United States Region 10
Environmental Protection 1200 Sixth Avenue
Agency Seattle WA 98101
Office of the Regional Administrator
<>EPA Environmental Programs in
Alaska
An EPA Report
1983
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Alaska, like all other States in the Union, is being urged by EPA to
assume more of the statutory authorities that Congress gave State
governments for implementing the body of environmental laws enacted in
the last 12 years. With varying degrees of emphasis in each of those
laws, it was Congress' clear intent for EPA to work with the States in
partnership. EPA's purpose is to support State pollution control efforts
with Federal grants and technical assistance and to carry out those
programs that the State does not take. In Fiscal Year 1982, EPA provided
Alaska with more than $24 million in Federal funds (see Attachment A) to
support State environmental efforts. In fiscal year 1983, EPA has $28
million available.
A key role for EPA is therefore to help the State take responsibility
for the development, management and enforcement of environmental programs
so that they can be tailored to fit the State's needs. Since only 3 of
the 9 major programs that EPA can legally delegate have been assumed by
Alaska, it can be expected that EPA will be actively encouraging Alaska
to take on more of the activities for which EPA is now responsible.
EPA's purpose will be to fulfill our mutual Congressional mandate, with
the result that Alaska itself will administer environmental programs that
will satisfy Federal statutory requirements and be more responsive to
local situations in the unique Alaskan environment.
The following pages describe major issues facing the State and EPA,
and provide a listing of the major grant programs by which EPA support's
Alaska's environmental activities. Shown below is a roster of the top
management officials in EPA's Region 10 who can provide more information
about any of the issues discussed in this document.
Phone
Regional Administrator John R. Spencer (206) 442-5810
Deputy Administrator L. Edwin Coate (206) 442-1220
Regional Counsel James Moore (206) 442-1152
Water Division Director Robert Burd (206) 442-1014
Air and Waste Director Alexandra Smith (206) 442-1352
Environmental Services Director Gary O'Neal (206) 442-1295
Alaska Operations Office Director Ron Kreizenbeck (907) 586-7620
-------
ALASKA
Priority Issues
DELEGATION OF AIR PROGRAMS TO ALASKA
Alaska's Department of Environmental Conservation has recently assumed,
or is about to assume, two Federal Clean Air Act responsibilities that
have been administered by EPA: the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) program and the New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS) program.
The PSD program is designed to keep clean air areas clean. It applies to
places that, by a wide margin, meet ambient air quality standards to
protect human health. ADEC is already administering part of the PSD
program. Full delegation is expected to be assumed by ADEC by June 1983.
The NSPS program, as its name implies, calls for new sources of air
pollution to meet emission standards established by EPA. Delegation of
this program to Alaska requires ADEC to enforce those standards.
The NSPS program delegation targets for FY 82 to ADEC are complete. ADEC
is now being encouraged by EPA to develop and adopt the necessary State
regulations for the following additional categories of new sources:
steam generators, electric utility boilers, two for petroleum liquid
storage, and stationary gas turbines.
CARBON MONOXIDE IN ANCHORAGE. FAIRBANKS AND JUNEAU
Alaska's Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) is awaiting the
outcome of a partially EPA-financed feasibility study that will determine
whether the periodic inspection of automobiles will solve serious
violations of the carbon monoxide standard in both Anchorage and
Fairbanks. Once the study is completed, ADEC should be prepared to
implement necessary measures to meet the carbon monoxide standard. By
terms of a clean-air plan already adopted by the State of Alaska, ADEC is
obliged to begin auto inspections in Anchorage and Fairbanks if it is
shown the inspections are necessary and appropriate to solve the problem.
Carbon monoxide in Juneau and the Mendenhall Valley is of concern because
of the use of wood stoves. An accompanying problem is the level of
particulate emissions from wood stoves. (It should be noted that
wood-burning devices produce from 10 to 100 times more particulate
pollution per BTU than oil or gas-fired furnaces.) ADEC is being asked
to conduct short-term monitoring to quantify the extent and seriousness
of the carbon monoxide and particulate problem. EPA is prepared to
provide both technical and monetary support to the ADEC effort.
-------
NPDES PROGRAM (Enforcement)
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)--i.e., the
wastewater discharge permit program—is currently administered in Alaska
by EPA. This permitting program is intended to prevent the discharge of
harmful pollutants to waters of the United States by insuring compliance
with EPA national guidelines and State water quality standards. Major
categories of activities permitted include: seafood processing, placer
mining, oil and gas activities, and municipal wastewater discharges. In
order to run an effective program as Congress intended, EPA will be
involved in enforcement actions against significant permit violators.
It is EPA's hope that the State will choose to take over the Federal
permitting responsibility. Feasibility studies have been completed^ but,
to this date, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation has
shown little interest in assuming EPA's role.
While EPA has the program, the State certifies the individual permits
which are issued. The State inspects the permitted facilities and
provides advice to EPA on potential enforcement actions against
violators. The State has a parallel permit program but usually defers to
EPA and the Federal permitting system.
If the State were to take on the program, legislative and regulatory
changes would be needed: primarily to stiffen penalties, to gain
authority over federal facilities and to be able to issue permits based
on national guidelines.
PLACER MINING - WATER QUALITY STANDARDS REVISIONS
Since Alaska has not assumed responsibility for issuing water discharge
permits required by the Clean Water Act, it is up to EPA to issue them.
EPA is currently developing one general permit (as opposed to single
permits for each individual mining operation) that will apply, in time
for the 1983 mining season, to all 800 or so Alaska placer miners.
Any discharge permit issued may be restrictive because the Clean Water
Act requires the permits to be consistent with State Water Quality
Standards. In Alaska's case, the streams to which the placer miners
discharge are classified for use as drinking water sources. If the use
classification is changed the water quality standards could allow EPA to
make corresponding adjustments in its discharge permit. Certain mining
districts are expected to petition for a change in the standards.
The State needs to evaluate its water quality standards and determine
whether any use classifications should be changed. If a change is
appropriate, the revision needs to occur quickly so that the new
standards are in place for the 1983 mining season. Further, the State
needs to provide comments to EPA on the language of the proposed general
permit. EPA Region 10 will get EPA Headquarters concurrence on a general
permit and issue it before the 1983 season starts.
-------
On a related matter, EPA needs the States help in developing a strategy
for dealing with those miners operating in 1982 who didn't comply with
conditions of the EPA issued administrative orders.
ORE MINING
Environmental impact statements and wastewater discharge permits must be
completed in a timely and effective manner in order for new mining
developments to proceed on schedule. The impact statements are being
prepared by Federal agencies. The discharge permits will be issued by
EPA.
Three major ore mining projects need permitting actions in 1983:
1. U.S. Borax - Quartz Hill (molybdenum)
2. Noranda - Green Creek (zinc, lead, silver gold)
3. Cominco - Red Dog Mine (zinc and lead)
Environmental Impact Statements are underway for all three projects.
Effluent guidelines which were recently promulgated by EPA require no
discharges from the milling process for new sources. U.S. Borax has been
excluded from this requirement pending the results of the Environmental
Review Process. Noranda exploration is not affected by the no-discharge
limit since construction of the project began before the limitation was
proposed. The Cominco project, which is just getting started, will be
subject to the no-discharge restriction. It is anticipated that these
projects represent the beginning of increased activity in the ore mining
industry in Alaska.
The State is expected to make timely and substantive comments on the
impact statements.
EPA will be a major participant in the preparation of the impact
statements and, after certification by the State, will issue the
necessary discharge permits.
OFFSHORE EXPLORATION
The Federal Clean Water Act requires oil companies to submit waste
discharge permit applications to EPA for oil and gas exploration,
development and production wells. Section 403(c) of the Act requires a
thorough environmental analysis before issuing permits.
Given recent and proposed offshore oil and gas lease sales, EPA's role in
permitting these activities will be increasing. In order to provide a
timely permitting process, Region 10 is developing "general permits" for
discharges resulting from exploration activities. This is intended to
replace previously required individual permits before permitting an
activity in a given geographical area. General permits for oil and gas
exploration in the Beaufort Sea and Norton Sound should be issued in
early 1983. Others will follow soon thereafter.
-------
EPA is working closely with the State environmental and natural resource
agencies, as well as industry, to produce effective and environmentally
sound permits. EPA will continue to look to the State to provide site
specific information as the environmental assessments and operating
conditions are developed for each permit.
EPA Region 10 will be responsible for final preparation of the general
permits and getting EPA Headquarters to concur with the Region 10 issued
permits.
WETLANDS - SECTION 404 PERMITS (Dredge and Fill)
Because of the lengthy coastline and substantial wetlands, the 404*
permitting program administered by the Corps of Engineers under EPA
guidelines is a major activity. It can have a profound effect on
development in Alaska because most developments impact wetlands, rivers,
and harbors. Therefore, EPA has encouraged the State to assume as much
of the program as Federal legislation will allow. Permit decisions are
basically land use decisions.
EPA has supported a program delegation feasibility study for the State.
The State, like EPA the Corps and industry, also needs to be an active
participant in streamlining the permitting process and commenting on any
revised 404 guidelines and regulations.
EPA along with the Corps will ultimately issue new guidelines and
regulations. EPA Region 10 will continue to advise the Corps on permit
issuing decisions. The State, similar to NPDES permits, must certify any
issued permit.
MUNICIPAL SECONDARY WASTE TREATMENT WAIVERS
Section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act allows municipalities to apply for
a discharge permit requiring less than secondary waste treatment. Twelve
applications have been received from Alaska including Anchorage and most
of the Southeast Alaskan communities.
While EPA issues the permit, the State must concur and certify that water
quality standards will be met. Related to this, ADEC must decide whether
coarse screening by itself will be sufficient to assure attainment of
standards.
* "404" refers to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act.
-------
HAZARDOUS HASTE MANAGEMENT IN ALASKA
Alaska's Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) has yet to
fulfill the directive from the Alaska Legislature that called for ADEC to
assume responsibility for the hazardous waste management program in
Alaska. ADEC has drafted implementing regulations, but has not taken all
the steps that would allow EPA to delegate the program. EPA hopes to see
Alaska adopt hazardous waste regulations, complete and application for
authorization, and secure the necessary State resources to operate the
program in lieu of EPA.
Until ADEC is in the position to apply for authorization, EPA will be
encouraging the State of Alaska to enter into a Cooperative Agreement
that would allow EPA and ADEC to jointly conduct hazardous waste
management activities.
HAZARDOUS WASTE FROM MILITARY INSTALLATIONS
No less than 65 percent of all hazardous waste in Alaska is generated by
military installations.
So far, EPA has inspected five military facilities in the State. Warning
letters have been sent to four of the installation (Eielson AFB, Fort
Richardson, Fort Greeley and Fort Wainwright). Their responses are
currently under EPA review.
The fifth facility — Elmendorff AFB -- did not receive a warning letter
because the base has applied for a hazardous waste permit from EPA.
Violations discovered during the EPA inspection will be corrected through
the permit process.
Other military facilities will also be considered for permitting once
they submit applications to EPA.
OIL SPILL RESPONSE AGREEMENTS
During 1982 EPA entered into an agreement with ADEC which spells out
responsibilities for oil spill response in the State. In this agreement,
ADEC is designated as the Federal On-Scene Coordinator (OSC) for all
areas of inland Alaska except where the TAPS right-of-way crosses Federal
lands. OSC responsibilities will be provided by BLM for these areas.
The purpose of the agreement to minimize State/Federal duplication and
insure more timely and effective response efforts. EPA staff, both in
Alaska and in Seattle, will be in a monitoring and support role. Under
certain circumstances identified in the agreement, EPA may assume the OSC
role for a specific spill. As part of the agreement, ADEC staff are
required to submit inspection reports, documents, etc. to EPA for
possible Federal enforcement actions under Section 311 of the Clean Water
Act. The first evaluation of EPA/ADEC operation under this agreement
will take place as part of our regular mid-year program review.
-------
SAFE DRINKING WATER PROGRAM
Alaska was granted primacy of the drinking water program in September 1978.
Prior to that time, the state had essentially no drinking water surveillance
program. Given this background, EPA and ADEC agreed in the FY 80 workplan to
"target" priority water systems to bring into compliance with the state
drinking water regulations. Each subsequent fiscal year's workplan would
target an additional group of water systems until statewide compliance was at
an acceptable level.
ADEC's program is based largely on responding to water system self-monitoring
reports. Reports which indicate that a water system is exceeding standards
is contacted or visited by ADEC staff to determine the cause of the problem.
This type of approach is highly dependent on high self-monitoring compliance
rates in order to be effective. Therefore, obtaining water system compliance
with self-monitoring requirements, particularly bacteriological monitoring,
has been emphasized in the workplans since FY 80.
The FY 82 workplan committed to bringing community water systems serving over
200 persons (and non-community water systems with food service facilities on
the road system) into compliance with bacteriological monitoring requirements
by the end of FY 82. As of June 1982, half of the systems serving over 500
population were out of compliance. A higher percentage of the systems
serving between 200-500 persons, and the non-community water systems, were
undoubtedly in non-compliance. As a result of the failure to meet the FY 82
compliance targets, ADEC has proposed the same targets for FY 83. These
targets are realistic for FY 83 (as they were for FY 82), but we feel that
the state may need to increase emphasis on compliance to meet these targets.
-------
ALASKA
EPA Grants to State Agencies
AIR PROGRAMS GRANTS (Section 105) $477,100
EPA makes grants to the Municipality of Anchorage and the Department of
Environmental Conservation to assist in the operation of air pollution
control programs. In addition, EPA Region 10 has been able to make some
special purpose grants available for high priority air pollution control
needs. Currently, the Municipality of Anchorage is using special purpose
funding to conduct an intensive study of the amounts and location of
carbon monoxide in Anchorage. Additional funding up to $200,000 is
available to Anchorage or Fairbanks or to both cities for initiation of
inspection and maintenance (automobile emissions programs) once a final
commitment is made to a mandatory program.
WATER PROGRAMS GRANT (Section 106) $168,000
EPA annually awards this grant under Section 106 of the Clean Water Act
to assist the Department of Environmental Conservation in managing its
statewide water pollution control program.
State activities partially supported by these funds include planning,
permitting, enforcement and water quality monitoring. Water quality
problems currently being addressed by the state under this program range
from the disposal of seafood processing waste to the protection of salmon
spawning beds from sediment produced by logging and placer mining
operations.
HAZARDOUS WASTE GRANT $363,000
The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation is eligible for an
annual EPA grant for development and implementation of a hazardous waste
regulatory program. The program consists of a tracking system for the
generation, transportation and disposal of hazardous waste was well as a
permit system for regulating treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities. Alaska has passed enabling legislation that may enable
authorization of the State program in lieu of the Federal program but has
not yet adopted regulations and applied for authorization. The State has
expressed an interest in approximately $90,000 in FY 82 carryover for
equipment purchases. The remainder of the $363,000 is still available to
the State. During 1983, the State will continue development of their
program and assist EPA in implementation of the Federal program under a
Cooperative Arrangement. State efforts during 1983 should be aimed at
developing State regulations consistent with Federal requirements so that
State authorization can occur and the possibility of dual State/Federal
requirements can be eliminated.
-------
UNDERGROUND INJECTION CONTROL PROGRAM $98,600
The purpose of the Underground Injection Control program is to protect
underground sources of drinking water from contamination by the injection
of fluids. EPA has developed construction and operating requirements to
assure that wells which inject fluids underground do not contaminate
ground water. The states are to assure that injection wells comply with
these standards. Alaska, however, has chosen so far to not participate
in the Federal program. The grant will be used for further definition of
the ground water aquifer, where underground injection may be a problem.
EPA will be preparing to directly implement the national regulations in
Alaska during 1983. Formal rulemaking describing the program for Alaska
will occur in late 1983; the issuance of Federal UIC permits will follow
in 1984. We will continue to urge the State to take over the Federal
program to avoid duplication of efforts because of a similar State
program.
PUBLIC UATER SYSTEM SUPERVISION PROGRAM $533,000
The purpose of the public water system supervision program is to assure
safe drinking water for residents and visitors to the State. EPA has
developed national drinking water standards and the states are to assure
that water systems which serve the public comply with these standards and
any other requirements which the states choose to implement. For the
programs to be most effective, they must be preventive in nature.
ADEC accepted responsibility for implementing the national drinking water
standards in 1978. Prior to that time, there had been only a minimal
state program. Since 1978, some improvements has been made in attaining
water system compliance with the standards, but overall compliance rates
are low. The state relies heavily on water system self-monitoring for
identifying health hazards. Therefore, the need for high compliance with
self-monitoring requirements is critical. For the past three years, ADEC
has identified high priority water systems to bring into compliance with
monitoring requirements. But the FY 81 and FY 82 targets were not met.
ADEC needs to place greater emphasis on compliance activities to assure
that the targets agreed to in the FY 83 State-EPA Agreement are met.
PESTICIDE APPLICATOR CERTIFICATION GRANT $9,800
The grant funds will be used by the Department of Environmental
Conservation. The purpose of the grant is to assist the State in the
training and certification of both private (farmers) and commercial
pesticide applicators in the proper and safe use of pesticides.
-------
COOPERATIVE ENFORCEMENT AGREEMENT Non-funded
The Department of Environmental Conservation has entered into a
non-funded cooperative agreement with EPA to enforce Federal and state
pesticide laws. The State has agreed to investigate the misuse incidents
as well as monitor pesticide product sales. EPA will provide assistance
in the form of training and laboratory analyses. EPA may provide a
portion of the $64,000 available to all Region 10 states if the state is
willing to increase its enforcement activity.
DREDGE AND FILL PROGRAM DELEGATION STUDY $60,000
A $60,000 grant to Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC)
was made by EPA's Office of Federal Activities (EPA Headquarters) in
October of 1981. The purpose is to determine the feasibility of ADEC
assuming the Federal program to issue dredge and fill permits covering
certain waters of the State. The consulting firm of Woodward and Clyde
and ADEC staff have nearly completed the study, but consideration is
being given to an extension to evaluate EPA's soon-to-be-released revised
program delegation regulations. Delegation of the Clean Water Act
Section 404 program would eliminate duplication of permit processing
activities and provide the State with greater control over development
decisions.
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS $25.9 million
a) Construction grants provide 75% of the funding to build municipal
sewerage works, which include treatment plants, interceptor sewers,
effluent discharge lines, and sewage collection systems. The Department
of Environmental Conservation (DEC) administers the program. The $25.9
million available for Alaska is made up of a $14.7 million FY 83
allocation plus unexpended FY 82 funds. Projects are scheduled for
funding under a priority list established annually be DEC. Projects
scheduled for funding in FY 83 include Nakneck ($4M), Anchorage SE
interceptor ($3M), Unalaska ($7.6M), and Fairbanks sludge disposal
The Alaska allocation currently contains $2.1 million which is reserved
for constructing facilities utilizing innovative and/or alternative
technology. If not used, a portion of those funds will be lost to the
State on October 1, 1983 and the balance on October 1, 1984. Current
prospects for using the funds are not good. Special efforts will be
required by both EPA and the State to identify opportunities for use of
these funds. Last year nearly one million dollars was lost to the State;
i.e. reallocated to other states, because ADEC did not develop innovative
projects.
-------
b) Water Planning Grant (Section 205j) (An element of the construction grant)
A minimum of $100,000 per year to a maximum of one percent of Alaska's
annual funding to build sewage treatment plants can be directed toward
water planning activities under §205(j). This is a new provision of the
Clean Water Act. The amounts noted above include both FY 82 and FY 83
funds. These are the only planning funds now potentially available to
local water quality agencies but also are to support statewide projects.
The minimum amount can be lost to the State if not used for water
planning activities.
c) State Management Assistance Grant (Section 205(g)) (An element of the
construction grant))
A maximum of four percent of Alaska's annual funding to build sewage
treatment plants can be use to pay DEC'S expenses in managing the EPA and
state sewage treatment plant construction programs. The Department has
the option of using any excess funds from this program to support certain
other water pollution control program activities.
-------
Attachment A
EPA Grants to State Agencies
State of Alaska
Department of Environmental Conservation
Consolidated Programs
Air (105)
Water (106)
Hazardous Waste
Totals
Other Grants
Local Air
Underground Injection
Public Water System
Totals
Pesticides
Certification
Enforcement
1982 funds
awarded
308,120
160,000
238.400
706,520
223,980
-0-
569.000
792,980
9,800
-0-
Estimated
1983 funds
available
477,100
168,000
363.000
1,008,100
98,600
533,000
631,600
9,800
unknown
Dredge and Fill Delegation Study -0- 60,000
* If Anchorage &/or Fairbanks develop an auto emission inspection
and maintenance program, $200,000 is available.
Construction Grants (as of 11-30-32)
FY 83 Funds
General Fund
Increase Reserve •
Allowance Reserve
State Mgmt. Asst.(205(g))
Innovative Tech.
Alternative Tech.
Small Communities
Advance Reserve
Water Quality Mgt. (205(j))
Totals
(FY 83 funds expire 9-30-84)
FY 82 Funds
General Fund
Increase Reserve
Allowance Reserve
State Mgmt. Asst.(205(g))
Innovative Tech.
Alternative Tech.
Small Communities
Advance Reserve
Water Quality Mgt. (205(j))
Totals
Unobligated
ADDrooriation Obliaated Balance
12,713,464
279,480
250,000
127,596
73,210
512,470
585,680
100
| 100.000
14,642,000
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
12,713,464
279,480
250,000
127,596
73,210
512,470
585,680
100
100,000
14,642.000
ApprooHation
7,335,555
2.362,020
100,000
472,404
59,050
413,353
472,404
100
100,000
11,314,886
Obliaated
-0-
8,771
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-o-
-0-
-0-
8,771
Unobligated
Balance
/ fwJDf^wO
2,353,249
100,000
472,404
59,050
413,353
472,404
100
100,000
li,306,H5
(FY 82 funds expire 9-30-83)
------- |