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!

Mason Selected to Join EPA Policy and Technology Council

Mason Selected to Join EPA Policy and Technology Council

gary mason

iSi CEO Gary Mason

Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler selects iSi CEO Gary Mason to join EPA’s National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology, or NACEPT. 

“This is an amazing opportunity to participate on developing environmental policy for our nation.  I’m extremely excited and look forward to working with other members of the council,” said Mason.

NACEPT brings together representatives from the government, business and industry, environmental organizations, academia, and other groups to advise the EPA Administrator on issues relating to federal environmental statutes, executive orders, regulations, programs and policies.

As part of the Council, Mason will be providing advice and recommendations on:

  • Developing and implementing domestic and international management policies and programs;
  • Developing guidance on how EPA can most efficiently and effectively implement innovative approaches throughout the Agency and its programs;
  • Identifying approaches to enhance information and technology planning;
  • Improving approaches to environmental management in the fields of economics, business operations, and emerging technologies;
  • Increasing communication and understanding with the goal of improving the effectiveness of federal and non-federal resources directed at solving environmental problems; and,
  • Evaluating statutes, executive orders, and regulations and reviewing and assessing their progress.

As a co-founder of iSi Environmental and former Deputy Secretary for the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE), Gary has developed insight to the regulatory climate that businesses must operate under, and the systems and processes that facilitate compliance in a cost effective manner.

Mason’s term for NACEPT will run through November 30, 2020.

Frequently Asked Asbestos Questions – A Free Webinar

Frequently Asked Asbestos Questions – A Free Webinar

asbestos frequently asked questions

As a long-time asbestos abatement, survey, inspection, sampling and training firm, we get a lot of questions about asbestos.

In this webinar we will be covering the questions we are asked the most, from who regulates asbestos to where it can be found, to training and licensing requirements, how the NESHAP regulations affects rules and more!

What questions do you have? Join us on Tuesday, December 11 at 1:30 pm CST.  There is no charge to attend, but space is limited!  Register Here

Register Today!

Register here for our free asbestos webinar on December 11!

iSi’s Industrial Services team can help you with your asbestos questions and issues — Contact us today!

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!

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!

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!

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!

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