My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-01-03_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - P2008043 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Prospect
>
P2008043
>
2011-01-03_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - P2008043 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:28:25 PM
Creation date
3/29/2011 8:15:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
P2008043
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Date
1/3/2011
Doc Name
Petition For Review of UIC Permit- 1.
From
Coloradoans Against Resource Destruction
To
EPA
Permit Index Doc Type
Gen. Correspondence
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
76
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
scientific methodology employed to arrive at a conclusion that the permit will be protective of <br />underground sources of drinking water. <br />Overall, the SWDA and associated regulations provide that "no injection shall be <br />authorized by permit or rule if it results in the movement of fluid containing any contaminant <br />into Underground Sources of Drinking Water" 40 CFR § 144.1(g). In order to ensure compliance <br />with the SDWA and EPA regulations, the EPA must assess the evidence with respect to the <br />existence and potential cross-aquifer communication that may result from these historic wells, <br />and require proper abandonment be completed prior to issuing a permit for injection. However, <br />as it currently stands, the record is insufficient to demonstrate that the permit will achieve the <br />protection of all USDW. As such, the strictures of the APA preclude the issuance of a permit in <br />this case until the applicant or EPA can provide sufficient evidence demonstrating the ability to <br />comply with applicable law. <br />III. This case presents substantial policy issues that warrant review. <br />In addition to the administrative record deficiencies and resulting clearly erroneous <br />findings of fact and conclusions of law detailed herein, the Board should exercise its discretion <br />based on important policy considerations at issue in this case. In particular, the Board should <br />accept review of this case to ensure that EPA permitting exercises be based on a policy that <br />ensures decision are based upon a full record, with evidence to support all conclusions inherent <br />in the decision-making process, and to ensure full participation by the affected public. <br />The EAB has opined on the importance of EPA conducting a full review of the relevant <br />facts underlying a permitting decision: <br />the goal inherent in the permitting process [is] that, to the maximum extent possible, <br />permit decisions be fully informed by all relevant and available information. It is difficult <br />to fathom a policy rationale for denying permit decisionmakers access to potentially <br />relevant and instructive information; <br />17
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.