Arizona Manufacturers Council Environmental & Sustainability - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Arizona Manufacturers Council

Environmental & Sustainability Summit

August 15, 2014

ADEQ: A LASTING LEGACY

Henry Darwin, ADEQ Director

Our Ecosystem

Our Mission

Our Ecosystem

Our Mission

Our Mission

What we do: How we do it:

Planning Permits Inspections Monitoring Data Analysis Cleanups Outreach Lean Management System ADEQ Way Continuous Improvement Career Paths Spot Incentives Pay-for-Performance Training

ADEQ’s approach emphasizes not only what we do to fulfill the mission, but also how we do it.

Our Mission

What we strive for:

A Lasting Legacy of Sustainable Environmental Stewardship

Our Mission

Demonstrated Results

To recap some key highlights, since beginning its Lean transformation in 2012, ADEQ has:

• Reduced by more than 60% the average permitting timelines for the most

complex permits that industry needs

• Reduced by more than 50% the average time required to return facilities to

compliance

• Reduced by more than 70% the average time to retrieve public records
• More than doubled the number of state-lead underground storage tank

cleanups (as compared to 2011)

• Closed two State superfund sites (0 closures in the previous 15+ years)
• Avoided unnecessary air quality controls for industry by leading the nation

in Exceptional (Dust) Event demonstrations

• Completed more than 150 process improvement projects to date,

accounting for 53% of the improvement projects cited in the Government Transformation Office’s 2013 Annual Report

What we strive for:

A Lasting Legacy of Sustainable Environmental Stewardship

Our Mission

WASTE PROGRAMS DIVISION

Laura Malone, Director

Improving the WQARF Process

• ADEQ has accelerated work in FY14

– 12 sites moved to the draft RI Phase – Remedial Investigations – 2 years versus 8 years – Feasibility Studies – evaluating process – goal is 2 years or less – Community Involvement – evaluating the process

• New contracting mechanism – “Best Value” ensures we have

the right talent on the job

WQARF Funding

• Fee structure cornerstone
• f new program
• Assured ADEQ would

receive $15M from CIT – cover orphan share

• With other fees – total

budget $18M

CIT Other fees

Corporate Tax Revenue Comparison

All numbers expressed in thousands

$15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $5,000 $10,000 $11,000 $15,000 $13,000 $13,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $9,947 $109 $6,623 $6,473 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Mandated Received Retained (post reduction)

Estimated Future Costs of WQARF

$424MM $95MM $155MM $79MM

WQARF Sites Federal Sites PI Sites Salaries/G&A

with escalation

If Only …

Continuing Challenges

• Program implementation significantly hindered by funding
• shortfalls. WQARF is not sustainable.
• 39 potential new WQARF sites being evaluated for listing
• Orphan shares are significantly higher than the original legislative

study committee anticipated

• EPA may not continue to defer site action – goes back to joint

and severable liability

What You Can Do To Help

• Play an active role in supporting full funding
• Embrace dynamic work plan implementation in order to

accelerate cleanups

• Look for innovative ways to get site characterized, remediated

and closed

• Focus on what’s important….the environment!

• Oct 2010: ADEQ filed Complaint under WQARF and

CERCLA against 21 Settling Parties.

• Mar 2011: ADEQ filed Motion to Enter the 18 Consent

Decrees with 21 Settling Parties.

• Feb 2012: Court approved settlements.
• Mar 2012: Appeal filed in the 9th Circuit by Intervenors.

Above: Driving south on the road through

• BSL. Note the wavy curb line due to

landfill subsidence. It was straight when the road was built .

Broadway-Pantano WQARF SITE

Broadway-Pantano WQARF SITE

• Issue raised in Appeal: whether the court used the

proper standard in reviewing the settlements and whether it had insufficient information before it to determine whether to approve the settlements.

• February 5, 2014: prior to oral argument and unanticipated by

either side, the Court ordered both parties be prepared to discuss the issue of what level of deference does a court owe to a state agency’s interpretation and application of CERCLA.

• Feb 10, 2014: Oral argument.
• Feb 25, 2014: Supplemental briefs filed.
• March 4, 2014: Colorado & Nevada filed amicus letters with the

court supporting Arizona’s arguments.

• August 1, 2014: Court Reversed in part and remanded the

matter back to the district court. The Court found that because the court did not “engage in a substantive analysis of the settlements’ terms” explaining in its finding, “the court deferred completely to [ADEQ’s] judgment that the proposed agreements were fair reasonable and consistent with federal law.”

This ruling may have an adverse impact on all WQARF/CERCLA settlements, especially early settlements,

• f requiring ADEQ to present detailed facts and

calculations to the Court before it will be able to rule whether the settlements should be approved. This may significantly slow the settlement process down as well as increase the burden on ADEQ and the settling parties to justify those settlements.

Ramifications of 9th Circuit Court Ruling Broadway-Pantano WQARF SITE

New ADEQ UST/LUST Programs – Recent Legislation

House Bill 2708 (51st Legislature, 2nd Regular Session 2014)

–

Delivery prohibition

–

Penny per gallon reverts back to ADEQ

–

Extends period for SAF payment claim submittal through 5pm December 31, 2015 (for releases reported prior to July 1, 2006)

–

Assurance Account funding (A.R.S. 49-1015) will be used to fund:

• A new and revised UST corrective action program
• Implement the new corrective action program

and existing UST leak prevention program

Senate Bill 1314 (51st Legislature, 2nd Regular Session 2014)

• Sec. 12. – Alternative to baseline assessment or standard policy

–

ADEQ conducting stakeholder meetings to help design new program

WATER QUALITY DIVISION

Michael Fulton, Director

• Safe Drinking Water Fees

– Rulemaking subject to

legislative authority

– Establish fees for safe

drinking water program services for which no fees are currently charged

– Where fees exist, review

and update fees as appropriate

ADEQ Rules

ADEQ Rules

• Certified Operator Fees

– Proposed Rulemaking:

July 11, 2014 (20 A.A.R. 1744)

– Establish new and

reasonable fees for the certification of drinking water and wastewater system operators

– Public hearings held;

proposed to be effective 7/1/2015

• Surface water quality standards

– Docket Opening:

January 17, 2014 (20 A.A.R. 135)

– Last amended in 2009 – A directed and focused review

including:

• numeric water quality standards for

nutrients

• net ecological benefit
• adoption of site specific standards
• technical corrections

– Informal comment period to be

conducted with interested parties.

Tentative meeting set for 9/4

ADEQ Rules

• Repealing biosolids

incineration prohibition

– Docket Opening:

January 17, 2014 (20 A.A.R. 135)

– Allow the incineration of

biosolids subject to Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act requirements

ADEQ Rules

• Implementation of SB 1274:

Aquifer Protection Permit financial assurance demonstrations

– Establishing financial

assurance review frequency based upon risk.

– Will require updates to permit

compliance schedules to:

• Assure financial assurance

mechanism is in force;

• Review/update closure cost

estimates.

• Proposed EPA/Army Corps of

Engineers Rule: Definition of “Waters of the United States” Under the Clean Water Act

– Assessing whether/how proposed

definition would change AZ CWA Section 402 permitting approach

– Vigorous national debate

• Preserves current exemptions for

farming activities

• Categorical inclusion of “tributaries”

as jurisdictional

• No firm description of how to determine

“significant nexus”

AIR QUALITY DIVISION

Eric Massey, Director

Air Quality News

Current Challenge

2 3 4 1 2020 2030

Future Challenge