TCEQ denies petition to revoke U.S. Ecology's injection-well permits; contested case set to proceed

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality on Aug. 6 denied a petition from Pipkin Ranch Holding LP seeking revocation of seven underground injection control permits (WDW344'WDW350) held by U.S. Ecology Winnie LLC.

Pipkin Ranch had asked the commission to revoke the permits and the interim order referring the renewal application for a contested case, arguing that U.S. Ecology delayed providing application materials to the chief clerk's office for more than 400 days and therefore had forfeited procedural rights; Pipkin Ranch counsel said the delay infringed on private property and subsurface "pore space" interests. "The permittee was required pursuant to section 80.118(d)(1) to forward the application within 10 days... this went 400 plus days," counsel for the petitioner told commissioners.

U.S. Ecology's counsel, Maddie Nada, said the company provided supplemental affidavits and declarations reflecting settlement discussions and that the matter had been set for a preliminary contested-case hearing on Sept. 23. Nada said the petition did not allege the statutory predicates required for revocation and that the company had made a substantial attempt to correct any procedural oversight.

Don Redmond, representing the executive director, told commissioners the ED recommended denying the petition because the petition did not establish grounds for revocation under the applicable rules and statutes and because an amendment application to increase the injection zone accompanies the renewal.

OPIC's Sheldon Wayne advised the commission that the statutory subsection cited by the petitioner (305.66(f)(5) in the TCEQ rules) applies only to hazardous waste management facilities and that U.S. Ecology's active permits at issue are for nonhazardous industrial and municipal wastes; OPIC also noted that rule 80.118(d)(1) requires filing copies with the chief clerk and that, even if the company violated that provision, the revocation standard requires additional factual showings before revocation is appropriate.

Commissioners said they took the petitioner's concerns seriously but noted that U.S. Ecology filed the required application materials with the chief clerk once the petition was threatened, and that the matter has been referred to SOA with a preliminary hearing set. After discussion, the commission moved to deny Pipkin Ranch Holding LP's petition to revoke the UIC permits WDW344'WDW350, denied the request to revoke the renewal or the interim order, and the motion passed on an oral "aye" vote.

Commissioners also discussed the nature of the application (a renewal with a technical amendment to expand the injection zone) and emphasized that, while delays in procedural filings are concerning, the revocation rules are intended for significant violations such as abandoned facilities or operations endangering health or the environment. The order denying revocation leaves the underlying renewal and amendment application to proceed through the contested-case process at SOA.