Methane, the key constituent of natural gas, is a potent greenhouse gas (GHG) with a global warming potential more than 25 times that of carbon dioxide.
As part of the Obama Administration’s commitment to addressing air pollution and climate change, EPA announced its next step in reducing emissions of methane from the oil and natural gas industry: moving to regulate emissions from existing sources. The agency will begin with a formal process to require companies operating existing oil and gas sources to provide information to assist in the development of comprehensive regulations to reduce methane emissions.
An Information Collection Request (ICR) will enable EPA to gather important information on existing sources of methane emissions, technologies to reduce those emissions and the costs of those technologies in the production, gathering, processing, and transmission and storage segments of the oil and gas sector.
There are hundreds of thousands of existing oil and gas sources across the country; some emit small amounts of methane, but others emit very large quantities. Through the ICR, EPA will be seeking a broad range of information that will help us determine how to effectively reduce emissions, including information such as how equipment and emissions controls are, or can be, configured, and what installing those controls entails.
EPA will also be seeking information that will help the agency identify sources with high emissions and the factors that contribute to those emissions. The ICR will likely apply to the same types of sources covered by the current and proposed New Source Performance Standards for the oil and gas sector, as well as additional sources.
Stakeholder outreach – In the next few weeks, EPA will be reaching out to stakeholders about the ICR process. We’ll be talking with industry; environmental groups, state, local, and tribal air agencies, and communities to walk them through the process and to hear feedback and insights on our plans.
Seek public comment on the draft ICR – The ICR process, which is governed by the Paperwork Reduction Act, provides the public opportunities to review drafts of the information collection request. EPA will begin the ICR process next month, signing a draft information collection request that will be made available for public comment. The agency will revise that draft as necessary based on comment and send it to the Office of Management and Budget for additional review and input. Once the collection request is approved—which can include surveys and required emissions monitoring—it will go to industry, which is required to respond and attest that the information it provides is accurate. EPA’s goal is to receive the first phase of information later this year.
EPA’s progress addressing methane from the oil and gas industry – Since 2012, EPA has taken a number of important steps to reduce air pollution from the oil and gas sector, while allowing continued responsible development in this industry that is important to the economy and energy security, and to improve measurement of methane emissions from this dynamic and diverse industry.
Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Rule
In the first major modification to the hazardous waste regulations in over 10 years, EPA plans to modify and reorganize the hazardous waste generator rule. When adopted, the rule will provide greater flexibility in how hazardous waste is managed and close important gaps in the regulations.
Attend Environmental Resource Center’s live, online session on April 18 to learn:
- New requirements for documenting hazardous waste determinations
- Revised requirements for when and how to submit the Notification of Generator Status form to EPA
- How to take advantage of the episodic generation exclusion to avoid reclassification to a larger generator status
- Definitions of important new terms – “Very Small Quantity Generator” and “Central Accumulation Area”
- How to mark containers, tanks, and containment buildings with new information required at central accumulation areas and satellites
- New conditions under which containers can be left open at satellite accumulation areas
- Updated time and volume limits for satellite accumulation areas
- New documentation requirements for contingency plans and biennial reports
- New requirements for shipping hazardous waste from a VSQG to another facility owned by the same organization
New Exclusions for Solvent Recycling and Hazardous Secondary Materials
EPA’s new final rule on the definition of solid waste creates new opportunities for waste recycling outside the scope of the full hazardous waste regulations. This rule, which went into effect on July 13, 2015, streamlines the regulatory burden for wastes that are legitimately recycled.
The first of the two exclusions is an exclusion from the definition of solid waste for high-value solvents transferred from one manufacturer to another for the purpose of extending the useful life of the original solvent by keeping the materials in commerce to reproduce a commercial grade of the original solvent product.
The second, and more wide-reaching of the two exclusions, is a revision of the existing hazardous secondary material recycling exclusion. This exclusion allows you to recycle, or send off-site for recycling, virtually any hazardous secondary material. Provided you meet the terms of the exclusion, the material will no longer be hazardous waste.
Learn how to take advantage of these exclusions at Environmental Resource Center’s live webcast on April 11 where you will learn:
- Which of your materials qualify under the new exclusions
- What qualifies as a hazardous secondary material
- Which solvents can be remanufactured, and which cannot
- What is a tolling agreement
- What is legitimate recycling
- Generator storage requirements
- What documentation you must maintain
- Requirements for off-site shipments
- Training and emergency planning requirements
- If it is acceptable for the recycler to be outside the US
San Antonio RCRA and DOT Training
Jacksonville RCRA and DOT Training
New Orleans RCRA and DOT Training
Oklahoma Establishes New Requirements for Oil and Gas Wells to Minimize Earthquakes
The Oklahoma Corporation Commission’s (OCC) Oil and Gas Conservation Division (OGCD) is continuing to move forward in its response to the risk of triggered earthquakes in Oklahoma, announcing actions to further reduce the amount of oil and gas wastewater injected by Arbuckle disposal wells in earthquake areas and increase the size of the so-called “yellow light” area. OGCD director Tim Baker says the central Oklahoma action will cover more than 5,000 square miles and more than 400 Arbuckle disposal wells. It is similar to the regional response strategy that was instituted in western Oklahoma on February 16. “The western and central Oklahoma actions combined cover over 10,000 square miles and more than 600 Arbuckle disposal wells.” Baker said.
Baker says the goal of the central Oklahoma plan is to reduce the total volume disposed in the area to 40% below the 2014 total. “This means a reduction of more than 300,000 barrels a day from the 2015 average injection volumes,” Baker explained. In a separate action, the OGCD is also expanding the size of the “Area of Interest” (AOI), bringing more restrictions to disposal well operations in areas that have not yet seen major earthquake activity. “This will result in 118 more Arbuckle disposal wells being covered by so-called ‘yellow light’ earthquake precautions. These include having to prove the well has not been drilled too deep in order to keep operating, and daily and weekly volume recording and reporting requirements,” Baker said. “It also eliminates the possibility of administrative approval of a new Arbuckle disposal well application. The AOI expansion is a proactive move to get ahead of the earthquake activity.
“The central Oklahoma volume reduction plan covers an area where we have taken numerous, localized actions over the past 12 months, such as in the Cushing, Crescent, and Edmond areas. But the research and data has grown to provide the basis needed to both expand into a regional approach for volume reduction and increase the size of the AOI.” said Baker.
Baker said the speed at which the latest actions were developed is a major step forward. “Our working relationship with the Oklahoma Geological Survey continues to bear more fruit, greatly helped by the fact that we have been able to add staff to the earthquake effort as a result of the emergency funding from Governor Fallin and grants from the Oklahoma Energy Resources Board and the Groundwater Protection Council,” said Baker. “We have also begun the process of a huge upgrade in our computing power, which will give us far more powerful tools and provide more data to researchers.”
The central Oklahoma volume reduction plan will be phased in over two months in keeping with recommendations from researchers, who warn against sudden pressure changes. The first stage starts today. Notification of well operators began on Thursday, March 3. It is important to note that researchers agree that any decrease in earthquakes that may result from such plans is rarely immediate, and must be evaluated over the course of several months.
Houston Man Sentenced to More than 10 Years in Prison for Biodiesel Fraud Scheme
Philip Joseph Rivkin, aka Felipe Poitan Arriaga, was sentenced recently in Houston, Texas, to 121 months in prison, three years of supervised release, and to pay more than $87 million in restitution and was ordered to forfeit $51 million for generating and selling fraudulent biodiesel credits in the federal renewable fuel program, the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division announced.
“Rivkin’s abuse of the biodiesel program, a program designed to further our nation’s energy independence and combat climate change, was an abuse against the American people,” said Assistant Attorney General John C. Cruden for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “This sentence should send a strong message that those committing fraud in the bio-diesel program will be vigorously prosecuted and sent to prison.”
“Today we take another big step toward upholding the integrity of an important program that reduces greenhouse gas emissions and promotes energy independence,” said Assistant Administrator Cynthia Giles for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “After years of persistence by EPA and our partners, we’ve brought a serious offender to justice for environmental crimes. This sentence deters would-be violators and helps protect responsible companies that follow the rules.”
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 created or extended several federally-funded programs that created monetary incentives for the production of renewable fuels, including biodiesel and to encourage the use of such fuels in the US. Authorized biodiesel producers and importers could generate and attach credits—known as renewable identification numbers (RINs)—to biodiesel they produced or imported. Because certain companies need RINs to comply with regulatory obligations, RINs have significant market value.
As admitted in the plea agreement, beginning around February of 2009, Rivkin operated and controlled several companies in the fuel and biodiesel industries, including Green Diesel LLC, Fuel Streamers Inc., and Petro Constructors LLC, all based in Houston. Rivkin claimed to produce millions of gallons of biodiesel at the Green Diesel’s Houston facility and then generated and sold RINs based upon this claim. In reality, no biodiesel was ever produced at the Green Diesel facility. This scheme allowed the defendant to generate over 60 million RINs that were fraudulent, which were then sold to companies that needed to obtain them and resulted in millions of dollars in sales. Rivkin created false records and made false statements to conceal his fraudulent claims of biodiesel production, importation and RIN generation.
The collaborative investigation that led to the recent sentence was the result of work by EPA’s Criminal Investigation Division, the U.S. Secret Service, Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation, Homeland Security Investigations, and the Guatemalan Special Investigations Unit, which worked with federal investigators to uncover the fraudulent nature of Rivkin’s Guatemalan citizenship, which led to his deportation back to the U.S.
The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Leslie E. Lehnert of the Environmental Crimes Section of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division.
Seafood Companies Agree to Cut Ozone-Depleting and GHG Refrigerant Releases
Two seafood processing and cold storage companies, Ocean Gold Seafoods, Inc., and Ocean Cold, LLC, have agreed to cut their releases of ozone-depleting and greenhouse gases (GHG) from leaking refrigeration equipment at their facilities in Westport, Washington.
Both of the companies used the refrigerant chlorodifluoromethane or “R-22,” a powerful ozone-depleting and potent GHG with 1,800 times more global warming potential than carbon dioxide. R-22 and other hydrochlorofluorocarbons, or HCFCs, damage the ozone layer, resulting in dangerous amounts of cancer-causing ultraviolet solar radiation striking the earth, increasing skin cancers and cataracts.
“Because of this settlement, the Ocean Companies are expected to cut their future ozone-depleting releases and reduce their future refrigerant emissions in an amount equivalent to approximately 47 million pounds of carbon dioxide each year, another step in our efforts to combat climate change,” said Director Ed Kowalski of EPA’s Pacific Northwest Office of Compliance and Enforcement. “Investing in better equipment and maintenance to stop wasteful refrigerant leaks is good for our environment and good for business.”
Since at least 2007, the Ocean Companies failed to promptly repair refrigerant leaks and failed to keep adequate records of the servicing of their refrigeration equipment necessary to prevent leaks, in violation of the Clean Air Act.
The settlement requires the Ocean Companies to commit to a refrigerant release reduction program, to implement a refrigerant compliance management plan, to train employees in their refrigerant-related work requirements, and to provide periodic reports to EPA. The companies also agreed to use a third-party verifier to inspect their facilities and records to observe leak detection and recordkeeping practices, as well as to determine whether the companies’ actions and records comply with the management plan and the terms of the settlement. In addition to the penalties, as part of the settlement, the Ocean Companies have agreed to fix all refrigerant leaks and implement facility-wide improvements expected to cost about $260,000.
Pesticide Company Fined More than $150,000 for Reporting Failures
A company that manufactures and imports pet care products has taken responsibility for its error and agreed to pay $151,040 to settle claims that it imported goods to its Mansfield, Massachusetts, facility in violation of federal pesticide laws.
Federal law requires an importer to report vital information to EPA regarding the device and its major active ingredients, which allows EPA to decide whether the importation will pose unreasonable risks to public health or the environment.
The claims against Hagen involve the import between 2010 and 2014 of two types of devices that destroy algae and filter waste in ponds and fish tanks.
“The information required lets EPA decide before a product enters our country whether it poses a risk for the public or our environment,” said Curt Spalding, regional administrator of EPA’s New England office. “This reporting is important for EPA to ensure that we are protecting the public and our communities.”
The information required on the EPA forms includes, for example, details concerning active ingredients, quantities, countries of origin, identity of producing establishments, carriers, ports of entry, and contact information.
Cutting Cattle Carbon
Cattle have bad breath and commonly suffer from severe, chronic flatus generating large amounts of methane, which is a GHG and a driver of anthropogenic global warming. There is an obvious answer to this problem, stop breeding cattle. Unfortunately a large proportion of us enjoy our bovine dairy products and meat too much. Until synthetic products that are indistinguishable from the real thing become available and accepted by milk drinkers and steak fans, we will have to look into alternative approaches to reducing the carbon emissions from these creatures.
These approaches involve improved genetic selection through breeding, modification of dietary composition, or through rumen microbial manipulation, vaccines against the methanogenic bacteria that generate the methane in these animals and various other techniques. It is possible that among the approaches or with a combination of approaches there might be a way to reduce the global burden of methane emissions from livestock.
"Methane emissions by livestock are very significant contributors to anthropogenic emissions of GHGs in many countries and the onus is increasingly on the farming industry to find ways of reducing these emissions," the researchers say. They point out that while changes in nutrition and feed can play an important role on methane production by ruminants, manipulating the diet of these animals to reduce absolute methane emissions is a big challenge both practically and financially. However, inhibitors of the methanogenic bacteria have been demonstrated, although more detailed studies are needed urgently to demonstrate efficacy and to ensure that latent side effects might not be more deleterious to the environment, animal welfare, and human health.
Fundamentally, however, the pressure to reduce the carbon footprint of livestock using any of these approaches will have to compete with the need for economic viability of the farming industry, at least until synthetic meat usurps the T-bone steak or the carnivores among us go vegetarian.
California Resin Manufacturer Required to Protect Waterways from Oil Spills
Sunpol will pay a $41,600 penalty as part of the agreement, and has already corrected its oil pollution prevention violations.
“Protecting California’s waterways from oil pollution is critical,” said Jared Blumenfeld, EPA’s Regional Administrator for the Pacific Southwest. “As a result of this enforcement action, the Suisun Marsh is better protected from possible spills and the resulting environmental degradation.”
Also, some parts of the facility lacked necessary containment systems or drainage control measures, such as using drip pans to catch spills when pumping oil between containers. Above-ground oil storage tanks also lacked adequate secondary containment, which must be in place to keep spilled oil from leaving the site and entering surrounding waters. A simple berm made of earth or concrete can control such spills.
EPA also recently settled with West Newport Oil Company for failure to have an adequate and complete SPCC Plan for its facility in Costa Mesa, California. West Newport Oil was fined $7,000 for failing to appropriately amend and re-certify its plan; identify suitable inspection criteria; and organize procedures so that they can provide complete information to proper authorities during an emergency.
National Grid will Pay $850,000 for Asbestos Cleanup of Salem, Massachusetts Site
This settlement covers most of EPA’s cleanup costs of $927,275.
The .38-acre site, at 15 Peabody St. in Salem, is owned by the city and is used as a public park. From 1910 to 1964, the Massachusetts Electric Company and other utilities operated a power plant at the site. The Massachusetts Electric Company then demolished the power plant, and left most of the demolition material in place.
The city discovered asbestos in soil when it was building a park at the site. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection asked for help from EPA, which in May 2009 agreed that contaminated soils should be removed quickly and which then did a cleanup that was finished in November 2009. In January 2014, EPA notified the electric company that it was a “potentially responsible party” at this Superfund site and made a demand for reimbursement of cleanup costs.
No additional cleanup actions or costs are anticipated at the site.
EPA’s 2016 Climate Leadership Awards
In Seattle, Washington, on March 9, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy recognized organizations from around the country at the Climate Leadership Awards (CLA) for their leadership and innovation in helping fight climate change. Winners are honored for managing and reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in internal operations and throughout the supply chain, as well as integrating climate resilience into their operating strategies.
“This year’s Climate Leadership Award winners are setting a high bar for organizations across the country,” said EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy. “They are proving that climate action isn’t just the right thing to do; it’s also the profitable thing to do.”
“The winners of the 2016 Climate Leadership Awards are showing the way to a more sustainable future,” said Ted Roosevelt IV, C2ES board chairman. “After the hottest year globally on record, this leadership is more urgent than ever. Companies, cities, and individuals are crucial to demonstrating real-world success in reducing the emissions contributing to climate change. We applaud the CLA winners for demonstrating the many paths forward to a low-carbon future, and hope others follow their example.”
“The Climate Registry is honored to recognize the 2016 award winners for their dedication to addressing climate change,” said David Rosenheim, TCR executive director. “This impressive group of climate champions has raised the bar for climate action, and we hope others will follow their lead as we move towards a low-carbon economy. We applaud this year’s winners for transparently measuring and reducing their carbon pollution, demonstrating the path to a more sustainable future.”
From an innovative partnership that dramatically increased mass adoption of home energy and water efficiency projects in communities across California to some of the country’s largest corporations exceeding their aggressive emission reduction goals, the EPA’s Climate Leadership Award winners illustrate that actions to combat climate change make smart business decisions.
- Organizational Leadership Award: California Department of Water Resources (Sacramento, CA) for protecting California’s water supply; Ingersoll Rand (Davidson, NC) for phasing out HCFCs and other refrigerants; Mars, Incorporated (McLean, VA) for working to eliminate GHG emissions 100% by 2040; Microsoft Corporation (Redmond, WA) for establishing an internal carbon fee that funds energy upgrades, and more.
- Supply Chain Leadership Award: Cisco Systems (San Jose, CA) for engaging all suppliers to have strong sustainability programs.
- Individual Leadership Award: Thomas G. Day, United States Postal Service (Washington, D.C.) for leading the U.S. Postal Service in reducing GHG emissions 20% by 2020.
- Innovative Partnerships Certificate: Government Authorities for the Home Energy Renovation Opportunity (HERO) Program (San Diego, CA) for helping to increase the mass adoption of home energy and water efficiency across California; King County-Cities Climate Collaboration (Seattle, WA) for adopting a countywide GHG emissions reduction goal of 25% by 2020; Minneapolis Clean Energy Partnership (Minneapolis, MN) for working to reduce the City’s emissions 30% by 2025.
- Excellence in GHG Management Goal Achievement: Best Buy Co., Inc. (Richfield, MN) for reducing absolute GHG emissions 26% from 2009 to 2014; Kimberly-Clark Corporation (Irving, TX) for reducing global absolute GHG emissions 6.9% from 2010 to 2014; Pitney Bowes (Stamford, CT) for reducing global absolute GHG emissions 15% from 2012 to 2014; United Technologies Corporation (Hartford, CT) for reducing global absolute GHG emissions 27% from 2006 to 2014; Xcel Energy (Minneapolis, MN) for reducing absolute GHG emissions 20% from 2005 to 2014.
- Excellence in GHG Management Goal Setting: Dallas Fort Worth International Airport (DFW Airport, TX) for setting an absolute target of an annual 2% reduction in its scope one and two GHG emissions from 2010 to 2020; IBM (Armonk, NY) for setting a 35% absolute GHG emissions third-generation reduction goal for global operations between 2005 and 2020; MetLife, Inc. (New York, NY) for working to achieve carbon neutrality from 2016 through at least 2018.
EPA’s Center for Corporate Climate Leadership establishes standards of climate leadership by encouraging organizations with emerging climate objectives to identify and achieve cost-effective GHG emission reductions, while helping more advanced organizations drive innovations in reducing their GHG impacts in their supply chains and beyond. The Center provides technical tools, guidance, educational resources, and opportunities for information sharing and peer exchange among organizations interested in reducing the environmental impacts associated with climate change.
$300,000 Green Technology Contract Awarded to Oakland, California Small Business
EPA is awarding $295,507 to Lucid Design Group, Inc., located in Oakland, California, to develop innovative technology to protect the environment.
Through this project, Lucid is focused on reducing energy consumption in commercial buildings by influencing people’s behavior. With this award, it will further develop, test and commercialize low-cost high-tech approaches that can reduce electricity use in commercial buildings by providing real-time feedback to office workers. The technology seeks to reduce peak electricity demand and associated utility bill costs through ambient color-based visual messaging; balancing energy usage and occupant comfort.
“Lucid’s project is a great example of how technology can be used to help protect the environment,” said Jared Blumenfeld, EPA’s Regional Administrator for the Pacific Southwest. “Giving office workers immediate feedback on their energy use can help them to change their habits for the better.”
These phase II awards are only available to companies that previously submitted research proposals for their innovative technologies and were awarded phase I contracts of up to $100,000.
Lucid got its start as a competing team from Oberlin College in EPA’s People, Prosperity, and the Planet (P3) grant competition. In 2005, the team won a P3 grant for their prototype, the Building Dashboard. This online tool tracks in real-time how much energy and water is being used in a building and provides visual insights that can influence occupants to change their habits. In 2014, Lucid received an SBIR phase I contract for their proposal to develop a software system to encourage behavior-based energy conservation in commercial buildings.
EPA is one of 11 federal agencies that participate in the SBIR program, which was enacted in 1982 to strengthen the role of small businesses in federal research and development, create jobs and promote U.S. technical innovation. To be eligible to participate in the SBIR program, a company must be an organized, for-profit U.S. business and have fewer than 500 employees.
EPA and Summit Inc. Reach Agreement on Cleanup at Gary, Indiana Facility
The company will also develop an emergency response plan, take steps to better train employees on handling waste, and pay a penalty of $263,375. Summit Inc., will submit a cleanup plan for state approval.
“This is great news for Gary residents living near Summit Inc., who will reap public health and environmental benefits from the cleanup required by this agreement,” said Acting Regional Administrator Robert Kaplan. “The company will also train employees to properly respond to releases of oil and hazardous waste at the facility.”
Making a visible difference in communities like Gary is one of EPA’s top priorities.
Pest Control Company and Employees Plead Guilty–Illegal Pesticide Application Injures a Minor
Sunland Pest Control Services, Inc. (Sunland); Grenale Williams, of South Bay, Florida; and Canarie Deon Curry, of Riviera Beach, Florida, recently pled guilty in federal court in Fort Pierce before U.S. District Court Judge Jose E. Martinez in connection with the illegal application of a pesticide that resulted in injuries to a minor child.
Sunland, Williams, and Curry pled guilty for their involvement in the illegal application of sulfuryl fluoride (a pesticide), contrary to the label’s safety requirements, in violation of Title 7, U.S. Code, Section 136i(b)(1)(B). Sunland also pled guilty to making false statements in connection with the investigation. Williams and Curry face a statutory maximum sentence of up to one year in prison and a fine of up to $100,000, to be followed by and a period of supervised release. In addition, Sunland faces up to five years of probation and a $500,000 fine for the false statements conviction. Sentencing is scheduled for May 11, 2016 in Fort Pierce.
Application of restricted use pesticides is limited to certified applicators or those under the direct supervision of certified applicators. Sulfuryl fluoride, a commonly used antimicrobial in structural fumigations for termites, is one such restricted use pesticide that is registered with the EPA. At the heart of the safe use of such pesticides is compliance with the product label, which includes the written, printed, or graphic matter associated with the pesticide. Under FIFRA, the label is the law, and strict compliance with it is critical to the safe application of the restricted use pesticide. Federal law also prohibits the making of material false statements in a matter within the jurisdiction of the EPA.
Court records and a joint factual statement indicate that in June 2015 residents contracted with Terminix for a home fumigation for termites under an existing warranty. Terminix, without warning or approval, subcontracted the job to Sunland. The fumigation occurred over a weekend and the residents returned to their home on Sunday, August 16, 2015, to find a clearance tag on the front door indicating that it was safe to enter. During the evening, several family members became ill and medical attention was sought for their nine year old son. It was determined that the family’s symptoms were consistent with pesticide poisoning.
A subsequent investigation revealed that contrary to the label requirements for use of the potentially deadly gas, the defendants failed, among other violations, to: provide the Fact Sheet for the pesticide being used; have the required number of properly trained personnel on site following the application of the pesticide; properly aerate the fumigated space; and conduct clearance testing with an approved and calibrated Low Fumigant Level Detection Device. In addition, a clearance tag was left at the premises indicating it was safe to enter when in fact the requisite procedures had not been completed. The family was falsely assured by Terminix and Sunland that the aeration and clearance requirements had been met. Additionally, Sunland representatives misrepresented the specific brand of pesticide that was used and indicated that the fumigation, aeration, and clearance of the home was in accordance with the law when in truth and fact, the defendants were not in compliance.
U.S. Attorney Wifredo A. Ferrer stated, “Federal regulations are in place to ensure that the public is protected. Individuals and corporations who knowingly side-step the safety protocols that have been instituted expose others to potentially dangerous consequences. The U.S. Attorney’s Office will continue to work with our law enforcement partners to hold those accountable who violate the law.”
“The preventable toxic poisoning of a young boy is a stark reminder of why pesticides must be used properly and responsibly,” said Andy Castro, Acting Special Agent in Charge of EPA’s criminal enforcement program in Florida. “EPA’s investigation revealed numerous FIFRA violations before, during, and after the defendants’ fumigated the victims’ home. These charges demonstrate that those who knowingly misuse pesticide products threaten the most vulnerable among us, and can expect to be prosecuted.”
Mr. Ferrer commended the investigative efforts of the EPA, the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Bureau of Pesticide and Incident Response, and the Florida Office of Agricultural Law Enforcement. The case was prosecuted by Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Jodi A. Mazer and Assistant US Attorney Thomas Watts-FitzGerald of the Economic & Environmental Crimes Section.
One Million Lights Recycled through Washington’s LightRecycle Program
People in Washington have recycled more than one million fluorescent tubes, CFLs, HID lamps, and other mercury-containing lights since the new LightRecycle Washington program launched January 1, 2015. The LightRecycle program allows individuals and businesses to recycle up to 10 fluorescent lights or CFLs per day at over 220 collection sites throughout the state.
Fluorescents and some other types of lights contain small amounts of mercury, a toxic heavy metal. Recycling these lights keeps mercury out of the environment. In 2015, LightRecycle topped its annual goal by 4%, recycling 989,034 lights, then surpassed 1 million lights in January 2016.
“People in Washington got the LightRecycle program off to a strong start, but there are a lot of mercury-containing lights still out there,” said Peter Thermos, program manager for LightRecycle Washington. “We’ll keep looking for ways to expand the program and let people know that it’s important to properly recycle fluorescent lights.”
According to a 2015 survey commissioned by LightRecycle, only about half of people in Washington know that fluorescent lights and CFLs contain mercury. Although individual lights only have a small amount of mercury, the millions of lights used in Washington have the potential to harm the environment if not properly recycled.
LightRecycle Washington is a product stewardship program, meaning that manufacturers set up a system to manage their products at the end of their useful life. LightRecycle is run by PCA Product Stewardship, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, and overseen by the Washington Department of Ecology, which administers the state’s mercury lights law.
Environmental News Links
Trivia Question of the Week
Recycled waste oil, mixed with what material has proven to be a strong and durable bitumen replacement in asphalt?
a) Spent printer toner
b) Fracking sand
c) Sewage sludge
d) Sodium bicarbonate dust produced from power plant CO2 emissions
