Opinion ID: 195693
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: F.R. Sec. 125.121(e)(1-3)

Text: 10 In his evidentiary hearing request, Adams requested that two conditions, warning signs and visual inspections, be added to the permit. Adams does not appear to advance that contention here in his petition for review. With respect to this request, however, we do not believe that the Agency arbitrarily or capriciously concluded that the inclusion of these permit conditions was not within the scope of issues raised during the public comment period, and that Adams failed to establish that he had good cause for not raising both of these issues at the appropriate time 11 In his petition for review, Adams does not appear to argue that the EPA's alleged failure to consider alternative sites for the outfall was in itself a violation of any statute or regulation. We note, however, that the Agency stated that the EPA is not required to evaluate alternative sites for an outfall that meets CWA requirements unless review is required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). See 33 U.S.C. Sec. 1371(c); 42 U.S.C. Sec. 4321 et seq. Adams did not challenge this determination. There also does not appear to be any dispute that the Seabrook permit is exempt from the NEPA requirements because no federal funding is involved in the plant, and because the plant is not a new source as defined in the CWA. See Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. U.S.E.P.A., 859 F.2d 156, 167 (D.C.Cir.1988). Because the EPA had no legal obligation to consider alternative locations for the outfall involved in the permit, the Agency did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in finding that no genuine issue of material fact was raised by Adams' objection that the EPA did not consider such locations 12 Specifically, in his evidentiary request, Adams stated: As it is generally accepted and also pointed out in a certain letter from the F.D.A. to a Mr. Richard Roach ... the remedy to high virus populations is very high dilutions (1/1,000,000,000) or more. The letter in the above paragraph also estimates that a 1/1,000 dilution would not occur until 4,000 feet from the manifold where as the beach is only 1200 feet at low tide when the dilutions are apt to be lowered. 13 In his evidentiary request, Adams also stated that no study was done with respect to the effect of viruses on children playing in the water at the beach which will contain only 318.5 parts water to each part of filth laced with viruses. Adams did not provide any citation as to where this dilution figure came from or how it was arrived at. We do not believe that this bare statement was sufficient to create a genuine factual dispute which would require a formal evidentiary hearing on the issue of dilution calculations 14 R.S.A. 482-A:1 (1993), New Hampshire's Water Management and Protection law, provides in pertinent part: It is found to be for the public good and welfare of this state to protect and preserve its submerged lands under tidal and fresh waters ... from despoliation and unregulated alteration, because such despoliation or unregulated alteration will adversely affect the value of such areas as sources of nutrients for finfish, crustacea, shellfish and wildlife of significant value, will damage or destroy habitats and reproduction areas for plants, fish and wildlife of importance, will eliminate, depreciate or obstruct the commerce, recreation and aesthetic enjoyment of the public, will be detrimental to adequate groundwater levels, will adversely affect stream channels and their ability to handle the runoff of waters, will disturb and reduce the natural ability of wetlands to absorb flood waters and silt, thus increasing general flood damage and the silting of open water channels, and will otherwise adversely affect the interests of the general public. 15 40 C.F.R. Sec. 125.122(a)(7) provides that the EPA shall determine whether a discharge will cause unreasonable degradation of the marine environment based on the consideration of existing or potential recreational and commercial fishing, including shellfishing