PUB00144 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Western States Water Council Water Quality Committee Washington, DC March 28, 2006 I. I I EP A provided to Trout Unlimited a covenant not to sue and also contribution protection in the event that the 3rd party would seek contribution under Superfund. The project is halfway completed. That was a success story. At the agency we are trying to create a model Good Samaritan agreement that uses the friendly orders as a model. Instead of entering an agreement, we could bless their work and tell them to go forth and do good work. Obviously this is increasingly important in the West. We are accelerating the pace of these cleanups. This is only intended to be in place until a legislative fix gets put into place. There is a lot more to come. Chairman Duncan from Tennessee is very interested in this. He recognizes the need to pass legislation. Shaun McGrath: The states are encouraged by the leadership EP A is bringing to this Issue. Brent, your interest and Ben's have elevated this and we appreciate it. Reaffirming the problems states and others are facing as they encounter the situations. WGA is looking at a position on the two bills that are out there. If the Administration comes forward with legislation that cuts out the middle ground. . Paul Frohardt: Seconded Shaun's statements in expressing appreciation for EPA's help. Tim Brown: Is there anything in CERCLA or Superfund that limits authority to clean them up? Brent Fewell: The short answer is, Yes, there are limitations. Many sites will never achieve water quality standards. There are major administrative hurdles to get over, and that's why we believe a legislative fix is the only viable effort. Tim Brown: We produced a report that is available. It's available in hard copy and on the web site. 9th Circuit Decision on Arizona NPDES Program Delegation Joan Card: The. 9th Circuit on August 22, 2005, moved to vacate the delegation of the Clean Water Act Program from EPA to Arizona. The court said that EPA and the Fish and Wildlife Service failed to consider the indirect effects on listed species arising from the delegation and the principal indirect effect that they pointed out was that there were no longer be Section 7 consultation on permitting, as there is when EP A administers the permitting program. That decision has not been put into effect with a mandate. The court is now considering a 8 .