DOCSLIB.ORG

2009-2011 Land Quality Division

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2009-2011 Land Quality Division 2009-2011 LAND QUALITY DIVISION Wendy Wiles Administrator, Land Quality Division PEMG Z7012 (38X) 0668 EMERGENCY RESPONSE/ SOLID WASTE HAZARDOUS WASTE & TANKS ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP Jeffrey Christensen Loretta Pickerell Andree Pollock Manager Manager Manager PEME X7008 (33X) 0571 PEME X7008 (33X) 0693 PEME X7008 (33X) 0359 LAND QUALITY PROGRAM Total Positions FTE HQ REG LAB 2007-2009 LAB 232 229.94 63.36 159.16 7.42 2009-2011 Modified Essential Budget Level 232 230.20 67.81 154.97 7.42 2009-2011 Program Packages 4 3.83 1.83 2.00 0 Total 2009-2011 Legislatively Adopted Budget 236 234.03 69.64 156.96 7.42 LQ-Narrative ___ Agency Request X Governor's Recommended ___ Legislatively Adopted Budget Page _____ 6-1 LAND QUALITY PROGRAM NARRATIVE LAND QUALITY I. OVERVIEW OF LAND QUALITY Land Quality consists of five program areas that are focused primarily on DEQ’s strategic direction of protecting human health and the environment from toxics. Land Quality achieves these goals through activities that: help Oregonians reduce the use of toxic chemicals and the generation of waste; manage materials used and waste generated to minimize the release of toxics to the air, water and land; reduce the risk from exposure to contaminants already in our environment by requiring cleanup of contaminated sites; and prepare for and minimize the danger from the release of hazardous substances from accidents or other emergency events. The aim of many program activities is to protect Oregon’s valuable water resources by ensuring that harmful substances are removed from the environment, or are safely managed. For example, ensuring compliance with landfill management requirements and with petroleum tank operation standards prevent hazardous substances from polluting Oregon’s groundwater. Similarly, requiring cleanup of historical toxic pollution reduces runoff of harmful chemicals to our rivers and streams. Land Quality addresses its environmental goals through five main program areas that are distinguished by the laws and regulations they carry out, and by segregated funding sources. The programs and their primary goals are: Solid Waste: promotes reduction of solid waste generation and toxics use in materials and in households; promotes recovery of resources in waste that is generated; ensures safe management of waste disposal. Conducts projects to increase understanding of the significant greenhouse gas emissions associated with products and materials and strategies to reduce those impacts. Hazardous Waste: promotes reduction of hazardous waste generation and toxics use; ensures that companies safely manage the hazardous waste they generate; provides oversight of the disposal and management of hazardous waste; and provides oversight of operations that eliminate chemical agents stored at the Umatilla Army Depot. Underground Storage Tanks: ensures underground storage tanks (USTs) containing petroleum or hazardous substances are properly operated to prevent leaks; oversees cleanup of releases from petroleum tanks. Protecting groundwater is the highest priority. Environmental Cleanup: ensures those responsible for contaminated sites take appropriate action; undertakes cleanup when necessary; supports voluntary and independent cleanups to facilitate property transfers and redevelopment. The environmental goal is to minimize exposure to contaminants that have been released into the environment and present an unacceptable risk to people or the environment. Emergency Response and Preparedness: ensures that new releases of oil and hazardous materials – including those caused by terrorist events and natural disasters– are contained and cleaned up. As the state lead agency for cleanup of oil and hazardous spills, DEQ LQ-Narrative ___ Agency Request X Governor's Recommended ___ Legislatively Adopted Budget Page _____ 6-2 LAND QUALITY PROGRAM NARRATIVE provides 24-hour a day, 7 days a week response capabilities for chemical and oil emergencies. Land Quality focuses on prevention and preparedness activities to minimize the effects of releases, especially to water, including minimizing the impacts of aquatic non-native species into Oregon’s waterways. Land Quality, like all of DEQ, is striving to meet the environmental challenges of the future. Climate change, for example, will make the reduction of greenhouse gases an increasingly important focus of waste prevention and management. It may also increase the number and severity of weather-related events, placing increased demand on our emergency preparedness and response resources. Currently, Land Quality continues to focus much of our time and resources on “core work” required under existing state and federal mandates. But as we move forward, we will look for both ways to shift our core work and to change the tools we use so in order meet new challenges like climate change and becoming more sustainable. For example: Although our waste management strategy has always identified reduction as the highest priority, we have been moving in the past several years to take a more comprehensive approach that examines the impacts of products over their life cycle, so that we encourage or require the most environmentally appropriate action. Our regulation of landfills is a way not only to protect water quality, but also to prevent emissions of greenhouse gases. And we try to use “greener” methods to clean up contaminated sites and encourage responsible parties to do the same. We will be able to make some of these changes within our current structures and with existing resources. But we also believe we will need new tools and some additional resources. DEQ’s proposals for the 2009 Legislative session are designed to help us address new environmental challenges. In particular, we are proposing a policy package to develop a framework for increasing product stewardship programs, similar to the electronic waste recycling program established by the 2007 Legislature. Product stewardship programs place the responsibility on manufacturers to provide opportunities to recycle their products and therefore provide an incentive to make products more reusable and recyclable. Land Quality’s goals will also be furthered by the policy package request (not included in the Governor’s Recommended Budget) in DEQ’s Cross Program budget unit that will strengthen toxic chemical reduction efforts. The additional staff requested will enable DEQ to improve our ability to reduce the use of toxic chemicals, rather than simply reducing or controlling waste produced. II. ACTIVITIES AND PROGRAMS Land Quality programs use a variety of approaches to protect the environment. In addition to traditional enforcement activities, Land Quality also focuses on providing education, technical assistance and outreach as important ways to meet its goals and objectives and achieve environmental protection. Land Quality subprograms carry out the following activities to achieve our goals: LQ-Narrative ___ Agency Request X Governor's Recommended ___ Legislatively Adopted Budget Page _____ 6-3 LAND QUALITY PROGRAM NARRATIVE Waste Reduction: Land Quality programs help Oregonians, both businesses and citizens, to reduce the use of all resources, especially toxic chemicals, and to minimize waste generated by: Providing technical assistance to toxic users to assist them in reducing the amount of toxic material used, toxic wastes generated, and the proper disposal of those materials; Providing technical assistance, educational and outreach efforts to achieve the statewide waste prevention goal of no increase in solid waste generated by 2009; Measuring statewide and regional material recovery rates; Providing technical and financial assistance to local government for recycling and waste prevention programs; Developing product stewardship management approaches for toxic and difficult-to-manage waste streams, such as electronics, pharmaceuticals, mercury thermostats, fluorescent lights, and other mercury-containing products; and Using life cycle analysis and other information to promote better understanding of significant resource consumption and greenhouse gas emissions associated with materials and products Oregonians use and consume. Safe Management: Land Quality Programs ensure that those who use hazardous products or generate or handle hazardous and solid waste do so properly to minimize releases to the environment by: Issuing permits for landfills and other waste disposal facilities, and monitoring compliance with permit requirements; Providing on-site technical assistance to hazardous waste generators to promote safe management practices; Conducting compliance inspections of hazardous waste generators to ensure proper waste management; Ensuring that hazardous waste generators and handlers notify DEQ of their operations and by inspecting them as necessary; Issuing permits to compost facilities and providing technical guidance and training to assure compliance with state and federal regulations; Providing opportunities for households and businesses to manage toxic wastes in an environmentally protective manner; Ensuring that owners of underground storage tanks know how to operate and maintain equipment to prevent and detect leaks, by providing technical assistance and conducting on site inspections; Reviewing underground tank facility plans and inspecting new installations prior to issuing certificates permitting the tanks to be operated; Ensuring that fuel is not delivered to unsafe tanks; Ensuring that underground storage tank owners are financially able to pay for prompt cleanup,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact Analysis of a Beverage Container Deposit Program in Maryland
    2011 Impact Analysis of a Beverage Container Deposit Program in Maryland Photo Credit: Alan Cressier, USGS Prepared for the Waterfront Partnership of Baltimore, Inc. and the Abell Foundation Prepared by the University of Maryland Environmental Finance Center (EFC) December 15, 2011 1 This document was prepared by the following partners: Environmental Finance Center The Environmental Finance Center (EFC) is located at the National Center for Smart Growth Research and Education at the University of Maryland in College Park. The EFC is a regional center developed by the Environmental Protection Agency to assist communities and watershed organizations in identifying innovative and sustainable ways of implementing and financing their resource protection efforts throughout the Mid-Atlantic region. The EFC is nonadvocacy in nature and has assisted communities and organizations in developing effective sustainable strategies for specific watershed protection goals for a variety of clients including state and local governments, watershed organizations, and land trusts. The Center for Integrative Environmental Research The Center for Integrative Environmental Research (CIER) at the University of Maryland addresses complex environmental challenges through research that explores the dynamic interactions among environmental, economic and social forces and stimulates active dialogue with stakeholders, researchers and decision makers. Researchers and students at CIER, working at local, regional, national and global scales, are developing strategies and tools to guide policy and investment decisions. ECONorthwest ECONorthwest is an economic consulting firm located on the west coast and provides an unbiased and thorough economic analysis to private and public sector clients throughout the United States. ECONorthwest is nationally known for its rigorous analyses in the area of environmental economics.
    [Show full text]
  • Hb 2402 Joint Interim Task Force Funding for Fish, Wildlife and Related Outdoor Recreation and Education
    HB 2402 JOINT INTERIM TASK FORCE FUNDING FOR FISH, WILDLIFE AND RELATED OUTDOOR RECREATION AND EDUCATION REPORT TO OREGON LEGISLATURE December 31, 2016 MEMBERS OF THE OREGON LEGISLATURE: On behalf of the HB 2402 Legislative Task Force, we submit the following report for your consideration. The Task Force for funding for Fish, Wildlife and Related Outdoor Recreation and Education was created by HB 2402 in the 2015 Legislative Session. We were charged with developing recommendations to strengthen the State’s ability to conserve natural resources and connect Oregonians to nature through outdoor recreation and education opportunities. The Task Force was comprised of 17 members from throughout Oregon, four non-voting legislators and two ex officio members (Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission Chair Mike Finley and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) Director Curt Melcher). We met twelve times from January through November 2016, and convened two groups to develop draft recommendations for full Task Force consideration. Our report to you provides a summary of several thousand hours of hard work by very dedicated and caring Oregonians. We took our Legislative charge very seriously by: 1. Identifying and recommending potential alternative, sustainable funding sources for ODFW. 2. Recommending potential budget adjustments to ensure relevant ODFW program areas are funded in accordance with Legislative direction. 3. Recommending opportunities for ODF&W to better achieve its mission through leveraging, coordinating and budgeting funds from alternate and existing sources. We contacted and received reports from other states on how their fish and wildlife agencies are funded. We conducted a statistically valid survey of Oregonians to ask their opinion on how fish and wildlife should be funded and what their impressions were of the agency.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Recycling: an Oregon Waste Reduction Curriculum. Teacher Resource Guide. INSTITUTION Oregon State Dept
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 365 554 SE 054 042 TITLE Rethinking Recycling: An Oregon Waste Reduction Curriculum. Teacher Resource Guide. INSTITUTION Oregon State Dept. of Environmental Quality, Portland. PUB DATE Oct 93 NOTE 188p. AVAILABLE FROM Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 811 S.W., Sixth Avenue, Portland, OR 97204. PUB TYPE Guides Classroom Use Teaching Guides (For Teacher) (052) EDRS PRICE MFOI/PC08 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Annotated Bibliographies; 'Educational Resources; Elementary Secondary Education; *Environmental Education; Instructional Materials; *Recycling; Solid Wastes; State Curriculum Guides; Teaching Guides; *Waste Disposal IDENTIFIERS Environmental Problems; *Oregon ABSTRACT In 1993, the Oregon State Department of Education, in conjunction with the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), developed four "Classroom Activity Packets" with waste reduction and recycling lessons for each of the following groups: Grades K-2; Grades 3-5; Grades 6-8; and Grades 9-12. This teacher resource guide is the final component of that curriculum and includes information on the content goals in waste reduction education and methods to help teacher integrate instruction to meet those goals in daily classroom lessons. The guide is presented in five sections. Section 1 provides an overview of the new materials that includes educational objectives, a cross-reference to statewide curriculum goals, and a list of materials in the activity packets. Section 2 presents a history of the problem of waste, the Oregon hierarchy of solutions, and special waste reduction concerns, Section 3 discusses the teaching methods that include making use of technology, games, simulations, and parental and community involvement. Exemplary programs are recognized. Section 4 pre ,nts programs to supplement the implementation of the curriculum thdt include an awareness week, a classroom resource center, and plays and songs.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon State Grange
    Table of Contents AGRICULTURE POLICY .......................................................................................................................................................... 1 SUPPORT THESE BROAD AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY ACTIVITIES ........................................................................................................ 1 OPPOSE THESE BROAD AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY PROGRAMS......................................................................................................... 1 FAMILY FARMS ............................................................................................................................................................................. 2 WATERSHED POLICY ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3 ENVIRONMENT, CONSERVATION, AND NATURAL RESOURCES POLICY ...................................................................................................... 4 AGRICULTURE ...................................................................................................................................................................... 4 FARM LAND AND FOREST LAND ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 IRRIGATION ................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Legislative Policy Handbook
    Oregon State Grange Legislative Policies 2021 In Essentials….Unity In Non-Essentials….Liberty In All things….Charity The Grange Motto Revised 10/2020 Table of Contents AGRICULTURE ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1 POLICY STATEMENTS ............................................................................................................................................................. 1 SUPPORT THESE BROAD AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY ACTIVITIES .................................................................................................. 1 OPPOSE THESE BROAD AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY PROGRAMS .................................................................................................. 1 FAMILY FARMS..................................................................................................................................................................... 2 WATERSHED POLICY .............................................................................................................................................................. 3 ENVIRONMENT, CONSERVATION, AND NATURAL RESOURCES POLICY ................................................................................................ 4 FARM LAND AND FOREST LAND ............................................................................................................................................... 4 IRRIGATION ........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]