. Comments due Aug. 8. See http://www.sosaz.com/aar/2001/26/proposed.pdf 

  • Safe Drinking Water: Monitoring Assistance Program (18 A.A.C. 4, Art. 2). In 1998, the Arizona Legislature enacted the monitoring assistance program (MAP) to assist small public water systems with water quality sampling and monitoring required by the federal SDWA. The MAP is administered by DEQ. The goal of the program is to keep the water systems in compliance with the SDWA through a regular testing schedule. In Arizona, there are approximately 1700 regulated public water systems. Of those regulated water systems, 15% of the largest systems provide water to approximately 90%  of the population. The remaining 85% of the water systems serve the remaining 10% of the population. The purpose of this rulemaking is to implement statutory changes, including the following:

    (1) The MAP is extended until Jan. 1, 2005 (from 2002). 
    (2) A water system participating in the MAP would not be able to opt out of the
    (3) Additional contaminants to be monitored are radiochemicals, asbestos and nitrites;
    (4) If the monitoring assistance fund has a surplus after the previous year's contract,
    any surplus in excess of $200,000 in any year shall be used to reduce fees for the
    following year; and
    (5) The cap on administrative costs is increased from 10% of the annual fund revenues to 15% or $184,000, whichever is less. Comments due Aug. 8. See http://www.sosaz.com/aar/2001/26/proposed.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 PM NAAQS and the violation is shown to be the result of an exceptional or natural event such as unusually high winds or wildfires. The applicable air pollution control agency may utilize ADEQ's policy to develop a natural events action plan (NEAP) in lieu of becoming designated as a nonattainment area by EPA. The NEAP must contain documentation and analysis showing a causal relationship of the ambient air quality monitored exceedance(s) and the natural event, details of public notification and education programs, descriptions of best available control measures (BACM), and area of applicability for the BACM. 

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

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

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

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

Water Quality-Opening of NPDES Update Rulemaking Docket

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

Air Quality-Opening of Rulemaking Docket

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

ADEQ's comments on U.S. EPA's proposed Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation rule

Intel Ocotillo Project XL Renewal Update

Safe Drinking Water Workshops Announced

Drinking Water-Monitoring Assistance Program Current, Proposed Fees

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

Superfund Program-Proposed Registry Inclusions, Prospective Purchaser Agreements

Current Air Quality Readings/Forecasts

red bar graphic ARKANSAS

Dept. of Environmental Quality

Enforcement Notices

  • Consent Administrative Orders 

Amerimax Coated Products, Helena Air Division, $1,125 penalty; Arkansas State Police, Troop F., Warren Regulated Storage Tank Division, $500 penalty; Arkansas State Police, Troop L., Springdale Regulated Storage Tank Division, $500 penalty; Ash Grove Cement Company, Foreman Solid Waste Division, $10,000 penalty; BICC General Cable Company, (Amendment No. 4 to CAO), Malvern; NPDES/Water Division, No penalty; CBI, McCrory, Asbestos/Air Division, $300 penalty; City of Sunset, (Amendment No. 1 to CAO), Sunset NPDES/Water Division, No penalty; City of Star City, Star City NPDES/Water Division, No penalty; Georgia Pacific Corp., Crossett Air Division, No penalty; Harris Concrete Pumps, Little Rock Water Division, $1,000 penalty; Doyle P. Meyer/Hong's Hog Farm, Ola Water Division, $400 penalty. 

  • Notices of Violation 

FDR Services, Austin Regulated Storage Tank Division, $1,500 penalty; Jacksonville Wastewater Utility, Jacksonville Regulated Storage Tank Division, $500 penalty.

  • Memorandums of Agreement 

Phillip Matthews Trust Property, Trumann Hazardous Waste Division, No penalty.


WM Tontitown Landfill, LLC., North Little Rock Air Division, No penalty.

Self-Audit Form for Arkansas USTs and ASTs

red bar graphic CALIFORNIA

Air Resources Board

Bay Area Ozone Attainment Plan Delayed

Board Approves Controls of Asbestos Dust During Construction and Mining

Revised ARB Clean Air Plan Schedule

  • Board consideration delayed until Dec. 2001. A draft CAP will be released in early Sept., with at least a 30-day comment period. A final proposed CAP will be issued in mid-Nov. for consideration at the Board's Dec. 13-14 meeting. See http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/caplan/schedule.htm 

Voluntary Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Proposed Regulation Update-Draft Regulations

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

Dept. of Toxic Substances Control

Proposed Revision of Hazardous Waste Code System

Emergency Regulations-Groundwater Remediation Loan Program

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

Guidance Document Availability

Draft Public Participation Policy Manual

Integrated Waste Management Board

Aug. 14-15 Board Meeting Agenda

Permit Enforcement Policy

Proposed Regulations-Playground Safety and Recycling Act Grants

  • Published in the California Regulatory Notice Register for 45-day public comment period on June 29, 2001. These regulations would implement the provisions of the Playground Safety and Recycling Act Grant Program relating to the award of grants to local public agencies and local public educational agencies to upgrade, repair, refurbish, install, or replace public playground facilities to prevent childhood injuries on public playgrounds while developing a market for recycled materials suitable for use in public playgrounds. The regulations will provide guidance to Board staff and to grant applicants in the administration of the grant program. Emergency Regulations for the Playground Safety and Recycling Act Grant Program, adopted by the Board at its Apr. 18-19, 2000, meeting have been extended and are currently in effect. Comments due Aug. 13. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/Playground/  

Proposed Regulations-Insurance as a Financial Assurance Demonstration

  • Proposed regulatory amendments of two related financial assurance demonstration requirements under the general term of "insurance." The Board held a public hearing at their regularly scheduled meeting on May 22.  Following the hearing, the Board directed staff to initiate an extended 15-day comment period to allow for review of minor revisions to the regulations and additional stakeholder input. The Board will consider adopting the regulations at its July 25-26, 2001, meeting. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/Insuranc/

Emergency Regulations-Putrescible Waste Transfer/Processing

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

Proposed Regulations-Waste Tires

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

Proposed Regulations-Nonhazardous, Nonputrescible, Industrial Waste

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

Proposed Regulations-Compostable Materials

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

Proposed Regulations-LEA Grants

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

Draft Regulations-Construction & Demolition Materials

  • Placement of facilities and operations handling inert and construction and demolition debris into regulatory tiers, and setting minimum standards. In Dec. 2000, the Board approved a two-phase approach to this rulemaking. Phase I will cover the transfer and processing of construction and demolition debris. Informal workshops for this Phase I are expected in summer 2001. Phase II will follow and will cover the disposal of construction, demolition, and inert debris. At the Aug. 14-15, 2001 meeting staff will present 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

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

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment


  • Reformatting of the List of Chemicals Known to the State to Cause Reproductive Toxicity

  • Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Amendment to Section 12601. Clear and Reasobable Warnings and Amendment to Section 12201. 

  • Notice to Interested Parties: Responses to Comments on the Final Public Review Draft Prioritization of Toxic Air Contaminants Under the Children's Environmental Health Protection Act

See http://www.oehha.ca.gov/news.html 

South Coast Air Quality Management District

Proposed Rule–Pilot Credit Generation Program for Truck Stops

  • Workshop Aug. 10. The objective of the proposal is to provide opportunities to generate NOx mobile source emission reduction credits (MSERCs) for use in the Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM) through the use of electric power in lieu of the operation of diesel-powered engines for truck cabs, and/or trailer refrigeration units. In March and May 2001, the AQMD’s Governing Board adopted five pilot credit generation rules for mobile and area sources. The proposed rule is part of the pilot program that will allow MSERCs to be generated by any person who voluntarily elects to participate and that meets the specified requirements in the proposed rule. These pilot credit generation rules will create opportunities to generate NOx credits for use in the RECLAIM Program. The proposal allows generation of MSERCs from the following actions at truck stops within district boundaries:

    Providing electric power in lieu of idling the propulsion engine of a truck to operate in-cab appliances and other on-board electric systems; 
    Providing heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) to truck cabs; or 
    Providing electric power in lieu of auxiliary engines to power a trailer refrigeration unit. 

    The proposed rule requires credit generators to submit an application demonstrating that the credit generating strategies meet the requirements of the proposed rule. Credit generators will also be required to comply with specific monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. See http://www.aqmd.gov/pub_edu/notice_pr1634.html  

Draft Protocol for the Measurement of Nitrogen Oxides, Carbon Monoxide, and Oxygen from Sources Subject to South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1146-Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen From Industrial, Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters

  • Public meeting Aug. 15. Effective Jan. 1, 2002, Rule 1146 requires non-RECLAIM facilities with boilers, steam generators, and process heaters with a rated heat input of greater than or equal to 10 million BTU per hour to conduct an annual emissions test to demonstrate compliance. Effective July, 1, 2002 non-RECLAIM units less than 10 million Btu per hour and greater than or equal to 5 million Btu per hour must also conduct annual emissions testing. A draft emissions testing protocol for Rule 1146 has been prepared to provide guidelines for facilities that are required to perform annual emissions tests. The protocol includes guidelines for all Rule 1146 test methods including the use of portable hand-held emissions monitoring equipment. The procedure for using hand-held monitoring equipment is based upon U.S. EPA method CTM-030. The protocol has been developed to reduce compliance costs and ensure standardization of test procedres, including specified test conditions, required test methods, specifications for test equipment, data collection and reporting, and quality assurance requirements. See http://www.aqmd.gov/pub_edu/pcn_draft_1146.html 

Proposed Amended Regulation XIII-New Source Review (PAR XIII)

  • Workshop Aug. 15 to discuss amendments to facilitate the permitting of new electric generating facilities (EGFs) to improve the supply of electricity in the district and to minimize the use of standby emergency diesel-fired electric power generators for electrical power generation. The emergency diesel-fired electric power generators are significantly more polluting than new EGFs and their use would have a potential negative impact on ambient air quality. As part of the pre-construction review process, new EGFs must offset all their future emissions. There is a limited supply of emission reduction credits in the open market, however, that can be used as offsets. This shortage of offset credits threatens to seriously impede the permitting and construction of new EGFs. Any construction delays of new EGFs will likely result in increased use of emergency diesel-fired electric generators with potential adverse air quality impacts. The proposed amendments would alleviate those impacts by facilitating the permitting of new EGFs. Specifically, staff proposes amendments to Rule 1309.1-Priority Reserve that would increase the allocation of CO and SOx credits to the Priority Reserve account and allow new and expanding EGFs as well as facilities generating electricity for their own use, temporary access to these credits provided they meet specific criteria and pay the appropriate mitigation fee. Also, the proposed amendments would authorize the Executive Officer to transfer up to 2,500 pounds per day of PM-10 to the Priority Reserve in the event the account balance falls below 500 pounds per day. See http://www.aqmd.gov/pub_edu/notice_r1309_1.html 

Proposed Regulations-Amended Rule (PAR) 1162-Polyester Resin Operations

  • The objective of PAR 1162 is to achieve further reduction of volatile organic compounds and hazardous air pollutants emissions from composite manufacturing operations by employing Pollution Prevention (P2) technologies. P2 technologies involve modifying the chemistry of the polyester resin material and utilizing nonatomizing and less polluting application technologies. PAR 1162 would implement portions of control measure CTS-09, of the proposed 1999 Amendment to the 1997 Ozone State Implementation Plan Revision. Draft regulations would require nonatomizing and less polluting application technologies for composite spraying operations and reduce the monomer content of the polyester resin materials such as clear gel coats, pigmented gel coats, general purpose resins, corrosion resistant resins, and fire retardant resins. The reduction of the monomer content will take place in two phases, in 2002 and 2003. The proposal would also require that all applied resin material to be vapor suppressed, require that the monthly average of the filler content of the applied resin material be at least 10 % by weight, and improve clarity and enforceability of the rule. Workshop was Aug. 1; comments due Aug. 8. See http://www.aqmd.gov/pub_edu/notice_r1162.html 

red bar graphic COLORADO

Air Quality Control Commission

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

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

Public Hearing-Requested Reopening of Operating Permit 

Water Quality Control Commission

Hearing Agenda

Rulemaking Hearings

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

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

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

red bar graphic CONNECTICUT

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Permit Hearings-Calendar

red bar graphic DELAWARE

Dept. of Nat. Resources and Envtl. Control

Notices of Violation

Regulatory Update/Public Notices

red bar graphic FLORIDA

Dept. of Environmental Protection

Proposed Regulations-Marjorie Harris Carr Cross Florida Greenway State Recreation and Conservation Area 

  • This new rule establishes definitions; operations, activities and recreation that is allowed, prohibited, or restricted on the Marjorie Harris Carr Cross Florida Greenway; and fine ranges for violations of the rules. The purpose of the rule is to assist the Office of Greenways and Trails in management of visitors to and resources of the Greenway. The rule will have the effect of advising the public of what they can and cannot do on the Greenway and how and when they could be fined for violations of the rule. Hearing, if held, will be Aug. 21.  

red bar graphic GEORGIA

Dept. of Natural Resources, Envtl. Protection Division

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality-Swine Feeding Operations

  • Amended regulations will be considered for adoption on Aug. 22; comments due and public hearing on Aug. 13.  

Air Permit Applications

red bar graphic HAWAII

Office of Envtl. Quality Control

Air Quality-Permit Applications

Environmental Impact Notices

red bar graphic IDAHO

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Outstanding Resource Waters-Petitions

Pending Permit Applications

red bar graphic ILLINOIS

General Assembly

MTBE Ban Legislation Enacted 

  • H.B. 171 signed into law July 24. Provides that beginning 3 years after the effective date of the Act, no person shall use, manufacture, or sell MTBE as a fuel additive or transport fuel containing MTBE in Illinois. Provides that the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency shall adopt rules for providing technical assistance and funds to local governments for drinking water testing. Authorizes research grants. Effective immediately. Illinois becomes the 12th state to ban MTBE use. See http://www.legis.state.il.us/scripts/imstran.exe?LIBSINCWHB0171 

Pollution Control Board (PCB)

Proposed Regulations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • Proposed revisions to the nondegradation rules (In the Matter of: Revisions to Antidegradation Rules: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.105, 303.205, 303.206 and 106.990-106.995). The proposed revisions are part of the triennial water quality standards review. Included in the proposal is changing the rules’ name to Antidegradation to conform with federal rules. The Board adopted a first notice opinion and order June 21. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/RULES/R01-013/HearingRecords.htm and   http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/RULES/106prop.pdf and http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Meeting/minutes.htm  

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

Open Regulatory Dockets

Envtl. Protection Agency

Permit Applications/Public Hearings


red bar graphic  INDIANA

Dept. of Envtl. Management

Final Regulations-Air Quality

  • Title 326 Air Pollution Control Board-#00-69. Amends 326 IAC 8-12 concerning shipbuilding and ship repair. Adds 326 IAC 20-26 to incorporate by reference federal standards for shipbuilding
    and ship repair. 

  • Title 326 Air Pollution Control Board-#00-70. Adds 326 IAC 20-28-1 concerning national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for hazardous waste combustors.

  • Title 326 Air Pollution Control Board-#00-71. Adds 326 IAC 20-27-1 concerning national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for each new and existing Portland cement plant.

  • Title 326 Air Pollution Control Board-#00-171. Amends 326 IAC 8-1-4 to incorporate by reference federal capture efficiency test methods.   

Proposed Regulations-Indiana Scoring Model

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

  • Amends and considers for readoption pursuant to comments received under IC 13-14-9.5, 329 IAC 11-9, 329 IAC 11-11, and 329 IAC 11-14. 329 IAC 11-9 addresses solid waste processing facilities permit requirements; 329 IAC 11-11 addresses solid waste processing permit issuance; and 329 IAC 11-14 addresses quarterly reporting of solid waste processing facilities. The amendments correct language and references. 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 IC 13-14-9.5-1 and IC 13-14-9.5-1.1, 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 are being included and considered within other currently existing rulemakings. Hearing Aug. 21. 

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • Title 326 Air Pollution Control Board-#01-249. Amends 326 IAC 2-6, Emission Reporting, to add definitions to clarify the requirements, revise existing definitions for clarification and consistency, change applicability, and to require the reporting of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs).

  • Title 326 Air Pollution Control Board- #01-251. Amendments to rule 326 IAC 8-1-2, compliance
    methods, applicable to dip or flow operations at miscellaneous metal coating operations regulated at 326 IAC 8-2-9. 

Proposed Regulations-Solid Waste Management

  • Title 329 Solid Waste Management Board-#01-237. New rules to establish procedures, requirements,
    and standards for processing and composting of non-vegetative organic material that is not covered by IC 13-20-10. Comments due Sept. 4. 

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality

  • 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. Comments due Sept. 4. 

  • Title 327 Water Pollution Control Board-#00-266. Amends 327 IAC 8-2 and 327 IAC 8-2.1 concerning public notification requirements for public water supply systems. Repeals 327 IAC 8-2-15, 327
    IAC 8-2-16, 327 IAC 8-2-17, and 327 IAC 8-2-18.  

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

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

Pending Permit Applications

red bar graphic  IOWA

Auditor of State

Audit Report Critical of DNR Released

  • Report says that DNR has not promulgated wetlands protection regulations, adequately inspected hazardous waste generators and disposal/treatment facilities, or established a toll-free "hotline" for citizens. See http://www.state.ia.us/government/auditor/ 

Dept. of Natural Resources-Envtl. Protection Commission

Final Regulations-Solid Waste Management

  • Rescinds Chapter 111, “Financial Assurance Requirements for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills,” Iowa Admin. Code, and adopts new Chapter 111 with the same title. New Chapter 111 is a reorganization and amendment of the former chapter. The new chapter adopts procedures for review of financial assurance instruments by the Department. The new chapter also updates the allowable financial assurance mechanisms to more closely conform to current U.S. EPA requirements. The amendment is intended to satisfy the concerns raised in the Petition for Rulemaking filed by the City of Henderson on May 31, 2000. Effective Aug. 15. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB010711.html 

Final Regulations-Air Quality

  • Amendments to Chapter 22, Iowa Admin. Code. The purpose of this rulemaking was to incorporate the Department’s existing Periodic Monitoring Guidance into the rules. Also, this rulemaking adopts by reference Compliance Assurance Monitoring (CAM) that is required to be included in 40 C.F.R. pts. 70 or 71 operating permits. Periodic monitoring and CAM are needed to provide reasonable assurance of compliance with applicable requirements under the CAA. Item 1 incorporates the Department’s existing Title V Periodic Monitoring Guidance into the rule. Periodic monitoring is required by 40 C.F.R. pts. 70.6 and 71.6 where the applicable requirement does not require periodic testing or instrumental or noninstrumental monitoring. Item 2 adopts by reference 40 C.F.R. pt. 64 CAM for major stationary sources of air pollution that are required to obtain operating permits under Title V of the CAA. The fundamental requirements of CAM are to: (a) monitor compliance in a manner that is sufficient to yield data that provide a reasonable assurance of compliance and allow an owner or operator to make an informed certification of compliance; (b) take necessary corrective actions in response to the monitoring data; (c) report on the results of such monitoring; and (d) maintain records of such monitoring. Effective Aug. 15. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB010711.html 

red bar graphic KANSAS

Department of Health & Environment, Division of Environment

KDHE "Kansas Environmental News"

red bar graphic KENTUCKY

Dept. for Envtl. Protection, Division of Air Quality

Permit Applications/Hearing Notices 

Dept. for Envtl. Protection, Division of Water

Permit Applications  

Proposed, Draft TMDLs

red bar graphic LOUISIANA

Dept. of Environmental Quality

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-Revision to Emission Reduction Credits Banking Regulations (LAC 33:III.Chapter 6) 

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-Control of Emission of Organic Compounds-Calcasieu Parish Area (LAC 33:III.2103, 2104, 2109, 2115, 2122, 2143, 2147, 2149, 2151, & 2153) 

Draft Five-Year Strategic Plan

Permit Applications

red bar graphic MAINE

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Final Regulations-Air Quality

  • Ch. 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. 

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality

  • Ch. 519, Interim Effluent Limitation and Controls for the Discharge of Mercury. Originally passed in Feb. 2000, Ch. 519 establishes procedures for setting of 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, Ch. 519
    expires on Oct. 1, 2001. A change in the law enacted by the 120th Legislature carries forward the need for interim control on mercury discharges beyond Oct. 1, 2001. Consistent with the new law, an amendment to Ch. 519 is being proposed to remove the expiration date from the rule. See http://www.state.me.us/dep/blwq/rule.htm Comments due Aug. 24. 

red bar graphic MARYLAND

Dept. of the Environment

General Permit-Water Quality

  • MDE has made a Final Determination to re-issue and modify discharge permits given to the state’s primary poultry producers. Poultry Processor Discharge Permits, also known as integrator permits, will authorize the poultry companies to continue operation of facilities in Berlin, Cordova and Showell on Maryland’s Eastern
    Shore. In brief, the Poultry Processor Discharge Permits: 

    (1) Apply to poultry companies only; 

    (2) Require the poultry companies to withhold chickens from the grower only if formal enforcement action for a water quality violation is taken against a grower, and appeals to that action are exhausted or not taken; 

    (3) Require the integrator to help growers develop nutrient management plans, research improvements in feed to reduce phosphorus in manure, provide training on manure management, and help growers with the distribution and use of excess manure; and  

    (4) Require the integrator to submit aggregate information from their growers about the total chickens grown, litter generated, and land available for its utilization and excess manure. Growers do not need to generate
    information not already required by Maryland Department of Agriculture for the Water Quality Improvement Act. See http://www.mde.state.md.us/wma/poultry/final%20allen%20perdue%20tysons.PDF 

Public Meetings/Hearings     

Water Quality Standard-Triennial Review

red bar graphic MASSACHUSETTS

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Draft Amendments to 310 CMR 27.00, Underground Injection Control Regulations

Guidelines for Private Drinking Water Wells

Enforcement Actions

red bar graphic  MICHIGAN

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • MDEQ 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.

Proposed Regulations-Environmental Response

  • These rules bring the rules for the state cleanup program under Part 201 up to date with statutory amendments enacted in 1995 and 1996. The rules provide for land use-based cleanup criteria; set forth algorithms for calculation of generic cleanup criteria; explain requirements for remedial action plans and other stages of response activity; clarify which types of response activity require DEQ approval; clarify affirmative obligations of liable persons; and update rules that deal with program administration, such as the inventory of contaminated sites, public funding for the cleanup program, and alternate water service. A public hearing will be held on Aug. 28 at the Forum Auditorium, Michigan Library and Historical Center, 717 West Allegan, Lansing, Michigan 48909. The hearing will take place from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. and from 6:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Copies of the proposed rules available at http://www.deq.state.mi.us/erd. Copies of the rules may also be obtained by contacting the Michigan DEQ, Environmental Response Division, 300 S. Washington Square, Lansing, Michigan 48933. Written comments must be received in the Environmental Response Division office identified above by 5:00 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time, on Sept. 11. Comments should be sent to Lynelle Marolf at the address above. Information Contact: Lynelle Marolf, Environmental Response Division, 517-373-9838; E-mail at marolfl@state.mi.us

Permitting Calendar  

Drinking Water Revolving Fund

  • MDEQ will hold a public hearing Aug. 28 on the draft Fiscal Year 2002 PPL for the DWRF that lists projects for which complete final Project Plans were submitted to the DEQ by May 1, 2001, and the draft Fiscal Year 2002 IUP. These documents can be found at http://www.deq.state.mi.us/ead/mfsect The public hearing will be held at Michigan DEQ, Environmental Assistance Division, 2nd Floor Town Center, Conference Room B, 333 S. Capitol, Lansing, Michigan. The hearing record will remain open to receive written comments until 5:00 p.m. on Aug. 31, 2001. Comments should be sent to Chip Heckathorn, Chief, Municipal Facilities Section, Environmental Assistance Division, Michigan DEQ, P.O. Box 30457, Lansing, Michigan 48909-7957. Information Contact: Chip Heckathorn, Environmental Assistance Division, 517-373-4725.

Permit Applications-Air Quality

Proposed Enforcement Consent Orders

Air Quality Division Newsletter

Surface Water Quality Division Bulletin

red bar graphic MINNESOTA

Pollution Control Agency

Penalties Total $263,533 in Second Quarter for Environmental Violations

Permit Applications, Other Notices

Minnesota 2001-2005 Nonpoint Source Management Plan

red bar graphic  MISSOURI

Dept. of Natural Resources

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • Amendment will increase the per ton annual permit fee from $25.70 to $28 per ton of regulated pollutant. Hearing was Aug. 3; comments due Aug. 10. See http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/moreg/2001/v26n13/v26n13b.pdf

  • 10 CSR 10-6.050 Start-Up, Shutdown, and Malfunction Conditions. The Air Conservation Commission proposes to amend this rule by amending the Purpose section, adding new sections (1), (2), (4), and (5) and renumbering and amending original section (1) as new section (3). If the commission adopts this rule action, it will be submitted to the U.S. EPA to replace the current rule in the Missouri SIP. This amendment will clarify what constitutes a malfunction, start-up, or shutdown condition. It will also determine the reporting requirements for each condition. The evidence supporting the need for this proposed rulemaking is the public comment from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regarding complaints and Notices of Violation due to excess emissions commonly from the start-up, shutdown, and malfunction conditions at air pollution sources. This rule, applicable to all installations in Missouri, provides the owner or operator of an installation the opportunity to submit data regarding conditions which result[ed] in excess emissions. These submittals will be used by the director to determine whether the excess emissions were due to a start-up, shutdown, or malfunction condition. These determinations will be used in deciding whether enforcement action is appropriate. Public hearing Aug. 30; Comments due Sept. 6. See http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/moreg/2001/v26n14/v26n14c.pdf   

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

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Permit Application Public Comment Notices

red bar graphic NEBRASKA

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Proposed Regulations-General

red bar graphic NEW HAMPSHIRE

Dept. of Envtl. Services

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • Proposed amendments to Env-A 1406.04 (clarifies the existing rule on in-stack concentration method) and
    1450.01 (updates the list of all regulated toxic air pollutants). The proposed amendments to Env-A 1406.04 clarify the existing rule by specifying that the in-stack concentration method is based on uncontrolled emissions. The proposed amendments to Env-A 1450.01 updates the list of all regulated toxic air pollutants, classifications, and ambient air limits in accordance with RSA 125-I:4. Hearing Aug. 23; comments due Sept. 4. See http://www.des.state.nh.us/ard/prpsdrul.htm and http://www.des.state.nh.us/hearings.htm 

Proposed Regulations-Asbestos Disposal

  • Hearing Aug. 22; comments due Sept. 3. Concerns management of asbestos disposal sites, including those located in Nashua and Hudson, N.H. The proposed rules specify provisions for covering, monitoring, and maintaining the disposal sites. The rules also specify safe work practices and work plan requirements for excavating or otherwise disturbing the sites. In addition, the rules identify certain notification and disclosure
    requirements. The proposed rules are posted on the DES website at http://www.des.state.nh.us/rules/asbrules

red bar graphic NEW JERSEY


Innocent Landowner Defense, Statute of Limitation Extension Legislation Enacted

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

2002 Water Quality Limited Segments List 

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

Current DEP Bulletin (Permit Applications; Proposed Regulations) 

red bar graphic NEW YORK

Office of the Governor

Sullivan, Franklin Counties Open Space Acquisitions

Building Code Energy Conservation Revisions Proposed

  • Proposed revisions to the Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code and the State Energy Conservation Construction Code. The proposal will, according to Governor Pataki, reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 517,000 tons per year and sulphur dioxide emissions by 493 tons per year. Public hearing Aug. 20. See http://www.dos.state.ny.us/code/energycode/whatsnew.htm  

Dept. of Envtl. Conservation

Draft Regulations-Air Quality-Acid Rain Control

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

Emergency Regulations-Radioactive Waste

  • An Emergency Adoption was filed with the Department of State and became effective on July 6, 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 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 the date of filing with the Department of State, i.e., until Sept. 4, 2001.

Division of Water-Draft Consolidated Assessment and Listing Methodology

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

DEC Issues Summary of Toxic Chemical Releases During 1999

DEC Releases Hudson River Dredge Spoil Reports 

Proposed List of Recommended Water Quality Improvement Projects Under The Clean Water/Clean Air Bond Act of 1996

ALJ Rulings

Environmental Notice Bulletin (Permit Applications) 

Permit Applications

Coastal Management Program Notices

red bar graphic  NORTH CAROLINA


Enacted Legislation

  • H.B. 570, nutrient controls in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin.

  • S.B. 783, extension until Sept. 30, 2003 of the sunset date for permit exemptions for disposal of demolition debris at captive (i.e., owned by the generator of the waste) landfills. 

Dept. of Env't and Natural Resources

North Carolina, Tennessee Extend Air Quality Pact For Pristine Areas 

  • The newest agreement will now expire if not extended by Jan. 31, 2002. The states are extending the agreement for only six months because the U.S. EPA is expected to issue new nationwide standards for reviewing permits for large industrial air emissions sources during the coming year. The agreement establishes the process for federal land managers to review applications for facilities whose emissions could affect Class I Areas, which include national parks and wilderness areas. Under the procedures, large new industries are required to conduct computer modeling to determine whether their emissions would affect air quality in Class I Areas. Industries benefit from having a more consistent permit review process and predetermined deadlines for federal reviews. Federal land managers benefit from receiving notifications about new facilities early in the permit application process, but they must respond within 60 days. Previously, there had been no deadline. The procedures do not give federal land managers the authority to veto permit applications. See http://www.enr.state.nc.us/newsrels/mather13.htm 

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

Proposed Regulations-Laboratories 


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

Proposed Regulations-Coastal Management; Land Use Planning Guidelines


  • In Nov. 1998, the CRC authorized the appointment of the Land Use Plan Review Team to evaluate the CAMA land use planning program and make recommendations for improvement. Based on the recommendations submitted in 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. The rules include simple, clear requirements for land use plans, improved land suitability analysis, and management topics to tie land use plans to CAMA goals and will be formally proposed this summer. 

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

Division of Air Quality Permit Applications, Hearings

Division of Air Quality Penalty Assessments

Air Quality-NOx SIP rules adopted July 12, 2001 by EMC

Public Hearings-Water Quality

DENR Enforcement Data

Water Quality-Basinwide Assessment Reports

Draft Air Quality Regulations

red bar graphic  OHIO

Envtl. Protection Agency

Proposed General Permit

  • OEPA is proposing to issue a general permit to regulate discharges to waters of the state from select household sewage treatment systems. The permit would cover systems serving one-, two-, or three-family residential dwellings in two circumstances: if a discharging system is necessary for new construction, or to replace an existing failing system. If a disposal system can be installed that does not require a discharge, coverage by this Ohio EPA permit is not necessary. OEPA has developed this general permit to complement the Ohio Department of Health's current rulemaking that updates the minimum requirements for household sewage treatment. Although this permit is being developed and will be issued by OEPA, individual homeowners will continue to work directly with local health departments to obtain all necessary permits to install and operate their household sewage treatment systems. The local health departments will continue to perform site inspections, recommend the type of system that can be installed, and determine if coverage by this general permit is necessary. See http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/docindex.html and http://www.epa.state.oh.us/pic/nr/2001/july/hhsewage.html  

OEPA Actions, Notices by County

Public Meetings

Pending Air Permits

red bar graphic OKLAHOMA

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • Air Quality Council Meeting Aug. 15, sponsored by DEQ. 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 252:100-8, Permits for Part 70 Sources, [AMENDED]. The proposed revisions will change the rule to be consistent with the federal Part 70 operating permit program. 9:00 a.m., OSU at Tulsa, 700 N. Greenwood, Room 150, Tulsa, OK. Contact: Scott Thomas (405) 702-4100. See http://www.deq.state.ok.us/air1/current.html (forthcoming). 

red bar graphic OREGON

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Final Regulations-Underground Injection Controls

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

Air Permit Applications 

Water Quality Permit Applications

Proposed Regulations-General 

Public Notices-Cleanup Remedies

Public Notices-Remedial Actions

red bar graphic PENNSYLVANIA

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

NPDES Permit Applications

Extension of Public Comment Period on Draft Antidegradation Guidance

Draft Guidance Documents

red bar graphic RHODE ISLAND

Dept. of Envtl. Management

Upcoming Events

red bar graphic SOUTH CAROLINA

Office of the Governor

Hog Farm Executive Order-Moratorium

Dept. of Health and Envtl. Control

Draft Regulations-Air Quality

  • Comments due Aug. 27 re 8-hour ozone control implementation. 

Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste

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

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

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

Proposed Regulations-Drinking Water Quality

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

Permit Application Notices

red bar graphic  TENNESSEE

Dept. of Environment and Conservation

Board Meeting Agendas, Schedules

Permit Applications

Hazardous Trace Elements in Tennessee Soils and Other Regolith

red bar graphic  TEXAS

Natural Resource Conservation Commission

Draft Innocent Owner/Operator Guidance

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • SB 5: Repeal Construction Equipment Operating Restriction Rules and Accelerated Purchase of Tier 2/Tier 3 Rules in DFW and HGA. The TNRCC proposes to repeal of rules that were adopted last year as part of the SIP to help the Dallas/Forth Worth and Houston/Galveston nonattainment areas meet the U.S. EPA NAAQS for ozone. The rules would have restricted the hours of operation for construction and industrial equipment in order to delay the emissions of NOx, a key ozone precursor, until later in the day, thus limiting ozone formation. The mixing of NOx and VOCs in the presence of sunlight early in the day optimizes the formation of ozone. Restricting the operation of construction equipment during morning hours can reduce these ozone forming compounds to minimize the critical mixing time. The rules also would have required owners or operators of diesel-powered equipment to replace their equipment with those that emit less NOx and VOCs. Senate Bill 5, passed by the 77th Legislature, requires the TNRCC to submit an SIP revision to the EPA deleting the requirements of these rules from the SIP no later than Oct. 1, 2001. The diesel emission reduction incentive program contained in the bill will replace the repealed rules and result in an equivalent level of emission reductions. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/exec/media/press/07-01siprep.html Senate Bill 5, Article 18 requires that the four divisions (2, 4, 8, and 9 of Subchapter I) regarding construction equipment operating restrictions and accelerated purchase of Tier 2/Tier 3 diesel be removed from the SIPs for Dallas/Fort Worth and Houston/Galveston. Also see http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/sips/terp.html for additional information. Public hearings Aug. 13-14. Comments due Aug. 14. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/sips/01025a114.pdf 

  • SB 5: Retrofit and Repower Incentive Program for On-Road and Non-Road High-Emitting Engines. Rules establishing an incentive program for the repower, retrofit or add-on, use of a qualifying fuel, and the development and demonstration of new engine technologies used in on-road and non-road equipment that would reduce NOx emissions not otherwise required by federal requirements. Also see http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/sips/terp.html for additional information. Public hearings Aug. 13-14. Comments due Aug. 14. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/sips/01025b114.pdf 

  • SB 5: New Purchase and Lease Incentive Programs for Light-Duty and Heavy-Duty On-Road Vehicles. 
    Rules establishing a state-wide incentive program for the purchase or lease of new on-road diesel vehicles and light-duty motor vehicles that meet emission standards more stringent than those required by federal requirements. Provides incentives which will be based on the emission standard to which the vehicle is certified. Also see http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/sips/terp.html for additional information. Public hearings Aug. 13-14. Comments due Aug. 14. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/sips/01025c114.pdf 

  • SB 1, Art. VI, Rider 30: Emissions Fees for Upset and Maintenance Emissions. Rider 30 requires that emissions from upset and maintenance be included in the total emissions for each account as part of the basis for calculating the operating permit fees (emissions fees) due. Hearing Aug. 13; comments due same date. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01030101_pro.pdf  

Permit Hearings

Public Hearings/Proposed Rules

red bar graphic  UTAH

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste

Permit Applications

red bar graphic VERMONT

Dept. of Envtl. Conservation

Permit Applications

red bar graphic VIRGINIA

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Public Meeting, Hearing Notices; Other Regulatory Notices

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

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

  • Air Pollution Control Board; Proposed amendments to the Regulations for the Control of Air Pollution (Revision B00-Technical Documents Incorporated by Reference). Proposed amendments will incorporate the latest edition of referenced technical documents into the Regulations for the Control and Abatement of Air Pollution. Aug. 16 hearing. See http://www.townhall.state.va.us/meeting/viewMeeting.cfm?MEETING_ID=1173

  • Water Board, notice of intent to adopt regulations governing the discharge of sewage from boats. Public meeting Aug. 6. Regulations would address discharges of sewage and other wastes (decayed wood, sawdust, oil, etc.) from boats, especially with regard to implementation of no discharge zones. See http://www.townhall.state.va.us/ 

  • Public briefings on progress on Chesapeake 2000: A Watershed Partnership, late July and August. See http://www.deq.state.va.us/cgi-bin/deq/prweb/BrowseRecord.cgi?URL_NAME=NOTICE&ID=170 

  • The Virginia Waste Management Board is proposing to amend the Hazardous Waste Management Regulations, 9 VAC 20-60-10 et seq., in Amendment 15 B. The proposed change consists of deletion of 9 VAC 20-60-261 B 8, which concerns the relationship of low-level nuclear wastes and hazardous wastes. This item is being deleted for clarity and because it is no longer needed. Comments due Aug. 15 and Sept. 6. See http://www.deq.state.va.us/cgi-bin/deq/prweb/BrowseRecord.cgi?URL_NAME=NOTICE&ID=161 

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

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

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

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

red bar graphic  WASHINGTON

Dept. of Ecology

Proposed Regulations

Suspensions of Rulemakings

State Environmental Policy Act Register

red bar graphic WEST VIRGINIA

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Public Notice Bulletin (Permit Applications, Proposed Regulations)

  • Latest issue available at http://www.dep.state.wv.us/pio/publicnotice/latestbulletin.pdf

  • Aug. 13 public meeting on Class D general solid waste landfill permit renewal.

  • Aug. 27 public hearing on proposed TMDL for Paint Creek and 14 tributaries.

  • Public hearing on proposed TMDL for Lower Elk River, Aug. 28

  • Public hearing on proposed TMDL for Stony River and four tributaries, Aug. 29

  • Public hearing on proposed TMDLs for Monongahela River, Aug. 30


red bar graphic WISCONSIN

Dept. of Natural Resources

Air Rules Development

Public Hearing and Meeting Schedule

red bar graphic WYOMING

Dept. of Environmental Quality

NPDES Permit Applications

Draft Regulations-Water Quality

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

large red bar graphic

red bar graphic GENERAL

  • Efforts to establish two new Southern Hemisphere whale sanctuaries, one in the South Pacific, the other in the South Atlantic, were rejected for the second time by the International Whaling Commission (IWC), coming up short of the three-quarters majorities necessary for approval. Japan was claimed to have engaged in "vote buying." "This wasn’t a vote, it was an auction, and Japan was the highest bidder,” said Mick McIntyre, Director of the Asia Pacific office of the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW). “It is also a slap in the face of small island nations in the South Pacific, most of whom are not represented here,” McIntyre said. “It is inexplicable that small island states of the Eastern Caribbean, who work so closely with South Pacific nations on other issues, would now turn their backs on sister island states in the South Pacific." See http://www.ifaw.org/page.asp?unitid=360 "This buying of votes has gone too far. If it goes on like this we may be only months away from ... the resumption of full-scale commercial whaling," said a Greenpeace representative. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1455000/1455753.stm  

  • Japan admitted that it used overseas trade incentives as campaign tools, see http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/asia-pacific/newsid_1444000/1444818.stm, but accused New Zealand and Australia of using "bullying" tactics of their own to promote the sanctuaries. See http://www.smh.com.au/news/0107/25/world/world5.html  

  • But Japan and Norway were unsuccessful in getting the 1986 ban on commercial whaling lifted. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1458000/1458923.stm 

  • And the IWC put Iceland's application for membership on hold (giving it observer status), due to that country's refusal to adhere to the moratorium. Iceland said the IWC's decision would have no effect on its position and that whaling activity would continue. WWF said some form of limited approved whaling might be necessary. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1458000/1458234.stm 

  • Japan was also censured for culling thousands of Dull's porposies, which Japan admits but claims is beyond the jurisdiction of the IWC because the activity occurred within domestic waters.  

  • India agreed to halt construction of a dam on the border with Nepal due to the latter's concern that the project might result in damage to Lumbini, the birthplace of Buddha, and would displace 100,000 residents. 

  • The European Commission proposed rules on food containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs); the proposal would impose extensive new registration and labeling requirements. The rules would mandate that all foods and animal feeds derived from GMOs be labeled, even if they contain no detectable actual GMO content, and provide that records must be kept so that the origins of processed goods may be traced back to the farm. "The provisions for traceability ensure a high level of environmental and health protection and pave the way for a proper labeling system," European Union Environment Commissioner Margot Wallstrom said. "Certainly there is a cost for the producers and for trade, but what is at stake is our ability to build public confidence." She expressed optimism that with the rules in place additional GMO approvals would occur. The EU has approved 11 GMO varieties, but none within the last three years. The tracing requirements would apply to items such as corn and soy oil, and are opposed by the United States The requirements would not become effective until after approval by both the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament, a process that is expected to take at least two years.

  • France agreed to increase disclosure to the public of GMO crop experiments. See http://www.finances.gouv.fr/OGM Meanwhile, Bayer filed lawsuits in French courts against a group of beekeepers it claims defamed the company regarding alleged environmental effects of its Gaucho pesticide. Brazil's president signed a directive setting labeling standards for foods from genetically modified crops. The standards were criticized as being too lax, and will likely be challenged.    

  • U.K. agriculture minister Margaret Beckett said she agreed with Germany's agriculture and consumer protection minister, Renate Kunast, that much-need revisions to the European Common Agriculture Policy should include methods of promoting "environmental sensitive" production methods. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_1443000/1443472.stm  

  • A new study adds evidence to the proposition that exposure to certain types of pesticides harms male fertility. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_1458000/1458660.stm 

  • The European Commission alleged that Austria, Italy, Ireland, and the U.K. are violating Directive 91/156/EEC. The EC also claimed that Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the U.K. are violating other directives on used batteries, environmental impact assessment, waste water treatment, sulfur content in fuels, control of pollution from nitrates, sludge management, and drinking water standards. See, e.g., http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&doc=IP/01/1172|0|RAPID&lg=EN, http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&doc=IP/01/1175|0|RAPID&lg=EN, http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&doc=IP/01/1156|0|RAPID&lg=EN,   http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&doc=IP/01/1166|0|RAPID&lg=EN, and http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&doc=IP/01/1157|0|RAPID&lg=EN    

  • A European industry group, Human and Environment Risk Assessment, is seeking input through Sept. 10 on draft risk assessments on two chemicals commonly used in household products such as detergents. See http://www.heraproject.com  

  • Hong-Xia Zhang of the University of Toronto and Eduardo Blumwald of the University of California, Davis reported in Nature they have developed a genetically engineered tomato that develops rapidly in salty conditions, storing sodium in its leaves but not in its fruit. The gene AtNHX1, found in a cabbage relative called thale cress, made the breakthrough possible. "Worldwide, more than 60 million hectares (150 million acres) of irrigated land, representing 25% of the total irrigated acreage in the world, have been damaged by salt," the scientists said. "Our findings suggests the feasibility of producing salt-tolerant transgenic plants that will produce edible crops." See http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nbt/journal/v19/n8/abs/nbt0801_765.html 

  • A coalition of Canadian environmental, farmer, and consumer groups asked Prime Minister Jean Chretien to disapprove the cultivation or sale of genetically modified wheat. 

  • The World Bank issued a report on air quality in South Asia, saying that urban air pollution is a major source of premature death and disability. Two-stroke gasoline powered vehicles are the primary reason. See http://www.worldbank.org/html/fpd/esmap/publication/airquality.html and http://www.worldbank.org/developmentnews/stories/html/072001a.htm 

  • South Korea transferred responsibilities for waste importation and export from the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy to the Ministry of Environment. See http://www.mocie.go.kr 

  • Major oil companies in New Zealand agreed to conduct trials of low-sulfur diesel fuel, the first in Auckland in August, the second for a six-week period nationwide.

  • Hungary issued new standards governing hazardous waste storage in order to comport with EU requirements. 

  • Canada's Competition Bureau issued for public comment draft green marketing requirements. Comments are due Oct. 15. See http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/ct02206e.html and http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/ct02205e.html  

  • Russia, implementing an agreement reached at the U.N. Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, said it would halt commercial fishing of sturgeon in the Caspian Sea and halt caviar exports at least through the end of the year. Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan will do likewise.

  • A report in Science says that overfishing, hardly a new activity, has had a much greater negative impact on ocean life than has global warming. Available at http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/293/5530/629 See also http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-000061189jul27.story    

  • A report released by a member of the French Senate calls for significantly increased funding of coastal conservation programs. See http://www.senat.fr (in French; report title is Vers de Nouveau Rivages, by Senator Louis de Pensec).

  • The Asian Development Bank is giving China technical assistance to combat desertification in western regions. See http://www.adb.org/Documents/News/2001/nr2001081.asp 

  • The World Health Organization announced the online availability of a number of documents on chemical safety. See http://www.inchem.org/  

red bar graphic CLIMATE CHANGE