ELI Primary Menu

Skip to main content

Weekly Update Volume 31, Issue 23


large red bar graphic

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


The Tenth Circuit held that EPA did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in approving Montana's water quality standards exempting nonpoint sources of pollution from antidegradation review or in approving Montana's mixing zone policies and procedures. Because the CWA nowhere gives EPA the authority to regulate nonpoint source discharges, EPA's determination that Montana's water quality standards exempting nonpoint source discharges from antidegradation review are consistent with the Act is a permissible construction of the CWA. States are not required to regulate nonpoint sources at the antidegradation stage; rather, the effect of nonpoint source discharges on water bodies will be diminished by state adoption of TMDLs for water bodies not meeting state water quality standards. Therefore, EPA did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in approving Montana's antidegradation review rules. Additionally, EPA properly approved Montana's mixing zone policy allowing point source discharges to degrade water quality within the mixing zone so long as the discharge does not degrade the water quality outside the zone. The CWA's antidegradation requirements apply to the waterbody as a whole, not specifically to the mixing zone. American Wildlands v. Browner, No. 00-1224 (10th Cir. Aug. 8, 2001) (15 pp.).


The Second Circuit vacated a preliminary injunction enjoining a New York town from proceeding with its condemnation action against a landowner. The city sought to condemn the landowner's property as part of its redevelopment plan for the city's downtown and waterfront area. The owner argued, and a district court agreed, that the action violated the owner's due process rights because although notice regarding a supplemental public hearing was given in a newspaper pursuant to New York's eminent domain law, he never received personal notice. The owner, however, lacks standing to bring these claims because he has not suffered actual or threatened injury. The owner attended the first hearing and failed to indicate that he would have raised additional objections at the second hearing had he been provided with notice. Moreover, although he did not receive personal notice, he failed to allege that he did not receive actual notice. Further, the district court failed to consider the public interests involved and weigh them against the owner's interests. The preliminary injunction, therefore, was vacated. Brody v. Village of Port Chester, No. 01-7201 (2d Cir. Aug. 8, 2001) (5 pp.).


The Eighth Circuit affirmed a district court decision upholding a jury verdict ordering the manufacturer of an organic cleaning solvent to pay an assembly line worker $2.2 million in damages for injuries she sustained after being sprayed with the product at her work. She alleged that the product caused her to suffer psychological problems, cognitive impairment, personality disorders, and Parkinsonian symptoms. The manufacturer argued that the district court erred in allowing one expert witness to testify that the worker's acute symptoms were caused by the manufacturer's product. The district court, however, conducted a thoughtful and thorough inquiry as to the validity of the expert's conclusion, and there is nothing in the record to suggest that his conclusion was the result of methodology so unreliable as to render its admission an abuse of discretion. Likewise, the district court did not err in permitting a second expert to testify that the product caused the worker's permanent injuries. The district court conducted an exacting review of the science involved and correctly concluded that, because the expert's methodology was scientifically valid, the scientific questions were best addressed by allowing each side to present its experts and submit their opinions to the jury. In addition, the district court properly dismissed the manufacturer's motion for a new trial based on its argument that the verdict was excessive. Under the circumstances of the case, an award of $2.2 million does not shock the conscience. Bonner v. ISP Technologies, Inc., No. 00-3458 (8th Cir. Aug. 3, 2001) (11 pp.).


The Tenth Circuit affirmed in part and vacated in part a lower court decision dismissing claims brought by the owner of several mill sites against the U.S. Forest Service for denying him use of his mining claims. In 1983 and 1984, the Forest Service authorized the owner to conduct operations at a site other than his preferred site, imposed certain mitigation conditions, and required a reclamation bond. The landowner failed to comply with those decisions, and in 1985 he announced his intent to begin operations at the site as well as at other of his sites. The Forest Service continued to demand that he have an approved plan of operations, but the owner claimed that he did not need one. Eventually, the Forest Service sent him a letter in November 1997 demanding that he remove his equipment and materials from the mill sites, and the owner filed suit. The lower court upheld the Forest Service's decision and the owner appealed. The lower court, however, lacked jurisdiction to resolve issues surrounding the letter. The owner did not have standing to challenge the 1997 letter because it is not a final agency action. The letter does not order the owner to file an operating plan or state that he does not have one. The letter merely implements decisions made long ago. Similarly, the owner failed to appeal the Forest Service's 1983 and 1984 decisions conditioning the owner's operation of the mill sites, and the statute of limitations has since passed. Thus, the lower court's decision addressing these issues was vacated. However, the lower court's dismissal of the owner's allegations of bad faith was affirmed. Cherry v. United States Department of Agriculture, No. 00-1139 (10th Cir. July 18, 2001) (5 pp.).

red bar graphic  ESA, RIPENESS:

The Tenth Circuit dismissed on ripeness grounds a conservation group's claim that the U.S. Forest Service violated the ESA by failing to carry out certain conservation programs in its management of the Medicine Bow National Forest in Wyoming. Specifically, the groups argued that by allowing forest density to increase, the Forest Service was contributing to the decline of river species. The issues, however, are not purely legal. For example, even were it to decide that the ESA imposes substantive requirements on the Forest Service, the court would have to determine whether increased timber harvesting would promote the conservation of river species. Additionally, the challenged agency action is not final. The Forest Service has not yet rejected the group's proposed management techniques and it has not unreasonably delayed a decision on whether to implement the techniques. Further, the species are not in immediate jeopardy from the Forest Service's inaction, and resolving the issues at this stage would not promote efficiency. Thus, because the case is not ripe, the court lacks jurisdiction and the case was dismissed. Coalition for Sustainable Resources v. United States Forest Service, No. 99-8060 (10th Cir. Aug. 7, 2001) (8 pp.).


The Tenth Circuit reversed a district court decision dismissing environmental groups' claim that the U.S. Forest Service's commercial timber harvest plans for the Norbeck Wildlife Preserve in South Dakota violate administrative law, NEPA, and the Norbeck Organic Act. The Forest Service relied on the NFMA's interest in overall plant and animal diversity to justify the fact that certain species in the preserve might be compromised as a result of the harvest plans, and the district court found that the Forest Service's plans complied with NEPA. The Norbeck Organic Act, however, requires the protection of game animals and birds, not the overall protection of all plant and animal species. Moreover, the Norbeck Organic Act permits timber harvests in only limited situations, and contrary to the Forest Service's view, the Act is not subordinate to the NFMA. Thus, for the harvest plans to be consistent with law, they must satisfy the Norbeck Organic Act. On remand, therefore, the Forest Service must show specifically that game animals and birds are protected under the proposed timber harvest plans. Sierra Club-Black Hills Group v. United States Forest Service, No. 99-1445 (10th Cir. Aug. 8, 2001) (12 pp.).


The Tenth Circuit held that the MBTA does not violate the Free Exercise or Establishment Clauses of the U.S. Constitution and, therefore, affirms an individual's conviction for possessing eagle feathers without a permit. Although the individual practiced Native American religion, he was not a member of a federally recognized tribe. The MBTA violates the Free Exercise Clause's neutrality requirement because it provides accommodations to tribal members expressly for religious purposes. Nevertheless, the MBTA's requirement that only tribal members who practice Native American religion may possess feathers passes strict scrutiny. The government has a compelling interest in protecting migratory birds in compliance with treaty agreements, but it also has a compelling interest in protecting the culture and heritage of Native Americans. The permitting process provided by the MBTA balances these two interests. Consequently, the regulation also does not violate the Establishment Clause. United States v. Hardman, No. 99-4210 (10th Cir. Aug. 8, 2001) (22 pp.).


The Tenth Circuit held that the BGEPA does not violate the Free Exercise or Establishment Clauses of the U.S. Constitution and, therefore, affirmed an individual's conviction for possessing eagle feathers without a permit. The individual adheres to Native American religion, but he is not a member of any federally recognized tribe. Therefore, he cannot legally possess eagle parts under the Act's exception for Native Americans. The BGEPA does not violate the Free Exercise Clause because it is neutral and generally applicable. It is neutral because its primary purpose is to protect eagles and because its exception for Native Americans is intended to benefit a political group, not a particular religion. Moreover, it is generally applicable because its proscription against possessing eagle feathers applies to almost all of society. In addition, the BGEPA does not violate the Establishment Clause by permitting members of federally recognized tribes to possess eagle feathers but not others. Allowing tribal members to possess eagle feathers for the purpose of worshipping according to the Native American traditions is rationally related to the government's obligation to preserve tribes' heritage and culture. The individual's conviction was therefore upheld. United States v. Wilgus, No. 00-4015 (10th Cir. Aug. 8, 2001) (14 pp.).


The Tenth Circuit held that the BGEPA's restrictions allowing members of federally recognized Native American tribes, but not non-members, to take eagle parts for religious purposes violates the RFRA. The individual who brought the suit is a member of a Native American tribe that is not federally recognized. While executing a search warrant at the individual's home, state officials found and confiscated eagle feathers because the individual did not have a permit under the BGEPA for the feathers. The government, however, failed to show any compelling interests for restricting the individual's use of the eagle feathers under the RFRA. Restrictions on the use of eagle parts would not help the government fulfill its trust and treaty obligations to federally recognized tribes because the exception in the BGEPA allowing members of federally recognized tribes to use eagles was not meant to serve as a substitute for certain abrogated treaty hunting rights as the government argued. Additionally, even if the government has a legitimate interest in eagle conservation, it is not furthering that interest by the least restrictive means. Allowing  non-members of Native American tribes to use eagle parts in religious ceremonies would not undermine the United States' obligations to recognized tribes, is not likely to result in increased numbers of illegal kills and an increased reliance on a black market for eagle parts, and would not raise equal protection problems making the permit process administratively unfeasible. Saenz v. Department of the Interior, No. 00-2166 (10th Cir. Aug. 8, 2001) (27 pp.).


The Fourth Circuit held that a district court properly denied an oil company's request for a new trial in a case concerning the company's petroleum pollution of a neighbor's property, and that the neighbor is entitled to prejudgment interest. At trial the jury returned a verdict finding that the oil company negligently stored or handled petroleum products on its property, which resulted in damages to the neighbor, but that the oil company did not trespass on the neighbor's property. The trial judge granted the oil company's motion for judgment as a matter of law, finding that the jury's conclusion that the oil company had not trespassed compelled the conclusion that none of the petroleum entered onto or physically affected the neighbor's property. The appellate court reversed the district court's holding and remanded for consideration of whether a new trial was warranted. The trial judge ordered a new trial but then recused himself. A second trial judge granted a motion to reconsider the order granting a new trial, but ultimately denied the oil company's motion for a new trial and did not award the neighbor prejudgment interest. The second judge correctly concluded that the jury's findings were not inconsistent with each other or with the general verdict. To reconcile the finding that the oil company did not trespass on the neighbor's property with a finding that the company negligently allowed petroleum to spread into the neighbor's property, the court need only assume, as did the second trial judge, that the jury was not aware that a subsurface invasion into property could constitute a trespass on the property. Additionally, the original trial judge did not base his decision to grant a new trial on the reconsideration of the admissibility of the neighbor's expert testimony, and, therefore, the second judge did not err in reconsidering the trial judge's grant of a new trial. Further, evidence discovered by the oil company after the close of trial did not warrant a new trial. However, the neighbor adequately raised the issue of prejudgment interest by repeatedly requesting it in its motions for judgment. Therefore, that portion of the case is remanded to the district court for determination of prejudgment interest. Castles Auto & Truck Service, Inc. v. Exxon Corp., Nos. 00-1453 et al. (4th Cir. Aug. 2, 2001) (10 pp.).


The Supreme Court of Nevada held that Nevada's state engineer improperly denied the BLM's applications for state water appropriation permits that would allow livestock to be watered on public lands in Douglas County, Nevada. The state regulation at issue allows the state engineer to issue permits only if the applicant is legally entitled to place the livestock on the public lands for which the permit is sought. The BLM does not own or have a proprietary interest in any livestock that would be benefited by a water permit. Instead, the BLM sought the permits so it could grant water rights to individuals seeking to obtain grazing permits from the BLM. The state engineer denied the BLM's applications, concluding that because the BLM does not possess a grazing permit or lease, it is not a person who is authorized to graze livestock on public lands and, thus, is not a qualified applicant for the permits. However, to say that the United States, the owner of the land, must issue itself a permit to lease or graze livestock on its land is an illogical and unreasonable construction of the statutory language. The phrase "legally entitled to place the livestock on the public lands for which the permit is sought" simply requires an applicant to have a legal right to graze livestock on the public land. And as the owner of the BLM land, the United States is entitled, and Congress has authorized, the grazing of livestock on the public lands managed by the BLM. United States v. State Engineer, No. 32740 (Nev. July 24, 2001) (23 pp.).


The EPA Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) denied a POTW's petition seeking review of several permit conditions EPA placed in the facility's NPDES permit for the discharge of treated waters into an Idaho creek. EPA did not err in applying the POTW's current design flow to calculate mass load limits instead of using an assumption that relates to future plant modifications. Given the record's lack of clarity regarding a potential upgrade of the facility to a higher design flow, EPA did not err in declining to write the permit in a way that anticipated and allowed for such an upgrade. Nor did EPA err in establishing compliance schedules that are more stringent than state certification requirements. Likewise, EPA's decision to follow the applicable TMDL in establishing seasonal constraints for phosphorous was not clearly erroneous. In essence, the POTW is challenging the underlying TMDL, and the EAB will not entertain such a challenge. Further, EPA did not misapply Washington state's water quality standards for temperature and dissolved oxygen for the creek in violation of the CWA. The EAB also rejected the POTW's argument that the permit conditions run against public policy because they are so stringent as to cause the facility to cease discharging into the creek, thereby harming the receiving water. Technological and economical infeasibility do not excuse compliance with water quality standards. Last, EPA did not err in requiring the facility to submit a quality assurance project plan. EPA may impose monitoring requirements in NPDES permits, and a permit limitation that requires an organized approach to data monitoring, such as the quality assurance plan, is not unreasonable. In re City of Moscow, NPDES Appeal No. 00-10 (EPA EAB July 27, 2001) (54 pp.).

red bar graphic  CWA, NPDES PERMIT, NOTICE:

The EPA Environmental Appeals Board denied a town's petition to review its NPDES permit for municipal wastewater discharges. EPA's NPDES permit decision instructed the town that it had 30 days from the receipt of notice to appeal any final permit conditions. Because the town's petition arrived at the EAB office 4 days after the 30-day deadline, the petition was denied as untimely. The notice regulation relied on by the town that gives petitioners an extra 3 days for mailing applies only when the 30-day appeal period follows a service of notice by mail, not receipt of mail as was directed by EPA in this case. In re Town of Hampton, NPDES Appeal No. 01-15 (EPA EAB July 26, 2001) (6 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 group IV polymers and resins. 66 FR 40903 (8/6/01). 

  • EPA proposed NESHAPs for flexible polyurethane foam fabrication operations. 66 FR 41717 (8/8/01). 

  • EPA proposed to determine that the Steamboat Springs, Colorado, Whitefish, Montana, and Thompson Falls, Montana moderate nonattainment areas attained the NAAQS for particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10). 66 FR 41486 (8/8/01). 

  • EPA proposed to find that California established that the Imperial Valley Planning area, a PM10 moderate nonattainment area, would have attained the NAAQS for PM10 by the applicable attainment date but for emissions emanating from outside the United States. Alternatively, EPA proposed to find that the county did not attain the PM10 NAAQS. 66 FR 42187 (8/10/01). 

  • EPA extended the attainment date for the San Diego, California, serious ozone nonattainment area from November 15, 2000, to November 15, 2001. 66 FR 40908 (8/6/01). 

red bar graphic  DRINKING WATER:

  • EPA determined that the Castle Valley Aquifer System at Castle Valley, Utah, and the immediately adjacent recharge area is the sole or principal source of drinking water for the region, thus, federal financially assisted projects constructed in the area must be designed and constructed in a manner that does not create a significant hazard to public health. 66 FR 41027 (8/6/01). 


  • The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry announced the availability of three new draft toxicological profiles for hazardous waste substances at DOE waste sites. 66 FR 41243 (8/7/01). 

  • EPA entered into a proposed administrative settlement under CERLCA in connection with the Kogut's Nursery Superfund site in Suffield, Connecticut. 66 FR 41027 (8/6/01). 

  • EPA entered into a proposed administrative settlement under CERCLA in connection with the Bedford Industrial Park Superfund site in New Bedford, Massachusetts. 66 FR 42226 (8/10/01). 

  • EPA entered into a proposed prospective purchaser agreement under CERCLA in connection with the San Gabriel Superfund site in Azusa, California. 66 FR 42227 (8/10/01). 

  • EPA approved revisions to New Mexico's hazardous waste program under RCRA. 66 FR 42140 (8/10/01). 

  • EPA approved revisions to Wyoming's hazardous waste program. 66 FR 40911 (8/6/01). 

  • EPA approved a negative declaration submitted by New York that there are no existing commercial and industrial solid waste incinerator sources in the state. 66 FR 41146 (8/7/01).

  • EPA granted a petition to exclude from hazardous waste control 1,800 cubic yards of excavated stabilized waste water treatment sludge currently stored in containment cells at Tenneco Automotive's Paragould, Arkansas, facility.  66 FR 41796 (8/9/01). 


  • EPA proposed to approve Minnesota's underground storage tank program. 66 FR 40954 (8/6/01). 

red bar graphic  WATER QUALITY:

  • EPA proposed to delay by 18 months the effective date of a rule published on July 13, 2000, that amends and clarifies existing regulations implementing CWA §303(d), which requires states to identify waters that are not meeting state water quality standards and to establish TMDLs to restore the quality of those waters. Due to controversy surrounding the rule, Congress prohibited EPA from implementing the final rule through a spending prohibition attached to the Military Construction Appropriation Act: FY 2000 Supplemental Appropriations. The spending prohibition is scheduled to expire on September 30, 2001, and barring further action by Congress, the rule would go into effect 30 days later. However, due to continuing and new concerns surrounding the rule, EPA determined that it should reconsider some of the choices it made in the July 2000 rule and, therefore, would like to delay the rule's effective date. 66 FR 41817 (8/9/01). 

  • EPA announced the availability of a draft report and two supporting technical documents on the total national costs associated with the TMDL program. 66 FR 41875 (8/9/01). 

  • EPA announced the availability of the final guidance, Coordinating CSO Long-Term Planning With Water Quality Standards Reviews. 66 FR 42226 (8/10/01). 

red bar graphic  WILDLIFE:

  • FWS proposed to establish 16 additional manatee protection areas in Florida. 66 FR 42317 (8/10/01). 

  • FWS made a minor adjustment to the boundary of the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska by adding an adjacent parcel of 2,793 acres of land to the Refuge. 66 FR 42233 (8/10/01). 


  • United States v. Diamond Shamrock Refining Co., No. H-01-2494 (S.D. Tex. July 25, 2001). A settling CAA, CWA, and RCRA defendant that owns and operates petroleum refineries in Three Rivers, Texas, and Sunray, Texas, must pay a $1.2 million civil penalty, must obtain required permit coverage under the CWA for the irrigation site associated with the Three Rivers Refinery, must modify the irrigation site to prevent the discharge of treated process wastewater to U.S. waters, and must replace existing pumps on volatile organic compound service with leakless pumps as a supplemental environmental project. 66 FR 41888 (8/9/01). 

  • United States v. Murphy Farms, Nos. 7:98-CV-4-F(1) et al. (E.D.N.C. July 10, 2001). Settling CWA defendants that discharged pollutants from five hog farms in North Carolina without an NPDES permit must pay a $72,000 civil penalty and must use buffer zones, improve agricultural practices, provide better training, and implement other prophylactic measures that will help prevent future discharges. 66 FR 41888 (8/9/01).

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-Water Quality

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

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

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 

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

Proposed Regulation Repeal-Safe Drinking Water

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

Emergency Regulation-Hazardous Waste Management

  • July 27 emergency rulemaking action regarding Commission Regulation No. 23, the Arkansas Hazardous Waste Code. As a result, the Commission has added the former Red River Aluminum facility at Stamps in Lafayette County to the Arkansas remedial Action Trust Fund Priority List for cleanup of hazardous waste, as contained in Regulation No. 23. The Arkansas DEQ is scheduled to assume responsibility from the U.S. EPA for cleanup of the abandoned facility in the near future. Estimated costs of cleanup at the site exceed the $60,000 limit for state money which can be spent from the Emergency Response Fund for environmental cleanup operations. In order to access money in the State Remedial Action Trust Fund, it is necessary to include the Red River Aluminum site on the State Priority List in Regulation No. 23. As a result, the ADEQ petitioned the Commission to add the Red River Aluminum site to the State Priority list, enabling the ADEQ to use money from the Remedial Action Trust Fund for cleanup activities necessary at the facility. Under state law and Commission regulations, emergency rulemaking actions may remain in effect for up to 180 days. A formal rulemaking procedure, including holding a public hearing, must be conducted to permanently incorporate emergency rulemaking provisions into the applicable regulation.

Self-Audit Form for Arkansas USTs and ASTs

red bar graphic CALIFORNIA

Air Resources Board

Bay Area Ozone Attainment Plan Delayed

ARB Enforcement Program Webpage

ARB Draft 2001 Strategic Plan

  • The ARB Draft 2001 Strategic Plan (Plan) was drafted within the framework established by the California Environmental Protection Agency's (Cal/EPA) Strategic Vision published in July 2000. The Strategic Vision sets forth Cal/EPA's vision, mission, core values, and goals and objectives. The key elements of this Plan include ARB's mission, vision, values, and their goals and strategies over the next several years. The Plan does not detail all of ARB's efforts, but rather focuses on new activities needed to meet clean air goals, including specific milestones through 2002. The goals identified in the Plan complement Cal/EPA's Strategic Vision and build upon ongoing programs. Comments are due Aug. 24. See http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/plan01/plan01.htm 

Vapor Recovery Equipment Defects Title 17 Update

Proposed Automotive and Mobile Equipment Coatings ATCM 

Rice Straw Demonstration Project Grant Fund Workshop 

Voluntary Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Proposed Regulation Update-Draft Regulations

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

Cal/EPA Library-Environmental Impact Report Listing Database

Dept. of Toxic Substances Control

Emergency Regulations-Cathode Ray Tubes

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

  • Establishment of a process for facilities to request a temporary waiver of terms and conditions of a solid waste facilities permit in the event of an unforeseeable situation. The Board will consider adoption of emergency regulations at its Aug. 14-15, 2001, meeting. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/PermitEnfPol/ 

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 Aug. 14-15, 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

Public Meetings to Discuss Legal Classification of Groundwater

  • Aug. 20, 23. Professor Joseph Sax of the University of California, Berkeley has been hired to prepare a report regarding the SWRCB’s permitting authority over subsurface waters. Professor Sax is evaluating the following six questions:

    1. What is the scope of the SWRCB’s water right permitting authority over groundwater? 
    2. What is the current legal test for determining whether groundwater is subject to the SWRCB’s permitting authority? 
    3. Under this legal test, what physical characteristics should the SWRCB evaluate in distinguishing subsurface waters subject to the SWRCB’s permitting authority from subsurface waters that are percolating groundwater? 
    4. What factors has the SWRCB considered in its past decisions regarding groundwater classification? 
    5. Should the legal test for determining what subsurface waters are subject to the SWRCB’s permitting authority be changed? If so, what legal test would be appropriate? 
    6. Can quantifiable criteria be established to implement the legal test? What are the quantifiable criteria? 

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 Reasonable 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

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 

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.  

Proposed Regulations-Underground Storage Tanks

  • Sept. 7 hearing; comments due Sept. 6. Proposed amendments to Georgia's Rules and Regulations for
    Underground Storage Tank Management, Chapter 391-3-15 (hereinafter, "the proposed rules amendments"). The proposed rules amendments consist of the revision of Rules 391-3-15-.01 "General Provisions"; 391-3-15-.02 "Definitions, UST Exclusions, UST Deferrals, and Lender Liability"; 391-3-15-.04 "Interim Prohibition for Deferred UST Systems"; 391-3-15-.05 "UST Systems: Design, Construction, Installation and Notification"; 391-3-15-.06 "General Operating Requirements"; 391-3-15-.07 "Release Detection";391-3-15-.08 "Release Reporting, Investigation, and Confirmation"; 391-3-15-.09 "Release Response and Corrective Action for UST Systems Containing Petroleum"; 391-3-15-.11 "Out-of-Service UST Systems and Closure"; 391-3-15-.12 "UST Systems Containing Petroleum; Financial Responsibility Requirements"; 391-3-15-.13 "Georgia Underground Storage Tank (GUST) Trust Fund." All Rules listed above contain amendments to incorporate by reference the currently published version of the Code of Federal Regulations for underground storage tanks, 40 C.F.R. Part 280. Rule -.13 contains amendments to paragraphs 391-3-15-.13(1)(b)2.(iii) "Subsequent Election for New Owners or Operators" and
    391-3-15-.13(1)(c)3.(iv) "Recordkeeping." See http://www.dnr.state.ga.us/dnr/environ 

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


Bill to Control Emissions from "Grandfathered" Power Plants Enacted

  • S.B. 372 signed into law Aug. 7. Amends the Environmental Protection Act. Makes legislative findings and declarations concerning air pollution levels from fossil fuel-fired electric generating plants. Requires the Board, by Dec. 31, 2002, to promulgate rules establishing a schedule of limits on the quantity of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and mercury emissions and caps on sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, mercury, and carbon dioxide emissions each year for fossil fuel-fired plants. Effective immediately. See http://www.legis.state.il.us/scripts/imstran.exe?LIBSINCWSB0372 and http://www.state.il.us/gov/press/01/aug/0807pollution.htm (statement by Gov. Ryan). 

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/August-1-2001.html and 

Pending Permit Applications

red bar graphic  IOWA

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 Regulations-Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations

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

  • 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. EPA 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   

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

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

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 TMDLss.  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

Dept. of Envtl. Conservation

Environmental Board Meeting

  • A meeting of the Environmental Board will be held at 2:00 p.m., Aug. 20, in Conference Room 1417 of the Department’s main offices at 625 Broadway, Albany, New York. The Environmental Board will consider the following rulemaking actions of the DEC:

    6 NYCRR Part 380: Disposal of certain radioactive wastes 
    6 NYCRR Part 208: Landfill Gas Rule 
    6 NYCRR Subpart 225-3: Fuel Composition and Use-Gasoline with Part 200, General Provisions 
    6 NYCRR Part 800: Classification of waterbodies

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  

ALJ Rulings

Environmental Notice Bulletin (Permit Applications) 

Permit Applications

Coastal Management Program Notices

red bar graphic  NORTH CAROLINA

Dept. of Env't and Natural Resources

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

Proposed Regulations-Water 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

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 

DEQ Assesses Fred Meyer Inc. $104,572 in Penalties For Diesel Fuel Leaks into Clackamas River

Air Permit Applications 

Water Quality Permit Applications

Proposed Regulations-General 

Public Notices-Cleanup Remedies

Public Notices-Remedial Actions

red bar graphic PENNSYLVANIA

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

NPDES Permit Applications

Draft Guidance Document

Corrective Amendment to 25 Pa. Code §121.1 (Air Quality)

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 regarding U.S. EPA 8-hour ozone control implementation (Notice of Drafting). 

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

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 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

Implementation of Laws Passed During the 77th Texas Legislative Session

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 with a June 8, 2001, decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia remanding the growth factors that EPA used for the electric generating unit emissions budgets in the NOx SIP Call Rule for reconsideration. In addition, there are specific issues on which DEQ is seeking comment, as noted in the background document. See generally http://www.deq.state.va.us/air/planning/noxsip.html .

  • 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

  • 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 15 day prior notification before creating a new accumulation area. 

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

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

  • Sept. 5, 6, 11 informational meetings; formal hearings will follow. The proposed rule would cut mercury emissions by 30% within five years, 50% in 10 years, and 90% in 15 years from four electric utilities in the state with significant mercury emissions. See http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/caer/ce/news/on/index.htm#art1 

Legislative Hearing on Proposed Isolated Wetlands Regulations

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

  • A European Union study found that fully 8% of all French food tested contains excessive levels of pesticides, rates matched in the EU only by Austria and the Netherlands. At least half of French-grown vegetables and grains contain residues. Britain came out relatively well, with only 2% showing excessive levels. See http://news.independent.co.uk/world/europe/story.jsp?story=87441 The European Commission said new techniques for data gathering and interpretation and increased resource commitment to safety precautions are needed. These new strategies include changes in the procedures for examining and evaluating data presented by producers, tighter timelines, better use of information technologies and an increase in resources in the Commission and the future European Food Authority (EFA). The Authority will take over the role of scientific peer review from the current Scientific Committee on Plants. A significant increase in the personnel dealing with the assessment of active substances is also foreseen in the EFA proposals, expected to be adopted by the Council and European Parliament before the end of the year. In the light of these developments, the report estimates that the evaluation program could be completed by 2008. See http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/inspections/fnaoi/reports/pesticides/mon-rep/index-en.html, http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/health_consumer/library/press/press173_en.html, and http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/health_consumer/library/press/press174_en.html 

  • The Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) has received a request from Mexico to terminate a citizen submission alleging Mexico's failure to enforce its environmental law in relation to the establishment and operation of the Cytrar hazardous waste landfill near the city of Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico (SEM-01-001). On June 4, 2001, the Party (Mexico) provided an initial response to the submission, informing the Secretariat of the existence of arbitration proceedings for resolving an international dispute related to the Cytrar hazardous waste landfill and requesting that the Secretariat proceed no further with the process for submission SEM-01-001, in accordance with Article 14(3)(a) of the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC). On June 13, the Secretariat determined that it was not provided sufficient information by Mexico to determine whether the matter raised in the Cytrar II submission and that subject to the international dispute resolution proceeding to which Mexico is party are the same. Under NAAEC Article 14(3), Mexico had the opportunity until July 31 to provide a response to the submission and/or additional information on the matter subject to the arbitration proceeding. On July 30, Mexico provided additional information concerning the matter subject to the arbitration proceeding. Mexico claims that, given "the connexity of causes [...] between the Cytrar II submission and the international dispute that is the subject of arbitration proceedings before the ICSID [International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes], it has been irrefutably proven that 'the matter (Cytrar II) is the subject of a pending judicial or administrative proceeding,' as stipulated in NAAEC Article 14(3)(a), and since the proceeding was officially instituted prior to the Cytrar II submission [...] the United Mexican States consider that the submission should be totally and absolutely terminated." Mexico did not respond to the allegations of the submission with this or its previous response. The Secretariat is reviewing Mexico's responses in accordance with NAAEC Articles 14 and 15 to determine whether it should proceed no further with the Cytrar II submission, or whether a factual record is warranted. See http://www.cec.org/citizen 

  • Nigeria's Environment and Mineral Resources Commissioner, Sola Ebiseni, said localities in the southern state of Ondo could be risking a water-borne epidemic from pollution unless steps are taken to address oil spills. 

  • The EC issued a study evaluating the economic and environmental implications of the use of environmental taxes and charges by the EU member states. It is a follow-up to the Commission´s 1997 communication on environmental taxes and charges in the "single market." See http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/enveco/taxation/environmental_taxes.htm 

  • The EU prepared a website detailing the results of EC-supported research into the safety of genetically modified organisms. It presents research carried out under successive EC Framework Programmes for Research and Technological Development from 1985 (Biotechnology Action Programme) to 2000 (Fifth Framework Programme). See http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/quality-of-life/gmo/index.html 

  • The EC released draft changes to its detergents regulations. See http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/chemicals/detergents/publicconsult/index.htm  

  • According to a report published in the London Guardian, Dja Faunal Reserve, a World Heritage site in Cameroon, is the site of unrestricted animal poaching. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,533077,00.html   

  • Friends of the Earth Middle East said that the Dead Sea is in such bad condition that it will seek U.N. protection status. See http://www.foei.org/members/Member_Middleeast.htm and http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/middle_east/newsid_1472000/1472842.stm 

  • The World Bank issued a report, "China: Air, Land and Water-Environmental Priorities for a New Millennium," setting forth a number of recommendations. The report includes the following proposals: 
    Cross-sectoral coordination: A powerful mechanism needs to be established to coordinate the work of different agencies, reduce overlaps and contradictions, maximize synergies and resolve disputes. Re-establishing an institution like the State Environmental Protection Commission of the State Council, which was dissolved during the 1998 central government reorganization, could be an option. 
    Mainstreaming: Government agencies concerned with economic and/or spatial planning, and natural resources management need to adjust their policies and objectives to: (i) fully incorporate the concept of environmentally sustainable development into their development objectives; (ii) emphasize their primary roles as "stewards" of the national estate; (iii) divest themselves, to the extent possible, of resource exploitation responsibilities; (iv) review their policies and operational programs to remove development/environment contradictions; and, (v) increase the support they provide for research, design, and implementation of environmentally sustainable development strategies. 
    Reform the approach to biodiversity conservation: To further strengthen the approach to biodiversity protection and management in China, an independent, National Parks Service should be established to manage nature reserves of national and global significance, to develop into a center of excellence for nature reserve management, to represent the country in international conservation forums, and to provide the lead and set standards for counterpart institutions at Provincial and lower levels.
    Integrated river basin management in water-scarce regions: New and separate river basin management institutions need to be created, with a governance structure that makes adequate provision for effective participation of key stakeholders-principally, provincial governments-in their decisionmaking processes. See http://www.worldbank.org/eap  

  • A group of Chinese doctors were arrested in Brussels, charged with attempted smuggling of ivory tusks from Mali. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_1475000/1475220.stm And, according to the Jakarta Post, Indonesia is failing to address trade in endangered species. See http://www.thejakartapost.com/yesterdaydetail.asp?fileid=20010731.H01 

  • The U.K.'s Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs issued a report finding that spending on pollution prevention technology has increased. The report said that, during 1999, U.K. industry spent an estimated £4.1 billion (± £800 million at 95% confidence intervals) on environmental protection, representing approximately 0.75% of total turnover. The primary spending industries were food production, beverages and tobacco products, chemicals and metals. The majority of spending was for the protection of air and water and for the treatment and disposal of solid waste. The proportion of capital expenditure spent on 'integrated' processes compared to 'end-of-pipe' pollution control has increased, nearly one-half in 1999 compared to under 30% in a 1997 survey. This reflects changes to the environmental regulatory process, where the emphasis is shifting from applying methods to clean up emissions and wastes to introducing production facilities that have been designed so that environmental protection is an 'integrated' part of the process. See http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2001/010731d.htm 

  • Argentina signed an agreement with Australia to accept nuclear waste for processing. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_1480000/1480511.stm 

  • New Zealand proposed tighter emission standards for vehicle fuels, to comport with Australian requirements and with upcoming EU provisions. See http://www.med.govt.nz/ers/oil_pet/fuelquality/discussion/index.html 

  • An Indian tribe in Nevada, the Western Shoshone, asked the U.N. to intervene in its dispute with the U.S. government. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1479000/1479559.stm 

  • An oil spill from a tanker that sank while trying to sneak through the blockade of Iraq could reach Saudi Arabian shores. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/middle_east/newsid_1479000/1479494.stm 

  • The first detailed study and mapping of coastal erosion in the U.K. is being performed. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1475000/1475905.stm 

  • Conservation groups said that too many porpoises are being killed in fishing nets in European waters. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1478000/1478269.stm 

  • Italy said it would host a summit on renewable energy Sept. 17, aimed at pre-Rio + 10 discussions and efforts by the Group of Eight nations to promote renewables. See http://www.ninambiente.it 

  • Canada's Environment Minister, David Anderson, said that imports of hazardous wastes decreased by 29% in 2000. See http://www.ec.gc.ca/Press/2001/010803_b_e.htm A working group under the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment has developed an action plan on a national regime for environmentally sound management of hazardous waste. As a priority, Environment Canada is working with Ontario and Québec, which account for 98% of the hazardous waste imported into Canada, to develop guidelines on the landfilling of hazardous wastes and contaminated soil. These guidelines will take the U.S. pre-treatment standards into account, adapting them to Canadian conditions. "Québec's new regulations for the landfilling of contaminated soils are a positive step forward," said Minister Anderson. "I look forward to continuing my work with the provinces and territories towards a Canadian solution to improve the environmentally sound management of hazardous wastes." The issue of assigning liability to hazardous waste generators and management facilities will also be addressed in cooperation with the provinces and territories based on on-going work initiated by Environment Canada. New guidelines for the management of hazardous waste will be incorporated under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) as amendments to the Export and Import of Hazardous Wastes Regulations which will be published in December 2002 for public consultation.

  • Canada is proposing new regulations to significantly reduce pollution entering waterways from metal mines. The draft regulations under the Federal Fisheries Act will require all metal mines in Canada to meet stringent new national environmental standards. The proposed Metal Mining Effluent Regulations will impose limits for metal and cyanide releases and will prevent the discharge of effluent that is acutely lethal to fish. The regulatory package also includes an Environmental Effects Monitoring program to evaluate the effects of metal mining effluent on fish, fish habitat, and the use of fisheries resources. See http://www.ec.gc.ca/press/2001/010731_n_e.htm 

  • The U.N. Development Program began to track the movement of endangered olive ridley sea turtles in India by satellite. See http://www.undp.org/dpa/frontpagearchive/2001/august/8aug01/index.html 

  • The EC asked for comments by Sept. 15 on a Working Document on the Prevention and Restoration of Significant Environmental Damage (Environmental Liability). See http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/liability/consultation.htm 

  • 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, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the U.K. are violating other directives on used batteries, environmental impact assessment, industrial accident hazard prevention, packaging waste, 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 

  • Over 2.2 million wild orchids are harvested in southern Tanzania as food sources, according to the Wildlife Conservation Society. The species could be threatened with extinction within a few years. According to the report, although all orchid species are protected by CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species), which requires certification of plants crossing international borders, scant knowledge of the trade’s existence, and a subsequent lack of enforcement of CITES rules, has led to truckloads of uncertified plants entering Zambia each day. See http://wcs.org/3422?newsarticle=49660  

red bar graphic CLIMATE CHANGE

  • Researchers at the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Davis found that greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles could increase as much as fourfold in Delhi and sevenfold in Shanghai during the next two decades if reduction efforts are not undertaken, due to a combination of population and economic growth. Yet the measures to address the problem are relatively inexpensive, the report notes. 

  • U.S. White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, interviewed on the NBC television program Meet the Press, said that President Bush's Administration will likely present new proposals for revising the Kyoto Protocol at the November follow-up meeting in Marrakech. "I'm optimistic that we'll have initiatives that we can go to Marrakech and talk about with the world leaders that will show that we're serious about solving the problem, that the Kyoto solution is really not a solution at all," he said. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35811-2001Aug5.html