Transcript ACEC Indiana Environmental Business Conference October 13, 2010 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE, QEP Commissioner IN Department of Environmental Management.

ACEC Indiana
Environmental Business Conference
October 13, 2010
Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE, QEP Commissioner
IN Department of Environmental Management
1
IDEM’s Mission
We Protect Hoosiers and Our Environment
IDEM’s mission is to implement federal and state
regulations to protect human health and the
environment while allowing the environmentally
sound operations of industrial, agricultural,
commercial and government activities vital to a
prosperous economy.
2
How Does IDEM Protect
Hoosiers and Our Environment?
•
•
Develop regulations and issue permits to
restrict discharges to the environment to safe
levels.
Inspect and monitor permitted facilities to
ensure compliance with the permits.
3
How Does IDEM Protect
Hoosiers and Our Environment?
•
•
Use compliance assistance and/or enforcement
when people exceed their permit levels or
violate regulations.
Educate people on their environmental
responsibilities.
4
Performance Metrics Oct 2010
Quality of Hoosiers' Environment
Result
Target
% of Hoosiers in counties meeting air quality
standards
100%
100%
80%
% of CSO Communities with approved programs
to prevent the release of untreated sewage
94.4%
100%
20%
% of Hoosiers receiving water from facilities in
compliance with safe drinking water standards
99.2%
99%
95%
Comments
93+9 (102) out of 98+9
(108)
Permitting Efficiency Total calendar days accumulated in issuing environmental permits, as determined by state statute
Land
20,070
66,565
86,864
Air
26,253
207,000
385,000
Water
14,377
48,000
200,000
* Places emphasis on back logged permits
Compliance Total percentage of compliance observations from regulated customers within acceptable compliance standards
Inspections
96.19%
97%
75%
Self reporting
96.86%
99%
95%
Continuous monitoring (COM)
99.84%
99.90%
99%
* Tracks observations and not just inspections
5
Performance Metrics June 2005
Quality of Hoosiers' Environment
Result
Target
Comments
% of Hoosiers in counties meeting air quality
standards
61%
100%
80%
12 counties & 2,408,571 of
6,195,643 above standard
% of CSO Communities with approved programs
to prevent the release of untreated sewage
4%
100%
20%
75% by 2007 is goal
Permitting Efficiency Total calendar days accumulated in issuing environmental permits, as determined by state statute
Land
100,013
66,565
86,864
Air
511,000
207,000
385,000
Water
301,000
48,000
200,000
* Places emphasis on back logged permits
Compliance Total percentage of compliance observations from regulated customers within acceptable compliance standards
Inspections
95.46%
97%
75%
Self reporting
97.11%
99%
95%
Continuous monitoring (COM)
99.19%
99.90%
98.95%
* Tracks observations and not just inspections
Organizational Transformation Budgetary agency dollars spent on key outside contracts for core agency functions.
Dollars spent on outside services per year
$6,179,367
$0
$3,447,017
6
Potential Regulatory Issues--Air
At the end of 2009, all of Indiana met every currently
effective NAAQS for the first time since NAAQS
were established in the 1970’s.
– New 75 ppb 1 hour SO2 Air Quality Standard.
– New 100 ppb short term NOx Air Quality Standard.
– U.S. EPA reconsideration of 0.075 ppm ozone Air Quality
Standard.
– U.S. EPA review of the 15 microgram/cubic meter
annual PM2.5 Air Quality Standard.
• U.S. EPA inaction on PM redesignation requests.
7
GHG Air Permits
• IDEM is using the expedited rulemaking
process and emergency rulemaking to obtain
the legal authority to issue the federally
required GHG permits by 1/2/2011.
• We can use the same process to adjust the
rule for any changes due to congressional or
court action.
8
Indiana Clean Water Act Issues
• Environmental Group Petition for Withdrawal of
Approval of the NPDES Program.
– Antidegradation
– General Permits
– Coal Mines
• Intake Structures (316(b))
– Currently, there are no applicable nationwide standards
implementing Section 316(b) for existing power plants. As
a result, best technology available (BTA) determinations
must be made on a case-by-case basis, using best
professional judgment.
9
Potential Regulatory Issues-Water
• Antidegradation regulations.
• Algae issues and nutrient regulations.
– Great Lakes, Gulf of Mexico, Ohio River, Indiana
lakes, rivers and reservoirs.
•
•
•
•
Pesticide General Permit.
Pharmaceuticals and other trace pollutants.
IDEM action on the final five extended permits.
More attention to the Great Lakes.
10
Potential Regulatory Issues--Land
• RISC guidance and regulations implementing
HB1162.
• Coal combustion waste regulations.
• U. S. EPA to speed up review of pollutant risk
evaluations.
11
Potential Regulatory Issues General
• Increased U.S. EPA emphasis on enforcement
to improve environmental quality.
• U.S. EPA reevaluation of permitting decisions
made during the past eight years.
• IDEM Outdoor Hydronic Heater Rule restart.
• Increased scrutiny of all coal related activities.
• Transparency.
12
OECA/OW Shared Vision for Revamping the
CWA NPDES Program to Improve Water Quality
• CWA Action Plan and Coming Together for Clean
Water identify the need to:
– Improve and adapt NPDES regulations, permitting,
compliance, and enforcement to better address today’s
water quality stressors; and,
– Strengthen communications, transparency and state-EPA
planning and program evaluation efforts to improve the
performance of the NPDES regulatory program.
13
CWA Action Plan General Findings
• Big stressors have changed—many dispersed sources
(e.g., agricultural & urban/suburban).
• Compliance is a concern in many sectors.
• Government regulatory resources are limited:
– Must create efficiencies in how and what work is done to
move beyond traditional model of individual facility on-site
inspections and enforcement actions.
• Technology advances provide new opportunities to
adapt regulatory tools to improve environmental
performance.
14
Ongoing U.S.EPA CWA Actions
• NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule, proposed rule Spring 2011 and Final
in Fall 2012.
• U.S.EPA Enforcement Initiatives: Municipal (CSO, SSO, Stormwater);
and CAFO.
• Joint (OECA/OW) Annual CWA NPDES Work Plans per June 2010
Interim Guidance—IDEM’s draft plan focuses on semi-public
community systems.
• Quick Fixes to remove perpetual reporting violations and distinguish
failure to submit DMR from state/EPA data entry gap.
– U.S. EPA has not started this work, but given strong support to do
this, and low cost, makes sense to move forward now.
• U.S.EPA is soliciting public and state input to improve the
transparency of the NPDES information it presents to the public.
– IDEM working to clean up U.S. EPA’s data files for Indiana facilities.
15
CWA Action Plan New System
• Design a new system to focus regulatory actions
(permitting, compliance monitoring, enforcement)
on the most important sources impacting water
quality.
– In FY2011, develop detailed blueprint for the new system,
based on 10 key principles set forth in the 9/8/10 paper.
– In FY2011, develop new analytical tools for improved
permit priority setting and enforcement targeting.
– FY2012 actions will be identified as part of detailed
blueprint.
16
CWA Action Plan New System

1)
2)
3)
Electronic reporting is an important part of the foundation on
which the new system is built.
Integrate the process for prioritizing use of permitting,
monitoring and enforcement tools to address serious water
quality problems.
Recognize contribution of regulated sources when identifying
water quality problems needing regulatory attention (majors
and non-majors, individual and general permittees). This
includes considering the relative contribution of non-regulated
sources.
Evaluate the seriousness of violations and water quality
problems not just on an individual source basis, but at
corporate, sector, watershed, and geographic levels.
17
CWA Action Plan New System
4)
Use information beyond traditional EPA/state systems to
improve targeting of serious noncompliance and/or setting
water permitting priorities, especially to identify “nonfilers”.
5) Ensure that our tools for using national data on impaired
waters recognize its limitations/variability.
– Need to consider new tools to identify waters that may
not be meeting water quality standards or are priorities
for protection (e.g., close to drinking water intake) for
purposes of prioritizing permitting and enforcement.
18
CWA Action Plan New System
6)
Include a multi-tier violation classification system, rather
than the existing two tier Significant Non Compliance (SNC)
policy.
– Would address use of all tools for responding to
noncompliance, including compliance assistance,
informal responses (e.g. Notices of Violation or NOVs),
administrative orders, administrative penalty order, civil
actions, criminal actions, and transparency.
19
CWA Action Plan New System
7)
Incorporate electronic methods to use compliance
assistance and informal enforcement responses in
responding to “minor” violations as identified in the new
multi-tiered classification system.
– U.S.EPA could build this functionality into the ICIS-NPDES
database for states to use, or states could do this thru
their own systems.
– U.S.EPA is not proposing to directly implement this in
authorized states.
20
CWA Action Plan New System
8)
Overhaul/replace and integrate regulations and policies on
majors, priority permits, RNC/QNCR, EMS SNC, and Watch
List.
9) Ensure that any priority setting tools support joint
permitting/enforcement planning and program
performance measurement.
10) Improve transparency so that the public has more complete
information on NPDES regulated sources, applicable
permits, pollutants they are permitted to discharge, their
compliance status and the actions of regulatory agencies.
– The contribution of non-regulated sources should be
included so the public has better understanding of the
relative causes of water quality problems.
21
Thank You
Tom Easterly
Commissioner
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
317-232-8611
[email protected]
22