ELI Primary Menu

Skip to main content

Weekly Update Volume 31, Issue 27


large red bar graphic

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


The Eighth Circuit upheld a district court decision holding a company liable for U.S. response costs incurred while cleaning up groundwater contamination at the Des Moines TCE site and awarding the United States over $4 million in cleanup costs. Ample evidence in the record supports the conclusion that the company released TCE and that it reached the soil, and the district court did not err in finding that the company's releases of TCE migrated into the groundwater and caused the contamination at issue. In addition, the district court properly allowed the testimony of the government's expert hydrologist. The company failed to show any deficiencies in the reliability of the expert's testimony. Similarly, the district court did not err in excluding several opinions of the company's expert that were neither contained in the expert's report nor disclosed to the United States prior to trial. Even if presented at trial, the opinions would not have altered the litigation's outcome. Further, the district court did not err in admitting deposition testimony offered by the government after both sides had rested their cases because the court afforded the company an adequate opportunity to respond. Moreover, the district court appropriately granted the government's request for cleanup costs. Indirect and oversight costs are recoverable in remedial actions under CERCLA, and the company failed to show that the government's attorney fees were inconsistent with the NCP. The court also rejected the company's challenge to CERCLA on Fifth Amendment grounds. United States v. Dico, Inc., No. 00-2430 (8th Cir. Sept. 19, 2001) (23 pp.).


The Eighth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of  property owners' claim that a consulting firm negligently announced that land neighboring the owner's property was suitable as a potential landfill site even though the land was farmland and, thus, could not be used for a landfill. The landowners claimed that this announcement lowered the value of their land, which they sought to convert to a residential subdivision. A district court held that the landowners' claim was not ripe because no landfill site has yet been selected, rendering the complaint speculative. However, the landowners did not allege that the landfill, if sited next to their property, might produce harm. Rather, they claimed that the announcement of the neighboring land as a potential site has directly and immediately harmed them by making their property less valuable for development and driving away potential purchasers. Nevertheless, the owners failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The firm did not owe a duty to the property owners, and it did not supply the information to the property owners or for their benefit. Further, the owners did not rely on that information in making any particular decision. The lower court, therefore, properly dismissed the case. Vogel v. Foth & Van Dyke Associates, Inc., No. 01-1070 (8th Cir. Sept. 17, 2001) (6 pp.).


The Eighth Circuit held that most of a company's claimed losses arising from the need to repair defective pipe welds that a laboratory had failed to discover were not property damages covered by the laboratory's insurance policy. The company did not argue that the defective pipes burst or caused accidental injury to surrounding property as a result of the laboratory's negligent inspection. Rather, the company claimed that incorporation of the defectively welded pipe sections into a partially completed pipe system was covered property damage and, thus, all direct and consequential costs resulting from that damage are covered losses. However, several courts construing the definition of "property damage" have concluded that the mere incorporation of a defective component is not property damage because it does not result in physical injury. Further, recent cases demonstrate that the Supreme Court of Missouri would likely hold that there is no property damage unless and until the incorporation of a defective product or component results in the physical injury to tangible property in at least some part of the system. Likewise, the costs of repairing the defective welds, standing alone, are not covered injuries. In addition, although the laboratory settled with the company for over $2 million, paying $125,000 and satisfying the remainder of its settlement obligation by assigning its rights against its insurer to the company, Missouri law limits the company's recovery to that portion of the settlement that reflects the laboratory's liability for covered losses. Therefore, because the insurer already paid for those losses, the district court's order requiring the insurer to pay the entire settlement amount was vacated. Esicorp, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., No. 00-2810 (8th Cir. Sept. 17, 2001)  (7 pp.).


The Federal Circuit held that the Emergency Low Income Housing Preservation Act's (ELIHPA's) and the Low-Income Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act's (LIHPRHA's) mortgage prepayment restrictions did not effect a per se taking of residential apartment building owners' property. The Acts prohibit the prepayment of owners’ federally subsidized mortgage loans after 20 years without pre-approval from HUD. Arguing that the Acts abrogated their contractual rights to prepay their mortgages and, thus, to convert their federally regulated housing into market-rate residences, the owners sued the United States for breach of contract and for just compensation under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The contract claims were ultimately dismissed for lack of privity. As for the owners' takings claims, the trial court ruled that the owners were required to request permission from HUD to prepay their mortgages, thereby exhausting their administrative remedies, before their takings claims would be justiciable. However, this case falls squarely into the futility exception. Because the trial court’s findings during the damages trial of the breach of contract action, as well as the United States’ own housing data, conclusively establish that HUD would have had no discretion under the statutory requirements of ELIHPA and LIHPRHA to permit the owners to prepay their mortgages, it would have been futile for the owners to file prepayment requests with HUD. Accordingly, the owners' takings claims were ripe for review.  Nevertheless, the application of ELIHPA and LIHPRHA to this case does not constitute a per se taking. The prepayment restrictions are merely intended to enhance an existing tenant’s possessory interest and do not authorize a permanent physical occupation of the owners’ property. Cienega Gardens v. United States, No. 00-5104 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 18, 2001) (17 pp.).


The D.C. Circuit upheld a district court decision denying a biomedical association's motion to intervene in an alternative research group's challenge of a USDA animal research regulation as well as the association's motion to vacate a subsequent stipulated dismissal entered between the USDA and the research group. The case arose after the alternative research group filed a petition for rulemaking requesting that the USDA amend the definition of "animal" to remove the definition's current exclusion of birds, mice, and rats bred for use in research. While its petition was pending, it filed a complaint in district court, alleging that the definition violated the Animal Welfare Act. The biomedical association, which uses birds, rats, and mice in research, filed a motion to intervene as of right. The USDA and the alternative research group then entered into a stipulation of dismissal that provides that the USDA will grant the group's petition to amend the definition and will initiate and complete rulemaking within a reasonable time. The association then filed a motion to vacate the stipulation, but the district court denied its motion to vacate the stipulation as well as its motion to intervene. The association then appealed. The denial of intervention as of right is an appealable, final order regardless of the merits of the claim for intervention as of right. Similarly, because the court can potentially grant the association effective relief, its appeal of the stipulated dismissal is not moot. Nevertheless, the association's concerns about the terms of the stipulated dismissal are insufficient to constitute an interest requiring intervention. It is not precluded from participating in the rulemaking, and, if the USDA decides to issue a final rule, the association may challenge that rule. Consequently, because the district court correctly denied intervention, the association is not a party to the action and it lacks standing to appeal the stipulated dismissal. Alternative Research & Development Foundation v. Veneman, No. 00-5438 (D.C. Cir. Sept. 7, 2001) (7 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 its federal nitrogen oxide (NOx) budget trading program regulations to revise the allowance allocations for certain NOx budget units subject to the program. 66 FR 48567 (9/21/01).

  • EPA proposed NESHAPs for hydrochloric acid (HCl) production facilities, including HCl production at fume silica facilities. 66 FR 48173 (9/18/01). 

  • EPA withdrew a final rule approving Alaska's operating permits program due to adverse comments. 66 FR 48357 (9/20/01). 

  • EPA approved a revision to the California state plan for implementing the emissions guidelines applicable to existing municipal solid waste landfills. 66 FR 48355 (9/20/01). 

  • EPA approved South Carolina's  CAA §§111(d)/129 plan to implement and enforce the emissions guidelines for existing hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerator units. 40 CFR pt. 62, 66 FR 48564 (9/21/01). 

  • EPA approved the Washington Department of Ecology's request, and the requests of four local air pollution control agencies in the state, for program approval and delegation of authority to implement and enforce specific federal NESHAP regulations that have been adopted into state law. 66 FR 48211 (9/19/01). 

  • EPA proposed to approve the Pinal County Air Quality Control District operating permit program in Arizona. 66 FR 48402 (9/20/01). 

  • EPA redesignated Klamath Falls, Oregon, from nonattainment to attainment for carbon monoxide. 66 FR 48349 (9/20/01). 

red bar graphic  HAZARDOUS & SOLID WASTES:

  • EPA entered into a proposed administrative order on consent in connection with the Red Panther Pesticide Superfund site in Clarksdale, Mississippi. 66 FR 48058 (9/17/01). 

red bar graphic  NATIONAL FORESTS:

  • The Forest Service announced that it is proposing to issue an interim directive to guide its employees in complying with NEPA and the CEQ regulations for issuance of a special use authorization involving administrative changes where no changes are proposed in authorized activities or facilities. 66 FR 48412 (9/20/01). 

red bar graphic  PESTICIDES:

  • EPA announced the availability of a pesticide registration notice entitled Disposal Instructions on Non-Antimicrobial, Residential/Household Use Pesticide Product Labels. 66 FR 48462 (9/20/01).

red bar graphic  RISK ASSESSMENT:

  • EPA announced the availability of an external review draft report entitled Trichloroethylene Health Risk Assessment: Synthesis and Characterization. 66 FR 48257 (9/19/01).

  • EPA and the Consumer Product Safety Commission announced the availability of draft sampling and analysis protocols to collect and analyze dislodgeable residues of arsenic, chromium, and copper from chromated copper arsenate pressure-targeted playground equipment and soil residues of arsenic, chromium, and copper in soils beneath such equipment. 66 FR 48428 (9/20/01). 


  • OSM proposed to approve an amendment to Indiana's regulatory program under SMCRA. 66 FR 48390 (9/20/01). 

  • OSM proposed to approve an amendment to Louisiana's regulatory program under SMCRA. 66 FR 48396 (9/20/01). 

  • OSM proposed to approve an amendment to Texas' regulatory program under SMCRA. 66 FR 48396 (9/20/01). 


  • United States v. Fullco Lumber Co., No. CV-01-J-1726-J (N.D. Ala. July 11, 2001). A settling CERCLA defendant must pay $320,000, plus interest, in past U.S. response costs incurred at or in connection with the Fullco Lumber Co., Inc., Superfund site in Haleyville, Alabama, and a second settling CERCLA defendant must pay $68,000 in past U.S. response costs; both must pay to EPA 100% of the net sales proceeds of the transfer of the property. 66 FR 48064 (9/17/01). 

  • United States v. JCI Jones Chemicals, Inc., No. 01-CF-6426 T(F) (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2001). A settling CERCLA defendant must pay $30,688.70 in past U.S. response costs incurred at the Jones Chemicals, Inc., Superfund site in the Village of Caledonia, New York, must pay all future costs incurred at the site, and must perform the cleanup at the site by implementing EPA's selected remedy, which includes the remediation of contaminated soil and groundwater, at an estimated cost of $2.3 million. 66 FR 48065 (9/17/01). 

  • United States v. Metropolitan Council, No. 99-CV-1105 (D. Minn. Sept. 4, 2001). A previously approved consent decree concerning a settling CAA defendant that violated the Act at its wastewater treatment plant in St. Paul, Minnesota, was amended by modifying the technology to be used for a supplemental environmental project. 66 FR 48065 (9/17/01). 

  • United States v. R&R Distributing Co., No. 1-00-0109 (M.D. Tenn. Aug. 17, 2001). A settling RCRA defendant that violated Tennessee's UST regulations must pay a $120,000 civil penalty. 66 FR 48066 (9/17/01).

  • United States v. Advanced Resin Systems, Inc., No. H-99-4357 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 24, 2001). A settling CERCLA defendant must pay $350,000 in past U.S. response costs incurred in connection with the Archem site in Texas. 66 FR 48479 (9/20/01).

  • United States v. Alcolac, Inc., No. 01-4097 (AJL) (D.N.J. Aug. 28, 2001). Several settling CERCLA defendants must pay $233,000 in past U.S. response costs incurred in connection with the PJP Superfund site in Jersey City, New Jersey. 66 FR 48479 (9/20/01).

  • United States v. Atlantic Richfield Co., No. H-98-0408 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 6, 2001). Several settling CERCLA defendants must pay $120 million in U.S. and Texas response costs incurred in connection with the Sikes Disposal Pits Superfund site in Crosby, Texas. 66 FR 48479 (9/20/01).

  • United States v. Ciba Specialty Chemicals Corp., No. 01-CV-4223 (D.N.J. Sept. 4, 2001). Settling CERCLA defendants must pay $250,000 in U.S. response costs incurred in connection with the Ciba-Geigy Superfund site in Toms River, New Jersey, and must implement cleanup actions relating to source control and soils at the site. 66 FR 48480 (9/20/01).

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

large red bar graphic

Since the tragic events of September 11, Congress has unified to address the well being and safety of our country. Congress quickly and unanimously passed legislation appropriating funds for the response efforts in New York and Washington, authorizing and funding the impending military operations, and bolstering domestic safety. Although Congress undertook some necessary action on the annual appropriations bills, other legislative issues, such as the environment, have understandably been set aside. ELR Update will continue to provide timely coverage of environmental legislation as it arises in Congress, but such activity may be scarce in the weeks and months ahead as Congress responds to the crucial issues before it. A safe and clean environment will again be an issue before Congress, but only after Congress has done what it can to assure our strong and secure nation.

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

large red bar graphic

red bar graphic ALABAMA

Dept. of Envtl. Management

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality

  • ADEM proposes to revise Administrative Code Rule 335-6-10-.11 to establish nutrient water quality criteria for Lake Martin, Yates Lake, Thurlow Lake, Guntersville Lake, Wheeler Lake, Wilson Lake, Pickwick Lake, Little Bear Creek Lake, and Cedar Creek Lake and to revise the existing nutrient water quality criterion for Walter F. George Lake. ADEM also proposes to amend Rule 335-6-11-.02 to revise the water use classifications for the other stream segments identified above. See www.adem.state.al.us/RegsPermit/PropRules/proprule.htm Hearing Oct. 30. See http://www.adem.state.al.us/RegsPermit/PropRules/hearing.htm 

Proposed General NPDES Permits

Public Notices–Permit Applications 










Daily Ozone Forecast

Jefferson County (Birmingham) Dept. of Health

Daily Air Quality Index

red bar graphic ALASKA

Development of Spill Regulations for Non-tanker Vessels and Railroads 

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

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

red bar graphic  ARIZONA

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

October Stakeholder Meeting(s) for Drywell General Permit

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality

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

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

  • Water Infrastructure Finance Authority (18 A.A.C. 15). The Water Infrastructure Finance Authority of Arizona (WIFA) is a self-supporting public financing agency that provides financial and technical assistance to drinking water and waste water facilities. WIFA pays administrative costs from either income or a maximum of 4% of federal capitalization grants. This rulemaking will allow for more timely processing of applications for financial or technical assistance, and will streamline the process used by WIFA to determine which systems have the greatest need. Hearing Sept. 18; comments due Sept. 20. See http://www.sosaz.com/aar/2001/33/contents.shtm 

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

Proposed Regulations-Underground Storage Tanks

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

Air Quality Exceptional and Natural Events Policy

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

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

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

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

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

Water Quality-Opening of NPDES Update Rulemaking Docket

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

Air Quality-Proposed Regulations/Opening of Rulemaking Docket

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

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

  • Vehicle Emissions On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) Testing (18 A.A.C. 2). ADEQ will propose changes to its vehicle emissions rules in order to implement OBD (On-Board Diagnostics) testing for 1996 and newer light-duty vehicles in Areas A and B. In addition, ADEQ will propose other minor technical changes to the vehicle emissions rules. Hearings Oct. 15 and 16; comments due Oct. 17. See http://www.adeq.state.az.us/lead/osc/draftrules.html and http://www.sosaz.com/aar/2001/37/contents.shtm 

  • Roadside Diesel Testing Pilot Program. The rule will implement a pilot program for roadside diesel testing
    according to Sections 10 and 19 of Chapter 371, Laws 2001 (HB2538). The pilot program would be implemented by contractors interested in participating in the permanent roadside diesel testing program under A.R.S. §49-542.06. Hearing Oct. 15, comments due Oct. 16. See http://www.sosaz.com/aar/2001/37/contents.shtm 

Intel Ocotillo Project XL Renewal Update

Safe Drinking Water Workshops Announced

Drinking Water-Monitoring Assistance Program Current, Proposed Fees

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

Development of an Aquifer Water Quality Standard for 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 Regulations-Air Quality

  • The Department has drafted a general minor source air permit for all animal/human remains incinerator facilities to be located within the state. This permit will be issued to interested facilities in lieu of a full minor source air permit. The permit has been written such that it will be applicable to a broad range of animal/human remains incinerator facilities. Any facility which does not meet the requirements for obtaining a general permit or wishes to obtain an individualized minor source permit will be required to obtain a minor source air permit for the site. Comments due Sept. 24. See http://www.adeq.state.ar.us/custsvs/pa/default.htm 

Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste

  • Proposed revisions to Regulation No. 23 (Hazardous Waste Management). The changes to Regulation No. 23 are based on federal revisions to hazardous waste management regulations enacted between Oct. 20, 1999, and May 16, 2001, and the addition of three abandoned hazardous substance sites to the Arkansas Remedial Action Trust Fund Priority List for investigation and cleanup. The three sites are: Baird Manufacturing Inc., Clarendon; Amity Lacquer Paint and Chemical Manufacturing Co., Amity; and Red River Aluminum, Stamps. The changes also include: U.S. EPA's decision to provide increased flexibility to facilities which manage low-level mixed waste and technologically enhanced naturally occurring and/ or accelerator-produced radioactive material containing hazardous waste. Public Hearing Oct. 2; comments due Oct. 16. Comments may be submitted to reg-comment@adeq.state.ar.us 

Emergency Regulation-Hazardous Waste

  • Commission has decided to adopt a federal decision delisting remediation wastes generated by Tenneco Automotive, Inc. of Paragould, Greene County. DEQ determined Aug. 24 that an emergency condition existed at the Tenneco Automotive, Inc. site, also known as the Monroe Auto Sludge Pit, which contains wastes from an electroplating facility. The purpose of the rulemaking is to exempt specific remediation wastes at the Monroe Auto Sludge Pit from further management as hazardous wastes and to expedite cleanup and closure of the hazardous substance site. 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. Comments may be submitted and are due Oct. 1. 

Proposed Regulation Repeal-Safe Drinking Water

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

Self-Audit Form for Arkansas USTs and ASTs

Proposed Penalty Assessments

  • Comments due Oct. 10. CONSENT ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS: Al Richards (Alrite Septic Tank Service), Alexander Water Division, $2000 penalty; B B & B Construction Company, Inc., Hot Springs Mining Division, $250 penalty; C. J. Horner Company, Inc., Arkadelphia NPDES/Water Division, $2,000 penalty; Cooper Tire & Rubber Co., El Dorado Air Division, $6,667 penalty; Eaton Moery Environmental Services, Inc., Wynne Solid Waste Division, $15,000 penalty, Escrow $5,000; Edie Construction Company, Malvern Air Division, $250 penalty; Hillcrest Camshaft Service, Inc. (Original CAO) and (Amendment No. 1 to CAO), Little Rock Hazardous Waste Division, $16,125 penalty; International Paper Camden Mill, Camden NPDES/Water Division, no penalty; City of Marshall, Marshall NPDES/Water Division, $2,000 penalty; Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company (Amendment No. 1 to CAO), Little Rock NPDES/Water Division, no penalty; Pulaski County SID #221, Wrightsville NPDES/Water Division, no penalty; Ward's Asbestos Removal, Inc., North Little Rock Air Division, $675 penalty; Willamette Industries, Inc. (Amendment No. 2 to CAO), Malvern Air Division, no penalty; NOTICE OF VIOLATION: Falcon Jet Corporation (Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation), Little Rock Regulated Storage Tank Division, $500 penalty; D. B. Hill (D. B. Hill Contractor), Little Rock Regulated Storage Tank Division, $500 penalty; North Little Rock Water Department (Crystal Hill Pump Station), North Little Rock Regulated Storage Tank Division, $500 penalty; North Little Rock Water Department (Montgomery Pump Station), North Little Rock Regulated Storage Tank Division, $500 penalty. 

red bar graphic CALIFORNIA

Air Resources Board

Public Hearing to Consider Adoption and Amendment to the Vapor Recovery Certification and Test Procedure Regulations-Oct. 25

  • Since 1975, the ARB has adopted certification and test procedures for vapor recovery systems for gasoline dispensing facilities. These procedures require vapor recovery equipment manufacturers to demonstrate compliance with the applicable performance standards or specifications through operational and performance testing. The Board on March 23, 2000, approved the enhanced vapor recovery (EVR) regulations, which represented substantial change to the vapor recovery certification program. The purpose of EVR was to seek additional emission reductions by increasing the stringency of performance standards and specifications, to improve the certification process by increasing the performance and reliability of vapor recovery equipment, and to re-evaluate currently certified systems. These new requirements will be phased in over the next several years to promote an orderly transition. See http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/vrmth01/vrmth01.htm and http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/vrmth01/Notice.htm 

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

  • Oct. 25. The objective of the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Fee Regulation (Fee Regulation) is to recover the State's costs and, where necessary, assist the local air pollution control and air quality management districts (districts) in recovering the costs of implementing and administering the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Information and Assessment Act. The fees assessed through this regulation are used to inventory air toxics emissions, prioritize facilities, prepare risk assessments, review risk assessments, notify the public of potential health risks from exposure to the emissions, and provide guidance to the facilities for reducing the potential risk from exposure to the emissions. The regulation specifically allocates the state's costs among the districts, and for 2001-2002, establishes facility fees for the five districts that have requested the ARB to adopt their facility fee schedules. The staff proposes amendments to the Fee Regulation which will recover approximately $900,000 in state costs to implement the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Program in fiscal year 2001-2002. This represents more than an 80% reduction from fiscal year 1993-1994 in state revenues to implement and administer the program. This is a direct result of legislative changes to the Program, as well as changes that have streamlined the Program. The proposed amendments are summarized below.

    Adoption of New Fee Schedules for Fiscal Year 2001-2002

    The state portion of the fees has been revised to reflect the changes in the number of facilities per fee category in each district based on the current status of facility risk. This revision results in a decrease of $180,000 in fees that will be collected for fiscal year 2001-2002 from last year. Fee Schedules for five districts that have requested the ARB to include recovery of their district Program costs in the Fee Regulation were updated for fiscal year 2001-2002. These five districts are the Antelope Valley, Great Basin Unified, Lassen County, and Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control Districts, and the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District.

    Delegation of Annual Update of the Fee Regulation to ARB Executive Officer

    The staff is proposing that the Board delegate authority for the administration of the annual Air Toxics Hot Spots fee program to the Executive Officer of the ARB. This will convert the update of the annual State Program costs and collection of the fees into an annual administrative process beginning in fiscal year 2002-2003. The fees assessed in future years will use the current method of calculating the fees. This proposal will streamline the annual fee update and collection process, provide districts and facilities more time to collect, review, and update the toxic emission data used to estimate the fees, and allow more flexibility in administering the program. This will allow the staff to reduce the amount of resources needed to administer the fee program and to devote more resources towards the actual goals of the "Hot Spots" program. These goals include identifying the sources of toxic air pollution emissions in California and gaining a better understanding of the risks posed by toxic air pollutants. Information on the assessment, collection, and use of the fees will still be available to the public via an annual status report on the fee program.

    New Option for Recovery of District Program Costs

    A new method for recovering district program costs is being proposed for districts that do not adopt local Hot Spots fee regulations beginning in fiscal year 2002-2003. This proposed amendment will authorize such districts to recover district program costs up to, but not to exceed, the State Program cost on a per-facility basis, from facilities that are subject to the State Fee Regulation. An accounting of the district Program costs for districts using this provision will be included in the annual status report on the fee regulation.
    See http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/hotspots/01-02/01-02.htm and http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/hotspots/01-02/Notice.htm 

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

  • Oct. 25. Heavy-duty diesel vehicles, with gross vehicle weight ratings (GVWR) of 14,001 pounds and greater, contribute a large portion of California’s inventory of several key air pollutants including NOx, reactive organic gases, and PM. On-road heavy-duty diesel vehicles are estimated to account for as much as 28% of the statewide mobile source NOx inventory and 16% of the statewide mobile source PM inventory in 2010. This is of particular concern due to the relatively small population of heavy-duty diesel vehicles. In addition to heavy-duty diesel-cycle engines, the proposal will apply to both natural gas fueled engines and liquefied petroleum gas fueled engines that are derived from the diesel-cycle engine, and to medium-duty diesel engines that certify using engine-based emission standards. The proposed standards are considered optional for medium-duty diesel vehicles since those vehicles may certify to either chassis-based or engine-based emission standards. Medium-duty diesel engines are those used in vehicles with a GVWR of 8,501 pounds to 14,000 pounds. Additionally, included in the inventory of heavy-duty diesel vehicles are motor homes and school buses. The proposal will not apply to heavy-duty spark-ignited (e.g., gasoline-fueled) engines and urban bus engines. Similar requirements for the spark-ignited engines are scheduled for consideration in 2002. More stringent urban bus engine emission standards were adopted in 2000. In addition, in-use diesel fuel standards similar to those adopted by U.S. EPA are currently being developed and scheduled for consideration in 2002. See http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/HDDE2007/hdde2007.htm 

Bay Area Ozone Attainment Plan Delayed

Enhanced Vapor Recovery Technical Review Workshop

#322 Advanced Variance/Hearing Board Workshop

Voluntary Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Proposed Regulation Update-Draft Regulations

$75,000 Fine to be Paid by Garbage Hauling Company

  • See http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/nr091801.htm An investigation by the ARB showed that Waste Management Collection & Recycling, Inc. of Santa Ana failed to properly self-inspect their diesel trucks to assure the trucks met state smoke emission standards. ARB found 43 vehicles that had not been subjected to the PSI inspections. Of those that were tested, Waste Management used a smoke opacity meter that was not in proper working order. 

Dept. of Toxic Substances Control

Schools Hazardous Waste Collection, Consolidation, and Accumulation Facility PBR Authorization Regulations -45-Day Public Notice and Comment Period

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

Emergency Regulations-Cathode Ray Tubes

Notice of Public Workshops for Portable Tank Regulations

Guidance Document Availability

Draft Public Participation Policy Manual

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

Department of Pesticide Regulation

Methyl Bromide Status Report

Integrated Waste Management Board

Emergency Regulations-Permit Enforcement Policy

Proposed Regulations-Playground Safety and Recycling Act Grants

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

Final Regulations-Insurance as a Financial Assurance Demonstration

Emergency Regulations-Putrescible Waste Transfer/Processing

  • Board adopted emergency regulations for the transfer/processing of putrescible waste. Previous regulations provided that if an activity only receives material that has been separated for reuse prior to receipt, and the residual amount of solid waste in this material is less than 10% of the amount separated for reuse material received by weight, it is not subject to the Board’s transfer/processing operation and facility regulations. The emergency regulations clarify that all "putrescible waste" received as separated for reuse material counts toward the "residual" amount. Activities that receive materials with a residual amount equal to or greater than 10% will be subject to the Board’s transfer/processing operation and facility regulations. Following this action, the Board received feedback from parties concerned about the potential impacts of the emergency regulations. In response to the feedback, staff brought the regulations back to the Board for re-evaluation and discussion of the issues at its Apr. 24-25 meeting. The Board directed staff to make changes to the regulations and then submit to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) with a request for a delayed effective date (length to be determined) as an emergency rulemaking. Staff is currently preparing the file for submittal to the OAL. At its Sept. 11-12, 2002, meeting, the Board directed staff to initiate a 45-day public comment period. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/Putrescible/  

Proposed Regulations-Waste Tires

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

Proposed Regulations-Nonhazardous, Nonputrescible, Industrial Waste

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

Proposed Regulations-Compostable Materials

  • Placement of solid waste facilities and operations that handle compostable materials (green material--not composted, woody material--not composted) into regulatory tiers, development of minimum standards, and adjustment of existing regulations to accommodate the above placement. Public workshops in Sept. 1999 were focused on odor monitoring and enforcement at compostable materials handling sites, as well as on regulatory concepts for the revision of the composting regulations. From early July through early Aug. 2000, in eight venues throughout the state, the Board held workshops to discuss proposed changes to the regulations. Staff analyzed the information gathered at the workshops and revised the draft regulations accordingly. In Dec. 2000, Board staff solicited feedback from an external working group and in Jan. 2001, revised the regulations based on this feedback. The Board discussed issues related to this package at its Feb. 20-22, 2001, meeting. The Board considered approval of the regulations for a 45-day public comment period at its Aug. 14-15, 2001, meeting. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/Organics/ At the meeting, the Board directed staff to initiate a 45-day public comment period. 

Proposed Regulations-LEA Grants

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

Draft Regulations-Construction & Demolition Materials

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

Draft Regulations-Closure and Post-closure Maintenance Plans

Water Resources Control Board

Emergency Regulations-Electronic Submission of Laboratory Data for UST Reports

Draft UST Cleanup Fund Cost Guidelines

TMDL Development Public Notices, Drafts

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

OEHHA Lists 5 Toxic Air Contaminants of Concern for Children

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

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

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

Update on Proposition 65 Activities

South Coast Air Quality Management District

Proposed Rule 1137-PM10 Emission Reductions From Woodworking Operations

  • The objective of this new Rule is to implement the 1997 Air Quality Management Plan (97-AQMP) control measure PRC-01 by reducing the amount of PM10 (particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter) generated from woodworking operations. Facilities that may be affected include lumberyards, cabinet making facilities, woodturning and carving shops, furniture manufacturing, and other product manufacturing operations. Common woodworking activities include sawing, planing, molding, lathing, and sanding. Many facilities currently have cyclones and/or baghouses that reduce PM10 emissions from their operations. The proposed rule seeks to reduce PM10 emissions by setting standards for existing control equipment and waste collection and disposal activities. Workshop meeting was Sept. 19. See http://www.aqmd.gov/pub_edu/notice_pr1137.html 

Proposed Amended Rule 401–Visible Emissions

  • Rule 401 was amended Sept. 1998 to allow charbroilers (excluding chain-driven and those operating with controls) to meet a Ringelmann 2 opacity standard. This standard is equivalent to the state standard and is less stringent than the AQMD Ringelmann 1 standard required for chain-driven charbroilers. The chain-driven charbroilers can reduce opacity through the use of a catalyst, as required by Rule 1138. However, there has yet to be identified a cost-effective control technology for under-fired charbroilers. The Ringelmann 2 standard for charbroilers expires this month. The proposed rule amendment would extend the Ringelmann 2 standard for another four years. AQMD anticipates the adoption of Proposed Rule 1138.1 – Control of Emissions from Under-fired Charbroiler Restaurant Operations, pending identification of cost-effective controls, in the spring of 2002. Control equipment for under-fired charbroilers is currently being laboratory and field tested. Proposed Rule 1138.1 would have a phased-in implementation and thus the  proposed extension of the Ringelmann 2 opacity standard for another four years would allow time for the rule’s adoption and implementation. See http://www.aqmd.gov/pub_edu/pcn_par401.html 

Proposed Amended Rule 1421–Control of Perchloroethylene Emissions from Dry Cleaning Systems

  • The AQMD MATES II study identified perchloroethylene (perc) as a key toxic compound driving the health risk impacts in the Basin. As a result of the study, the AQMD Governing Board approved an Air Toxics Control Plan for the region in March 2000. The Plan contains a control measure (AT-STA-02–Further Reductions of Perchloroethylene Emissions from Dry Cleaning Operations), calling for a 95% reduction of perc emissions. Proposed amendments to Rule 1421 would completely phase out the use of perc dry cleaning system by 2011 or later and only allow the use of non-perc alternative technologies. Alternative technologies include: wet cleaning, solvent cleaning, and liquid carbon dioxide (CO2). The proposed amendments to Rule 1421 would also preclude upon adoption any facility from operating a dip tank and any new facility from operating a perc dry cleaning system. For existing facilities, the proposed amendments would also preclude in 2003 or later the addition of any perc dry cleaning system and in 2004 or later, the operation of any converted machine. In 2006 or later, only closed-loop perc dry cleaning machines equipped with primary and secondary control systems would be allowed to operate until the use of perc is phased out. See http://www.aqmd.gov/pub_edu/notice_r1421.html 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 102-Definitions of Terms

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

Proposed Amendments to Rule 1124-Aerospace Assembly Component Manufacturing Operations

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

red bar graphic COLORADO

Air Quality Control Commission

Rulemaking Hearings

  • Nov. 15 hearing regarding proposed revisions to the ambient air quality standards regulation in support of the redesignation request for the Lamar PM10 Nonattainment Area and Maintenance Plan. See http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/op/Lamar_PM10_03_01.htm 

  • Nov. 15 hearing to consider proposed revisions to Regulation No. 3, Part B, to implement the requirements of 1999 House Bill 1351. 99HB1351 established requirements for managers of public lands to submit emission inventories for specified sources and activities that have an impact on federal Class I areas in Colorado. Federal land management agencies are required to provide such an inventory to the Commission by Dec. 31, 2001 and at least every five years thereafter. The inventory must include emissions from activities in Colorado and other states that may affect visibility in Colorado’s Class I areas. See http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/op/reg311-15.htm 

  • Nov. 15 hearing regarding proposed revisions to the ambient air quality standards regulation in support of the redesignation request for the Steamboat PM10 Nonattainment Area and Maintenance Plan. See http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/op/steam_PM10_03_01.htm 

Water Quality Control Commission

Rulemaking Hearings

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

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

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

red bar graphic CONNECTICUT

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality-General Permit for the Discharge of Nitrogen from Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs)

  • All POTWs identified in the general permit will be required to treat for the removal of nitrogen to meet an annual nitrogen mass loading limit consistent with the individual wasteload allocations established in the TMDL or purchase equivalent nitrogen credits in accordance with the Nitrogen Credit Exchange Program established pursuant to Public Act 01-180. The annual effluent limit for each POTW shall decrease each year over the term of the permit. This permit covers all areas of the State of Connecticut and contains an individual nitrogen discharge limit specific to the following POTWs and municipalities served by these POTWs: Ansonia; Beacon Falls; Branford; Bridgeport (East); Bridgeport (West); Bristol; Canton; Cheshire; Cromwell (Mattabasset); Danbury; Derby; East Hampton; East Hartford (MDC); East Windsor; Enfield; Fairfield; Farmington; Glastonbury; Greenwich; Griswold (Jewett City); Groton City; Groton Town; Hartford (MDC); Killingly; Ledyard; Litchfield; Manchester; Mansfield (University of Connecticut); Meriden; Middletown; Milford (Beaver Brook); Milford (Housatonic); Montville; Naugatuck (Treatment Co.); New Canaan; New Haven (East Shore); New London; New Milford; Newtown; Norfolk; North Canaan; North Haven; Norwalk; Norwich; Plainfield (North); Plainfield (Village); Plainville; Plymouth; Portland; Putnam; Ridgefield (South St.); Rocky Hill (MDC); Salisbury; Seymour; Shelton; Simsbury; South Windsor; Southbury (Training School); Southington; Sprague; Stafford Springs; Stamford; Stonington (Borough); Stonington (Mystic); Stonington (Pawcatuck); Stratford; Suffield; Thomaston; Thompson; Torrington; Vernon; Wallingford; Waterbury; West Haven; Westport; Windham; Windsor Locks; Windsor (Poquonock MDC); and Winsted. Informational meetings Oct. 2, 3, and 4. Public hearing Oct. 24. See http://dep.state.ct.us/wtr/ncp/pngp.htm (notice) and http://dep.state.ct.us/wtr/ncp/ndrgp.pdf (proposed permit)

Compost Erosion Control Study

Permit Hearings-Calendar

red bar graphic DELAWARE

Dept. of Nat. Resources and Envtl. Control

Delaware To Lower Permissible Arsenic Levels in Drinking Water To 10 Parts Per Billion, Becomes First State To Do So

Notices of Violation

Regulatory Update/Public Notices

red bar graphic FLORIDA

Dept. of Environmental Protection

Sept. 25, 26, and Oct. 10 Hearings-State Water Revolving Fund

  • To receive testimony and public comment and to take final action on the management of the FY 2002 State Revolving Fund loan priority list for water pollution control projects under Rule Chapter 62-503, Florida Administrative Code and incipient Agency policy. Martin County has prepared planning documents for a stormwater construction project and has requested that the Department hold a hearing for the purpose of adding the project to the fundable portion of the priority list. Approximately $322 million is projected to be available for assignment to qualifying wastewater, stormwater, or nonpoint source projects. The Department may adopt, modify, or deny the proposed actions at the hearing. Projects may be added to the priority list to be adopted pursuant to incipient Agency policy, if requests and required documentation are approved by the Department by Sept. 26, 2001. Under the incipient Agency policy, preconstruction loans for stormwater project planning and design may be authorized; certain parts of the Rule having to do with document submittal and priority list adoption schedules have been abrogated or revised; the limit on funds available for stormwater loans has been lifted; and project eligibility has been expanded to include publicly and privately owned non-point source pollution control activities as defined in the §§319 and 320 of the amended federal CWA.

Proposed Regulations-Fiber Optic Cable Placement

  • Sept. 28 meeting in West Palm Beach to continue discussion and receive public comments on proposed rule amendments to Chapter 18-21, F.A.C., to establish provisions for the placement of fiber optic cables on sovereign submerged lands in the territorial sea of the Atlantic Ocean. This workshop will be held in conjunction with a rule development workshop (at the same time and location as above) to discuss proposed amendments to Section 62-341.625, F.A.C., which will provide for a new Noticed General Environmental Resource Permit for installation of offshore fiber optic cables (Docket No. 01-10R). A copy of the agenda may be obtained by contacting: Jeanese McCree, Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Water Facilities, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS #2500, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400, (850)921-9901, e-mail: Jeanese.McCree@dep.state.fl.us or fax (850)488-6579.

Proposed Regulations-Phosphorus Water Quality Standard 

  • Workshop meeting Oct. 2-3,  West Palm Beach.  To discuss revisions to Rules 62-302.530 and 62-302.540, F.A.C., pertaining to the establishment of a phosphorus water quality criterion for the Everglades Protection Area pursuant to the Everglades Forever Act. A copy of the agenda may be obtained by contacting: Kristi Mader, Department of Environmental Protection, Everglades Technical Support Section, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS #3560, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400, (850)921-5213.

red bar graphicGEORGIA

Dept. of Natural Resources, Envtl. Protection Division

Air Permit Applications

red bar graphicHAWAII

Office of Envtl. Quality Control

Air Quality-Permit Applications

Environmental Impact Notices

red bar graphicIDAHO

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Outstanding Resource Waters-Petitions

Pending Permit Applications

red bar graphicILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board (PCB)

Proposed Regulations

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

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

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

  • In the Matter of: Proposed Regulated Recharge Area for Pleasant Valley Public Water District, Proposed Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 617–The Board July 26 adopted a final opinion and order in this rulemaking to amend the Board’s public water supply regulations to establish the first regulated recharge area under section 17.3 of the Act (415 ILCS 5/17.3 (2000)). See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Meeting/minutes.htm

  • In the Matter of: Proposed Amendments to Tiered Approach to Corrective Action Objectives (TACO): 35 Ill. Adm. Code 742 (MTBE)–The Board July 26 adopted a final opinion and order in this matter to amend the standards for tiered approach to corrective action objectives (35 Ill. Adm. Code 742). On Sept. 6, the Board adopted a first notice opinion and order in this rulemaking. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/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. On Sept. 6, the Board adopted a first notice opinion and order in this rulemaking to amend the Board’s public water supply regulations. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Meeting/agenda.htm 

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

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

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

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

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

  • 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.

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

Open Regulatory Dockets

red bar graphic  INDIANA

Dept. of Envtl. Management

Final Regulations-Air Quality

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

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

Final Regulations-Water Quality

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

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

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

Proposed Regulations-Wastewater Management

  • IDEM has developed draft rule language for new rules concerning management of wastewater. Cleaning of sewage disposal systems, wastewater transportation, wastewater disposal, and related business activities are included in the scope of the draft rules. The new article, 327 IAC 7.1, will replace 327 IAC 7. The new rule language will allow the agency to meet the requirements of 40 C.F.R. pt. 503 and 40 C.F.R. pt. 257 subpt. A regarding the land application of wastewater. To reflect the new rules, IDEM will be repealing 327 IAC 7. See http://www.in.gov/legislative/register/Vol24/09Jun/11ID327970007.pdf

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality

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

Proposed Regulations-Solid Waste Management

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

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


Publication Date


65 FR 42292

July 10, 2000

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

65 FR 67068

November 8, 2000

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

65 FR 81373

December 26,2000

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

66 FR 24270

May 14, 2001

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

66 FR 27218

May 16, 2001

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

66 FR 27266

May 16, 2001

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

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

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

Pending Permit Applications

red bar graphicIOWA

Environmental Protection Commission

Proposed Regulations-Manure Management Plans

  • Would amend Chapter 65, “Animal Feeding Operations,” Iowa Admin. Code. This proposed amendment addresses the subject of five public hearings held across the state during December 2000, pursuant to a Notice of Intended Action published in the Iowa Administrative Bulletin on Nov. 15, 2000, as ARC 0278B. On June 19, 2000, the Commission voted to deny a petition for rulemaking filed by 16 Iowa legislators urging the preconstruction filing of manure management plans for confinement feeding operations that did not need construction permits, but directed that the Animal Agriculture Consulting Organization be consulted and that public hearings be held to seek input. The proposed amendment would require the owner of a planned confinement feeding operation, who is not a permit applicant but who still must file a manure management plan, to file the plan at least 30 days prior to initiating construction. Under this proposal, the manure management plan must include documentation that the plan has been filed with the county where the operation is located and information pertaining to separation distances and ownership/management of other nearby operations. Comments due Oct. 17. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB010919.html 

Final Regulations-Water Quality

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

Final Regulations-Animal Feeding Operations

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

Final Regulations-Sanitary Disposal Projects

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

red bar graphic  KANSAS

Department of Health & Environment, Division of Environment

KDHE "Kansas Environmental News"

red bar graphicKENTUCKY

Dept. for Envtl. Protection, Division of Air Quality

Permit Applications/Hearing Notices 

Dept. for Envtl. Protection, Division of Water

Permit Applications

Proposed Regulations-Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations

Proposed 401 KAR 8:022. Sanitary surveys

  • Subject of Sept. 25 hearing. KRS 224.10-100 and 224.10-110 authorize the Cabinet to promulgate administrative regulations for the regulation and control of the purification of water for public and semipublic use. This administrative regulation contains the requirements of a systematic program for conducting sanitary surveys by the cabinet and requirements on the public water system subject to a sanitary survey. The expected benefits from the administrative regulation are: Kentucky will have an approvable program for conducting sanitary surveys of public water systems as is required by 40 C.F.R. §§142.12(b)(2) and 142.16(b). Thus, Kentucky will be able to maintain its primacy of the enforcement of the federal regulations for public water systems pursuant to 40 C.F.R. Part 141. The public hearing will be held if it is requested by at least 10 calendar days prior to Sept. 25. The request must be in writing, by five persons or by an administrative body or an association having at least five members, provided that a minimum of five persons, or one person representing an administrative body or association, agree to be present at the public hearing. See http://water.nr.state.ky.us/dow/hrgnots.htm#DW 

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

Proposed, Draft TMDLs

red bar graphicLOUISIANA

Dept. of Environmental Quality

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

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

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

Draft Five-Year Strategic Plan

Permit Applications

red bar graphicMAINE

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

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

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

Final Regulations-Air Quality

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

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

red bar graphicMARYLAND

Dept. of the Environment

Public Meetings/Hearings     

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

Water Quality Standard-Triennial Review

Ozone Forecast

red bar graphicMASSACHUSETTS

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Draft Indoor Air Sampling and Evaluation Guide

Guidelines for Determining Closure Activities at Inactive Unlined Landfill Sites

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

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

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

Draft Amendments to 310 CMR 27.00, Underground Injection Control Regulations

Guidelines for Private Drinking Water Wells

Enforcement Actions

red bar graphic  MICHIGAN

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

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

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

  • The Air Quality Division will hold a public hearing Oct. 17 on proposed revisions to Parts 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, and 11 of the Air Pollution Control Rules (ORR Nos. 2000-064EQ, 2000-065EQ, 2000-066EQ, 2000-067EQ, 2000-068EQ, 2000-069EQ, and 2000-070EQ). The proposed amendments will bring the Air Pollution Control Rules up to date with Executive Orders 1993-31 and 1995-18 by changing "commission" to "department" and correcting the department name and address, updating information regarding documents adopted by reference, and making other administrative corrections to the rules. The proposed rules can be viewed and downloaded from the Internet at www.deq.state.mi.us/AQD/rules/Proposed%20Amendments.htm . Copies of the proposed rules may also be obtained by contacting the Air Quality Division, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, 106 West Allegan Street, P.O. Box 30260, Lansing, Michigan 48909-7760. Written comments will be accepted until 5:00 p.m. on Oct. 17, 2001, and should be mailed to the address above. The public hearing will be held in the AQD Conference Room, Hollister Building, 4th floor, 106 West Allegan Street, Lansing, Michigan.

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

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

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

Permitting Calendar  

Sept. 24 Public Meeting with DEQ Director

  • A public meeting will be held at the Mt. Clemens Community Center, 300 North Groesbeck, Mt. Clemens. Two sessions will be conducted. The first session (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) will be an informal format for the public to speak with DEQ management individually on specific issues and concerns. The second session (6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.) will consist of a question and answer format to receive public comment on general environmental issues. Anyone wishing to speak at the formal session must sign a card upon arrival. Each person will have a maximum of five minutes to ask questions or make a statement, though additional time will be allotted once everyone has had a chance to speak.

Permit Applications-Air Quality

Proposed Enforcement Consent Orders

Air Quality Division Newsletter

Surface Water Quality Division Bulletin

red bar graphicMINNESOTA

Pollution Control Agency

Planned New Rules Governing Conditionally Insignificant and Conditionally Exempt Air Emissions to be codified in Minnesota Rules Chapter 7008; Amendments to Rules Governing Permits and Offsets, Chapter 7007 (Amended Notice)

  • Comments due Sept. 26. The Request for Comments notice published at State Register, Volume 25, Number 35, pages 1442-1443, February 26, 2001 (25 SR 1442), http://www.comm.media.state.mn.us/bookstore/stateregister/2535.pdf, is being amended to include the following: Upon reviewing the above referenced Request for Comments notice, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) discovered it inadvertently left out of the notice that it also plans to amend Minn. R. ch. 7011, which governs the Standards for Stationary Sources. In addition, the MPCA is changing the title of the new rules to be codified in Minn. R. ch. 7008, from Air Emission Permits to Conditionally Insignificant and Conditionally Exempt Air Emissions. The new title more clearly represents the text of the new rules. See http://statsbox.pca.state.mn.us/pca/news/newsRelease.cfm?NR=2953&type=1 

Permit Applications, Other Notices

Minnesota 2001-2005 Nonpoint Source Management Plan

red bar graphic  MISSOURI

Dept. of Natural Resources

Proposed Regulations-Sand and Gravel Operations

  • Division 40—Land Reclamation Commission, Chapter 10—Permit and Performance Requirements for Industrial Mineral Open Pit and In-Stream Sand and Gravel Operations. This rule is being amended in order to add requirements to the permit applications for in-stream sand and gravel mining operations that will comply with standards designed to protect the stream environment and adjacent properties from damage. Comments due Oct. 17. See http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/moreg/2001/v26n18/v26n18b.pdf 


Proposed Regulations-Drinking Water Quality

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

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • 10 CSR 10-6.280 Compliance Monitoring Usage. The Air Conservation Commission proposes to add new section (1), renumber original section (1), renumber and amend sections (2) and (3), and add new section (4). If the Commission adopts this rule action, it will not be submitted to U.S. EPA for inclusion in the Missouri SIP because this rule only establishes methodology and does not establish requirements. Sept. 26 public hearing; comments due Oct. 3. See http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/moreg/2001/v26n16/v26n16a.pdf  and http://www.dnr.state.mo.us/newsrel/nr02_090.htm  

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

Final Regulations-Air Quality

Final Regulations-Hazardous Waste

Emergency Regulation-Drinking Water-Grants

  • 10 CSR 60-13.010 Grants for Public Water Supply 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

Final Regulations-Air Quality

Permit Application, Public Comment Notices

red bar graphic NEBRASKA

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Proposed Regulations-General

red bar graphic NEVADA

State Environmental Commission

Proposed Permanent Regulations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

red bar graphic  NEW HAMPSHIRE

Dept. of Envtl. Services

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • Comments due Oct. 1 on a proposed rule that would require that any heavy-duty diesel engine in a motor vehicle manufactured for model year 2005 or 2006 be certified to meet the California standard for such engines before it can be sold in New Hampshire. The purpose of the rule is to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides and particulate matter by filling a 2-year gap in the federal standard and, thus, preventing any backsliding by manufacturers. Manufacturers are currently required to meet this standard and will be required to meet it after model year 2006, so this rule will not cause them to change their manufacturing process. See http://www.des.state.nh.us/ard/prpsdrul.htm 

red bar graphic NEW JERSEY

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

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

Freshwater Wetlands Regulations; Final Regulations, Proposed Regulations 

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

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

2002 Water Quality Limited Segments List 

  • DEP is requesting submission of water quality related data to support the development of the 2002 Water Quality Limited Segments List under §303(d) of the federal CWA and Subchapter 6 of the New Jersey Watershed Management Planning Rules (N.J.A.C. 7:15-6). The Water Quality Limited Segments List is used to establish priorities for implementation of water quality improvement measures including, as appropriate, development of TMDLs.  Data received through this solicitation may be used to: (1) confirm impairment of a waterbody and/or presence of a pollutant that is currently on the 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 MEXICO

Environment Department

Proposed Solid Waste Management Regulations, 20 NMAC 9.1

Proposed TMDLs

  red bar graphic  NEW YORK

Dept. of Envtl. Conservation

Proposed Revisions to Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS) Comprehensive Management Plan

  • Comments is sought from parties interested in or affected by invasive, exotic nuisance aquatic species such as: zebra mussels; eurasian watermilfoil; round goby; or others. Input is sought from the general public, natural resource trustees, municipalities, boating/sporting organizations, utilities, or other interested parties. This information is sought because the NYSDEC is revising the current ANS management plan that was first written in 1993. The plan is being revised to maintain consistency with the latest federal guidance, thus allowing NYSDEC continued access to federal funding for ANS management activities. Input regarding the environmental and socio-economic impacts of ANS species is sought from both ANS scientists and public interest groups. Productive input from individuals and groups will be essential to the NYSDEC in preparing the revised plan. The public information meeting will include brief informational presentations from NYSDEC, followed by a facilitated discussion. Interested parties that can not attend are asked to submit relevant comments to Stephen Trojanczyk, Environmental Sciences Group, 162 Eastgate Drive, Rochester, NY. 14617 Telephone: 716-756-8933. Email: tro@rochester.rr.com by Oct. 1st. See http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/enb/20010912/not0.html 

Emergency Regulations-Radioactive Waste Disposal 

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

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

Emergency Regulations-Air Quality

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

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

Draft Regulations-Air Quality-Acid Rain Control

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

Draft Enforcement Directive

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

ALJ Rulings

Environmental Notice Bulletin (Permit Applications) 

Permit Applications

Coastal Management Program Notices

red bar graphic  NORTH CAROLINA

Dept. of Env't and Natural Resources

Isolated Wetland Regulations Promulgated




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

Proposed Coastal Area Management Act Land-Use Planning Improvements 

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

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

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

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

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

Proposed Regulations-Laboratories 

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

Proposed Regulations-Coastal Management; Land Use Planning Guidelines

  • In Nov. 1998, the CRC authorized the appointment of the Land Use Plan Review Team to evaluate the CAMA land use planning program and make recommendations for improvement. Based on the recommendations submitted in September 2000, the CRC is revising its land use planning guidelines (Subchapter 07B). The revised guidelines aim to improve the quality of local plans by better supporting the purposes and goals of CAMA. 

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

Draft Nationwide Permit Certification for Surface Coal Mining

  • Presently, all surface coal mining projects receive a review by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, as well as an individual review by both OEPA and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). This proposed certification process would allow smaller surface coal mining projects to be covered under the Army Corps' Nationwide Permit 21, without individual review by OEPA. These projects would still be reviewed by ODNR's Division of Mineral Resources Management. Ohio EPA is accepting public comments on the draft certification through Oct. 5; a public hearing will be held Sept. 27. This proposed certification would allow a maximum of 3,000 linear feet of total impacts to intermittent and perennial streams, including 1,500 linear feet of previously mined streams, to encourage remining as a benefit to water quality. Under Nationwide Permit 21, a maximum of three acres of total wetland impacts would be allowable, depending on the size and quality of the wetlands. Wetland mitigation would be required to follow OEPA's wetland water quality standards. Projects that impact streams with a designation of warm-water habitat or better, or those that propose impacts above the proposed thresholds, would be required to seek an individual 401 water quality certification from OEPA, and would not be allowed under this proposed certification. See http://www.epa.state.oh.us/pic/nr/2001/sept/nwp21.html  

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

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

OEPA Actions, Notices by County

Public Meetings

Pending Air Permits

red bar graphic OKLAHOMA

Air Quality Council

Proposed Regulations

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

red bar graphic  OREGON

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • Adoption by reference of federal rules and rule amendments regarding hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPS). DEQ is also proposing to delete a rule that regulates volatile organic compound emissions from perchloroethylene dry cleaning and extend a requirement that all perchloroethylene dry cleaners monitor and maintain their pollution control equipment. Hearing was Sept. 20; comments due Sept. 27. See http://www.deq.state.or.us/news/releases/312.htm 

  • Amendment and Clarification of and Housekeeping revisions to Asbestos Rules. The proposed rule changes include a proposed nonfriable disposal rule, a demolition and renovation project survey requirement, the addition of a negative pressure enclosure requirement, and several punctuation, form, reference, and omission corrections that are considered housekeeping changes. The proposed rules also extend responsibility for proper abatement to those who "provide for" an asbestos abatement project. The proposed rules listed above also include the following proposed definitions that are intended to enhance the scope of the asbestos requirements: "accredited inspector," "negative pressure enclosure," "owner or operator," "shattered," and "survey." There are also additions to the following existing definitions that will clarify their meaning and possibly expand their scope, "asbestos abatement project," "asbestos-containing material," "friable asbestos-containing material," and "nonfriable asbestos-containing material." The proposed effective date of the proposed rule revisions is Jan. 1, 2002, following adoption by the EQC on Dec. 7, 2001. The start date of formal enforcement actions for the survey rule (OAR 340-248-0270(1)) will be delayed for 6 months so that the DEQ can ensure the regulated community knows about the survey rule and to give them time to adjust to the survey requirements. Existing staff in Medford, Coos Bay, Salem, Bend, Pendleton, and Portland will implement these rule revisions. Hearing was Sept. 18; comments due Sept. 25. See http://www.deq.state.or.us/aq/asbestos/rule_notice816.htm 

Final Regulations-Underground Injection Controls

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

Air Permit Applications 

Water Quality Permit Applications

Proposed Regulations-General 

Public Notices-Cleanup Remedies

Public Notices-Remedial Actions

red bar graphic PENNSYLVANIA

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

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

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

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

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

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

NPDES Permit Applications

red bar graphic RHODE ISLAND

Dept. of Envtl. Management

Draft Environmental Equity Policy

Upcoming Events

red bar graphic SOUTH CAROLINA

Dept. of Health and Envtl. Control

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

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

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

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

Revised Air Modeling Guidelines Available

Proposed Regulations-Hazardous Waste

  • Proposed Amendment of R.61-79, Hazardous Waste Management Regulations: U.S. EPA promulgates amendments to 40 C.F.R. pts.124, 260 through 266, 268, 270, and 273 throughout each calendar year. Recent amendments include revised standards for hazardous air pollutants for hazardous waste combustors (MACT standards); technical amendments to Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV; a new rule which allows certain generators of F006 sludges up to 180 days to accumulate without a permit under specific conditions; the vacating of previous listings for organobromine production wastes; and other minor amendments. In addition, minor typographical errors may be corrected to achieve conformity with federal regulations. These rules and other amendments have been published in the Federal Register between Sept. 30, 1999, and June 30, 2000. DHEC intends to amend R.61-79 to adopt federal amendments through June 30, 2000, to maintain conformity with federal requirements and ensure compliance with federal standards. Will be submitted to Board Oct. 11. 

  • DHEC is proposing amendments to R.61-79 to remove state provisions that are not required for federal compliance and that provide financial assurance for restoration of environmental impairment. Removal of these provisions is proposed as a result of an Apr. 4, 2000, decision of the South Carolina Court of Appeals. This amendment will remove the environmental impairment regulations that were published as proposed in the State Register on June 24, 1994, and published as final regulations in the State Register on June 23, 1995, as Document No. 1823. Affected sections are R.61-79.264, subsections .152, and .153 and cross-references at 264.140 and 265.140. Legislative review will be required. Will be submitted to Board Oct. 11. 

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

Proposed Regulations-Drinking Water Quality

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

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

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

Permit Application Notices

red bar graphic  TENNESSEE

Dept. of Environment and Conservation

Solid Waste Disposal Control Board Meeting, Oct. 2-4 Agenda

Interagency Energy Policy Work Group

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

Board Meeting Agendas, Schedules

Permit Applications

Metropolitan Nashville and Davidson County Health Department, Pollution Control Division

Air Quality Data

red bar graphic  TEXAS

Natural Resource Conservation Commission

General Permit-Stormwater Discharges from Industrial Facilities

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

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

Proposed Regulations-Underground Injection Wells

Proposed Regulations-Procedure

Proposed Regulations-RCRA Cluster Rule

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

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • HB 2912, HB 2947, and SB 688: Notice Requirements. Relating to the issuance of certain permits for the emission of air contaminants. This proposal would establish insignificant levels for agricultural facilities, de minimis levels for all other facilities, and criteria for the meaning of net increase, for the purpose of public notice. This addresses the notice and other requirements in Article 2 of HB 2912, HB 2947, and SB 688.688. This bill project has been identified as a project with a short timeline for implementation, because it affects applications for permit amendments pending before the commission on Sept. 1, 2001, or filed with the Commission on or after Sept. 1, 2001. Hearing was Sept. 20, comments due Sept. 24. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/hearings/01028a039_phn.pdf (notice), http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01028a039_pro.pdf (proposal).

Proposed Regulations-Miscellaneous

Permit Hearings

Public Hearings/Proposed Rule Tracking Log

Implementation of Laws Passed During the 77th Texas Legislative Session

red bar graphic  UTAH

Dept. of Envtl. Quality

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality

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

Permit Applications

red bar graphic VERMONT

Dept. of Envtl. Conservation

Lake Champlain Phosphorus TMDL for Vermont Portion

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

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

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

  • Nov. 7 Air Pollution Control Board meeting. See http://www.townhall.state.va.us/meeting/viewMeeting.cfm?MEETING_ID=1275 

  • 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.

  • Public hearing Oct. 3 to receive comments on a proposed revision to the SIP. The proposed revision consists of amendments to (i) a plan to reduce and maintain VOC and NOX emissions in the Richmond Ozone Nonattainment Area through the year 2007 such that they do not exceed the 1993 attainment year level; and (ii) the mobile emissions budget established by the plan for the year 2015 and beyond. The maintenance plan contains a program of contingency measures to be implemented only if any air quality monitoring station in the area records a violation of the ozone air quality standard. The amendments to the maintenance plan revise the contingency measures, as well as some of the control measures used in the mobile source budget. See http://www.townhall.state.va.us/meeting/viewMeeting.cfm?MEETING_ID=1339 

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

red bar graphic  WASHINGTON

Dept. of Ecology

Final Regulations-Air Quality

Proposed Regulations

State Environmental Policy Act Register

red bar graphic WEST VIRGINIA


Coal Reclamation Tax Increase Passed

  • S.B. 5003, passed Sept. 15 by both houses during a special session, would increase the tax from 3 to 14 cents per ton, effective Jan. 1, 2002, as a partial response to federal concerns about the state program. See http://www.legis.state.wv.us 

Dept. of Envtl. Protection

Public Notice Bulletin (Permit Applications, Proposed Regulations)


red bar graphic WISCONSIN

Dept. of Natural Resources

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

  • Public hearings Sept. 26-Oct.3. The proposed rule would cut mercury emissions by 30% within 5 years, 50% in 10 years, and 90% in 15 years from 4 electric utilities in the state with significant mercury emissions. Chapters NR 400, 405, 406, 408, 439, 445,and 446 would be revised and a new subchapter subch. II of ch. NR 446, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to the control of the atmospheric deposition of mercury, promulgated. The proposed rule contains a phased mercury reduction schedule for 4 major electric utilities covering a 15-year period. Five years after promulgation, a 30% reduction in baseline mercury emissions must be achieved by each major utility. A 50% reduction in baseline emissions is required after 10 years, and a final reduction of 90% is to be achieved after 15 years. In addition to the emission reductions by large electric utilities, the proposed rules include an emissions ceiling on mercury emissions for other utilities and large stationary sources that annually emit 10 pounds of mercury or more. See http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/caer/ce/news/on/index.htm#art1 

Proposed Regulations-Underground Injection Wells

  • Public hearings Oct. 17, 18, and 24 regarding revisions to ss. NR 600.03 and 600.04 and the creation of ch. NR 815, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to the control of underground injection wells. Proposed ch. NR 18 has been developed in response to new federal rules for Class V injection wells that went into effect on April 5, 2000. The new regulations expanded the definition of an injection well, prohibited the construction or use of a large-capacity cesspool, and prohibited the disposal of waste fluids from the repair or maintenance of motorized vehicles via an injection well. For more information, contact Richard Roth at (608) 266-2438.

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

  • Bolivia officially designated South America's largest freshwater protected area, by setting aside three wetlands totaling 17,760 square miles as protected under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. See http://www.panda.org/news/press/news.cfm?id=2490 

  • The executive director of the Nigerian Conservation Foundation said that poor land management practices cost the country at least $5 billion annually. 

  • The Inter-American Development Bank extended a $32.7 million loan to Nicaragua to promote sustainable development in watershed areas. See http://www.iadb.org/exr/PRENSA/2001/cp16001e.htm 

  • EU Agriculture Minister Franz Fischler, joined by Health and Consumer Safety Commissioner David Byrne, said that some EU politicians are making dubious claims about genetically modified foods/organisms "to echo populist stances and play on fears in order to score cheap political points." He said that what is instead needed is open discussion "about the pros and cons of biotech." 

  • France's Ministry of Environment will get a 6.4% increase in funding in 2002 under a government-introduced bill. See http://www.environnement.gouv.fr 

  • The European Commission said it would seek harmonized gasoline and diesel fuel taxes. A wide range of taxes now apply. And a report issued by the European Environment Agency said that despite rapid growth in highway traffic during the 1990s, and a significant hike in the number of automobiles and trucks in service, emissions of greenhouse gases decreased. See http://reports.eea.eu.int/term2001 

  • Federal, provincial, and territorial wildlife, forests, and fisheries and aquaculture ministers in Canada met jointly to discuss Canada's strategy to protect biodiversity. At a joint meeting, ministers reviewed progress made under the Canadian Biodiversity Strategy in the five years since it was endorsed by all governments. "The development of the Canadian Biodiversity Strategy is an example of federal-provincial-territorial cooperation at its best," said federal Environment Minister David Anderson, who co-chaired the meeting with Ontario Natural Resources Minister John Snobelen. "We now face the challenge of moving forward in a manner that is logical, practical and within our financial capabilities. We recognize the importance of our cooperation and concerted efforts in preparing for the Earth Summit 2002 and ultimately in protecting our country's rich biodiversity." Ministers agreed to collaborate on four implementation priorities for biodiversity issues of Canada-wide concern. The priorities are: to develop a biodiversity science agenda; enhance capacity to report on status and trends; deal with invasive alien species; and engage Canadians by promoting stewardship. See http://www.ec.gc.ca/Press/2001/010919_n_e.htm 

  • The Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) dismissed a citizen submission that alleges failure on the part of Mexico in its enforcement of environmental laws with respect to a civil dispute arising from contamination of groundwater in Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico. The submission (SEM-01-003) was filed by the company Mercerizados y Teñidos de Guadalajara, S.A. on 14 June, 2001. It claims that, in a civil trial, Mexico refused to treat a technical opinion issued by the Federal Attorney for Environmental Protection (Procuraduría Federal de Protección al Ambiente--Profepa) as valid evidence. The Profepa opinion related to damages caused to Mercerizados by groundwater contamination that the submission says was caused by the firm Dermet, S.A. de C.V., a producer of pesticides and fungicides in the city of Guadalajara. The submission asserts that in so doing, Mexico failed to enforce effectively Article 194 of the General Law of Ecological Equilibrium and Environmental Protection (Ley General del Equilibrio Ecológico y la Protección al Ambiente--LGEEPA), and its commitments concerning procedural guarantees and private access to remedies under Articles 5, 6 and 7 of the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC). The CEC informed the Submitters that the submission does not meet the criteria of Article 14(1) of the NAAEC. In its consideration of the matter, the CEC found that, contrary to an assertion made by the Submitters, the final decision by the courts regarding the civil suit brought by Mercerizados against Dermet, did in fact ascribe probative value to the technical opinion issued by Profepa. The suit was not successful because the plaintiff (Mercerizados) failed to launch court proceedings within the statute of limitations. Further, the CEC concluded, this delay in launching the suit does not appear to have been the result of a failure by Mexico to enforce environmental law.

red bar graphic  CLIMATE CHANGE

  • International Ozone Day, Sept. 17, was marked by concerns about new and banned ozone-depleting chemicals that are entering or reentering the marketplace, in Japan and other countries. UNEP said that smuggling of banned chemicals continues and may be increasing.    

  • NASA launched a newest ozone-monitoring instrument, the Quick Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer (QuikTOMS), which will serve as a replacement for the Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer in monitoring ozone.

  • Mirant, an energy company with power plants in North and South America, Europe, and Asia, said that it would invest $50 million over the next decade to assist in addressing climate change.

  • Scientists predicted that the hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica, which begins widening in August, will likely be at least as large as last year's.

  • A majority of Americans surveyed in a Harris Poll said that the U.S. was correct in not accepting Kyoto and Bonn. See also http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20010916-55438858.htm (op-ed commentary)

  • The Manitoba Task Force on Climate Change said that "Manitoba and Canada should work with Mexico" in crafting a unified strategy. See http://www.iisd.org/taskforce/pdf/final_report.pdf