December 1995 Issues Online June 2007 April 2007 February 2007 December 2006 October 2006 August 2006 June 2006 April 2006 February 2006 December 2005 October 2005 August 2005 June 2005 April 2005 February 2005 December 2004 October 2004 August 2004 June 2004 April 2004 February 2004 December 2003 October 2003 August 2003 June 2003 April 2003 February 2003 December 2002 October 2002 August 2002 June 2002 April 2002 February 2002 December 2001 October 2001 August 2001 June 2001 April 2001 February 2001 December 2000 October 2000 August 2000 June 2000 April 2000 February 2000 December 1999 October 1999 August 1999 June 1999 April 1999 February 1999 December 1998 October 1998 August 1998 June 1998 April 1998 February 1998 December 1997 October 1997 August 1997 June 1997 April 1997 February 1997 December 1996 October 1996 August 1996 June 1996 April 1996 February 1996 December 1995 October 1995 August 1995 June 1995 April 1995 February 1995 December 1994 October 1994 August 1994 June 1994 April 1994 February 1994 December 1993 October 1993 August 1993 Select any issue from the menu in this bar.

Inside the Agencies

The State's $2 Million Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program faced an uncertain future as this issue went to press. The program (funded primarily by shoreline industries, businesses and ports statewide) requires the State and Regional Boards to identify and characterize toxic hot spots, plan for the prevention and control of further pollution and develop cleanup plans. Dischargers objecting to the program's "scientifically flawed and unworkable" requirements, "inequitable" discharger fees and "duplicative" mandate (with existing Board authority) recently recommended that the State Board abolish it, according to the Bay Planning Coalition's Ellen Johnck. But environmental groups and legislators voiced strong support for the program during a November hearing process. As a result, the program's Public Advisory Committee and Monitoring and Surveillance Task Force will jointly convene a December 12 meeting to discuss the program's future direction and potential legislative changes. The State Board's Craig J. Wilson says he expects a program revamp that includes at the least some provisions for bay and estuary monitoring and watershed management. (916)657-1108

A New Task Force to Coordinate Bay Area Environmental Enforcement held its first meeting November 15th. "All of us are short on enforcement dollars and manpower," says the S.F. Bay Commission's Will Travis, whose agency's single enforcement officer has a Baywide beat. Task force members include all the primary regulatory agencies, among them the Commission, U.S. EPA, the Army Corps and the S.F. Regional Board. Participating agencies hope to train field staff to collect information and evidence for multiple agencies at once, to bring all their enforcement staff together for monthly meetings, and to share and better allocate their dwindling enforcement resources. (415)557-3686

Highway Expansion and Wetland Restoration have a new $100,000 study in common. The roadway in question is the North Bay's accident-plagued Highway 37. The study, funded by the regional Metropolitan Transportation Commission and overseen by a new advisory committee of environmental and transportation agencies and local governments, will explore how to increase the highway's capacity while restoring wetlands on the north side (via creating causeways and culverts through which tides can move in and out under the highway). The study will also examine how to improve recreational trail access to the area. (415)557-3686

Local Brake Pad Pollution Concerns got a National Nod this fall, when U.S. EPA's Washington headquarters officially endorsed a new national Brake Pad Partnership. The push to start the national partnership came from Bay Area stormwater agencies, the City of Palo Alto, Stanford University and the Estuary Project's CCMP Implementation Committee and South Bay Geographic Subcommittee. These groups brought the issue to the attention of the national environmental protection agency - pointing out studies showing that up to 40% of the South Bay's copper pollution comes from brake pad dust carried into the Bay via stormwater. Brake pads can also contribute lead, zinc and other metals. U.S. EPA will likely assess brake pads' effects on other water bodies and may soon initiate talks with brake pad manufacturers. "The partnership's particular focus is on the brake pad design issue, which is more appropriately addressed at the national or even international level," says the City of Palo Alto's Kelly Moran. (415)329- 2421

Responsibility for Pesticide Regulation will shift in early 1996 when an agreement between the State's Water Board and the Department of Pesticide Regulation is finalized. Under the agreement, the board essentially turns pesticide pollution problems concerning water quality over to the department for solving, according to the Central Valley Regional Board's Rudy Schnagl. Schnagl says the department is better set up than the board to work with individual growers, as it has close ties with county agricultural commissioners. But environmentalists are concerned that the department has a tamer track record in terms of cracking down on pesticide pollution than the board. They point out that this tame record is hardly surprising given that the department's funding comes from a mill tax on chemical sales - a tax slated to sunset or be cut by Republicans within the next year and a half. How then, if the department stands to loose a good portion of its budget, can it take on more responsibility? Schnagl says he's unaware of a current mechanism for state board money to be channeled to the department and that funding is not addressed in the new agreement. (916)255-3101

«To @@(newsletter_title)@@ Index

[ ABAG HOME | SFEP HOME ]

Copyright © 2002, San Francisco Estuary Project