EPA will hold five listening sessions to help the agency update the Clean Air Act (CAA) pollution standards to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution from fossil fuel power plants and petroleum refineries. The listening sessions will be open to the public and will help EPA develop what the agency describes as a common-sense approach to reduce GHGs from two of the largest industrial pollution sources, which are responsible for nearly 40% of the GHG pollution in the United States. Reducing GHG pollution can also result in reductions to other harmful air pollutants emitted by these facilities.
The agency is in the process of gathering information and seeking important input and, as part of a settlement agreement announced December 23, 2010, will propose GHG standards based on existing technologies for power plants in July 2011 and for refineries in December 2011. The agency will issue final standards in May 2012 and November 2012, respectively.
In addition to these GHG New Source Performance Standards, EPA is also addressing other pollutants, including mercury and particle pollution, in separate, coordinated actions.
The feedback from these sessions will play an important role in helping EPA develop smart, cost-effective and protective standards that reflect the latest and best information available. The agency will solicit additional public comment during the usual notice and comment period—including the opportunity for a formal public hearing—after the proposals have been published and before they go into effect.
Each listening session is scheduled to last two hours and will feature a facilitated round table discussion among stakeholder representatives who have been identified and selected for their expertise in the CAA standard-setting process. The agency has asked key stakeholder groups to identify these round table participants.
Registration is not required to attend the sessions. There will be a short period of time at the end of each session for the public to provide comments. The March 4 session will allow additional time for the public to provide feedback. To speak during these times, please notify EPA when signing in to the session. If you do not have the opportunity to speak during these times or you cannot make it to the sessions, written comments on these planned rulemakings may also be submitted. The agency requests that written comments be submitted by March 18, 2011.
Only Two Webcasts Remaining, Register Today for: IATA Update – What’s New for 2011?
Each year, the International Air Transportation Association (IATA) updates and revises the regulations for the transportation of dangerous goods (hazardous materials) by air. If you offer dangerous goods for transportation by air, you must follow the new regulations by January 1. A large number of significant changes are being implemented in the 2011 IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR).
At this live webcast, you will learn:
- Changes in the regulations for consumer commodities– new marking and shipping paper entries
- New test authorized to determine classification and packing group of corrosives
- Changes in the classification criteria for magnetized materials
- Revisions to the classification of environmentally hazardous substances, marine pollutants, and aquatic pollutants
- Phase in of new packing instructions for Class 3 flammable liquids, Class 4 flammable solids, Class 5 oxidizers/organic peroxides, Class 8 corrosives, Class 9 miscellaneous, and Division 6
- New entries on the IATA List of Dangerous Goods and new special provisions
- New marking requirements for net quantities, limited quantities, environmentally hazardous substances, and orientation arrows
Tampa, Florida RCRA and DOT Training
Advertising Opportunities Available
Environmental Resource Center is making a limited number of advertising positions available in the Safety Tip of the Week™, the Environmental Tip of the Week™, and the Reg of the Day™.
Greening the Supply Chain: Businesses Unlock Hidden Value
Businesses are now seeing a return on investment from embedding sustainable practices into the procurement function, indicating an emerging trend in supply chain engagement and collaboration. More than 50% of large businesses and 25% of their suppliers have seen cost savings as a result of carbon management activities.
That’s according to The Carbon Disclosure Project 2011 Supply Chain Report, produced by management consulting firm A.T. Kearney, which looks at climate change actions and performance of 57 of the leading global companies and 1,000 of their suppliers across a broad cross-section of industries.
Of the companies in the report, 86% saw commercial benefits from working closely with suppliers to improve performance and mutual return on investment, up from 46% in 2009. This jump is evidence of how sustainable procurement practices are addressing climate change and could have major impact on the supply chain, which for most companies accounts for at least 50% of carbon emissions.
PepsiCo, for example, has uncovered more than $60 million in energy savings opportunities and a 16% reduction in per-unit energy use across its beverage plants, as a result of its carbon management strategy and proprietary energy assessment tool. “With a robust strategy and proven benchmarks in place, PepsiCo set out to engage and educate suppliers about potential opportunities to innovate their own operations,” said Walter Todd, Vice-President of Operations, PepsiCo UK & Ireland. “By providing suppliers access to the same energy assessment tools we use in our own operations, we’ve seen mutual return on investment.”
With more than 79% of the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) Supply Chain member businesses now employing a formal climate change strategy (up from 63% in 2009), there has been a parallel shift in the key business drivers for action within the supply chain, affecting how large organizations and their suppliers engage and implement carbon management processes.
The increase in strategic awareness in 2010 has created a ripple effect across supply chain operations and processes, which have allowed businesses to more effectively leverage opportunities for top-line growth, savings, and new carbon reductions. For example:
- More than 50% of large businesses and 25% of their suppliers have seen cost savings as a result of carbon management activities;
- More businesses are training procurement staff in this area (up to 41% from 26% in 2009) and incentivizing staff through awards and recognition (up from 11% in 2009 to 25%);
- Employee motivation and brand management have increased in priority by more than 50% of businesses; and
- Product differentiation has also become an increasingly important objective (60%).
Quality and consistency of reporting processes across the supply chain remain significant hurdles in advancing carbon management practices. However, the development and use of standardized scorecards is emerging, which will enable more informed and strategic supplier measurement and selection.
- The percentage of businesses which track and report supply chain emissions more than doubled to 45% in 2010;
- 72% of large businesses have their data verified externally, yet only 39% of suppliers do so due to the high costs associated with this process; and
- Carbon management criteria is increasingly part of supplier selection—up to 17% from 11% and expected to be 29% in 5 years.
“We’re seeing a shift among leading companies in the way they are implementing sustainable, quantifiable climate change policies and practices, said Frances Way, Program Director, CDP. “Whereas last year we saw a rise in the number of large organizations embedding climate change policy into the business strategy; now these policies are increasingly being put into practice at an operational level, across the entire supply chain. What’s encouraging is that suppliers and large purchasing corporations alike are starting to realize the commercial benefits as a result of collaboration.”
Daniel Mahler, A.T. Kearney partner and study co-leader said, “Forward looking corporate executives are realizing that the implementation of carbon emission reduction programs deliver significant economic and strategic benefits for their organizations. Close collaboration with suppliers on these efforts multiplies the benefits.”
On-Site Training Saves Time and Money
When leading companies and government agencies need to ensure that their employees learn the latest environmental, safety, and transportation requirements, they turn to Environmental Resource Center. For the past 30 years, companies such as Air Products, BASF, Chevron, Corning, John Deere, Entergy, Sempra, Exxon, Merck, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Mack Trucks, Motorola, as well as many government agencies, such as the EPA, Army, Air Force, Navy, VA DEQ, and universities, such as Columbia, UCLA, Cornell, Tulane, Duke, Clemson, and others have depended on Environmental Resource Center for on-site training of their key staff, top management, and plant personnel.
Environmental Resource Center’s on-site training is an effective way to train your personnel on the specific rules that apply to your site and is tailored to your site’s procedures. Site specific training is available on-site, online, and with our HELP™ (Health and Environmental Learning Program), we can develop computer based training modules that work with your learning management system.
EPA, DOT and California Align Timeframe for Proposing Standards for Next Generation of Clean Cars
The DOT, EPA, and the state of California have announced a single timeframe for proposing fuel economy and GHG standards for model year 2017-2025 cars and light-duty trucks.
Proposing the new standards on the same timeframe—by September 1, 2011—signals continued collaboration that could lead to an extension of the current National Clean Car Program, providing automakers certainty as they work to build the next generation of clean, fuel efficient cars.
Improving fuel efficiency will save consumers money at the pump, reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil, and cut emissions of harmful pollutants.
“The single timeframe is another great example of the cooperation that has led us to strong and achievable standards for clean cars in America,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “I’m proud to be working with my federal and state partners on this next step in the process to make the U.S. the world leader in fuel efficient clean cars.”
“Today’s announcement is a big step forward, but it is only the beginning. By working together with EPA and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop standards for the next generation of clean cars, we can set a standard that works for automakers across the country,” said DOT Secretary LaHood. “Our continued collaboration is win-win-win for the environment, businesses and the American consumer.”
“President Obama’s invitation last year to join with the federal agencies to develop new emission and fuel economy standards has resulted in a model of government cooperation to address the important issues of global climate change and urban pollution,” said Mary Nichols, Chairman of the California Air Resources Board.
In April 2010, DOT and EPA established GHG emission and fuel economy standards for model year 2012-2016 light-duty cars and trucks.
In the fall of 2010, California accepted compliance with these federal GHG standards as meeting similar state standards as adopted in 2004, resulting in the first coordinated national program. The standards require these vehicles to meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide per mile in model year 2016, which is equivalent to 35.5 miles per gallon.
In May 2010, President Obama announced that EPA, DOT, and California would begin working together to assess the performance and costs of a variety of technologies that could be available in model years 2017-2025 as the first step in possibly extending the current national emission and fuel economy standards. The three agencies completed an interim technology assessment and have since funded additional research critical to future rulemaking.
With this announcement, CARB is committing to continue its collaboration with DOT’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and EPA in an effort to establish standards that will provide manufacturers with the regulatory certainty needed to invest in the kind of new technologies that will provide consumers a full range of efficient clean vehicle choices.
Prior to this announcement, CARB announced its intention to propose GHG emission standards for model years 2017 to 2025 in March of this year, while EPA and NHTSA were working on an end of September timeline for proposal. This announcement ensures that both proposals will come out simultaneously after a thorough, joint review of all data available when the proposals are issued.
Auto manufacturers are responding to these goals through the increased domestic production and use of existing, advanced, and emerging technologies to strengthen the auto industry and enhance job creation in the United States.
EPA Solicits Public Input on Using Vapor Intrusion Threats as Criteria for Superfund Sites
Superfund sites are the most polluted, complex, uncontrolled or abandoned sites in the United States and are eligible for federal cleanup funding to protect the people’s health.
Vapor intrusion describes the migration of volatile chemicals from contaminated groundwater or soil into the atmosphere, and is a particular concern if vapors enter an overlying building.
EPA is accepting public feedback on seven specific topics related to the potential revisions to the Hazard Ranking System (HRS), which is used to evaluate sites for the Superfund list, for 75 days. The agency will consider information gathered during the comment period, as well as input from three public listening sessions before making a decision on whether to issue a proposed rulemaking to add a vapor intrusion component to the HRS.
Two additional listening sessions will be held in San Francisco, California, and Albuquerque, New Mexico. EPA will post dates, times, and addresses for the listening sessions on its Superfund webpage.
EPA Proposes Stronger Protections for People in Pesticide Experiments
It will be harder for the chemical industry to use people as test subjects in pesticide research sent to the EPA, based on an expanded “human testing rule.”
EPA has proposed dramatic changes in how studies that intentionally expose people to pesticides can be conducted and in what studies it will accept. These proposed changes should force the chemical industry to avoid these types of studies altogether.
The proposed rule, now open for a 60-day public comment period, results from a 2010 court settlement between EPA, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and other public health and farmworker advocacy groups represented by NRDC and Earthjustice. The lawsuit was filed to prohibit EPA’s reliance on these experiments that often led to weakened pesticide safety standards.
“With this new proposal, EPA has cut the incentive for pesticide manufacturers to conduct unethical, and often unscientific, human experiments,” said NRDC Senior Attorney Michael Wall. “While it does not ban human testing outright, it sets the bar high enough that studies on people should not be an attractive option as evidence submitted to EPA. We don’t want to see anyone getting paid to dose themselves with toxic pesticides, but if EPA is going to continue to consider studies that use humans when it regulates pesticides, the research needs to adhere to these stricter rules,” Wall said.
The existing human testing rule, in place since 2006, allows parents or other authority figures to allow pesticide testing on their children in some circumstances. The proposed rule closes that loophole. The existing rule also only applies to pesticide studies conducted with the intention of being submitted to EPA. With this proposal, the human testing rule will apply to all studies EPA reviews, whether or not the researchers intended for the study to go to EPA.
The new standards are drawn from National Academy of Sciences recommendations and the Nuremberg Code. Under these new standards, EPA expects the number of such experiments to fall dramatically.
In 2006, EPA lifted a moratorium on its use of experiments in which people are purposely dosed with pesticides to assess toxic effects. In some studies, public records show that researchers paid people to eat or drink pesticides, to enter pesticide vapor “chambers,” or to have pesticides sprayed into their eyes or rubbed onto their skin. The pesticide industry submitted results of such tests to EPA to use as part of its review on pesticide safety.
“Some of the worst scientific reports I have read are these industry-funded pesticide studies where no more than a handful of adults are dosed with a toxic pesticide, and then the companies try to argue away complaints of headaches, nausea, and even vomiting,” said NRDC Senior Scientist Jennifer Sass. “In one experiment, the people tested were even told that the chemical was a medicine instead of a pesticide.”
A coalition of health and environmental advocates, and farmworker protection groups filed the lawsuit against EPA in 2006, claiming that its rule violated a law requiring strict ethical and scientific protections for pesticide testing on humans.
The coalition argued in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that the rule ignored scientific criteria proposed by the National Academy of Sciences, did not prohibit testing on pregnant women and children, and even violated the Nuremberg Code, including the requirement of fully informed consent. The Nuremberg Code is a set of standards governing medical experiments on humans that was put in place after World War II, following criminal medical experiments performed by Nazi doctors.
The 2006 lawsuit was brought by the Farm Labor Organizing Committee, Migrant Clinicians Network, NRDC, Pesticide Action Network North America, United Farm Workers, Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste (Northwest Treeplanters and Farmworkers United), and the San Francisco Bay Area Physicians for Social Responsibility. Attorneys with NRDC, Earthjustice, and Farmworker Justice served as legal counsel for the coalition.
Maui and Kauai to Ban Plastic Shopping Bags
The Mayors, County Councils, and residents of Maui and Kauai counties in Hawaii were recognized by EPA for enacting restrictions banning plastic shopping bags—reducing their waste and protecting the environment in a single action.
“The leadership shown by the Counties of Maui and Kauai in banning these bags will help keep their environments pristine,” said Jared Blumenfeld, EPA’s Regional Administrator for the Pacific Southwest. “This will not only decrease the amount of plastic in the counties, but it will reduce the number of bags that end up in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch—an enormous area of floating plastic waste.”
The Counties of Maui and Kauai join American Samoa in banning plastic shopping bags in the Pacific area. Other areas, including San Francisco, Portland, San Jose, Santa Monica, Marin County, South Padre (Texas), coastal North Carolina, and other California cities including Malibu, Palo Alto, Fairfax, and Los Angeles County have bag bans. California cities of Fremont, Sunnyvale, Santa Cruz, Trent Hills, Long Beach, Santa Clara County, and other areas such as New York City, Seattle, Boston, Phoenix, Arkansas, Oregon, Vermont, Connecticut, and Maryland are also considering legislation to ban plastic bags. Other countries that have banned free plastic bags include China, Bangladesh, Australia, Italy, South Africa, Ireland, and Taiwan.
The Great Pacific Garbage Patch refers to two areas of floating plastic waste in the North Pacific that have been identified by NOAA and many other organizations. These areas are located in both the eastern and western Pacific and are composed of marine debris. The main type of garbage in the patch is plastic litter along with other debris such as derelict fishing nets. Much of the debris is very small bits of floating plastic debris broken down through photodegradation, and surveys estimate that there may be as much as six times more plastic than plankton in parts of the garbage patch. The action by the counties of Maui and Kauai will help protect many species of Pacific marine and bird life, which attempt to consume the plastic debris after mistaking it for food.
Nation’s Second Largest Refinery to Pay $700 Million to Upgrade Pollution Controls at U.S. Virgin Islands Facility
HOVENSA LLC, owner of the second largest petroleum refinery in the United States, has agreed to pay a $5.375 million civil penalty and spend more than $700 million in new pollution controls to resolve CAA violations at its St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, refinery, the Department of Justice and EPA recently announced.
“This important settlement with the second largest refinery in the United States will result in significant improvements to human health and the environment of the U.S. Virgin Islands,” said Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice. “Because of this settlement, HOVENSA will install advanced pollution control and monitoring technology, will adopt more stringent emissions limits, and will also create a fund dedicated to local environmental projects. This is another major step in our efforts, alongside EPA, to bring the petroleum refining sector into compliance with our nation’s environmental laws.”
“This settlement will produce significant benefits for the environment and for the people of the Virgin Islands,” said Cynthia Giles, Assistant Administrator of EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “The commitments made by HOVENSA to install state-of-the-art pollution controls will mean cleaner air for years to come.”
“Residents of the Virgin Islands expect and deserve to live in an environment free from harmful emissions and other pollutants,” said Ronald W. Sharpe, U.S. Attorney for the District of the Virgin Islands. “This agreement further illustrates the U.S. Department of Justice’s commitment to enforcing environmental laws so that current and future generations will be able to enjoy the natural beauty so prevalent in the Virgin Islands.”
The consent decree, lodged in the U.S. District Court of the Virgin Islands, is subject to a 30-day public comment period and court approval.
The government’s complaint, filed concurrently with the settlement, alleged that the company made modifications to its refinery that increased emissions without first obtaining pre-construction permits and installing required pollution control equipment. The CAA requires major sources of air pollution to obtain such permits before making changes that would result in a significant emissions increase of any pollutant.
Once fully implemented, the pollution controls required by the settlement are estimated to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) by more than 5,000 tons per year and sulfur dioxide (SO2) by nearly 3,500 tons per year. The settlement will also result in additional reductions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), particulate matter, carbon monoxide, and other pollutants that affect air quality. Additional pollution-reducing projects at the refinery’s coking unit under the settlement will also reduce GHG emissions by over 6,100 tons per year.
High concentrations of SO2 and NOx, two key pollutants emitted from refineries, can have adverse impacts on human health, and are significant contributors to acid rain, smog, and haze.
The government of the U.S. Virgin Islands has joined in the settlement and will receive a portion of the civil penalty. In addition, the company will set aside an additional $4.875 million for projects to benefit the environment of the U.S. Virgin Islands. The projects will be identified jointly by the U.S. Virgin Islands government and HOVENSA, in consultation with EPA.
The first of EPA’s settlements was reached in 2000, and with this settlement, 105 refineries operating in 32 states and territories—more than 90% of the total refining capacity in the United States—are under judicially enforceable agreements to significantly reduce emissions of pollutants. As a result of the settlement agreements, refiners have agreed to invest over $6 billion in new pollution controls designed to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and other pollutants by over 360,000 tons per year.
HOVENSA is one of the 10 largest refineries in the world and has the capacity to refine more than 525,000 barrels of crude oil per day.
DEQ Issues Violations for Radioactive Waste Shipments
The executive secretary of the Utah Radiation Control Board (RCB) has issued a Notice of Violation (NOV) to waste generators in connection with unacceptable shipments of waste last year to EnergySolutions’ low-level radioactive waste landfill in Clive, Utah.
EnergySolutions notified the Division of Radiation Control (DRC) in December when shipments contained waste above the Class A waste criteria. DRC reviewed the data and confirmed that 15 shipments with 23 containers exceeded the radioactivity permitted for disposal at the facility.
“The company did report the problem to us and has worked with DRC to resolve these errors,” Lundberg said. “At this time, we intend to propose penalties and negotiate with EnergySolutions to do an environmental project that will benefit the citizens of Utah in retribution.”
EnergySolutions regularly conducts analysis on all waste disposed at its Clive facility with software monitoring and analysis. It was through this process that the issue was discovered and consequently self-reported. The waste has been disposed of in EnergySolutions’ Class A and Mixed Waste Disposal Embankments. Although the disposal poses no threat to human health or environment, state law prohibits EnergySolutions from accepting Class B or C wastes.
The NOVs were issued according to state statue and rule that sets the enforcement of civil penalties. The following entities were also cited in the same week: Bechtel of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, including a civil penalty of $4,875; CH2M Hill of Richland, Washington, including a civil penalty of $3,250; Materials and Energy Corporation of Oak Ridge, including a civil penalty of $3,250; Cavanagh Services Group Inc., of Salt Lake City, including a civil penalty of $3,250; and NASA, including a civil penalty of $3,250. The companies have 30 days to respond to their NOV.
Simula Inc. Fined $40,000 Penalty for Hazardous Waste Violations
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and Arizona Attorney General’s Office announced that a South Phoenix-based manufacturer has agreed to pay a $40,000 penalty under a consent judgment for hazardous waste violations.
The company is located at 7822 S. 46th Street in Phoenix.
“The improper management of hazardous waste puts employees and the community at risk. BAE has since improved its business practices and we hope this settlement is a new beginning,” ADEQ Acting Director Henry Darwin said.
“Any company handling hazardous waste needs to rigorously comply with state standards to protect the health of our citizens and our environment,” Attorney General Tom Horne said. The consent judgment is subject to court approval.
Asbestos Contractors Fined $45,412 by MassDEP for Improper Removal of Asbestos Materials
The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) has assessed a $45,412 penalty jointly to J.H. Lynch & Sons, Inc., of Cumberland, Rhode Island, and Costello Dismantling Company, Inc., of Middleboro, Massachusetts, for violations of MassDEP’s asbestos regulations that occurred during work that the companies conducted in Worcester, Massachusetts.
MassDEP personnel observed the violations during a November 2008 inspection of the work site located at 25 Tobias Boland Way. During the inspection, MassDEP asbestos program personnel observed significant quantities of concrete duct bank containing asbestos transite pipe that had been excavated, broken up, and stockpiled in an uncontained manner at the site. Upon discovery of the violations, MassDEP required that a Massachusetts Division of Occupational Safety licensed asbestos contractor be retained to properly remove, package, and dispose of all the asbestos-containing waste being stored at the site.
In the consent order, the companies were cited for failing to notify MassDEP of a demolition/renovation operation involving asbestos-containing materials; for improper handling, packaging, and storage of asbestos-containing waste materials; and for allowing asbestos-containing materials to be handled in a manner that caused or contributed to a condition of air pollution. Under the terms of the order, the companies agreed to remain in compliance with applicable regulations in the future, and pay the penalty.
“Contractors doing demolition and construction site work in Massachusetts must be fully aware of their responsibilities under the regulations to identify asbestos-containing materials which they encounter in the course of their work, and then take appropriate response actions,” said Martin Suuberg, director of MassDEP’s Central Regional Office in Worcester. “Failing to identify asbestos materials and immediately take measures to have them removed, handled, packaged and stored in accordance with the regulations is an extremely serious oversight that potentially exposes workers and the general public to a known carcinogen. Noncompliance inevitably results in significant penalty exposure, as well as escalated cleanup, decontamination, disposal and monitoring costs.”
Property owners or contractors with questions about asbestos-containing materials, proper removal, handling, packaging, storage and disposal procedures, or the asbestos regulations in general are encouraged to contact the appropriate MassDEP Regional Office for assistance.
DCI Agrees to Pay Fines for Air Pollution Violations
Commissioner Thomas S. Burack of the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) announced the execution of an Administrative Fine by Consent Agreement with DCI, Inc., of Lisbon. The Agreement resolves alleged violations of the State’s Air Toxics Control Act that occurred at the facility.
Under the terms of the agreement with DCI, the company has not admitted liability for the alleged violations but will pay administrative fines totaling $3,900 to the State. DES has agreed to suspend $500 of the fine, provided that DCI does not violate its permit or the Act for the next two years. The fines resolve allegations that the company violated numerous recordkeeping and reporting requirements as set forth in its permit and DES administrative rules.
“Compliance with recordkeeping and reporting requirements is necessary for DES to be able to determine a facility’s compliance with air pollutant limits that protect the health of the state’s residents,” said Commissioner Burack.
General Linen Service Agrees to Pay Fines for Air Pollution Violations
Commissioner Thomas S. Burack of the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) announced the execution of an Administrative Fine by Consent Agreement with General Linen Service Co., Inc., of Somersworth. The Agreement resolves alleged violations of the Federal CAA and the State’s Air Pollution Control Act that occurred at the facility.
Under the terms of the agreement, the company has not admitted liability for the alleged violations but has paid administrative fines totaling $3,750 to the State. The fines resolve allegations that the company failed to renew the air permit for its boilers in a timely manner and failed to apply for a permit when it increased the amount of solvent-soaked ink wipers accepted for laundering in 2009. The company has informed its customers that it has stopped accepting ink wipers, and it will request a cap on VOC emissions in its air permit.
Commissioner Burack noted that companies can avoid fines and penalties by asking for assistance from DES in order to comply with environmental requirements when they expand or change operations.
EPA Settles Clean Water Act Case with Harrah’s Casino for Unpermitted Waste Discharges to the Delaware River
The EPA announced it has settled a Clean Water Act case with Harrah’s Chester Casino & Racetrack (Harrah’s) for unpermitted discharges to the Delaware River. Under the settlement, Harrah’s has agreed to pay a $39,000 penalty and to take measures, costing an estimated $24,000, to reduce water pollution from the facility.
EPA inspected the horse racing facility in Chester, Delaware County, Pennsylvania, on April 27, 2009. EPA alleges that its inspectors observed evidence of horse manure and other pollution in close proximity to several inlets of a stormwater collection system that discharges to the Delaware River.
On July 28, 2009, EPA ordered Harrah’s to obtain a permit from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PaDEP), which the facility failed to do in a timely manner. In July 2010, the company applied to PaDEP for a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) discharge permit. PaDEP is currently reviewing the application.
As part of the settlement, Harrah’s has neither admitted nor denied liability for the alleged violations.
Environmental News Links
Trivia Question of the Week
Rank the following activities based on water use, from lowest to highest:
1. Flushing a low-flush toilet
2. Five minute shower with efficient shower head
3. Wash dishes in an efficient automatic dishwasher
4. Wash a load of clothes in efficient washer
a. 1, 2, 3, 4
b. 1, 3, 2, 4
c. 1, 3, 4, 2
d. 1, 2, 4, 3