On January 1, 2010, EPA will, for the first time, require large emitters of heat-trapping emissions to begin collecting greenhouse gas (GHG) data under a new reporting system. This new program will cover approximately 85% of the nation’s GHG emissions and apply to roughly 10,000 facilities.
“This is a major step forward in our effort to address the greenhouse gases polluting our skies,” said EPA Administrator, Lisa P. Jackson. “For the first time, we begin collecting data from the largest facilities in this country, ones that account for approximately 85% of the total U.S. emissions. The American public, and industry itself, will finally gain critically important knowledge and with this information we can determine how best to reduce those emissions.”
EPA’s new reporting system will provide a better understanding of where GHGs are coming from and will guide development of the best possible policies and programs to reduce emissions. The data will also allow businesses to track their own emissions, compare them to similar facilities, and provide assistance in identifying cost effective ways to reduce emissions in the future. This comprehensive, nationwide emissions data will help in the fight against climate change.
Greenhouse gases, like carbon dioxide, are produced by burning fossil fuels and through industrial and biological processes. Fossil fuel and industrial GHG suppliers, motor vehicle and engine manufacturers, and facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of CO2 equivalent per year will be required to report GHG emissions data to EPA annually. This threshold is equivalent to about the annual GHG emissions from 4,600 passenger vehicles.
The first annual reports for the largest emitting facilities will be submitted to EPA in 2011, covering calendar year 2010. Vehicle and engine manufacturers outside of the light-duty sector will begin phasing in GHG reporting with model year 2011. Some source categories included in the proposed rule are still under review.
EPA Considers Adding NTP Carcinogens to List of Chemicals Subject to TRI Reporting
The National Toxicology Program (NTP) periodically publishes its Report on Carcinogens (RoC) which classifies chemicals as either “known to be a human carcinogen” or “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.” The RoC is a congressionally mandated scientific and public health document that provides data on carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, and biologic mechanisms. The RoC evaluations are performed by scientists from the NTP, other Federal health research and regulatory agencies, and non-government institutions. The RoC review process includes external peer review and public comment.
EPA is reviewing the 11th edition of the NTP RoC to identify those chemicals that are not currently on the list of Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) substances and that have not previously been reviewed for listing. EPA will propose to add to the TRI list, those NTP carcinogens that have sufficient production or use levels such that the Agency expects that TRI reports will be filed. If additions to the TRI are proposed, this action is expected to take place within the next year.
EPA Plans to Revise Lead Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program Rule
EPA intends to propose several revisions to the 2008 Lead Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program (RRP) rule that established accreditation, training, certification, and recordkeeping requirements as well as work practice standards on persons performing renovations for compensation in most pre-1978 housing and child-occupied facilities.
The first action EPA is considering will involve proposing amendments to the opt-out provision that currently exempts a renovator from the training and work practice requirements of the rule where he or she obtains a certification from the owner of a residence he or she occupies that no child under age 6 or pregnant women resides in the home and the home is not a child-occupied facility.
Included in this first potential action, EPA plans to propose revisions that involve renovation firms providing the owner with a copy of the records they are currently required to maintain to demonstrate compliance with the training and work practice requirements of the RRP rule and, if different, providing the information to the occupant of the building being renovated or the operator of the child-occupied facility. EPA will also propose various minor amendments to the regulations concerning applications for training provider accreditation, amending accreditations, course completion certificates, recordkeeping, State and Tribal program requirements, and grandfathering (i.e., taking refresher training in lieu of the initial training). In addition, the proposed amendments intend to clarify that certain requirements apply to the RRP rule as well as the Lead-based Paint Activities (abatement) regulations, that a certified inspector or risk assessor can act as a dust sampling technician, which hands-on training topics are required for renovator and dust sampling technician courses, and requirements for States and Tribes that apply to become authorized to implement the RRP program.
The second new rulemaking EPA is considering will address renovation or remodeling activities in remaining buildings described in Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 402(c)(3). Specifically, the new regulations will address public buildings built prior to 1978 and commercial buildings that are not child-occupied facilities. Section 402(c)(3) of TSCA requires EPA to regulate renovation or remodeling activities in target housing (most pre-1978 housing), pre-1978 public buildings, and commercial buildings that create lead-based paint hazards. On April 22, 2008, EPA issued a final rule to address lead-based paint hazards created by these activities in target housing and child-occupied facilities built before 1978. In this rule, child-occupied facilities are a subset of public and commercial buildings or facilities where children under age 6 spend a great deal of time.
In a third area of lead-paint related regulations, EPA will be addressing dust lead hazards generated by renovations because children, especially younger children, are at risk for high exposures of lead-based paint dust via hand-to-mouth exposure. EPA is considering whether to establish additional requirements to ensure that renovation work areas are adequately cleaned after renovation work is finished and before the areas are re-occupied. These additional requirements may include dust wipe testing after renovations and ensuring that renovation work areas meet clearance standards before re-occupancy.
EPA and DOT Propose Joint Rule to Improve Fuel Economy and Reduce Greenhouse Gases
Building on a vision laid out in May by President Obama, the EPA and the DOT have announced details of a proposed joint rule establishing a national program for greatly improved fuel economy and reduced greenhouse gases. The proposal presents coordinated national fuel efficiency and emissions standards for passenger cars and light trucks, with the goal of saving 1.8 billion barrels of oil and reducing greenhouse gas emissions by nearly 950 million metric tons. For vehicles in model year 2016, the proposed rules would save the average car buyer more than $3,000 in fuel costs over the life of the vehicle.
The plan covers model years 2012 through 2016 for light-duty vehicles sold in the United States, requiring a 5% increase in fuel economy each year to reach a target of 35.5 miles per gallon (mpg) for the overall light-duty vehicle fleet by 2016. Those improved fuel efficiencies would fall under the Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards (CAFE) program, which is run by DOT’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The proposal also would mark the first-ever national emissions standards under EPA’s greenhouse gas program, with vehicles required to meet an estimated combined average emission level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide per mile. The proposed standards vary with the size of the vehicles to achieve the targeted average values for the U.S. fleet as a whole. The EPA is proposing to provide extra credits for flex-fuel and alternative fuel vehicles, advanced technology vehicles, and vehicles with improved air conditioning systems and other greenhouse gas reduction technologies. The EPA also proposes to place a cap on nitrous oxide and methane emissions from vehicles, to help limit their greenhouse gas emissions.
President Obama unveiled the new policy on May 19 as a result of a collaboration of the federal government with 10 major automakers, the United Auto Workers, leaders in the environmental community, and officials from California and other states. The NHTSA and EPA will provide a 60-day comment period that will begin once the proposal is published in the Federal Register.
EPA to Reconsider Interpretation of Regulations that Determine Pollutants Covered by the Federal PSD Permit Program
EPA is reconsidering the agency’s interpretation of the regulatory phrase “subject to regulation” as it applies to the federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program (40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)). At issue is a December 18, 2008, memorandum titled, “EPA’s Interpretation of Regulations that Determine Pollutants Covered By Federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permit Program,” which specified that a pollutant is only “subject to regulation” when its emissions are actually controlled or limited under a provision of the Clean Air Act (CAA) or a final EPA rule issued under the authority of the CAA.
Following issuance of the memo, EPA received a petition for reconsideration from the Sierra Club and several other organizations. The petitioners argued that EPA’s issuance of the Memo violated the procedural requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act and the CAA, and the Memo’s interpretation conflicted with prior agency actions. On February 17, 2009, the Administrator granted reconsideration on the December 18, 2008 memorandum in order to allow for public comment on the issues raised in the Memo and in a related decision of the Environmental Appeals Board (EAB). Therefore, EPA will proceed with a reconsideration proceeding and conduct rulemaking regarding the proper interpretation of this regulatory phrase.
EPA Considering Revisions to Procedures that Ensure Protection of Data Submitters’ Rights for Pesticide Registrations
EPA is considering taking action to revise and update EPA’s existing regulations in 40 CFR 152, Subpart E. The action would address changes to procedures for the protection of exclusive use and data compensation rights of individuals and entities who submit data to EPA in support of a pesticide registration decision (i.e., data submitters). The revisions would accommodate statutory and procedural changes that have occurred over the last 25 years since the existing regulations were issued in 1984. The revisions would simplify the procedures, reduce burdens upon certain data submitters, and make minor changes to clarify the requirements.
EPA Considering Modifying Rules for Enforceable Consent Agreements under TSCA
EPA is considering amending the procedures for negotiating Enforceable Consent Agreements (ECAs) to develop test data under TSCA. The main features of the ECA process that EPA may change include the following: when and how to initiate negotiations; setting a firm deadline at which negotiations will terminate; revising (i.e., delete, modify, or consolidate) several parts of 40 CFR 790 to place the ECA provisions in one section and the Interagency Testing Committee (ITC) provisions in a separate section; clarifying that there is one ECA negotiation procedure applicable to all circumstances where an ECA is being considered; and conforming changes in other sections that reference the ECA procedures. The ECA procedures were established to provide an effective alternative to TSCA Section 4 test rule, and provide a timely, efficient, and enforceable means of working with interested parties to gather test data on chemicals under TSCA. Experience with the procedures over the past two decades indicates that several changes need to be made to improve the ECA process.
EPA Guidance on PCBs in Caulk
The EPA announced a series of steps that building owners and school administrators should take to reduce exposure to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) that may be found in caulk in many buildings constructed or renovated between 1950 and 1978. The agency is also conducting new research to better understand the risks posed by caulk containing PCBs. This research will guide EPA in making further recommendations on long-term measures to minimize exposure as well as steps to prioritize and carry out actions to remove the caulk to better protect public health.
PCBs are man-made chemicals that persist in the environment and were widely used in construction materials and electrical products prior to 1978. PCBs can affect the immune system, reproductive system, nervous system, and endocrine system and are potentially cancer-causing if they build up in the body over long periods of time.
“PCBs have been banned for the last 30 years for most uses,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “But unfortunately high levels of PCBs are present in many buildings and facilities constructed prior to the PCB ban, including most recently some schools. We’re concerned about the potential risks associated with exposure to these PCBs and we’re recommending practical, common sense steps to reduce this exposure as we improve our understanding of the science. For building owners and administrators who want to take added and more aggressive immediate steps, EPA is providing additional guidance to help them identify the extent of potential risks and determine whether mitigation steps are necessary. Local communities and governments have constrained resources that make this a particularly challenging and sensitive situation.”
You can also call the agency’s hotline for PCBs in Caulk at 1-888-835-5372.
Although Congress banned the manufacture and most uses of PCBs in 1976 and they were phased out in 1978, there is evidence that many buildings across the country constructed or renovated from 1950 to 1978 may have PCBs at high levels in the caulk around windows and door frames, between masonry columns and in other masonry building materials. Exposure to these PCBs may occur as a result of their release from the caulk into the air, dust, surrounding surfaces and soil, and through direct contact. EPA has calculated prudent public health levels that maintain PCB exposures below the “reference dose”—the amount of PCB exposure that EPA does not believe will cause harm. Those levels vary depending on the age group and use assumptions about potential PCB exposures from other sources, such as diet.
Although this is a serious issue, the potential presence of PCBs in buildings should not be a cause for alarm. If buildings were erected or renovated between 1950 and 1978, EPA recommends that owners implement steps to minimize exposure to potentially contaminated caulk in the following ways:
- Cleaning air ducts
- Improving ventilation by opening windows and using or installing exhaust fans where possible
- Cleaning frequently to reduce dust and residue inside buildings
- Using a wet or damp cloth or mop to clean surfaces
- Not sweeping with dry brooms and minimizing the use of dusters in areas near potential PCB-containing caulk
- Using vacuums with high efficiency particulate air filters
- Washing hands with soap and water often, particularly before eating and drinking
- Washing children’s toys often
EPA also recommends testing peeling, brittle, cracking, or deteriorating caulk directly for the presence of PCBs and removing the caulk if PCBs are present at significant levels. Alternately, the building owner can assume the PCBs are present and proceed directly to remove deteriorating caulk.
Building owners and facility managers should also consider testing to determine if PCB levels in the air exceed EPA’s suggested public health levels. If testing reveals PCBs in the air above these levels, building owners should be especially vigilant in implementing and monitoring ventilation and hygienic practices to minimize exposures. Owners and managers are encouraged to retest PCB levels in air to determine whether these practices are reducing the potential for PCB exposures. Should these practices not reduce exposure, caulk and other known sources of PCBs should be removed as soon as practicable.
There are several unresolved scientific issues that must be better understood to assess the magnitude of the problem and identify the best long-term solutions. For example, the link between the concentrations of PCBs in caulk and PCBs in the air or dust is not well understood. The EPA is doing research to determine the sources and levels of PCBs in buildings in the U.S. and to evaluate different strategies to reduce exposures. The results of this research will be used to provide further guidance to building owners as they develop and implement long-term solutions.
Where buildings were constructed or renovated between 1950 and 1978, EPA recommends that PCB-containing caulk be removed during planned renovations and repairs (when replacing windows, doors, roofs, ventilation, etc.). It is critically important to ensure that PCBs are not released to the air during replacement or repair of caulk in affected buildings.
EPA will work directly with owners and managers facing serious problems to help them develop a practical approach to reduce exposures and prioritize the removal of caulk.
Fender Musical Instruments Corp. and Goodrich Aerostructures Group Fined for Hazardous Waste Violations
EPA has fined Fender Musical Instruments Corp. $78,861 and Goodrich Aerostructures Group $66,500 for violating numerous federal hazardous waste requirements at their Southern California facilities.
“We trust today’s action sends the right message—hazardous waste generating companies must follow all federal regulations to protect their employees, surrounding communities and the environment,” said Jeff Scott, the EPA’s Waste Management Division director for the EPA’s Pacific Southwest region. “Proper storage, handling, and preparation for emergencies involving hazardous waste are critical responsibilities.”
During a routine inspection of the Fender facility in 2008, EPA investigators found that the musical instruments manufacturer had multiple hazardous waste violations at its plant located in Corona, California. The following violations were recorded:
- Stored hazardous wastes without a permit;
- Failed to provide adequate aisle space for hazardous storage containers;
- Failed to inspect hazardous waste storage areas;
- Failed to close hazardous waste storage containers;
- Failed to determine if wastes generated were hazardous.
During a 2008 inspection of the Goodrich facility, EPA investigators found that the aerospace component manufacturer had multiple violations at its facility in Riverside, California. The following violations were recorded:
- Stored hazardous waste for more than 90 days without a permit;
- Stored hazardous waste in improperly labeled containers; and
- Failed to properly manage satellite and storage containers.
Both companies generated corrosive and paint wastes as a result of the manufacturing activities performed by each company. The paint wastes contain solvents and/or metals such as chromium.
Both companies have taken action to correct the violations. RCRA requires facilities to properly store, label, and seal hazardous waste containers.
Emco Chemical Fined Over $82,000 for Chemical Release Reporting Violations
EPA Region 5 recently settled with EMCO Chemical Distributors Inc., of North Chicago, Illinois, on hazardous chemical release reporting violations. The company will pay an $82,661 penalty.
EMCO was cited for failure to promptly report two hazardous chemical releases to the National Response Center. The company failed to report a 603-pound release of trichloroethylene in July 2007 and a 5,224-pound release of tert-butyl acetate in August 2007. The company also failed to notify state and local response agencies in a timely manner.
Under the requirements of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act , federal, state, and local authorities be notified of reportable hazardous chemical releases. In the event of a fire or emergency, responders need to know what chemicals are involved in a release in order to take steps to protect people living or working in the area.
Linde LLC Fined $81,400 for Failure to Notify Response Agencies of Ammonia Releases
EPA has fined Linde LLC $81,400 for ammonia air releases that occurred in 2007 and 2008 at its Torrance and Carson, California, carbon dioxide production plants.
Linde LLC did not immediately notify the National Response Center and the State Emergency Response Commission after five separate ammonia releases occurred between December 2007 through May 2008—with reportable quantities ranging from 250 to 665 pounds of anhydrous ammonia. The reportable quantity of anhydrous ammonia is 100 lb.
EPCRA ) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) require companies to notify appropriate authorities of reportable releases to ensure appropriate responses to spills and releases.
“Without accurate information on accidental releases, emergency responders cannot adequately protect our communities,” said Keith Takata, the EPA’s Superfund Division director for the Pacific Southwest region. “When accidental releases occur, firms such as Linde LLC, must immediately notify local, state and federal authorities.”
In addition to the fine, the company will also spend approximately $415,550 in equipment upgrades as part of an environmental project to prevent future ammonia releases into the environment.
Chemical Spill Reporting Violation Leads to $42,137 Penalty for MBH Trucking
EPA Region 5 has settled an administrative case involving hazardous chemical release and inventory reporting violations for MBH Trucking LLC, in Webberville, Michigan. The company will pay a civil penalty of $42,137 and will spend at least $22,500 to provide chemical release reporting training to the trucking and agricultural industries in Michigan.
An MBH truck driver failed to provide immediate notification to the National Response Center and state and local emergency response commissions of a 920-pound release of anhydrous ammonia while making a delivery to a farm. MBH also failed to provide state and local authorities with chemical information about the diesel fuel that was on-site at the company’s transport facility. The diesel fuel has been removed from the site.
Charleswood, Inc. to Resolve Storm Water Violations at North Dakota Residential Development
The U.S. Department of Justice, on behalf of EPA, has filed a civil complaint and lodged a consent decree against Charleswood, Inc. to resolve alleged violations of the Clean Water Act (CWA) in West Fargo, North Dakota. The company will pay a penalty of $37,500.
Charleswood allegedly violated the CWA during the development of a residential subdivision by failing to comply with the terms and conditions of the North Dakota Storm Water Construction General Permit. Specifically, Charleswood failed to implement best management practices to reduce the amount of sediment discharged from construction activities. The company also failed to conduct inspections at the required frequency.
“Charleswood’s alleged actions compromised water quality by ineffectively managing runoff from construction activities,” said Diane Sipe, Director of EPA Region 8’s Water Enforcement program. “EPA will continue to pursue those who violate laws that protect North Dakota’s waters.”
Bridgeport United Recycling Pays $26,000 for PCB Violations
A Bridgeport, Connecticut, company that treats, stores, and disposes of toxic waste has paid $26,000 to settle claims by EPA that it violated federal regulations covering the storage and handling of PCBs.
Bridgeport United Recycling was charged with misidentifying 5,000 gallons of waste containing PCBs that it picked up in April 2007 from the former site of the Bridgeport Brass Company in Bridgeport at the request of Connecticut Transfer Company.
EPA claimed that Bridgeport United violated TSCA and PCB regulations by failing to comply with all of the requirements for PCB waste manifests when it shipped the waste for recycling. Specifically, the company failed to: identify the waste material as PCB waste; list the weight of the waste in kilograms; and indicate the earliest date of removal from service for disposal.
According to EPA, in April, a Bridgeport United vacuum truck picked up 883 gallons of waste material from two 55-gallon drums and a transformer. Two weeks earlier, the company had a sample of the waste tested and did not detect the presence of PCBs. After leaving the site, the truck made pickups at three other companies before returning to its recycling facility with 3,317 gallons of waste. The mixed waste from the truck was again analyzed and again PCBs were not detected.
The company “topped off” this load with waste from other sources for a total volume of 5,000 gallons of waste and on April 2 shipped the mix to Norlite, a hazardous waste treatment and recovery facility in Cohoes, New York, to use as fuel. Norlite, which is not permitted to reuse oil containing PCBs, analyzed the material and found a PCB concentration of 2,006 parts per million. The company notified Bridgeport United of its findings and sent the waste back.
Bridgeport United, which is owned by United Oil Recovery, eventually determined that the waste indeed was highly contaminated with PCBs and shipped it for disposal to Clean Harbors Deer Park, an approved PCB disposal facility in Texas.
In February 2008, Bridgeport United and United Oil agreed to pay a combined $325,000 in civil penalties for alleged violations of RCRA in settlement of a suit filed in 2003 by the Department of Justice and EPA. As part of the settlement, Bridgeport United also agreed to automate and upgrade the device that controls organic air emissions at its facility, including installation of high-level alarms, automatic switching of the carbon beds, and increasing the operational rate of the blower.
PCBs are persistent in the environment and are suspected carcinogens. Exposure to PCBs can cause liver problems and skin rashes.
Connecticut Transfer Company Faces Stiff Fines for PCB Violations
The owner of an inoperative Bridgeport, Connecticut brass facility faces a penalty of up to $37,500 per day per violation for violating federal regulations covering the disposal, use, storage, and marking violations of PCBs. Connecticut Transfer Company (CTC) owns the former Bridgeport Brass Company (BBC) facility in Bridgeport, Connecticut.
In 2008, CTC hired a waste transporter to pump out waste oil from an electrical transformer and two 55-gallon drums located at the facility. CTC’s waste oil was mixed with waste oil from other companies by the waste transporter and sent for recycling to an oil disposal and recycling company in New York, called the Norlite Corporation. Norlite discovered that the combined shipment of waste oil contained a high concentration of PCBs and rejected the shipment, as it was not permitted to reuse waste oil containing PCBs. Norlite then notified the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NY DEC). After tracking down the origins of the shipment, NY DEC notified the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (CT DEP) of the attempted delivery of PCB-contaminated oil to Norlite.
Bridgeport United Recycling Corp. (BUR), the company hired by CTC to pick up and deliver the oil to the Norlite facility, reported to CT DEP that it believed that the source of the contaminated oil came from 883 gallons of waste oil that it had picked up from the BBC facility.
This information prompted CT DEP to inspect the BBC facility for compliance with TSCA and PCB regulations. The inspection revealed several federal violations, including the improper disposal of PCBs via two spilled or leaking transformers; and failure to comply with various use, storage, and marking requirements by not labeling a PCB transformer, not labeling PCB storage areas, and not meeting various PCB storage and dating requirements.
CTC is currently developing a PCB cleanup plan to remedy these violations and come into compliance with TSCA and PCB requirements.
City of Plainview, Nebraska, to Pay $14,940 Civil Penalty for Violating Terms of NPDES Permit
The City of Plainview, Nebraska, has agreed to pay a $14,940 civil penalty to the United States for violations of the federal CWA and requirements of their National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
An April 2008 inspection found that Plainview violated the CWA by failing to meet effluent limitations for ammonia and nitrogen, as set forth by its NPDES permit. Additionally, the inspection found that Plainview failed to comply with NPDES permit requirements related to sampling procedures, recordkeeping, and reporting.
In addition to paying the $14,940 civil penalty, Plainview has agreed to spend $10,860 on a public education and assistance program aimed at eradicating illegal sump pump connections to its wastewater collection system. Those connections, although prohibited by city ordinances, have contributed to the inflow of groundwater into the city’s wastewater lagoon, adding to the city’s water permit compliance issues.
Many homes in Plainview are situated in low areas that require sump pump usage. Through the education and assistance program, the city will seek to help homeowners correct illegal sump pump connections, which should decrease the toxicity of wastewater flowing into the treatment lagoon, and avoid unnecessary burdens on the system.
EPA Inspects and Fines Three Louisiana Companies for SPCC Violations
EPA has fined the following three companies for violating federal Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) regulations outlined under the CWA:
- Carlo Ditta, Inc.—New Orleans, Louisiana, $2,250 fine
- Marina Del Rey—Madisonville, Louisiana, $900 fine
- Seaway Marina—Lafitte, Louisiana, $2,250 fine
A federal inspection of Carlo Ditta’s bulk storage facilities on May 22, 2009, revealed the facility’s SPCC plans did not conform to federal requirements and had the following shortcomings:
- Inadequate or no information and procedures for reporting an oil spill,
- Inadequate or no description of procedures to implement when an oil spills occur,
- Inadequate or no prediction of equipment failure which would result in discharges,
- Site personnel had no training on the operation and maintenance of equipment to prevent discharges,
- Site personnel had no training on discharge procedure protocols,
- Spill prevention briefings were not scheduled and conducted periodically, and
- The facility’s SPCC plans had inadequate or no discussion of site security, site drainage, or bulk storage tanks.
A federal inspection of Marina Del Ray’s bulk storage facility on May 14, 2009, revealed the following violations:
- The facility’s SPCC plan did not conform to federal requirements,
- Inadequate or no description of the physical layout of the facility,
- Inadequate or no information and procedures for reporting an oil spill,
- Inadequate or no description and procedures to use when oil spills occur, and
- Inadequate or no discussion of site security including that the facility was not fully fenced and entrance gates were not locked or guarded when site was unattended.
A federal inspection of Seaway Marina’s bulk storage facility on May 6, 2009, revealed the following deficiencies:
- Facility had no SPCC plan required by federal regulations,
- Secondary containment of bulk storage areas to be inadequate,
- Containment bypass valves were not closed when not draining rainwater, and
- Valves used for drainage from diked storage areas were not controlled to prevent a discharge of oil.
As part of three separate Expedited Settlement Agreements with EPA, all three companies have provided certification that all identified deficiencies have been corrected.
Environmental News Links
National and International Environmental Trends
Federal Regulatory Activity
State and Regional News
Meeting Announcements
News of Note
Trivia Question of the Week
To demonstrate that a recycled waste is not a solid waste due to speculative accumulation, you must
a. Recycle the waste within 90 days
b. Show that the waste was not used as a fuel or applied to the land
c. Recycle at least 75% per calendar year
d. Demonstrate that there is a reliable market available for the reclamation of the waste