George Desch wrote:

Attached should be a letter soliciting comments on the proposed rule revisions to the Solid Waste Management Rules. Please feel free to distribute this to anyone you wish. We have sent the letter to solid waste district managers and environmental groups, but I am relying on electronic distribution for the mine site.

The second page of the letter includes the proposed language. I distributed an early draft of the language at a recent meeting of the EMCAG. This language is slightly different, in that it responded to early comments received about the use of the phrase "to the greatest extent practicable". The language included with the letter is the language which was submitted to the Secretary of State to begin the formal adoption process. The change in language still requires the Secretary to make a findings regarding the extent to which the proposed action meets the technical standards in the rules, but allows for the findings to be based on adherence to the standards . . . "to the extent practical in light of the overall objectives of the response action." This explicitly provides for consideration of objectives not included in the SW Rules, for instance, historic preservation.


Waste Management Division
103 South Main Street/West Office
Waterbury, Vermont 05671-0404
(802) 241-3888
FAX (802) 241-3296

February 14, 2002

Re: Solid Waste Management Rules - Proposed Revisions

Dear Solid Waste Managers and Interested Persons,

The Agency of Natural Resources recently filed a proposed rule with the Secretary of State's Office to revise the January 15, 1999 Solid Waste Management Rules. The text of the rule is included on the back of this letter, and we are inviting you to comment on the proposed changes. The rule revision allows the Secretary of ANR to consider waivers from technical standards of the existing Solid Waste rules, for a federal response action at a hazardous waste site. The Secretary may only waive the standards upon finding that the proposed action will meet the standards to the extent practical, and that it will not adversely affect public health, safety and the environment. This revision is necessary at USEPA Superfund sites where the application of the existing solid waste rules in their entirety can be impractical in scope and cost. There are two projects which are presently in the Superfund process which demand immediate attention, Elizabeth Mine, Strafford and Pownal Tannery. Application of the revised rule at these sites will allow for substantial improvements to the environment and protection of human health in a more expeditious manner. This rule revision could apply to sites in the future as well.

You may comment in several ways. You may write comments by addressing them to George Desch, at the address on the letterhead, or you may enter verbal or written comments at the public hearing scheduled for March 7, 2002, 10:00AM to Noon, at the Pavilion Auditorium, State Street, Montpelier, VT. Comment will be accepted until March 14, close of business. Following comment, a responsiveness summary will be prepared and, absent significant changes, it is expected that the final rule will be filed with the Secretary of State and the Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules (LCAR) by the end of March. Adoption of revised rule will occur after LCAR's review is completed. The earliest the revised rule could become effective is mid-May.

Go to our website at

http://www.anr.state.vt.us/dec/wastediv/solid/swrule1_15_99.htm

to review the Vermont SW Rules currently in effect. Your comments concerning this proposed amendment are welcome, and if you have any questions please contact me at 802-241-3491.

Sincerely,

George Desch
Hazardous Sites Manager

* * *

State of Vermont
Agency of Natural Resources
Department of Environmental Conservation
Proposed Revision of January 15, 1999 Solid Waste Management Rules

6-301(d) is added to read:

(d) The Secretary may waive technical and siting requirements of these rules provided the following conditions are met:

(1) The President of the United States intends to perform a response action, as defined in 42 U.S.C. ¤9601(25), in response to a release or threatened release of hazardous substances; and

(2) The Secretary makes a written finding that:

(A) the proposed response action will not adversely affect public health, safety or the environment; and

(B) the technical and siting requirements will be complied with to the extent practical in light of the overall objectives of the response.