ACEC IndianaEnvironmental Business Conference

October 13, 2010

Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE, QEP CommissionerIN Department of Environmental Management

1

2

IDEM’s MissionWe 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.

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

5

Performance Metrics Oct 2010Quality of Hoosiers' Environment Result Target Comments

% 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% 93+9 (102) out of 98+9

(108)

% of Hoosiers receiving water from facilities incompliance with safe drinking water standards 99.2% 99% 95%

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

6

Performance Metrics June 2005Quality 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

Potential Regulatory Issues--AirAt 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

13

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.

14

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.

15

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.

16

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.

17

CWA Action Plan New System Electronic reporting is an important part of the foundation on

which the new system is built.1) Integrate the process for prioritizing use of permitting,

monitoring and enforcement tools to address serious water quality problems.

2) 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.

3) Evaluate the seriousness of violations and water quality problems not just on an individual source basis, but at corporate, sector, watershed, and geographic levels.

18

CWA Action Plan New System4) Use information beyond traditional EPA/state systems to

improve targeting of serious noncompliance and/or setting water permitting priorities, especially to identify “non-filers”.

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.

19

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.

20

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.

21

CWA Action Plan New System8) 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.

Thank You

Tom EasterlyCommissioner

Indiana Department of Environmental Management317-232-8611

teasterly@idem.in.gov

22