As part of Administrator Lisa P. Jackson’s commitment to enhance the US EPA’s chemical management program and increase transparency, the agency is making available to the public hundreds of studies on chemicals that had been treated as confidential business information (CBI). The move is part of EPA’s plan to make public the chemicals that are not entitled to CBI status. Releasing the data will expand the public’s access to critical health and safety information on chemicals that are manufactured and processed in the US.
“EPA is increasing the availability of critical health and safety studies on chemicals that children and families are exposed to every day. We are making important progress in making this information public and giving the American public easy access to it,” said Steve Owens, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. “Over the next year, we expect to review several thousand additional studies on industrial chemicals and make many of these more accessible to the public.”
Since 2009, 577 formerly confidential chemical identities are no longer confidential and more than 1,000 health and safety studies are now accessible to the public that were previously unavailable or only available in limited circumstances. In 2010, EPA issued new guidance outlining the agency’s plans to deny confidentiality claims for chemical identities in health and safety studies under the federal Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) that are determined to not be entitled to CBI status. EPA has been reviewing CBI claims in new and existing TSCA filings containing health and safety studies.
Consistent with the guidance, the agency will request that the submitter voluntarily relinquish the CBI claims and make the newly available studies available to the public. EPA also challenged the chemical industry to make available information that was previously classified as CBI. To date, more than 35 companies have agreed to review previously submitted filings containing health and safety studies and determine if any CBI claims may no longer be necessary.
Wilmington, Delaware RCRA and DOT Training
Cleveland, Ohio RCRA and DOT Training
Safety Consultant/Trainer
Environmental Resource Center has a new opening for a safety consultant and auditor. We are looking for a former OSHA CSHO, OSHA trainer, or state inspector for this position in our Cary, North Carolina, office. Applicants should have excellent writing and speaking skills and be willing to travel 7–14 days per month. We are looking for an expert in all of the General Industry and Construction standards who is capable of performing audits of industrial facilities as well as conducting on-site training.
Strong consideration will be given to applicants who also have experience providing HAZWOPER, Hazcom, lockout/tagout, confined spaces, and machine guarding training.
The position includes maintenance of training materials (books and presentations), working on consulting projects, development of classes and computer-based training programs, and ensuring customer satisfaction.
How to Author GHS Safety Data Sheets
OSHA is adopting the new Globally Harmonized System (GHS) for the classification and labeling of hazardous chemicals. A cornerstone of GHS is the adoption of a completely revised Safety Data Sheet (SDS).
- December 15, 2011
- January 27, 2012
- February 29, 2012
How to Label Hazardous Chemicals Using OSHA’s New GHS Hazcom Standard
Workplace and supplier hazard communication labels are being reinvented as OSHA adopts the new Globally Harmonized System (GHS) for labeling hazardous chemicals.
- December 16, 2011
- February 3, 2012
- March 1, 2012
EPA Clarifies Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Rule and Allows One-Time Extension for 2012 Reporting Deadline
These final changes include additional information to clarify compliance obligations, correct data reporting elements so they more closely conform to the information used to perform calculations, and make other corrections and amendments. In addition, these final amendments allow a limited, one-time six-month extension of the 2012-reporting deadline for facilities and suppliers that contain one or more source categories for which data collection began in 2011.
The final rule amendments are effective on December 29, 2011.
EPA Proposes Changes to Clean Air Act Standards for Boilers and Incinerators
EPA is proposing changes to Clean Air Act (CAA) standards for boilers and certain incinerators based on extensive analysis, review, and consideration of data and input from states, environmental groups, industry, lawmakers, and the public. The proposed reconsideration would achieve extensive public health protections through significant reductions in toxic air pollutants, including mercury and soot, while increasing the rule’s flexibility and addressing compliance concerns raised by industry and labor groups. The changes also cut the cost of implementation by nearly 50% from the original 2010 proposed rule while maintaining health benefits. These standards meet important requirements laid out in the 1990 CAA Amendments.
Soot and other harmful pollutants released by boilers and incinerators can lead to adverse health effects including cancer, heart disease, aggravated asthma, and premature death. In addition, toxic pollutants such as mercury and lead that will be reduced by this proposal are linked to developmental disabilities in children. These standards will avoid up to 8,100 premature deaths, prevent 5,100 heart attacks, and avert 52,000 asthma attacks per year in 2015.
More than 99% of boilers in the country are either clean enough that they are not covered by these standards or will only need to conduct maintenance and tune-ups to comply. These proposals focus on the less than 1% of boilers that emit the majority of pollution from this sector. For these high emitting boilers, typically operating at refineries, chemical plants, and other industrial facilities, EPA is proposing more targeted emissions limits that protect Americans’ health and provide industry with practical, cost-effective options to meet the standards—informed by data from these stakeholders. These limits are based on currently available technologies that are in use by sources across the country.
As a result of further information gathered through the reconsideration process, including significant dialog and meetings with stakeholders, the proposal maintains the dramatic cuts in the cost of implementation that were achieved in the final rules issued in March while continuing to deliver significant public health benefits. As a result, EPA estimates that for every dollar spent to cut these pollutants, the public will see $12 to $30 in health benefits, including fewer premature deaths.
Using a wide variety of fuels, including coal, natural gas, oil, and biomass, boilers are used to power heavy machinery, provide heat for industrial and manufacturing processes in addition to a number of other uses, or heat large buildings. EPA’s proposal recognizes the diverse and complex range of uses and fuels, and tailors standards to reflect the real-world operating conditions of specific types of boilers.
Some of the key changes EPA is proposing include:
- Boilers at large sources of air toxics emissions: The major source proposal covers approximately 14,000 boilers—less than 1% of all boilers in the US—located at large sources of air pollutants, including refineries, chemical plants, and other industrial facilities. EPA is proposing to create additional subcategories and revise emissions limits. EPA is also proposing to provide more flexible compliance options for meeting the particle pollution and carbon monoxide limits, replace numeric emissions limits with work practice standards for certain pollutants, allow more flexibility for units burning clean gases to qualify for work practice standards, and reduce some monitoring requirements. EPA estimates that the cost of implementing these standards remains about $1.5 billion less than the April 2010 proposed standards. Health benefits to children and the public associated with reduced exposure to fine particles and ozone from these large source boilers have increased by almost 25% and are estimated to be $27 billion to $67 billion in 2015.
- Boilers located at small sources of air toxics emissions: The proposal also covers about 187,000 boilers located at small sources of air pollutants, including commercial buildings, universities, hospitals, and hotels. However, due to how little these boilers emit, 98% of area source boilers would simply be required to perform maintenance and routine tune-ups to comply with these standards. Only 2% of area source boilers may need to take additional steps to comply with the rule. To increase flexibility for most of these sources, EPA is proposing to require initial compliance tune-ups after two years instead after the first year.
- Solid waste incinerators and revisions to the list of non-hazardous secondary materials: There are 95 solid waste incinerators that burn waste at a commercial or an industrial facility, including cement manufacturing facilities. EPA is proposing to adjust emissions limits for waste-burning cement kilns and for energy recovery units.
EPA is also proposing revisions to its final rule, which identified the types of non-hazardous secondary materials that can be burned in boilers or solid waste incinerators. Following the release of that final rule, stakeholders expressed concerns regarding the regulatory criteria for a non-hazardous secondary material to be considered a legitimate, non-waste fuel, and how to demonstrate compliance with those criteria. To address these concerns, EPA’s proposed revisions provide clarity on what types of secondary materials are considered non-waste fuels, and greater flexibility. The proposed revisions also classify a number of secondary materials as non-wastes when used as a fuel and allow for a boiler or solid waste operator to request that EPA identify specific materials as a non-waste fuel.
Following the April 2010 proposals, the agency received more than 4,800 comments from businesses, communities, and other key stakeholders. As part of the reconsideration process, EPA also received additional feedback after the agency issued the final standards in March 2011. EPA will accept public comment on these standards for 60 days following publication in the Federal Register. EPA intends to finalize the reconsideration by spring 2012.
Illinois Electronics Disposal Ban Takes Effect in the New Year
Beginning January 1, it will no longer be legal for individuals in Illinois to dispose of unwanted electronics in their regular trash. Discarded electronics, including computers, monitors, electronic keyboards, scanners, fax machines, and many other electronic devices, must now be taken to a registered recycler for proper management. It will be illegal for the consumer to dispose of them in the trash and it will be illegal for Illinois landfills to accept them.
The Illinois Electronic Products Recycling and Reuse Act, which took effect in 2008, required manufacturers to establish a recycling program for discarded and unwanted electric products, if they sell their products in Illinois. This newest phase will include individual citizens in the effort to keep electronics, which contain a variety of potentially toxic contaminants, out of the state’s 48 active landfills.
A 2007 report showed that electronic products were the fastest growing portion of the solid waste stream. That year, three million tons of electronic products became obsolete, yet only 14% of those products were recycled.
During calendar year 2011, electronics manufacturers are being required to collect and recycle or refurbish more than 28 million pounds of products. The reuse of these products, including metals, plastics, and glass conserves natural resources and saves energy. The law requires manufacturers of 17 electronic products, including televisions, computers, monitors, printers, keyboards, and DVRs to recycle their percentage of a statewide recycling goal. Manufacturers typically hire local recyclers to help them meet their goal.
The metals, which include gold, cadmium, lead, and silver can threaten groundwater if landfilled. When the metals are reused, it eliminates some of the need for mining for new supplies and can also be valuable resources when reclaimed.
Lafarge North America, Inc. will Pay $740,000 to Resolve Clean Water Act Violations in Five States and Invest Approximately $8 Million to Improve Compliance at 189 US Facilities
Lafarge North America, Inc., one of the largest suppliers of construction materials in the US and Canada, and four of its US subsidiaries have agreed to resolve alleged Clean Water Act (CWA) violations. The violations include unpermitted discharges of stormwater at 21 stone, gravel, sand, asphalt, and ready-mix concrete facilities in Alabama, Colorado, Georgia, Maryland, and New York. Stormwater flowing over concrete manufacturing facilities can carry debris, sediment and pollutants, including pesticides, petroleum products, chemicals, and solvents, which can have a significant impact on water quality.
“EPA is committed to protecting America’s waters from polluted stormwater runoff,” said Cynthia Giles, EPA Assistant Administrator for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “Today’s settlement will improve stormwater management at facilities across the nation, preventing harmful pollutants from being swept into local waterways.”
“Owners and operators of industrial facilities must take the necessary measures to comply with stormwater regulations under the Clean Water Act, which protects America’s rivers, lakes, and sources of drinking water from harmful contamination,” said Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “The system-wide management controls and training that this settlement requires from Lafarge and its subsidiaries will result in better management practices and a robust compliance program at hundreds of facilities throughout the nation that will prevent harmful stormwater runoff.”
Lafarge will implement a nationwide evaluation and compliance program at 189 of its similar facilities in the US to ensure they meet CWA requirements. Lafarge will also pay a penalty of $740,000 and implement two supplemental environmental projects, in which the company will complete conservation easements to protect approximately 166 acres in Maryland and Colorado. The value of the land has been appraised at approximately $2.95 million. Lafarge will also implement one state environmentally beneficial project valued at $10,000 to support environmental training for state inspectors.
The comprehensive evaluation will include a compliance review of each facility’s permit, an inventory of all discharges to US waters, and identification of all best management practices in place. In addition, Lafarge must identify an environmental vice president, responsible for coordinating oversight of compliance with stormwater requirements, at least two environmental directors, to oversee stormwater compliance at each operation, and an onsite operations manager at each facility. The US estimates that Lafarge will spend approximately $8 million over five years to develop and maintain this compliance program.
The company will also develop and implement an extensive management, training, inspections, and reporting system to increase oversight of its operations and compliance with stormwater requirements at all facilities that it owns or operates.
The complaint, filed in federal court with the settlement, alleges a pattern of violations since 2006 that were discovered after several federal inspections at the company’s facilities. The alleged violations included unpermitted discharges, violations of effluent limitations, inadequate management practices, inadequate or missing records and practices regarding stormwater compliance and monitoring, inadequate discharge monitoring and reporting, inadequate stormwater pollution prevention plans, and inadequate stormwater training.
The CWA requires that industrial facilities, such as ready-mix concrete plants, sand and gravel facilities, and asphalt batching plants, have controls in place to prevent pollution from being discharged with stormwater into nearby waterways. Each site must have a stormwater pollution prevention plan that sets guidelines and best management practices that the company will follow to prevent runoff from being contaminated by pollutants.
Since being notified of the violations by EPA, the company has made significant improvements to its stormwater management systems.
The settlement is the latest in a series of federal enforcement actions to address stormwater violations from industrial facilities and construction sites around the country. The states of Maryland and Colorado are co-plaintiffs and have joined the proposed settlement.
Lafarge is required to pay the penalty within 30 days of the court’s approval of the settlement.
BP to Pay $426,500 Penalty and Secure Funds to Properly Close Facilities and Clean Up Contaminated Sites
EPA has announced that several subsidiaries of BP America, Inc., have agreed to pay a $426,500 penalty and ensure that more than $240 million in funds are secured to resolve violations of hazardous waste, drinking water, and Superfund financial assurance requirements. Financial assurance protects public health and the environment by ensuring that companies have the financial resources available to properly close facilities and clean up pollution at contaminated industrial sites.
“Financial assurance protects taxpayers from having to foot the bill for costly cleanups,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “Today’s settlement will ensure that BP’s subsidiaries have the funds available to cover any necessary cleanup costs today and into the future.”
BP produces, refines, and markets oil and gas. Upon receipt of information from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control and BP, EPA determined that between 2006 and 2010 BP Exploration (Alaska), Inc., BP Products North America, Inc., and BP West Coast Products, LLC, failed to meet their Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) financial assurance requirements.
On July 14, 2010, EPA sent notices of violation to BP notifying the companies that they were not in compliance with applicable financial assurance requirements and that they needed to obtain qualifying financial assurance for these obligations.
As part of the two administrative agreements, BP has obtained replacement financial assurance instruments in the form of letters of credit, standby trusts, and insurance policies for more than $149.1 million in obligations. Specifically, BP has provided assurances covering $129.8 million for its RCRA hazardous waste facilities and $19.2 million to address the closure, plugging, and abandonment of underground injection control wells under the SDWA. BP has also agreed to pay a civil penalty of $411,500 and has agreed to maintain compliance with the financial assurance requirements under RCRA and SDWA.
EPA found that financial assurance provided by BP subsidiaries, Atlantic Richfield Company and BP Products North America, Inc., at several Superfund sites was also inadequate. BP has resolved these issues by providing compliant financial assurance mechanisms covering $98.8 million in Superfund obligations and agreeing to pay a penalty of $15,000.
BP also had inadequate financial assurance coverage for RCRA facilities covered by state orders and regulations and for SDWA wells for which the states have primary enforcement responsibility. EPA worked with its state partners to obtain from BP a total of $76.4 million in compliant financial assurance coverage for these obligations.
Oregon Construction Equipment Manufacturer Exceeds Federal Air Pollution Limits, Pays Penalty
Johnson Crushers International, a construction equipment manufacturer based in Eugene, Oregon, released air pollutants into the environment in excess of federal limits, according to a settlement with the US EPA and US Department of Justice. The company has agreed to pay a $147,788 fine for the CAA violations, as well as $27,212 in past permit fees.
“Under this settlement, Johnson Crushers International will achieve compliance with the Clean Air Act and reduce harmful emissions,” said Amanda Marshall, US Attorney for the District of Oregon.
The company emitted xylene in excess of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for operations that apply coatings such as paint to metal products. They also failed to obtain an air operating permit and avoided paying permit fees. Xylene is a hazardous chemical that can damage the eyes, skin, blood, liver, and kidneys as well as the respiratory, nervous, and gastrointestinal systems.
EPA and Lane Regional Air Protection Agency inspectors identified the violations, which occurred between 2004 and 2009.
Hazardous Waste Company Sparks Fires, Pays EPA Penalty
Burlington Environmental, a Kent, Washington, hazardous waste management facility, has agreed to pay the US EPA a $275,000 penalty for violating state and federal hazardous waste management laws. According to EPA, workers at Burlington Environmental caused two fires by mishandling hazardous waste and failing to comply with basic facility safety rules.
Improper hazardous waste handling can lead to dangerous situations,” said Jeff Kenknight, manager of EPA’s Hazardous Waste Compliance Unit in Seattle. “Facilities need to follow basic rules to run facilities safely and protect surrounding neighborhoods.”
According to EPA documents related to the case, improper processing of lead-contaminated firing range filters and fertilizers started two fires at the facility in July 2009. The company was also cited for failing to store hazardous waste containers properly, storing incompatible wastes next to each other, faulty safety equipment, and inadequate signage.
Burlington Environmental is a subsidiary of Philip Services Corporation.
Nevada Hazardous Waste Treatment Facility Fined $79,500
EPA has fined a hazardous waste treatment, storage, and recycling company $79,500 for the improper management of hazardous waste at its Fernley, Nevada, facility.
A 2010 inspection at 21st Century Environmental Management of Nevada, LLC, uncovered violations of federal standards governing the handling and storage of hazardous waste. In this case, the facility processes and recycles a variety of hazardous materials. Among the violations were storage of hazardous waste in an unpermitted area, cracked and deteriorated containment areas, and a leaking container.
Under EPA’s RCRA regulatory program, hazardous wastes must be stored, handled, and disposed of using measures that safeguard public health and the environment.
Environmental News Links
Trivia Question of the Week
On average, how many days of human activities produce an amount of carbon dioxide equivalent to the carbon dioxide produced globally by volcanoes each year?
a. One to two days
b. Three to five days
c. Sixty to ninety days
d. One hundred twenty to one hundred fifty days
