![]() |
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only. Although the information provided here was accurate and current when first created, it is now outdated. All the links in the document have been removed. |
![]() |
Pursuant to paragraph 3(a) of the Consent Decree in the
above-referenced matter, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"
or "the Agency") provides this second Quarterly Status Report concerning
its actions to propose and take final action with respect to regulations
under § 316(b) of the Clean Water Act ("CWA"). In the past quarter, EPA has continued to collect data to determine
what is an "adverse environmental impact" and what is the "best technology
available" to minimize such impacts under § 316(b). On March 18 and 19,
1996, EPA attended a conference on "Managing for Biodiversity" sponsored
by the Electric Power Research Institute. At the conference, EPA learned
of additional sources of information on aquatic biodiversity and fish
population models. EPA is now pursuing these sources. In addition, EPA has
begun to analyze four major databases to help define the scope of the
regulated community under § 316(b). On March 7, 1996, the Agency workgroup that is developing the § 316(b)
regulations met for an all day conference in Washington, D.C. to review
progress on the rule to date and to further refine the regulatory issues
for research and data collection. Twenty EPA experts, including
biologists, engineers, 316(b) permit writers, an economist, and a lawyer
participated in the conference. The Agency has formed three subgroups of
these twenty individuals. The subgroups will address: 1) which industries
and types of facilities should be the subject of this regulatory
proceeding; 2) how to determine an "adverse environmental impact;" and 3)
what are the options for "best technology available" to minimize any
identified adverse impacts. The subgroups have been meeting regularly
during the past month. Their first major task is to develop questions to
be included in a survey questionnaire under § 308 of the CWA, which will
be sent to facilities that employ cooling water intake structures. The
survey results will be used in environmental and economic analyses of the
regulatory options for the § 316(b) regulations. EPA notes that Congress still has not enacted a full year appropriation
for the Agency for fiscal year 1996, which began on October 1, 1995. The
levels of funding available to EPA under the short term funding measures
(continuing resolutions) that have been enacted in this fiscal year are
substantially reduced from fiscal year 1995 levels. As EPA reported in the
last Quarterly Status Report, EPA employees, including staff working on
the § 316(b) regulatory proceeding, were on furlough from November 14
through November 19, 1995 and December 18, 1995 through January 7, 1996
during the broader government shutdowns. Contractor personnel likewise
were instructed to stop work during the same period. In addition, a
blizzard shut down federal offices in the Washington area, including EPA
headquarters, for four days during the week of January 8, 1996. An
important effect of these shut downs was a loss of momentum, which
magnified the effect of actual time lost. For example, workgroup meetings
were canceled, delaying progress on the development of the rule. Also, it
was necessary to execute formal documentation to restart contract support,
which added to the time lost. EPA will inform the Court and the parties if
future furloughs or funding shortfalls make it impossible for the Agency
to meet the requirements of the Consent Decree. The undersigned, James F. Pendergast, is acting Director of the Permits
Division of EPA's Office of Wastewater Management. The Permits Division
has primary responsibility for discharging EPA's duties under the Consent
Decree. |