29.01.2015 Views

Issue 3 - the Montana Secretary of State Website

Issue 3 - the Montana Secretary of State Website

Issue 3 - the Montana Secretary of State Website

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

-383-<br />

pursuant to (3), that compliance with remedy requirements cannot be practically<br />

achieved, before <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> alternative control measures. The<br />

department does not believe this approval would cause unacceptable delay or risk.<br />

The department has prepared findings, pursuant to 75-10-107, MCA, concerning <strong>the</strong><br />

stringency <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> requirements in (3)(a) and (d) for department approval. See<br />

Stringency Findings for this rule. Therefore, <strong>the</strong> department declines to revise <strong>the</strong><br />

language as requested in <strong>the</strong> comment.<br />

Section (7) concerns certification <strong>of</strong> completion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> selected remedy by a<br />

qualified ground water scientist and approval by <strong>the</strong> department. Department review<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> certification <strong>of</strong> completion is necessary to protect public health. In addition,<br />

completion <strong>of</strong> a corrective action remedy triggers release <strong>of</strong> financial assurance,<br />

which is critical to funding <strong>the</strong> remedy. Corrective action financial assurance should<br />

not be released until <strong>the</strong> department has determined that <strong>the</strong> remedy is complete.<br />

The department has prepared findings, pursuant to 75-10-107, MCA, concerning <strong>the</strong><br />

stringency <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> requirement in (7) for department approval. See Stringency<br />

Findings for this rule.<br />

Therefore, <strong>the</strong> department declines to revise <strong>the</strong> language as requested in<br />

<strong>the</strong> comment.<br />

NEW RULE XLV<br />

COMMENT NO. 61: A commentor stated that <strong>the</strong> department noted in its<br />

testimony at <strong>the</strong> November 4, 2009, hearing on stringency that, in response to<br />

comments, it has conducted an analysis <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> phrase "necessary to protect human<br />

health and <strong>the</strong> environment," found in (2)(g).<br />

RESPONSE: Concerning (2)(g), in response to a comment that <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> phrase "necessary to protect human health or <strong>the</strong> environment" is vague and<br />

overly broad, <strong>the</strong> department substituted <strong>the</strong> phrase "necessary to adequately<br />

characterize <strong>the</strong> hydrogeologic characteristics <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> solid waste landfill facility."<br />

For <strong>the</strong> same reason discussed above, in <strong>the</strong> response to Comment No. 45,<br />

<strong>the</strong> department has revised New Rule XLV(2)(c) to require a description <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

hydrogeologic units that overlie "<strong>the</strong> uppermost aquifer, or underground drinking<br />

water source," as required in New Rule XXXIII.<br />

NEW RULE XLIX<br />

COMMENT NO. 62: A commentor stated that <strong>the</strong> department may not<br />

impose closure requirements on facilities o<strong>the</strong>r than MSWLF landfill units, because<br />

those requirements would be more stringent than comparable federal regulations.<br />

A commentor criticized <strong>the</strong> department's use, in (4), <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> phrase "any o<strong>the</strong>r<br />

information determined by <strong>the</strong> department to be necessary to protect human health<br />

or <strong>the</strong> environment" as being more stringent than comparable EPA regulations and<br />

vague, arbitrary, capricious, and easily abused, and <strong>the</strong> commentor asked that this<br />

phrase be deleted.<br />

RESPONSE: Section 75-10-204, MCA, provides <strong>the</strong> authority for closure<br />

requirements for Class II and Class IV landfill units. There are no comparable<br />

federal requirements for closure or post-closure care for a Class IV landfill unit.<br />

3-2/11/10 <strong>Montana</strong> Administrative Register

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!