EPA Proposes to Regulate Coal Ash

The EPA recently announced the first national regulations to provide for the safe disposal of coal combustion residuals ) from coal-fired power plants. The final rule establishes safeguards to protect communities from coal ash impoundment failures, like the catastrophic Kingston, Tennessee, spill in 2008, and establishes safeguards to prevent groundwater contamination and air emissions from coal ash disposal.

“EPA is taking action to protect our communities from the risk of mismanaged coal ash disposal units, and putting in place safeguards to help prevent the next catastrophic coal ash impoundment failure, which can cost millions for local businesses, communities and states,” said EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy. “These strong safeguards will protect drinking water from contamination, air from coal ash dust, and our communities from structural failures, while providing facilities a practical approach for implementation.”

EPA has been studying the effects of coal ash disposal on the environment and public health for many years. In the wake of the failure of the TVA coal ash pond in Kingston, Tennessee, EPA began a multi-year effort to help ensure the safety of the nation’s coal ash disposal facilities, including assessing more than 500 facilities across the country. Improperly constructed or managed coal ash disposal units have been linked to nearly 160 cases of harm to surface or ground water or to the air. EPA carefully evaluated more than 450,000 comments on the proposed rule, testimony from eight public hearings, and information gathered from three notices soliciting comment on new data and analyses.

Improperly constructed or managed coal ash disposal units have resulted in the catastrophic failure of surface impoundments, damages to surface water, groundwater and the air. The first federal requirements for impoundments and landfills to address these risks include:

• The closure of surface impoundments and landfills that fail to meet engineering and structural standards and will no longer receive coal ash
• Reducing the risk of catastrophic failure by requiring regular inspections of the structural safety of surface impoundments
• Restrictions on the location of new surface impoundments and landfills so that they cannot be built in sensitive areas such as wetlands and earthquake zones
• Protecting groundwater by requiring monitoring, immediate cleanup of contamination, and closure of unlined surface impoundments that are polluting groundwater
• Protecting communities using fugitive dust controls to reduce windblown coal ash dust
• Requiring liner barriers for new units and proper closure of surface impoundments and landfills that will no longer receive CCRs

 

Implementation of these technical requirements will be reported through comprehensive and regular disclosure to states, and communities to enable them to monitor and oversee these requirements. The rule requires that power plant owners and operators provide detailed information to citizens and states to fully understand how their communities may be impacted. The rule sets out new transparency requirements, including recordkeeping and reporting requirements, as well as the requirement for each facility to post specific information to a publicly-accessible website. This will provide the public with information such as annual groundwater monitoring results, and corrective action reports, coal ash fugitive dust control plans, and closure completion notifications.

 In 2012, almost 40%of all coal ash produced was recycled (beneficially used), rather than disposed. Beneficial use of coal ash can produce positive environmental, economic and performance benefits such as reduced use of virgin resources, lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, reduced cost of coal ash disposal, and improved strength and durability of materials.

EPA is committed to working closely with our state partners on implementation of this rule. To ease implementation and harmonize the regulatory requirements for coal ash landfills and surface impoundments, EPA encourages states to adopt the federal minimum criteria, revise their Solid Waste Management Plans (SWMPs) and submit these revisions to EPA for approval. A revised and approved SMWP will signal EPA’s opinion that the state SWMP meets the federal criteria.

Learn DOT’s New Rules for Lithium Battery Shipments

These changes are designed to ensure that lithium cells and batteries are able to withstand normal transportation conditions and are packaged to reduce the possibility of damage that could lead to an unsafe situation.

 

• Enhance packaging and hazard communication requirements for lithium batteries transported by air
• Replace equivalent lithium content with Watt-hours for lithium ion cells and batteries
• Adopt separate shipping descriptions for lithium metal batteries and lithium ion batteries
• Revise provisions for the transport of small and medium lithium cells and batteries including cells and batteries packed with, or contained in, equipment
• Revise the exceptions for small cells and batteries in air transportation
• Revise the requirements for the transport of lithium batteries for disposal or recycling
• Harmonize the provisions for the transport of low production and prototype lithium cells and batteries with the ICAO Technical Instructions and the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code
• Adopt new provisions for the transport of damaged, defective, and recalled lithium batteries

If you ship batteries by ground or air, you must comply with the latest DOT and IATA/ICAO regulations that specify how the batteries must be packaged, marked, labeled, and transported. The rules apply not only to batteries, but also to equipment or vehicles that contain batteries as well as batteries packed along with equipment. Virtually all types of batteries are regulated, including lithium, lead-acid, nickel cadmium, and metal hydride alkaline. According to 49 CFR 172.704, all personnel involved in the classification, packaging, marking, labeling, or shipment of batteries must receive initial and recurrent transportation training.

 

Cleveland RCRA and DOT Training

 

Raleigh RCRA, DOT, IATA/IMO, and SARA Training

 

Anaheim RCRA and DOT Training

 

Toxic Chemicals Found in Majority of Seasonal Holiday Products

 Researchers found that two-thirds of tested products had one or more hazardous chemicals that have been linked to serious health effects. The study is an update to, and expansion of, research done in 2010 and 2013 by HealthyStuff.org (a project of the Ann Arbor-based nonprofit organization, the Ecology Center) which found high levels of chemical hazards in light strings, holiday garland, and other decorative products. Before disposing of your office’s holiday decorations, you should determine if they are hazardous waste, and dispose of them properly. At home, you might consider bring them to your local household hazardous waste facility.

For this study, Ecology Center researchers tested 69 seasonal holiday products including beaded and tinsel garlands, artificial wreaths and greenery, stockings, figurines, and other tabletop decorations, and gift bags. Products were tested for substances that have been linked to asthma, birth defects, learning disabilities, reproductive problems, liver toxicity, and cancer. People can be exposed to these chemicals by breathing air or dust containing chemicals volitalized from the products or by handling them.

“We’ve been testing and finding similar problems with these products since 2010. Most retailers have been slow to react and continue sell these products,” said Jeff Gearhart, the Ecology Center’s research director. Environmentalists and public health advocates have called for retailers to work with suppliers to eliminate these hazards and develop safer substitutes.

Thirteen percent of the 2014 holiday products contained lead above 100 ppm; 12% of the products contained more than 800 ppm bromine, indicating the presence of brominated flame retardants. 

“Parents shouldn’t have to worry that their holiday decorations contain chemicals like lead and toxic flame retardants,” said Mike Schade, Mind the Store campaign director for Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families. “Big retailers should get these hidden hazards out of holiday decorations, once and for all. When it comes to risking people’s health, customers expect their favorite retailers to mind the store.”

HealthyStuff.org recommends common sense precautions when handling these products because they may contain hazardous substances.

• Do not allow children (or adults) to put small holiday ornaments in their mouths
• Wash your hands after handling the holiday light strings
• Frequent vacuuming and reducing levels of dust can reduce exposures to many of these chemicals of concern. Editor’s comment: vacuuming can release airborne contaminants. Use a HEPA vacuum or equipment designed to prevent releases. Use care when emptying dust from vacuum.

EPA Tightens Up Hazardous Materials Recycling Regulations

 

“Americans do not have to choose between a clean environment and economic prosperity,” said Mathy Stanislaus, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. “This important rule gives communities a voice in the decisions that impact them, promotes safe and responsible recycling of hazardous secondary materials and conserves vital resources, while protecting those most at risk from the dangers of hazardous secondary materials mismanagement. This innovative rule demonstrates that protecting communities and leveraging economic advantages for sustainable recycling and materials manufacturing can go hand-in-hand.”

 

EPA conducted a rigorous environmental justice analysis of the DSW rule that examined the location of recycling facilities and their proximity and potential impact to adjacent residents. The methodology and scope was developed through a broad public engagement and expert peer review process. The analysis identified significant regulatory gaps in the 2008 rule, which could negatively impact communities adjacent to third party recyclers, including disproportionately impacting minority and low-income populations.

It includes several provisions that result in both resource conservation and economic benefits by encouraging certain types of in-process recycling and remanufacturing:

• The rule addresses significant regulatory gaps in the 2008 rule by requiring off-site recycling at a facility with a RCRA permit or verified recycler variance, which will allow EPA and the states to verify that a facility has the equipment and trained personnel to safely manage the material, adequate financial assurance, is prepared to respond in case of an emergency, and can demonstrate that the recycling is not disposal in the guise of recycling. The new verified recycler exclusion also includes a public participation requirement for recyclers seeking variances, so that communities are notified prior to the start of recycling operations.
• The rule affirms the legitimacy of the pre-2008 DSW exclusions, such as the scrap metal exclusion, and does not change the regulatory status of material legitimately recycled under these long-standing exclusions. The final rule includes a revised definition of legitimate recycling that re-affirms the legitimacy of in-process recycling and of commodity-grade recycled products, such as metal commodities. The rule retains the exclusion for recycling under the control of the generator, including recycling on-site, within the same company and through certain types of toll manufacturing agreements, which recognizes those generators who follow good business practices by taking responsibility for their recycling and maintaining control of their hazardous secondary materials.
• Finally, the final rule includes a targeted remanufacturing exclusion for certain higher-value hazardous spent solvents, which are being remanufactured into commercial-grade products. This allows manufacturers to reduce the use of virgin solvents, resulting in both economic and environmental benefits, including energy conservation and reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

 

EPA Publishes Significant New Use Rule on Glycol Ethers

EPA is taking action to protect the public from seven ethylene glycol ethers or glymes chemicals that can cause health effects including birth defects and blood toxicity.

“Today’s action is part of our continuing efforts to help ensure that chemicals in products we use every day are safe for the American public,” said Jim Jones, assistant administrator for chemical safety and pollution prevention. “Finalizing this action could prevent an increase in the use of these chemicals and reduce human exposure through ingestion and inhalation.”

Some of these chemicals are currently used in consumer products, including paints, inks, and glues. The final rule will allow EPA to review any proposed new uses of these chemicals to ensure that human health and the environment are protected. EPA believes that new uses of these chemicals should not be allowed without an opportunity for review and, if necessary, place restrictions on these chemicals, as warranted.

EPA has also added one of the more toxic of these ethylene glycol ethers, ethylene glycol dimethyl ether (monoglyme), to the Work Plan for Chemical Assessments. Monoglyme met the criteria for priority assessment because of its toxicity and use in some commercial and consumer products. EPA will conduct a risk assessment for this chemical and determine if further risk reduction action should be taken.

This rule, known as a Significant New Use Rule (SNUR), is issued under the Toxic Substances Control Act and will require manufacturers (including importers) to notify EPA at least 90 days before starting or resuming new uses of these chemicals in consumer products. This notification allows EPA the opportunity to evaluate the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit or limit that activity. SNURs ensure that once a chemical has been phased out or taken off the market for certain uses, no use can resume without notification and review by the agency.

 

EPA Proposes NESHAP for Brick and Structural Clay Products Manufacturing and Clay Ceramics Manufacturing

Section 112(d) of the Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set emissions standards for HAP emitted by major stationary sources based on the performance of the MACT. The Agency issued the NESHAP for Brick and Structural Clay Products (BSCP) manufacturing and the NESHAP for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing on May 16, 2003. The two NESHAP were vacated and remanded by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on March 13, 2007.

EPA is proposing that all major sources in these categories meet maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards for mercury, non-mercury metal hazardous air pollutants (HAP) (or particulate matter (PM) surrogate) and dioxins/furans (Clay Ceramics only); health-based standards for acid gas HAP; and work practice standards, where applicable. The proposed rule, which has been informed by input from industry and other stakeholders, including small businesses, would protect air quality and promote public health by reducing emissions of HAP listed in section 112 of the Clean Air Act.

Neutrogena Fined Over $400,000 for Hazardous Waste Violations

 

The California Attorney General’s Office filed the action in Los Angeles County Superior Court and negotiated the settlement on behalf of DTSC. The complaint alleges that Neutrogena treated hazardous waste in the wastewater treatment system without a permit or other authorization from DTSC. The company manufactures cosmetics and skin care products.

“DTSC is committed to protecting all Californians,” said DTSC’s Director Barbara A. Lee. “We will ensure our laws and regulations are enforced, and we will pursue those who violate them.”

The complaint also alleges that Neutrogena:

•  
• Failed to determine whether filter bags from the waste water treatment system were hazardous and, as a result, disposed of hazardous waste filter bags in the trash
• Failed to maintain a closure plan and financial assurance for closure of the wastewater treatment system
• Failed to assess the integrity of a hazardous waste storage tank and the drum washer tank
• Failed to maintain adequate aisle space between hazardous waste containers

“These violations created an unnecessary potential for harm to Neutrogena’s employees and to the environment,” said Reed Sato, DTSC’s Chief Counsel.

DTSC discovered these and other violations after an unannounced inspection in 2010. Neutrogena took corrective actions and returned to compliance in 2010.

As a part of the settlement, Neutrogena may reduce the civil penalty payment by up to $5,000 by sending employees to the California Compliance School to receive training on the HWCL requirements for handling hazardous waste. Neutrogena also agreed to broaden the scope of its waste analysis plan to include waste profiles to be made for new product lines or changes to the production process and equipment or chemicals used in a rinse or maintenance operation.

 

Updated Stormwater Permits for Western Washington

 

Along the way, it can pick up pollution from oil, fertilizers, pesticides, soil, trash, and animal waste. Then the water might flow untreated directly into a local stream, bay, lake or Puget Sound.

Unmanaged, stormwater flooding can pollute waters and harm important salmon habitat.

When stormwater is managed well, decreased amounts of bacteria and toxic chemicals are carried into our downstream waters. This, in turn, helps restore the health of waters in our streams, lakes and Puget Sound.

Local governments in the most populated areas of our state are required to follow the state’s stormwater permits, which are key tools to protect water quality.

 

After a public process, Ecology modified the August 2013 municipal stormwater permits for Western Washington only.

The changes are being made following rulings by the state Pollution Control Hearings Board to resolve appeals of the permits.

Changes that take effect Jan. 16, 2015, include:

• Technical issues around low-impact development
• Watershed planning requirements
• Improved definitions
• Updates to the Western Washington Stormwater Manual

 

EPA Prevents Harmful Chemicals from Entering the Marketplace

EPA is taking action to protect the public from certain chemicals that have the potential to cause a range of health effects from cancer to reproductive and developmental harm to people and aquatic organisms.

“We are committed to protecting all Americans from exposure to harmful chemicals used in domestic and imported products,” said Jim Jones, assistant administrator for chemical safety and pollution prevention. “There must be a level playing field for US businesses—which is why we’re targeting harmful chemicals no longer used in the US that find their way into commerce, sometimes through imported products. This final action will give EPA the opportunity to restrict or limit any new uses of these chemicals, including imported goods with these chemicals.”

The recent action addresses the following chemicals:

 

 

 

EPA believes that new uses of these chemicals should not be allowed without an opportunity for review and, if necessary, to place restrictions on these chemicals, as warranted.

The action adds nine benzidine-based dyes to an existing SNUR. It closes a loophole to ensure that these chemicals and products containing them, such as clothing, cannot be imported without EPA review and possible restriction. EPA has investigated safer dyes and colorants as alternatives to benzidine as part of its Safer Chemical Ingredients List and Design for the Environment program.

In 2012, EPA required companies to stop manufacturing and importing SCCPs and to pay fines as a result of an enforcement action. 

EPA is further evaluating related medium-chain (MCCPs) and long-chain chlorinated paraffins (LCCPs) as part of the TSCA Work Plan for Chemical Assessments.

EPA has added several phthalates to the TSCA Work Plan for Chemical Assessments. If a TSCA Work Plan assessment indicates a potential risk, the agency would determine if risk reduction actions, as appropriate, should be taken.

These final SNURs will require anyone who wishes to manufacture (including import) or process these chemical substances for a significant new use to notify EPA 90 days before starting or resuming new uses of these chemicals. This notice will provide EPA with the opportunity to evaluate the intended use of the chemicals and, if necessary, take action to prohibit or limit the activity.

EPA Announces 2014 Annual Environmental Enforcement Results

 

“By taking on large, high impact enforcement cases, EPA is helping to level the playing field for companies that play by the rules, while maximizing our ability to protect the communities we serve across the country,” said Cynthia Giles, Assistant Administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “Despite challenges posed by budget cuts and a government shutdown, we secured major settlements in key industry sectors and brought criminal violators to justice. This work resulted in critical investments in advanced technologies and innovative approaches to reduce pollution and improve compliance.”

In fiscal year 2014, EPA enforcement actions required companies to invest more than $9.7 billion in actions and equipment to control pollution and clean up contaminated sites. EPA’s cases resulted in $163 million in combined federal administrative, civil judicial penalties, and criminal fines. Other results include:

• Reductions of an estimated 141 million lb of air pollutants, including 6.7 million lb of air toxics
• Reductions of approximately 337 million lb of water pollutants
• Clean up of an estimated 856 million cubic yards of contaminated water/aquifers

EPA pursues high impact cases that drive compliance across industries:

• Lowe’s Home Centers agreed to a corporate-wide compliance program ensuring contractors nation-wide follow laws to protect children from dangerous lead paint exposure
• The nation’s second largest natural gas producer, Chesapeake Appalachia, agreed to restore streams and wetlands damaged from its operations and implement a comprehensive plan to comply with water protection laws

EPA holds criminal violators accountable that threaten the health and safety of Americans, while directing funds to affected communities:

• EPA’s criminal program generated $63 million in fines and restitution, secured $16 million in court-ordered environmental projects and sentenced defendants to a combined 155 years of incarceration
• After EPA pursued the case, Tonawanda Coke was found guilty and required to pay a $12.5 million criminal penalty and to fund $12.2 million in community service in New York, for releasing benzene from its facility into neighboring communities

EPA enforcement work reduces pollution in the sectors that impact American communities the most:

• Settlements with Minnesota Power and Wisconsin Electric Power Company are cutting coal fired power plants emissions, requiring companies to control pollution and conduct innovative mitigation projects that promote renewable energy development and protect clean air for local communities
• We’re reducing dangerous air toxics released from industrial flares at refineries and chemical plants, requiring companies like Shell and DuPont to implement monitoring and pollution control technologies. These efforts are equipping minority and low-income communities with monitoring data, while reducing toxic air pollution for residents living near the facilities.
• EPA is working closely with cities such as East Bay MUD (California), Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (Illinois) and Miami-Dade County (Florida) to cut discharges of raw sewage and contaminated stormwater through integrated planning, green infrastructure and other innovative approaches

EPA ensures companies and federal facilities take responsibility and clean up toxic pollution they create.

• Polluted sites across the country are being cleaned up while EPA conserves and recovers federal funds. This year, settlements will result in more than $453.7 million in commitments from responsible parties to clean up Superfund sites, and return $57.7 million to the Superfund trust
• When abandoned munitions posed an imminent and substantial endangerment at the Camp Minden, Louisiana site, EPA acted to ensure proper cleanup and accountability by the US Army

Major cases developed in 2014, but not included in fiscal year 2014 statistics demonstrate EPA’s ongoing commitment to tough enforcement:

• A settlement with Hyundai-Kia netted a $100 million fine, forfeiture of emissions credits and more than $50 million invested in compliance measures helps level the playing field for car companies that follow the law, and helps reduces GHG emissions fueling climate change
• The largest cleanup settlement in American history, with Anadarko and Kerr McGee, will put more than $4.4 billion into toxic pollution cleanup, improving water quality and removing dangerous materials in tribal and overburdened communities
• A settlement with Alpha Natural Resources, one of the country’s largest coal companies, requires it to protect water quality in communities near their coal mining operations in five states

EPA Takes Action to Protect Public from Harmful Lead Exposure

 

The enforcement actions include 55 settlements and six complaints issued between February and October 2014 for renovations performed on pre-1978 homes and child-care facilities. All of the settlements require that the alleged violators certify their compliance with RRP standards and, in most cases, pay civil penalties. In two of the settlements, the violators agreed to fund voluntary lead abatement supplemental environmental projects, which require the removal of lead-based paint and post-construction testing to ensure that no hazardous conditions remain. The settlements led to $213,171 in civil penalties and the violators coming into compliance with federal law. These recent actions are in addition to EPA’s settlement with Lowe’s Home Improvement in April 2014, which included a $500,000 civil penalty as well as implementation of a corporate-wide RRP compliance program.

“Children are most vulnerable to the dangers of lead paint exposure, especially those in predominantly minority and low-income communities, where housing is more likely to contain lead-based paint,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “These cases to enforce the RRP rule are vitally important to improving compliance among companies that handle lead-based paint. This leads to safer communities, healthier children and a level playing field for companies that follow the law.”

Lead dust and debris from improper renovation activities on properties built prior to 1978 is a major source of lead exposure that can cause lead poisoning. Although using lead-based paint in dwellings was prohibited after 1978, it is still present in more than 30 million homes across the nation, in all types of communities. The RRP Rule provides important protections for children and others vulnerable to lead exposure. Even low levels of lead in the blood of children can result in behavior and learning problems, lower IQ and hyperactivity, slowed growth, hearing problems, and anemia. In rare cases, ingestion of lead can cause seizures, coma and even death.

The RRP Rule, which is part of the federal Toxic Substances Control Act, is intended to ensure that owners and occupants of pre-1978 “target housing” and “child-occupied facilities” receive information on lead-based paint hazards before renovations begin, that individuals performing such renovations are properly trained and certified, and that renovators and workers follow specific lead-safe work practices during renovations to reduce the potential for exposure to lead.

The penalties in the settlements address the cited violations. Enforcement penalties also help deter violations by others in the regulated industry, and level the playing field for complying companies, since the fines help eliminate the financial advantage a violator may derive from non-compliance which, otherwise, would allow the violator to underbid its complying competitors.

Contractors that are certified under EPA’s RRP standards are encouraged to display EPA’s “Lead-Safe” logo on worker’s uniforms, signs, websites, and other material, as appropriate. Consumers can protect themselves by looking for the logo before hiring a home contractor, and by being generally aware of whether a renovator is following lead-safe work practices when working on their property. 

Celebrate Clean Water

 

We all rely—and have come to expect—that plenty of clean water will flow from our faucets whenever we need it. Whether for drinking, cooking, or bathing, water plays an obvious role in our daily lives.

It’s hard to imagine then, that 40 years ago all sorts of pollution—sewage, chemicals, and trash—was carelessly dumped into our rivers, lakes, and streams. More often than not, this contamination would find its way into our drinking water. Back then we lacked the authority, science, technology, and funding to adequately tackle the problem.

This law proved to be a giant step forward in protecting public health. In fact, it sets the US apart as one of the world leaders in drinking water protection.

The Act specifically allows EPA to regulate the nation’s public drinking water supplies by setting and enforcing national standards for drinking water quality. EPA now has drinking water regulations that protect us from more than 90 contaminants, including bacteria, disinfectants, inorganic and organic chemicals, and radioactive materials. Approximately 12.5 million New Englanders benefit from the clean and safe public drinking water, ensured by the protections of the Safe Drinking Water Act.

In addition to its regulatory responsibilities, EPA works in partnership with community water systems to improve their technical and financial capabilities in delivering safe drinking water. Since 1997, the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund has provided funding for drinking water infrastructure projects, including the repair and replacement of pipes for transmission and distribution of water and storage.

Ray Raposa, Executive Director of the New England Water Works Association acknowledged “the passage of the Safe Drinking Water Act not only raised the level of attention to public health by regulating public drinking waters nationally, but also ushered in a great period of partnership between water suppliers and EPA. We still have a few remaining challenges, but we should take time to celebrate the great progress we’ve made in protecting public health.”

So this holiday season, let’s raise a glass and toast to 40 years of progress from source to tap!

For Old Electronics: Don’t Think Trash. Think e-Cycling

In 2013 each American household owned on average 28 electronic devices, according to the Consumer Electronics Association. But with advancing technology, sleeker, shinier and faster cell phones, computers, tablets, mp3 players and televisions are finding their way onto many holiday gift lists. And into the hands of American consumers.

But what about the old ones that are still perfectly functional? 

Rather than making products from scratch, recycling electronics keeps harmful toxins out of landfills, recovers valuable materials that can be reused, conserves virgin resources and results in lower emissions, including GHGs which contributes to climate change.

Many people actively look for new ways to protect the environment and recycling electronics can make a significant impact. For example, smartphones make up a large portion of the waste stream. For every one million smart phones recycled, 35,274 lb of copper, 772 lb of silver, 75 lb of gold and 33 lb of palladium can be recovered and reused.

The good news for consumers is that electronics recycling is growing in popularity and ease. Through EPA’s National Electronics Challenge, many retailers and manufacturers now take back old electronics for recycling by certified electronics recyclers. By using certified recyclers, you can rest assured that your old electronics will be recycled responsibly.

In addition, many states, cities, and counties sponsor collection events for electronics during the year, or they may offer a permanent drop-off location with certain hours of operation.

 

Green Buildings Deliver Many Climate Benefits, Study Shows

A new study finds that certified commercial green buildings throughout California use less water, produce less waste, and require fewer car trips than traditional commercial buildings. This demonstrates that green buildings have an even smaller carbon footprint than when just considering their reduced energy consumption.

The study evaluated the performance of more than 100 commercial buildings throughout California certified as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) under the 2009 Existing Building Operations and Maintenance (EBOM) rating system. While typical studies of LEED buildings focus on reduced energy consumption only, this one examined several other climate-related impacts.

On average, the certified green commercial buildings cut GHG emissions from water consumption by 50%, reduced solid waste management-related GHG emissions by 48% and lowered transportation-related GHG emissions by 5%, when compared to their traditional California counterparts.

These reductions were achieved through a variety of strategies, from water-efficient landscaping to recycling programs to commuter benefit programs.

“A notable finding from this work is that by far the largest source of building-related GHG emissions was from the transportation sector,” said Dr. William Eisenstein, executive director of the Center for Resource Efficient Communities at UC Berkeley, and lead researcher on the study. “This suggests that programs like telecommuting and commuter benefit programs, when combined with smart location siting decisions driven by SB 375, can bring substantial GHG reductions.”

The Center for Resource Efficient Communities is a research center focusing on urban sustainability, climate change, water efficiency and land use. The study, “Quantifying the Comprehensive Greenhouse Gas Co-Benefits of Green Buildings,” was funded by the Air Resources Board.

Maryland Releases Zero Waste Plan

 

The plan, developed with input from a broad range of stakeholders, also calls for the beneficial reuse of wastewater and a reduction in potential waste generation through steps such as product redesign, and it includes incentives for energy recovery and job creation. The plan sets a goal of diverting 85% of waste from disposal by 2040. Benefits of Zero Waste actions include a reduction of the GHGs that contribute to climate change, conservation of energy and natural resources, creation of green jobs, and protection of public health and the environment.

“We owe it to our children and future generations of Marylanders to take steps now to ensure that our communities are environmentally sustainable, prosperous and healthy,” said Governor Martin O’Malley. “This Zero Waste Plan is an ambitious policy framework to create green jobs and business opportunities while virtually doing away with the inefficient waste disposal practices that threaten our future.”

Maryland has made significant progress in recycling during the past two decades. However, Marylanders generate significantly more solid waste per person than the United States as a whole and continue to dispose of more than half of this waste. The majority of this waste is disposed in landfills.

“Zero Waste Maryland: Maryland’s Plan to Reduce, Reuse and Recycle Nearly All Waste Generated in Maryland by 2040,” includes nearly 60 policy options to reach waste reduction goals, and it sets priorities. It establishes source reduction—changing the way products are designed and consumed to prevent waste before it occurs—as the top priority. That is followed by reuse of materials—recycling and composting what must be discarded into useful products—and then by energy recovery from wastes that cannot be prevented or recycled.

The plan also includes initiatives that support recycling and reuse technology and business growth and a call for State government to lead by example, and encouraging more education and outreach.

A draft plan, published in April 2014, received more than 115 written comments and was the subject of three stakeholder meetings over the summer to gather additional input. The plan being released adds or strengthens key initiatives, such as expanding recycling of construction and demolition debris, promoting composting in a variety of applications and reducing residential disposal through “pay-as-you-throw” programs.

Massachusetts Landlords Will Remove Lead Hazards from Residential Properties

Two Boston-area landlords will perform health-protective improvements on five Dorchester, Massachusetts, properties to settle EPA claims that they failed to follow federal lead paint disclosure laws.

Under the settlement, My Van Nguyen and Xem Thi Le will also pay a cash penalty of $10,887, in addition to lead abatement projects valued at $97,977 at a number of other properties in Dorchester.

EPA alleged in a complaint that My Van Nguyen and Xem Thi Le violated the federal Toxic Substance Control Act when they failed to provide tenants with lead paint disclosure information at rental units they owned from 2010–11 in Dorchester, as required by the federal lead-based paint disclosure rule.

According to the agreement with EPA’s New England office, the environmental lead abatement project includes replacing lead-paint containing windows, doors and wood siding, and other lead abatement work at their residential rental properties located at 47-49 Savin Hill Ave., 37-45 Neponset St., 114 Sawyer Ave., 156 Ballou Ave. and 6-8 Westville Terrace, all of which are in Dorchester. Old windows, doors and wood siding in housing built before 1978 are known to contribute to lead poisonings in children in residential settings. Exposure to lead paint is a serious health concern in New England due to the age of the housing stock. All of the properties subject to work under this settlement were built in the early 1900s.

“The lead abatement projects required under this settlement will result in significant public health protections, because the work will remove lead hazards from these residential units,” said Curt Spalding, regional administrator of EPA’s New England office. “Infants and young children are especially vulnerable to lead paint exposure. Replacing windows, doors and wood siding at these properties will protect kids from the risk of lead poisoning.”

Lead poisoning of infants and children can cause lowered intelligence, reading and learning disabilities, impaired hearing, reduced attention span, hyperactivity and behavior problems. Adults with high lead levels can suffer difficulties during pregnancy, high blood pressure, nerve disorders, memory problems, and muscle and joint pain.

The lead abatement work must be done within two years. Wipe sampling will be done when the work is completed to ensure that no lead-based paint dust remains at the work site. The five properties are located in a historically-disadvantaged “environmental justice” area.

 

Clean Air Act Violations Result in Penalties over $1 Million

 

EPA’s Environmental Appeals Board ruled that the companies are responsible for a $1,258,582 civil penalty for these violations. EPA also denied applications from Zhejiang Jonway Motorcycle Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Shenke USA, Inc., and a third company not part of the case decided by the Environmental Appeals Board—Huibang USA, Inc.—for certificates of conformity for model year 2015 highway motorcycles and recreational vehicles manufactured by Zhejiang Jonway Motorcycle Manufacturing Co., Ltd. Without these certificates, which are like permits, Jonway and Shenke may not lawfully sell their model year 2015 vehicles in the US.

“EPA’s vehicle certification regulations are an important way we help reduce air pollution and protect public health,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “Failing to provide honest and accurate information to EPA compromises our ability to protect clean air for Americans.”

Jonway Motorcycle (USA) Co., Ltd. and Shenke USA, Inc., hold the certificates of conformity for uncertified vehicles. Four Chinese entities—Jonway Group Co., Ltd., Shanghai Shenke Motorcycle Co., Ltd., Zhejiang JMStar Shenke Motorcycle Co., Ltd., and Zhejiang Jonway Motorcycle Manufacturing Co., Ltd.—manufactured the vehicles.

As EPA reviews future certificate applications for these manufacturers, the agency will carefully consider all available information, including any outstanding or unresolved enforcement penalties or actions, when deciding whether to approve those applications.

To obtain certificates of conformity, manufacturers or importers must submit an application to EPA that describes the engine or vehicle, including its emission control system. The application must also provide emissions data demonstrating that the engines and vehicles will meet applicable federal emission standards.

Through inspections of imported vehicles at the Los Angeles/Long Beach Seaport and Nitro Powersports, LLC, a vehicle retailer in Carrollton, Texas, EPA discovered that Jonway and Shenke imported 11,043 noncompliant highway motorcycles and 226 ATVs beginning in model year 2009. The companies illegally imported and distributed over 80 models of uncertified vehicles, which were available for purchase across the US.

The motorcycles and ATVs were not covered by certificates of conformity because they had undersized catalysts, adjustable carburetors that were not described in the corresponding application for certification, were manufactured by an entity different from the one specified in the corresponding application for certification, or were manufactured after the applicable certificate expired. Jonway and Shenke also imported ATVs that lacked proper warranties and labels.

EPA’s investigation also uncovered evidence of recordkeeping violations related to emissions testing and certification. Jonway Motorcycle (USA) Co., Ltd., and Shenke USA, Inc., failed to maintain complete emissions test records for several of the engine families for which they were the certificate holders. The companies also failed to maintain records on all of the vehicles covered by their certificates that were imported into the US as well as failing to timely and completely respond to EPA’s request for information to assess their compliance.

In July and August, 2014, Shenke USA, Inc., and Zhejiang Jonway Motorcycle Manufacturing Co., Ltd., jointly submitted applications for certificates of conformity for model year 2015 highway motorcycles and recreational vehicles. These applications were denied later in August 2014. In September 2014, Huibang USA, Inc. and Zhejiang Jonway Motorcycle Manufacturing Co., Ltd., jointly submitted an application for a certificates of conformity for model year 2015 recreational vehicles. This application was denied in October 2014.

Highway motorcycles and recreational vehicles emit carbon monoxide, as well as hydrocarbons, and nitrogen oxides that contribute to the formation of ground-level ozone. Breathing carbon monoxide can cause harmful health effects by reducing oxygen delivery to the body’s tissues and organs, like the heart and brain. Nitrogen oxides can cause or contribute to a variety of health problems and adverse environmental impacts, such as ground-level ozone, acid rain, water quality deterioration, and visual impairment. Breathing ozone can trigger a variety of health problems, including chest pain, coughing, throat irritation and congestion, and can worsen bronchitis, emphysema, and asthma.

Hanover Insurance Group Fined for Air Violations

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) has assessed a $6,004 penalty on Hanover Insurance Group, Inc., which operates its property and liability insurance company at 440 Lincoln Street in Worcester, for violating Air Pollution Control, Hazardous Waste and Underground Storage Tank regulations.

During a routine inspection conducted by MassDEP in December 2012, it was determined that the company failed to properly record and monitor air pollution control data from its emergency backup engines, register its waste oil status with MassDEP and comply with numerous underground storage tank requirements. A notice of non-compliance (NON) was issued for those violations in March 2013.

During a follow-up inspection conducted in December 2013, MassDEP determined that the company continued to be in non-compliance with the citations listed in the original NON and other violations were found. In a recent consent order, the company—which has since corrected the violations—has agreed to maintain compliance and pay the penalty.

All of the assessed $6,004 penalty will be used to complete an energy-related Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP) that will benefit the Boys and Girls Club at the City of Worcester’s Great Brook Valley public housing complex. The SEP will include an energy audit and follow-up review, installation of energy-efficient lighting and installation of reflective window film. The company will also provide youth members with information about the impact of these improvements on everyday use and the importance of energy efficiency. The cost to complete the SEP work is estimated at between $7,500 and $9,000.

“The company has taken steps to ensure its future compliance with environmental regulations,” said Lee Dillard Adams, director of MassDEP’s Central Regional Office in Worcester. “The SEP will result in improved energy efficiency for the Boys and Girls Club and great educational opportunities for youths from the city.”

Arboretum Village LLC Fined $8,000 for Wetland Violations

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) has assessed an $8,000 penalty on Arboretum Village, LLC, of Holden to address damage caused by violations of the Wetlands Protection Act that occurred at Arboretum Village Estates, a sub-division off Sarah Drive in Worcester.

MassDEP inspected the site in June 2013 and observed the discharge of silt-laden runoff to wetland resource areas and the Blackstone River in Millbury due to inadequate erosion and sedimentation controls at a portion of the sub-division that was under construction.

MassDEP ordered the owner to stop the discharge of silt and sediment, install erosion control measures to stabilize soils and retain a wetland specialist to prepare a comprehensive erosion and sedimentation plan, a slope stabilization plan, and a wetland restoration plan, if needed. That order was later appealed by the owner.

Through a consent order, the owner and MassDEP have agreed to settle the appeal. The consent order also requires implementation of the Erosion Control Plan that has been approved by MassDEP, and the performance of all additional work at the site in compliance with wetlands regulations.

Under the settlement, $2,000 of the penalty must be paid to the Commonwealth. The remaining portion of the penalty will be used for a Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP). The SEP will provide funding to the Massachusetts Audubon Society for the construction of a Red Maple Swamp board walk and bridge at the Broad Meadow Brook Audubon Sanctuary in Worcester.

“Companies constructing phased sub-divisions need to remain vigilant in the placement of adequate erosion and sedimentation control throughout the project,” said Lee Dillard Adams, director of MassDEP’s Central Regional Office in Worcester. “Developers need to be more sensitive to preventing erosion and sedimentation, especially near steep slopes, as this will save time and money in the long run.”

Veryfine Products Assessed $9,420 Penalty for Violating Air and Water Regulations

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) has assessed a $9,420 penalty on Veryfine Products, Inc., which manufactures non-carbonated juice and water beverages at its facility at 20 Harvard Road in Littleton, for violating Air Pollution Control, Hazardous Waste, Industrial Wastewater, and Underground Storage Tank regulations.

During an inspection conducted in April 2014, MassDEP found that Veryfine Products failed to provide adequate information on its Air Pollution Control Source Registration Form and Industrial Wastewater Discharge Monitoring Reports. The company also accumulated hazardous waste in excess of its registered status, failed to properly label its hazardous waste accumulation containers area and did not comply with numerous Underground Storage Tank requirements.

In a consent order signed with MassDEP, the company agreed to maintain compliance with all applicable regulations and pay the $9,420 penalty.

“Environmental regulations are in place to protect public health and the natural resources that make our Commonwealth special,” said Lee Dillard Adams, director of MassDEP’s Central Regional Office in Worcester. “Companies that operate in our communities must know the rules and be diligent in following them for the benefit of all.”

Occidental Chemical Company to Pay $190 Million for Contaminating Waterways

Acting Attorney General John J. Hoffman and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Commissioner Bob Martin announced recently that a Superior Court judge has approved a $190 million settlement with Occidental Chemical Corp. that resolves the company’s liability for contamination of the Passaic River.

Approved by Superior Court Judge Sebastian P. Lombardi on Tuesday, the Occidental settlement is the third and final settlement in the Passaic River litigation, a series of settlements in which the State obtained costs and damages from multiple parties responsible for contaminating the river.

Altogether, the State has recovered a total of $355.4 million from the three Passaic River litigation settlements, over and above the cost of remediation.

“The Occidental settlement approved today, along with the two Passaic River litigation settlements that preceded it, represents a tremendous victory for the citizens of New Jersey,” said Acting Attorney General Hoffman. “As a result of these three settlements, not only will the Passaic River be cleaned up at no cost to New Jersey taxpayers, but the Sta