Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGWWMC_DRAFTMeetingSummary_09Mar2022DRAFT March 2022 Summary 1 Drafted 04/14/2022 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION GROUNDWATER AND WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE DRAFT SUMMARY March 9, 2022 11:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. Yvonne Bailey, Chair Presiding The Groundwater and Waste Management Committee (GWWMC) of the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission (EMC) addressed the following at its March 9, 2022, meeting: GWWMC Members in Attendance: Ms. Yvonne Bailey, Chair Dr. Suzanne Lazorick, Vice-Chair Ms. Shannon M. Arata Ms. Jenny Kelvington Mr. David Anderson Mr. J.D. Solomon Other Commissioners in Attendance: Ms. Robin Smith, EMC Chair Ms. Patricia Harris Mr. Charles Carter Ms. Marion Deerhake Mr. John McAdams Mr. Christopher Duggan Others Present: Mr. Phillip T. Reynolds, Commission Counsel I. Preliminary Matters: In accordance with North Carolina General Statute § 138A-15, Chair Bailey asked if any GWWMC member knew of any known conflict of interest or appearance of conflict with respect to any item on the March 9, 2022, GWWMC agenda. None of the members stated there was a conflict. Commissioner Arata made a motion to approve the January 12, 2022, GWWMC meeting minutes. Commissioner Lazorick seconded the motion. The vote taken was unanimous and the minutes from the January meeting were approved. DRAFT March 2022 Summary 2 Drafted 04/14/2022 II. Information Items 1. Overview of the Request for the EMC to Adopt Rule Text Modifications to 15A NCAC 02L .0202 Groundwater Quality Standards Made in Response to RRC's Objection Based upon Ambiguity (DWR) Bridget Shelton Bridget Shelton with the Division of Water Resources (DWR) provided an overview explaining the request that would be before the full EMC the following day to adopt modifications to the rule text in 15A NCAC 02L .0202. She explained that, at their February 2022 meeting, the Rules Review Commission (RRC) objected to rule amendments that had been adopted by the EMC at the November 2021 EMC meeting. The RRC objection was based on ambiguity because it lacked specific guidelines required by G.S. 150B-19(6) to waive or modify the practical quantitation limit requirements through the use of interim maximum allowable concentrations (IMACs). Ms. Shelton explained the recommended modifications made to the rules to address the RRC’s objection; and summarized the requested action that would be before the EMC the following day. Counsel Reynolds stated that he expects that the modifications to the rule recommended by DWR should satisfy the RRC’s objection. Counsel Reynolds also explained that the decision of whether to publish the rules again for public comment was under the authority of the RRC at this time. He also explained that, while there appeared to be many highlighted changes made to the rule text, the changes are not considered to be substantive changes, and he expects that the RRC is unlikely to require an additional public comment period based on the changes. Chair Bailey also suggested that DWR review the IMACs separately from the groundwater standards in the triennial review process to avoid confusion. 2. Status of Pending IMAC Requests Submitted to the Division of Water Resources (DWR) Bridget Shelton Bridget Shelton with the Division of Water Resources provided an update on the requests for IMACs that were submitted to the Division of Water Resources and are still pending. Ms. Shelton stated that the Division had one pending IMAC request submitted by Chemours for GenX; however, Chemours rescinded that request a week prior to this meeting. Ms. Shelton noted that the EPA published the toxicity DRAFT March 2022 Summary 3 Drafted 04/14/2022 assessment for GenX in October 2021, with a final toxicity value that was lower than the 2018 draft value. She also noted that the EPA is in the process of developing a drinking water health advisory for GenX. Ms. Shelton concluded by saying that, with Chemours having rescinded their request, the Division does not currently have any outstanding IMAC requests. Chair Bailey asked if the Division has checked with industry associations to verify that they did not have any other outstanding IMAC requests, and Ms. Shelton confirmed that they did. Chair Bailey also confirmed that the Division still has some existing IMACs that were not added as groundwater quality standards in the rulemaking for 15A NCAC 02L .0202; but clarified that this is a different topic. Commissioner Solomon asked, with regards to GenX, if the Department would come back with a recommendation for a standard. Ms. Shelton responded that she did not have that answer at the time but would consult with the Department about a path forward. 3. Update on the Plan Required by SL 2021-165 (H951) for Financial Assurance for Decommissioning of Utility-Scale Solar Facilities (DWM) Michael Scott Michael Scott, Director of the Division of Waste Management, provided an update on the plan required by SL 2021-165 (H951) for financial assurance for decommissioning of utility-scale solar facilities. Director Scott gave an overview of the recent legislation requiring that the Department submit the plan, a prior related report submitted to the General Assembly by the Department and EMC in January 2021, and the legislation requiring that prior report. Director Scott gave an overview of the existing universe of solar facilities and existing requirements for such facilities in North Carolina. Director Scott also explained the Department’s efforts in developing the plan, and the factors considered by the Department. Director Scott then outlined the Department’s key recommendations provided in the plan. He concluded by saying that the plan was submitted to the General Assembly on March 1, 2022, and the Department is awaiting feedback and potential legislative action on the plan’s recommendations. Chair Bailey stated that the registration process is a key component of the plan; and is needed since no such dataset of built and operating facilities currently exists. DRAFT March 2022 Summary 4 Drafted 04/14/2022 Chair Bailey also inquired about the existing facilities that are not currently subject to any existing local requirements, and the plan’s recommendations for those facilities. Director Scott confirmed that, other than the registry requirement, the plan did not recommend requiring financial assurance for existing facilities unless they made a major modification to the facility. This recommendation is consistent with regulations adopted in other states. Director Scott also explained the feedback received from stakeholders and the difficulty with revising the financial models for these existing projects. Chair Bailey also asked about the possibility of developing model ordinances. Director Scott confirmed that model ordinances have been drafted in the past, but this plan recommends state minimum requirements, while allowing local governments to add additional ordinances above the state minimum. Commissioner Arata stated that, if the registration is implemented, providing some kind of online tool or interactive map providing the registration information would be very useful, once the registration implemented. Director Scott agreed that the agency tasked with establishing the program should develop such a tool. Director Scott also discussed the various models in other states for the agencies responsible for solar programs, which varies between environmental agencies, agencies governing utilities, and hybrid approaches. Commissioner Solomon requested that a briefing on the other components of the recently passed energy act, SL 2021-165 (H951), be provided for the full EMC. Commissioner Arata stated that a briefing was planned for the Air Quality Committee, but EMC Chair Smith agreed to try to coordinate something for all EMC members. Commissioner Kelvington asked what the state is doing to prepare for decommissioning where the landowners are leasing properties to existing facilities which may be owned by temporary LLCs, and there are no local requirements for financial assurance or decommissioning plans. Director Scott replied that the Department looked at this circumstance in the plan development; and stated that facilities in those circumstances may still have decommissioning and/or financial assurance requirements in their lease agreements, even though they are private agreements and the state and local governments do not currently have access to that information. He also emphasized that the legislation only required the plan to address utility-scale solar facilities that DRAFT March 2022 Summary 5 Drafted 04/14/2022 are over 1 MW and are connected to the energy grid, so the plan does not address rooftop solar or projects for individual homeowners. Commissioner Kelvington also suggested that the registration process require reporting of the types or models of solar panels used in the projects, and whether the panels contain hazardous waste. EMC Chair Robin Smith asked if it may be feasible for a program to have some minimum requirements for the decommissioning process for existing facilities, even if financial assurance is not required. Director Scott agreed that minimum decommissioning requirements is an option. Commissioner Solomon asked about financial assurance for landfills and how the requirements may be based on some threshold for size or type of landfill, and the same logic could be applied to existing solar panel projects. Director Scott agreed and emphasized that the plan did draw on the existing programs and requirements for closure plans and financial assurance in the Division of Waste Management and other Departmental programs. III. March 10, 2022 EMC Meeting Agenda Items Following the Information Items, the agenda items for the next day’s Environmental Management Commission meeting were briefly discussed. Director Scott provided an update on a change made to EMC agenda Item #22-05 regarding the readoption and amendments to 15A NCAC 02P. He stated that this was a change to the rule text in Rule .0402(c) after it was previously approved by the GWWMC to move forward to the EMC for public comment. He explained that the change provided a minor clarification on the existing procedures for pre- approvals issued by the Department, and the EMC presentation was also updated to explain the change. IV. Future Committee Interests There was brief discussion regarding upcoming proposed rules for the Groundwater and Waste Management Committee meeting. V. Closing Remarks Following items III and IV, Chair Bailey adjourned the meeting.