Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality

Annual
Report

2000

ADEQ

Introduction
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) was established under
the Environmental Quality Act of 1986 as the state's environmental regulatory
agency. Our mission is to preserve, protect, and enhance the environment and public health and to be a leader in the development of
public policy to maintain and improve the quality of
During Fiscal Year 2000, our departArizona’s air, land and water resources. During Fiscal
ment was subject to a “Sunset
Year 2000, our department was subject to a “Sunset
Review,” which resulted in legislation
Review,” which resulted in legislation to continue the
to continue the agency for an addiagency for an additional five years, to June 30, 2005.
tional five years, to June 30, 2005.
During the process of the Sunset Review, the depart... In conjunction with [this] legislament’s director and division directors made presentation, ... we entered into a stakeholdtions to the Legislative Committee of Reference coner process to gain consensus on specerning our agency’s performance in the two years
cific measures by which to gauge
since the previous Sunset Review, and set out a plan
our future performance in key areas.
to build the agency of the future on the four pillars of
productivity, quality, service and advocacy for
Arizona. In conjunction with the legislation to continue the department for five
more years, we entered into a stakeholder process to gain consensus on specific
measures by which to gauge our future performance in key areas. We continue to
make progress on all fronts. This report highlights our significant FY 2000 achievements. The appendices to this report contain additional program-specific information, as required by law. Where appropriate, references to the appendices are provided to guide you to more detailed information.

ADEQ at a Glance

We had an average of 730 employees working in our Phoenix headquarters and our
Flagstaff and Tucson regional offices during FY 2000. Organized into the Director’s
Office and four divisions (administrative services, air quality, waste programs and
water quality), these employees fulfill our mission by performing and supporting several core functions. These include planning and assessing, rule-writing, permitting,
inspecting, pursuing compliance and enforcement actions, monitoring and sampling,
investigating and remediating contaminated sites, and responding to emergencies.
In addition to these regulatory functions, we also develop public education and
information programs, and provide technical support and compliance assistance to
individuals, local governments and businesses. In an effort to improve customer
service and enhance efficiency, we have worked to increase coordination among our
various staff members who have similar functional responsibilities in different program divisions affecting common facilities or areas.

Director’s Office
During FY 2000, our director implemented a comprehensive management review of
that office’s functions, and reduced the number of staff offices reporting to the
director from seven to three. The resulting staff offices that report to the
director/deputy director are the Office of Communications (combining executive
communications, media relations, public information, and employee recognition),
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

1

the Office of Administrative Counsel (including rule writing, administrative appeals,
environmental justice and policy development functions), and the Government and
Legislative Office. The General and Laboratory Services section was assigned to the
Administrative Services Division and the Office of Strategic Management functions
were combined with the Office of Strategic Planning and Budget, which is also in
the Administrative Services Division.
By transferring eight positions to the regional offices, we decentralized the public-service functions of the Compliance Assistance Section to help regulated entities
and communities comply with our rules, prepare and process permit applications,
and find ways to improve local infrastructures. The primary reason for this decentralization from the director’s
By transferring eight positions to
office was to better serve the needs of the public and
the regional offices, we decentralthe regulated community in the more rural areas of the
ized the public-service functions of
state. We established four community liaison positions
the Compliance Assistance Section
and received offers from local governments in Bisbee,
to help regulated entities and com- Kingman, St. Johns and Yuma to house our staff withmunities comply with our rules,
out having to incur additional facility-related costs.
prepare and process permit appliAt the outset, our new deputy director focused prications, and find ways to improve
marily on internal processes and internal customers,
local infrastructure. The primary
coordinating the follow-on actions from the 1999
employee survey (including a series of employee teams)
reason for this decentralization
and developing departmental training program
from the director’s office was to
improvements. During the latter part of the fiscal year,
better serve the needs of the public and the regulated community in the deputy director also represented the agency on the
Governor’s Brown Cloud Summit and on the state’s
the more rural areas of the state.
Power Plant and Line Siting Committee under the
Arizona Corporation Commission. In this latter role he
has moved the committee to require the adoption of enforceable environmentalimpact mitigation and reduction measures for proposed merchant power plants and
transmission facilities.
Our legislative liaison assisted our department’s leadership team through the
Sunset Review process and the second regular session of the 44th Legislature during
FY 2000 to ensure continuation of the department for an additional five years. In
addition, the Senate confirmed the governor’s appointment of Jacqueline E. Schafer
as our director.
Our newly created communications office coordinated and strengthened media
relations, risk communications, Web site and document publication, educational
and public information activities, internal communications, and employee recognition. The customer service activities of the office were well represented in FY 2000
with answering 32,240 phone calls received at the switchboard, greeting 11,073 visitors at the front desk, selling 1,275 publications, and assisting 7,040 library customers in person or over the phone.
Our office of administrative counsel assisted significantly on the agency’s extensive regulatory agenda. We put 24 rule packages into effect during the year and
assisted with five-year rule reviews for three chapters in Title 18. Regulatory development highlights for FY 2000 include the establishment of consumer confidence
reporting and capacity development requirements for drinking water systems,
2

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

updates to several hazardous and solid waste rules, and necessary adjustments to the
vehicle emissions inspection program rules. We also completed the performance
audits of our delegated local agencies. Three counties − Mohave, LaPaz and Gila −
and four cities − Sierra Vista, Kingman, Prescott and Flagstaff − completed field
audits. The audits indicate that, in general, the delegated local agencies are effectively implementing ADEQ delegated powers, functions and duties. The completion
of these seven delegated agency audits closes the audit cycle for ADEQ’s 1996-2000
delegation agreements. We processed a total of 144 administrative hearing requests
timely in FY 2000; this was a 20 percent decrease in appeals from FY 1999.

Administrative Services Division
We provide our own day-to-day financial and business support services (such as
contracting, budgeting, accounting, payroll, information technology, general and
laboratory services, and human resources) for our program staff.

Licensing Time Frames System

The Licensing Time Frames (LTF) system is the first agency-wide computer application using our Arizona Unified Repository for Informational Tracking of the
Environment (AZURITE). We track the processing of
licenses and permits from our receipt to our issuance
We track the processing of licenses
or denial of the permit. LTF ensures that we comply
and permits from our receipt to our
with legislatively-based requirements for the timely
issuance or denial of the permit.
processing of permits and licenses (A.R.S. §41-1072
LTF ensures that we comply with
through §41-1079). Other than a few exempted types,
legislatively-based requirements for
all permits that we issue are subject to the common
the timely processing of permits
elements identified in the LTF legislation. Each permit
and licenses. Since August 1999,
has its application, review period and decision tracked
the agency has received and
in AZURITE, with common data tables for the miletracked 4,739 permit and license
stones and events associated with permitting. This
applications subject to the Licensing
allows the agency to track information across all perTime Frames rule.
mitting programs and enables the association of all
permits with a common facility. Since August 1999,
the agency has received and tracked 4,739 permit and license applications subject
to the Licensing Time Frames rule. All but 12 were processed within the time limit.

Windows NT

In FY 2000, our technological environment was at a critical juncture as our 16-bit,
Windows 3.1 operating system neared obsolescence. As a result, our technical infrastructure strained to support our business needs.
More than half of our desktop computers lacked the processing power to run 32bit applications, including Oracle, Geographical Information System (GIS) software,
Internet browsers and office-suite applications. Additional servers, software and
technical expertise were required to develop public-access applications and provide
electronic-reporting capabilities to the regulated community.
Funding issues prevented us from upgrading our computer network and desktops
earlier. Desktop computers had been funded through individual program budgets,
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

3

and this created a disparity since not all
of our programs had the resources,
Fines and other (1.98%)
needs or commitments for upgrades.
Water Permits
To develop consistency, we leverInterest (3.96%)
and Fees (6.68%)
aged federal grant funds against appropriated dollars from the Legislature to
fund the transition to Windows NT.
Waste Permits
The necessary expenses included
and Fees
General Fund
(30.46%)
investment in desktop hardware; instal(32.82%)
lation, upgrade and configuration of the
hardware; backup and restoration of
data on hard drives; conversion of legacy applications not supported by a 32Air Permits and
bit operating system; development of a
Federal Funds (11.60%)
Fees (12.39%)
temporary legacy environment; consolidation of servers; and connectivity
Total Revenue: $101,653,104
upgrades for desktops. Other incurred
costs included training for
end users and informationChart II. ADEQ FY 2000 Expenditures (by classification)
technology staff, reconfiguring the servers in the comIndirect (10.22%)
Personnel Services
puter room, and converting
(29.70%)
Capital Equipment (2.54%)
noncompliant applications.
Other Operating
To ensure that desktop
Expenses (7.37%)
computers are managed
consistently and remain current, we are leasing new
equipment, which is a first
Employee-Related among state agencies.
Aid to Organizations/
Expenses (6.21%) Leasing also reduces annual
Individuals (23.63%)
expenditures and will move
Professional and Outside computer costs from a capiTravel (1.08%)
Services (19.26%)
tal to an operating expense.
Total Amount: $90,499,634
At less than $600 per year
per computer, leasing
reduces current annual
Chart III. ADEQ FY 2000 Expenditures (by funding source)
desktop computer costs
Federal Funds (11.42%)
drastically. We will now
Non-Appropriated
budget desktop costs in
Funds (49.80%)
terms of monthly charges
General Fund (14.84%)
per computer.
Chart I. ADEQ FY 2000 Fees, Permits and Fines

Financial Information

Appropriated Funds (23.93%)
Total Amount: $90,499,634
4

Information on our FY 2000
expenditures, revenues and
full-time employees (FTEs)
is shown on the adjacent

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

four charts. Total revenue from general fund
appropriations, federal funds, interest, fines,
penalties and fees was $101,653,104. Chart I
shows the sources of revenue and the percent
contribution from each source. We expended
$90,499,634 in FY 2000. Chart II displays the
expenditures broken down by the state’s
accounting classifications, while Chart III
shows the expenditures by the four major funding sources. Information on funding sources for
authorized staff is provided in Chart IV.

Air Quality Division

Chart IV. ADEQ FY 2000 Appropriated and
Authorized FTE (by funding source)
Appropriated
Federal Fund
Funds (33.7%)
(17.17 %)

General Fund
Non-Appropriated
(26.31%)
Funds (22.82%)
Total Authorized FTE: 934.60

Our focus is to reduce air pollution and
improve ambient air quality. In areas that
exceed the federally established health standards, known as the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards, we prepare or participate in the development of air pollution
control plans, which address control strategies to decrease emissions from industrial
sources, area sources or vehicles.
Our core functions that regulate air pollution from industrial stationary and
mobile sources include permitting, inspections, enforcement; monitoring ambient
air quality; researching air pollution conditions and pollution control techniques,
technical assistance, and rule writing. An inspection program regulates emissions of
vehicles that operate in Maricopa and Pima counties.

Achieving Healthful Air Quality

The 1990 federal Clean Air Act Amendments established attainment dates for
areas not meeting the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for pollutants. The
pollutants of concern in the metropolitan Phoenix area are ozone, carbon monoxide
and PM10 , which can all cause serious health problems.
Ozone is a highly reactive form of oxygen that can significantly reduce lung
function and induce respiratory inflammation.
Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless gas that forms when fuels such as gasoline do not burn completely. When carbon monoxide is inhaled, it combines with
hemoglobin in the red blood cells and blocks the uptake of oxygen. Without adequate oxygen, heart contractions weaken and less blood is delivered throughout the
body. Consequently, overall performance declines.
PM10 is the acronym for particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter.
These very small particles of dust are inhaled deep into the lungs where they can
remain for long periods. The particles irritate lung tissue, cause respiratory damage
and make breathing generally difficult.
The scheduled attainment dates are Nov. 15, 1999, for ozone, Dec. 31, 2000, for
carbon monoxide and Dec. 31, 2001 for PM10 . The Phoenix area has achieved
attainment for ozone and carbon monoxide levels. By the end of 1999, Arizona
capped the necessary third straight year of no monitored violations for ozone and
the second straight year for carbon monoxide, the first steps in getting an area
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

5

redesignated to attainment. We are currently working with the Maricopa County
Environmental Services Department and Maricopa Association of Governments to
develop maintenance plans to submit to EPA. These plans establish how the area
will remain in attainment for the standards and request official redesignation to
attainment status.
Though getting better, PM 10 is a more difficult pollutant for the Phoenix area.
In FY 99, we submitted to EPA an attainment plan containing several control measures to reduce PM10 emissions. The measures include
Maricopa County rules regulating excessive dust from conADEQ’s Web Site Resources
struction and earthmoving activities, paving heavily used
www.adeq.state.az.us
unpaved roads, and controlling dust from parking lots and
vacant lots. We also included a rule regulating commercial
Go to...
agricultural activities that may create unhealthful levels of
Environmental Programs
dust. Because these measures affect entities previously unafAir Quality Division
fected by air quality regulations, in FY 2000 both we and the
county are developing and implementing widespread educaFor information on:
tional programs to explain the health effects of PM10 and
the localized nature of PM10 emissions. Better understandw Air quality readings
ing of the reasons behind the regulations should lead to betw Air quality in Arizona
ter compliance results.
w Assessment
In late 1999, EPA took action on the Tucson carbon
w Air pollution monitoring,
monoxide nonattainment area’s maintenance plan and promodeling and research data
posed to redesignate the area to attainment. EPA redesigw Compliance
nated the area in June.

w Air quality compliance
w Permits
w Air Quality Division Permits
Section
w Planning
w Focal point for division-wide
air quality issues
w Vehicle emissions inspection

Arizona/Mexico Air Quality Study

Following on the heels of the Ambos Nogales Air Pollution
and Risk Assessment study completed in 1999, we established a network of air pollution monitors in Douglas,
Arizona, and Agua Prieta, Sonora. We collected gaseous and
particulate air pollution data and meteorological data from
January 1999 to February 2000. This monitoring exercise is
the first phase in a complete risk assessment, which will also
include an emissions inventory, atmospheric modeling and
risk estimates from pollutant concentrations. Fine particulate concentrations in
Agua Prieta were the highest we ever monitored, with average values three times
the proposed National Ambient Air Quality Standard. The site in Douglas closest
to the Mexican border also exceeded the annual average standard for PM 10 .
Volatile organic compounds (e.g., solvents and exhaust fuels) were measured at
higher concentrations in Agua Prieta than in the Phoenix area.

Air Permitting Program

The federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 require the development of operating permit programs to consolidate all of the Clean Air Act requirements into one federally enforceable document. Air pollution sources must identify all the requirements
to which they are subject and certify twice a year that operations are in compliance.
Those who knowingly violate the provisions of the act could face criminal penalties.
6

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

We continue efforts toward finalizing the federal mandate to consolidate all air
pollution requirements for a given facility into one document with the issuance of
permits to three electric utilities and by publically noticing permits for three copper
mines. During FY 2001, we expect to take final action on one electric utility permit
and four copper mine permits, and continue processing ten applications from copper
smelters, cement plants, lime plants, paper plants and ammonium nitrate plants.
We continue to simplify the permitting process for smaller sources through the
development of general permits, which cover sources of pollution that are similar in
nature, have similar emissions and are subject to similar requirements. A general
permit differs from an individual permit in that it can apply to more than one
source, is usually more restrictive, but less expensive, and can be issued more quickly than an individual permit. During FY 2000, we completed general permits for
crematories and began development of general permits for soil vapor extraction
units, gas stations, hot mix asphalt plants and generators.
We issued a total of 111 permits in FY 2000, 37 of which were general permits.

Western Regional Air Partnership

Our membership in the Western Regional Air Partnership is an example of stakeholder participation in the planning process. The Western Regional Air Partnership,
composed of 12 western states and tribes, was formed to implement recommendations of the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission, which completed its
work in 1996, and to facilitate preparation of state plans
for improving visibility for parks and wilderness areas.
We continue to simplify the perThe Western Regional Air Partnership conducts its work
mitting process for smaller
though stakeholder-based forums and committees, which
sources through the developundertake technical and policy work such as developing
ment of general permits, which
the technical and policy tools needed by states and tribes
[are] usually more restrictive, but
to implement the federal regional haze rule.

Rule Development

less expensive, and can be issued
more quickly than an individual
permit. We issued a total of 111
permits in FY 2000, 37 of which
were general permits.

Stakeholder participation continues to be an important
component in rule development. With a record number
of rules − updating source permitting requirements, the
vehicle emissions inspection program, and Arizona’s
cleaner burning gasoline program − adopted through our
cooperative efforts with stakeholders, FY 2000 was particularly productive. In addition to including industry, environmental and public stakeholders in the planning
process, we worked closely with local air pollution control agencies and EPA to
ensure consistency and effectiveness in rules and programs.

Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program

In FY 2000, we implemented new test procedures in the Vehicle Emissions
Inspection Program in the Phoenix metropolitan area. Beginning Jan. 2, 2000, with
the current emissions testing contractor, Gordon-Darby, Inc., we successfully implemented the IM147 emissions test procedure for non-diesel passenger cars and lightduty trucks of 1981 and newer model years. The IM147 test procedure ensures the
test vehicle is sufficiently warmed-up, thereby preventing false failures, and will
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

7

allow us to further define emissions standards to improve
the identification of hydrocarbon and oxides of nitrogen
emissions failures. On April 12, 2000, with GordonDarby, Inc., we successfully implemented the SAE J1667
diesel emissions test procedure. The SAE J1667 test procedure is portable and used across the nation as the testing standard for heavy-duty diesel vehicles.
The current emissions inspection contract expires
Dec. 31, 2001. To ensure that the inspection program
continues uninterrupted, we are currently conducting a
solicitation for the next contract, which will begin Jan. 1, 2002.
During FY 2000, we tested more than 1.1 million vehicles, and over of 15,500
vehicles went through our waiver lanes.
Additional information on air quality programs is contained in Appendix I.

On April 12, 2000, with
Gordon-Darby, Inc., we successfully implemented the SAE J1667
diesel emissions test procedure.
The SAE J1667 test procedure is
portable and used across the
nation as the testing standard for
heavy-duty diesel vehicles.

Waste Programs Division
We address problems associated with waste through numerous programs, such as
hazardous waste, solid waste, special waste, waste tires, state and federal Superfund,
underground storage tanks, emergency response, recycling, and pollution prevention. Through these programs, we seek to prevent environmental contamination by
ensuring proper waste disposal, reducing or eliminating waste generation, and overseeing the remediation of contaminated sites.
The regulation of hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities and solid waste
landfills and transfer stations involves the core functions of permitting, inspecting,
monitoring, enforcing and rule writing. The state and federal Superfund programs
and the leaking underground storage tank program focus on environmental monitoring, rule writing, and remediating soil and groundwater. The recycling and pollution
prevention programs take a proactive approach to preventing environmental contamination by targeting the elimination, reduction and reuse of waste materials.
Information about the recycling program is in Appendix II. Information about the pollution prevention program is in the Waste Programs Division Report, Appendix III.

Hazardous Waste Facilities

The hazardous waste program seeks to provide cradle-to-grave management of hazardous waste by generators, transporters, and owners and operators of treatment,
storage and disposal facilities. We are responsible for permitting treatment, storage
and disposal facilities; inspecting generators, transporters, and treatment, storage
and disposal (TSD) facilities; and undertaking enforcement actions when a hazardous waste facility is out of compliance. In addition to Arizona’s 13 treatment and
21 storage facilities, there are approximately 1,800 hazardous waste generators.
The hazardous waste permitting process is complex and time intensive. To gather more accurate information for the procedure, we developed an extensive public
involvement process involving a series of small community meetings for two-way
dialogue with community members for hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities. Such informal meetings allow us to gain a better understanding of
community concerns in these areas and draft permit conditions that are more pro8

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

tective of public health and the environment. During FY
2000, eight permits were at different stages in the process
toward completion.
Every hazardous waste generator, transporter and TSD
facility needs an EPA identification (ID) number to ship
hazardous waste to a treatment, storage or disposal facility. Arizona is currently the only state program within EPA
Region IX issuing EPA ID numbers to hazardous waste
generators. This allows our customers to receive timely
turnaround for these requests. In FY 2000, all requests for
EPA ID numbers − a total of 438 − were issued within five
working days.
Information about enforcement in the hazardous waste
program is contained in the Waste Programs Division Report,
Appendix III.

Emergency Response

Quality Assurance Project Plan
Because environmental monitoring or sampling is essential to
many of our waste programs, we
worked cooperatively to complete the Quality Assurance
Project Plan. The Quality
Assurance Project Plan provides
consistent sampling procedures
and a credible quality assurance
and control program. The plan
also leads to more accurate
data, which improve decision
making for remediation and
enforcement actions.

Our emergency responders provide assistance at the scene
of accidental releases or spills of hazardous materials, hazardous wastes or other
chemical pollutants. Because scientific and technical advice is frequently required
in surface and groundwater hydrology, hazardous-substance chemistry and physics,
air monitoring and meteorology, and the engineering and operation of containment
and treatment structures, we created an Environmental Emergency Team that has
expertise in several environmental disciplines.
During FY 2000, we supervised the disposal of hazardous materials during 194
on-scene responses. We reported on a total of 670
ADEQ Emergency Response Unit Activity
incidents and referred 180 calls to other agencies
FY
96
97
98
99
00
and offices. The number of reported spills has
Spill
355
492
535
521 670
been increasing since FY 1994.
Reports
177
236
217
194 194
Two of the major incidents were a diesel fuel
spill and a train derailment. The diesel fuel spill
occurred in the Billingsley spring, diversion dam and lake; and the fuel was observed
as far as two miles down the water course at its confluence with Date Creek. We
initiated an enforcement investigation and a water-quality assessment, and we hired
a contractor to place absorbent booms and take other emergency actions to remove
the diesel from the water.
A 10 car train derailment near the community of Yampai released approximately
10,000 gallons of ethanol and 200 gallons of vinyl acetate from the damaged railcars.
To begin spill remediation, we secured the leaks and cross-loaded the materials from
the damaged cars. We also ensured the recovery of standing ethanol and the on-site
bioremediation of the remaining ethanol-contaminated soils. We arranged for the
removal and disposal of all of the released vinyl acetate and the soil it contaminated.

Underground Storage Tanks

We oversee the clean up of releases from leaking underground storage tanks, which
commonly contain gasoline, diesel fuel, aviation fuel or waste oil. If a tank leaks,
the contents contaminate soil and sometimes groundwater. In FY 2000, we oversaw
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

9

the clean up and closure of 763 leaking underground storage tanks. The cumulative
closure total is 5,123, which is 63 percent of the 8,098 reported releases throughout
the state and higher than the national average of 50 percent.
Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) is a gasoline additive
ADEQ ’s Web Site Resources
used to provide for cleaner air by reducing vehicular emiswww.adeq.state.az.us
sions of carbon monoxide and ozone-forming pollutants.
MTBE also has impacted drinking water supplies in various
Go to...
parts of the country. To help evaluate the impact of MTBE
Environmental Programs
on groundwater in Arizona, the Underground Storage Tank
Waste Programs Division
program surveyed the approximately 600 leaking underground storage tank sites where fuel releases have affected
For information on:
groundwater quality to determine the existence and nature
w Capacity development
of any MTBE contamination. The program detected low levels of MTBE in groundwater at or near 75 percent of these
w Hazardous waste
sites. ADEQ is striving to limit the potential impact of
w Solid waste
MTBE and other gasoline constituents on our drinking water
w Superfund (NPL/WQARF)
supplies through a concerted effort directed at release prew Underground storage tanks
vention, early leak detection and source control.
The State Assurance Fund reimburses owners and operators for some of the cost of remediating the releases. In FY 2000, we processed
1,076 applications. The fund paid $19,032,918. The money in the fund comes from
a one-cent-per-gallon excise tax on regulated substances.
Additional information on the fund is contained in the Waste Programs Division
Report, Appendix III.

Solid Waste

Under the solid waste program, we have included the used-oil, waste-tire and recycling programs in addition to the regulation of landfills and illegal disposal. We
opened and resolved 150 complaints regarding solid waste violations during FY
2000. Of the 41 active municipal solid waste landfills operating in Arizona, 37 operate under approved solid waste facility plans. The remaining four are in the plan
approval process. To provide citizens with easy access to facility information, we
developed a plan to locate information repositories near solid waste facilities undergoing public comment.
Information on the used oil program can be found in the Recycling Report, Appendix
II. Information on waste tires is in Waste Programs Division Report, Appendix III.

Water Quality Assurance Revolving Fund

Through the WQARF program, we identify, assess, and clean up soil and groundwater contaminated with hazardous substances. In consultation with the WQARF
Advisory Board, we direct remediation activities using state and federal funds, and
we oversee independently-funded cleanup efforts.
The WQARF Registry contains sites that require investigation and cleanup.
Cleanup of contamination at WQARF sites, especially those with contaminated
groundwater, can take many years. Most of the releases of hazardous substances at
WQARF sites occurred before it was widely known that those releases would potentially harm the environment and affect human health.
10

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

During FY 2000, 2.3 billion gallons of groundwater were treated under WQARF,
and 5,000 pounds of volatile organic compounds and 4.2 million pounds of metals
were removed from the environment at Registry sites. At the end of FY 2000, the
Registry contained 33 sites. Three source-control, early-response actions were initiated at the following WQARF sites: ALSCO in West Van Buren (soil vapor extraction and groundwater treatment), F&B in West Central Phoenix (soil vapor extraction and soil removal), and Central and Camelback (groundwater pump and treat).
Statutes governing qualified business settlements now allow a person or business
to settle all WQARF liability with us. To be eligible, a person or business must have
a gross income averaging less than $2 million per year. Eligible persons or businesses
pay 10 percent of their gross income as a settlement
amount. If a purchaser has not contributed to the conDuring FY 2000, 2.3 billion galtamination at the site and is eligible, a prospective purlons of groundwater were treated
chaser agreement may offer liability protection to the pur- under WQARF, and 5,000
chaser of a contaminated property. At the end of FY
pounds of volatile organic com2000, 15 qualified business settlements, two prospective
pounds and 4.2 million pounds
purchaser agreements, 26 access agreements, and four
consent decrees/consent orders were finalized; and we had of metals were removed from the
environment at Registry sites.
initiated 12 potentially responsible party searches.
The WQARF community-involvement program keeps
citizens informed about site progress and gives them the opportunity assist us in
determining the best way to clean up sites. By the end of FY 2000, we had established ten Community Advisory Boards at the following WQARF sites: Payson,
Vulture Mill, Miracle Mile, West Van Buren, Tyson Wash, Broadway-Pantano, Estes
Landfill, Park-Euclid, Klondyke Tailings and West Central Phoenix.
More information on the Water Quality Assurance Revolving Fund is in Waste
Programs Division Report, Appendix III.

Water Quality Division
Water is a precious resource in our desert environment. While we do not regulate
the quantity of water used in the state, we do ensure the quality of Arizona’s waters.
Under Arizona law, groundwater quality is to be protected to drinking-water quality
standards; this is one of the highest standards in the nation.
We safeguard drinking water and protect groundwater and surface water quality
by regulating point and source discharges from wastewater treatment plants, mines,
industry and other sources of potential pollution, and by providing general permitting programs of voluntary best management practices for nonpoint sources of potential discharge. Our control of discharges entails the core functions of permitting,
inspection, plan review, compliance and enforcement, technical assistance, and rule
writing. Some major achievements of FY 2000 are presented below.

Water Permits

Working with stakeholders during the last legislative session, we secured passage of
H.B. 2418, which authorized us to increase the maximum fee for Aquifer Protection
Permit program activities from $16,000 to $75,000. This change allows us to recover
our “reasonable and necessary” costs for permitting.
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

11

This year, we crafted and
published five major rules packFY 2000 FY 1999
ages, including the Unified
ADWR recharge permits certified
3
6
Water Quality Permit, which
Reuse permits issued
40
36
streamlines and consolidates
Drywell registrations processed
1,417
1,929
permitting activities for aquifer
Wastewater approvals to construct issued
413
285
protection permits, reclaimed
Subdivision approvals issued
178
111
water permits, reclaimed water
NPDES permits (wastewater) certified
53
29
quality standards, water quality
NPDES permits (stormwater) certified
3
2
planning rules, and water quali401/404 (“dredge-and-fill”) permits certified 43
49
ty fee fund rules. These rules
packages were designed to simplify permitting, strengthen environmental protection and public health considerations, and recover appropriate program costs.
In response to a November 1999 report of the auditor general, we implemented
administrative and management initiatives focused on establishing and implementing a formal training program, providing better data management and controls, and
preparing work management plans to ensure that statutory deadlines for completing
permits are met.
The Water Permits Section also issued 110 permit actions for Aquifer Protection
Permit facilities, compared to 104 in FY 99 and 88 in FY 98. The adjacent table lists
other permits, approvals and certifications that the section issued.
Permits, Approvals and Certifications

Safe Drinking Water Capacity Development

This year, we successfully adopted the rules by which Arizona’s capacity-development program operates. Working with our partners, the Water Infrastructure
Finance Authority, the Arizona Department of Water Resources and the Arizona
Corporation Commission, we ensure that no new water system begins operation in
Arizona without meeting minimum standards for technical, managerial and financial competencies. Also this year, we collaborated with stakeholders to craft strategies for existing water systems to develop and maintain technical and managerial
competency and adequate financing.

Monitoring Assistance Program Electronic Reporting

Our Monitoring Assistance Program Electronic Reporting (MAPER) project is an
electronic reporting application that provides water systems access to our Safe
Drinking Water database, allowing real-time access to water system monitoring and
reporting data, while ensuring appropriate protection of data systems. MAPER is a
first effort in allowing the water systems to report electronically and to review water
system compliance with user-friendly capability. We anticipate that all water systems
will have access to the system in FY 2001. This project is our prototype for providing public access to a variety of environmental data types.

Water Quality Improvement Grants

The transformation of our key grant program turned what was a bureaucratic and
cumbersome contracting process into a customer-friendly grant program, designed
to allow for program education and outreach as well as providing funds. We created
12

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

new tools and processes as part of the redesigned former 319(h) program to provide
federal funds for nonpoint-source projects. The new program includes education
and outreach in addition to providing funding for on-the-ground water quality
improvement projects. Examples of improvement projects
eligible for grant funding include reducing stream turbidity,
ADEQ’s Web Site Resources
implementing erosion control, and reducing sediment in
www.adeq.state.az.us
runoff. The goal, which was to provide $1 million of grant
funding, was far exceeded by issuance of approximately $1.9
million in total grants.
Go to...

Source Water Assessment

Environmental Programs
Water Quality Division

In FY 2000, EPA approved our Source Water Assessment
Plan, a key water-source protection program. This plan,
For information on
which we prepared with stakeholders, includes the methodw Assessment and monitoring
ology for assessing risk to a water system’s source of supply
w Compliance and enforcement
and offers potential solutions to provide protection. We have
w Drinking water
combined efforts under the Source Water Assessment
w Management support
Program and the Total Maximum Daily Load Program to
w Non-point source
identify opportunities to share data and ideas for water quality improvement plans. In addition, we led the nation with
w Water permits
our initiative to prepare an interstate Source Water
Assessment Plan for the Colorado River, coordinating efforts
among Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado and Utah.
Additional information on the water programs is contained in the Ground Water
Quality Report, Appendix IV and the Water Quality Report in Appendix V.

Regional Offices
Our regional offices continued to demonstrate the great value of our moving toward
a more decentralized operating mode.
Leading this effort was the director’s management review of our complianceassistance program, previously based in Phoenix. Service to rural Arizona and advocacy on behalf of outlying customers had been reported as weaknesses to the director during her statewide visits during the summer of 1999. The solution was to disperse eight positions from the Ombudsman and Compliance Assistance Section,
which was established as part of the director’s staff, to the two regional offices. Of
these positions, four were reclassified as executive consultants and established as
community liaisons for the northwest (Mojave County), northeast (Navajo and
Apache counties), southeast (Cochise, Graham, Greenlee and Santa Cruz counties), and southwest (Yuma and LaPaz counties) parts of the state. The primary role
of these ADEQ ambassadors is to help local residents, businesses and governments
understand and comply with environmental requirements. They provide professional resources to help develop compliance strategies and infrastructure improvements
for increased environmental quality in the rural areas of the state. The other four
positions were based, two each, in the regional offices to provide community outreach services, multiprogram technical coordination, inquiry response and followup, compliance assistance, and associated administrative support to our delegated
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

13

authorities and outlying customers. Through these new positions, we expect to
increase productivity in the regions by identifying local needs better and responding
to them faster.
In Flagstaff and the northern region construction permitting for drinking water
and waste water systems continues to dominate the work efforts. Unexpected
requests for construction reviews have diverted resources normally involved in
proactive inspections of facilities which already have valid environmental permits.
Even with these unanticipated tasks, during FY 2000, we fulfilled all of our regional
workplan commitments − exceeding some productivity requirements substantially −
all within constrained budget parameters.
In Tucson and the southern region, we also met or substantially exceeded all
proactive water-quality workplan goals for FY 2000. With this productivity came an
excellent measure of service under the Licensing Time Frames program by achieving
a 100 percent success record for completion of water and wastewater system construction approvals within allowable time frames. We also provided two-way advocacy in conjunction with the development of the draft Unified Water Quality
Permit rules by advocating for the rule to regional stakeholders
and by advocating for regional needs to the Water Quality
The Sister City mayors of San
Division. Regional engineers also actively participated with
Luis/San Luis Rio Colorado and
stakeholders as they developed the rules through our On-Site
Ambos Nogales signed the first Wastewater Advisory Committee and Sewer Collection
two binational cross-border
Subcommittee.
emergency-response plans in
Our Superfund program continued its growth and influence
U.S. EPA Region IX. The plans
in the Tucson area as it poised itself to begin improving aquifer
allow local authorities to assist quality by cleaning up historically contaminated sites under the
state’s WQARF program. Regional Superfund staff grew to 11,
the neighboring country with
up from four two years ago, by adding a fifth project manager
assets and personnel, if
requested, without committing and a second community-involvement coordinator. During the
course of the year, we added a new Tucson site to the WQARF
other mutual aid resources or
Registry and successfully advocated to EPA for continued
state and federal resources.
state-lead at a site identified for potential National Priorities
List designation. We constituted and facilitated three
Community Advisory Boards into very positive and productive neighborhood partnership groups. Now with responsibility for ten state and federal superfund sites in
the Tucson area, we have continued to make substantial gains in investigating and
remediating the region’s contaminated aquifers.
We continued to develop our border program’s reputation as a model among the
southwestern states for advancing transboundary environmental quality. We have
served as strong advocates and technical leaders for the resolution of the challenging environmental problems in the Arizona-Mexico border region. We completed a
landmark binational air quality study for Nogales and began a public outreach initiative to address the area’s issues. We also designed and implemented the highly
acclaimed AMIGO program which promotes pollution prevention among Mexican
maquiladora industries. By providing technical and advocacy support to Arizona’s
border communities in their pursuit of federal funding and approvals for environmental infrastructure projects, we helped obtain a multimillion dollar grant package
for Nogales’ binational wastewater management infrastructure. We also coordinated
14

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

two new binational emergency-response plans signed ceremoniously in San Luis and
Nogales − both historic events within their respective communities and the first in
EPA’s Region IX. Additionally, we produced 80 Emergency Response Notification
System reports and 52 on-scene visits by deploying a regional emergency responder
during the year. We were also honored for the second year in a row by being
assigned the leadership role in the Border Governors’ Conference Environment
Table, which resulted in joint declarations by the 10 border governors.

Conclusion
FY 2000 was a productive year for us. We worked hard for the citizens of Arizona to
provide excellent customer service, to attain environmental quality, and to advocate
for state interests. We have endeavored to streamline operations, clarify roles, be
responsive and be accountable in an effort to provide what our external
customers want and need, knowing that their judgment ultimately
determines our success.
For FY 2001, we will continue to build departmental successes
on the pillars of advocacy, quality, service and productivity; and we
will continue to share a common vision where public health is our
mission, public service is our method and professionalism is our
means. We are preparing for the 2001 legislative session to be crucial
to our ability to meet the performance goals we set for ourselves during the most recent Sunset Review. The ADEQ continuation bill adopted by the Legislature and approved by Governor Hull during the last session provides a clear planning horizon for our department through the next five
years. We intend to take full advantage of this vote of confidence in the future of
our department by securing the authorities and fiscal resources we need to build a
stronger department to better serve the citizens of Arizona and enhance the quality
of our state’s natural environment.

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 2000 Annual Report

15