EQCMinutes19860425

DETP/19/48794

''Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 12:01:36 PM (GMT+07:00) Goldstein, Meyer:'' eqc meeting eqc minutes DEQ 8-1986( Temp), f. & ef. 4-29-86 DEQ 10-1986, f. & ef. 5-9-86 DEQ 11-1986, F. & CERT. EF. 5-12-86 DEQ 9-1986, f. & ef. 5-1-86 DEQ 12-1986, f. & ef. 5-20-86 Eqc environmental quality commission minutes 4/25/86 EQC Agenda 10:00 a.m. *H. -2- April 25, 1986 Proposal to Declare a Threat to Drinking Water in a specifically defined area in Mid-Multnomah County pursuant to ORS 454.275 et. seq.--Proposed Final Order. I. Proposal to adopt a temporary rule to amend the existing cesspool rules--OAR 340-71-335 and ORS 340-73-080. *J. Proposed adoption of amendments to the State Implementation Plan regarding stack heights. dispersion techniques, deleting rules OAR 340-20-340 and 340-20-3451; adding replacement rule 340-20-047. *K. Proposed adoption of the consolidated and updated State of Oregon Clean Air Act Implementation Plan, OAR 340-20-047. *L. Proposed adoption of amendments·to Hazardous Waste Management Civil Penalty Schedule, OAR 340-12-068. M. Informational Report: Metropolitan Landfill Site Selection Criteria. N. Informational Report: Yard debris as a principal recyclable material in the Portland, Washington, Multnomah, Clackamas and West Linn Wastesheds. WORK SESSION The Conunission reserves this time, if needed, for further consideration of any item on the agenda. ---------------------------~--------------------------------------------------------- Because of the uncertain length of time needed, the Commission may deal with any item at any time in the meeting ·except those set for a specific time. Anyone wishing to b heard on any item not having a set time should arrive at 9:00 ain to avoid missing any item of interest. The Commission will have breakfast (7:30 a.m.) at the .Imperial Hotel, 400 SW Broadway Portland. Agenda items may be discussed at breakfest. The Commission will lunch at the DEQ offices, 522 SW Fifth Avenue, Portland. The next Commission meeting will·be June 13, 1986, in Tillamook. Copies of the staff reports on the agenda items are available by contacting the Director's Office of the Department of Environmental Quality, PO Box 1760, Portland, Oregon 97207, phone 229-5395, or toll-free 1-800-452-4011. Please specify the agend item letter when requesting. DOR721 5. Discussion of Possible Landfill Tour. Stan Biles, Assistant to the Director, suggested that the Commission tour the St. Johns Landfill and recycling facilities in the Portland area to better familiarize themselves with the garbage problem. The Commission agreed to a tour after their special meeting on June 27. FORMAL MEETING AGENDA ITEM A: Minutes of the March 14, 1986 EQC Meeting Chairman Petersen made the following correction to the minutes on page l, the first paragraph under Formal Meeting. He discovered the [turn was actually farther south than he had anticipated.) 276 degree radial was actually farther south than he had anticipated when abreast of Hayden Island. It was MOVED by Commissioner Bishop, seconded by Commissioner Brill and passed unanimously that the March 14, 1986 minutes be approved as amended. AGENDA ITEM B: Monthly Activity Report for February, 1986. Commissioner Denecke said this was the first time he had noticed so many aircraft items on the report of materials being disposed of at the Chem Security hazardous waste disposal facility at Arlington. He asked if they were coming primarily from Boeing. Michael Downs, Administrator of the Department's Hazardous and Solid Waste Division, reported back at the lunch meeting that the items were indeed from Boeing. AGENDA ITEM C: Tax Credit Applications Commissioner Bishop, noting there were an unusually large number of tax credit applications, MOVED that the Director's Recommendation be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Buist and passed unanimously. Director Hansen explained that the large number of applications was due to a deadline date of December 31, 1985 for certain facilities. AGENDA ITEM D: Request for Authorization to Conduct a Public Hearing on the Proposed Adoption of a Rule Establishing the Maximum Repair Permit Fee for Linn County. Linn County has requested authority to adopt a repair permit fee equal to the average amount the County has determined it costs to provide this service. Because the proposed fee exceeds the current fee established by the Commission, approval to charge a higher fee must be done by rule. The first step in the rulemaking.process is to request Commission authorization to proceed. OOY277.5 -4- Director's Recommendation Based upon the summation in the staff report, it is recommended the Cornmission authorize a public hearing to take testimony on the proposed rule amendments establishing a repair permit fee for Linn County. It is further recommended that the Commission authorize the Director to appoint a Department staff member to serve as Hearings Officer in this matter. · Bob Wilson, Linn County Environmental Health Department, appeared expressing support for the Director's Recommendation. It was MOVED by Commissioner Buist, seconded by Commissioner.Bishop and passed unanimously that that Director's Recommendation be approved. PUBLIC FORUM No one wished to appear. AGENDA ITEM E: Consideration of Hearing Authorization Requests by the Environmental Quality Commission At the Commission's March 14, 1986 meeting, Commissioner Denecke. raised the issue of the need or desirability for continued formal Commission approval of rulemaking hearing authorization requests. The Department was asked to review the matter and report back at this meeting. Commission authorization of rulemaking hearings is not required by statute or rule. The Department believes the current practice assures opportunity for the Commission to be informed and provide important input prior to hearing and is therefore recommending that the current practice be continued. Director's Recommendation It is recommended that the current practice of specific Commission approval of rulemaking hearing authorization requests be continued. It is also recommended that the Commission instruct the Department to review the present procedural rules, and propose amendments if appropriate. Cornmissioner Denecke was satisfied the practice served a useful purpose and said he was happy to have it continue. Chairman Petersen noted the hearing authorization process gives the Commission an opportunity to review issues before rules are proposed for adoption. He agreed it was a good idea to continue the practice and expressed his support for the Director's Recommendation. Director Hansen said it was important to note that this was one way in which the Department worked with the Commission to see that all issues are considered before rule adoption. DOY277.5 -s It was MOVED by Commissioner Buist seconded by Commissioner Denecke and passed unanimously that the Director's Recommendation be approved. AGENDA ITEM F: Informational Report: Review of FY 87 State/EPA Agreement and Opportunity for Public Comment The State/EPA Agreement is the contractual document which outlines what work the state will perform during Fiscal Year 87 supported.partially by federal dollars. Director's Recommendation It is recommended that the Commission: 1. Provide opportunity for public comment at today's meeting on the draft State/EPA agreement; and 2. Provide staff its comments on the policy implications of the draft agreement. John Charles, Oregon Environmental Council, testified he wanted the Department to expand their efforts in the area of nonpoint source water pollution control and did not see much in the State/EPA Agreement regarding nonpoint sources. He said that Oregon's assessment of its water quality problems began in the 1970's and 1985 data indicates little or no change in the problems identified earlier. Few areas of the state avoid nonpoint pollution to s.ome degree, he continued. Mr. Charles said the Department had the option of either taking a minimum of $100,000 from the Federal Environmental Protection Agency to use for ;n.onpoint pollution, or up to 1% of the construction giant· funds. In the .last two years DEQ has chosen to take the minimum. Mr. Charles said that last year the alternative of 1% of the construction grant funds would have brought the state $260,000. Mr. Charles suggested it would be wise to get the maximum amount of money for water quality planning in the nonpoint source program with a little less money for construction grants. Director Hansen said it was the Department's intent to take the maximum money from EPA to deal with nonpoint sources and that had been so noted in the construction grants staff report. He said the problem was not with intent but with a budget note contained in the President's budget which limits the amount of 205J money available. He said the Department's only concern now was with the federal requirement. Mr. Charles was pleased with Director Hansen's statement, and asked the Department to let him know if he could help. Chairman Petersen noted that he saw the focus changing from point sources to nonpoint sources and was very interested in getting a handle on the nonpoint source problem. The Commission accepted the Informational Report. DOY277.5 -6- I AGENDA ITEM G: Proposed Adoption of Rules to Establish Chapter 340, Division 120, siting and Permitting Requirements for Hazardous Waste and PCB Treatment and Disposal Facilities, and to Amend Division 110, Management of PCB. During the 1985 Session, the Oregon Legislature enacted Senate Bill 138 which requires the Commission to adopt rules to regulate the siting of hazardous waste and polychlorinated byphenyl (PCB) treatment and disposal facilities •• At the Commission's March 14 meeting, they authorized the Department to conduct public hearings on proposed rules. Testimony was received from 23 people at the public hearings and 35 people submitted written testimony. The proposed rules as presented in Division 120 establish additional siting and permitting requirements. The proposed rules as presented in Division 110 replace the existing rules for managing PCB. The Department is entering a new area with these rules. Future developments may require the Department to come back before the Commission with rule modifications. It must be ensured' that these rules do not act as a roadblock to needed facilities but it must also be ensured that these rules go far enough in protecting the public health and safety of the environment. Chairman Petersen noted that this'was a different approach to regulation in the very important area of hazardous waste and toxic waste. As such, before anyone in industry can site a facility to dispose and treat hazardous waste and PCB, the Commission must come up with rules of the game. He said the statute was unique in terms of the policy decisions made it it. The Legislature stated they did not want any more of this waste in Oregon than can be helped, and specified criteria on how large these sites can be. Recognizing, he continued, that there are agreements with other states on the acceptance of hazardous waste for disposal in Oregon. Chairman Petersen said the advisory committee did a very good job in wrestling with these issues and have helped to develop the proposed rules. Commissioner Bishop asked why portable facilities were exempted on time rather than on quantity. Bob Danko, of the Department's Hazardous and SOlid Waste Division, said the portable facilities were exempted on time so that a temporary facility did not become a longer-term facility. He said the Department did not want a quasi-permanent facility to be able to take advantage of this exemption. Commissioner Bishop asked why a limit was not put on the amount that could be treated within the time limit. Mr. Danko replied that the Department was not comfortable putting a quantity in the rule, as the Department's experience in this area so far had been limited. He said this issue had been dealt with among staff and the advisory committee and neither could come up with a good number to use. DOY277.5 -7- 340-120-001 (5) For the purposes of this Divsion, a facility can receive, with the Department's approval, as much as 10% of waste on a weekly basis from off the site and be an on-site facility. 340-120-010(2)(b) (A) The facility shall not be sized less than what is needed, in conjunction with existing facilities[,] in the compact states to treat or dispose of all hazardous waste or PCB generated, or reasonably projected to be generated over the next 10 years, in Oregon. 340-120-010(2) (b) (B) The facility shall not be sized greater than needed to treat or dispose of hazardous waste or PCB generated. 340-120-010 ( 2) (b) (C) If the facility is sized to treat or dispose of more hazardous waste[s] or PCB generated ••• 340-120-015 (3) •••• The Department is compliance with state permit. ultimately responsible for determining land use goals -fo-r the purpose of issuing a '• Referencing Chairman Petersen's proposal to delete 340-120-010(2) (b) (D), Director Hansen said in the final analysis what should be the result of that section would be a burden for the applicant to size down a facility to meet the requirement rather than sizing up to meet profitability of the operation. Unless there are unacceptable proposals, he continued,. this provision would not come into play because there are too many other factors. Representatives from Chem Security who were in the audience said they would prefer this provision did not exist, but it made no difference to them now. It was MOVED by Commissioner Denecke, seconded by Conunissioner Buist and passed unanimously that the Director's Reconunendation, as amended be approved. Chairman Petersen expressed his thanks to all who worked on this item. AGENDA ITEM H: Proposal to Declare.a Threat to Drinking Water in a Specifically Defined Area of Mid-Multnomah County Pursuant to ORS 454.275 et. seq.--Proposed Final Order DOY277.5 -14- •