Environmental engineers handbook - Chapter 1 ppsx

© 1999 by CRC Press LLC

Product Manager:

Maureen Aller

Project Editor:

Susan Fox

Packaging design:

Jonathan Pennell

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Catalog record is available from the Library of Congress.
These files shall remain the sole and exclusive property of CRC Press LLC, 2000 Corporate Blvd., N.W., Boca Raton, FL 33431.
The contents are protected by copyright law and international treaty. No part of the

Environmental Engineers’ Handbook CRCnetBASE
1999

CD-ROM product may be duplicated in hard copy or machine-readable form without prior written authorization from CRC
Press LLC, except that the licensee is granted a limited, non-exclusive license to reproduce limited portions of the context for the
licensee’s internal use provided that a suitable notice of copyright is included on all copies. This CD-ROM incorporates materials
from other sources reproduced with the kind permission of the copyright holder. Credit to the original sources and copyright notices
are given with the figure or table. No materials in this CD-ROM credited to these copyright holders may be reproduced without
their written permission.
WARRANTY

The information in this product was obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Every reasonable effort has been
made to give reliable data and information, but the publisher cannot assume responsibility for the validity of all materials or the
consequences of their uses.
© 1999 by CRC Press LLC
No claim to original U.S. Government works
International Standard Book Number 0-8493-2157-3
International Standard Series Number 1523-3197


©1999 CRC Press LLC
On behalf of my late husband, David Liu, I would like to
convey his sincere gratitude and respect for all the coau-
thors who helped, directly or indirectly, currently or in the
past, in this product’s development. With your help, he ac-
complished his goal: a comprehensive, authoritative, and
current reference. The valuable expertise, strong support,
and dedication of all the coauthors will make the Environ-
mental Engineers’ Handbook an unqualified success.
Special appreciation is extended to Béla Lipták and Paul
Bouis, who did the final technical review of manuscript,
art and page proofs, sharing their valuable time and ad-
vice to complete David’s work.
Irene Liu
Princeton, New Jersey
Acknowledgments
©1999 CRC Press LLC
Contents
CONTRIBUTORS
PREFACE
The Condition of the Environment

The Condition of the Waters
The Condition of the Air
The Condition of the Land
Energy
Population
FOREWORD
1Environmental Laws and Regulations
1.1 Administrative Laws
1.2 Information Laws
1.3 Natural Resource Laws
1.4 Pollution Control Laws
2Environmental Impact Assessment
2.1 Background Conceptual and Administration Information
2.2 EIA Methods: The Broad Perspective
2.3 Interaction Matrix and Simple Checklist Methods
2.4 Techniques for Impact Prediction
2.5 Decision-Focused Checklists
2.6 Preparation of Written Documentation
2.7 Environmental Monitoring
2.8 Emerging Issues in the EIA Process
2.9 International Activities in Environmental Impact Assessment
3Pollution Prevention in Chemical Manufacturing
3.1 Regulations and Definitions
3.2 Pollution Prevention Methodology
3.3 Pollution Prevention Techniques
3.4 Life Cycle Assessment
3.5 Sustainable Manufacturing
3.6 R & D for Cleaner Processes
©1999 CRC Press LLC
3.7 Reaction Engineering

3.8 Separation and Recycling Systems
3.9 Engineering Review
3.10 Process Modifications
3.11 Process Integration
3.12 Process Analysis
3.13 Process Control
3.14 Public Sector Activities
4Standards
Air Quality Standards
4.1 Setting Standards
4.2 Technology Standards
4.3 Other Air Standards
Noise Standards
4.4 Noise Standards
Water Standards
4.5 Water Quality Standards
4.6 Drinking Water Standards
4.7 Groundwater Standards
International Standards
4.8 ISO 14000 Environmental Standards
5Air Pollution
Pollutants: Sources, Effects, and Dispersion Modeling
5.1 Sources, Effects, and Fate of Pollutants
5.2 VOCs and HAPs Emission from Chemical Plants
5.3 HAPs from Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industries
5.4 Atmospheric Chemistry
5.5 Macro Air Pollution Effects
5.6 Meteorology
5.7 Meteorologic Applications in Air Pollution Control
5.8 Atmospheric Dispersion Modeling

Air Quality
5.9 Emission Measurements
5.10 Air Quality Monitoring
5.11 Stack Sampling
5.12 Continuous Emission Monitoring
5.13 Remote Sensing Techniques
Pollutants: Minimization and Control
5.14 Pollution Reduction
5.15 Particulate Controls
5.16 Dry Collectors
5.17 Electrostatic Precipitators
5.18 Wet Collectors
5.19 Gaseous Emission Control
5.20 Physical and Chemical Separation
©1999 CRC Press LLC
5.21 Thermal Destruction
5.22 Biofiltration
Fugitive Emissions: Sources and Controls
5.23 Fugitive Industrial Particulate Emissions
5.24 Fugitive Industrial Chemical Emissions
5.25 Fugitive Dust
Odor Control
5.26 Perception, Effect, and Characterization
5.27 Odor Control Strategy
Indoor Air Pollution
5.28 Radon and Other Pollutants
5.29 Air Quality in the Workplace
6Noise Pollution
6.1 The Physics of Sound and Hearing
6.2 Noise Sources

6.3 The Effects of Noise
6.4 Noise Measurements
6.5 Noise Assessment and Evaluation
6.6 Noise Control at the Source
6.7 Noise Control in the Transmission Path
6.8 Protecting the Receiver
7Wastewater Treatment
Sources and Characteristics
7.1 Nature of Wastewater
7.2 Sources and Effects of Contaminants
7.3 Characterization of Industrial Wastewater
7.4 Wastewater Minimization
7.5 Developing a Treatment Strategy
Monitoring and Analysis
7.6 Flow and Level Monitoring
7.7 pH, Oxidation-Reduction Probes and Ion-Selective Sensors
7.8 Oxygen Analyzers
7.9 Sludge, Colloidal Suspension, and Oil Monitors
Sewers and Pumping Stations
7.10 Industrial Sewer Design
7.11 Manholes, Catch Basins, and Drain Hubs
7.12 Pumps and Pumping Stations
Equalization and Primary Treatment
7.13 Equalization Basins
7.14 Screens and Comminutors
7.15 Grit Removal
7.16 Grease Removal and Skimming
7.17 Sedimentation
7.18 Flotation and Foaming
7.19 Sludge Pumping and Transportation

©1999 CRC Press LLC
Conventional Biological Treatment
7.20 Septic and Imhoff Tanks
7.21 Conventional Sewage Treatment Plants
Secondary Treatment
7.22 Wastewater Microbiology
7.23 Trickling Filters
7.24 Rotating Biological Contactors
7.25 Activated-Sludge Processes
7.26 Extended Aeration
7.27 Ponds and Lagoons
7.28 Anaerobic Treatment
7.29 Secondary Clarification
7.30 Disinfection
Advanced or Tertiary Treatment
7.31 Treatment Plant Advances
7.32 Chemical Precipitation
7.33 Filtration
7.34 Coagulation and Emulsion Breaking
Organics, Salts, Metals, and Nutrient Removal
7.35 Soluble Organics Removal
7.36 Inorganic Salt Removal by Ion Exchange
7.37 Demineralization
7.38 Nutrient (Nitrogen and Phosphorous) Removal
Chemical Treatment
7.39 Neutralization Agents and Processes
7.40 pH Control Systems
7.41 Oxidation-Reduction Agents and Processes
7.42 ORP Control (Chrome and Cyanide Treatment)
7.43 Oil Separation and Removal

Sludge Stabilization and Dewatering
7.44 Stabilization: Aerobic Digestion
7.45 Stabilization: Anaerobic Digestion
7.46 Sludge Thickening
7.47 Dewatering Filters
7.48 Dewatering: Centrifugation
7.49 Heat Treatment and Thermal Dryers
Sludge Disposal
7.50 Sludge Incineration
7.51 Lagoons and Landfills
7.52 Spray Irrigation
7.53 Ocean Dumping
7.54 Air Drying
7.55 Composting
8Removing Specific Water Contaminants
8.1 Removing Suspended Solid Contaminants
8.2 Removing Organic Contaminants
8.3 Removing Inorganic Contaminants
8.4 Inorganic Neutralization and Recovery
©1999 CRC Press LLC
8.5 Oil Pollution
8.6 Purification of Salt Water
8.7 Radioactive Liquid Waste Treatment
9Groundwater and Surface Water Pollution
Principles of Groundwater Flow
9.1 Groundwater and Aquifers
9.2 Fundamental Equations of Groundwater Flow
9.3 Confined Aquifers
9.4 Unconfined Aquifers
9.5 Combined Confined and Unconfined Flow

Hydraulics of Wells
9.6 Two-Dimensional Problems
9.7 Nonsteady (Transient) Flow
9.8 Determining Aquifer Characteristics
9.9 Design Considerations
9.10 Interface Flow
Principles of Groundwater Contamination
9.11 Causes and Sources of Contamination
9.12 Fate of Contaminants in Groundwater
9.13 Transport of Contaminants in Groundwater
Groundwater Investigation and Monitoring
9.14 Initial Site Assessment
9.15 Subsurface Site Investigation
Groundwater Cleanup and Remediation
9.16 Soil Treatment Technologies
9.17 Pump-and-Treat Technologies
9.18 In Situ Treatment Technologies
Storm Water Pollutant Management
9.19 Integrated Storm Water Program
9.20 Nonpoint Source Pollution
9.21 Best Management Practices
9.22 Field Monitoring Programs
9.23 Discharge Treatment
10Solid Waste
Source and Effect
10.1 Definition
10.2 Sources, Quantities, and Effects
Characterization
10.3 Physical and Chemical Characteristics
10.4 Characterization Methods

10.5 Implications for Solid Waste Management
Resource Conservation and Recovery
10.6 Reduction, Separation, and Recycling
©1999 CRC Press LLC
10.7 Material Recovery
10.8 Refuse-Derived Fuel
Treatment and Disposal
10.9 Waste-to-Energy Incinerators
10.10 Sewage Sludge Incineration
10.11 Onsite Incinerators
10.12 Pyrolysis of Solid Waste
10.13 Sanitary Landfills
10.14 Composting of MSW
11Hazardous Waste
Sources and Effects
11.1 Hazardous Waste Defined
11.2 Hazardous Waste Sources
11.3 Effects of Hazardous Waste
Characterization, Sampling, and Analysis
11.4 Hazardous Waste Characterization
11.5 Sampling and Analysis
11.6 Compatibility
Risk Assessment and Waste Management
11.7 The Hazard Ranking System and the National Priority List
11.8 Risk Assessment
11.9 Waste Minimization and Reduction
11.10 Hazardous Waste Transportation
Treatment and Disposal
11.11 Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Requirements
11.12 Storage

11.13 Treatment and Disposal Alternatives
11.14 Waste Destruction Technology
11.15 Waste Concentration Technology
11.16 Solidification and Stabilization Technologies
11.17 Biological Treatment
11.18 Biotreatment by Sequencing Batch Reactors
Storage and Leak Detection
11.19 Underground Storage Tanks
11.20 Leak Detection and Remediation
Radioactive Waste
11.21 Principles of Radioactivity
11.22 Sources of Radioactivity in the Environment
11.23 Safety Standards
11.24 Detection and Analysis
11.25 Mining and Recovery of Radioactive Materials
11.26 Low-Level Radioactive Waste
11.27 High-Level Radioactive Waste
11.28 Transport of Radioactive Materials
©1999 CRC Press LLC
Irving M. Abrams
BCh, PhD; Manager, Technical Development,
Diamond Shamrock Chemical Company
Carl E. Adams, Jr.
BSCE, MSSE, PhDCE, PE; Technical Director,
Associated Water & Air Resources Engineers, Inc.
Elmar R. Altwicker
BS, PhD; Professor, Department of Chemical Engineering,
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Donald B. Aulenbach
BSCh, MS, PhDS; Associate Professor,

Bio-Environmental Engineering,
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Richard C. Bailie
BSChE, MSChE, PhDChE;
Professor of Chemical Engineering,
West Virginia University
Edward C. Bingham
BSCh, MBA; Technical Assistant to General Manager,
Farmers Chemical Association, Inc.
L. Joseph Bollyky
PhD; President,
Pollution Control Industries Ozone Corp.
David R. Bookchin, Esq.
BA, JD, MSL; private practice, Montpelier, Vermont
Paul A. Bouis
BSCh, PhDCh; Assistant Director, Research &
Development, Mallinckrodt-Baker, Inc.
Jerry L. Boyd
BSChE; Chief Process Application Engineer, Eimco
Corp.
Contributors
Thomas F. Brown, Jr.
BSAE, EIT; Assistant Director, Environmental Engineering,
Commercial Solvents Corp.
Barrett Bruch
BSME, BSIE; Oil Spill Control Project Leader,
Lockheed Missiles & Space Company
Robert D. Buchanan
BSCE, MSCE, PE; Chief Sanitary Engineer,
Bureau of Indian Affairs

Don E. Burns
BSCE, MSCE, PhD-SanE; Senior Research Engineer,
Eimco Corp.
Larry W. Canter
BE, MS, PhD, PE;
Sun Company Chair of Ground Water Hydrology,
University of Oklahoma
Paul J. Cardinal, Jr.
BSME; Manager, Sales Development, Envirotech Corp.
Charles A. Caswell
BS Geology, PE; Vice President,
University Science Center, Inc.
Samuel Shih-hsien Cha
BS, MS; Consulting Chemist, TRC Environmental Corp.
Yong S. Chae
AB, MS, PhD, PE; Professor and Chairman,
Civil and Environmental Engineering, Rutgers University
Karl T. Chuang
PhDChE; Professor, Department of Chemical
Engineering, University of Alberta
Richard A. Conway
BS, MSSE, PE; Group Leader, Research & Development,
Union Carbide Corp.
George J. Crits
BSChE, MSChE, PE; Technical Director,
Cochrane Division, Crane Company
Donald Dahlstrom
PhDChE; Vice President and Director of Research &
Development, Eimco Corp.
Stacy L. Daniels

BSChE, MSSE, MSChE, PhD; Development Engineer,
The Dow Chemical Company
Ernest W.J. Diaper
BSc, MSc; Manager,
Municipal Water and Waste Treatment,
Cochrane Division, Crane Company
Frank W. Dittman
BSChE, MSChE, PhD, PE;
Professor of Chemical Engineering, Rutgers University
Wayne F. Echelberger, Jr.
BSCE, MSE, MPH, PhD; Associate Professor of Civil
Engineering, University of Notre Dame
Mary Anna Evans
BS, MS, PE; Senior Engineer, Water and Air Research,
Inc.
Jess W. Everett
BSE, MS, PhD, PE; Assistant Professor, School of Civil
Engineering and Environmental Engineering, University
of Oklahoma
David C. Farnsworth, Esq.
BA, MA, JD, MSL; Vermont Public Service Board
J.W. Todd Ferretti
President, The Bionomic Systems Corp.
Ronald G. Gantz
BSChE; Senior Process Engineer,
Continental Oil Company
William C. Gardiner
BA, MA, PhD, PE; Director, Electrochemical Development,
Crawford & Russell, Inc.
Louis C. Gilde, Jr.

BSSE; Director, Environmental Engineering,
Campbell Soup Company
Brian L. Goodman
BS, MS, PhD; Director, Technical Services,
Smith & Loveless Division, Ecodyne Corp.
Ahmed Hamidi
PhD, PE, PH, CGWP; Vice President,
Sadat Associates, Inc.
Negib Harfouche
PhD; President, NH Environmental Consultants
R. David Holbrook
BSCE, MSCE; Senior Process Engineer, I. Krüger, Inc.
Sun-Nan Hong
BSChE, MSChE, PhD; Vice President, Engineering,
I. Krüger, Inc.
Derk T.A. Huibers
BSChE, MSChE, PhDChE, FAIChE; Manager,
Chemical Processes Group, Union Camp Corp.
Frederick W. Keith, Jr.
BSChE, PhDChE, PE; Manager, Applications Research,
Pennwalt Corp.
Edward G. Kominek
BS, MBA, PE; Manager, Industrial Water & Waste Sales,
Eimco Processing Machinery Division, Envirotech Corp.
Lloyd H. Ketchum, Jr.
BSCE, MSE, MPH, PhD, PE; Associate Professor,
Civil Engineering and Geological Sciences,
University of Notre Dame
Mark K. Lee
BSChE, MEChE; Project Manager,

Westlake Polymers Corp.
David H.F. Liu
PhD, ChE; Principal Scientist, J.T. Baker, Inc. a division
of Procter &Gamble
Béla G. Lipták
ME, MME, PE; Process Control and Safety Consultant,
President, Liptak Associates, P.C.
©1999 CRC Press LLC
©1999 CRC Press LLC
Janos Lipták
CE, PE; Senior Partner, Janos Liptak & Associates
Andrew F. McClure, Jr.
BSChE; Manager, Industrial Concept Design Division,
Betzon Environmental Engineers
George W. McDonald
PhD, ChE; Pulping Group Leader, Research and
Development Division, Union Camp Corp.
Francis X. McGarvey
BSChE, MSChE; Manager, Technical Center,
Sybron Chemical Company
Kent Keqiang Mao
BSCE, MSCE, PhDCE, PE; President,
North America Industrial Investment Co., Ltd.
Thomas J. Myron, Jr.
BSChE; Senior Systems Design Engineer,
The Foxboro Company
Van T. Nguyen
BSE, MSE, PhD; Department of Civil Engineering,
California State University, Long Beach
Frank L. Parker

BA, MS, PhD, PE;
Professor of Environmental and Water Resources
Engineering, Vanderbilt University
Joseph G. Rabosky
BSChE, MSE, PE; Senior Project Engineer, Calgon Corp.
Gurumurthy Ramachandran
BSEE, PhD; Assistant Professor,
Division of Environmental and Occupational Health,
University of Minnesota
Roger K. Raufer
BSChE, MSCE, MA, PhD, PE; Associate Director,
Environmental Studies,
Center for Energy and the Environment,
University of Pennsylvania
Parker C. Reist
ScD, PE; Professor of Air and Industrial Hygiene
Engineering, University of North Carolina
LeRoy H. Reuter
MS, PhD, PE; Consultant
Bernardo Rico-Ortega
BSCh, MSSE; Product Specialist,
Pollution Control Department,
Nalco Chemical Company
Howard C. Roberts
BAEE, PE; Professor of Engineering (retired)
Reed S. Robertson
BSChE, MSEnvE, PE; Senior Group Leader, Nalco
Chemical Company
David M. Rock
BSChE, MSChE, PE; Staff Engineer,

Environmental Control, American Enka Company
F. Mack Rugg
BA, MSES, JD, Environmental Scientist,
Project Manager, Camp Dresser & McKee Inc.
Alan R. Sanger
BSc, MSc, DPhil; Consultant and Professor,
Department of Chemical Engineering,
University of Alberta
Chakra J. Santhanam
BSChE, MSChE, ChE, PE;
Senior Environmental Engineer, Crawford & Russell, Inc.
E. Stuart Savage
BSChE, PE; Manager, Research and Development,
Water & Waste Treatment, Dravco Corp.
Letitia S. Savage
BS Biology; North Park Naturalist,
Latodami Farm Nature Center,
Allegheny County Department of Conservation
Frank P. Sebastian
MBA, BSME; Senior Vice President, Envirotech Corp.
Gerald L. Shell
MSCE, PE; Director of Sanitary Engineering,
Eimco Corp.
Wen K. Shieh
PhD; Department of Systems Engineering,
University of Pennsylvania
Stuart E. Smith
BChE, MSChE, MSSE, PE; Manager,
Industrial Wastewater Operation, Environment/One Corp.
John R. Snell

BECE, MSSE, DSSE, PE; President,
John R. Snell Engineers
Paul L. Stavenger
BSChE, MSChE; Director of Technology,
Process Equipment Division, Dorr-Oliver, Inc.
Michael S. Switzenbaum
BA, MS, PhD; Professor,
Environmental Engineering Program,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Floyd B. Taylor
BSSE, MPH, PE, DEE; Environmental Engineer,
Consultant
Amos Turk
BS, MA, PhD; Professor Emeritus,
Department of Chemistry,
The City College of New York
Curtis P. Wagner
BA, MS; Senior Project Manager, TRC Environmental,
Inc.
Cecil C. Walden
BA, MA, PhD; Associate Director, B.C. Research, Canada
Roger H. Zanitsch
BSCE, MSSE; Senior Project Engineer, Calgon Corp.
William C. Zegel
ScD, PE, DEE; President, Water and Air Research, Inc.
©1999 CRC Press LLC
©1999 CRC Press LLC
Engineers respond to the needs of society with technical
innovations. Their tools are the basic sciences. Some en-

gineers might end up working on these tools instead of
working with them. Environmental engineers are in a priv-
ileged and challenging position, because their tools are the
totality of man’s scientific knowledge, and their target is
nothing less than human survival through making man’s
peace with nature.
When, in 1974, I wrote the preface to the three-volume
first edition of this handbook, we were in the middle of
an energy crisis and the future looked bleak, I was wor-
ried and gloomy. Today, I look forward to the 21st
Century with hope and confidence. I am optimistic be-
cause we have made progress in the last 22 years and I am
also proud, because I know that this handbook made a
small contribution to that progress. I am optimistic be-
cause we are beginning to understand that nature should
not be conquered, but protected, that science and tech-
nology should not be allowed to evolve as “value-free”
forces, but should be subordinated to serve human values
and goals.
This second edition of the Environmental Engineers’
Handbook contains most of the technical know-how
needed to clean up the environment. Because the environ-
ment is a complex web, the straining of some of the strands
affects the entire web. The single-volume presentation of
this handbook recognizes this integrated nature of our en-
vironment, where the various forms of pollution are in-
terrelated symptoms and therefore cannot be treated sep-
arately. Consequently, each handbook section is built upon
and is supported by the others through extensive cross-ref-
erencing and subject indexes.

The contributors to this handbook came from all con-
tinents and their backgrounds cover not only engineering,
but also legal, medical, agricultural, meteorological, bio-
logical and other fields of training. In addition to discussing
the causes, effects, and remedies of pollution, this hand-
book also emphasizes reuse, recycling, and recovery.
Nature does not cause pollution; by total recycling, nature
makes resources out of all wastes. Our goal should be to
learn from nature in this respect.
The Condition of the Environment
To the best of our knowledge today, life in the universe
exists only in a ten-mile-thick layer on the 200-million-
square-mile surface of this planet. During the 5 million
years of human existence, we lived in this thin crust of
earth, air, and water. Initially man relied only on inex-
haustible resources. The planet appeared to be without
limits and the laws of nature directed our evolution. Later
we started to supplement our muscle power with ex-
haustible energy sources (coal, oil, uranium) and to sub-
stitute the routine functions of our brains by machines. As
a result, in some respects we have “conquered nature” and
today we are directing our own evolution. Today, our chil-
dren grow up in man-made environments; virtual reality
or cyberspace is more familiar to them than the open spaces
of meadows.
While our role and power have changed, our conscious-
ness did not. Subconsciously we still consider the planet
inexhaustible and we are still incapable of thinking in time-
frames which exceed a few lifetimes. These human limi-
tations hold risks, not only for the planet, nor even for life

on this planet, but for our species. Therefore, it is neces-
sary to pay attention not only to our physical environment
but also to our cultural and spiritual environment.
It is absolutely necessary to bring up a new generation
which no longer shares our deeply rooted subconscious
belief in continuous growth: A new generation which no
longer desires the forever increasing consumption of space,
raw materials, and energy.
Preface
Dr. David H.F. Liu passed away during the preparation of this revised edition.
He will be long remembered by his co-workers,
and the readers of this handbook will carry his memory into the 21st Century
It is also necessary to realize that, while as individuals
we might not be able to think in longer terms than cen-
turies, as a society we must. This can and must be achieved
by developing rules and regulations which are appropri-
ate to the time-frame of the processes that we control or
influence. The half-life of plutonium is 24,000 years, the
replacement of the water in the deep oceans takes 1000
years. For us it is difficult to be concerned about the con-
sequences of our actions, if those consequences will take
centuries or millennia to evolve. Therefore, it is essential
that we develop both an educational system and a body
of law which would protect our descendants from our own
shortsightedness.
Protecting life on this planet will give the coming gen-
erations a unifying common purpose. The healing of en-
vironmental ills will necessitate changes in our subcon-
scious and in our value system. Once these changes have
occurred, they will not only guarantee human survival, but

will also help in overcoming human divisions and thereby
change human history.
The Condition of the Waters
In the natural life cycle of the water bodies (Figure 1), the
sun provides the energy source for plant life (algae), which
produces oxygen while converting the inorganic molecules
into larger organic ones. The animal life obtains its mus-
cle energy (heat) by consuming these molecules and by also
consuming the dissolved oxygen content of the water.
When a town or industry discharges additional organic
material into the waters (which nature intended to be dis-
posed of as fertilizer on land), the natural balance is up-
set. The organic effluent acts as a fertilizer, therefore the
algae overpopulates and eventually blocks the trans-
parency of the water. When the water becomes opaque,
the ultraviolet rays of the sun can no longer penetrate it.
This cuts off the algae from its energy source and it dies.
The bacteria try to protect the life cycle in the water by
attempting to break down the excess organic material (in-
cluding the dead body cells of the algae), but the bacteria
require oxygen for the digestion process. As the algae is
no longer producing fresh oxygen, the dissolved oxygen
content of the water drops, and when it reaches zero, all
animals suffocate. At that point the living water body has
been converted into an open sewer.
In the United States, the setting of water quality stan-
dards and the regulation of discharges have been based on
the “assimilative capacity” of the receiving waters (a kind
of pollution dilution approach), which allows discharges
into as yet unpolluted waterways. The Water Pollution Act

of 1972 would have temporarily required industry to ap-
ply the “best practicable” and “best available” treatments
of waste emissions and aimed for zero discharge by 1985.
While this last goal has not been reached, the condition of
American waterways generally improved during the last
decades, while on the global scale water quality has dete-
riorated.
Water availability has worsened since the first edition
of this handbook. In the United States the daily withdrawal
rate is about 2,000 gallons per person, which represents
roughly one-third of the total daily runoff. The bulk of
this water is used by agriculture and industry. The aver-
age daily water consumption per household is about 1000
gallons and, on the East Coast, the daily cost of that wa-
ter is $2–$3. As some 60% of the discharged pollutants
(sewage, industrial waste, fertilizers, pesticides, leachings
from landfills and mines) reenter the water supplies, there
is a direct relationship between the quality and cost of sup-
ply water and the degree of waste treatment in the up-
stream regions.
There seems to be some evidence that the residual chlo-
rine from an upstream wastewater treatment plant can
combine in the receiving waters with industrial wastes to
form carcinogenic chlorinated hydrocarbons, which can
enter the drinking water supplies downstream. Toxic
chemicals from the water can be further concentrated
through the food chain. Some believe that the gradual poi-
soning of the environment is responsible for cancer, AIDS,
and other forms of immune deficiency and self-destructive
diseases.

©1999 CRC Press LLC
FIG. 1 The natural life cycle.
©1999 CRC Press LLC
While the overall quality of the waterways has im-
proved in the United States, worldwide the opposite oc-
curred. This is caused not only by overpopulation, but also
by ocean dumping of sludge, toxins, and nuclear waste, as
well as by oil leaks from off-shore oil platforms. We do
not yet fully understand the likely consequences, but we
can be certain that the ability of the oceans to withstand
and absorb pollutants is not unlimited and, therefore, in-
ternational regulation of these discharges is essential. In
terms of international regulations, we are just beginning
to develop the required new body of law. The very first
case before the International Court of Justice (IJC) wherein
it was argued that rivers are not the property of nation
states, and that the interests of nations must be balanced
against the interests of mankind, was heard by IJC in 1997
in connection with the Danube.
The Condition of the Air
There is little question about the harmful effects of ozone
depletion, acid rain, or the greenhouse effect. One might
debate if the prime cause of desertification is acid rain, ex-
FIG. 2 Areas of diminishing rain forests and spreading deserts.
cessive lumbering, soil erosion, or changes in the weather,
but it is a fact that the rain forests are diminishing and the
deserts are spreading (Figure 2). We do not know what
quantity of acid fumes, fluorinated hydrocarbons, or car-
bon dioxide gases can be released before climatic changes
become irreversible. But we do know that the carbon diox-

ide content of the atmosphere has substantially increased,
that each automobile releases 5 tons of carbon dioxide
every year, and that the number of gas-burning oil plat-
forms in the oceans is approaching 10,000.
Conditions on the land and in the waters are deter-
mined by complex biosystems. The nonbiological nature
of air makes the setting of emission standards and their
enforcement somewhat easier. As discussed in Chapter 5
of this handbook, the United States has air quality and
emission standards for particulates, carbon monoxide, sul-
fur and nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, photochemical ox-
idants, asbestos, beryllium, and mercury.
For other materials, such as the “possible human car-
cinogens,” the furans and dioxins (PCDD and PCDF),
there are no firm emission or air quality standards yet.
These materials are the byproducts of paper bleaching,
wood preservative and pesticide manufacturing, and the
incineration of plastics. Because typical municipal solid
waste (MSW) in the U.S. contains some 8% plastics, in-
cineration is probably the prime source of dioxin emis-
sions. Dioxins are formed on incinerator fly ash and end
up either in landfills or are released into the atmosphere.
Dioxin is suspected to be not only a carcinogen but also
a cause of birth defects. It is concentrated through the food
chain, is deposited in human fat tissues, and in some cases
dioxin concentrations of 1.0 ppb have already been found
in mother’s milk.
©1999 CRC Press LLC
FIG. 3 The “open” and “closed” material-flow economies.
A circular or closed materials economy. Limits on the total amount of materials or wealth will depend upon the

availability of resources and energy and the earth’s ecological, biological and physical system. Within these limits,
the lower the rate of material flow, the greater the wealth of the population. The objective would be to maximize
the life expectancy and, hence, quality of items produced.
An essentially “linear” or open materials economy. The objective is to increase annual production (GNP) by
maximizing the flow of materials. The natural pressure, therefore, is to decrease the life or quality of the items
produced.
©1999 CRC Press LLC
Although in the last decades the air quality in the U.S.
improved and the newer standards (such as the Clean Air
Act of 1990) became stricter, lately we have seen misguided
attempts to reverse this progress. Regulations protecting
wetlands, forbidding clear-cutting of forests, and mandat-
ing use of electric cars have all been relaxed or reversed.
In the rest of the world, the overall trend is continued de-
terioration of air quality. In the U.S., part of the im-
provement in air quality is due not to pollution abatement
but to the exporting of manufacturing industries; part of
the improvement is made possible by relatively low pop-
ulation density, not the result of conservation efforts.
On a per capita basis the American contribution to
worldwide pollutant emissions is high. For example, the
yearly per capita generation of carbon dioxide in the U.S.
is about 20 tons. This is twentyfold the per capita CO
2
generation of India. Therefore, even if the emission levels
in the West are stabilized or reduced, the global genera-
tion of pollutants is likely to continue to rise as worldwide
living standards slowly equalize.
The Condition of the Land
Nature never produces anything that it can not decom-

pose and return into the pool of fresh resources. Man does.
Nature returns organic wastes to the soil as fertilizer. Man
often dumps such wastes in the oceans, buries them in
landfills, or burns them in incinerators. Man’s deeply
rooted belief in continuous growth treats nature as a com-
modity, the land, oceans, and atmosphere as free dumps.
There is a subconscious assumption that the planet is in-
exhaustible. In fact the dimensions of the biosphere are
fixed and the planet’s resources are exhaustible.
The gross national product (GNP) is an indicator based
on the expectation of continuous growth. We consider the
economy healthy when the GNP and, therefore, the quan-
tity of goods produced increases. The present economic
model is like an open pipeline which takes in resources at
one end and spills out wastes at the other. The GNP in
this model is simply a measure of the rate at which re-
sources are being converted to wastes. The higher the GNP,
the faster the resources are exhausted (Figure 3). According
to this model, cutting down a forest to build a parking lot
increases the GNP and is therefore good for the economy.
Similarly, this open-loop model might suggest that it is
cheaper to make paper from trees than from waste paper,
because the environmental costs of paper manufacturing
and disposal are not included in the cost of the paper, but
are borne separately by the whole community.
In contrast, the economic model of the future will have
to be a closed-loop pipeline (Closed-GNP). This will be
achieved when it becomes more profitable to reuse raw
materials than to purchase fresh supplies. This is a func-
tion of economic policy. For example, in those cities where

only newspapers printed on recycled paper are allowed to
be sold, there is a healthy market for used paper and the
volume of municipal waste is reduced. Similarly, in coun-
tries where environmental and disposal costs are incorpo-
rated into the total cost of the products (in the form of
taxes), it is more profitable to increase quality and dura-
bility than to increase the production quantity (Figure 3).
In addition to resource depletion and the disposal of
toxic, radioactive, and municipal wastes, the natural en-
vironment is also under attack from strip mining, clear cut-
ting, noise, and a variety of other human activities. In short,
there is a danger of transforming the diverse and stable
ecosystem into an unstable one which consists only of man
and his chemically sustained food factory.
Energy
When man started to supplement his muscle energy with
outside sources, these sources were all renewable and in-
exhaustible. The muscle power of animals, the burning of
wood, the use of hydraulic energy were man’s external en-
ergy sources for millions of years. Only during the last cou-
ple of centuries have we started to use exhaustible energy
sources, such as coal, oil, gas, and nuclear. This change in
energy sources not only resulted in pollution but has also
caused uncertainty about our future because we can not
be certain if the transition from an exhausted energy source
to the next one can be achieved without major disruptions.
The total energy content of all fossil deposits and ura-
nium 235 (the energy source of “conventional” nuclear
plants) on the planet is estimated to be 100 ϫ 10
18

BTUs.
Our present yearly energy consumption is about 0.25 ϫ
10
18
BTUs. This would give us 400 years to convert to an
inexhaustible energy source, if our population and energy
demand were stable and if some energy sources (oil and
gas) were not depleted much sooner than others.
Breeder reactors have not been considered in this eval-
uation because the plutonium they produce is too dan-
gerous to even contemplate a plutonium-based future. This
is not to say that conventional nuclear power is safe. Man
has not lived long enough with radiation to know if mil-
lions of cubic feet of nuclear wastes can be stored safely.
We receive about 100 Watts of solar energy on each
square meter of the Earth’s surface, or a yearly total of
about 25 ϫ 10
18
BTUs. Therefore, 1% of the solar energy
received on the surface of the planet could supply our to-
tal energy needs. If collected on artificial islands or in desert
areas around the Equator, where the solar radiation in-
tensity is much higher than average, a fraction of 1% of
the globe’s surface could permanently supply our total en-
ergy needs. If the collected solar power were used to ob-
tain hydrogen from water and if the compressed hydro-
gen were used as our electric, heat, and transportation
energy source, burning this fuel would result in the emis-
sion of only clean, nonpolluting steam. Also, if the com-
bustion took place in fuel cells, we could nearly double

the present efficiency of electric power generation (about
33%) or the efficiency of the internal combustion engine
(about 25%) and thereby substantially reduce thermal pol-
lution.
Today, as conventional energy use increases, pollution
tends to rise exponentially. As the population of the U.S.
has increased 50% and our per capita energy consump-
tion has risen 25%, the emission of pollutants has soared
by 2000%. While the population of the world doubles in
about 50 years, energy consumption doubles in about 20
and electric energy use even faster. In addition to chemi-
cal pollution, thermal pollution also rises with fossil en-
ergy consumption, because for each unit of electricity gen-
erated, two units of heat energy are discharged into the
environment.
It is time to redirect our resources from the military—
whose job it is to protect dwindling oil resources—and
from deep sea drilling—which might cause irreversible
harm to the ocean’s environment—and use these resources
to develop the new, permanent, and inexhaustible energy
supplies of the future.
Population
Probably the most serious cause of environmental degra-
dation is overpopulation. More people live on Earth to-
day than all the people who died since Creation (or, if you
prefer, the “accidental” beginning of “evolution”). Three
hundred years ago the world’s population doubled every
250 years. Today it doubles in less than a life span. When
I was editing the first edition of this handbook, the pop-
ulation of the planet was under 4 billion; today it is near-

ing 6 billion (Figure 4). During that same time period, the
population of the Third World increased by more than the
total population of the developed countries.
The choice is clear: we either take the steps needed to
control our numbers or nature will do it for us through
famine, plague, and loss of fertility. We must realize that
the teaching which was valid for a small tribe in the desert
(“Conquer nature and multiply”) is no longer valid for the
overpopulated planet of today. We must realize that, even
if we immediately take all the steps required to stabilize
the population of the planet, the total number will still
reach some 15 billion before it can be stabilized.
To date, food production has kept pace with popula-
tion growth, but only at a drastic price: increases in pes-
ticide (300%) and fertilizer (150%) use, which in turn fur-
ther pollutes the environment.
The total amount of land suitable for agriculture is
about 8 billion acres. Of that, 3.8 billion acres are under
cultivation and, with the growth of the road systems and
cities, the availability of land for agricultural uses is shrink-
ing. The amount of water available for irrigation is also
dropping. Without excessive fertilization, one acre of land
is needed to feed one person: therefore, the human popu-
lation has already exceeded the number supportable with-
out chemical fertilizers. As chemical fertilizer manufactur-
ing is based on the use of crude oil, models simulating
world trends predict serious shortages in the next century
(Figure 5).
While all these trends are ominous, the situation is not
hopeless. The populations of the more developed countries

seem to have stabilized, the new communication tech-
nologies and improved mass transit are helping to stop or
even reverse the further concentration of urban masses.
Environmental education and recycling have been suc-
cessful in several nations. New technologies are emerging
to serve conservation and to provide nonpolluting and in-
exhaustible energy sources.
When Copernicus discarded the concept of an earth-
centered and stationary Universe, the Earth continued to
travel undisturbed in its orbit around the Sun, yet the con-
sequences of this discovery were revolutionary.
Copernicus’ discovery changed nothing in the Universe,
but it changed our subconscious view of ourselves as the
“centerpiece of creation.” Today, our concept of our im-
mediate universe, the Earth, is once again changing and
this change is even more fundamental. We are realizing
that the planet is exhaustible and that our future depends
©1999 CRC Press LLC
FIG. 4 Growth of human population.
©1999 CRC Press LLC
on our own behavior. It took several centuries for
Copernicus’ discovery to penetrate our subconscious.
Therefore, we should not get impatient if this new under-
standing does not immediately change our mentality and
life style. On the other hand, we must not be complacent.
Human ingenuity and the combined talent of people, such
as the contributors and readers of this handbook, can solve
the problems we face, but this concentrated effort must
not take centuries. We do not have that much time.
Protecting the global environment, protecting life on

this planet, must become a single-minded, unifying goal
for all of us. The struggle will overshadow our differences,
will give meaning and purpose to our lives and, if we suc-
ceed, it will mean survival for our children and the gener-
ations to come.
Béla G. Lipták
Stamford, Connecticut
FIG. 5 Computer simulation of world trends.
©1999 CRC Press LLC
Foreword
The revised, expanded, and updated edition of the
Environmental Engineers’ Handbook covers in depth the
interrelated factors and principles which affect our envi-
ronment and how we have dealt with them in the past,
how we are dealing with them today, and how we might
deal with them in the future. Although the product is
clearly aimed at the environmental professional, it is writ-
ten and structured in a way that will allow others outside
the field to educate themselves about our environment, and
what can and must be done to continue to improve the
quality of life on spaceship earth. Environmental
Engineers’ Handbook CRCnetBASE 1999 covers in detail
the ongoing global transition among the cleanup of the re-
mains of abandoned technology, the prevention of pollu-
tion from existing technology, and the design of future
zero emission technology. The relationship of cost to ben-
efit is examined and emphasized throughout the product
The Preface will remind the reader of Charles Dickens’
famous A Christmas Carol, and we should reflect on its
implications carefully as we try to decide the cost-to-

benefit ratio of environmental control technology.
Following the Preface, Environmental Engineers’
Handbook CRCnetBASE 1999 begins with a thorough re-
view of environmental law and regulations that are then
further detailed in individual chapters. The chapter on en-
vironmental impact assessment is the bridge between the
release of pollutants and the technology necessary to re-
duce the impact of these emissions on the global ecosys-
tem. Chapters on the source control and/or prevention of
formation of specific pollutants in air, water, land, and our
personal environment follow these introductory chapters.
A chapter on solid waste is followed by the final chapter
on hazardous waste, which tries to strike a balance be-
tween the danger of hazardous wastes and the low prob-
ability that a dangerous environmental event will occur be-
cause of these wastes.
The type of information contained in every chapter is
designed to be uniform, although there is no unified for-
mat that each chapter follows, because subject matter
varies so widely. The user can always count on finding
both introductory material and very specific technical an-
swers to complex questions. In those chapters where it is
relevant, in-depth technical information on the technology
and specific equipment used in environmental control and
cleanup will be found. Since analytical results are an in-
tricate part of any environmental study, the user will find
ample sections covering the wide variety of analytical
methods and equipment used in environmental analysis.
Several chapters have extensive sections where the deriva-
tion of the mathematical equations used are included.

Textual explanations usually also accompany these math-
ematical-based sections.
A great deal of effort has gone into providing as much
information as possible in easy-to-use tables and figures.
We have chosen to use schematic diagrams rather than ac-
tual pictures of equipment, devices, or landscapes to ex-
plain or illustrate technology and techniques used in var-
ious areas. The bulk of material is testimony to the level
of detail that has been included in order to make this a
single-source handbook. The user will also find ample ref-
erences if additional information is required. The author
of a section is given at the end of each section and we en-
courage users to contact the author directly with any ques-
tions or comments. Although extensive review and proof-
reading of the manuscript was done, we ask users who
find errors or omissions to bring them to our attention.
Finally, we wish to acknowledge the numerous indi-
viduals and organizations who either directly or indirectly
have contributed to this work, yet have not been men-
tioned by name.
Paul A. Bouis
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Introduction
1.1
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Government Agencies
Legislative
Executive
Judicial
Limitations on Agencies

Judicial Review of Agency Actions
Exhaustion
Standards of Review
Deference to the Agency
Finding Regulations
1.2
INFORMATION LAWS
National Environmental Policy Act
Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
Summary
Freedom of Information Act
Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
Summary
Occupational Safety and Health Act
Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
Summary
Emergency Planning and Community Right-
to-Know Act
Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
Summary
1.3
NATURAL RESOURCE LAWS

Endangered Species Act
Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
Summary
Coastal Zone Management Act
Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
Summary
1.4
POLLUTION CONTROL LAWS
Clean Air Act
Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
Other Features
Summary
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act
Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
Summary
Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
©1999 CRC Press LLC
1
Environmental Laws and
Regulations

David Bookchin Խ David Farnsworth
CHAP1.QXD 1/20/99 7:50 AM Page 1
©1999 CRC Press LLC
Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
Summary
Noise Control Act
Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
Summary
Safe Drinking Water Act
Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
Summary
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
Summary
Toxic Substances Control Act
Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
TSCA’s Limited Regulatory Practice
Summary
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act

Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
Summary
Pollution Prevention Act
Statutory Roadmap
Purpose
Specific Provisions
Summary
CHAP1.QXD 1/20/99 7:50 AM Page 2
Introduction
Environmental law consists of all legal guidelines that are
intended to protect our environment. Much of the envi-
ronmental legislation in the United States is initiated at the
federal level. Various regulatory agencies may then pre-
pare regulations, which define how activity must be con-
ducted to comply with the law. In practice, the terms law,
statute, and regulation are often used interchangeably.
Regulations are generally more volatile than laws
(statutes), of more applicability in determining compliance.
However, to obtain copies of laws or regulations, one
must differentiate between statutes (laws) and regulations.
Laws can be accessed through their public law number
from the U.S. Printing Office and are compiled under the
United States Code (USC). Regulations are printed in the
Federal Register (FR) and are compiled annually in the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
Regulatory compliance is a significant aspect of con-
ducting business today. The scheme of obligations posed
by environmental legislation represents two costs: the ef-

fort and expenditure required to achieve compliance and
the fines, penalties, and liabilities that may be incurred as
a result of noncompliance. Whether preparing for envi-
ronmental audits, developing an emergency response plan,
or participating in an environmental impact study, envi-
ronmental engineers must be conversant in environmental
law and environmental policy. Ignorance of regulatory re-
quirements is viewed by federal, state, and local govern-
ments as no excuse for noncompliance.
An overview of federal environmental laws is provided
in this chapter. The chapter is divided into four sections
and an appendix.
Government Agencies and Administrative Law. This sec-
tion outlines some of the procedures under which laws are
developed and applied. It is a “broadbrush” characteriza-
tion of administrative law which focuses on the practice
of government agencies.
Information Laws. This section includes statutes used to
gather and disseminate information as a central part of
their regulatory schemes. This section includes the
National Environmental Policy Act and the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act.
Natural Resource Laws. This section includes statutes
such as the Endangered Species Act and the Coastal Zone
Management Act which protect habitat and regulate land
use.
Pollution Control Laws. Statutes discussed in this sec-
tion, such as the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, and Toxic Substances
Control Act, generally focus on regulating the pollutants

which create risk to human health and the environment.
Federal Environmental Protection Agencies. The organi-
zation of the Environmental Protection Agency and the ad-
dresses and telephone numbers of the headquarters and
regional offices and state and territorial agencies are pre-
sented in the appendix.
This chapter provides an overview and a general un-
derstanding of the key features of the major environmen-
tal statutes. The discussions of statutes should pave a way
for further, in-depth study into the environmental laws.
It should be noted that environmental laws are dynamic
and subject to change, interpretation, and negotiation.
Although the following discussions of these federal laws
provide important information, the reader is advised to
determine if any updates or revisions of these laws are in
effect. The information provided on these statutes is no
substitute for up-to-date advice from licensed practition-
ers.
©1999 CRC Press LLC
CHAP1.QXD 1/20/99 7:50 AM Page 3
This section provides an overview of government agencies
and their characteristics, limitations on agencies, and the
judicial review of agency actions.
Government Agencies
The government can be divided into the executive, leg-
islative, and judicial branches. Agencies within the execu-
tive branch perform a large part of the day-to-day busi-
ness on environmental protection. This branch is
comprised of many agencies including the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and other cabinet-level agencies,

such as the Department of Interior and the Department of
Commerce.
Administrative agencies have the essential attributes of
the three branches of our government. They generally have
legislative, executive, and judicial powers.
1
As organiza-
tions, agencies possess many of the same powers and lim-
its as the three government branches do.
LEGISLATIVE
Agencies regulate according to the statutes developed by
Congress. In addition, agencies are responsible for devel-
oping and promulgating regulations. Regulations generally
are more specific statements of the rules found in statutes.
For example, in response to Congressional mandates in
the Clean Water Act, the EPA has promulgated specific
regulations for storm water permits.
Agencies often develop regulations through an informal
rulemaking that involves input from the EPA’s technical
and policy specialists and from interest groups which ex-
pect to be affected by those regulations.
2
Agencies initially
develop proposed regulations. The EPA then publishes the
proposed regulations and allows a period for public com-
ment. (See Section 4.6). This process allows interested par-
ties, such as industries and nongovernmental organiza-
tions, to review the proposed regulations and provide the
EPA with their comments.
If enough interest exists, hearings may be scheduled to

discuss and clarify the proposed regulations. The input of
various parties during the comment and hearing period,
like the input of legislators, all goes into what finally be-
comes the regulation or rule. Once all the comments are
reviewed, the agency publishes a final rule or regulation.
EXECUTIVE
After an agency promulgates regulations, the rules are im-
plemented or applied. Usually, the agency which develops
the regulations also applies them. Under the Clean Water
Act, for example, the EPA has the authority not only to
promulgate regulations, but also to implement them.
3
JUDICIAL
Agencies are also adjudicatory. In other words, they work
like courts and hand down judgments regarding issues
which arise in the context of their programs. When an
agency adjudicates, it performs trial-type procedures which
are similar to civil trials performed by the judicial branch
of government.
4
Parties participate in hearings, present ev-
idence and testimony, conduct cross-examinations, and de-
velop a written record. Hearings take place before a neu-
tral administrative law judge. Finally, agency adjudications
may be appealed within an agency as well as to state or
federal courts.
Limitations on Agencies
The three branches of government exercise numerous con-
trols over agencies. For example, Congress is responsible
for creating and empowering agencies as well as defining

an agency’s role.
5
Congress has also developed the
Administrative Procedures Act (APA) (5 USC§§501–506)
which sets forth various standards for all agency actions.
The executive branch controls the nomination of agency
©1999 CRC Press LLC
1.1
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
1. The discussion here focuses on executive branch agencies. However,
the term executiveis used as an adjective to describe, in general, the ex-
ecutive functions of agencies.
2. Usually, when an agency legislates or develops regulations, it follows
procedures commonly known as notice and comment or informal rule-
making. Informal rulemaking requires the agency to notify the public
that it is considering developing a rule, commonly referred to as a pro-
posed rule. The agency must publish a draft of the proposed rule and in-
vite comments from the public in response. Other kinds of rulemakings
include formal, hybrid, and negotiated rulemaking. However, the scope
of this discussion does not go beyond the informal rulemaking model.
3. The EPA can also delegate the authority to implement regulations to
a state environmental agency. Many states, for instance, have their own
water discharge permit programs which they implement themselves.
Others do not. This delegation, however, does not change the executive
function which agencies—state or federal—possess.
4. Some significant differences between agency adjudications and stan-
dard civil bench trials include relaxed rules of evidence. Pretrial discov-
ery (information-gathering) rules may also be different.
5. Enabling legislation is typically the law that creates an agency, gives
it authority, and defines its role.

CHAP1.QXD 1/20/99 7:50 AM Page 4
directors and administrators. However, these upper-level
appointments are subject to confirmation by the Senate.
Congress and the executive branch also control an agency’s
budget. These provisions translate into a large amount of
control over an agency. Finally, courts define and limit
agency action. They review agency decisions within the ju-
dicial framework of statutory and common law.
Due processis one of the most fundamental legal prin-
cipals which courts apply to agencies when reviewing their
relationship to and treatment of citizens. The term is found
in the fifth and fourteenth amendments to the U.S.
Constitution. The fifth amendment states that “No person
[shall] be deprived of life, liberty or property without due
process of law.”
6
Due process generally implies sufficient notice and a
right to a hearing. It involves the application of certain
procedures which seek to assure fairness, participation, ac-
curacy, and checks on the concentration of power in gov-
ernment’s hands.
Judicial Review of Agency Actions
Several observations can be made about the court system’s
review of agency decisions. First, parties must initially use
or exhaustall the avenues of agency review before they
take their complaints to the court system. Second, several
U.S. Supreme Court decisions define a court’s role in re-
viewing agency actions. Generally, the Supreme Court has
held that courts should acknowledge and accommodate
agency expertise, rely upon the controlling statutory au-

thority in making their judgements, and avoid imposing
further rulemaking procedures on an agency without
showing extraordinary circumstances.
7
EXHAUSTION
Parties that disagree with the results of an agency adjudi-
cation are typically required to exhaust administrative
remedieswithin that agency before going to the court sys-
tem. This requirement means that if an agency has estab-
lished appeal procedures, the party must follow those pro-
cedures before entering an appeal in court. Unless a party
fully exhausts agency review, it cannot take the next step
and get review in the court system.
STANDARDS OF REVIEW
The APA (5 USC§§501–706) provides a statutory basis
for the review of agency actions, with two exceptions.
8
The APA (5 USC§701[a]) does not apply “to the extent
that (1) statutes preclude judicial review; or (2) agency ac-
tion is committed to agency discretion by law.”
9
The first
exception applies, for example, where a statute explicitly
precludes review. The second exception has been clarified
by judicial interpretation.
The Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc., v. Volpe
(401 U.S. 402, 411 [1971]) case involved the second ex-
ception. In this case, the Court reviewed the secretary of
transportation’s authorization of funds to build a highway
through a public park. The statute at issue allowed the sec-

retary to use funds for highways except in situations where
a feasible and prudent alternative was available. Environ-
mentalists successfully argued that the secretary of trans-
portation did not have the discretion to authorize the
funds, as he maintained, and that he had not considered
alternatives to the highway construction.
The Overton Parkcase emphasizes the arbitrary and
capricious standard for nonadjudicative agency actions.
This test establishes a minimum standard which agencies
must meet to justify their decisions. In reviewing the record
upon which an agency bases its decision, a court must find
some basis for the agency’s decision. If no basis exists for
the agency’s decision within the record, a court can hold
that the agency was arbitrary and capricious, i.e., that it
failed to meet the minimum standard for justifying its de-
cision. In the Overton Parkcase, the Supreme Court found
a sufficient basis for overturning the lower court’s decision
that upheld the original agency action.
DEFERENCE TO THE AGENCY
Although many cases deal with administrative law and the
role of agencies, the Chevron U.S.A. Inc., v. Natural
Resources Defense Council, Inc.(467 U.S. 837 [1984])
case readily demonstrates how courts should review an ap-
peal from an agency action.
Because courts frequently lack the expertise to make
technical decisions associated with environmental issues,
they often show deference to agencies. If an agency pre-
sents a justifiable basis for its decisions, a court frequently
relies on the agency’s expertise. In the Chevroncase, the
Supreme Court reviewed the EPA’s interpretation and ad-

ministration of the Clean Air Act. The Court was faced
with the issue of what rules of interpretation to apply in
considering whether the EPA was justified in defining a
Clean Air Act term: stationary source.
The Chevroncase establishes the procedures for a court
to follow in reviewing an agency’s interpretation of the
statutes it administers. First, a court must ask: “has
©1999 CRC Press LLC
6. The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution contains similar
language: “[N]or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law ”
7. See Baltimore Gas and Electric Co. v. Natural Resources Defense
Council (NRDC),462 U.S. 87 (1983); Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC,
467 U.S. 837 (1984); Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC,
435 U.S. 519 (1978).
8. The standard of review of factual issues in adjudications is the sub-
stantial evidence test. This standard requires a reviewing court to uphold
the decision of a lower court unless the reviewing court can find no sub-
stantial evidence in the record to support the holding.
9. See alsoLevin. 1990. Understanding unreviewability in administrative
law. Minn. L.R.74:689.
CHAP1.QXD 1/20/99 7:50 AM Page 5