EPA’s National Compliance Initiatives Show Enforcement Priorities

EPA’s National Compliance Initiatives Show Enforcement Priorities

Does This Apply To You?

We can help determine which of these apply to your facility, and help you make sure you’re on the right track if you’re inspected.

Just like OSHA has national emphasis programs for areas they want to target in their enforcement, EPA has its own national emphasis targets.  Called the National Compliance Initiatives (NCI), EPA has listed 7 priority areas to target for enforcement for Fiscal Years 2020-2023. 

So what’s on the EPA NCI Target List?

Air – Reducing Air Emissions at Hazardous Waste LQGs and TSDFs

EPA has found that facilities that generate a greater amount of hazardous waste have air emissions issues.  Their focus will be on air emissions at Large Quantity Generators (LQGs) and Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs).  This emphasis item was in the agency’s last list of NCIs, and inspectors have found there is still significant noncompliance at these facilities.  EPA wants improved compliance in controlling organic air emissions from certain management activities.  They will especially be looking at the following areas in which they are continuously finding problems:

  • Leaking or open pressure relief valves;
  • Tank closure devices;
  • Monitoring; and,
  • Recordkeeping.

Water – Reducing NPDES Permits Noncompliance

EPA will be looking at your facility’s NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permits to see if you’re in compliance.  NPDES permits are for water discharges, whether they be wastewater, stormwater or otherwise.  In 2018, 11,000 permits had violations totaling 4 billion pounds of pollutants above permitted limits, and EPA wants to crack down on that.  Out of 40,000 facilities with NPDES permits, EPA estimates 29% are in significant noncompliance.  EPA’s goal is to cut that in half by fall 2022.  EPA specifically mentions failure to submit required reports and significant exceedances of limits as two of the most violated areas.

Air – Reducing Excess Emissions of HAPs and VOCs from Stationary Sources

EPA wants a focus on reducing emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs).   They will be focusing on sources of VOCs that may have substantial impact on an area’s attainment or non-attainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards.  EPA will also be focusing on areas with a greater concentration of HAP sources.  EPA has listed over 180 chemicals that are HAPs, including mercury, asbestos, toluene, cadmium, chromium, benzene, perchloroethylene, and lead.

Hazardous Chemicals – Reducing Risks of Accidental Releases at Industrial and Chemical Facilities

This was on EPA’s list last time, and is continuing.   This NCI not only applies to facilities subject to Risk Management Program requirements (for accidental chemical releases at facilities that store certain chemicals above a certain threshold).   EPA cites a General Duty Clause in their Clean Air Act to cover all facilities with regulated substances and extremely hazardous substances, regardless of quantity.  They’ll be using that General Duty Clause (Clean Air Act Section 112(r)) which requires companies:

  • Identify hazards that may result from accidental releases by using appropriate hazard assessment techniques;
  • Design and maintain a safe facility;
  • Take steps to prevent releases; and,
  • Minimize the consequences of the accidental releases that occur.

It will be important that your facility not only has conducted the proper hazard assessments and has plans and controls in place, but has documentation that has occurred.  This exercise and documentation will help you with both EPA and OSHA compliance.

Air – Stopping Aftermarket Defeat Devices for Engines

This is a new item on EPA’s list.  They will be looking to stop the manufacture, sale and installation of defeat devices on engines.  Often called tuners, these devices bypass the engines’ emissions control systems in order to improve engine performance or fuel efficiency.  The systems modify the exhaust system or electronic chips within the vehicle.   EPA has been levying fines on car manufacturers for a number of years in this area.  One of the most famous cases is the recent Volkswagen emissions scandal where vehicles were rigged to recognize regulatory emissions testing, but operated differently in real world driving conditions.  Now EPA is going after the aftermarket manufacturers and have already started.  However, the emphasis isn’t just limited to vehicles on the road, it’s for any engine, including non-road vehicles and engines.

Water – Noncompliance with Drinking Water Standards at Community Systems

This is a new NCI area for EPA.  EPA says that out of 50,000 Community Water Systems that serve water to the same people year-round, 40% violated at least one drinking water standard in 2018.  Also at these facilities, 30% had monitoring and reporting violations and 7% had health violations.  EPA’s goal is to reduce this noncompliance by 25% by having EPA’s Office of Water work to increase capacity within the states and tribes to address these violations.

Lead – Child Exposure to Lead

This one is an unofficial NCI emphasis because it will be treated as a directive but not be a part of the official NCI enforcement list as a separate program.  EPA has an overall initiative for lead, and the NCI guidance documents affirm enforcement commitment to participating in that initiative.   Plans for EPA’s overall lead initiative include:

  • Increasing compliance with and awareness of lead-safe renovations with the Renovation, Repair and Painting rule;
  • Developing a mapping tool to identify communities with higher lead exposures;
  • Targeted geographical initiatives; and,
  • Public awareness campaigns on lead issues.

What’s Next:  Regional Plans

Each region is to develop a strategic plan on how they will be accomplishing these EPA NCI goals.  Within these plans the regions are to determine how they’re going to allocate resources to these NCIs and how much investment will be put into each one.  The plans are due August 1.   

These NCIs are the goals for Fiscal Year 2020-2023, thus they will go into effect October 1, 2019.

Does your facility fall under these targets?  We can help you determine that, and get you ready — Contact us today!

EPA’s “Once In, Always In” May Be Officially on the Way Out

EPA’s “Once In, Always In” May Be Officially on the Way Out

EPA has proposed a rule that would officially eliminate the air regulations rule of “Once In, Always In” for major source hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions.  As a result, EPA is estimating reduced regulatory burden for thousands of locations, and thousands of others could now have a better incentive to reduce air emissions.

Background: Air Emissions Regs

Locations that emit one or more of the 187 named hazardous air pollutants above a certain threshold are classified as a “major source.”  As a result, they become subject to a number of additional regulatory obligations.  They are required to follow certain rules established by their related Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rules and are required to complete annual Title V Air Emissions permitting. 

If locations have HAP air emissions below the stated threshold, they are classified as “area sources.”  The regulatory requirements at this level are much less burdensome.

What’s Once In, Always In?

EPA’s Once In, Always In policy stated that once a location reaches that major source classification, they were always going to be a major source, not matter what – even if the company took steps to reduce emissions below that threshold.  It was developed in 1995 as a guidance memo and originally intended to only be in place until the agency could propose amendments, but it stayed in permanently. 

As part of the 2017 Executive Order for agencies to review and reduce regulations, EPA looked at Once In, Always In.  They determined the Clean Air Act really did not specify or support time limits.  As a result, EPA issued its own interpretation memo saying there was no basis for major sources to have that classification permanently.  These sources should have the ability to reclassify as area sources if they implemented the controls and reductions necessary to become area sources.

This new proposed rule is the formal step to make this interpretation final.

The Benefits

This rule will benefit companies that have already implemented technologies to control HAP emissions, and companies whose processes or operations have changed to the degree that they no longer emit or have the capabilities to emit HAPs above the thresholds. 

EPA estimates that out of 7,920 major sources, approximately half will now be eligible to reclassify as an area source.  Besides the lessened compliance burden, EPA estimates costs savings of $168.9 million in the first year, and $163-$183 million each year after.

Those companies who are still major sources will also now have a concrete incentive to make changes to operations that would further reduce HAP emissions.

Public Comment

Find out more information about this rule here.  EPA is also soliciting public comment at regulations.gov.  They want to hear about all aspects of their proposal including their interpretation of Once In, Always In, requirements for establishing effective HAP limits, allowing limits issued by states/local/tribal agencies as effective as long as they are legally and practically enforceable, and ideas for safeguards to ensure emissions are not increased.

Which Source Are You?

Is your site a major source or an area source? Can you reclassify?  Let us help!

iSi can help you with air emissions determinations & compliance — Contact us today!

What are Lab Packs and How Could Your Facility Use Them?

What are Lab Packs and How Could Your Facility Use Them?

Casey Moore, iSi Environmental

About the Author: iSi’s Casey Moore has more than 25 years of experience in the hazardous waste industry including working for hazardous waste carriers and operating hazardous waste facilities in California and Arizona.

I’ve never been a fan of “spring” cleaning, but it’s a necessary part of good housekeeping around the home or at your facility. When was the last time your facility did a “spring cleaning” walkthrough to see if there are any materials around your workplace that are expired, or you don’t need?  Flammable cabinets, chemical storage, research/QC labs and maintenance shops are likely places these items accumulate.

What is a Lab Pack?

Since most of the items in these locations are likely to be in smaller containers, they aren’t treated like regular waste streams. Lab packs are a practical solution. Lab packs are consolidation packaging of “like” materials from the smaller containers into larger containers to satisfy proper DOT shipping and EPA RCRA hazardous waste management.

The lab pack was designed for managing expired materials in labs, however, it’s something that can be used for any facility that needs to do a cleanout of smaller containers usually less than 10 gallons each.

What Items Are Candidates for a Lab Pack?

Look for jars, jugs, vials and cans of hazardous materials, including chemicals, solvents, paints, thinners, acids, cleaners, strippers, inks and more. These are typically out of date, off-specification, partially used, and no longer needed.

Who Does Lab Packing?

There are strict regulations about who is qualified to do lab packing. These persons need to determine which containers can be put together and which ones may cause harmful reactions when mixed. Typically, hazardous waste carriers provide this service.

How is Lab Packing Accomplished?

First, items are segregated, that is, sorted, for combining into one larger container.  Items are segregated by:

  • Hazard class — most common are flammables, corrosives, and toxics
  • Type of material — liquids, solids, etc.
  • Compatibility

“Paper pack” is the term used to show the segregation by container. An initial inventory list is converted into lab pack inventory sheets (what goes into each container). This is what waste companies use to create approval numbers for compliance under RCRA. It is also how they establish price. Pricing is based on disposal, transportation and labor associated with packaging.

Packaging is accomplished by:

  • Putting the segregated materials into their respective larger containers;
  • Filling with a packing material (vermiculite is most common) to create stability and containment while shipping;
  • Vermiculite will be in the base and surrounding each of the internal containers; and,
  • The smaller containers are placed into the larger container vertically, so the label with the double arrows pointing up is on the outer packaging.

RCRA Regulation Implications

A lab pack counts towards your waste generation status if you’re a Very Small Quantity Generator (VSQG) or a Small Quantity Generator (SQG), so be mindful of the amount of hazardous waste generated in the process.

For states that have already adopted the Generator Improvements Rule, this is a good use of the episodic event and would not count against your generator status.

If you have any questions regarding lab packs or hazardous waste regulations, contact us!

iSi can help with hazardous waste compliance and facility walkthroughs to find environmental and safety issues.  Contact us today!

EPA’s Mercury Inventory Report Due July 1

EPA’s Mercury Inventory Report Due July 1

Any person, company or organization who manufactures or imports mercury or mercury-added products, or intentionally uses mercury in a manufacturing process are required to file a report to EPA by July 1, 2019. 

Called the “Mercury Inventory Reporting Rule,” it is a part of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).  The final rule for this was published in June 2018.  TSCA requires EPA to publish an inventory on mercury supply, use and trade every 3 years.  EPA’s next inventory is due in 2020, so as a result, they are requiring those use and import mercury to get their data submitted by July 1, 2019.

Requirements

If you fall under this requirement, it doesn’t matter how much mercury you use, you still need to report to EPA.  Reporting is done through EPA’s Central Data Exchange.

The data you’ll use in the report are quantities from calendar year 2018.  Some of the items required to be reported include:

  • Amount of mercury produced, imported, stored, used, sold, or exported;
  • Types of products made;
  • Types of manufacturing processes and how mercury is used;
  • Business sectors to which mercury or mercury-added products are sold;
  • Country of origin of imported mercury or mercury-added products; and
  • Destination country for exported mercury or mercury-added products.

Once submitted, you’ll be required to submit this report again every 3 years.  EPA will not publish names or identifying information once they publish the results.

Exemptions

There are a few exemptions to reporting.  In the following instances you won’t need to report:

  • Your mercury activity isn’t for commercial advantage;
  • The mercury you use is only as an impurity;
  • You’re generating, handling or managing mercury-containing waste only (and not recovering it for commerce purposes)
  • The mercury is in an assembled product that contains a mercury component (EPA gives the example of a mercury light bulb for a car manufacturer); or,
  • You manufacture assembled products that contain a component that’s a mercury-added product but you didn’t manufacture or import that component.

EPA Webinar

EPA is having two webinars to explain this Mercury Inventory Reporting Rule.  One is Tuesday May 21, the other is Thursday May 23.  Click on those dates to go to the signup page for each.

Need Help?

Does this apply to you? What other environmental reports apply to you?  We can determine that for you!

iSi can help determine if this applies to you, and what other environmental reporting applies to you too. Contact us today!

PFAS Chemicals: What Are They and Where Are They Found?

PFAS Chemicals: What Are They and Where Are They Found?

EPA has announced its first ever comprehensive nationwide Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Action Plan. This action plan attempts to address two of the most common PFAS chemicals; PFOA and PFOS.  Despite having called this press conference, no definitive regulations have yet been set in place.  This has led to some frustrated state regulatory agencies deciding to move on without EPA in fear that EPA regulations may take 10 years or more to materialize and finalize, if ever.

So far, 8 states have adopted bills regarding PFAS chemicals and other states are already trying to determine what to do about them.  Because regulations may be seen on the state level before the federal, we believe an awareness of this issue – what is it, why is it important – will prove to be highly beneficial.  

In seminars and conferences, we’ve even heard these mentioned as potentially “the new asbestos” in terms of prevalence of exposure and need for elimination.

SO WHAT ARE PFAS CHEMICALS?

Simply put, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances are a class of man-made chemicals that are widely used in industrial processes and can be found in many consumer products. They are split into two groups: Polymers and Non-polymers. To be a bit more specific, PFAS chemicals are chains of carbon atoms that are bonded by fluorine atoms. The chemistry is very complex, which is what allows for there to be thousands upon thousands of variations existing in commerce today.

WHERE CAN PFAS BE FOUND?

It would almost be easier to say where they aren’t found!  PFAS chemicals can be found anywhere; in pizza boxes, cookware, paints, polishes, electronics manufacturing, fuel additive, and more! There are even cases of the direct release of PFAS products into the environment. The use of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) for fire fighting, chrome surfacing facilities, landfills, and wastewater treatment all contribute to the release of PFAS chemicals in the environment.

Some applications where PFAS-containing materials are used include:

  • Water and stain resistance in textile and paper coating
  • Plastics manufacturing
  • Reducing surface tension in surface coatings
  • Stabilizing agents for metal finishing and electroplating
  • Industrial rinse agents
  • Solder wetting agents and coatings in semiconductors
  • Cable and wiring manufacturing
  • Building and construction
  • Anywhere that uses fire fighting foams (military, oil refineries, manufacturing, airfields)
  • Recovery in metal mining and oil extraction


WHY IS IT IMPORTANT?

Some PFAS chemicals are known to be persistent in the environment, bioaccumulative in organisms, and toxic at relatively low levels. The fact that PFAS chemicals come in so many shapes and sizes and in so many industries and consumer products means that an alarmingly high percentage of people have been exposed to PFAS chemicals. Contaminated drinking water is the best documented source of known human exposure pathways, but food, house dust, and workplace exposure are amongst the top as well. In communities with contaminated drinking water, human health effects include higher cholesterol, increased uric acid, lower birth weight, lower response to vaccines, diabetes, cancer, and more.

EPA’s ACTION PLAN

EPA’s Action Plan covers a number of different areas.  However, most of these plans are in the development, research, and pre-regulatory phase.  They are focusing efforts on developing rules and tools for Cleanup, Monitoring, Research, Communication, and Drinking Water.  For more information on PFAS chemicals , visit EPA’S PFAS data and tools website at https://www.epa.gov/pfas/epa-pfas-data-and-tools.

Get Our Articles Each Week!

We send out our weekly compliance articles each week via email.  Sign up below to get our updates sent directly to your inbox!

Which EPA environmental regulations apply to your facility?  iSi can help determine which ones apply and what you need to do next!

Methylene Chloride Banned for Consumer Use, Industry Use Continues

Methylene Chloride Banned for Consumer Use, Industry Use Continues

Update:  As of November 23, 2019 it is now against the law for any person or retailer to sell or distribute paint removal products containing methylene chloride for consumer use, including online sales.

EPA has issued a final rule to ban the use of methylene chloride for consumer use.  This rule applies to the manufacture, import, process, and distribution of methylene chloride for consumer use.  Industrial use, for now, is still allowed.

Methylene Chloride, also known as dichloromethane, is a key ingredient used in paint strippers.  It also can be found in some acrylic cements for hobbyists.

EPA has been evaluating high-hazard chemicals through the Toxic Substances Control Act, or TSCA.  EPA found the hazards associated with the methylene chloride to be an unreasonable risk.  The fumes are heavier than air and can stay in an unventilated area for several hours.  The fumes can rapidly cause dizziness, loss of consciousness, and death due to nervous system depression.

Retailers have 180 days after the rule finalization to be in compliance.  However, many retailers made pledges to stop selling it long before the rule was finalized.  Lowes, Home Depot, AutoZone, PPG and Sherwin Williams agreed to stop selling methylene chloride-containing products by the end of 2018.  Walmart agreed to stop selling products online and in stores by the end of February 2019 and Amazon targeted March 2019.  Ace Hardware is targeting the end of July 2019.

Industrial Usage Continues

In industry, methylene chloride is used not only as a paint stripper, but for general cleaning, automotive care, bath tub refinishing, metal cleaning and degreasing, lubrication, pharmaceutical manufacturing, and lithography.

EPA is still allowing usage in industry in industry at this time, but are is soliciting public comment for future rulemaking which may include training requirements, limited access rules, and/or certification.

On the employee protection side, methylene chloride usage in industry is also subject to OSHA’s Methylene Chloride Standard.  This standard lines out specific requirements for usage, medical surveillance, respiratory protection, training, hygiene facilities, protective clothing, recordkeeping, and control measures.

Occupational Exposures

Which chemicals are your facility using and have you determined all of your employee exposure responsibilities?  Let us help!

iSi can help you with worker exposure plans, sampling and strategies — Contact us today!

The Federal Shutdown: EPA, OSHA and DOT

The Federal Shutdown: EPA, OSHA and DOT

We were working on preparing price proposals for two separate federal agencies this week and one greeted with a return email saying it was closed, while the other is still open.  This prompted the question…what about the other regulatory agencies we work with such as EPA, OSHA and the DOT?

EPA

In short, part of EPA is open while the other is closed.  Those functions still open involve ensuring there are personnel necessary to respond to emergencies involving safety of human life or the protection of property. 

Functions Still Open at EPA

  • Activities essential to ensure safe continued public health and safety including safe use of food and drugs and safe use of hazardous materials;
  • Superfund projects, where failure to maintain operations would pose an imminent threat;
  • EPA labs where it’s necessary to ensure physical integrity of research property and research conditions;
  • Law enforcement, legal counseling and criminal investigations;
  • Protection of federal lands/buildings/equipment; and,
  • Emergency response readiness and disaster service.

Functions Closed at EPA

  • Inspections;*
  • Non-emergency environmental site sampling;
  • New contract obligations;
  • Existing contract obligations and task orders;
  • Existing grant, cooperative agreement and interagency agreement obligations;
  • Payment activities including contracts, grants and payroll;
  • Travel;
  • New hiring; and,
  • Non-mission critical IT systems.

*While federal inspectors are on hold, please note that state environmental inspections are likely to continue using other sources of funding. 

For more information on EPA’s shutdown, take a look at their contingency plan.

OSHA

At OSHA, it is business as usual because their agency is funded through September of this year.   The same goes for MSHA, so inspectors for both agencies are still out and active. 

DOT

At DOT, some agencies of DOT are busier than others are. 

It’s business as usual for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and the Federal Highway Administration because they’ve already been funded by multi-year appropriations. 

Functions Closed at DOT

At other DOT agencies, about half of the staff has been furloughed.  Much of what is closed has been administrative such as rulemaking and program development, training, research, purchasing, and grants.   

Functions Open at DOT

Those functions still operational include:

  • Hazardous materials (hazmat) inspections of shippers and carriers;
  • Hazmat enforcement activities;
  • Hazmat testing facilities and cylinder reconditioning facilities;
  • Hazmat approvals and permits for emergencies only;
  • Pipeline safety regulation inspectors;
  • Those who manage rail and pipeline accidents/incident investigations; and,
  • Pipeline operations/systems inspectors.

For more information about all the DOT shutdown activities, download their Shutdown Contingency Plan.

Free Webinar

Catch our free webinar on EPA environmental reporting!

We can help with EPA, OSHA & DOT concerns — Contact us today!

iSi’s Environmental Reporting Webinar

iSi’s Environmental Reporting Webinar

osha-silica-dust-construction-general industry-webinar

Webinar

Attend our webinar to determine how these regulations apply to your organization.

osha-silica-dust-construction-general industry-webinar

Webinar

Attend our webinar to determine how these regulations apply to your organization.

There are a number of environmental reports companies in general industry must prepare on an annual basis.

Some like EPA’s SARA Tier II, SARA Form Rs, Air Emissions Inventories and Hazardous Waste Biennial Reports have set dates.  Others for air, hazardous waste, wastewater, stormwater and boilers may be guided by your state or your permit itself. 

In this webinar, we’ll cover the basics of the most common reports you may be required to prepare for your facility each year and the due dates you need to know.  

Need help sorting out your reporting requirements? Let iSi help!

What is an ISO 14001 Environmental Management System?

What is an ISO 14001 Environmental Management System?

The International Organization for Standardization, or ISO, determines internationally agreed upon standards for businesses.  ISO standards that end in “001” are management systems. ISO 14001 is for environmental management systems as ISO 9001 is the standard for quality management systems and 45001 is for safety and health management systems.

Standards in the “ISO 14000 family” relate to environmental management.  There are actually other standards in the 14000 family such as 14004, 14006 and 14064-1 that complement ISO 14001 or take it a step further.

Who Is Required to Have ISO 14001 Certifications?

ISO 14001 is voluntary; however, many national and international companies are increasingly requiring their suppliers to become certified. 

Having the certification signals that your company conforms to pre-approved standards of environmental performance and has procedures in place for compliance and improvement. It also shows your company is committed to certain environmental objectives like waste minimization, pollution prevention and climate change mitigation as well as has perspective on the effects of life cycle and the value chain of a product/service.

What’s the Process for Creating an Environmental Management System?

An ISO 14001 environmental management system (EMS) is all about developing and documenting objectives and processes, implementing them, monitoring and measuring their success, reporting results, maintaining them, then taking actions to continuously improve upon them. 

Some of the elements of the EMS include developing procedures for:

  • Scope of the EMS
  • Leadership and commitment;
  • Defining and documenting your environmental policy;
  • Organizational roles and responsibilities;
  • Identifying risks, threats and opportunities
  • Identifying environmental aspects and impacts;
  • Establishing environmental objectives and plan for achieving them;
  • Resources;
  • Competence, training records, skills, experience and qualifications;
  • Internal and external communication;
  • Document control;
  • Operational control;
  • Emergency preparedness and response;
  • Compliance obligations and evaluation;
  • Monitoring and measuring results;
  • Internal auditing the EMS and the results from this;
  • Management review results;
  • Nonconformity and corrective action; and,
  • Continual improvement.

How Do You Become Certified?

Once you have your procedures developed, you will need to conduct an internal audit of the procedures.  From here, tweaks are made and deficiencies are corrected.  An external audit is next, that is, a third-party auditor such as iSi will review your system to verify it complies with the requirements.  After the external audit, corrections are made before an ISO certification agency does the final certification audit.

ISO 14001:2015

The most current version of ISO 14001 is 14001:2015.  Any company with the original 2004 certification had until September 15, 2018 to upgrade to the newest version.  Thus, the 2004 version is now out of date.

As with newer ISO standards such as safety standard 45001, the 2015 revision increases emphasis on commitment from company leadership.  ISO is required to be more prominent in an organization’s strategic direction and stakeholder-focused communication is important.  Other revisions require proactive initiatives for protecting the environment from harm and degradation and requires companies to consider life cycle, that is, how the entire process from development to end-of-life can affect the environment.

Benefits of an EMS

Even if you are not required to have ISO 14001 certification, developing an environmental management system can be beneficial to your company.  Having procedures in place can help improve your overall environmental compliance It can help give your company personnel a roadmap of how to manage environmental issues, which can be helpful in times of employee turnover.  An EMS will help ensure systems are continuously improved and evaluated.  In addition, there may be additional cost benefits through pollution prevention, increased efficiencies, consistency, better resource management, and good public relations.

ISO Audit

iSi can help you create your EMS and has the auditors to inspect it.

How can an environmental management system help your compliance? Let iSi help you put the pieces together!

Semiannual Regulatory Priorities Set by EPA and OSHA

Semiannual Regulatory Priorities Set by EPA and OSHA

Twice a year each of the President’s cabinets and executive agencies submits a regulatory agenda for the upcoming months.  It’s a list of priorities and which regulatory areas they intend to focus on.  The following items were listed as priorities in EPA’s agenda and in the OSHA portion of the Department of Labor’s agenda.

EPA – Air Quality

  • New Source Review and Title V Permitting – EPA hopes to simplify the New Source Review process (preconstruction air permits). There are two memos EPA wants to make law.  The first is EPA won’t second guess preconstruction analysis that complies with procedural requirements.  The other is the rescinding of the “once in always in” rule. A rule change will allow companies who are major sources to become area sources if their potential to emit falls below thresholds, reducing regulatory requirements.
  • Electric Utility Greenhouse Gas Rules – Recently EPA proposed a new rule for greenhouse gas emissions called the Affordable Clean Energy Rule. They will continue to look at this alternative approach to the Clean Power Plan Rule.
  • Oil and Gas New Source Performance Standards – EPA has been reviewing the rule including regulation of greenhouse gases through emissions limits on methane. A proposal for public comment will be issued.
  • Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Rule – EPA will hold public hearings on their August 2018 proposal to amend and establish new Corporate Average Fuel Economy and greenhouse gas emissions standards for passenger cars and light trucks for model years 2021-2026.

EPA – Water Quality

  • National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for Lead and Copper and Perchlorate – EPA will be looking at the lead and copper drinking water rule in order to clarify, reduce complexity, modernize and strengthen it to make it more effective and enforceable. They will also be working on drafting a regulation for regulating perchlorate in drinking water.
  • Peak Flows Management – EPA will be updating permitting regulations for publicly owned treatment works that have separate sanitary sewer systems to deal with the excess wastewater collection that comes with wet weather.
  • “Waters of the U.S.” – EPA will be working on step 2 in the redefining of the term waters of the United States with a reevaluation of the definition, including redefining the term “navigable waters”.
  • Clean Water Act Section 404(c) – EPA will update the regulations concerning its authority in the permitting of dredged and fill material discharges. In reducing its power to veto a permit for any reason, it hopes to help increase predictability and certainty for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, landowners, investors, and businesses.
  • Steam Electric Power Generating Point Sources – EPA will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking for reconsideration of the Steam Electric Effluent Limitations Guidelines rule.

EPA – Waste and Land Contamination

  • Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances – The use of these chemicals have been prevalent in a wide variety of items such as stain resistant fabrics and carpets, cosmetics and fire-fighting foam. EPA is set to designate them as hazardous substances and is yet to determine which mechanism to use, whether it be CERCLA or the Clean Water Act.
  • Accidental Release Prevention Regulations Under Clean Air Act – EPA has proposed changes to the Risk Management Plan rule to better coordinate with OSHA and DOT rules, lessen security concerns of sharing information with local emergency planning and response organizations and ease the economic burden caused by some provisions. In the next few months, public comment will be solicited on rule changes.
  • Disposal of Coal Combustion Residues from Electric Utilities – EPA is planning to modify the final rule on disposal of coal combustion residual (CCR) as solid waste and will be amending certain performance standards to give additional flexibility to states.

EPA – Chemical Safety

  • TSCA Amendments – 2016 TSCA amendments require EPA to evaluate existing chemicals for health risks to vulnerable groups and workers who daily use them. This action will be funded by user fees from chemical manufacturers and processors when they submit test data for EPA review, manufacture or use a new chemical, or process one subject to risk evaluation.  These fees will go into effect in 2019.  Also, EPA is on a deadline to do risk evaluations and issue any new proposed rules for persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) chemicals by June 2019.
  • Lead Dust Hazards – EPA has proposed strengthening lead hazard standards on dust from floors and window sills in child-occupied facilities. Final action will be June 2019.
  • Pesticide Safety – EPA is considering changes to Certification of Pesticide Applicators regulations from 2017 and agricultural Worker Protection Standard regulations from 2015.

OSHA

  • Electronic Reporting – After requiring certain employers to submit OSHA recordkeeping information to a website which would provide publicly available data, OSHA realized it couldn’t guarantee that personally identifiable information from the 300 and 301 logs wouldn’t be published. Thus, OSHA is proposing to change the Improved Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses Rule to just include the OSHA 300A summary data.
  • Beryllium – After revising the beryllium standard, OSHA realized exposure in shipyards and construction was limited to a few operations so some of the provisions required within the standard wouldn’t improve worker protection and could be redundant with other standards. OSHA will be working to revise the rule.
  • Standards Improvement Project (SIP) – OSHA will be working on Phase IV of their SIP. SIPs are used by OSHA to fix standards to correct errors, update technical references, account for new technologies and practices, delete duplicate information and fix inconsistent information.  SIPs can affect one or a number of standards.  For example, items for SIP IV include removing the requirement to put social security numbers on records and allowing for storing digital copies of x-rays rather than on film only.

Want more details?  Read the full regulatory agenda for EPA here and for OSHA here.

Want us to write an article in more detail about any of these issues?  Email our team and let us know what you’d like to see!

Need Help?

Do you need help determining which regulations apply to your facility? Contact us today!

iSi can help you determine which regulations apply to your facility. Contact us today!

Who Regulates Hazmat Shipments?

Who Regulates Hazmat Shipments?

In the environmental and safety world, it’s pretty simple to determine who’s the regulatory authority. For safety, in most cases it’s OSHA, and if you’re in a “state plan” state or if you’re a public entity, your state has an additional safety regulatory agency. For environmental issues, it’s EPA and for many states there is an additional state agency which covers environmental regulations plus you have municipal environmental rules. However, when it comes to shipping hazardous materials, it gets a little more complicated.

In the U.S., the shipment of hazardous materials is covered by federal regulation 49 CFR. 49 CFR addresses the shipment of hazardous materials by ground, air and vessel. The Department of Transportation (DOT) is responsible for enforcing 49 CFR.

DOT contains a variety of agencies which are responsible for ensuring specific parts of 49 CFR are being followed:

  • Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Security Administration (PHMSA);
  • Federal Aviation Administration (FAA);
  • Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA); and,
  • Federal Railroad Administration (FRA).

In addition to the federal agencies, there are additional state agencies with the authority to enforce DOT regulations. For example, this could be your state’s department of transportation and additional agencies which govern the highway patrol, rail lines or pipelines. Thus, you could receive inspections from a variety of state officials and highway patrol in additional to the federal agencies.

If there was one arm of DOT which takes the lead in hazardous materials, it’s PHMSA. PHMSA’s focus is safe shipments and it creates and publicizes regulations. Thus, if you wanted to learn new information about shipping hazardous materials, start with PHMSA.

When it comes to air and vessel shipments, you’ll find that although 49 CFR has rules regarding these types of shipments, in parts, 49 CFR defers to two other agencies, the International Air Transport Association (IATA) and the International Maritime Organization who publishes the International Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG). These are international organizations, as the shipment of hazardous materials will often cross country boundaries via ocean or air. Thus, when you’re required to have training, you need the training of both 49 CFR and IATA or IMDG. IMDG can also be applicable to shipments within in the U.S. when shipping to Hawaii, Alaska or Puerto Rico.

Radioactive materials shipments are regulated under the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

Both OSHA and EPA mention and defer to DOT within its regulations. Thus, you need to be aware AND trained in both the regulations of OSHA/EPA and DOT when dealing with environmental or safety issues.

49 CFR regulations can become very confusing. If you need help determining which regulations apply to you and how you need to ship your hazardous materials, contact us and we’d be happy to help!

Need Help?

Need help sorting out your hazmat shipping requirements? What about your required training?

iSi can help you with hazmat shipping regulations — Contact us today!

New Clean Air Act Interpretation May Affect Facility Air Permitting

New Clean Air Act Interpretation May Affect Facility Air Permitting

Facilities required to have an EPA Title V air permit, New Source Review (NSR) air permit, or a Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) air permit may soon be affected by a proposed new interpretation of the word “adjacent”.

Adjacent Properties

In the regulations, the word adjacent comes into play when determining if a facility qualifies for permits.  When determining sources, a building, structure, facility or installation must be under the control of the same person, belong in the same industrial grouping, and located on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties.  When it came to “adjacent”, EPA wouldn’t give a determination on how far apart the properties needed to be and said that it would be determined on a case by case basis.  Besides physical proximity, EPA has been considering “functional interrelatedness” in its adjacent determinations.

Companies determine how their facilities should be permitted within the rules, whether there is one combined source, or whether there are separate sources.  In one court case, EPA disagreed with a petroleum company that it had separate sources.  EPA said the company’s operations and wells were adjacent, even though they were miles apart.  EPA was considering the operations, pipelines and wells as having functional interrelatedness.  The petroleum company sued EPA, and the court found in favor of the petroleum company.  The court said the definition of “adjacent” was simple and meant only physical proximity.

After the court ruling, EPA tweaked interpretation rules by region to include functional interrelatedness, and they were also thrown out by courts in other lawsuits and challenges.

The New Interpretation

EPA has issued a draft guidance for the interpretation of adjacent and it’s available for public comment.  The new interpretation says for all industries other than oil and natural gas production and processing, adjacent is physical proximity only.  EPA makes additional comments on the word “contiguous” as well, noting the difference between adjacent and contiguous.  Operations don’t have to be contiguous to be adjacent.  That is, operations that don’t share a common boundary or border, not physically touching each other will be considered adjacent if the operations are nearby.  If there is proximity (neighboring or side-by-side operations where the “common sense notion of a plant” can be deduced) that will be considered adjacent.  Railways, pipelines and other conveyances will no longer be used to determine adjacency.

What’s Next

The interpretation will be used from now on for new sources only.  Operations already considered one source will remain that way as long as common control and industrial grouping code (SIC) criteria exists.  States with approved NSR and Title V permitting programs aren’t required to follow the new interpretation but EPA recommends it for greater uniformity in permitting decisions.

Read EPA’s memorandum regarding adjacent properties here.

How Does This Apply to Your Facility?

Need help determining where you stand on air compliance? Let iSi’s environmental team help you with your site-specific obligations.

iSi can help you with air permits & determinations – Contact us today!

What is EPA’s Affordable Clean Energy ACE Rule?

What is EPA’s Affordable Clean Energy ACE Rule?

EPA has proposed a new rule for greenhouse gas emissions at power plants called the Affordable Clean Energy Rule (ACE) Rule. This rule is a replacement for the controversial Clean Power Plan (CPP) Rule.

The CPP Rule was developed by the Obama Administration, and it put some definite limits in place to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at power plants. The rule created quite a bit of controversy and EPA was taken to court by a number of parties. The Trump Administration and EPA put the CPP on hold in order to review it for potential repeal and replacement. The new ACE Rule is the result of this review.

With the new ACE Rule, EPA hands over greater power to the states to set their own limits. According to EPA, ACE will reduce greenhouse gas emissions through four actions:

  1. Defines a “Best System of Emission Reduction”, for existing power plants based on heat rate efficiency improvements;
  2. Provides states with an example list of technologies that may be used in their rules to establish standards of performance;
  3. Updates the New Source Review permit program to further encourage efficiency improvements; and,
  4. Puts the regulation in Clean Air Act section 111(d) to give states time to develop their own plans.

Opponents of the original CPP Plan say that while limiting greenhouse gas emissions is very important, the makeup of the CPP Plan went too far. It would create burdensome regulation and a tremendous negative economic impact. Coal industry advocates are happy with the ACE Rule in that it will save coal industry jobs. Also, giving the responsibility back to the states will allow states to customize their rules for the conditions and economies around them.

Critics of the new ACE Rule say the new regulations will not nearly reduce the emissions the CPP would have. There is some fear it’ll allow states to write less strict regulations that the power companies will be able to get around. Other say the new rule appears to be an appeasement to the coal industry.

EPA says that replacing CPP with ACE will save $400 million in net benefits and $400 million in compliance burden, will still reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and may reduce carbon dioxide emissions even as much as 33-34% from 2005 which is even more than what CPP projected.

The ACE Rule is available for comment and there will be a public hearing scheduled. The D.C. Circuit Court will also have to determine if it is a suitable replacement for the CPP rule, which is still on hold with the court.

Get Our Articles Each Week!

We send out our weekly compliance articles each week via email.  Sign up below to get our updates sent directly to your inbox!

Which EPA environmental air regulations apply to your facility?  iSi can help determine what applies and help you get the paperwork completed!

EPA Superfund Task Force Sees Successes

EPA Superfund Task Force Sees Successes

In a previous blog we discussed the plans EPA had for expediting the cleanups of Superfund sites in hopes of reducing costs, reducing delays caused by long studies, and speeding up the timeline for getting the lands turned over for redevelopment, reuse and community revitalization. On its one-year anniversary, EPA has published a progress report on the efforts of their Superfund Task Force.

Among the successes within the past year:

  • “Substantial progress” has been made on cleanup of 21 sites which were targeted for immediate and intense action;
  • Seven sites were deleted from the program and 2 were partially deleted. There are an additional 10 sites currently proposed to be added to that list;
  • Sites with human exposures are being tracked in real time on a dashboard-style webpage. An additional 24 sites were added to the list as having human exposures under control;
  • EPA listed 31 sites with the greatest reuse potential, and as a result, they received over 120 redevelopment-related prospective purchaser inquiries for these;
  • EPA and the Department of Justice engaged a national team of redevelopment experts on the issue of liabilities for third-party developers and issued a new policy that encourages more frequent consideration of Bona Fide Prospective Purchaser Agreements and Prospective Purchaser Agreements to help get cleanup and reuse moved forward; and,
  • EPA held 1,370 public meetings and 3,190 in-person meetings and interviews with people living near Superfund sites to obtain their input.

Within the next year, the task force wants to implement any remaining recommendations from the original 42. Other goals include:

  • Continue to model enforcement language to reduce responsible party cleanup negotiation timeframes and shorten Potentially Responsible Party lead cleanups.
  • Encourage private investment in cleanup and reuse by developing new work agreements and comfort letters to create certainty and assist third parties in identifying investment opportunities at the sites;
  • Continue to expedite cleanups and moving sites to deletion from the program;
  • Use more adaptive management principles where possible; and,
  • Complete an evaluation of groundwater beneficial use policies.

A video of success stories has been developed. More information about the Task Force program can be found here.

Environmental Assistance

Need an extra hand to get your environmental tasks done? Need help interpreting a regulation?  Contact our environmental team today!

Need an extra hand to get it all done? Contact us today!

EPA Proposing Changes to Aerosol Can Hazardous Waste Regulations

EPA Proposing Changes to Aerosol Can Hazardous Waste Regulations

EPA is proposing to allow generators to handle aerosol cans as a universal waste rather than a hazardous waste. As a result, EPA hopes to encourage more recycling, ease regulatory burdens on generators, reduce the amount of cans going to landfills, and save over $3 million per year.

The Current Aerosol Can Hazardous Waste Regulation

Aerosol cans, when discarded, are handled as hazardous waste. Entities with these are required to follow all hazardous waste rules regarding them. The number of days you can store these cans ranges from 90 to 270 depending on generator status and transportation. Retail stores who discard aerosol cans must also follow all hazardous waste rules. In some states, generators can recycle the cans for scrap metal by puncturing them and draining the contents into other containers. The can becomes non-hazardous, but the container of leftovers may be considered hazardous waste. Some states don’t allow the puncturing and recycling of cans at all, even under carbon filtration.

The Proposed Aerosol Can Hazardous Waste Regulation

The proposed regulation would make discarded aerosol cans a universal waste. Other EPA universal wastes include batteries, mercury-containing equipment, and hazardous waste mercury lamps. Universal wastes can be stored and collected for up to one year and don’t need a hazardous waste manifest as long as they’re properly packaged and labeled.

As for aerosol can recycling, the proposed rule would encourage generators to collect and send their cans to a centralized hazardous waste handler for recycling. Any company recycling aerosol cans would be subject to special requirements. Only approved commercial devices for safely puncturing cans could be used. These facilities would also be required to have written procedures for operations and maintenance of the machines, how incompatible wastes would be segregated, proper hazardous waste management practices to be followed, and what emergency spill procedures would be followed.

EPA’s intent is to ease the retailer’s burden of managing aerosol can as hazardous waste, ease the generators’ burden of managing aerosol cans as hazardous waste, and to encourage more states and more entities to recycle aerosol cans.

Gaps

There are still some gaps and unknowns within the regulations such as: What is the exact definition of an aerosol can, that is, would cans that do not aerate (such as shaving gel cans), be included? At what point between full, empty, “RCRA empty”, and used would the cans be eligible for universal waste consideration? Should there be a size limit on the cans; would cylinders be included? Would the equipment that some generators have already invested in to puncture and recycle their own cans be suitable under the new regulation?

EPA is accepting comments until May 15, 2018. To read more about the proposed regulation and where to send your comments, read here.

More Info

Need help sorting out your hazardous and universal waste issues?
Hazardous Waste e-Manifest System Coming in June

Hazardous Waste e-Manifest System Coming in June

EPA is establishing a nationwide electronic hazardous waste tracking system, and it hopes to have it up and running by June. The system will be known as e-Manifest, and will allow shippers to complete electronic manifests and destination/receiving facilities the opportunity to electronically upload manifests.

All states will be required to implement e-Manifest and incorporate it into their hazardous waste programs as an option. The system will be linked to RCRAInfo, a separate site which collects information on hazardous waste sites.

Right now, the using e-Manifest will be optional. Paper manifests will still be accepted from generators for the foreseeable future, and from destination/receiving facilities for up to three years. EPA hopes that by using electronic means, significant gains in cost, time, accuracy, notification, and monitoring effectiveness can be realized by all who use the system. Electronic manifests will be just as legal as paper ones, except they’ll be completed and signed electronically.

Using e-Manifest will satisfy EPA, RCRA and DOT 3-year recordkeeping requirements. EPA is also working with DOT to ensure e-Manifest will produce a proper shipping paper. DOT will still be requiring hard copies to be sent with the shipment, so those using e-Manifest will be able to print out a copy of their manifest for DOT purposes.

In the future, the e-Manifest system may link to the Biennial Hazardous Waste Report, and potentially replace it.

The fees for the system will be paid by the destination or receiving facility, which more than likely will be passed down to the generator. Fees will be per manifest, and fees for electronic manifests will be lower than the paper ones.

The target date for e-Manifest roll-out is June 30, 2018.

Need Help?

Need guidance or support with hazardous waste? Do you have your required training and reporting complete?

Need Help?

Need guidance or support with hazardous waste? Do you have your required training and reporting complete?

EPA is establishing a nationwide electronic hazardous waste tracking system, and it hopes to have it up and running by June. The system will be known as e-Manifest, and will allow shippers to complete electronic manifests and destination/receiving facilities the opportunity to electronically upload manifests.

All states will be required to implement e-Manifest and incorporate it into their hazardous waste programs as an option. The system will be linked to RCRAInfo, a separate site which collects information on hazardous waste sites.

Right now, the using e-Manifest will be optional. Paper manifests will still be accepted from generators for the foreseeable future, and from destination/receiving facilities for up to three years. EPA hopes that by using electronic means, significant gains in cost, time, accuracy, notification, and monitoring effectiveness can be realized by all who use the system. Electronic manifests will be just as legal as paper ones, except they’ll be completed and signed electronically.

Using e-Manifest will satisfy EPA, RCRA and DOT 3-year recordkeeping requirements. EPA is also working with DOT to ensure e-Manifest will produce a proper shipping paper. DOT will still be requiring hard copies to be sent with the shipment, so those using e-Manifest will be able to print out a copy of their manifest for DOT purposes.

In the future, the e-Manifest system may link to the Biennial Hazardous Waste Report, and potentially replace it.

The fees for the system will be paid by the destination or receiving facility, which more than likely will be passed down to the generator. Fees will be per manifest, and fees for electronic manifests will be lower than the paper ones.

The target date for e-Manifest roll-out is June 30, 2018.

iSi can help you with hazardous waste compliance — Contact us today!

EPA to Change the Way It Handles Lawsuits

EPA to Change the Way It Handles Lawsuits

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has announced EPA will be ending practice of “sue and settle.”

In sue and settle, a third-party group sues a federal agency, asking the courts to require the agency to change statutory duties or to enforce specific timelines written within laws. In the past, EPA has settled out of court with these groups through a consent decree or settlement agreement. EPA says the resulting negotiations would often change regulations, causing unreasonable deadlines or commitments to actions which weren’t part of the existing regulations.

These consent agreements were negotiated privately and any new requirements were not eligible for public comment. On top of that, the agency would pay tens of thousands of dollars in attorney’s fees and litigation costs of the groups which were suing them.

Going forward, EPA promises further transparency and public engagement when it comes to considering any settlement or consent decree, including:

  • Establishing procedures to publish lawsuits, complaints, and petitions which have been filed against them or their state agency counterparts;
  • Publishing a list of consent decrees and settlement agreements, including attorney’s fees paid;
  • Providing sufficient time for public comment on any action which would modify a proposed or final rule, and publishing proposed and modified decrees and settlements for public comment;
  • Not entering into any consent decree that exceeds the authority of the courts; and,
  • No longer paying attorney’s fees and litigation costs of the groups who are suing them.

To learn more, see EPA’s announcement.

 

How can iSi help your company with EPA compliance? Check us out!

EPA to Propose Repeal of Clean Power Plan

EPA to Propose Repeal of Clean Power Plan

power plant
A number of news agencies have obtained a document outlining EPA’s plans to propose a repeal of the Clean Power Plan. The announcement from EPA may come early this week and then a formal proposal will be issued in the Federal Register.  The plans include a 60-day comment period to solicit ideas on alternatives or a replacement approach.  Plans also include a cost-benefit analysis of a repeal, estimating $33 billion in compliance cost savings.

The Clean Power Plan rule was developed by the previous administration as a way to lower carbon emissions from existing power plants by 2030.  Opponents have contended that the rule’s compliance and equipment requirements will create massive costs on the power sector and its consumers, that EPA overreached its authority to regulate emissions under the Clean Air Act, and it invaded the powers of the states, who’ve traditionally managed and regulated the energy sector. Over 27 states, 24 trade associations, 37 rural electric Co-Ops and 3 labor unions have sued EPA over the rule.  A bipartisan group of over 200 Senators and House members also filed a briefing against it.

How can iSi help your company with air compliance issues?
Check us out!

Chemical Manufacturers & Importers: Ensure You’re on EPA’s Active Chemical List

Chemical Manufacturers & Importers: Ensure You’re on EPA’s Active Chemical List

In compliance with updates to the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA), EPA is updating its inventory of the chemicals manufactured or imported in the U.S.  Called the Inventory Reset Rule, EPA is making an “Active” chemical list and an “Inactive” chemical list.

If your company manufactured or imported a chemical between June 21, 2006 and June 21, 2016, you will need to make sure it’s on the list and marked “Active” in order to continue to produce or import it after February 7, 2018.  If you reported your chemicals in the 2012 or 2016 TSCA Chemical Reporting Rule, they’re already marked Active on the list, as are chemicals added after June 22, 2016.  However, for many companies TSCA reporting is for large quantities.  This effort includes chemicals in small quantities as well.

If you’re a chemical processor, you have until October 5, 2018 to report chemicals as Active.  However, for you it’s voluntary reporting and more of a protection in case one or more of your raw materials doesn’t get reported by the manufacturer.  A chemical processor is a company which takes the additional step of preparation with a chemical substance or mixture.  this could be repackaging it, manufacturing a mixture, or producing an article with it.  (If you’re unsure whether you’re a manufacturer or processor, contact iSi.)

Reporting is to be done through Notice of Activity forms on EPA’s Central Data Exchange.  There are a few exemptions to reporting including naturally occurring substances, substances currently produced under TSCA 5(h) exemptions, byproducts, research and development substances, chemicals for export only or test marketing, and chemicals already reported by someone else/already on the list.

After the deadline passes, a chemical marked as Inactive will be able to be reactivated, however, there will be an official approval process to go through in order to do that.

Is your chemical already on the list?  Check out the current Active list here.  Does this apply to you or do you need assistance?  Contact us!

Oklahoma Stormwater in Construction Regs Updated

Oklahoma Stormwater in Construction Regs Updated

The Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) updated its Multi-Sector General Stormwater Permit for industrial activities last month, and now ODEQ has updated its stormwater permit for construction activities.

The new “General Permit OKR10 for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activities” will go into effect on September 12.  Anyone under the current permit, and anyone seeking to obtain a new one, will need to be covered under this new permit in order to discharge stormwater from construction activities.

Stormwater activities are federally covered under EPA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).  In most areas, stormwater permitting is handled by the state(s) you’re operating in, and then each state can have additional requirements. Permits have limits on what you can discharge, monitoring and reporting requirements and other requirements.

As a reminder, if your company falls under the Oklahoma stormwater permit for industrial activities, remember you will need to reapply for a new authorization before October 3, which is only a little over a month away.  As part of this you’ll need to revise your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWP3), file a new Notice of Intent (NOI) and submit fees.

If you need assistance with anything related to stormwater, including plan updates, compliance determinations, or NOIs, please contact iSi and we’d be happy to help!

iSi can help with stormwater permitting, training and compliance, check us out!

EPA Superfund Task Force Sees Successes

Superfund Cleanup Speed and Property Reuse Focus of EPA Task Force

There are over 1,300 Superfund sites currently in various stages of cleanup.  Cleanup, and the studies associated with it, can be a drawn out process, leaving property reuse and community revitalization on hold for years.  In May, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt established a task force to look at improving and streamlining the Superfund cleanup process.

The task force worked on a number of goals: finding ways to expedite site cleanup and reuse, engaging partners and encouraging private investment, promoting redevelopment and community revitalization, and reinvigorating potentially responsible parties’ (PRPs) efforts for cleanup and reuse.

The task force had 42 recommendations, and Pruitt has narrowed the list to a handful of priority tasks.  Some highlights:

  • Each EPA region is to:
    • Submit cleanup status and reuse potential for each site in their region.
    • Submit total indirect costs charged to PRPs for 2016 and 2017 and what formula they use to determine that number.
    • Make a list of sites to be proposed for deletion or deleted within the next 12 months in order to expedite that.
    • Identify and prioritize sites where the risk of human exposure is not fully controlled.
  • Prevent years of delays by using more early/interim response actions for migration and risk, and less long studies.  Where possible, allow portions of sites for reuse while more detailed evaluations of the other portions are carried out.
  • Focus resources on the sites with the most reuse potential, and Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Studies (RI/FS) for sites which require more immediate action.
  • Encourage PRPs, state and local governments and real estate to work together to identify opportunities for reuse.
  • Use enforcement authorities and unilateral orders more actively to discourage drawn out negotiations over response actions.

View Pruitt’s full priority list here.

 

How can iSi help your company with environmental site investigation and remediation? Check us out!

New Oklahoma Stormwater Regs Require NOI and SWP3 Updates

New Oklahoma Stormwater Regs Require NOI and SWP3 Updates

The Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) has replaced its Multi-Sector General Stormwater Permit with a new version which is effective July 5, 2017. This permit governs the stormwater activities of industrial facilities and makes a number of changes from its previous permit, issued in 2011.

Any company authorized under the 2011 permit will need to reapply to ODEQ for a new authorization within the next 90 days, that is, before October 3, 2017. This includes revising the facility’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWP3), submitting a new Notice of Intent, and submitting application fees.

Any company must have authorization from ODEQ prior to discharging stormwater from industrial activities. Allowable and non-allowable activities have been updated in the new permit as well as limits, types of facilities, types of activities, and covered discharges. Other changes include clarified NOI requirements, procedures for permit coverage, control measures and effluent limits, and conditions which need corrective action.

Two additional monitoring requirements have been added: impaired waters monitoring, which is to occur once per year, and “other monitoring” which is additional monitoring ODEQ can require for your facility.

There have been eight changes to the SWP3 requirements as well. Among those, permittees must now describe the type and location of the control measures chosen to comply with effluent levels as well as how they chose each of those measures. The SWP3 must also document the evaluation process for the presence of any unauthorized non-stormwater discharges and include a certification.

For more information regarding the 26 overall changes incorporated into new permit, for help in sorting out how this updated regulation will affect your facility, or for assistance in updating your plan before the deadline approaches, please contact our team and we’d be happy to assist you.

We can help update your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans and file NOIs. Contact us today!

EPA Proposes Roll Back of Waters of the U.S. Definition

EPA Proposes Roll Back of Waters of the U.S. Definition

The EPA, along with the Army and the Army Corps of Engineers, announced its intent to make changes to the Clean Water Rule and return the definition of “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) back to what it was prior to the 2015 rule change.

The definition of WOTUS has been at the point of contention between regulators, industry and environmental groups since the Clean Water Act was amended in 2015.   The definition has been at the heart of a number of legal battles, and an item of regulatory enforcement uncertainty. The rules containing it were in a state of stay by the Supreme Court.

Today’s announcement will turn back the definition of WOTUS to what it was prior to 2015 with a published proposed rule announcement in the Federal Register, along with a public comment period.  Next, the agencies will work to review and revise the definition to replace the approach of the 2015 Clean Water Rule.

EPA’s announcement emphasized the redefinition is intended to “…provide regulatory certainty in a way that is thoughtful, transparent, and collaborative with other agencies and the public.”

 

How can iSi help your company with Clean Water Act compliance? Check us out!

Mason Joins PrairieChar Advisory Board

Mason Joins PrairieChar Advisory Board

Photo of Gary Mason, CEO of iSi

iSi CEO Gary Mason has joined the Board of Advisors of PrairieChar.

iSi’s Gary Mason has joined the Board of Advisors for biomass waste recycling innovator PrairieChar, Inc..  PrairieChar has developed an innovative approach to converting biomass waste into products such as organic fertilizer, phosphoric acid, and specialty phosphoric chemicals.  They are providing a management solution for feedlot animal manure that not only produces a profitable renewable product for both energy and agricultural markets, but reduces its impact to the environment.

Mason said, “It is a great opportunity to be a part of the PrairieChar team.  PrairieChar’s technology provides an environmentally sound way to manure that will protect our waterways from nutrient leaching and runoff.  Nitrate leaching is hard to remove from our drinking water and phosphate runoff is the primary cause of toxic blue-green algae in our waterways.”

More information about PrairieChar can be found at PrairieChar.com.

iSi’s Gary Mason has joined the Board of Advisors for biomass waste recycling innovator PrairieChar, Inc..  PrairieChar has developed an innovative approach to converting biomass waste into products such as organic fertilizer, phosphoric acid, and specialty phosphoric chemicals.  They are providing a management solution for feedlot animal manure that not only produces a profitable renewable product for both energy and agricultural markets, but reduces its impact to the environment.

Mason said, “It is a great opportunity to be a part of the PrairieChar team.  PrairieChar’s technology provides an environmentally sound way to manure that will protect our waterways from nutrient leaching and runoff.  Nitrate leaching is hard to remove from our drinking water and phosphate runoff is the primary cause of toxic blue-green algae in our waterways.”

More information about PrairieChar can be found at PrairieChar.com.

How can iSi help your company with EPA environmental compliance? Check us out!

EPA Delays Air Regulations

EPA Delays Air Regulations

EPA has announced at least four postponements of upcoming regulations regarding air emissions and air quality.

RMP Rule Amendment

In the final days of the Obama administration, EPA issued amendments to the Risk Management Program (RMP) rule. These included additional requirements for process hazard analysis, incident investigation, emergency preparedness, public availability of chemical hazard information, additional regulatory definitions, and audit requirements. In order to give the agency more time to review petitions, hear additional comments, and consider revisions, the new effective date has been moved to February 19, 2019.

Emissions Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources for Oil and Gas; NSPS Subpart OOOOa

EPA has issued a stay on certain parts of OOOOa until August 31, 2017. It is reconsidering the rule as a whole, including fugitive emissions monitoring requirements for well sites and compressor stations. Initially, companies were to have a monitoring plan in place and perform initial LDAR compliance by June 6, 2016. EPA also wants to take another look at the entire rule. For now, they’ve issued a stay on fugitive emissions requirements, PE certifications, and standards for pneumatic pumps at well sites.

Ozone Standard

EPA has delayed the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground level ozone. EPA is giving states another year to develop and refine their air quality plans. Last fall, states were to turn in their recommendations on what to do about those areas which couldn’t reach the 70 ppb standard. Then EPA was to make their final designations and set those recommendations into motion by October of this year. Now those designations have been postponed to October 2018.

Landfill Methane Emissions From Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

Over 1,000 municipal solid waste facilities were going to be impacted by two separate standards relating to methane emissions. EPA has issued a stay until August 29 to reconsider items such as design approval, definition of cover penetration, annual liquids reporting, surface emissions reporting, corrective action timelines, and overlapping requirements. EPA estimates that implementation of the changes as written could cost businesses more than $100 million per year to install and operate gas collection and control systems.

How can iSi help your company with Clean Water Act compliance? Check us out!

The New Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Rule

The New Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Rule

Called the “Hazardous Waste Improvements Rule,” EPA has issued updates and changes to its Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste regulations.

When: EPA has made over 60 changes which are geared to make technical corrections, clarify, increase flexibility and improve environmental protection. The changes will not go into effect until May 30, 2017, then every state but Iowa and Alaska will have until mid-2018 to implement and adopt (or not adopt) the less stringent requirements.

Consolidation of VSQG Waste at LQGs

EPA now allows very small quantity generators (VSQG, now the term for the former “conditionally exempt small quantity generator”) to consolidate waste at a large quantity generator (LQG) under the control of the same person. In some cases, organizations have satellite locations that qualify as a VSQG and could take advantage by consolidating together. VSQGs would need to mark and label their waste as “Hazardous Waste,” and indicate the hazards associated with the contents. LQGs would notify on the Site ID Form 30 days prior to receiving the waste that they are participating in this activity, who the VSQG is, maintain records for each shipment for 3 years, mark the accumulation units with the date the HW was received, manage consolidated waste as LQG waste and report in annual and biennial reports.

HW Determinations

  • Generator’s waste must be classified at its point of generation and at any time during the course of its management. Container markings and labels apply at the point of generation as well.
There’s more!  Click here to continue…

 

Need help sorting out your EPA hazardous waste compliance issues? Let us help!

Georgia NPDES Permittees Required to File Electronically Through NetDMR

Georgia NPDES Permittees Required to File Electronically Through NetDMR

The Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) has been moving towards electronic filing of various reports and permits. This electronic requirement is now being required for submittal of Discharge Monitoring Reports from those companies who hold an NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) permit for water discharges.

Starting December 21, 2016, all NPDES permittees will be required to submit their Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) online using a site called NetDMR.   Those who use land application systems, pre-treatment, PID, and general permittees will also eventually be required to use NetDMR later.

NetDMR will have similar features to other online applications.

Step 1:           Create Your Own Account

Each person must create their own account. When setting up an account, facilities should be mindful of the instance and type of user chosen.  Within the state of Georgia, the instance should be “Georgia Environmental Protection Division”.  You may see other options such as EPA – GA, but DO NOT select these options.

Once the appropriate instance or agency has been selected, click on “Create a new account” and follow the prompts.  The type of user for facility personnel should be the external user type “Permittee User.”  An internal user is meant for agency use only.

Step 2:           Set User Roles

Once an account has been created, there are four roles for a permittee user: View, Edit, Signatory, and Permit Administrator.

Permit Administrator: The Permit Administrator has the ability to approve role requests within their permit for all roles except Signatory.  The first person to request and get approved for Signatory Role will be granted the Permit Administrator role automatically.

Signatory: No one will be able to access the permit within NetDMR until someone is approved by EPD as the Signatory.  EPD is the only entity that can approve access to Signatory Role requests.  Someone seeking Signatory Role must submit a signed Subscriber Agreement to EPD by mail and wait approval.  EPD estimates approximately a two week turnaround to review and approve Subscriber Agreements.  Remember, the first person to request and get approved for Signatory Role will also be granted the Permit Administrator role automatically.

View, Edit: Other personnel can request View, Edit, and/or Permit Administrator Roles from the Permit Administrator.

Step 3:           Start Using the System

Once approval has been received, you may then start entering DMR data electronically into the system. Note: there is no external notification, so if a role request has been made within NetDMR the Permit Administrator must check within NetDMR to see that request.

Learn More

If you need assistance, iSi can also help walk you through the process, contact us or give us a call at (678) 712-4705.

How can iSi help your company with NPDES compliance? Check us out!

EPA Broadens Definition of “Remote” Sites for Stationary Engine Air Compliance

EPA Broadens Definition of “Remote” Sites for Stationary Engine Air Compliance

A change in the definition of what a “remote” site is in EPA’s NESHAP Subpart ZZZZ air compliance regulations could bring good news for companies with stationary reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE).  Stationary RICE engines are typically used at natural gas compressor stations, for other uses in the oil and gas industry and for landfills.

The modified definition, which went into effect January 30, 2016, makes a change to what is considered to be “remote.”  If a company’s RICE is remote, the engine will be exempt from Subpart ZZZZ requirements for initial compliance testing.

According to the new rule, a remote engine is now considered to be:

There’s more!  Click here to continue…

 

How can iSi help your company with EPA air emissions compliance? Check us out!

Hazardous Waste Manifest Signers Need DOT Training

Hazardous Waste Manifest Signers Need DOT Training

Did you know anyone who signs a haz waste manifest on behalf of your company is required to have DOT training?

We come across many companies who have overlooked this important requirement, especially if their haz waste transporter is filling out all the paperwork for them.  Your hazardous waste is covered under EPA regulations, but once it’s sent for transportation, it becomes a hazardous material and is subject to DOT regulations.

Under DOT, your company is the shipper, not the hazardous waste transporter.  Even if the person signing the manifest doesn’t complete any of the shipping paperwork, (that is, if the transporter prepares it), as soon as he or she signs it, they become legally responsible for that shipment.  With their signature, they’re certifying everything has been packaged correctly, labeled correctly and that the forms have been filled out correctly.  Per DOT, this cannot occur without proper training.

Thus, in addition to hazardous waste training, the person signing your manifest needs DOT training.  This requirement can be satisfied through our Ground Hazardous Materials (DOT) Transportation course.  Visit our training page for dates, times and pricing.

iSi can help your company with haz waste and DOT compliance! Check us out!

Pin It on Pinterest