Designing Designing De De MinimisMinimis

Indiana Antidegradation WorkshopIndiana Antidegradation Workshop

April 29, 2008April 29, 2008

Brad Klein -- Environmental Law & Policy CenterBrad Klein -- Environmental Law & Policy Center

Scope of Scope of de minimisde minimis doctrinedoctrine

Not mentioned in federal antidegradation Not mentioned in federal antidegradation regulation but under common law courts regulation but under common law courts allow that a limited exception for allow that a limited exception for insignificant cases be implied into a insignificant cases be implied into a regulation. regulation.

EPA will review state rules on a “case-by-EPA will review state rules on a “case-by-case basis” to ensure that exemption does case basis” to ensure that exemption does not allow significant degradation either not allow significant degradation either individually or cumulatively.individually or cumulatively.

IC 13-18-3 (a/k/a SEA 431)IC 13-18-3 (a/k/a SEA 431)

Requires a Requires a de minimisde minimis threshold threshold for Outstanding State Resource for Outstanding State Resource WatersWaters

Does not limit IDEM to any specific Does not limit IDEM to any specific approach for defining what approach for defining what qualifies as qualifies as de minimisde minimis

Limits on De minimis Limits on De minimis ExceptionsExceptions

An allowable de minimis test will An allowable de minimis test will only exempt “trifling matters” from only exempt “trifling matters” from detailed study, but avoid detailed study, but avoid unnecessary pollution and trigger unnecessary pollution and trigger full antidegradation review for all full antidegradation review for all significant new or expanded significant new or expanded discharges.discharges.

U.S. EPA’s interpretationU.S. EPA’s interpretation

Can’t allow “significant degradation”Can’t allow “significant degradation”

States should consider the extent of the States should consider the extent of the

loading capacity (USEPA calls this “assimilative loading capacity (USEPA calls this “assimilative

capacity”) used by the increase as part of the capacity”) used by the increase as part of the

testtest

Incorporate a “cumulative cap”Incorporate a “cumulative cap”

Also consider overall pollutant loadingAlso consider overall pollutant loading

E. King memo (2005)E. King memo (2005)

De MinimisDe Minimis – Draft Rule – Draft Rule Sec. 6Sec. 6

IDEM draft uses three concepts:IDEM draft uses three concepts:DTBELsDTBELs““end of pipe” WQBELsend of pipe” WQBELs10% “unused loading 10% “unused loading

capacity”capacity”

Concerns with DTBELs…Concerns with DTBELs…

Focus exclusively on treatment Focus exclusively on treatment technology, rather than pollution technology, rather than pollution avoidance or minimization.avoidance or minimization.

May be difficult and/or controversial to May be difficult and/or controversial to identify and keep current. identify and keep current.

Will be inappropriate in many situations Will be inappropriate in many situations (e.g. little assimilative capacity, discharge (e.g. little assimilative capacity, discharge to sensitive or important waters)to sensitive or important waters)

DTBEL solutions…DTBEL solutions…

Must consider pollution avoidance or Must consider pollution avoidance or minimization alternatives before minimization alternatives before applying DTBEL.applying DTBEL.

Ensure limits reflect best treatment Ensure limits reflect best treatment technology possible.technology possible.

Consider restricting DTBELs in Consider restricting DTBELs in sensitive waters and where little sensitive waters and where little dilution available.dilution available.

Loading or “Assimilative” Loading or “Assimilative” capacitycapacity

“ “The difference between the The difference between the applicable water quality criterion applicable water quality criterion for a pollutant parameter and the for a pollutant parameter and the ambient water quality for that ambient water quality for that pollutant parameter where it is pollutant parameter where it is better than the criterionbetter than the criterion…”…”

E. King memo (2005)E. King memo (2005)

Loading capacity exampleLoading capacity example

Water quality criterion = 100 mg/L

0 mg/L

20 mg/L

100 mg/L

Pollutant“X”

Ambient concentration = 20 mg/L

Loading or “assimilative” capacity “The available assimilative capacity of a waterbody is a valuable natural resource.” (U.S. EPA, 2005)

Loading capacity example: Loading capacity example:

5% de minimis – first 5% de minimis – first “bite”“bite”

Water quality criterion = 100 mg/L

0 mg/L

20 mg/L

100 mg/L

Pollutant“X”

baseline concentration = 20 mg/L

5 percent of loading capacity: (100 mg/L – 20 mg/L) x (5%) = 4 mg/L

24 mg/L de minimis if new conc. < 24 mg/L

5% de minimis – second 5% de minimis – second “bite”“bite”

Water quality criterion = 100 mg/L

0 mg/L

100 mg/L

Pollutant“X”

5 percent of remaining loading capacity: (100 mg/L – 24 mg/L) x (5%) = 3.8 mg/L

24 mg/L

de minimis if new conc. < 27.8 mg/L27.8 mg/L

ambient concentration = 24 mg/L

baseline concentration = 20 mg/L

Flaws in Loading Capacity Flaws in Loading Capacity Approach:Approach:

1)1) Allows incremental “creeping” Allows incremental “creeping” degradationdegradation

2)2) Allows huge unnecessary new Allows huge unnecessary new pollution in large volume waterspollution in large volume waters

3)3) Cannot apply % of loading Cannot apply % of loading capacity for pollutants lacking capacity for pollutants lacking numeric criterianumeric criteria

4)4) Cannot apply to General PermitsCannot apply to General Permits

Problem 1:Problem 1:

How do we prevent incremental How do we prevent incremental degradation over time from degradation over time from consuming majority of loading consuming majority of loading capacity without a single capacity without a single antidegradation review? antidegradation review?

Potential SolutionsPotential Solutions

Use a cumulative capUse a cumulative cap Strongly recommended by U.S. EPAStrongly recommended by U.S. EPA Required by lawRequired by law Cap > 20% would likely be Cap > 20% would likely be

disapproved under Ohio Valley disapproved under Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition.Environmental Coalition.

Loading capacity: Loading capacity: 20% cumulative cap20% cumulative cap

Water quality criterion = 100 mg/L

0 mg/L

20 mg/L

100 mg/L

Pollutant“X”

Baseline concentration = 20 mg/L

20 percent of baseline loading capacity: (100 mg/L – 20 mg/L) x (20%) = 16 mg/L

36 mg/L Total de minimis “bites” capped at 36 mg/L

27.8 mg/L

CAP

Problem 2:Problem 2:

How do we identify significant new How do we identify significant new or expanded loadings in large or expanded loadings in large waters like Lake Michigan or the waters like Lake Michigan or the Ohio River?Ohio River?

Solution …Solution …

Indiana must place overall limit on Indiana must place overall limit on volume of de minimis volume of de minimis new/expanded loading. new/expanded loading.

For example, expansions of more For example, expansions of more than .5 MGD cannot be considered than .5 MGD cannot be considered de minimisde minimis. .

Problem 3:Problem 3:

What should be done with What should be done with pollutants that lack numeric pollutants that lack numeric criteria? criteria?

Possible Solutions … Possible Solutions …

First consider options for minimizing or First consider options for minimizing or redirecting the discharge.redirecting the discharge.

Apply narrative criteria “translator” if Apply narrative criteria “translator” if practicablepracticable

For common pollutants (e.g. nitrogen For common pollutants (e.g. nitrogen and phosphorus) use DTBELs. and phosphorus) use DTBELs.

Restrict or eliminate de minimis for Restrict or eliminate de minimis for certain pollutants (e.g. bioaccumulative certain pollutants (e.g. bioaccumulative pollutants, potential carcinogenic or pollutants, potential carcinogenic or hormone disrupting pollutants).hormone disrupting pollutants).

Problem 4:Problem 4:

How do we ensure that the use of How do we ensure that the use of general permits does not undermine general permits does not undermine the antidegradation policy? the antidegradation policy?

““the EPA has not explained how the type of review called the EPA has not explained how the type of review called for in § 131.12(a)(2), which is location-specific and for in § 131.12(a)(2), which is location-specific and requires public participation, can be done on a statewide or requires public participation, can be done on a statewide or nationwide basis …”nationwide basis …”

Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, 279 F. Supp 2d at 762. Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, 279 F. Supp 2d at 762.

Solution …Solution … Design general permits so that they allow Design general permits so that they allow

only de minimis degradation in all cases.only de minimis degradation in all cases. Do not allow use of general permits in Do not allow use of general permits in

sensitive waters.sensitive waters. Ensure that there is a loading cap on Ensure that there is a loading cap on

general permit sources. general permit sources. Build in public notice of general permit Build in public notice of general permit

usage.usage. Preserve authority of IDEM to require Preserve authority of IDEM to require

individual permits where general permit individual permits where general permit would allow more than trivial degradation. would allow more than trivial degradation.

Revised draft shouldRevised draft should1)1) Refine DTBEL concept to ensure use of best Refine DTBEL concept to ensure use of best

technology.technology.2)2) Consider opportunities to minimize or redirect Consider opportunities to minimize or redirect

discharges for all permits for new or increased discharges for all permits for new or increased loadings.loadings.

3)3) Incorporate reasonable cumulative cap (i.e. no more Incorporate reasonable cumulative cap (i.e. no more than 20%) on consumption of loading capacity.than 20%) on consumption of loading capacity.

4)4) Make clear that substantial new or increased Make clear that substantial new or increased discharges to large waters like Lake Michigan and discharges to large waters like Lake Michigan and the Ohio River are not considered de minimis.the Ohio River are not considered de minimis.

5)5) Make clear that pollutants are covered that lack Make clear that pollutants are covered that lack numeric criteria.numeric criteria.

6)6) Ensure that general permits allow only de minimis Ensure that general permits allow only de minimis pollution. pollution.