Issue 3 - the Montana Secretary of State Website
Issue 3 - the Montana Secretary of State Website
Issue 3 - the Montana Secretary of State Website
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