ELI Primary Menu

Skip to main content

Weekly Update Volume 31, Issue 34


large red bar graphic

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


The D.C. Circuit held that the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in upgrading dioxin from the list of "reasonably anticipated" human carcinogens to the list of "known" human carcinogens. The upgrade was set forth in the HHS' Ninth Report on Carcinogens. A manufacturer of products that release dioxin when incinerated had standing to bring suit challenging the Secretary's actions. The manufacturer showed injury resulting from the new characterization of dioxin by proving that it would experience reduced profits. The manufacturer also showed that the reduction in profits would be fairly traceable to the dioxin upgrade and that this injury is redressable by a reclassification of dioxin. Additionally, the dioxin upgrade is reviewable. Although the report's preamble states that it is for informational purposes only, the listing has binding effect. Listing a substance as a human carcinogen triggers obligations under other statutes. Moreover, although the report was not published in the Federal Register, the Secretary published a notice proposing a dioxin upgrade and, once finalized, a summary of the decision. As for the merits, the Secretary did not err in relying on mechanistic rather than epidemiological evidence in upgrading dioxin. The agency's interpretation of the listing criteria as allowing mechanical evidence to be applied to both the "reasonably anticipated" and the "known" categories is entitled to deference. Tozzi v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, No. 00-5364 (D.C. Cir. Nov. 23, 2001) (13 pp.).


The Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a domestic utility company's allegation that EPACT unconstitutionally imposed monetary assessments on domestic utilities for the remediation of environmentally contaminated U.S. uranium processing facilities. Beginning in the 1960s, the utility company purchased uranium enrichment services from the United States under various agreements that charged the utility for services according to an established pricing policy and capped the maximum unit charge. In the 1980s, the U.S. government realized the extent to which its uranium processing facilities were contaminated, so in 1992, Congress enacted EPACT, which established a fund to accumulate the money necessary to remediate the facilities. Due to the contamination's discovery date, however, the government's past uranium enrichment contracts did not account for the problem. EPACT, therefore, provided that the government would pay 68% of the remediation costs and the remaining 32% of the costs would by paid by those domestic utilities that benefited from uranium processing at government facilities. The utility company brought suit claiming that the special assessment breached the government's contracts with the company by retroactively increasing the cost of the uranium enrichment services and constituted an impermissible taking of those contracts in violation of the Fifth Amendment. The Court of Federal Claims properly dismissed the company's claims. While a taking may occur when a specific fund of money is involved, the mere imposition of an obligation to pay money, as here, does not give rise to a claim under the Takings Clause. Additionally, the imposition of the special assessment was a lawful exercise of Congress' taxing power and was not designed to retroactively increase the price of the government's earlier contracts with the company. Nor did the government make an unmistakable promise in the contracts that precluded it from later imposing an assessment. Further, the retroactivity of the special assessment did not violate the company's due process rights. This case does not involve the imposition of liability on companies having no responsibility for creating the expectation of a future benefit; rather, it involves a congressional determination to impose liability in companies that received a benefit, the production of which contributed to a societal problem. Moreover, the company could not reasonably have been expected to be free from regulatory exaction. The company operates in a highly regulated industry, was aware of the hazardous nature of the materials, and could reasonably have anticipated the possibility of the assessments. Commonwealth Edison Co. v. United States, No. 00-5069 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 20, 2001) (50 pp.).


The Federal Circuit reversed the Court of Federal Claim's holding that the Flood Control Act partially repealed the Tucker Act by implication, thereby immunizing the United States from breach-of-contract claims for damages arising from or related to flood control projects. In 1961, the United States and the state of California entered into an agreement for a joint water use project and agreed that each would pay a portion of the operation, maintenance, and replacement costs. Over the course of the agreement, the United States and California made payments totaling over seven million dollars due to damages from flood waters. However, after a large storm in 1995 caused flooding and property damage, the United States denied California's reimbursement claims, alleging that it was immune under the Flood Control Act. The Tucker Act grants the Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction over a variety of claims against the United States, including contract and damages, thereby constituting a waiver of sovereign immunity for those claims. The Flood Control Act prohibits liability of any kind from attaching to the United States for any damage from or by flood or flood waters. The two statutes, therefore, are directly at odds with one another. That contradiction could be reconciled if the later-occurring statute, the Flood Control Act, partially repealed the earlier-occurring statute, the Tucker Act, by implication. The waiver of immunity in the Tucker Act, however, arises not from the Act itself, but from some substantive right guaranteed by or granted in the underlying document upon which jurisdiction is based. Additionally, the Tucker Act, which predates the Flood Control Act by 40 years, is not mentioned in the Flood Control Act and does not appear in the legislative history to have been discussed at all. Therefore, the Flood Control Act did not impliedly partially repeal the Tucker Act. The Court of Federal Claims further erred in holding that the United States was without authority to contract to indemnify California for flood claim payments. Congress passed a law authorizing the Secretary of the Interior to enter into an agreement with California providing for coordinated operation of the water use project on behalf of the United States. The Secretary, therefore, did not act ultra vires by entering into the 1961 agreement and the United States waived its sovereign immunity. Thus, the case was reversed and remanded for a calculation of damages. California v. United States, No. 01-5031 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 27, 2001) (8 pp.).


The Second Circuit affirmed a district court grant of a preliminary injunction to a gas station operator whose lessor sought to evict him from the property after the operator purchased unbranded gasoline from a gasoline supplier different from the one provided for in the lease and supply agreements. After seeking to terminate its relationship with the operator, the original gasoline supplier filed for bankruptcy and rejected its supply agreement with the operator. Meanwhile, the lessor sent the operator a termination of lease notice and then, without notifying the operator, sold the property. The new owner promptly filed a petition to oust the operator as a holdover tenant, followed by a claim for unpaid rent. The operator filed suit under the PMPA claiming that the original lessor had no cause to terminate the franchise agreement and that the sale to the new owner violated provisions of the PMPA requiring notice of the sale and a right of first refusal. The district court granted a preliminary injunction to the operator and the original lessor and new owner appealed. The district court properly exercised jurisdiction over the dispute. The relationships created by the lease and supply agreements fall under the PMPA's definition of a franchise, thereby creating federal question jurisdiction. Additionally, it makes no difference whether a franchise relationship existed when the supplier rejected the supply agreement in bankrupcty; what matters is whether the complaint alleged a violation of the PMPA. The operator alleged that the PMPA was violated when the lessor and the supplier sought to terminate their arrangement with the operator and oust him from the property, which occurred months before the supplier rejected the supply agreement in bankruptcy court. Therefore, the operator properly pleaded a federal question. Further, the district court's grant of a preliminary injunction to the operator was appropriate. The operator's complaint alleges a violation of the PMPA and claims as a remedy a right of first refusal to purchase the premises. While changed circumstances threaten the operator's ability to reestablish or continue a franchise, the situation is not so clear as to rule out a preliminary injunction to preserve the status quo. Further, the operator's failure to seek a preliminary injunction until after the sale of the premises is due in part to the fact that the lessor did not notify the operator of the sale until the day the sale was completed. Moreover, the operator's purchase of unbranded gasoline was not a violation of the terms of its agreements. The rider to the supply agreement arguably contemplated that the operator might purchase unbranded gasoline; the supplier had delivered unbranded gasoline to the operator; and the supplier's failure to perform its obligations under the supply agreement allowed the operator to acquire gasoline from independent sources. Koylum, Inc. v. Peksen Realty Corp., Nos. 99-9039(L), -9229(CON) (2d Cir. Nov. 21, 2001) (11 pp.).


The Second Circuit upheld an individual's conviction under the CAA for unlawfully removing and disposing of asbestos from a building in violation of the asbestos NESHAPs and accompanying work-practice standards. The individual bought an abandoned building from a Connecticut city in order to renovate it for use as apartments. Before purchasing the building, the individual was made aware that the building contained a considerable amount of asbestos. The individual hired people who were not licensed to perform asbestos abatement to oversee the renovations, and when a state health inspector's investigation revealed these practices, the individual procured fake documents to show that the abatement had been completed. After a jury trial, the individual was imposed a sentence and a fine. The individual then appealed, arguing that the district court erred in instructing the jury on the level of scienter required to prove that he "knowingly violated" the asbestos work-practice standard. CAA §113(c)(1) does not require specific knowledge of the threshold elements of the work-practice standard--the friability and quantity of asbestos--that trigger the standard. Additionally, the phrase "knowingly violates" requires knowledge of facts and attendant circumstances that comprise a violation of the statute, not specific knowledge that one's conduct is illegal. The presence of asbestos is easily sufficient to trigger a reasonable person's expectation of regulation and to distinguish in his or her mind innocent from wrongful conduct. As a general matter, asbestos is strictly regulated at the local, state, and federal levels, and no reasonable person, let alone a sophisticated real estate developer like the individual at issue here, could be unaware that asbestos in almost all of its applications is closely regulated. Therefore, in a criminal prosecution under CAA §113 for a violation of the asbestos work-practice standard, the government need only prove that the defendant knew that the substance involved in the alleged violation was asbestos; it need not establish the defendant's knowledge that the conduct proscribed by the statute involved the kind and quantity of asbestos sufficient to trigger the asbestos work-practice standard. Here the jury instructions required that the jury find that the individual knew that material involved in the renovation contained asbestos. The district court's jury instructions, therefore, were sufficient. United States v. Weintraub, Nos. 99-1691(L) et al. (2d Cir. Nov. 19, 2001) (12 pp.).

red bar graphic  SMCRA, TAKINGS:

The Federal Circuit reversed a lower court decision finding the OSM liable for the permanent taking of a mining company's leasehold property. The mining company applied to the OSM for a permit and was told that its application was administratively incomplete. After receiving two technical deficiency letters (TDLs) from the OSM, the mining company applied for financial assistance in complying with the request for additional information through the OSM's small operator assistance program (SOAP). The OSM denied the permit application before it ruled on the SOAP request. The mining company appealed the ruling to an administrative law judge who, after a lengthy review process, ordered the parties to work together in providing the needed information. The OSM then sent a third TDL, but the mining company chose not to respond and instead applied again for SOAP funds. During this time, the mining company's deadline for extending its lease came and went without the the company exercising its option, thus, the lease expired on February 28, 1991. After issuing another TDL and a letter encouraging response to the TDL, the OSM denied the mining company's permit application, and the company filed suit. The lower court incorrectly found that the mining company had a takings claim. By voluntarily choosing not to renew its leasehold interest, the mining company had no valid property interest as of February 28, 1991, from which it could assert a takings claim. Additionally, a taking did not occur prior to February 28, 1991, contrary to the mining company's argument that extraordinary delay by the government in processing its permit application constituted a taking. Any delay in processing the permit was not sufficiently extraordinary to constitute a taking. Deference must be given to the OSM concerning the extent of information it required. Further, much of the delay through 1991 was caused by the mining company's failure to respond to the OSM's requests for information, and the lower court's finding of bad faith on the part of the OSM is inadequately supported. Wyatt v. United States, Nos. 99-5054, -5059 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 19, 2001) (17 pp.).


The Sixth Circuit affirmed an administrative law judge's (ALJ's) use of EPCRA's enforcement response policy (ERP) in assessing penalties against a metal manufacturer for failure to file timely reports regarding its processing of toxic chemicals. The ALJ understood that the ERP was only a policy, not a rule, and that it had discretion to depart from the ERP if there was reason for doing so. The ALJ also gave detailed reasons for applying the ERP in this case and correctly concluded that the manufacturer's lack of culpability was not a reason for departing from the ERP-recommended penalty, especially given the strict liability nature of EPCRA. Further, the ALJ's comment that there were no extraordinary circumstances in the case that would suggest deviation from the ERP does not indicate that the ALJ applied too exacting a standard for deviating from the ERP. The ALJ's statement that the case does not involve extraordinary circumstances must be read as meaning only that this case does not present circumstances that raise policy issues not accounted for in the ERP, and, thus, that departure from the ERP is not warranted. Moreover, the manufacturer misconstrued the substantial evidence standard of review in arguing that the ERP should not have been applied. The manufacturer argued that there was substantial evidence on the record to support its position that the ERP should not have been applied at all, rather than challenging specific factual determinations in the record. Under the substantial evidence standard, the court's review of the ALJ's factual determinations is limited to deciding whether those determinations are supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole--not whether there was substantial evidence in the record for a result other than that arrived at by the ALJ. Steeltech, Ltd. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, No. 00-2008 (6th Cir. Nov. 28, 2001) (5 pp.).


The Ohio Supreme Court held that carbon monoxide emitted from a malfunctioning residential heater is not a pollutant under the pollution exclusion clause of a comprehensive general liability policy, and, thus, the insurer has a duty to indemnify and defend the insured. After inhaling fumes from a faulty heating unit at an apartment building, one woman died and another was injured. The estate of the deceased sued the apartment building owner and manager, who, in turn, sued their insurer seeking defense and indemnification. The insurer claimed it did not have a duty to defend and indemnify the owner and manager. However, the policy at issue here never clearly excludes claims for deaths or injuries caused by residential carbon monoxide poisoning. Additionally, the genesis of the pollution exclusion does not support the notion that it was created to preclude the kind of claim involved in this case. Further, based on the history and original purposes for the pollution exclusion, it was reasonable for the apartment building owner and manager to believe that policies purchased would not exclude claims for injuries due to carbon monoxide leaks. The appellate court's finding in favor of the insurer was therefore reversed.  Andersen v. Highland House Co., No. 00-1214 (Ohio Nov. 14, 2001) (16 pp.).


The Arizona Supreme Court rejected the use of the "practicably irrigable acreage" test as the exclusive quantification measure for determining water rights on Native American reservations and instead created a new list of factors to be considered in determining reserved water amounts. Under Winters v. United States, 207 U.S. 564 (1908), the government, in reserving land, impliedly reserves enough water to fulfill the purpose of each such reservation. It seems clear to the court here that the purpose of Native American reservations is to serve as a permanent home and abiding place for the Native American people living there. In this case, however, the trial court failed to recognize any purpose of the reservation at issue. Instead, it held, as have other courts, that each Native American reservation was entitled to the amount of water necessary to irrigate all of the practically irrigable acreage (PIA) on that reservation. The PIA method of determining water allotments, however, is neither practicable nor objective. The PIA test has the potential for inequitable treatment of tribes based solely on geographical location, and it forces tribes to pretend to be farmers in an era when large agricultural projects are risky, marginal enterprises. And not only does the PIA method create a temptation for tribes to concoct inflated, unrealistic irrigation projects, it deters consideration of actual water needs based on economic choices, and potentially frustrates the requirement set forth in Winters that federally reserved water rights be tailored to minimal need. Therefore, the court set out a list of factors to be examined and balanced before determining a reservation's water rights, including the tribe's history; tribal culture; the tribal land's geography, topography, and natural resources, including groundwater availability; the tribe's economic base; past water use on a reservation; and the tribe's present and projected future population. In addition, although non-Native American reserved rights are narrowly quantified to meet the original, primary purpose of the reservation and water for secondary purposes must be acquired under state law, the trial court correctly held that the significant differences between Native American and non-Native American reservations preclude application of the primary/secondary purpose test to Native American reservations. In re General Adjudication of all Rights to Use Water in the Gila River System & Source, Nos. WC-90-0001-IR et al. (Ariz. Nov. 26, 2001) (33 pp.).


A Louisiana court denied an environmental remediation specialist's claims that a port commission owed it money for cleaning up property leased by the commission. A chemical manufacturer leased land from the port commission. Upon discovering contamination on the property, the manufacturer hired the environmental remediation specialist who successfully completed the remediation. However, after a hard rain, the same material spilled on the manufacturer's property. By this time the manufacturer was experiencing financial difficulties and ultimately shut down all operations. Thus, the port commission took over and hired a different environmental remediation company to clean up the spill. The initial remediation specialist then sued the port commission seeking to recover $85,842.00 due to it from the manufacturer. The trial court correctly granted the port commission summary judgment. There was no genuine issue as to whether the spilled material was hazardous, thereby entitling the environmental specialist to recovery under state law. The specialist does not allege, nor does the record contain any evidence to establish any particular flaw or defect in the analysis conducted of the material or the results thereof. The trial court's finding that the material was not hazardous, therefore, was not erroneous. Additionally, the port commission was not unjustly enriched by the specialist's services. Further, there was no quasi-contract between the specialist and the port commission because the services rendered by the specialist were done so pursuant to its contract with the manufacturer. The law does not transform the port commission into a surety to protect the specialist from losses on an account receivable created in the course of the specialist's business operations. Coastal Environmental Specialists, Inc. v. Chem-Lig International, Inc., No. 2000 CA 1936 (La. Ct. App. Nov. 9, 2001) (15 pp.).


The EPA Environmental Appeals Board denied several petitions to review the Hawaii Department of Health's (DOH's) decision to issue an electric company a PSD permit authorizing the expansion of a generating plant. There was no clear error in the DOH's choice of a monitoring site for the ambient air quality impact report required before issuance of the PSD permit. The DOH required the collection of site-specific monitoring data for the generating plant, and the record support's the DOH's selection of the monitoring site. Further, the DOH's reasons for not using data collected from another monitoring station in the ambient air quality impact report was not clearly erroneous. Similarly, the DOH did not err when it allowed confirmatory air sampling of the area around the generating plant. Because the data collected from the confirmatory sampling was not used in the ambient air quality impact report, the PSD regulatory requirements for pre-construction monitoring do not apply. Moreover, the record contains a sufficient explanation for the DOH's selection of the site used for the confirmatory study, and nothing in the PSD regulations prohibits the use of additional studies to support permitting decisions. Likewise, the data collected at the monitoring station and uses in the ambient air quality impact report qualifies as current under the PSD regulations. In addition, any argument that the DOH improperly limited the scope of public comments in a notice during remand proceedings is rendered moot by the DOH's subsequent public comment notice, which requested comments on the entire draft PSD permit and the ambient air quality impact report. In re Hawaii Electric Light Co., PSD Appeal Nos. 01-24, -29 (EPA EAB Nov. 27, 2001) (30 pp.).

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

large red bar graphic

Note: Citations below are to the Federal Register.

red bar graphic  AIR:

  • EPA amended the NESHAPs for Pesticide Active Ingredient Production by requiring precompliance plans 3 months in advance of the compliance date instead of 6 months in advance. 66 FR 58393 (11/21/01). 

  • EPA amended the NESHAPs for Pesticide Active Ingredient Production by revising the definition of the term "process tank." 66 FR 58396 (11/21/01). 

  • EPA proposed NESHAPs for existing and new asphalt processing and asphalt roofing manufacturing facilities. 66 FR 58609 (11/21/01). 

  • EPA amended the standards of performance for large municipal waste combustors by extending the time during which such units will be excused from compliance with the emission limits for carbon monoxide due to certain types of malfunctions. 66 FR 57823 (11/16/01).

  • EPA promulgated a change to the definition of "major source" that no longer requires states to provide that sources in categories subject to standards under CAA §§111 or 112 promulgated after August 7, 1980, must include fugitive emissions in determining major source status under §302 or part D of CAA Title I. 66 FR 59161 (11/27/01). 

  • EPA announced the availability of the requirements for federally enforceable SIPs for each state pursuant to CAA §110(h). 66 FR 58070 (11/20/01). 

  • EPA entered into a proposed settlement agreement under CAA §113(g) in Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 99-1457 (D.C. Cir.), which concerns a challenge to the NESHAPs for Hazardous Waste Combustors rule that was published on September 30, 1999 (64 Fed. Reg. 52828). 66 FR 57715 (11/16/01).  

  • EPA entered into a proposed settlement agreement under CAA §113(g) in Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, No. 99-1537 (D.C. Cir.), which concerns NESHAPs for publicly owned treatment works. 66 FR 59417 (11/28/01). 

  • EPA announced the availability of a staff technical paper on nonroad diesel emissions standards.  66 FR 58085 (11/20/01). 

  • EPA amended certain regulations to reflect the current delegation status of NESHAPs in Arizona. 66 FR 57668 (11/16/01).

  • EPA approved a negative declaration submitted by Illinois indicating that there is no need for regulations covering existing small municipal waste combustors in the state. 66 FR 59711 (11/30/01). 


  • EPA listed as hazardous three wastes generated from inorganic chemical manufacturing processes:  K176, baghouse filters from the production of antimony oxide, including filters from the production of intermediates (e.g., antimony metal or crude antimony oxide); K177, slag from the production of antimony oxide that is speculatively accumulated or disposed, including slag from the production of intermediates (e.g., antimony metal or crude antimony oxide); and K178, solids from manufacturing and manufacturing-site storage of ferric chloride from acids formed during the production of titanium dioxide using the chloride-ilmenite process. 66 FR 58257 (11/20/01). 

  • EPA proposed an additional regulatory change to the Agency's proposed amendments to the Corrective Action Management Unit rule that was published on August 22, 2000. 66 FR 58085 (11/20/01). 

  • EPA approved revisions to Utah's hazardous waste program under RCRA. 66 FR 58964 (11/26/01). 

  • EPA authorized changes to New York's hazardous waste program under RCRA. 66 FR 57679 (11/16/01). 

  • EPA approved Minnesota's UST program for petroleum and hazardous substances. 66 FR 59713 (11/30/01). 

red bar graphic  NATIONAL FORESTS:

  • The U.S. Forest Service announced the withdrawal of the Northern Regional Guide and the decisions therein that are to be transferred to the regional supplement of the Forest Service directive system. 66 FR 58990 (11/26/01). 

  • The U.S. Forest Service announced the withdrawal of the Regional Guide for the South and the decisions therein that are to be transferred to the regional supplement of the Forest Service directive system. 66 FR 58990 (11/26/01). 

  • The U.S. Forest Service announced the withdrawal of the Regional Guide for the Eastern Region. 66 FR 59232 (11/27/01). 

  • The U.S. Forest Service announced the withdrawal of the Regional Guide for the Intermountain Region and the transfer of selected decisions therein to specific Forest Plans. 66 FR 59232 (11/27/01). 

  • The U.S. Forest Service announced the withdrawal of the Pacific Northwest Regional Guide and the transfer of selected decisions therein to the land and management plans for the national forests in the Pacific Northwest Region. 66 FR 59407 (11/28/01). 

  • The U.S. Forest Service developed a plan revision schedule for the National Forest System units that have not completed revisions of their plans pursuant to the Land and Resource Management Planning rule adopted in November 2000. 66 FR 59775 (11/30/01). 

red bar graphic  PESTICIDES:

  • EPA announced the availability of a draft science policy document entitled The Incorporation of Water Treatment Effects on Pesticide Removal and Transformations in Food Quality Protection Act Drinking Water Assessments. 66 FR 58485 (11/21/01). 

  • EPA announced the availability of the revised version of the pesticide science policy document entitled Guidance for Performing Aggregate Exposure and Risk Assessments 66 FR 59428 (11/28/01). 

red bar graphic  RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL:

  • EPA announced the availability of DOE documents applicable to the characterization of transuranic radioactive waste at the Hanford site proposed for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. 66 FR 59208 (11/27/01). 

  • EPA announced the availability of DOE documents applicable to the characterization of transuranic radioactive waste at the Savannah River site proposed for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. 66 FR 59207 (11/27/01). 

red bar graphic  RISK ASSESSMENT:

  • The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry announced those sites for which it has completed public health assessments during the period from July through September 2001. 66 FR 57719 (11/16/01). 

  • EPA announced its intent to issue the revised Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment in 2002, but it is seeking additional comment from the public. 66 FR 59593 (11/29/01). 


  • OSM adjusted the penalty amount of certain civil monetary penalties authorized by SMCRA. 66 FR 58643 (11/21/01).

  • OSM approved an amendment to Illinois' regulatory program under SMCRA. 66 FR 58371 (11/21/01). 

  • OSM proposed to approve an amendment to Illinois' regulatory program under SMCRA. 66 FR 59201 (11/27/01).

  • OSM approved an amendment to Indiana's regulatory program under SMCRA. 66 FR 57655 (11/16/01).

  • OSM proposed to approve an amendment to Kansas' regulatory program under SMCRA. 66 FR 59751 (11/30/01). 

  • OSM approved an amendment to Montana's regulatory program under SMCRA. 66 FR 58375 (11/21/01). 

  • OSM approved an amendment to North Dakota's regulatory program under SMCRA. 66 FR 57660 (11/16/01). 

  • OSM approved an amendment to Pennsylvania's regulatory program under SMCRA. 66 FR 57662 (11/16/01). 

red bar graphic  WATER QUALITY:

  • EPA proposed a Class II administrative penalty under CWA §311(b)(6) of $65,000 against Chevron U.S.A., Inc., for the unlawful discharge of oil into U.S. waters at the company's Honolulu Terminal in Honolulu Harbor, Hawaii. 66 FR 57966 (11/19/01). 

  • EPA announced the availability of data and comments it has received in connection with its January 12, 2001, proposal to revise and update two regulations that ensure manure, wastewater, and other process waters generated by concentrated animal feeding operations do not impair water quality. 66 FR 58555 (11/21/01).

red bar graphic  WILDLIFE:

  • FWS issued an emergency rule listing the Columbia Basin distinct population segment of pygmy rabbit as endangered. 66 FR 59734 (11/30/01).

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

THE CONGRESSlarge red bar graphic

red bar graphic  PUBLIC LAWS

  • H.R. 2330 (appropriations; USDA), which makes appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the 2002 fiscal, was signed into law by President Bush on November 28, 2001. Pub. L. No. 107-76, 115 Stat. 748.

  • H.R. 2500 (appropriations; NOAA), which makes appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, including NOAA, for the 2002 fiscal year was signed into law by President Bush on November 28, 2001. Pub. L. No. 107-77, 115 Stat. 808.

  • H.R. 2620 (appropriations; EPA), which makes appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent agencies, including EPA, for the 2002 fiscal year, was signed into law by President Bush on November 26, 2001. Pub. L. No. 107-73, 115 Stat. 651.    

red bar graphic  CHAMBER ACTION

  • S. 1389 (land conveyance; mining), which would provide for the conveyance of certain real property in South Dakota to the state of South Dakota with indemnification by the United States government, was passed by the Senate. 147 Cong. Rec. S11916 (daily ed. Nov. 15, 2001).

  • H.R. 1230 (Detroit River International Wildlife Refuge), which would provide for the establishment of the Detroit River International Wildlife Refuge in Michigan, was passed by the House. 147 Cong. Rec. H9393 (daily ed. Nov. 27, 2001). 

  • H.R. 1913 (Native American lands; mining), which would require the valuation of nontribal interest ownership of subsurface rights within the boundaries of the Acoma Indian Reservation, was passed by the House. 147 Cong. Rec. H8392 (daily ed. Nov. 27, 2001).

  • H.R. 2983 (Price Anderson Act), which would extend indemnification authority under Atomic Energy Act §170, was passed by the House. 147 Cong. Rec. H8358 (daily ed. Nov. 27, 2001).

red bar graphic  COMMITTEE ACTION

  • S. 1008 (Energy Policy Act; global climate change) was reported by the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs. S. Rep. No. 107-99, 147 Cong. Rec. S11939 (daily ed. Nov. 15, 2001). The bill would amend the Energy Policy Act of 1992 to develop the U.S. Climate Change Response Strategy with the goal of stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system, while minimizing adverse short-term and long-term economic and social impacts, aligning the strategy with United States energy policy, and promoting a sound national environmental policy, to establish a research and development program that focuses on bold technological breakthroughs that make significant progress toward the goal of stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations. The bill would also establish the National Office of Climate Change Response within the Executive Office of the President.

  • S. 1731 (agriculture) was reported by the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. 147 Cong. Rec. S12053 (daily ed. Nov. 27, 2001). The bill would strengthen the safety net for agricultural producers, would enhance resource conservation and rural development, and would provide for farm credit, agricultural research, nutrition, and related programs. 

  • H.R. 2115 (water resources; wastewater) was reported by the House Committee on Resources. H. Rep. No. 107-302, 147 Cong. Rec. H8420 (daily ed. Nov. 27, 2001). The bill would amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in the design, planning, and construction of a project to reclaim and reuse wastewater within and outside of the service area of the Lakehaven Utility District, Washington.

red bar graphic  BILLS INTRODUCED

  • S. 1706 (Harkin, D-Iowa) (biological agents and toxins) would provide for the enhanced control of biological agents and toxins. 147 Cong. Rec. S11940 (daily ed. Nov. 15, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committees on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. 

  • S. 1709 (Smith, R-N.H.) (energy consumption) would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives to introduce new technologies to reduce energy consumption in buildings. 147 Cong. Rec. S11940 (daily ed. Nov. 15, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Finance. 

  • S. 1711 (Campbell, R-Colo.) (James Peak) would designate the James Peak Wilderness and the James Peak Protection Area in Colorado. 147 Cong. Rec. S11940 (daily ed. Nov. 15, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

  • S. 1716 (Kerry, D-Mass.) (climate change) would speed national action to address global climate change. 147 Cong. Rec. S11940 (daily ed. Nov. 15, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. 

  • S. 1727 (Reid, D-Nev.) (agriculture) would reward the stewards of America's farms, ranches, public and private lands, wildlife, adn water quality and supply, to reduce the risk of specialty crop production. 147 Cong. Rec. S12001 (daily ed. Nov. 16, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.

  • S. 1746 (Reid, D-Nev.) (nuclear facilities) would amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 to strengthen security at sensitive nuclear facilities. 147 Cong. Rec. S12161 (daily ed. Nov. 29, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. 

  • H.R. 3299 (Thune, R-S.D.) (land conveyance) would provide for the conveyance of certain real property in South Dakota to the state of South Dakota with indemnification by the U.S. Government. 147 Cong. Rec. H8248 (daily ed. Nov. 15, 2001). 

  • H.R. 3300 (Capuana, D-Mass.) (land conveyance) would reconvey certain property. 147 Cong. Rec. H8249 (daily ed. Nov. 15, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Financial Services. 

  • H.R. 3307 (Thompson, D-Miss.) (land acquisition) would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire the property known as Pemberton's Headquarters and to modify the boundary of Vicksburg National Military Park to include that property. 147 Cong. Rec. H8248 (daily ed. Nov. 15, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources. 

  • H.R. 3322 (Hansen, R-Utah) (Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge) would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to construct an education and administrative center at the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge in Box Elder County, Utah. 147 Cong. Rec. H8337 (daily ed. Nov. 16, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources. 

  • H.R. 3343 (Shimkus, R-Ill.) (Energy Policy Act) would amend title X of the Energy Policy Act of 1992. 147 Cong. Rec. H8343 (daily ed. Nov. 19, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

  • H.R. 3355 (Morella, R-Md.) (land conveyance) would direct the Secretary of Commerce to convey certain federal property in Montgomery County, Maryland, to the city of Gaithersburg, Maryland. 147 Cong. Rec. H8421 (daily ed. Nov. 27, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Science.

  • H.R. 3362 (Condit, D-Cal.) (CAA) would amend the CAA to impose certain requirements on areas upwind of ozone nonattainment areas. 147 Cong. Rec. H8564 (daily ed. Nov. 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

  • H.R. 3366 (Moran, D-Va.) (traffic congestion) would reduce traffic congestion, promote economic development, and improve the quality of life in the metropolitan Washington, D.C., region. 147 Cong. Rec. H8564 (daily ed. Nov. 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

  •  H.R. 3370 (Stupak, D-Mich.) (land conveyance) would amend the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1996 to modify the reversionary interest of the United States in a parcel of property conveyed to the Traverse City Area School District in Traverse City, Michigan. 147 Cong. Rec. H8564 (daily ed. Nov. 28, 2001). The bill was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

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

large red bar graphic

red bar graphic ALABAMA

Department of Environmental Management

Proposed Permanent Regulations-Solid Waste Management 

  • Revisions to the Division 13 Code are being proposed to permanently incorporate and adopt Phase I and Phase II of the State Solid Waste Management Plan into the Division 13 regulations. Phase I of the state Solid Waste Management Plan was submitted to ADEM on Nov. 10, 1989, and Phase II was submitted to ADEM on Apr. 19, 1991. Code of Alabama 1975, §§22-27-40 et seq. requires ADEM to adopt the state Solid Waste Management Plan as a regulation. The purpose of this rulemaking will be to adopt as a regulation all parts of the state Solid Waste Management Plan that ADEM has statutory authority to regulate. The proposed rule also requires counties and some municipalities to revise their local solid waste management plans and requires ADEM to revise the state Solid Waste Management Plan every 10 years. Hearing Dec. 17; comments due Dec. 18. See http://www.adem.state.al.us/EduInfo/Calendar/hearings/10div13.htm and http://www.adem.state.al.us/RegsPermit/PropRules/proprule.htm 

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

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

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality

Public Notices–Permit Applications 



Jefferson County (Birmingham) Dept. of Health

Daily Air Quality Index

red bar graphic ALASKA

Department of Environmental Conservation

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

Proposed Regulations-Underground Storage Tanks

  • Proposed changes to oil and hazardous substances pollution control regulations, 18 AAC 75, Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) regulations, 18 AAC 78, and the Department’s UST Procedures Manual. Comments due Jan. 3, 2002. Changes are being made to Chapter 75 to update and modify the regulations and references to guidance documents, correct errors, clarify the intent and purpose of the regulations, update soil cleanup levels, modify offsite and portable treatment facilities requirements, add a timeframe for appeals, modify various definitions, modify and adjust civil penalties, modify sampling and analysis requirements, and refine the regulations to be consistent with 18 AAC 78. 

    Changes are being made to Chapter 78 to simplify and clarify the UST prevention, operation, and maintenance requirements, revise priority ranking scoring for continuing projects and loan priority ranking exemption, revise the Board of Storage Tank Assistance funding application and allocation language, revise dispute resolution to allow for more flexibility, correct errors and incorrect cross referencing to other sections, eliminate the grandfather clauses that reference old analytical lab methods, make improvements to standardize the requirements to assist third party inspectors in the evaluation of operations compliance of UST systems,  eliminate duplicative leak detection requirements, modify offsite and portable treatment facilities requirements, update codes of practice, update spill and overfill control requirements, make improvements to promote clarity of intent and purpose of the regulations, update and modify references to the UST Procedures Manual and other reference documents and guidance, make the regulations consistent with statutes, and refine the regulations to be consistent with 18 AAC 75. 

    The Department is also proposing to update the UST Procedures Manual that is adopted by reference in 18 AAC 78. Changes in the Procedures Manual include treatment checklists, standard sampling procedures, Tables 1 and 2, and Appendices A, B, C, D, and E. See http://www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/ENV.CONSERV/title18/proposed/7578pubcm.pdf and http://www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/ENV.CONSERV/dec_cal.htm#downl 

Proposed Regulations-Drinking Water Quality

red bar graphic  ARIZONA

Department of Environmental Quality

"Listening Sessions" Scheduled to Discuss Water Quality Regulations

  • ADEQ is hosting eight "listening sessions" around the state in December and January to receive public feedback on water quality rules that it revised in January 2001. ADEQ will consider this information for a rulemaking that is scheduled to be proposed in 2002. The rules establish the requirements for Aquifer Protection Permit and Reclaimed Water Permits. Under the Aquifer Protection Permit rule, or the Unified Water Quality Permit rule as it is also known, (18 Arizona Administrative Code [A.A.C.] Ch. 9, Articles 1, 2 and 3), ADEQ issues permits to control discharges from domestic wastewater treatment plants, mining operations, industrial facilities, sewage collection systems, and on-site sewage disposal systems. The Reclaimed Water Permits rule (18 A.A.C. Ch 9, Articles 6 and 7) provides for directly using reclaimed water for beneficial uses while protecting groundwater quality and conserving potable water sources for human consumption and domestic uses. For information, see http://www.adeq.state.az.us/comm/pr/2001/nov01.html#1114 

Safe Drinking Water Workshops Announced

Superfund Program-Proposed Registry Inclusions, Prospective Purchaser Agreements

Corporation Commission

Commission Votes to Deny a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility for a Power Plant

  • Caithness Corporation had applied for a permit to build a 720-megawatt project in Wikieup, south of Kingman, Arizona. "The unanimous vote today shows that my colleagues and I take very seriously our role as stewards of Arizona's environment," Commission Chairman Bill Mundell explained." The Siting Committee went through an exhaustive process of hearings, public comment, and cross examination. The Siting Committee could not support the development of this power project at this location. That was the matter before us--whether this power plant at its location along the Big Sandy riparian habitat met the detailed criteria outlined in the siting statutes," Mundell added.  The decision marked the first time the Commission has rejected an application to construct a power plant. See http://www.cc.state.az.us/news/pr11-26-01.htm  

red bar graphic ARKANSAS

Department of Environmental Quality

Proposed Penalties, Consent Orders


    Alumax Foils, Inc., Russellville, Air Division, $4000 penalty; Arkansas Sheet Metal Co., Little Rock Regulated Storage Tank Division, $500 penalty; Best Petroleum Plus, Inc., Jonesboro NPDES/Water Division, $2000 penalty; Blake Street Cleaners, Pine Bluff; Hazardous Waste Division, $1350 penalty; Collision Connection, Springdale Hazardous Waste Division, $1350 penalty; Hanson Aggregates West, Inc. Eagle Mills Plant, Bearden NPDES/Water Division, $22,500 penalty; J. R. Hardage, Malvern Air Division, $350 penalty; International Paper Corporation (Amendment to Administrative Agreement), Pine Bluff Air Division, no penalty; Kawneer Company, Inc., Springdale Air Division, $750 penalty; Maxwell Hardwood Flooring, Inc., Monticello Air Division, $3000 penalty; Phillips Litho Co., Springdale Hazardous Waste Division, $1350 penalty; Rapid Roberts #201, Eureka Springs Hazardous Waste Division, $675 penalty; Rineco Chemical Industries, Inc., Haskell Hazardous Waste Division, $78,910 penalty, Supplemental Environmental Project $34,307; Safety-Kleen Systems, Inc., Little Rock Hazardous Waste Division, no penalty; Tyson Foods, Inc., Rogers Chick-N-Quick Plant, Rogers Air Division, $3500 penalty; University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Hazardous Waste Division, no penalty; VP Buildings, Pine Bluff Air Division, $2500 penalty; Waterloo Industries, Inc., Pocahontas Air Division, no penalty. 


    Harper Development, Inc., Bryant NPDES/Water Division, $10,000 penalty; Trans Chem, Inc. 1600 East 26th Street, Little Rock Hazardous Waste Division, $129,400 penalty; Trans Chem, Inc. 2508 East Roosevelt Road, Little Rock Hazardous Waste Division, $195,200 penalty; 

Comments due Dec. 10; persons submitting comments may request the Pollution Control and Ecology Commission to set aside the order in the matter by filing a petition with the Commission Secretary. 

red bar graphic CALIFORNIA

Air Resources Board

Proposed Environmental Justice Policies

Proposed Regulations-Availability of California Motor Vehicle Service Information

  • Dec. 13 public hearing. The California Clean Air Act as codified in Health and Safety Code §43105.5 directs the ARB to develop regulations that require manufacturers of 1994 and later model year passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty vehicles to make available emission-related service information to the automotive repair industry. The ARB staff is proposing regulations to implement these service information requirements and the process for administrative review of Executive Officer determinations of noncompliance. See http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/cmvsip/notice.htm 

Clean Air Plan (CAP) Implementation Schedule

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

Voluntary Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Proposed Regulation Update-Draft Regulations

New Residential Waste Burning Air Toxics Control Measure Webpage

New Title V Permits Search Engine

Department of Toxic Substances Control

Proposed Regulations-Permit Modification Applicability

Proposed Regulations-Mercury-Containing Waste

Public Notices-Permit Applications

Integrated Waste Management Board

Emergency Regulations-Rigid Plastic Packaging Container Recycling Rates 

Emergency Regulations-Permit Enforcement Policy

Proposed Regulations-Playground Safety and Recycling Act Grants

  • Published in the California Regulatory Notice Register for 45-day public comment period on June 29, 2001. These regulations would implement the provisions of the Playground Safety and Recycling Act Grant Program relating to the award of grants to local public agencies and local public educational agencies to upgrade, repair, refurbish, install, or replace public playground facilities to prevent childhood injuries on public playgrounds while developing a market for recycled materials suitable for use in public playgrounds. The regulations will provide guidance to Board staff and to grant applicants in the administration of the grant program. Emergency Regulations for the Playground Safety and Recycling Act Grant Program, adopted by the Board at its Apr. 18-19, 2000, meeting have been extended and are currently in effect. Approved by the Board, but not yet by the OAL. 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 OAL with a request for a delayed effective date (length to be determined) as an emergency rulemaking. Staff is currently preparing the file for submittal to the OAL. At its Sept. 11-12, 2002, meeting, the Board directed staff to initiate a 45-day public comment period. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/Putrescible/  

Proposed Regulations-Waste Tires

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

Proposed Regulations-Nonhazardous, Nonputrescible, Industrial Waste--45-Day Rulemaking Period

  • These regulations set permitting and operational standards for hazardous waste disposal facilities that accept for disposal certain nonhazardous, nonputrescible, industrial solid wastes within a hazardous waste management unit. OAL approved emergency regulations July 31, 2000. The emergency regulations became effective on Oct. 1, 2000. OAL approved an extension through May 30, 2001. Board staff has initiated the process to adopt permanent regulations. The Board conducted a public workshop on Jan. 17, 2001, to discuss the proposed permanent regulations. At its Mar. 20-21, 2001, meeting the Board approved the proposed permanent regulations to be noticed for 45-day public comment period. The comment period ran from Sept. 28 through Nov. 12. A public hearing will be held Dec. 11. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/nonhaz/

Proposed Regulations-Compostable Materials

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

Proposed Regulations-LEA Grants

  • New regulations for the local enforcement agency (LEA) grants program. The Permitting and Enforcement Committee approved these draft regulations for public notice in Sept. 1997, however, LEA outreach staff workload forestalled the public notice period. The Board approved the regulations for a 45-day public comment period at its June 19-20, 2001, meeting. Comments were due Nov. 27; public hearing Dec. 11. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/leagrant/ 

Proposed Regulations-Process for LEA Designation Withdrawal, and Board Designation Approval Withdrawal and Decertification Regulations

  • These regulations establish a procedure for local governing body withdrawal of LEA designation, Board withdrawal of LEA designation approval, partial or full decertification, or temporary suspension of certification. A 45-day public comment period ran from Oct. 12 through Nov. 27. The Board will hold a public hearing on the proposed regulations on Jan. 22, 2002. See http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Rulemaking/leadsign/ 

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-Miscellaneous

Water Resources Control Board

Agenda-Dec. 5 Board Meeting

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality Enforcement Policy

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

Chemical Listed Effective Nov. 16 as Known to the State of California to Cause Cancer

Notice-Dec. 18 Meeting of the Science Advisory Board's Carcinogen Identification Committee

Notice-Dec. 17Meeting of the Science Advisory Board's Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant (DART) Identification Committee

Request for Information on Diuron (CAS No. 330-54-1), Chemical to be Considered by OEHHA's Science Advisory Board's DART Identification Committee

Results of the Third Round Pilot Random Selection of the Chemicals Eligible for Prioritization for Consideration of Carcinogenicity Evaluation

Prioritizing Chemicals for Consideration as Carcinogens Under Proposition 65 by the "State's Qualified Experts": Third Round Random Selection

OEHHA Withdraws Public Health Goal for Chromium

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)

Final Regulations-Rule 1634-Diesel Truck Stop Emissions

  • Under Rule 1634-Pilot Credit Generation Program for Truck Stops, companies that provide electricity to trucks at truck stops can earn nitrogen oxide Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credits. Those credits can be sold on the open market to facilities in SCAQMD's Regional Clean Air Incentives Program. There are about 20 truck stops in SCAQMD's jurisdiction that potentially could participate in Rule 1634. See http://www.aqmd.gov/hb/011131a.html and http://www.aqmd.gov/news1/Governing_Board/2001/Bs11_09_01.htm 

Final Regulations-Amended Rule 1122--Solvent Degreasers

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

red bar graphic COLORADO

Air Quality Control Commission

Rulemaking Hearings

Water Quality Control Commission

Rulemaking Hearings

red bar graphic CONNECTICUT

Department of Environmental Protection

Final Regulations-Hazardous Waste Management

  • The newly adopted revisions include the addition of two key U.S. EPA rules--the universal waste rule and standards for the management of used oil. The universal waste rule establishes management requirements for batteries, thermostats, pesticides, and lamps. This rule will facilitate the recycling of these wastes and help in removing them from the solid waste stream. The used oil management standards establish modified requirements for used oil generators, transporters, processors, re-refiners, burners, and marketers.

    In addition to the hazardous waste regulations revisions, the newly adopted regulations revised section 22a-454-1 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies, which relates to hazardous materials management permit fees, and added section 22a-209-17 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies to the state's solid waste regulations. This new section establishes standards for the management of mercury-containing lamps that qualify as a solid but not as a hazardous waste. These new standards mirror the universal waste rule standards. Effective Oct. 31. See http://dep.state.ct.us/wst/hw/hwregs.htm 

Permit Hearings-Calendar

red bar graphic DELAWARE

Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control

Proposed Amendment to Regulation Governing Pollution Release Reporting

  • Workshops Dec. 4 and Dec. 6 on a planned amendment to the current regulation that describes requirements for reporting environmental releases or discharges of a pollutant or air contaminant. The Dec. 4 workshop will be held 9 a.m. to noon at the Grass Dale Center, Polktown Place, off Route 9, Delaware City; the Dec. 6 workshop will be held 1 to 3 p.m. in DNREC's auditorium, Richardson and Robbins Building, 89 Kings Highway, Dover. Senate Bill 33 modified the definition of an environmental release to mean substances and their reportable quantities under the federal CERCLA or regulations enacted under Title 7, §6028, Del. Code. The amendment would replace the current regulation and will include changes required by SB 33, changes to the Delaware list of substances and their reportable quantities, and the inclusion of a mandatory follow-up incident report. The Department will provide drafts of the planned amendment, along with background information, at each workshop. See http://www.dnrec.state.de.us/DNREC2000/Admin/Press/Story1.asp?PRID=316 

Proposed TMDL

Notices of Violation

Regulatory Update/Public Notices

red bar graphic FLORIDA

Department of Environmental Protection

Public Meeting-Brownfields

  • One-day public meeting Dec. 4.  The purpose of the meeting is to convene environmental insurance professionals, lenders, developers, environmental contractors, and the public sector in a forum atmosphere to discuss and share information about environmental insurance as a possible incentive to enhance redevelopment and clean up of Brownfield sites (areas). All persons are invited to participate. DATE AMD TIME: Dec. 4, 2001, 9:30 a.m.–not later than 5:30 p.m. Place: Orange County Public Library, 101 E. Central Boulevard, Orlando, Florida 32801, (407)835-7323, Ext. 7481. A copy of directions to the meeting room may be obtained by calling Roger B. Register, Department of Environmental Protection,  (850) 413-0062. Electronic requests for information may be sent to roger.register@dep.state.fl.us

Proposed Rule Workshop-Wetlands

  • DATE AND TIME: Dec. 7, 2001, 9:30 a.m. PLACE: Department of Environmental Protection, Rooms 153 and 4, Carr Building, 3800 Commonwealth Boulevard, Tallahassee, Fla. General Subject Matter to be Considered To discuss and receive public comment on proposed draft rule amendments regarding "Forms of Authorization." This rule has been revised following public workshops on May 24, July 14 and Nov. 14, 2000. The current workshop is intended to receive additional public comments on the revised rule draft. The purpose of the rulemaking is to provide more clarity so that the appropriate form of authorization for persons to conduct activities on sovereignty submerged lands can be more easily determined. This will include clarifying and amending the existing provisions and thresholds used in determining the appropriate form of authorization; definitions; management policies, standards, and criteria, including general consent conditions that would apply to all forms of authorization; and provisions related to riparian rights. Rulemaking on this topic follows deliberations of a Technical Advisory Committee formed by the Department in July 1999. In addition, the "Forms of Authorization" rulemaking is required by the Board of Trustees’ action on Mar. 14, 2000, to settle a rule challenge filed against the Board by Catalpa Cove Property Owners’ Association. (Docket No. 00-10R).  A copy of the draft rule is available at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wetlands/erp/rules/draft.htm

Public Workshop-Water Well Contractors

  • Public workshop on proposed amendments to Chapter 62-531, Water Well Contractors. DATE AND TIME: Dec. 13, 5:00 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time). PLACE: South Florida Water Management District, Fort Myers Service Center, 2301 McGregor Boulevard, Fort Myers, Fla. 33901. GENERAL SUBJECT MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED: Update the points and monetary matrix of the Water Well Contractor Disciplinary Guidelines and Procedures Manual in order to provide more stringent disciplinary action for violations during the construction, repair, or abandonment of water wells. Proposed amendments will also require approved course work be completed prior to becoming a licensed water well contractor and continuing education be completed for each renewal cycle of a license.

Public Workshops-Draft Water Conservation Initiative Report

  • DATE AND TIME: Dec. 14, 10:00 a.m. PLACE: Stavros Institute, Enterprise Village, 12100 Starke Road, Largo, Fla. DATE AND TIME: Dec. 18, 10:00 a.m. PLACE: South Florida Water Management District Governing Board Room, 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, Fla. DATE AND TIME: Dec. 19, 1:00 p.m. PLACE: Department of Environmental Protection, Room 609 Twin Towers Building, 2600 Blair Stone Road, Tallahassee, Fla. GENERAL SUBJECT MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED: To receive comments on the public review draft of the Florida Water Conservation Initiative Report that was developed by the Department in coordination with the five water management districts, the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, the Public Service Commission, and six work groups comprised of interested citizens, business interests, environmental groups, water supply utilities, agriculture interests, government representatives, and others. The primary goal of the workshops is to continue gathering information in preparation for completing the draft Department report on ways to increase water use efficiency. The recommendations in the draft report are intended to improve the efficient use of water (including reclaimed water) throughout the state. The recommendations cover six broad areas of interest including: Non-Agricultural Irrigation; Indoor Water Use and Water Features; Agricultural Irrigation; Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Use; Water Pricing to Promote Conservation; and Reuse of Reclaimed Water. 

Proposed Rule Workshop-Wastewater Facilities

  • DATE AND TIME: Dec. 12, 2001, 9:00 a.m –4:00 p.m. PLACE: Room A204, Twin Towers, Lab Complex, 2600 Blair Stone Road, Tallahassee, Fla. GENERAL SUBJECT MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED: This public meeting is the first meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee which was formed to provide technical assistance to the Department during development of proposed revisions to Rule 62-620, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), Wastewater Facilities and Activities Permitting. This rulemaking implements specific provisions of §403.0882, Florida Statutes (F.S.) regarding Demineralization Concentrate Disposal. The legislation directs the Department to conduct rulemaking to develop permit applications for concentrate disposal, options and requirements for concentrate disposal, requirements and methods for evaluating effluent mixing in receiving waters, and toxicity provisions.

Air Quality Regulations-Rule Development Update

Southwest Florida Water Management District

Proposed Regulations

  • The purpose of the proposed amendments is to incorporate into the District’s rules several revisions to the environmental resource permitting (ERP) rules regarding activities associated with mining. The proposed amendments will add to 40D-4, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), a slightly modified version of the definition of prospecting that was previously found in Chapter 40D-45, F.A.C. The amendments will also exempt mining or mining related activities previously permitted or exempt pursuant to Chapter 40D-45, F.A.C., and revise a provision of § of the ERP Basis of Review (BOR) regarding wetland creation, restoration, and enhancement as mitigation. The revised language in the BOR will track the statutory provisions of §373.414(6)(b), Florida Statutes (F.S.).  The proposed definition differs from the prior definition of prospecting in that it adds the word "natural" before the word "deposits" at the end of the sentence. The definition is necessary to the implementation of the District’s proposed Noticed General Permit for Prospecting. The proposed amendment to Rule 40D-4.051, F.A.C., will create an exemption for mining or mining-related activities that were previously permitted or determined to be exempt pursuant to Chapter 40D-45, F.A.C. Such mining or mining-related activities will remain exempt from environmental resource permitting requirements so long as they are conducted in accordance with the terms and conditions approved in their permit or exemption confirmation letter. An alteration, as the term is defined in subsection 40D-4.021(7), F.A.C., of a system exempt pursuant to this provision will require an environmental resource permit. Finally, the proposed revision to § of the BOR will revise the language in paragraph (g) to more closely track the statutory language of subsection 373.414(6)(b), F.S., which provides that wetland reclamation activities for phosphate and heavy mineral mining conducted pursuant to Chapter 378, F.S., must be considered appropriate mitigation for wetland impacts if they maintain or improve water quality and the function of the biological systems present at the site prior to the commencement of mining activities. Two general permits will also be adopted. Hearing will be held if requested in accordance with the Fla. Administrative Procedures Act. 

red bar graphic GEORGIA

Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division

Permit Applications

red bar graphic HAWAII

Office of Environmental Quality Control

Air Quality-Permit Applications

Environmental Impact Notices

red bar graphic IDAHO

Department of Environmental Quality

Outstanding Resource Waters-Petitions

Pending Permit Applications

red bar graphic ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board (PCB)

Dec. 6 Meeting Agenda

Proposed Regulations

  • In the Matter of: Enhanced Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Regulations: Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 240.191-240.193. Rulemaking proposal filed by IEPA 8/20/01; Proposal for public comment adopted Aug. 23, 2001; Illinois Register publication Sept. 7, 2001. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Archive/dscgi/ds.py/GetRepr/File-14412/html. In Illinois, two areas do not meet the NAAQS for ozone: (1) the Chicago metropolitan nonattainment area, which is a severe nonattainment area; and (2) the Metro-East St. Louis nonattainment area, which is a moderate nonattainment area. Under Illinois’ Vehicle Emissions Inspection Law of 1995 (Vehicle Emissions Law (625 ILCS 5/13B-1 et seq. (2000)), the agency has proposed, and the Board has adopted, as amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 240, an enhanced I/M program for these two nonattainment areas. See Enhanced Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Regulations: Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 240 (July 8, 1998), R98-24; (Dec. 1, 1994), R94-20; (Dec. 1, 1994), R94-19. The agency currently proposes to further amend the enhanced I/M program. 

  •  In the Matter of: Site Remediation Program: Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 740; In the Matter of: Site Remediation Program 35 Ill. Adm. Code 740, and Subpart H (Public Schools)–Proposed Rule, First Notice, Opinion and Order, Nov. 1 Board meeting. 

  • In the Matter of: Amendments to Regulation of Petroleum Leaking Underground Storage Tanks: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 732–Proposed Rule, First Notice, Opinion and Order, Nov. 1 Board meeting. 

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

  • In the Matter of: UIC Corrections, U.S. EPA Amendments (July 1, 1999, through June 30, 2000)–Adopted Rule, Final Order, Opinion, and Order issued Aug. 9. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Archive/dscgi/ds.py/GetRepr/File-14327/html 

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

  • In the Matter of: Proposed Regulated Recharge Area for Pleasant Valley Public Water District, Proposed Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 617–The Board July 26 adopted a final opinion and order in this rulemaking to amend the Board’s public water supply regulations to establish the first regulated recharge area under §17.3 of the Act (415 ILCS 5/17.3 (2000)). See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Archive/dscgi/ds.py/GetRepr/File-14272/html

  • In the Matter of: Proposed Amendments to Tiered Approach to Corrective Action Objectives: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 742 (MTBE)–The Board July 26 adopted a final opinion and order in this matter to amend the standards for tiered approach to corrective action objectives (35 Ill. Adm. Code 742). On Sept. 6, the Board adopted a first notice opinion and order in this rulemaking. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Archive/dscgi/ds.py/Get/File-14492 

  • In the Matter of: Proposed MTBE Groundwater Quality Standards Amendments: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620– Proposed Rule, First Notice, Opinion, and Order issued July 26. On Sept. 6, the Board adopted a first notice opinion and order in this rulemaking to amend the Board’s public water supply regulations. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Meeting/agenda.htm 

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

  • In the Matter of: Amendments to Livestock Waste Regulations: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 506–The Board on Sept. 6 adopted a second notice opinion and order in this rulemaking to amend the livestock waste regulations. The Part 506 amendments seek to accomplish two objectives. First, the rules delete provisions from Part 506 that are now superseded by the Department of Agriculture's Part 900 rules. Several sections of Subparts A-C are deleted, and Subparts D-G are deleted in their entirety. The Board did not receive any comment regarding the deleted language; thus, those changes are not discussed in this opinion. Second, the rules establish or enhance new design and construction standards for livestock waste lagoons and livestock waste handling facilities other than lagoons (Subparts B and C). Subpart A sets forth general provisions applicable to Part 506. Section 506.101 refers to §§506.201 and 506.301 for the applicability of these amendments to new facilities, and requires the public to use Part 506 in conjunction with the Dept. of Agriculture’s Part 900 rules. Section 506.103 defines terms used in Part 506, and §506.104 lists the documents incorporated by reference into the proposal. The proposal prescribes procedures for requesting alternatives, modifications, and waivers to the new design and construction standards in §506.106. Subpart B establishes or enhances design and construction standards for livestock waste lagoons. These standards apply to designs not approved prior to the effective date of these amendments (§506.201). The site investigation requires determining the presence of aquifer material, and determining whether the lagoon will be located in a floodway, floodplain, or karst area (§506.202). Sections 506.204 and 506.205 specify lagoon design and liner standards. Groundwater monitoring requirements operate in conjunction with the Dept. of Agriculture’s Part 900 rules (§506.206). The proposal establishes new standards for constructing lagoons in karst and flood fringe areas (§§506.207, 506.208). Section 506.210 establishes new requirements for secondary containment features. Subpart C establishes design and construction standards for livestock waste handling facilities other than lagoons. These standards apply to designs not approved prior to the effective date of these amendments (§506.301). The site investigation requires determining the presence of aquifer material, and determining whether the livestock waste handling facility will be located in a floodway, floodplain, or karst area (§506.302). The proposal prescribes waste storage volume requirements in §506.303. Section 506.304 specifies general design and construction standards. Additional standards are established for concrete, metal, earthen material, synthetic material, and wooden material (§§506.305-506.309). The proposal includes new standards for constructing livestock waste handling facilities in areas with shallow aquifer material, flood fringe areas, and karst areas (§§506.310-506.312). Board adopted Second Notice Sept. 6, 2001; Rulemaking was scheduled for Oct. 16, 2001, JCAR meeting; Nov. 1 Board meeting. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Archive/dscgi/ds.py/GetRepr/File-14449/html 

  • In the Matter of: SDWA Update, USEPA Amendments (Jan.1, 2001 through June 30, 2001)–The Board adopted proposal for public comment Oct. 4, 2001, Illinois Register publication Oct. 26, 2001. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/rules/proposal.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 (Jan.1, 2001, through June 30, 2001). Board adopted proposal for public comment 10/4/01. See http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/rules/proposal.htm 

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

Open Regulatory Dockets

Environmental Protection Agency

Proposed TMDLs 

red bar graphic  INDIANA

Department of Environmental Management

Final Regulations-Hazardous Waste

  • Adds 329 IAC 3.1-6-6 to conditionally exclude from regulation under 329 IAC 3.1 electric arc furnace dust that is treated to be nonhazardous by Heritage Environmental Services, LLC at Nucor Steel Corporation, Crawfordsville, Indiana.

Final Regulations-Air Quality

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

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

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

Final Regulations-Water Quality

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

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

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

  • IDEM has developed draft rule language for amendments to rule 326 IAC 8-1-2, compliance methods, applicable to dip or flow operations at miscellaneous metal coating operations regulated at 326 IAC 8-2-9.

  • IDEM has developed draft rule language for a new rule to establish control limits for commercial and industrial solid waste incinerator units for which construction commenced on or before Nov. 30, 1999.

  • IDEM has developed draft rule language, on behalf of Union Tank Car Co. in Lake County, for amendments to 326 IAC 6-1-10.1, which would establish a new emission limit for particulate matter less than or equal to ten (10) micrometers (m), or PM10, for the grit blast operation.

  • IDEM has developed draft rule language for repeal of rule 326 IAC 11-5.

Proposed Regulations-Wastewater Management

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

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality

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

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

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

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

Proposed Regulations-Solid, Hazardous Waste Management

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

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

  • IDEM has developed draft rule language for amendments concerning hazardous waste staging. The amendments will address temporary staging at permitted hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities outside of the permitted storage areas, at storage areas subject to interim status requirements and recycling facilities under 40 C.F.R. §261.6(c)(2). For the last several years, staging has been addressed by state policy. IDEM recognizes that temporary staging is a necessary activity that is not currently reflected in the state rules. Current rules that are strictly interpreted do not allow this activity without a permit. Reliance on discretionary policies complicates enforcement and leaves the regulated community vulnerable to policy shifts or implementation inconsistency. A rule provides protection for the regulated community by allowing staging, by being consistent in implementation and not requiring a permit for storage.

See http://www.IN.gov/legislative/register/November-1-2001.html 

Pending Permit Applications

red bar graphic IOWA

Environmental Protection Commission

Emergency Regulations-Drinking Water Quality

  • Amends Chapter 44, “Drinking Water Revolving Fund,” Chapter 92, “State Revolving Fund Loans for Wastewater Treatment,” and Chapter 93, “Onsite Wastewater Treatment Assistance Program,” Iowa Administrative Code. The amendments for the drinking water and wastewater revolving loan funds (Chapters 44 and 92) provide for a lower, uniform interest rate versus the existing rate formula, increase the annual loan servicing fee, revise loan repayment criteria, provide more flexibility in loan repayment schedules (e.g., allow for shorter term loans), amend parity requirements with respect to other obligations outstanding, and specify detailed revenue pledge coverage requirements. Other changes to these chapters include the following:
    • No water supply system project may receive funding for more than five years in succession.
    • The amount of funding available for private, for-profit water supply systems in a single year is restricted to 5% of the amount of the particular bond issues in any given year.
    • Definitions for “applicable interest rate” and for “debt service coverage ratio” are eliminated, as the terms are no longer needed with the new uniform interest rate.
    • The project initiation conference requirement, previously required for water supply system funding, is now optional at the Department’s discretion.
    • The wastewater revolving loan fund rules recognize the relationship to the onsite wastewater assistance fund established in Chapter 93, as a portion of the annual wastewater capitalization grant from U.S. EPA will be used to capitalize the onsite program fund.
    • Terminology and other updates are made for overall rule consistency.
    The amendment to Chapter 93 replaces language stating that the Department will assume the risk for loans made under the onsite wastewater assistance program with language stating that neither the Department nor the state will assume the risk for loans. The changes to Chapters 44 and 92 are needed to implement provisions reflecting a restructuring of the drinking water and wastewater revolving loan program as recommended by the Iowa Finance Authority. This restructuring will allow lower and more uniform interest rates as well as provide loan recipients with more flexibility. The change to Chapter 93 was necessitated by a conflict with the Iowa Constitution. Under Article VII, Section 1 of the Iowa Constitution, the “credit of the state” cannot be given or loaned to any individual, association, or corporation. Informal advice from the Attorney General’s office indicated the previous language (i.e., the Department would assume the risk) was in direct conflict with this provision. Effective Oct. 26. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB011114.html 

Proposed Regulations-Drinking Water Quality

  • Will amend Chapter 44, “Drinking Water Revolving Fund,” Chapter 92, “State Revolving Fund Loans for Wastewater Treatment,” and Chapter 93, “Onsite Wastewater Treatment Assistance Program,” Iowa Administrative Code. The amendments revise the loan interest rate determination to a flat rate, revise loan repayment criteria, amend parity requirements with respect to other obligations outstanding, and specify revenue pledge coverage requirements. The amendments also update terminology and recognize the relationship to the Onsite Wastewater Assistance Fund established in 567-Chapter 93. Hearing Dec. 4; comments due same date. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB011114.html 

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality-Stormwater

  • Will amend Chapter 60, “Scope of Title--Definitions--Forms--Rules of Practice,” Iowa Administrative Code. The amendment to Chapter 60 modifies the definition of “storm water discharge associated with industrial activity” to allow more types of facilities to qualify for the “no-exposure” exemption whereby facilities are exempted from permitting if no activities or materials are exposed to precipitation. Comments due Dec. 4; hearing same date. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB011114.html 

Proposed Regulations-Radioactive Material Transport

  • Would rescind Chapter 132, “Transportation of Radioactive Materials in Iowa,” Iowa Administrative Code. The Department of Natural Resources currently delegates all authority granted under Iowa Code sections 455B.332 and 455B.333 to the Iowa Department of Public Health under a 28E agreement between the two agencies. The Department of Public Health now has authority to establish policy for the transportation, storage, handling, and disposal of radioactive material for the purpose of protecting the public health and safety. This authority is granted by Iowa Code chapter 136C and in conjunction with agreements between the Iowa Department of Transportation and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Therefore, it is proposed that this chapter be rescinded in its entirety. Comments due Dec. 4; no hearing. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB011114.html  

Final Regulations-Water Quality

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

Final Regulations-Animal Feeding Operations

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

Final Regulations-Sanitary Disposal Projects

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

Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Fund Board

Proposed Regulations

  • Will rescind Chapters 2, 3, 4, 11, and 12, Iowa Administrative Code, and adopt new chapters with the same title. The proposed amendments are intended to implement changes to comply with Executive Order Number 8. The amendments reorganize the rules in a new chapter to replace references in the rules to the Uniform Rules on Agency Procedure and incorporates the actual language previously referenced. Comments accepted through Dec. 4. See http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Rules/2001/Bulletin/ACB011114.html 

red bar graphic  KANSAS

Department of Health & Environment, Division of Environment

KDHE "Kansas Environmental News"

red bar graphic KENTUCKY

Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, Division for Air Quality

Permit Applications/Hearing Notices 

Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, Division of Water

Permit Applications

Proposed Regulations-Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations

Proposed, Draft TMDLs

red bar graphic LOUISIANA

Department of Environmental Quality

Emergency Regulations-Laboratory Accreditation

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


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

Draft Five-Year Strategic Plan

Petition for Rulemaking for Approval of ASTM D 6450-99 for Flash Point Testing

Permit Applications

red bar graphic MARYLAND

Department of the Environment

Public Meetings/Hearings     

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

Water Quality Standard-Triennial Review

Ozone Forecast

red bar graphic MASSACHUSETTS

Department of Environmental Protection

Draft TMDLs 

Draft Calendar Year 2002 Clean Water and Drinking Water SRF Project Priority List/Intended Use

Draft Indoor Air Sampling and Evaluation Guide

Guidelines for Determining Closure Activities at Inactive Unlined Landfill Sites

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

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

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

Draft Amendments to 310 CMR 27.00, Underground Injection Control Regulations

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

Guidelines for Private Drinking Water Wells

Enforcement Actions

red bar graphic  MICHIGAN

Department of Environmental Quality

New Address, Location

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

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • The Air Quality Division will be holding a public hearing on Dec. 3 on proposed revisions to Parts 1 and 9 of the Air Pollution Control Rules (ORR Nos. 2001-040EQ and 2001-059EQ). The addition of R 336.1915 and R 336.1916 will provide companies with a protocol for providing evidence to the DEQ that the emission violations resulted from a malfunction, start-up, or shutdown. The DEQ will use the evidence in the determination of whether to use enforcement discretion. The rules will also provide companies with an affirmative defense against state enforcement actions for excess emissions that arise during certain start-up and shutdown episodes if practices to reduce the emissions are followed. In addition, there are proposed changes to the definitions for "excess emissions" and "malfunctions," R 336.1105 and R 336.1113. The remainder of the proposed revisions to R 336.1102, R 336.1104, R 336.1107, R 336.1108, R 36.1118, R 336.1120 are administrative changes to update the rules in accordance with Executive Orders, make corrections, and update adoptions by reference. See http://www.deq.state.mi.us/AQD/rules/Proposed%20Amendments.htm. Written comments will be accepted until 5:00 p.m. on Dec. 3. Information Contact: Jerald Trautman, Air Quality Division, 517-335-4855, or by e-mail at trautmaj@michigan.gov

  • The Air Quality Division will be holding a public hearing on Dec. 3 on proposed revisions to Part 8 of the Air Pollution Control Rules (ORR No. 2000-056EQ). An amendment to R 336.1801 and the addition of R 336.1802 through R 336.1818, regulations for reducing emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx), have been developed in response to the U.S. EPA’s requirements for an approved State Implementation Plan for NOx. See http://www.deq.state.mi.us/AQD/rules/Proposed%20Amendments.htm. Written comments will be accepted until 5:00 p.m. on Dec. 3. Information Contact: Robert Irvine, Air Quality Division, 517-373-7042, or by-mail at irvinerl@michigan.gov

Final Regulations-Oil Spills

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

Permitting Calendar-Pending Permit Applications; Consent Orders  

Permit Applications-Air Quality

Proposed Enforcement Consent Orders

Permitting Calendar (Permit Applications)

Air Quality Division Newsletter

Surface Water Quality Division Bulletin

red bar graphic MINNESOTA

Pollution Control Agency

Public Meetings-Water Quality-§303 List

  • Meetings scheduled for December (through Dec. 17; written comments accepted through Jan. 15, 2002) that will focus on activities related to restoring impaired surface waters. Discussion will be on a new list of impaired waters, a revised guidance manual, and proposed changes to Minnesota Rules Chapter 7050. The agency's new guidance manual describes in detail the methods the MPCA uses to assess the water quality of Minnesota's rivers and lakes. It also provides background information and rationale for these methods. The guidance manual helps MPCA staff determine whether water bodies meet the water quality standards spelled out in Minnesota Rules Chapter 7050. The MPCA is proposing to amend Minnesota Rules Chapter 7050 by adding a series of factors that describe the types of data and information the agency uses to determine whether rivers and lakes are meeting water quality standards. See http://statsbox.pca.state.mn.us/pca/news/newsRelease.cfm?NR=3064&type=2 

Proposed Regulations-Solid Waste Management

  • MPCA is planning to amend parts of Minnesota Rules Chapters 7001 and 7035 that govern management of solid waste transfer facilities, demolition debris land disposal facilities, and industrial solid waste land disposal facilities. The rules will also be modified to include requirements for utilization of solid waste. Revisions will not affect standards for mixed municipal solid waste land disposal facilities or financial assurance. The current solid waste rules have been in effect since 1982. Since then, solid waste processing and management activities have changed, making parts of the rule obsolete and not as effective as they could be. Some goals of this rule revision include: updating the rule to coincide with current solid waste management practices; eliminating rule requirements that are redundant or no longer needed; removing loopholes in the rule that make MPCA enforcement difficult or time consuming; and streamlining processes to enable MPCA staff to concentrate their efforts on areas of greatest environmental concern. A draft rule is not available for review at this time. See http://www.comm.media.state.mn.us/bookstore/stateregister/2619.pdf 

  • Tentative Schedule for Rule Revisions: Obtain input from interested parties, Nov. 2001 through Feb. 2002; Draft rule Mar. 2002 through July 2002; Public notice proposed rule Aug. 2002; Respond to comments/hold hearing if required/make revisions as needed, Sept. 2002 through Dec. 2002; Finalize rule Dec. 2002. MPCA will host stakeholder meetings Nov. 28 and 29 and Dec. 4 in St. Cloud, St. Paul, and Mankato. See http://www.pca.state.mn.us/waste/swrules.html#proposals 

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

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

Permit Applications, Other Notices

Alfalfa Processing Plant Ordered to Shut Down Until it Meets Air Quality Standards 

Minnesota 2001-2005 Nonpoint Source Management Plan

red bar graphic  MISSOURI

Department of Natural Resources

Final Regulations-Air Quality

  • 10 CSR 10-6.110 (entire state) (fees). The Department’s Air Pollution Control Program emission fee revenue has been less than expenditures since emission year 1997 (emissions during calendar year 1997 and fees payable Apr. 1, 1998, as compared to expenses for state fiscal year starting July 1, 1998). Since that time, the fund balance accumulated prior to 1997 has been used to supplement emission fee revenue. Revenues due Apr. 1, 2001, were $500,000 less than projected in last year’s analysis. Fringe benefits cost increased more than projected last year. Last year’s projections used 26.5% as the fringe benefit rate while this year’s projections used 33.7% because of increases in health care insurance cost. The existing fund balance is rapidly being depleted. The Air Pollution Control Program had estimated that emission fees payable Apr. 1, 2001, would be $7.4 million. Actual receipts were only $6.9 million or $500,000 less than projected. Fund projections were shared with representatives of industry in a meeting on May 30, 2001. The Air Pollution Control Program obtained input from industry and restated the financial projections from a state fiscal year basis to an emission year basis. The revised analysis was then shared with the industry group in a second meeting on June 19 and later shared with the Small Business Compliance Advisory Committee on June 28. The Air Pollution Control Program needs to transition from an emission fee supplemented by a fund balance to an emission fee sufficient to cover expenses. The options presented by the Air Pollution Control Program to the Missouri Air Conservation Commission on Aug. 3, 2001, were raise the fee for 2001 to phase in the increase in the fee or wait and raise the fee for 2002 more dramatically. As a result of comments, the Air Pollution Control Program is recommending that the fee not be increased for emissions in calendar year 2001 but remain at $25.70 per ton for 2001. However, the department’s Air Pollution Control Program expects that the fee for calendar year 2002 will need to be significantly increased. This approach has been thoroughly covered in the fee analysis and it is industry’s preference not to phase in fee increases but to postpone any fee increase until next year. The Air Pollution Control Program will continue to work with industry and others to implement efficiencies. The Air Pollution Control Program will consider these improvements in the next fee analysis. See http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/moreg/2001/v26n21/v26n21c.pdf 

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

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

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

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality

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

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

Final Regulations-Air Quality

Final Regulations-Hazardous Waste

Emergency Regulation-Drinking Water-Grants

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

Proposed TMDLs

Water Pollution Control-Permit Applications

red bar graphic MONTANA

Department of Environmental Quality

Final Regulations-Air Quality

Permit Application, Public Comment Notices

red bar graphic NEBRASKA

Department of Environmental Quality

Proposed Regulations

Comprehensive Study Of Water Quality Monitoring; LB1234 Phase II Report

red bar graphic  NEVADA

Environmental Commission

Proposed Regulations-Water Quality

  • Hearing Dec. 11 on two proposed petitions. Petition 2002-03 (LCB R-128-01) is a permanent amendment to NAC 445A.119 to 445A.225, the pollution control standards for water quality. The petition amends the standards for various reaches of the East and West forks of the Walker River. Amendments are proposed for NAC 445A.159 through 445A.169, inclusive including Sweetwater Creek and Desert Creek of the Walker River. Revised area of water quality standards includes pH, the nitrite in the lower reaches, the time period for dissolved oxygen beneficial use standard, the Topaz Lake dissolved oxygen standard, the replacement of the narrative color standard with a numeric standard, establishing sulfate requirements to maintain existing higher quality (RMHQ), replacement of existing fecal coliform standard with E. Coli standard and to establish a total suspended RMHQ for Sweetwater Creek. It is proposed to revise the time period that adult Lahontan cutthroat trout may be present in the reach from Walker Lake to Weber Reservoir. 

  • Petition 2002-04 (LCB R-129-01) is a permanent amendment to NAC 445A.119 through 445A.225, the pollution control standards for water quality. The permanent regulation establishes water quality standards for Walker Lake. The regulation establishes beneficial uses and water quality standards to protect those uses. Proposed standards for Walker Lake include pH, dissolved oxygen, total suspended solids, temperature, dissolved oxygen, nitrite, total inorganic nitrogen, total phosphorus, and E. Coli. See http://ndep.state.nv.us/admin/hear1800.htm 

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • Hearing Dec. 11 on permanent amendment to NAC 445B.400 to 445B.774, the vehicle emission control program. The amendment adopts by reference a state of California regulation that became effective on July 25, 2001. The amendment requires model year 2005 and 2006 new heavy-duty diesel engines (HDDEs) with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) of 14,001 pounds and greater to meet supplemental emission tests. The regulation establishes criteria and requirements for registration with the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles. Definitions added include the applicable Executive Order, heavy-duty diesel engine, model year, new motor vehicle, new motor vehicle engine, ultimate purchaser, ultra-small volume manufacturer, and urban bus. See http://ndep.state.nv.us/admin/hear1800.htm 

red bar graphic  NEW HAMPSHIRE

Department of Environmental Services

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality

  • Proposed repeal of Env-A 1300. In accordance with RSA 125-I:5, II(a), Env-A 1300 remained in effect during a three year transition period ending in May 2001. Compliance with the new air toxics program in Env-A 1400 is now mandatory. Hearing Dec. 11; comments due Dec. 21. See http://www.des.state.nh.us/hearings.htm 

red bar graphic  NEW JERSEY

Department of Environmental Protection

Public Hearings-Drought Warning for Delaware River Basin Area

  • DEP has scheduled two public hearings, on Tuesday, Dec. 4, at 10 a.m. in Westfield (Union County), and Wednesday, Dec. 5, at 10 a.m. in Moorestown (Burlington County) to obtain public comment on the situation, the warning issued Nov. 21, and the state's need to take this action on a regional basis, or statewide in the future, if necessary. Following the public hearing and comment period, the drought warning designation gives DEP greater authority to control water distribution and transfers among the major reservoir systems, and to temporarily modify water allocation permits. See http://www.state.nj.us/dep/newsrel/releases/01_0140.htm 

Upcoming Proposed Regulations (Rulemaking Agenda)

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

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

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

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

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

Current DEP Bulletin (Permit Applications; Proposed Regulations) 

red bar graphic NEW MEXICO

Environment Department

Final TMDLs




Air Quality Bureau-Pending Permit Applications

Other Public Notices

  red bar graphic  NEW YORK

Department of Environmental Conservation

Final Project List-Water Quality Improvement Projects for Hudson River and New York Harbor Estuary Under the Clean Water/Clean Air Bond Act of 1996

Emergency Regulations-Radioactive Materials

  • An Emergency Adoption was filed with Department of State and became effective on Nov. 1 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 Nov. 15. 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; i.e., until Dec. 31. 

ALJ Rulings

Environmental Notice Bulletin (Permit Applications) 

Permit Applications

Coastal Management Program Notices

red bar graphic  NORTH CAROLINA

Department of Environment and Natural Resources

"Truth in Penalties" Enforcement Plan Described

Proposed Interbasin Transfer

  • The North Carolina Environmental Management Commission (EMC) will hold a public hearing to receive comments on the petition for an increase in interbasin transfer from the Catawba River Basin to the Rocky River Basin. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities (CMUD) is requesting an increase from the grandfathered Interbasin Transfer (IBT) of 16.1 million gallons per day (mgd) to 33 mgd (maximum day basis). The proposed IBT is based on additional water withdrawals from Lake Norman and Mountain Island Lake in the source basin (Catawba River Basin). The IBT will increase due to transfer of the water to the receiving basin (Rocky River Basin) via consumptive use in eastern Mecklenburg County and existing discharges at Mallard Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant [WWTP] and Water and Sewer Authority of Cabarrus County’s [WSACC] Rocky River Regional (RRR) WWTP. CMUD is requesting a permitted IBT increase to 33 mgd, which will allow CMUD to meet projected water supply demands through the year 2030 in eastern Mecklenburg County. This IBT does not include transfers associated with water or wastewater service provided to the Goose Creek watershed in the Town of Mint Hill in Mecklenburg County. The public hearing will start at 5:00 PM on Dec. 11, 2001, at the North Mecklenburg Water Treatment Plant, 7980 Babe Stillwell Road, Huntersville, NC. In addition, Division of Water Resources staff will be available to answer questions from 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the hearing location. See http://www.ncwater.org/Permits_and_Registration/Interbasin_Transfer/Status/Cmud/ .

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality


  • Title 15A, Chapter 02. Will amend 15A NCAC 02D and 02Q–to make rules in Subchapter 15A NCAC 02D and 02Q with reporting requirements conform with reporting requirements in General Statutes; 15A NCAC 02D .2200 or 02Q .0900–to adopt procedures for special orders of consent specifically for the Division of Air Quality; 15A NCAC 02D .0202–to add a definition for significant and minor modification for permit fees purposes; 15A NCAC 02D .0933–to clarify the requirements for tanks with shoe-mounted secondary seals; 15A NCAC 02Q .0102–to allow dry cleaners covered under new source performance standards (NSPS) to qualify for exemption from permitting; 15A NCAC 02Q .0702–to exempt air curtain burners from the air toxic rules. 

Proposed Temporary Regulations-Wetlands


  • Will adjust the amount of payment into the Wetlands Trust Fund necessary to achieve compliance with compensatory mitigation requirements associated with impacts to classified surface waters to reflect the actual cost of restoration projects implemented by the Wetlands Restoration Program as required by G.S. 143-214.11(e). As required by G.S. 143-214.11(e), the Environmental Management Commission has adopted a Schedule of Fees (15A NCAC 02R .0402) that specifies the amount of payment into the Wetlands Trust Fund necessary to achieve compliance with compensatory mitigation requirements associated with impacts to classified surface waters and wetlands. The Schedule of Fees is reviewed annually and adjustments are proposed based on the comparison of the actual costs of projects implemented by the Wetlands Restoration Program with the Schedule of Fees. Based on this review it is recommended that the fee for compensatory mitigation requirements associated with impacts to classified surface waters (streams) be increased from $125 per linear foot to $180 per linear foot. The Environmental Management Commission intends to utilize the temporary rulemaking process to adjust this fee during the time the permanent rulemaking process is being conducted. It is anticipated that the Environmental Management Commission will adopt the temporary rule at the Feb. 14, 2002 meeting with an effective date on or after Mar. 15, 2002. Written comments may be submitted to the Environmental Commission until Jan. 15, 2002. Comments should be submitted to Crystal Braswell, Wetlands Restoration Program, 1619 Mail Services Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1619. Additional information concerning this proposal can be obtained by contacting Crystal Braswell at 919-733-5208, or at the above address.

Final Regulations-Air Quality

Division of Air Quality Permit Applications, Hearings

Division of Air Quality Penalty Assessments

DENR Enforcement Data

Water Quality-Basinwide Assessment Reports

Draft Air Quality Regulations

red bar graphic  OHIO

Environmental Protection Agency

Draft Regulations-Air Quality

OEPA Actions, Notices by County

Public Meetings

Pending Air Permits

Companies to Pay $20,000 for Hazardous Waste Violations at Henry County Site

red bar graphic  OREGON

Department of Environmental Quality

Proposed Air Quality Permit Fee Increases

  • DEQ is proposing an increase in annual fees for Air Contaminant Discharge Permit (ACDP) holders. The permit program regulates more than 1,100 sources of air emissions statewide ranging from large facilities such as sawmills, gasoline terminals, grain elevators, and rock crushing operations to smaller businesses such as auto body repair/paint shops and commercial bakeries. During the 2001 Oregon Legislative session, DEQ requested a 48% increase in fee revenue to maintain the current level of service for the permit program. The Legislature authorized a 30% increase. The basis of the proposed increase is the current Air Contaminant Discharge Permit fee system, which was simplified in May 2001 as part of a larger state rulemaking effort to streamline the program. Among other impacts, the May rules reduced the number of permit categories from more than 75 to 6, and established uniform fees for each permit category. Instead of an “across-the-board” 30% increase, the proposal modifies current ACDP fees to represent the amount of work associated with each type of permit. Comments are due Dec. 26. See http://www.deq.state.or.us/aq/notices/acdpfeerulenotice.htm 

Proposed TMDL

Air Permit Applications 

Water Quality Permit Applications

Proposed Regulations-General 

Public Notices-Cleanup Remedies

Public Notices-Remedial Actions

red bar graphic PENNSYLVANIA

Department of Environmental Protection

Proposed Regulations-Air Quality-Consumer Products; Portable Fuel Containers

  • The purpose of the proposed regulations is to reduce the volatile organic compounds (VOC) emitted from consumer products. The proposed regulations expand upon the federal consumer products rule, which became effective in Dec. 1998. The federal rule regulates 24 product categories representing 48% of the consumer products inventory nationally and reduces VOC emissions from that inventory by 20%. To capture additional emission reductions from these products, the Commonwealth is proposing to adopt these regulations. The Commonwealth has used the California Air Resources Board regulations and the Ozone Transport Commission model rule and background material as a starting point and reviewed those documents, including specific emission reductions, for applicability in this Commonwealth. As a result, the proposed regulations include most, if not all, of the product categories covered in California, with limits effective at a later date than California. To maximize consistency, emission limits for specific product categories are identical to those used in California. Interested persons are invited to submit comments, suggestions or objections regarding the proposed regulations to the Environmental Quality Board, P.O. Box 8477, Harrisburg, PA 17105-8477 (express mail: Rachel Carson State Office Building, 15th Floor, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg, PA 17101-2301). Comments submitted by facsimile will not be accepted. Comments, suggestions or objections must be received by the Board by Jan.16, 2002. Interested persons may also submit a summary of their comments to the Board. The summary may not exceed one page in length and must also be received by Jan. 16, 2002. The one-page summary will be provided to each member of the Board in the agenda packet distributed prior to the meeting at which the proposed regulation will be considered. Comments may be submitted electronically to the Board at RegComments@state.pa.us. A  subject heading of the proposal and return name and address must be included in each transmission. Comments submitted electronically must also be received by the Board by Jan.16, 2002.

    The Board will hold three public hearings. The hearings will be held at 2 p.m. as follows:

    Dec. 11, Department of Environmental Protection, Southwest Regional Office, 400 Waterfront Drive, Pittsburgh, PA.

    Dec. 13, Department of Environmental Protection, Southcentral Regional Office, 909 Elmerton Avenue, Harrisburg, PA.

    Dec. 17, Department of Environmental Protection, Southeast Regional Office, Suite 6010, Lee Park, 555 North Lane, Conshohocken, PA. See http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol31/31-45/2013.html 

  • In a separate proposal, the Board will consider proposed rules to reduce the VOCs emitted from portable fuel containers. This proposed rulemaking is part of the Commonwealth's specific action plan to achieve and maintain the ozone NAAQS. This proposed rulemaking applies to all portable fuel containers or spouts, or both, except: (1) containers with capacity of less than or equal to 1 quart; (2) rapid refueling devices with capacities equal to or greater than 4 gallons, provided they are designed for use in officially sanctioned off-road motorcycle competitions; and (3) safety cans and portable marine fuel tanks that operate in conjunction with outboard motors. Portable fuel containers or spouts, or both, must be equipped with an automatic shut-off device that stops fuel flow before the fuel tank overflows and an automatic device that closes and seals when it is removed from the fuel tank. There are also other required design specifications, all of which are intended to significantly lessen the possibility of gasoline spillage and reduce emissions. Compliance with the proposed performance standards are designed to maximize VOC emission reductions. It is estimated that VOCs would be reduced by approximately 75% of total uncontrolled emissions from this sector once the rule is finalized. Same comment period and hearing dates/locations as above. See http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol31/31-45/2014.html 

Water Quality-Draft Comprehensive Stormwater Management Policy

  • Proposal to update the current stormwater management program, using existing authority, to improve water quality, sustain water quantity (including ground water recharge and stream base flow), and integrate upcoming stormwater management obligations. The draft proposal is available on the DEP website at http://www.dep.state.pa.us (''Comprehensive Stormwater Policy'') or can be obtained by contacting Stuart Gansell at (717) 783-7420, e-mail to sgansell@state.pa.us, or DEP Office of Water Management, Bureau of Watershed Management, 10th Floor, Rachel Carson State Office Building, P.O. Box 8555, Harrisburg, PA 17105-8555. At the 15 water forums held throughout the Commonwealth in the spring of 2001, stormwater management was a consistent and recurring concern of citizens and municipal officials. DEP is facing challenges to its existing approach in litigation before the Environmental Hearing Board. The Commonwealth must also implement Phase II stormwater controls under the federal CWA within the next several years. DEP proposes a best management practices (BMP) approach to stormwater management that generally encourages, and sometimes requires, minimization and infiltration of stormwater flows. This approach will reduce pollutant loadings to streams, recharge groundwater tables, enhance stream base flow during times of drought, and reduce the threat of flooding and stream bank erosion resulting from storm events. Permit conditions will require BMPs as the means of managing stormwater from both Phase I and Phase II construction, as well as postconstruction stormwater flows. Administratively, DEP proposes to integrate its permitting programs with stormwater management plans developed on a watershed basis under the Stormwater Management Act (Act 167). Act 167 county plans will include water quality and quantity protections implemented by municipalities within the watershed. In addition, DEP will, in appropriate circumstances, rely on these Act 167 plans to meet the NPDES permitting requirements for municipalities under the Phase II municipal stormwater permitting program. Comments accepted through Dec. 27. See http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol31/31-43/1928.html and http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/subject/Draft_technical_guidance/392-0300-002.pdf 

NPDES Permit Applications

Draft Technical Guidance

red bar graphic RHODE ISLAND

Department of Environmental Management

Draft Environmental Equity Policy

Upcoming Events

red bar graphic SOUTH CAROLINA

Department of Health and Environmental 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/ 

  • The hearing date for the proposed permanent regulations has been postponed until Dec. 13. See http://www.lpitr.state.sc.us/regs/2646.doc (proposed rules) The amendments will: (1) establish a new Part 50 where all definitions are now found; (2) rewrite Part 100 (Swine Facilities) in its entirety which will be the separate and distinct regulation for swine facilities as required by 1996 Act No. 460, which included the Confined Swine Feeding Operations Act; (3) add new requirements to Part 100 which address a new class of large swine facilities; (4) modify Part 200 (Other Animal Facilities) and Part 300 (Innovative and Alternative technology); (5) add a new section that specifically outlines requirements for manure broker operations, as well as a section that addresses integrator registration, and a section for severability; and (6) incorporate recommendations made by a Regulation Development Committee that was organized to review the regulation for issues and concerns.

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

Revised Air Modeling Guidelines Available

Permit Application Notices

red bar graphic  TENNESSEE

Department of Environment and Conservation

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

Board Meeting Agendas, Schedules

Permit Applications

Water Quality Reports

Solid Waste Management Act-Task Force Review

Metropolitan Nashville and Davidson County Health Department, Pollution Control Division

Air Quality Data

red bar graphic  TEXAS

Natural Resource Conservation Commission

Proposed Regulations-Miscellaneous

  • Senate Bill 5, Section1(b) requires a comprehensive plan (Texas Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP)) to reduce emissions from mobile sources. The TERP fund provides subsidies for the replacement of older diesel engines and the purchase of low emitting automobiles. The TERP is to be funded in part by contributions from stationary sources in the Dallas/Fort Worth and Houston/Galveston areas in exchange for deferment of a portion of their required NOx emissions. This rulemaking, in conjunction with a separate rulemaking in Chapter 101 (SB 1561:2001-063-101-AI) (see below), will implement the stationary source emissions trading portion of TERP. Hearings Dec. 18 and 20; comments due Jan. 7, 2002. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/hearings/01025d117_phn.pdf (notice) and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01025d117_pro.pdf (proposal).

  • SB 1561: Air Emissions Trading Across International Borders. Rules to authorize the use of emissions reductions achieved outside the United States to satisfy SIP requirements for U.S. areas near international borders (El Paso), and to allow substitution of emissions reductions of one air contaminant to satisfy emissions reduction requirements of another air contaminant. Hearings Dec. 17 and 18; comments due Jan. 7, 2002. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/hearings/01063101_phn.pdf and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01063101_pro.pdf 

  • SB 1175: Weather Modification Program. Provides that on the effective date of this act, all powers, duties, obligations, rights, records, employees, and property of the TNRCC that are used by the agency to administer the weather modification program are transferred to the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation. Comments due Dec. 27. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01062281_pro.pdf and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01062289_pro.pdf 

  • Indexing, Cross-Indexing, and Availability of Certain Documents. Tom Lake, Cameron, Texas Petition - Chapter 20. The TNRCC received a rulemaking petition requesting the agency amend 30 TAC, Chapter 20, Rulemaking, Section 20.3, APA Rulemaking. The proposed amendment would more fully implement the provision of Texas Government Code, Section 2001.004, Requirement to Adopt Rules of Practice and Index Rules, Orders, and Decisions, which requires the agency to index and cross-index to statute its rules, final orders, decisions, and opinions. Comments due Dec. 10. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/00058020_pro.pdf 

  • HB 2687: Remediation of Underground and Above Ground Storage Tanks. Relating to the program for the regulation and remediation of underground and above ground storage tanks. Comments due Dec. 10. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/proposals/01039334_pro.pdf 

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

Final Regulations-Miscellaneous

  • HB 3111(HB 2912, Art 18.04): Occupational lic./reg.; HB 2912; Art 7- Water Treatment; Art 8-Irrigators/Disposal: Quad Review of 290 A: Operator Certification This rulemaking implements HB 3111 and HB 2912, Art. 7, Art 8 and Art. 18, relating to occupational licenses and registrations issued by the TNRCC. This rulemaking also incorporates the "quad" review of Chapter 290, Subchapter A and federal rulemaking in 40 CFR Part 60 (65 Federal Register 75338, Dec. 1, 2000)-Licensing of incinerator units. The rule team proposes to create a new chapter, 30 TAC Chapter 30, Occupational Licenses and Registrations. Changes are reflected in chapters 30, 285, 290, 325, 330, 334 and 344. Effective Dec. 17. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rules/propadop.html 

  • SB 324: Fees Charged for Underground Injection Wells. Effective Dec. 16. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rules/propadop.html 

  • HB 2912: Citizen Collected Evidence. New §70.4 addresses the requirements of HB 2912, §1.24 and §18.10, concerning the initiation of enforcement using information provided by a private individual. House Bill 2912, §18.10 requires the commission to adopt rules on this subject. Effective Dec. 11. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/adoptions/01029070_ado.pdf and http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/exec/media/press/11-01citizen.html (press release)

  • HB 2997: Environmental Systems Management. Relating to the implementation by the TNRCC of a program to encourage the use of environmental management systems. Effective Dec. 16. See http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rule_lib/adoptions/01040090_ado.pdf 

Permit Hearings

Public Hearings/Proposed Rule Tracking Log

October 2001 Draft Update to the Water Quality Management Plan for the State of Texas

red bar graphic  UTAH

Department of Envtl. Quality

Notices of 5-Year Rule Reviews, Proposed Continuations

Permit Applications

red bar graphic VERMONT

Department of Environmental Conservation

Vermont Solid Waste Plan

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

Permit Applications

red bar graphic VIRGINIA

Department of Environmental Quality

Public Meeting, Hearing Notices; Other Regulatory Notices

  • Available at http://www.deq.state.va.us/cgi-bin/deq/prweb/BrowseIndex.cgi?URL_NAME=NOTICE  

  • 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 U.S. 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 U.S. 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.

  • Waste Management Board; Public Hearing-Regulated Medical Waste Management Regulations Proposed Amendments. Hearings Jan. 4, 7, and 8, 2002. As a result of a periodic review of the Regulated Medical Waste Management Regulation, the Virginia Waste Management Board is considering amendment of the regulation to include, but not be limited to, the issue of storage of separately accumulated objects for personal hygiene, the issue of temporary storage, and such other issues that may result from public comment on the NOIRA or activities of the technical advisory committee established to assist in the development of any proposal. Amendment 2 is being proposed in order to address the following: 
    1. Definition of the concepts of generation, storage and accumulation;
    2. Exemption of items used for personal hygiene;
    3. Requirements for the temporary storage of regulated medical waste;
    4. Requirements related to the transportation of hazardous materials; and
    5. Consolidation of the text and elimination of redundant requirements. See http://www.townhall.state.va.us/action/ViewAction.cfm?vac=210&chapter=120&action=392 and http://www.deq.state.va.us/cgi-bin/deq/prweb/BrowseRecord.cgi?URL_NAME=NOTICE&ID=335 

  • Air Pollution Control Board; Hearing Dec. 7 regarding Rev. G00-Emission Standards for Toxic Pollutants. The purpose of the proposed action is to render the state toxic pollutant program consistent with the federal CAA. See http://www.townhall.state.va.us/meeting/viewMeeting.cfm?MEETING_ID=1386 

  • Hearings Jan. 8 and 9, 2002, regarding Water Quality Standards-Bacteria and Ammonia Criteria. Amendments to the water quality standards regulation to include updating surface water criteria for ammonia in freshwater, new alternative indicators for assessing bacterial water quality, updated contact recreational use designations for primary and secondary and/or seasonal uses, etc. See http://www.townhall.state.va.us/meeting/viewMeeting.cfm?MEETING_ID=1479  

  • Public Hearing-Proposed Water Quality Management Public Participation Guidelines and WQMP Repeals. (9 VAC 25-420, 430,440, 450, 452, 460, 470, 480, 490, 500, 510, 520, 530, 540, 550, 560, 570, 572). The regulation will establish, among other planning items, the procedures for public participation during TMDL development, submittal of proposed TMDLs to EPA, and inclusion of approved TMDLs and TMDL implementation plans in the water quality management plans. The action will also include repeal of existing water quality management plans (9 VAC 25-420, 430, 440, 450, 452, 460, 470, 480, 490, 500, 510, 520, 530, 540, 550, 560, 570, 572). See http://www.townhall.state.va.us/stage/ViewStage.cfm?vac=196&chapter=720&action=624&stage=1370 and http://www.townhall.state.va.us/meeting/viewMeeting.cfm?MEETING_ID=1494 Dec. 10 hearing in Glen Allen.

red bar graphic  WASHINGTON

Department of Ecology

Final Regulations-Air Quality

Proposed Regulations

State Environmental Policy Act Register; Miscellaneous

red bar graphic WEST VIRGINIA

Department of Environmental Protection

Public Notice Bulletin (Permit Applications, Proposed Regulations)

red bar graphic WISCONSIN

Department of Natural Resources

Air Rules Development

Public Hearing and Meeting Schedule

  • DNR will hold public hearings on revisions to subch. II of ch. NR 16, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to fish farms. The proposed rule will modify the definitions of "natural body of water" to reflect existing water law regulation of "private" ponds and to expand the types of private ponds that are exempt from regulation, add an exemption for DNR-permitted wetland ponds to the definition of natural body of water consistent with the exemption of waterways considered private under chs. 30 and 31, Stats. 3, clarify the criteria the department will use to assess permit renewals after the 10-year permit expires, and make minor changes including updating permit application deadlines and clarifying statutory enforcement provisions. For more information, contact Steve Hewett at (608) 267-7501. The hearings will be held on: Dec.18, in Conference rooms 1 & 2, DNR South Central Region Headquarters, 3911 Fish Hatchery Rd., Fitchburg, at 6 p.m.; Dec. 20, in LMC Room, John Muir Middle School, 1400 W. Stewart Ave., Wausau at 6 p.m. 

  • DNR will hold a public hearing Jan. 16, 2002, on revisions to chs. NR 700, 714, 722, 726 and 749, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to deed restrictions on contaminated lands and soil geographic information system (GIS) registry. The rule changes proposed to ch. NR 726 are needed to clarify the criteria and process for applying deed restrictions and deed notices to contaminated properties where residual soil contamination remains after case closure. The rule changes authorize the creation of a soil GIS registry that will be available on the Internet to replace the use of most soil deed notices. The rule changes in ch. NR 749 establish a fee of $200 to enable DNR to recover its costs in managing the GIS registry. Sites closed with residual soil contamination will be placed on the soil GIS registry as a means of notifying future owners/users of the property of the existence of soil contamination. The hearing will be held at 10 a.m. For more information, contact Dale Ziege at (608) 267-7533 Video conference participation will be available at: Room 021, Natural Resources building, 101 S. Webster St., Madison; Room 139 State Office building, 718 W. Clairemont Ave., Eau Claire; Room 618, State office building, 200 N. Jefferson St., Green Bay; Room 542, State Office building, 819 N. 6th St., Milwaukee; Room 3, DNR Regional Headquarters, 107 Sutliff Ave., Rhinelander; Lower Level conference room, DNR Regional Headquarters, 810 W. Maple St., Spooner. 

  • The DNR Aquifer Storage Recovery (ASR) Technical Advisory Group will meet at 1 p.m., Dec. 7, in Room 611B of the State Natural Resources Building (GEF 2), 101 South Webster Street, Madison. The agenda for the meeting includes a final review and discussion of the outline for a report on ASR techniques. Following the adoption of the final outline, the technical advisory group will also begin working on the first draft of the report. The ASR Technical Advisory Group was created by DNR to provide an independent, technical review and assessment of ASR techniques. The group consists of representatives with expertise in hydrogeology, geochemistry, water treatment techniques, and toxicology from the University of Wisconsin System, U.S. Geological Survey, and the Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services. For more information, please contact Rich Roth, Bureau of Drinking Water and Groundwater, at (608) 266-2438. 

  • DNR will hold a public informational meeting to review its ambient air quality monitoring network throughout Wisconsin. This meeting will review the changes that occurred in 2001 and will present an outline of the changes for 2002. An explanation will be provided for each deviation from the original plan as well as the proposed changes. Public comments on the changes will also be received at the informational meeting. The meeting will be Dec. 21 at 10 a.m. in room 709 of the Natural Resources building at 101 S. Webster St., Madison. For more information, contact Bruce Rodger at (608) 266-1722 

  • Listing available at http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/caer/ce/news/hearmeet.html

red bar graphic WYOMING

Department of Environmental Quality

NPDES Permit Applications

Draft, Proposed Regulations

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

large red bar graphic

red bar graphic GENERAL

  • In the face of international concern about plans to increase development and tourism at Zhangjiajie, a U.N. World Heritage site in China, the regional government of Hunan has said it will expedite implementing its plans, according to the South China Morning Post

  • Antarctica New Zealand, a government agency in New Zealand, released a report detailing contamination of the seabed near U.S. and New Zealand research bases in Antarctica. 

  • Klaus Toepfer was named to another four-year term as executive director of the U.N. Environment Program.

  • Italy declared a state of environmental emergency in Venice, Messina, and Milan. "Extraordinary measures are needed because of the high levels of pollution," said Federica Cingolani, spokesman for the Environment Ministry. "The states of emergency could last a year but it will be up to local officials to decide." The declaration of environmental emergency is the first of its kind for Italy.

  • China described a huge water transfer project. The (U.S.) $60.4 billion South-to-North Water Transfer Project will move water from the county's longest river, the Yangtze, along three channels to three northern rivers, the Yellow, Huai, and Hai, which are in an area that sees much less rain. Hundreds of thousands of residents would likely have to be relocated. Meanwhile, the World Bank recommended that China dramatically increase spending on environmental protection programs. Still, the Bank commended China, saying it was "one of the few developing countries to make measurable improvements in environmental protection over the past 10 years." 

  • Meanwhile, the U.N. Development Program issued a report that contends that China's air pollution is among the worst in the world. The UNDP urged the Chinese government to adopt strict economic measures to reduce emissions. "China's major cities have been characterized by some of the highest levels of air pollution in the world, often with pollutant concentrations at multiples of the levels considered safe for human health and the environment," the report notes. The document refers to a role for "market-oriented solutions based on the rule of law."

  • The first intergovernmental review meeting of the Global Program of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities was held in Montreal. See http://www.gpa.unep.org/igr/ 

  • France's Ministry of Agriculture issued a ban on using arsenic salts, which were frequently used in vineyards, due to concerns about cancer potential among farm workers. See http://www.agriculture.gouv.fr 

  • Britain issued plans for an underwater cable, running from the coast of Scotland to western England, that would link up renewable energy plants such as wind farms with the main power grid. See http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/bpamoco2.pdf  

  • The extinction of plants and animals worldwide was about 1,000 times faster during the last century than the average rate over the past 600 million years, according to British scientist Robert May, president of the Royal Society and former chief government science adviser. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4309534,00.html 

  • The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development urged the U.S. to raise taxes on fuel to encourage conservation. 

  • A report in the journal Nature by a group of researchers at the University of British Columbia at Vancouver contends that global seafood catches have been declining by almost 800 million pounds per year, rather than increasing by 700 million pounds per year as statistics have previously suggested. The discrepancy, according to the authors, is due to chronic misreporting of fish harvests by Chinese authorities. See http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=107359 

  • The North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) is seeking comments on its initiative studying environmental issues in an integrated North American electricity market. A discussion paper, "Environmental Challenges and Opportunities of the Evolving North American Electricity Market", has been prepared by the CEC Secretariat to facilitate dialogue on key environmental issues related to the emerging North American electricity market. Comments are requested and should be submitted by Jan. 10, 2002. See http://www.cec.org/news/details/index.cfm?varlan=english&ID=2431 and http://www.cec.org/programs_projects/other_initiatives/electricity/index.cfm?varlan=english 

  • Local air enforcement authorities are falling short in the U.K., according to a report issued by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. See http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2001/011123a.htm 

  • Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Secretary Margaret Beckett convened a "waste summit" to discuss progress, or lack thereof, in waste reduction. The EU Landfill Directive requires the U.K. to reduce the landfilling of biodegradable municipal waste by two-thirds of its 1995 level by 2020. To help accomplish that mandate, the government has set statutory targets in England, which will triple local authority recycling and composting of household waste by 2005/6. The government also has a target to cut the amount of industrial and commercial waste going to landfill in England. The Department also said that compliance with the European Commission's ban on the sale of refrigerators using ozone-depleting substances (and on landfilling of discards before the CFCs have been removed), which goes into effect Jan. 1, 2002, would not be possible. See http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2001/011121c.htm 

red bar graphic  CLIMATE CHANGE

  • Tuvalu, a small Pacific island nation that was the first to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, said it will begin evacuating residents next year, due to rising waters. So far, no other country has expressed a willingness to accept them.

  • The European Commission issued a report, "The Carbon Sink: Absorption Capacity of the European Terrestrial Biosphere." 

  • Europe's Union of the Electricity Industry issued a paper that argues for expansion of the scope of the EU emissions trading program. See http://www.eurelectric.org/Public/content  

  • Canada announced a number of initiatives to address climate change. The projects, worth $425.15 million (Canadian), are funded as part of the $1.1 billion in climate change commitments made in Budget 2000 and the Action Plan 2000 on Climate Change announced in October 2000. "The initiatives we're announcing today reach out to all Canadians and all sectors of our economy, and they will put us significantly closer to meeting our climate change goals," said Minister of Natural Resources Ralph Goodale. "They demonstrate our determination to continue leading the way on climate change and our commitment to finding solutions."

    "We are putting these tools in place to continue the partnership between governments, industry, and all Canadians in addressing climate change," said Minister of the Environment David Anderson. "These initiatives will offer Canadians choices for cleaner energy, more energy-efficient buildings and homes, and greener transportation. By building on past actions and by acting today, we can contribute to a better, more secure tomorrow."

    Among the initiatives announced by the Ministers are the following: 

    (1) the Commercial/Institutional Buildings Retrofit Initiative ($30 million) provides incentives, training, information and advice to encourage commercial and institutional organizations to carry out energy-efficient retrofit projects on existing facilities to reduce energy consumption and, by extension, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; 
    (2) the Energy Efficient Housing Initiative ($35 million), which builds on the success of the EnerGuide for Houses program by offering a national marketing effort, increased support in northern and remote communities and the ability to link homeowners with qualified, trained renovators. The program also promotes the construction and purchase of energy-efficient houses;
    (3) the Technology Innovation Program ($19 million), which will accelerate the development of cost-effective GHG mitigation technologies; and
    (4) the Clean Development Mechanism/Joint Implementation Office ($25.25 million), which will greatly expand activities to support Canadian companies' pursuit of GHG credits through project investments in other countries. Details on the 28 projects can be found at http://www.climatechange.gc.ca/english/action_plan/na_intro.shtml