DOCSLIB.ORG

DEQ Issued a Public Notice on May 19, 2017 Requesting Public Comment on DEQ's Draft Air Quality Permit for American Petroleum Environmental Services, Inc

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DEQ Issued a Public Notice on May 19, 2017 Requesting Public Comment on DEQ's Draft Air Quality Permit for American Petroleum Environmental Services, Inc American Petroleum Environmental Services Air Contaminant Discharge Permit 26-3021 Response to Comments DEQ issued a public notice on May 19, 2017 requesting public comment on DEQ's draft air quality permit for American Petroleum Environmental Services, Inc. DEQ mailed notice to property owners within at least one mile of the facility, and included additional zip codes and neighborhood associations where DEQ anticipated there would be interest. DEQ also provided public notice through publication m two local newspapers, posting of the notice on DEQ's website, and through email; subscribers ofDEQ's email notification list received a message about the proposed permit issuance and the chance to comment. The comment period closed at 5 p.m. on July 3, 2017. The following response to comments combines like topics and comments to minimize duplicates. Comments are paraphrased to address the main point and are not included verbatim. All written and oral (transcribed) comments are included as an addendum to this document. Comments relating to other facilities are not addressed by the responses below. Some of the following comments are verbatim, combined, or paraphrased with similar comments to reduce redundancy. 1. Comment The DEQ should issue American Petroleum Environmental Services (APES) an immediate Cease and Desist order (ORS 468.115(1)) requiring them to shut down until they can reduce emissions below levels that may be harmful to the residents in the area. DEQ should shut the facility down using the authority in OAR 340-216-0082 (permit revocation). DEQ should deny the permit renewal until all neighborhood concerns are met. DEQ response In order to issue a cease and desist order under Oregon Revised Stahite (ORS) 468.115, DEQ would need to determine that air pollution from APES was causing "an imminent and substantial endangerment to the health of persons," and the Governor would need to direct DEQ to enter such an order. DEQ has authority under Oregon Admmistrative Rule (OAR) 340-216-0082(4) to revoke an air quality permit if it finds that the pemiittee's activities are seriously endangering public health, safety or the environment. DEQ has not determined APES to be in violation of its air quality permit. Results of air sampling conducted by DEQ and EPA have not shown concentrations of air pollutants to exceed levels that would result in serious danger to public health, safety, or the environment. We therefore conclude that a cease and desist order is not appropriate at this time. 2. Comment DEQ should regulate the emissions of toxic air pollutants (e.g., dioxin, hexavalent chromium, lead) and prohibit the burning ofPCB containing oil. DEQ should require APES to meet the 1 I Page health-based benchmarks and implement the draft proposal under the Cleaner Air Oregon fi'amework that is currently in the works. DE 0 response The draft permit includes applicable existing requirements under current environmental rules and laws as related to toxic air pollutants. The permit cannot be used to create new emission standards unsupported by existing mle. The draft permit uses less than 2 parts per million (ppm) as the PCB limit for used oil combusted on site. EPA considers 2-ppm to be the quantifiable level ofPCB's in used oil. DEQ proposes to modify the "less than 2 ppm" to "non-PCB containing oil" to mitigate confusion. The health based benchmarks m the current DEQ rules are goals for air quality, but not enforceable standards a facility can be held to. Stricter requirements under a new industrial air toxics program, known as Cleaner Air Oregon, are currently under development and will be presented to the Environmental Quality Commission for review and adoption in 2018. Requirements that have not been adopted by the EQC cannot be implemented by DEQ. Cleaner Air Oregon may or may not address operations at APES. APES must comply with any applicable Cleaner Air Oregon requirements when the rules are adopted. APES will not be grandfathered out of the Cleaner Air Oregon rules ifDEQ issues this air quality renewal permit. APES has been operating under an expired permit with outdated permit conditions. The renewal permit contains current requirements that APES must comply with. DEQ intends to issue the renewal permit. 3. Comment The draft permit is inadequate to protect public health and does not set strict enough standards. DEQ should establish stricter requirements in the air quality permit. DEQ should require 24 hour per day, 7 day per week stack monitoring for all pollutants. Monitoring and reporting should be more frequent. Allow DEQ access at ALL times. DEQ response As stated above in response to Comment 2, the draft permit is based on current DEQ rules. Continuous full spectrum monitoring is not practicable to implement. In lieu of this type of monitoring, the permit requires APES to complete stack testing to verify emissions. Testing will be completed by a 3rd party testing company that must follow EPA Reference Methods. The 3rd party testing company must submit plans to DEQ for review and approval prior to testing. DEQ representatives will attend the stack test to verify the proper EPA test methods are used. The testing will be completed under representative conditions, meaning the testing will be conducted under the worst case operating conditions. Representative testing will challenge a piece of emissions control equipment called a thermal oxidizer. If the thermal oxidizer can 2 | Page meet the destruction efficiency required under that operating scenario, it will be able to under any future scenario. Operating parameters, like contaminant concenteation in the used oil, flow rate, process temperature, etc., will be included as monitoring conditions in the permit. APES renewed air quality permit requires periodic stack testing to verify continued conb'ol of emissions. 4. Comment DEQ should not allow APES to emit concentrations of S02 that are 10 times that of other oil refineries in the United States. DEQ response Current environmental law does not limit the concentration of Sulfur Dioxide emissions from the processes at APES. Therefore, the draft permit does not address the concentration of Sulphur Dioxide (SO^) in air emissions. Instead, the permit contains a Plant Site Emission Limit (PSEL) for S02. PSELs are limits on the overall amount of emissions from activities at a facility in a year. The burning of fuel in the oil heater and the regeneration of the oil filtration system are sources of S02 emissions. By comparing the inlet sulfur concentration to the outlet sulfur concentration 862 emissions, a total amount ofS02 emissions is determined. The difference between the inlet and outlet concentrations represents the total sulfur remaining in the system after one complete filtration cycle. During filter regeneration, the remaining sulfur is converted to SOs. 5. Comment An independent investigation into overall compliance including emissions from the facility and removal of TOs in 2006. Independent stack testing should be required and paid for by APES. An independent investigation into DEQ's implementation of the permitting program and compliance with regulations should be conducted. DEQ response The thermal oxidizer removed from the facility in 2006 was not required by permit, only acknowledged in the review report, and not required for facility operation. The removal of the control equipment was a violation because the previous owner failed to notify DEQ the device was being removed. DEQ could not legally cite APES for the violation because the removal occurred under previous ownership. APES is required to have stack testing conducted by a certified stack testing company. The proposed permit requires periodic stack testing; see response to Comment 4, above. DEQ's permitting programs are periodically evaluated by EPA as part of implementing federal requirements. DEQ often consults with the Oregon Department of Justice and DEQ's Office of Compliance and Enforcement, and the EPA to ensure the air quality program is implementing regulations consistently and according to state statute and administrative rules. 3]Page 6. Comment DEQ should require a higher standard than 97% control for the thermal oxidizer. DEQ response DEQ drafts permits requiring facilities to maintain compliance 100% of the time. The thermal oxidizer is likely to exceed the 97% control efficiency stated m the permit, but 97% is considered typically achievable control technology, which is the mle DEQ is implementing, and allows a small buffer zone for compliance. Commenters are correct that 97% control allows 3 times the amount of emissions that 99% control would allow; however, 99% does not control 3 times as many emissions compared to 97% control. EXAMPLE: Facility A emits 10 tpy VOC. 99% control allows 0.1 tpy VOC emissions. 97% control allows 0.3 fpy VOC emissions. 7. Comment Reclassify APES as a Title V source. Require best available control technology. Eliminate odors, not just mitigate DEQ response Title V permittmg is triggered for specific emission levels and/or being subject to regulations that require Title V permitting. Sources with emissions less than 100 tons/year of criteria pollutants, less than 10 tons/year of any individual Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) and less than 25 tons/year of combined HAPs are not subject to Title V permitting unless there is a federal regulation (New Source Performance Standards or National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants) that requires the facility to get a Title V permit. Title V permits do not add requirements not supported by rule, and are no more stringent than the ACDP permits. Facilities may be subject to best available control technology if they make a major modification (with a significant increase in emissions) to the facility. DEQ carmot require more stringent standards in permits than are required by rule. Although not required by rule, in 2016, DEQ initiated a Typically Achievable Control Technology (TACT) analysis of APES emission control devices for the fi-ont plant cooking operation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Deq Site Assessment Program - Strategy Recommendation
    DEQ SITE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM - STRATEGY RECOMMENDATION Site Name: Diversified Marine, Inc. Site CERCLIS Number: (none) DEQ ECSI Number: 3759 Site Address: 1801 N Marine Drive Portland, OR 97217 Recommendation By: Steve Fortuna, Site Assessment Section, DEQ Northwest Region Approved By: Sally Puent, Northwest Region Manager for Solid Waste and Site Assessment Sections Date: July 3, 2003 Background and History The subject site is an approximate 0.8 acre parcel in North Portland, on the south shore of North Portland Harbor, about 500 feet west of the Interstate Highway 5 (I-5) bridge over North Portland Harbor (see Figures 1 and 2). Diversified Marine, Inc., has conducted tug boat and barge building, repair, sandblasting, painting, machine shop, bilge removal, and boat and equipment refueling activities at the site under various names since at least 19901. Work is performed inside of an onshore building, on vessels moored in the river along the site, and in a 200-ton floating dry dock at the site. The site first came to the attention of Site Assessment in January 2003 during an evaluation of the adjoining Former Schooner Creek Boat Works site (ECSI #3526; see Figure 3). Between 1991 and 2002, DEQ received a series of Pollution Complaints alleging that boat building and repair activities at the neighboring Former Schooner Creek Boat Works site were releasing petroleum, solvents, fiberglass dust, and paint wastes, that might threatened water quality in North Portland Harbor (the Columbia River). Several of the reported releases were verified through DEQ follow-up inspections although no source could be located for some of the 1 Diversified Marine, Inc., (Kurt Redd, corporate president) was formed in 1986.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Tourism Commission
    Oregon Tourism Commission Staff Report | February 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Optimize Statewide Economic Impact............................................................................... 2 Drive business from key global markets through integrated sales/marketing plans leveraged with global partners and domestic travel trade ..................................................... 2 Guide tourism in a way that achieves the optimal balance of visitation, economic impact, natural resources conservation and livability ......................................................................... 7 Inspire overnight leisure travel through industry-leading branding, marketing and communications ........................................................................................................................ 7 Support and Empower Oregon’s Tourism Industry ...................................................... 34 Provide development and training opportunities to meet the evolving tourism industry needs ......................................................................................................................................... 34 Implement industry leading visitor information network ................................................... 43 Fully realize statewide, strategic integration of OTIS (Oregon Tourism Information System) .................................................................................................................................... 45 Deploy tourism programs (e.g. RCTP, Competitive Grants) in a powerful way
    [Show full text]
  • Sovereignty by Subtraction: the Multilateral Agreement on Investment Robert Stumberg*
    Cornell International Law Journal Volume 31 Article 5 Issue 3 Symposium 1998 Sovereignty by Subtraction: The ultM ilateral Agreement on Investment Robert Stumberg Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cilj Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Stumberg, Robert (1998) "Sovereignty by Subtraction: The ultM ilateral Agreement on Investment," Cornell International Law Journal: Vol. 31: Iss. 3, Article 5. Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cilj/vol31/iss3/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell International Law Journal by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Sovereignty by Subtraction: The Multilateral Agreement on Investment Robert Stumberg* Introduction ..................................................... 492 I. Overview of the MAI Sovereignty Debate .................. 496 A. Trade-Offs in the MAI Negotiations .................... 496 B. Defining Sovereignty as the Balance of Power .......... 498 C. Main Features of the MAI ............................. 501 D. Sovereignty Preservation Arguments ................... 503 1. Preemption by Federal Courts ...................... 503 2. Administrative Implementation ..................... 504 3. Legislation ........................................ 504 E. Likelihood of Conflict Arguments ..................... 506 1. Trade Is Not Investment
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting Notes 1999-05-13 [Part B]
    Portland State University PDXScholar Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation Oregon Sustainable Community Digital Library 5-13-1999 Meeting Notes 1999-05-13 [Part B] Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy . Follow this and additional works at: http://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/oscdl_jpact Recommended Citation Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation, "Meeting Notes 1999-05-13 [Part B] " (1999). Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation. Paper 270. http://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/oscdl_jpact/270 This Minutes is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Priorities 2000 Public Comment Letters and e-mail April 1 - May 3,1999 Alegria, Pamela 65 American Institute of Architects, Portland Chapter 39 Bicycle Transportation Alliance 36-37 Bridger, Glenn W 60 Brown, Russ 26 Ciarlo, Catherine 36-37 Clackamas County Board of Commissioners 5 Clackamas County Economic Development Commission 16 CNF Service Company 40 Columbia Slough Watershed Council 9-10 Custom Woodworking 49-54 Dawes, Rick 34 Ditmars, Lois 42 Edwards, Representative Randall 58-59 Enoch Manufacturing Company 34 Epstein, Andrew 11 Erwert, Tim 29 Fekety, Sharon 45 Follett, Matthew 28 Gailey, Allison 30 Goldfarb, Gabriela 8 Gordly, Senator Avel 57 Gresham-Barlow School District 56 Hall, Elinor 32-33 Hillsboro,
    [Show full text]
  • A Multi-Method Investigation of Circadian Rhythms, Sleep, And
    Running Head: BIOLOGICAL RHYTHMS & REWARD MOTIVATION A Multi-Method Investigation of Circadian Rhythms, Sleep, and Affective States: Characterising Modulation, Imaging Reward Mechanisms, and Improving Clinical Measurement Jamie E. M. Byrne Centre for Mental Health, Faculty of Health, Arts, and Design, Swinburne University of Technology Submitted in the year of 2018 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Clinical Psychology) qualification at Swinburne University of Technology BIOLOGICAL RHYTHMS & REWARD MOTIVATION ii Abstract The relationship between biological rhythms (circadian and sleep-wake processes) and reward motivation is proposed to be important, with circadian modulation of reward motivation one pathway in this relationship. To date, the relationship between biological rhythms and reward motivation has largely been investigated in animal studies, with limited exploration of this important interaction in humans. The aim of this project was to incrementally advance understanding of the relationship between biological rhythms and reward motivation in humans. To do this, the relationship between biological rhythms and reward motivation was reviewed (Study 1) and psychometrically examined (Study 2). Study 2 psychometrically quantified the separation of sleep quality, diurnal preference, and mood leading to the generation and initial psychometric testing of a new self-report measure of sleep quality, circadian functioning and depressed mood. The remaining three studies focused on the circadian component of biological rhythms, investigating critical aspects of a putative circadian modulation of reward motivation. Study 3 examined diurnal variation in three psychological components of reward. Findings indicated that unconscious “wanting” and conscious wanting of rewards exhibited diurnal variation peaking at 14:00h with diurnal variation in conscious liking and learning not fitting a waveform peaking at 14:00h.
    [Show full text]
  • Scanned Using Book Scancenter 5131
    ST. JOHN’S Independent Bj-Weekly Jonathan Morgan__________________________ Adam Willson______________________________ Hay and Apples for the Dark Horse: Dear gentle and not-so-gentle readers, Some Thoughts on the upcoming We, at The Moon, are thrilled whenever we receive contro­ Erotic Poetry Contest versial submissions. It is important for us as students and for The Moon as an ongoing student discussion to address touchy Tired of reading limp, impotent prose? Find Hegel hard to and often overly provocative themes. Many articles in our last swallow? The Moon wants to provide release for the torrents of issue were definitely touchy, if not to say a bit scandalous. We passion pent up in your sticky little...hearts. That’s why we’re published an article about the subconcious dream-struggles that bringing back the Erotic Poetry Contest this year. But before you arise in an institution like St. John’s. We printed a fairly pro­ all grab your pens and wet your lips, let me whisper a few sweet vocative letter in response to The Letter Home, security article nothings in your ears. (a side note: this article was not written by Randy Harris or by First, I’d like to share some thoughts on content and style. the Communications office, but by a parent who had interviewed When sculpting a poem, try to probe the depths of your soul security). We further prodded you with Ashley Cardiff’s inflam­ for the mot juste, rather than just mounting any old word that matory fashion article. We introduced you to the profound yet happens through your naughty mind to the page.
    [Show full text]
  • This Digital Document Is Courtesy of the Oregon State Library. Voters’ Pamphlet
    This digital document is courtesy of the Oregon State Library. Voters’ Pamphlet Oregon Primary Election May 15, 2012 Kate Brown Oregon Secretary of State This voters’ pamphlet is provided for assistance in casting your vote by mail ballot. OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE ELECTIONS DIVISION STEPHEN N. TROUT KATE BROWN DIRECTOR SECRETARY OF STATE 255 CAPITOL ST NE, SUITE 501 BARRY PACK SALEM, OREGON 97310 DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE (503) 986-1518 Dear Oregon Voters, We are happy to present the 2012 Voters’ Pamphlet for the May Primary Election. On a daily basis my offi ce provides many important services including business registration, auditing and the archiving of Oregon’s history. However, the most important service we perform is distributing information to the public. Technology has provided us with the ability to share information and conduct business online. Oregon’s elections website: www.oregonvotes.org offers a variety of services including voter registration, the ability to update your registration, ballot tracking and locating the nearest offi cial ballot dropsite. If you have not registered to vote, and would like to participate in the May Primary Election, you have until April 24, 2012. I urge all eligible Oregonians to vote and exercise the most essential right of our democratic system. Oregon offers the most convenient, accessible, secure and cost effective voting systems. We were the fi rst in the nation to implement an all vote by mail system and we consistently have some of the nation’s highest voter turnout rates. Let’s continue this Oregon tradition of participation. Please remember all ballots must be received by your county elections offi ce by 8 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Hayden Island Light Rail Station Conceptual Design Report
    Public Discussion Draft January 14, 2010 HAYDEN ISLAND LIGHT RAIL STATION CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REPORT Project Partners: Federal Highway Federal Transit Administration Administration SW Washingtongg Regional Transportation Council C-TRAN City of Vancouver tro TriMet y of Portland ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS PROJECT TEAMS PORTLAND WORKING GROUP (AS OF 12-31-09) John Gillam, City of Portland Richard Carhart, Hayden Island Neighborhood Network (HiNooN) Barry Manning, City of Portland Pam Ferguson, Hayden Island Manufactured Home Owners and Patrick Sweaney, City of Portland Renters Association Brad Howton, Columbia Crossings Kelly Betteridge, CRC staff Bill Jackson, Safeway Corporation Coral Egnew, CRC staff Casey Liles, CRC staff Sam Judd, Jantzen Beach SuperCenter Aaron Myton, CRC staff Steve Kayfes, Kenton Neighborhood Association Chris Novotny, CRC staff Tom Kelly, Member-at-Large Vickie Smith, CRC staff Charlie Kuffner, pedestrian advocate Steve Witter, CRC staff Colin MacLaren, Friends of Portland International Raceway Talia Jacobson, ODOT Barbara Nelson, Jantzen Beach Moorage, Inc. Andrew Johnson, ODOT IAMP Manager Deborah Robertson, Bridgeton Neighborhood Association Alex Dupey, David Evans and Associates, Inc. Walter Valenta, Waterside Condo Elizabeth Mros-O’Hara, David Evans and Associates, Inc. Nolan Lienhart, ZGF Greg Baldwin, ZGF TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION Purpose of the Report 1 Station Location and Map 1-2 Project Objectives and Approach 3 II. PROJECT BACKGROUND Existing Conditions on Hayden Island 5 Hayden Island Plan 6 Locally Preferred Alternative 9 The Hayden Island Interchange Area Management Plan 10 III. STAKEHOLDER INPUT Portland Working Group 11 Meetings and Community Workshop 13 IV. DESIGN PRINCIPLES Preliminary Concepts 15 Design Elements 28 Recommended Design Principles for the Transit Station 31 Hayden Island Light Rail Station Conceptual Design Report I.
    [Show full text]
  • Beverage Container Regulation: Economic Implications and Suggestions for Model Legislation
    Beverage Container Regulation: Economic Implications and Suggestions For Model Legislation Charles M. Gudger* and Kenneth D. Walters* INTRODUCTION It is a paradox of modem industrial societies that while they recently have been encountering shortages of many natural resources, more and more resources are thrown away every year. These societies face shortages of energy and at the same time experience an ever- increasing glut of solid waste residuals and litter. In the United States, production of solid waste reached the rate of 3.32 pounds per person per day in 1971.1 A prime contributor to this trend has been the growing use of throw-away consumer product packaging. Packaging is the largest com- ponent of municipal solid waste in the United States, 34 percent by weight.2 Annual U.S. consumption of packaging materials increased from 35 million tons in 1958 to 59.5 million tons in 1970, and will reach a projected 73.5 million tons in 1976, equivalent to 661 pounds of packaging per person per year.3 The use of nonreturnable beverage containers is a significant com- ponent of the solid waste problem. The growing use of nonreturnable beverage containers represents a classic success story in modern market- ing in the United States. In 1958, only two percent of the soft drink packages and 42 percent of the beer containers were nonreturnable., By 1972, 59 percent of soft drink packages and 77 percent of beer contain- ers were nonreturnable.5 In 1958, 12 billion beverage containers were * Associate Professor of Management, Oregon State University. B.S. 1948, M.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Fall Clinical Meeting October 4-9, 2014
    Texas Club of Internists FALL CLINICAL MEEtiNG October 4-9, 2014 The Nines Hotel Portland, Oregon CME jointly sponsored by Oregon Health & Science University and the Texas Club of Internists TCI Fall Clinical Meeting President’s Welcome Message Leighton and I are excited that you will be joining us in Portland, Oregon this fall. We have spent a week there each of the last two summers, and have come to love this city. We know you will enjoy the trip to Mt. Hood on Sunday: we watched people skiing there in July! And we don’t think the club has ever offered a short hike as part of the Sunday outing. But that’s optional, and shops in Hood River await the more urban members. Of course we get to visit the Willamette Valley for wine tasting, and that will take place on Tuesday. Make special note of the options for wineries, as you may want to experience some others before or after the meeting. While some of the places we would have liked to visit wouldn’t take large groups during harvest season, you may be able to drop in on your own. We also hope you have an extra day or two to enjoy the amazing Oregon coastline. OHSU is excited about our group. The CME department tells us they never had such a willing group of speakers as for this meeting. If you get the chance, take the aerial tram up to the campus. It’s spectacular. We have an out-of-sight band for Wednesday night.
    [Show full text]
  • Commerce - Constitutional Law - Validity of a Bottle Bill Encouraging the Use of Standard-Size Returnable Bottles
    North Dakota Law Review Volume 51 Number 2 Article 13 1974 Commerce - Constitutional Law - Validity of a Bottle Bill Encouraging the Use of Standard-Size Returnable Bottles William L. Guy III Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.und.edu/ndlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Guy, William L. III (1974) "Commerce - Constitutional Law - Validity of a Bottle Bill Encouraging the Use of Standard-Size Returnable Bottles," North Dakota Law Review: Vol. 51 : No. 2 , Article 13. Available at: https://commons.und.edu/ndlr/vol51/iss2/13 This Case Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at UND Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in North Dakota Law Review by an authorized editor of UND Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RECENT CASES nity-enacted growth restrictions . 4 The traditional question of wheth- er the legislatures and Congress might be better equipped to handle the problems of growth needs to be seriously considered. The right to travel may simply be too abstract to be effective in coping with all of the complexities of urban reality.45 CHARLES S. MILLER JR. COMMERCE-CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-VALIDITY OF A "BOTTLE BILL" ENCOURAGING THE USE OF STANDARD-SIZED RETURNABLE BOTTLES. On October 1, 1972,1 Oregon became the first state2 to regu- late the use of non-returnable beverage containers." The legislative purpose of the so-called "Bottle Bill" was two fold: 1) to force bev- erage packagers to use tiniform, returnable, multiple-use bottles, 44.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Authorizing Bonds for Education Building
    Portland State University PDXScholar City Club of Portland Oregon Sustainable Community Digital Library 5-8-1964 Report on Authorizing Bonds for Education Building Program (State Ballot Measure No.1); Report on School District Number One, Multnomah County, Building Fund Serial Tax Levies (Ballot Measure No.3); Report on Multnomah County Special Bond Election (Multnomah County Measure No.2) City Club of Portland (Portland, Or.) Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/oscdl_cityclub Part of the Urban Studies Commons, and the Urban Studies and Planning Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation City Club of Portland (Portland, Or.), "Report on Authorizing Bonds for Education Building Program (State Ballot Measure No.1); Report on School District Number One, Multnomah County, Building Fund Serial Tax Levies (Ballot Measure No.3); Report on Multnomah County Special Bond Election (Multnomah County Measure No.2)" (1964). City Club of Portland. 217. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/oscdl_cityclub/217 This Report is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in City Club of Portland by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. P (.) R T L A X I) C I T Y C L U B HULL K T I N 9;s.'i REPORT ON AUTHORIZING BONDS FOR EDUCATION BUILDING PROGRAM (State Ballot Measure No. 1) Purpose: To amend the Constitution to authorize State General Obligation Bonds up to $30 million for building projects. Of this amount $25 million to provide funds for higher education and $5 million for community colleges and education centers.
    [Show full text]