November – 2019 – Synergy Environmental Inc

Changes to PADEP’s Management of Fill Policy

Posted on November 20, 2019

Synergy Environmental, Inc.
Brian Loughnane, P.G

November 19, 2019

PADEP’s Management of Fill Policy is set to take effect on January 1, 2020 here are some thoughts from a Pennsylvania Licensed Professional Geologist

Land owners, real estate developers, excavation contractors, municipalities, environmental consultants and lenders need to take note of the upcoming changes that will be occurring with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection’s (PADEP’s) Management of Fill Policy (Fill Policy). On November 2, 2019 PADEP published a notice within the PA Bulletin that the new Management of Fill Policy has been finalized. The policy is effective as of January 1, 2020. Projects and activities throughout Pennsylvania that involve earth disturbance or excavation will be impacted by the new Fill Policy.

PFAS Solution IN (or OUT) of the NDAA?

Posted on November 20, 2019

Greenberg Traurig LLP
Steven Barringer and Katie P. Reed

November 1, 2019

As legislative days dwindle, Congress is in a full sprint to pass the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) (related blog post), among several other must-pass bills. Controversial issues, such as border wall funding, military actions related to Iran, PFAS, among others, have bedeviled congressional negotiators since the Senate (S. 1790) and House (H.R. 2500) passed their bills in early summer. As Greenberg Traurig reported in July, H.R. 2500 would designate all PFAS (over 5,000 chemicals) as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), but S. 1790 does not include similar language.

Both bills contain a variety of provisions addressing PFAS pollution, and there is common ground on most of them between the House and Senate packages, and more generally, broad agreement among Republicans and Democrats that legislation is necessary to address PFAS. However, the CERCLA listing is where consensus breaks down.

SCOTUS Hears Oral Arguments in Major Clean Water Act Case

Posted on November 20, 2019

Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
Scott C. Beightol, John A. Sheehan, Leah Hurtgen Ziemba and Samuel M. Mitchell

November 8, 2019

The U.S. Supreme Court appeared divided following recent oral arguments on Wednesday, November 6, 2019 in a closely followed environmental case which will have major implications on the scope federal regulatory power under the Clean Water Act (CWA).

In County of Maui, Hawaii v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund, the justices are considering whether the CWA requires a permit when pollutants originate from a point source but are conveyed to navigable waters by a nonpoint source, such as groundwater. The outcome of Maui will have a significant impact on a wide-array of industries and private individuals by either subjecting millions of pollutant sources to the CWA’s permitting requirements for the first time or enshrining what environmentalists consider a loophole in the CWA. Although several justices seem to reject the county’s argument that the federal government should only regulate pollution direct from a point source, the justices appear divided as to the limits of such regulation.

NJDEP Changes Policy for Applicability of the ISRA De Minimis Quantity Exemption

Posted on November 20, 2019

Riker Danzig Scherer Hyland & Perretti LLP
Alexa Richman-La Londe

November 6, 2019

Certain business transactions involving property in New Jersey now risk facing expanded environmental obligations if the parties do not follow an administrative policy that has been quietly revised by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (“NJDEP”). The environmental obligations at issue arise under the New Jersey Industrial Site Recovery Act (“ISRA”), which requires owners and/or operators of “industrial establishments” in New Jersey that cease operations or undergo a transfer of ownership or operational control to conduct an environmental review of and, if necessary, remediation of the industrial establishment prior to closing the transaction. However, ISRA allows those responsible for “industrial establishments” to avoid complying with the substantive requirements of ISRA as long as the establishment qualifies for a De Minimis Quantity Exemption (“DQE”). A DQE is available if an industrial establishment only has small (i.e., de minimis) amounts of hazardous materials present on site, and must be approved by the NJDEP based on an application submitted in connection with the transaction.