Environmental regulations; no stricter than federal law. (HB1082)

Introduced By

Del. David Yancey (R-Newport News)

Progress

Introduced
Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law

Description

Environmental regulations; no stricter than federal law. Prohibits the Department of Environmental Quality, the State Air Pollution Control Board, the State Water Control Board, and the Virginia Waste Management Board from adopting any environmental rule, regulation, or standard that is inconsistent with or exceeds the requirements of any relevant and duly adopted federal environmental statute, regulation, standard, criterion, or guidance document. Read the Bill »

Outcome

Bill Has Failed

History

  • 01/10/2018 Committee
  • 01/10/2018 Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/10/18 18102000D
  • 01/10/2018 Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources
  • 01/22/2018 Impact statement from DPB (HB1082)
  • 02/02/2018 Assigned ACNR sub: Subcommittee #3
  • 02/13/2018 Left in Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources

Comments

Scott J Thomas writes:

I am posting a public comment in opposition to proposed HB1082 for the following reasons:

1. At times, there are specific land, soil or water features or public protection specific reasons that necessitate more stringent environmental regulations at the state level because federal regulations may not cover or address. Some examples include Virginia's Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area program regulations, watershed management planning, protections due to karst areas, protections needed due to coastal erosion or flooding from tropical hurricanes or storm events or noreasters, and protections involved with specific protections to high quality soils, riparian areas, unique plant/aquatic habitats specific to Virginia, or streams or manmade storm systems that drain to municipal drinking water reservoirs. It is not conceivable to not be able to consider local or Commonwealth specific conditions to enact policies or regulations that federal programs may not cover or address.

2. The current process in the Commonwealth to propose, adopt, or enact more stringent statutes, programs or policies related to the environment is not flawed in any way. For example, it took years to update and enact more stringent urban stormwater management regulations through use of expert and advisory committees, multiple public comment periods, and review/consideration by established state boards and commissions. And that was just at the state level. Many of the adopted stormwater management programs then transcended to the local level and went through similar adoption processes.

2. Currently many environmental regulations that protect air, land and water resources are being rescinded, repealed or not being enacted (if proposed) at the federal level. If many of the current federal programs which offer protection disappear or are lessened in ability to provide adequate protection for the Commonwealth's health, safety and welfare or natural resources, then there still should be an ability to enact such legislation through state programs. For example, if the notion that offshore energy investigation or production facilities will have no effect to coastal shore/beach/dune areas or the Chesapeake Bay are not to be recognized or climate change or sea level rise are no longer recognized as threats at the federal level, this should not limit the Commonwealth to deal with these issues through more stringent state programs. Of course they must go through proper public comment and legislative processes.

Jane writes:

Vehemently OPPOSE HB1082!

1. At times, there are specific land, soil or water features or public protection specific reasons that necessitate more stringent environmental regulations at the state level because federal regulations may not cover or address. Some examples include Virginia's Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area program regulations, watershed management planning, protections due to karst areas, protections needed due to coastal erosion or flooding from tropical hurricanes or storm events or noreasters, and protections involved with specific protections to high quality soils, riparian areas, unique plant/aquatic habitats specific to Virginia, or streams or manmade storm systems that drain to municipal drinking water reservoirs. It is not conceivable to not be able to consider local or Commonwealth specific conditions to enact policies or regulations that federal programs may not cover or address.

2. The current process in the Commonwealth to propose, adopt, or enact more stringent statutes, programs or policies related to the environment is not flawed in any way. For example, it took years to update and enact more stringent urban stormwater management regulations through use of expert and advisory committees, multiple public comment periods, and review/consideration by established state boards and commissions. And that was just at the state level. Many of the adopted stormwater management programs then transcended to the local level and went through similar adoption processes.

2. Currently many environmental regulations that protect air, land and water resources are being rescinded, repealed or not being enacted (if proposed) at the federal level. If many of the current federal programs which offer protection disappear or are lessened in ability to provide adequate protection for the Commonwealth's health, safety and welfare or natural resources, then there still should be an ability to enact such legislation through state programs. For example, if the notion that offshore energy investigation or production facilities will have no effect to coastal shore/beach/dune areas or the Chesapeake Bay are not to be recognized or climate change or sea level rise are no longer recognized as threats at the federal level, this should not limit the Commonwealth to deal with these issues through more stringent state programs. Of course they must go through proper public comment and legislative processes.

Post a Public Comment About this Bill



if you have one


(Limited HTML is OK: <a>, <em>, <strong>, <s>, <embed>)