Sierra Club, ForestEthics, and Earthjustice have filed a lawsuit against the Department of Transportation (DOT) for failing to respond to a legal petition filed on July 15, 2014, calling for an emergency order prohibiting the use of hazardous rail cars—known as DOT-111s—for shipping flammable Bakken crude oil. The DOT was required by law to respond to this petition. The groups have received no response.
The National Transportation Safety Board has repeatedly found that the DOT-111 tank cars are prone to puncture on impact, spilling oil and often triggering destructive fires and explosions. The Safety Board has made official recommendations to stop shipping crude oil in these hazardous tank cars.
On July 25, the DOT introduced a proposal to address some safety issues, giving these puncture-prone tankers three to six more years to roll through communities across the country and risk lives along the paths of these rail lines nationwide.
The following are statements from the groups filing the lawsuit:
Said Patti Goldman, Earthjustice attorney:
“The Department of Transportation agrees these tank cars create an unacceptable public risk and need to be banned for shipping Bakken crude oil. But the department proposes to expose the public to these unacceptable risks for four more years. We can’t run the risk of another disaster like Lac-M?gantic, Quebec, when 47 people died in a DOT-111 crude oil explosion.”
Said Matt Krogh, ForestEthics campaign director:
“Twenty-five million Americans live in the blast zone along the nation’s rail lines. These oil tank cars have been called tin cans on wheels and the Pinto of the rails—we can’t wait years to protect our families and our drinking water, we need the Obama Administration to act right now.”
Training on New Rules for Lithium Battery Shipments
These changes are designed to ensure that lithium cells and batteries are able to withstand normal transportation conditions and are packaged to reduce the possibility of damage that could lead to an unsafe situation.
- Enhance packaging and hazard communication requirements for lithium batteries transported by air
- Replace equivalent lithium content with Watt-hours for lithium ion cells and batteries
- Adopt separate shipping descriptions for lithium metal batteries and lithium ion batteries
- Revise provisions for the transport of small and medium lithium cells and batteries including cells and batteries packed with, or contained in, equipment
- Revise the exceptions for small cells and batteries in air transportation
- Revise the requirements for the transport of lithium batteries for disposal or recycling
- Harmonize the provisions for the transport of low production and prototype lithium cells and batteries with the ICAO Technical Instructions and the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code
- Adopt new provisions for the transport of damaged, defective, and recalled lithium batteries
If you ship batteries by ground or air, you must comply with the latest DOT and IATA/ICAO regulations that specify how the batteries must be packaged, marked, labeled, and transported. The rules apply not only to batteries, but also to equipment or vehicles that contain batteries as well as batteries packed along with equipment. Virtually all types of batteries are regulated, including lithium, lead-acid, nickel cadmium, and metal hydride alkaline. According to 49 CFR 172.704, all personnel involved in the classification, packaging, marking, labeling, or shipment of batteries must receive initial and recurrent transportation training.
Columbus RCRA and DOT Training
San Antonio RCRA and DOT Training
Spartanburg RCRA and DOT Training
EPA’s New Solvent Wipe, Shop Towel Rule Demystified
- Does the rule apply to both cloth and paper wipes and rags?
- What solvents can be on the towels, and which are prohibited?
- Does the rule also apply to towels that contain characteristic hazardous waste?
- Can P or U-listed wastes be on the towels?
- How must the towels be stored on-site?
- Do they need to be tested for anything?
- How long can they be stored?
- How must the containers be marked or labeled?
- How must they be prepared for transportation?
- Where can you ship them and what are the disposal and recycling options?
- What are the documentation requirements?
- How is the new rule impacted by current state regulations?
Navy Penalized for Hazardous Waste and Clean Air Act Violations at Hampton Roads
EPA has reached a settlement with the US Navy over alleged environmental violations at the Naval Support Activity Hampton Roads in Chesapeake, Virginia. The settlement will help reduce potentially harmful discharges and protect the public and environment from exposure to potentially harmful substances.
The CAA violations pertained to regulations designed to reduce discharges of ozone-depleting substances used as coolants in air conditioning units. EPA alleged that the facility did not perform leak rate calculations when it serviced those units. In addition, EPA alleged that the facility did not have a CAA permit to operate a diesel-fired boiler, which meant that the boiler was not subject to required emissions limits.
The RCRA violations pertained to regulations that require the safe, environmentally-sound storage and disposal of hazardous waste and prevention of spills from underground storage tanks. The Navy has upgraded its underground storage tanks, which should help protect waters in the nearby Great Dismal Swamp.
EPA Urged to Ban Neurotoxic Pesticide
A coalition of environmental health groups recently sued the EPA, asking a federal court to require a ban on chlorpyrifos. The chemical is a widely used toxic pesticide that can interfere with brain development in fetuses, infants, and children.
The EPA used scientific evidence to support its ban on household use of chlorpyrifos 14 years ago. Earthjustice, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) urged the agency in 2007 to extend the ban to all uses.
“Because of its continued widespread agricultural use, thousands of people are still exposed to this toxic chemical through contaminated foods, drinking water and the air around farmland,” said Earthjustice attorney Patti Goldman.
Though banned in the home because of dangers to children, chlorpyrifos is still heavily used on fruit and nut orchards, soybeans, and corn, with an estimated 5 million pounds applied in the US annually. This widespread agricultural use means that people continue to be exposed through contaminated foods, drinking water, and pesticide blowing off of farmland and into neighboring areas.
“Chlorpyrifos disproportionally impacts farmworkers and their families, rural school children, and other residents,” said Luis Medellin, a farmworker and member of PANNA. “My family has dealt with the problems of chlorpyrifos exposure, finding it at unacceptable levels in our air and in our bodies. We don’t know the long-term impacts and we shouldn’t have to worry. EPA has failed its responsibility to protect communities from hazardous pesticides.”
Medellin lives in the agricultural town of Lindsay, California, where chlorpyrifos is sprayed routinely on the orange groves surrounding his parents’ home and along Medellin’s commute to work. During the growing season, the family has been awakened by the sickly smell of nighttime pesticide spraying. What followed was worse: searing headaches, nausea, and vomiting.
EPA officials began their review of the chemical in 2001, while California officials began a review in 2004. Few changes to the chemical’s use have resulted to date, despite mounting evidence of harm.
“The science on health impacts—together with many personal stories—overwhelmingly supports the need for a phase out,” said Margaret Reeves, Ph.D., senior scientist at PANNA. “EPA and California officials have moved at a snail’s pace, and have failed to protect children’s health.”
Young children are particularly vulnerable to the pesticide because their bodies and brains are still developing, and chemicals that interfere with the nervous system during development may cause long-term or permanent damage.
“Many studies have found severe and long-lasting impacts to children, including developmental delays, lower IQ and behavioral problems,” said Jennifer Sass, Ph.D., senior scientist with NRDC. “Families can’t wait any longer—EPA needs to move swiftly to protect kids from chlorpyrifos.”
Hazardous Waste Generator Fined $131,115 for Permit Violations
The decree assesses a civil penalty of $131,115 to be paid in monthly increments of $10,926.
Bronze Craft is a notified generator of hazardous waste that manufactures custom cast metal parts such as window latches. In its manufacturing activities, Bronze Craft operates a permitted on-site hazardous wastewater treatment unit designed to remove heavy metals from its wastewaters before they are discharged to the Nashua Wastewater Treatment Facility.
The settlement resolves allegations that Bronze Craft generated hazardous wastewater containing selenium from its metal finishing operations, and that Bronze Craft failed to determine the hazardous characteristics of the wastewater before it discharged it to the on-site wastewater treatment unit. Bronze Craft was not permitted to treat selenium in its wastewater treatment unit. Additionally, the wastewater treatment unit was not designed to treat for selenium, resulting in the discharge of selenium to the Nashua Wastewater Treatment Facility. The State’s complaint also alleged that Bronze Craft failed to identify the hazardous waste containing selenium in its hazardous waste treatment permit applications.
“The hazardous waste permitting system is designed to protect human health and the environment from the effects of hazardous chemicals. It is important for regulated entities to accurately complete permit applications and comply with state issued permits to assist in the protection of our environment,” said Thomas Burack, NHDES Commissioner.
The violations alleged by the state were discovered during a NHDES inspection in April of 2012. Bronze Craft quickly corrected the problems once identified by NHDES and was cooperative throughout the investigation.
Flint Hills Resources Alaska, LLC, Fined $80,000 for Hazardous Waste Violations
On June 19, 2013, Flint Hills Resources (FHR) conducted groundwater cleanup activities at its North Pole refinery that generated spent groundwater pre-filters containing iron sulfide. The spent groundwater pre-filters were disposed of in an exposed, uncovered “roll off” container (dumpster) where they soon self-ignited, causing two container fires. The fires required local fire department assistance to extinguish. The settlement includes a civil penalty of $80,000.
“In this case, two completely avoidable dumpster fires occurred because the facility’s hazardous waste was not properly identified and managed,” said EPA’s Downey. “Worker and responder safety can be jeopardized when ignitable and reactive wastes are not managed and stored in strict accordance with the law.”
In case documents, EPA alleges:
- FHR violated RCRA by failing to determine that the spent groundwater pre-filters were an ignitable and reactive hazardous waste, and then failed to manage the materials accordingly
- FHR mishandled the filter waste by placing it in an uncovered roll off container that was not properly labeled as Hazardous Waste and was not dated for storage (as required by federal law)
- FHR hazardous waste was not managed to minimize the possibility of a fire, explosion, or other mishap due to the unstable nature of this this hazardous waste
ADESA Inc. Fined $30,000 for Numerous Hazardous Waste Management, Air Quality Violations
The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) has penalized ADESA, Inc., $30,000 for violations found during an inspection of its facility in Framingham, Massachusetts. The company, which is based in Carmel, Indiana, operates in Framingham under the name ADESA Auctions Boston.
“This facility was not managing its hazardous waste properly on numerous fronts,” said Eric Worrall, director of MassDEP’s Northeast Office in Wilmington. “It is critically important that facility owners ensure their workers comply with hazardous waste management regulations in order to protect public health, safety and the environment.”
Among the hazardous waste management violations were the following: the main accumulation area had three rusted drums, two dented drums, inadequate aisle space, and inaccurate signage; records of the required weekly inspections did not accurately represent conditions observed at the facility; and there was no record that the employees were trained in hazardous waste management. In addition, waste batteries and mercury-containing bulbs were improperly stored in the accumulation area, a 30-gallon drum of solvent was improperly labeled, the waste-oil accumulation area was not delineated, and the fill pipe was open and improperly covered with tape.
The air quality violations included a natural gas-fired emergency generator that was not properly designed to prevent a condition of air pollution and potential public health impacts as wells as a rubber gasket on an underground storage tank was missing, which is a vapor recovery violation.
The company has agreed to correct the violations, including immediate compliance with the hazardous waste management regulations and the replacement of the rubber gasket. Within 90 days, the facility will have completed the modification of the emergency generator’s stack height so that the stack is vertical and terminates at least 10 feet above the roofline. MassDEP has agreed to suspend $15,000 of the penalty pending demonstrated compliance with the order.
Hawaii Department of Transportation to Pay $1.2 Million to Correct Stormwater Violations
“Stormwater discharges pollute Hawaii’s streams and coastal waters,” said Jared Blumenfeld, EPA’s Regional Administrator for the Pacific Southwest. “By making long-term changes to its operations, HDOT is taking major steps to increase the protection of beaches, coral reefs and water quality on Oahu.”
Inspections by EPA and DOH in December 2008 first identified the CWA stormwater violations at the harbor facilities. Stormwater runoff from unpaved land areas, paved streets and maintenance yards contains contaminants such as sediments, trash, chemicals, and oils that can flow into waterways and coastal zones, resulting in environmental damage. By creating a system of project review and oversight inspections, installing treatment systems, and exercising better control over tenant activities, HDOT can significantly reduce the amount of pollutants discharged in stormwater runoff.
“Stormwater carries contamination from the land into the ocean; this is the biggest source of water pollution in our islands,” said Gary Gill, Department of Health Deputy Director for Environmental Health. “All landowners are responsible to protect our streams and coastlines. With this case settled, we can expect our state government to be a better steward of Hawaii’s clean waters.”
The $1.2 million in penalties will be divided equally between the state of Hawaii and the US, and the settlement requires HDOT to undertake a variety of actions to improve the management of stormwater runoff at the two harbors, including:
- Create a new Office of Environmental Compliance to ensure all HDOT facilities comply with federal, state, and local environmental regulations.
- Develop a stormwater prevention outreach and training program to communicate with the public using harbor facilities, to inform the public about how their activities impact the quality of stormwater runoff.
- Rank all harbor tenants annually based on their activities and risk of pollutant discharges. Inspect all high-risk tenants twice per year, medium risk tenants once per year, and low risk tenants every five years.
- Inspect stormwater outfalls during wet and dry weather for the presence of non-stormwater discharges, and assess the physical condition of each outfall to determine if maintenance is needed.
- Establish a comprehensive Construction Runoff Control Program to control discharges from sites subject to new development or redevelopment. HDOT will study the feasibility of retrofitting construction projects, and complete at least three retrofits.
Watershed Advocates Challenge Maryland Stormwater Permits
Recently, a coalition of environmental and local watershed advocates legally challenged the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) to improve the permits that govern urban storm sewer systems.
In the D.C. and Baltimore regions, urban stormwater runoff is documented as the number one source of contaminants polluting rivers, creeks and streams, many of which ultimately flow into the Chesapeake Bay. MDE is the department authorized to oversee Maryland’s program to reduce pollution from this runoff. The coalition asserts that MDE is issuing permits that are unenforceable and ineffective. Their challenge rests on four main arguments:
- MDE’s refusal to impose enforceable limits in the permits
- Lack of public participation process in setting deadlines and limits
- Inadequate monitoring and absence of compliance timetables
- Inadequate requirements for the elimination of non-stormwater pollution discharges
General statement from the coalition:
“MDE continues to waste millions of Maryland taxpayer dollars on ineffective and unenforceable permitting programs that fail to protect our beloved waterways and the nationally treasured Chesapeake Bay. These challenges simply seek to increase accountability and the public participation process so desperately needed to protect the waters in which we swim, fish, boat and enjoy.”
Statement from Khushi Desai, Earthjusctice’s lead counsel on this case:
“There is no question that MDE has full authority to impose strong, specific and enforceable limits on stormwater pollutants. We urge them to take this opportunity by putting forth meaningful protections instead of allowing the pollution of our cherished waters to continue indefinitely.”
Supported by Earthjustice, a non-profit public interest environmental law firm, the petitioners are groups who work to protect and conserve waterways that flow throughout Maryland, including: Anacostia Riverkeeper, Anacostia Watershed Society, Blue Water Baltimore/Baltimore Harbor Waterkeeper, Gunpowder Riverkeeper, Mattawoman Watershed Society, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Patuxent Riverkeeper, Potomac Riverkeeper, Sierra Club, and Waterkeepers Chesapeake.
The third legal challenge is scheduled for Baltimore County on September 24th. The judge’s decision from the initial challenge held July 11th in Prince George’s County is forthcoming.
Minnesota Continues Nation-Leading Effort to Reduce Mercury to Protect Minnesotans’ Health
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has announced a new rule that will protect public health by reducing mercury emissions from taconite processing. The work to reduce mercury began under Governor Tim Pawlenty in 2007 and over the last seven years the MPCA has worked closely with the mining industry to develop the final rule. This rule will safeguard public health and the environment, while giving the mining industry long-term certainty and the time it needs to develop mercury reduction technology and strategies.
“In Minnesota, we have always found a way to support a thriving mining economy, while protecting the health of our citizens,” said MPCA Commissioner John Linc Stine. “This rule to reduce mercury is an important step forward in safeguarding public health and working to meet our longstanding mercury-reduction goals. Mercury gets into the fish we eat, and affects brain function. Babies and young children are particularly impacted by the negative effects of mercury.”
The rule requires a few specific industries (including taconite) to define how they can reduce or eliminate mercury emissions from their processes. Specifically, iron mining companies will need to submit plans by 2018 that outline how they intend to achieve reductions by 2025. The rule also sets forth a consistent reporting requirement for all other major mercury-emitting industrial facilities (those emitting at least 3 lb per year).
Minnesota already is a national leader in reducing mercury emissions from coal fired power utilities, currently on track toward reducing mercury 95% by 2016. Electric utilities are doing this by installing controls and reducing or eliminating the use of coal. For the taconite industry, reducing mercury will take new technologies because mercury is released when the rock that is mined and crushed for taconite production is heated in the furnaces.
The new rule acknowledges that the mining industry needs time to develop mercury-reduction technology and strategies, and gives the industry great flexibility as to how they meet goals for reductions. The MPCA agreed that if by 2018 the mercury goals are impractical or unachievable, taconite facilities will be allowed to submit alternative approaches to reduce mercury emissions that are practical and feasible for their operations.
Commissioner Stine emphasized that Minnesota’s work serves as a model for how to limit the harmful effects of mercury. Stine said that Governor Dayton is directing MPCA leaders and pressing the EPA to implement similar rules in other states around the US to reduce non-Minnesota sources of mercury in Minnesota waterways and fish.
“This rule is the first of its kind in the nation and demonstrates Minnesota’s leadership on an issue that directly impacts the health of our citizens and environment,” said Stine. “But we should not have to act alone.”
The Municipality of Culebra Puerto Rico Cited for Stormwater Violations
The EPA Regional Administrator Judith A. Enck announced a legal settlement with the Municipality of Culebra for discharging pollutants from the Parcelas Culebra Lot Development into the Culebra Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System. The settlement requires the payment of a $3,200 civil penalty and the connection of between 35–40 residences in the Clark and Villa Mu?eco Communities to the Culebra municipal sewer system.
“Water pollution can seriously damage public health and the coastal environment,” said EPA Regional Administrator Judith A. Enck. “All developers in Puerto Rico must comply with environmental laws that protect oceans, wetlands, lagoons and other water bodies from contamination.”
A December 2009 EPA inspection of the Parcelas Culebra Lot Development and a subsequent EPA investigation revealed that the municipality had discharged stormwater into the Culebra Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System from the construction site it owned, without first applying for the required permit. Under the federal CWA, pollutants may not be discharged into navigable waters of the US without environmental permits. The rate at which water carries soil and contaminants off construction sites is typically 10–20 times greater than that from agricultural lands, and 1,000–2,000 times greater than those of forested lands. Soil and pollutants carried by uncontrolled stormwater runoff can cause physical and biological harm to waterways.
The agreement will improve water quality in area waterways. Under this project, 35–40 individual homes in Clark and Villa Mu?eco with faulty septic tanks will be connected to Culebra’s municipal sewer system, which will reduce the amount of untreated sewage reaching Ensenada Honda and the Lobina Lagoon by 16,000 gallons per day. This reduction in pollution will help protect human health, and marine and coral reef ecosystems surrounding Culebra. The new sewer connections Culebra has agreed to establish is considered by the EPA to be a supplemental environmental project, which is an environmentally-beneficial project that a violator voluntarily agrees to undertake in partial settlement of violations, and it must be a project that a violator would not otherwise be required to perform. The municipality will spend at least $41,000 on this project.
EPA Settlement with Amerikohl Mining Inc. Will Help Restore Water Quality
As part of the settlement agreement, Amerikohl will pay a $140,000 penalty and implement a new standard operating procedure to ensure CWA compliance at existing and future mining operations.
EPA cited Amerikohl for 157 violations at the 22 mining operations. Violations included exceedances of CWA permit limits for discharges of pH, aluminum, iron, manganese, and total suspended solids.
Of the 22 mines covered by the settlement agreement, five are in Indiana County, four are in Clarion County. The rest of the mines are in Washington, Butler, Armstrong, Beaver, Somerset, Lawrence, Venango, Fayette, Clearfield, and Westmoreland Counties.
As part of the settlement, Amerikohl did not admit liability for the alleged violations, but has certified that it is now in compliance with applicable requirements. For more information about the CWA permit program, visit www.epa.gov/npdes.
EPA Stop Sale Order Protects Philadelphia Residents from Buying Misbranded Pesticides
To protect the public and ensure safe and effective use of pesticides, FIFRA requires proper labeling of pesticides and anti-pest products. The law also requires companies to register pesticides and pesticide-production facilities.
In 2013, EPA issued a warning letter to China Town Dollar after inspectors found two misbranded anti-pest products. During a February 25, 2014, follow-up EPA inspection of the China Town Dollar store, inspectors found three misbranded anti-pest glue traps: Gokiburi Hoi-Hoi; Trap-A-Roach Hoy-Hoy; and Hunters Fly Glue Pit. Both Gokiburi Hoi-Hoi and Trap-A-Roach Hoy-Hoy packaging did not contain valid EPA establishment numbers. Also, there were no EPA establishment numbers evident on the Hunters Fly Glue Pit packaging.
Also, during the 2014 follow-up inspection, EPA inspectors found that the store had continued to sell one of the previously identified misbranded products under a new name, Hunters Fly Glue Pit.
Following receipt of the Stop Sale Order, China Town Dollar worked with the EPA to properly destroy all of the misbranded items.
FIFRA’s requirements protect public health and the environment by ensuring the safe production and handling of pesticides and devices; and by preventing false, misleading, or unverifiable product claims. FIFRA also prohibits the marketing of misbranded, improperly labeled, or adulterated pesticide and devices.
New York Property Owner and Manager Sentenced to 21 Months in Federal Prison for Conspiring to Violate the CAA
Mills’ and Allen’s prison sentences will be followed by two years of supervised release. In addition, Mills must also pay a $25,000 fine and a $300 crime victim special assessment fee.
On January 21, 2014, Mills and Allen, both of Malone, New York, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to violate CERCLA. Mills also pleaded guilty to two counts of knowingly violating CERCLA for failing to immediately report the release of more than a pound of asbestos from properties owned by Mills. In addition to the conspiracy, Allen pleaded guilty to one count of knowingly violating CERCLA. Mills owned the buildings from which more than 260 linear feet of pipe wrap containing asbestos had been removed by one of Mills’ employees. Mills and Allen directed that employee— without warning him or giving him adequate personal protective equipment —to remove the asbestos pipe wrap from 458 East Main Street, 144 Elm Street, and 100 Elm Street, all properties owned by Mills, and managed by Allen, who oversaw the asbestos removal work.
As part of the plea, Mills and Allen admitted they knowingly failed to report to the National Response Center the release of asbestos, in the form of thermal system insulation, or “pipe wrap,” that had been removed from the basement of buildings owned and operated by John Mills, as soon as they knew of the release. They also admitted to illegally removing and disposing of more than 260 linear feet of pipe wrap containing asbestos. They transported and caused others to transport that pipe wrap, which was in open bags, in the open bed of a pickup truck. They further admitted that they conspired together to violate CERCLA. The asbestos pipe wrap was deposited by the defendants in a U-Haul-style box truck owned by Mills and a shed maintained by the Malone Department of Public Works in an effort to conceal the material from authorities.
The required standards include providing notice to the EPA before starting asbestos removal, adequately wetting the asbestos during the removal and before disposal, and properly disposing of the asbestos at an EPA-approved disposal site.
Environmental News Links
Trivia Question of the Week
What percentage of domestic US oil production occurs in the Bakken shale fields of North Dakota?
a) 3%
b) 5%
c) 10%
d) 25%
