New Requirements Proposed for Hazardous Waste Shipments

“When hazardous waste is shipped across multiple countries there can be a higher risk of mismanagement from unsafe transport, recycling and disposal practices,” said Mathy Stanislaus, assistant administrator of EPA’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. “This proposal will provide greater protection to communities and the environment through increased transparency, better data sharing and more efficient compliance monitoring.”

The proposal, when finalized, will affect the approximately 3,000 hazardous waste import shipments and 49,000 hazardous waste export shipments that largely occur within North America.

The proposal will also make electronic reporting to EPA mandatory and will require linking the consent to export with the exporter declaration submitted to US Customs and Border Protection. These changes will provide for more efficient compliance monitoring and will enable increased sharing of hazardous waste import and export data with state programs, the general public, and individual hazardous waste exporters and importers.

The Agency will accept public comments on the proposal for 60 days following publication in the Federal Register.

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 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

EPA Issues New Industrial Stormwater General Permit

 If you were permitted under the 2008 MSGP and need to obtain coverage under the new permit, you must submit your Notice of Intent (NOI)—in accordance with the 2015 MSGP’s updated NOI requirements—by September 2, 2015.

You will learn how to:

• Obtain a stormwater discharge permit
• Develop and implement an effective SWPPP
• Select and implement effective control measures (including best management practices)
• Develop and document inspection procedures
• Implement an effective monitoring and sampling plan
• Meet your permit’s training requirements
• Comply with reporting and recordkeeping requirements
• Certify no-exposure
• Comply with permit renewal requirements
• Terminate permit coverage

Los Angeles RCRA and DOT Training

EPA’s Revised Underground Storage Tank Regulations

EPA has revised the Underground Storage Tank (UST) regulations for all facilities—including those with emergency generator tanks. These are the first major revisions to the UST regulations since 1988.

The rules establish new requirements for the use of equipment to reduce releases to the environment, as well as detect releases should they occur.

You will learn:

• Existing UST regulations and requirements
• EPA’s approved leak detection methods
• New requirements for:
• Secondary containment for new and replaced tanks and piping
• Operator training
• UST system capability for biofuel blends
• Operation and maintenance for UST systems
• Removed deferrals for emergency generator tanks, airport hydrant systems, and field constructed tanks—making these tanks fully regulated
• Updating codes and practices

Chicago RCRA and DOT Training

Atlanta DOT and IATA Training

EPA Publishes New Hazardous Waste Generator and Pharmaceutical Regulations

Both rules were published in the Federal Register on September 25. The rules as published appear to be the same as the advanced copies that were available in our earlier articles. You can find the official versions, as published in the Federal Register at these links:

Environmental Resource Center will be offering exhaustive webcast sessions on the impact and implications of these major new rules.

EPA Finalizes Rule to Modernize Clean Water Act Reporting

EPA estimates that, once the rule is fully implemented, the 46 states and the Virgin Islands Territory that are authorized to administer the NPDES program will collectively save approximately $22.6 million each year as a result of switching from paper to electronic reporting. The final rule will make facility-specific information, such as inspection and enforcement history, pollutant monitoring results, and other data required by NPDES permits accessible to the public through EPA’s website.

“Electronic reporting will give the public full transparency into water pollution sources, save millions of dollars, and lead to better water quality in American communities,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “This rule will significantly reduce the burden and costs of paperwork, freeing up limited resources for states and other regulatory authorities to focus on the most serious water quality problems. After more than two years of working closely with states and a range of stakeholders, today we take a critical step to bring clean water protection into the modern age.”

“ECOS is pleased to see a rule move ahead that modernizes how businesses, states, and the federal government interface and share information in the clean water program,” said Alexandra Dapolito Dunn, Executive Director and General Counsel of the Environmental Council of the States. “Our focus going forward with EPA and the impacted regulated community will be on smooth implementation of this rule, and on developing flexible approaches when needed.”

The NPDES program requires that permitted facilities monitor and report data on pollutant discharges and take other actions to ensure discharges do not affect human health or the environment. Currently, some facilities subject to these reporting requirements submit data in paper form to states and other regulatory authorities, where the information must be manually entered into data systems. Through the e-reporting rule, these facilities will electronically report data directly to the appropriate regulatory authority.

EPA proposed the e-reporting rule in July of 2013 with a public comment period. Since then, EPA has held over more than 70 technical and individual meetings with states to review the electronic reporting provisions and to identify any issues requiring resolution. In addition, EPA held over 50 webinars and meetings with over 1,200 stakeholders to discuss the rulemaking. EPA will continue collaborating with states as they enhance their electronic reporting capabilities to support the rule’s implementation. Over the next few months, EPA will schedule trainings and outreach webinar sessions for states and regulated entities to provide an overview of the final rule, and the next steps for implementing electronic reporting.

In response to state feedback, the final rule provides authorized NPDES programs with more flexibility for implementation, providing more time for the transition from paper to electronic reporting and more flexibility in how they can grant electronic reporting waivers to facilities. Most facilities subject to effluent monitoring reporting requirements will be required to start submitting data electronically one year following the effective date of the final rule.  Also in response to comments and suggestions from states, EPA is providing states with more time to electronically collect, manage, and share this data—up to five years instead of two years as initially proposed.

The shift toward electronic reporting in the NPDES program and others will help make environmental reporting more accurate, complete, and efficient. It will also help EPA and co-regulators better manage information, and improve effectiveness and transparency.

EPA expects to publish the final rule in the Federal Register in October, 2015. The final rule will be effective 60 days following this publication.

Study Links California Regulations, Dramatic Declines in Cancer Risk from Exposure to Air Toxics

The study quantifies emission trends for the period from 1990 through 2012 for seven toxic air contaminants (TACs) that are responsible for most of the known cancer risk associated with airborne exposure in California.

“These impressive reductions in California’s most hazardous toxic contaminants in our air took place against a backdrop of more than two decades of steady growth in California, with a growing population, and increasing numbers of cars and trucks that used ever larger quantities of gas and diesel,” Air Resources Board Chair Mary D. Nichols said. “There is no way these improvements in public health would have occurred without a strong, well designed program to reduce public exposure to toxic air pollution.”

Significant findings of the study, “Ambient and Emission Trends of Toxic Air Contaminants in California,” include:

• Thanks to state regulations, emissions from perchloroethylene from dry cleaners and hexavalent chromium from chrome plating, each dropped by more than 90%, and regulations already in place are expected to eliminate the remaining emissions of perchloroethylene and greatly reduce hexavalent chromium.
• Diesel particulate matter, which is emitted mainly from trucks and buses and is responsible for most of the airborne cancer risk in California, declined 68%, as a result of the State’s regulatory efforts to clean up diesel exhaust. This reduction took place even while the state’s population increased 31%, diesel vehicle-miles-traveled increased 81%, and the gross state product increased 74%. The implementation of ARB’s recent diesel engine retrofit and replacement requirements has accelerated fleet turnover to cleaner trucks, and significant additional reductions are projected statewide.
• Two other toxic air contaminants emitted mainly from mobile sources, benzene and 1,3-butadiene, declined by nearly 90%. This was largely the result of California gasoline reformulation in 1996.
• The aggregated collective cancer risk from exposure to these seven air toxics declined 76% over the 23-year period.

The paper makes clear that further significant reduction in cancer risk to California residents is expected to continue as a result of continued implementation of air toxic controls. Such controls are part of broader statewide transportation initiatives, including the Truck and Bus Rule and more than a dozen rules focused on diesel equipment serving ports and railyards. Neighborhoods in freight corridors, including those near ports, will especially benefit.

The nearly 70% drop in harmful diesel particle pollution coincided with actions taken over the years, beginning in the 1990s, to reduce diesel emissions. In the 1990s, California adopted a reformulated diesel fuel program, started a heavy-duty diesel truck roadside inspection program, implemented particle pollution standards for urban transit buses and established standards for off-road diesel engines. In 2006, California began requiring ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel. And following the establishment of California’s statewide Truck and Bus Rule in 2008, California began requiring diesel particulate filters on trucks, dramatically reducing diesel particulate matter, or soot, from the exhaust gas of diesel engines.

ARB regulations have reduced air toxics emissions from vehicles and their fuels, from stationary sources and from consumer products since the mid-1980s. In response to public concern, the California Legislature passed the Toxic Air Contaminant Identification and Control Act in 1984. Since then, ARB has implemented regulations to limit TAC emissions. In 1987, the California Legislature passed the Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act, which requires businesses to reduce risks from exposure to emitted TACs.

25th Anniversary of Pollution Prevention Act Serves as Reminder that Everyone Can Take Steps for a Healthy Environment

The 2015 week-long observance is particularly important since it marks the 25th anniversary of the Pollution Prevention Act, the law which established the national policy that pollution should be prevented or reduced at the source whenever feasible.

“We celebrate Pollution Prevention Week to recognize people and organizations who are successfully preventing pollution to reduce their environmental footprint, and to remind others that we all can choose to do one small thing for a healthier environment,” said EPA Regional Administrator Shawn M. Garvin. “Compared to 25 years ago, more businesses, industries, communities and families are seeing the health and economic benefits of reducing waste and using energy and other natural resources more wisely.”

EPA estimates that each individual generates about 1.67 tons of solid waste per year, which equates to about 4.62 lb per person each day. Whether you are a student, a parent, a small business owner or a corporate leader, everyone can help.

These tips can help you prevent pollution:

• Ride a bike, carpool, walk, or take mass transportation to work or school
• Buy school supplies wrapped with minimal packaging; or buy products that come in bulk sizes. Packaging accounts for more than 30% of all the waste generated each year.
• Use re-useable lunch containers bags rather than paper or plastic
• Practice safe take-out—say NO to extra napkins, plastic-ware, and condiments
• Help start a recycling program at school or at work
• Use only recycled paper and other recycled products
• Maintain heaters, air conditioners, refrigerators, and other energy using equipment, to reduce the amount of energy used
• Switch to compact fluorescent light bulbs
• When you purchase electronics and appliances look for the ENERGYSTAR label and buy the most energy efficient items possible to meet your needs
• Purchase products in bulk with minimal packaging
• Save water and protect the environment by choosing WaterSense labeled products in your home, yard, and business and taking simple steps to save water each day

Washington State to Set Carbon Pollution Limits to Help Slow Climate Change

Work that will help protect the state’s land, air, water, public health, and economy from climate change is underway in Olympia.

The Washington Department of Ecology recently formally began writing a rule that would require the state’s largest polluters to reduce their GHGs.

• Natural gas distributors
• Petroleum fuel producers
• Factories
• Power plants
• Waste facilities
• Metal manufacturers

In July 2015, Gov. Jay Inslee directed Ecology to strengthen existing air pollution rules and set limits on GHGs to help meet emission reductions passed by the Legislature in 2008. Inslee said Washingtonians have too much at stake to wait any longer for action on climate change.

“This year’s record-setting drought and wildfires are sobering examples of what our future could look like if we don’t take action on climate change,” said Ecology Director Maia Bellon. “We need to do our part to protect what we have for future generations. We can’t afford the cost of inaction.”

GHGs, most of which come from the carbon dioxide emitted from power plants, industry and vehicles, are driving significant changes in the Earth’s climate and influencing weather patterns in the Pacific Northwest.

Washington is particularly vulnerable to a warming climate. Communities depend on snow-fed water supplies to provide drinking water, irrigation for agriculture, and almost 75% of the state’s electrical power. Nearly 40 communities, including many of our largest population centers, are threatened by sea level rise along Washington’s 2,300 miles of shoreline. And shellfish beds, which are a major industry on Washington’s coast, are susceptible to ocean acidification—created when carbon dioxide reacts with seawater.

The carbon reductions being considered would contribute to slowing these effects. Regulated businesses would have a broad range of compliance options. In addition to gradually reducing their carbon pollution, businesses could obtain or trade credits from others, or fund projects that reduce carbon pollution.

Over the next year Ecology will hold a series of public meetings and hearings to gather input from everyone interested in participating. 

“We’re at the beginning stages and want to craft the rule together with industry, tribes, environmental groups and the public to ensure clean air in Washington,” Bellon said.

Car-Crushing and Recycling Companies to Pay up to $1.25 Million for Pollution and Hazardous Materials Mishandling

According to a consent judgment, approved by Suffolk Superior Court Judge Heidi Brieger, Metals Recycling, LLC, and Prolerized New England Company, LLC, both doing business as Schnitzer Northeast will pay a civil penalty of up to $900,000. The companies must also fund two Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) of up to $300,000 toward the safe removal of waste tire piles in three locations in Middleton that have been an environmental problem for decades; and up to $50,000 toward a program to recycle mercury-containing consumer products. Mercury is a dangerous neuro-toxin that can accumulate in the ground, be absorbed by food plants and animals, and ultimately cause serious human health problems.

“Companies that emit pollutants must be careful and abide by all laws put in place to protect the public and our environment,” said Attorney General Healey. “These dangerous substances endanger public health, and have detrimental effects on our precious natural environment.”

“This comprehensive investigation has resulted in these defendants re-charting their course by installing state-of-the-art air controls and implementing tighter management of their waste stream,” said Commissioner Martin Suuberg of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP). “The funding of two environmentally beneficial projects within the local community was also a key element of this agreement.”

PCBs are manmade organic compounds known to cause cancer and have adverse effects on human reproductive, nervous, immune, and endocrine systems. Lead can cause central nervous system damage if not properly managed. The complaint also alleges that Prolerized failed to seek and obtain required air permits prior to installing and using the 9000-horsepower Megashredder, a large crusher which emits volatile organic compounds and particulate matter that can harm respiratory health, at the Everett facility. The AG’s Office also alleges that Prolerized shredded hundreds of vehicles at the Everett facility without obtaining required proof that all mercury-added vehicle switches had first been removed before shredding.

According to the complaint, Prolerized did not properly handle or store asbestos-containing material consisting of thermal system and boiler insulation on equipment at Prolerized’s Attleboro facility, and Metals Recycling also failed to handle such material properly at its Worcester facility. Exposure to loose, friable asbestos particles can cause cancer or mesothelioma in humans. The complaint further alleges that Prolerized failed to store waste oil properly at the Worcester facility, as required by the Commonwealth’s hazardous waste regulations.

The AG’s Office alleges that Metals Recycling did not properly store containers of gasoline and likely contaminated soils, and also kept open and unlabeled containers of gasoline in a vehicle draining area at its Worcester facility.  The Worcester facility also allegedly emitted excessive amounts of particulate matter to the ambient air from its operations. Fine particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less easily enters the lungs and can cause serious respiratory problems in humans, including premature mortality.

The consent judgment also mandates that the defendants implement much tighter testing and sampling protocols at their facilities. This will result in a cleaner waste stream and will ensure that substances like mercury, asbestos and other pollutants that are routinely part of the shredder residue will be managed and handled much more effectively and safely.

The consent judgment also requires the defendants to apply for and obtain permits for the Megashredder and for the installation of state-of-the-art emissions controls, known as Best Available Control Technology (BACT), which will achieve the lowest technologically feasible emission rates for facilities like those operated by the company. The defendants must install a BACT-level pollution capture system to enclose the Megashredder and contain its emissions. The system must be able to incinerate 98% of the facility’s volatile organic compound emissions, control 98% of the facility’s acid gas emissions, and control 99% of its particulate emissions. It must also install monitoring devices to ensure that facility emissions are accurately reported to MassDEP.

The court-approved consent judgment requires that the defendants pay $450,000 of the $900,000 they owe to the state within 30 days of the filing of the consent judgment. The remaining $450,000 will be suspended and will be waived in incremental amounts as the defendants meet certain defined milestones set forth in the consent judgment. If the defendants fail to meet these milestones or otherwise violate the law during the seven-year life of the consent judgment, they will have to pay to the state those portions of the civil penalty that have not yet been waived.

Lehigh Southwest Cement Company Fined $47,600 for Toxic Chemical Release

The EPA announced a settlement with Lehigh Southwest Cement Company for failing to properly report releases of toxic chemicals at its Cupertino, California, plant. The company is required to pay a $47,600 penalty and spend $144,250 to fund projects that support local emergency response and limit future releases from the plant.

An EPA inspection found that for the years 2009 and 2010, Lehigh manufactured or processed nickel, thallium, lead, and mercury compounds at the Cupertino plant in amounts that exceeded the thresholds, yet Lehigh failed to submit or submitted inaccurate Form Rs for those chemicals.

“The citizens of Cupertino play an important role in holding polluters accountable, and they rely on data from the Community Right-to-Know law.” said Jared Blumenfeld, EPA’s Regional Administrator for the Pacific Southwest. “It is critical for Lehigh to comply with federal laws that ensure the safety of neighboring communities and protect the local environment.”

The settlement requires the company to donate emergency response equipment, including 12 hazmat suits, to the Santa Clara County Fire Department within 90 days. The purchase of this equipment will enhance the fire department’s ability to respond to and prepare for chemical release emergencies at the area around the Cupertino facility.

Lehigh has also committed to fully enclose a raw materials conveyor belt to include new covers, sealed inspection ports, and specialized dust/debris collectors within a year of the settlement. This will help prevent fine-grained material conveyed on the belt from escaping, reducing potential environmental and public health impacts from the dust.

The Lehigh cement plant was subject to a joint federal and state Clean Water Act settlement announced in April 2015 that required the facility to reduce toxic discharges of selenium and other metals to Permanente Creek, a tributary of San Francisco Bay.

Bayer CropScience to Pay $975,000 Fine, Improve Facility after Explosion

The EPA and US Department of Justice (DOJ) recently announced a $5.6 million settlement with Bayer CropScience LP to resolve violations of federal chemical accident prevention laws at its facility in Institute, West Virginia, where an explosion killed two people in 2008. Under the settlement, Bayer CropScience committed to spending $4.23 million to improve emergency preparedness and response in Institute and protect the Kanawha River, pay a $975,000 penalty, and spend approximately $452,000 to implement a series of measures to improve safety at chemical storage facilities across the United States.

“The tragic accident at the Bayer CropScience facility in West Virginia underscores the need for hazardous chemicals to be stored and handled in accordance with the law to protect worker health and the environment,” said Assistant Administrator Cynthia Giles for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “This settlement will establish important safeguards at its facilities across the country and improve emergency response capabilities in the Institute, West Virginia community.”

“Failures by a chemical manufacturer to comply with safety, accident prevention, and response requirements can have catastrophic consequences,” said Assistant Attorney General John C. Cruden for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “The Department of Justice is committed to worker safety. Under this judicially enforceable settlement, Bayer Crop Science will not only pay a penalty but commits to significant improvements in preparedness and response capabilities at its facilities across the country.”

Under the settlement, Bayer CropScience will implement a series of steps to prevent future chemical releases at its facilities in West Virginia, Texas, Missouri, and Michigan by improving inspections to identify potential safety issues and standardize facility safety operating procedures. At the facility in Institute, the company will conduct emergency response exercises with local responders and ensure proper certification of facility environmental management systems. Bayer must complete the majority of these actions within three years.

 Local emergency responders may start receiving equipment as early as December 2015.

The complaint details numerous problems that arose at the pesticide manufacturing facility where the company did not comply with its standard operating procedures designed to prevent accidental releases. In 2008, a new digital control system was installed, but safety interlock associated with the control system was not properly engaged at startup. Employees were not fully trained to understand or operate the system and failed to follow procedures for sampling, temperature control and flow safeguards. The result was an uncontrollable buildup in a treatment unit causing a chemical reaction resulting in the explosion, fire and loss of life. During the incident, the company delayed emergency officials trying to access the plant and failed to provide adequate information to 911 operators.

EPA Takes Action Against Underground Petroleum Storage Tank Violations in New Jersey

In separate agreements with the EPA, Monmouth and Middlesex counties in New Jersey have settled alleged violations of federal laws regarding the proper maintenance and operation of underground petroleum storage tank systems. 

“Owners of underground storage tanks have a responsibility to follow rules that prevent petroleum from polluting our environment,” said EPA Regional Administrator Judith A. Enck. “When these tanks are not properly maintained, people and the environment are at risk.”

Under a legal agreement with the EPA, Monmouth County will spend an estimated $275,000 to install a 20,000 gallon above-ground tank to replace three underground tanks at its reclamation center in Tinton Falls, New Jersey. EPA inspections and a subsequent investigation revealed several alleged violations at the Tinton Falls site and at two other county facilities. The EPA cited Monmouth County for failing to keep adequate records of release detection for pressurized piping, and failing to conduct monthly monitoring of an underground storage tank. The County has recently come into compliance with these requirements.

Monmouth County will also pay a $3,660 penalty for past violations, a penalty that was reduced due to the money the county will expend to build the new tank.

Under a legal agreement with the EPA, Middlesex County will pay a $51,100 penalty under their agreement with the EPA.  The EPA cited Middlesex County for: failing to keep adequate records of release detection monitoring; failing to keep adequate records of release detection for pressurized piping; and failing to perform annual tests of automatic line leak detector systems. As part of its agreement with the EPA, Middlesex County has installed electronic release detection monitoring equipment to ensure compliance at all of its underground storage tank facilities.

Earlier this year, the EPA reached an agreement with the City of Paterson to settle alleged violations involving underground storage tanks at three locations throughout the city. Under the terms of that agreement, Paterson paid an $11,480 fine and agreed to operate its underground tanks in full compliance with the law.

Greenlight WVO LLC Fined $40,000 for Failure to Comply with Oil Spill Prevention Requirements

As part of a settlement with the EPA, Greenlight WVO, LLC, located in Beltsville, Maryland, has come into compliance with oil spill prevention requirements to resolve EPA claims that the company was not prepared to prevent or contain an oil spill. 

In addition, Greenlight, a used cooking oil recycling company, has agreed to pay a penalty of $40,000.

EPA alleges that Greenlight had not properly prepared or implemented a Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure plan (“SPCC plan”), as required by the Clean Water Act. These plans are required to minimize the risk of spills polluting nearby waterways.

Specific allegations include the lack of a properly designed drainage and containment system to contain oil, if spilled. Recycled cooking oil, like all types of oil, can be harmful to aquatic ecosystems and water quality, if discharged.

At the time of the EPA inspection, there were over 152,000 gallons of aboveground oil storage capacity at Greenlight’s facility located within 1500 feet from Indian Creek.

Virgin Islands Water and Power Authority to Comply with Clean Air Act

 These pollutants are linked to health problems, including asthma, lung and heart disease. VIWAPA will spend approximately $12.2 million to comply with the agreement’s requirements. VIWAPA will also pay a $1.3 million penalty.

Separate from the settlement, VIWAPA has been in the process of converting several of its oil-fired turbines at the St. Thomas facility to be capable of burning liquefied petroleum gas or liquefied natural gas. The settlement requires that at least 85% of the power VIWAPA generates from the converted units be from burning liquefied petroleum gas or liquefied natural gas at the converted units and renewable sources. The agreement will result in a reduction of nitrogen oxide emissions by approximately 1,300 tons per year and particulate matter emissions by approximately 185 tons per year. In addition, the conversion to liquefied petroleum gas or liquefied natural gas will reduce the amount of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas (GHG), from the St. Thomas facility by approximately 66,000 tons per year and sulfur dioxide by approximately 200 tons per year.

“Today’s settlement marks another milestone in our ongoing efforts to enforce the Clean Air Act and reduce air pollution from power plants,” said Assistant Attorney General John C. Cruden for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “This settlement will eliminate thousands of tons of harmful air pollution each year, significantly improving air quality in the Virgin Islands.”

“This settlement will drastically reduce the amount of air pollution in the Virgin Islands and bring the St. Thomas power plant, one of the most significant sources of air pollution in the US Virgin Islands, into compliance with the Clean Air Act,” said EPA Regional Administrator Judith A. Enck.

Under the Clean Air Act, large industrial facilities that make modifications that increase air pollution emissions must install best available control technology. VIWAPA operates with a permit that requires it to use the best available control technology to control emissions of nitrogen oxides and particulate matter. The complaint, which this settlement resolves, alleged numerous violations, including that VIWAPA had not properly operated nor maintained its water injection pollution control system during various times from October 2005 through December 2013. The complaint also alleged that the St. Thomas facility failed to meet the opacity (smoke) emission limits during normal operations and failed to conduct continuous monitoring to ensure compliance with its limits, and to keep proper records.

Under the agreement, at the St. Thomas facility, VIWAPA will:

• Properly operate and maintain the water injection pollution control system
• Properly operate and maintain the continuous monitoring equipment
• Develop and maintain an inventory of spare parts for the St. Thomas facility’s water injection pollution control system and emission monitoring equipment
• Arrange for third-party audits and self-audits to ensure compliance with the water injection pollution control system requirements and emission monitoring requirements
• Install a pollution control device to reduce visible emissions from one unit
• Install a video camera system to monitor visible emissions from the stacks and conduct visible emission monitoring when visible emissions are observed

Under the agreement, at the St. John facility, VIWAPA will:

• Use cleaner fuel
• Submit a request to the Virgin Islands government to modify the permit to designate the unit as an emergency unit

The EPA has worked with VIWAPA over the past several years to address its violations and operations at the St. Thomas facility and the St. John facility. As a result of that work, VIWAPA has already repaired and replaced pollution controls and monitoring equipment at the St. Thomas facility. It replaced its data acquisition system and installed an improved water system, which it now uses in its water injection pollution control system.

EPA Requires Major Agricultural Chemical Dealer to Safely Manage Pesticides

The EPA recently announced settlements with two associated companies for the improper storage and containment of agricultural pesticides. Fertizona, a large fertilizer and crop protection retailer, and Compton Ag Services operate six facilities in Arizona and California subject to the enforcement actions. They have agreed to pay a total of $133,240 in civil penalties.

Fertizona must pay $111,800 in penalties and, separately, Compton Ag Services was fined $21,440.

“Pesticides must be carefully handled and stored to prevent harmful releases,” said Jared Blumenfeld, EPA’s Regional Administrator for the Pacific Southwest. “Failing to comply with the necessary safeguards is a serious violation that puts workers and the environment at risk.”

Fertizona (Arizona): The Arizona Department of Agriculture inspected Fertizona’s Arizona facilities in 2012, 2013 and 2014. As a result of these inspections, EPA claimed a total of 27 violations at five facilities located in Waddell, Buckeye, Willcox, Casa Grande, and Yuma.

At its Waddell facility, the company failed to have a secondary containment structure around the storage tank; failed to have proper safeguards for pesticide transfer equipment; failed to have the required design features to contain pesticide spills on its dispensing and loading pad; failed to use a pesticide in a manner consistent with its label; and was improperly using an external site gauge to monitor levels of liquid pesticide in a storage tank.

At its Buckeye and Willcox facilities, the company failed to clean up spilled pesticides in a timely manner. At its Buckeye, Willcox, and Casa Grande facilities, the company failed to repair unsealed cracks in the floors and walls of pesticide containment areas. In addition, the company distributed and sold misbranded pesticides, and failed to include the proper language on the labels, which consumers rely on to determine appropriate use and disposal.

Compton Ag Services (California): EPA claims that five violations were found during an inspection by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation at Compton Ag’s facility in Blythe, California, in October 2011.  The company failed to implement necessary infrastructure upgrades needed to prevent the spread of spills or leaks. Compton Ag was also cited for inadequate recordkeeping, and failure to properly label its pesticide tank.

FIFRA authorizes EPA to review and register pesticides for specified uses, regulate safe storage and disposal of pesticides, and conduct inspections and enforcement to ensure compliance.

EPA Cites FMC Corp. For Violating FIFRA

The EPA has issued a complaint against Philadelphia-based FMC Corporation for violations of the federal pesticide law related to the marketing and distribution of its agricultural product, “Stallion Brand Insecticide.”

FIFRA’s requirements protect public health and the environment by ensuring the safe production, handling, and application of pesticides; and by preventing false, misleading, or unverifiable product claims. FIFRA also prohibits the marketing of misbranded, improperly labeled, or adulterated pesticides.

FMC’s “Stallion Brand Insecticide” is intended as an agricultural insecticide for use on crops including alfalfa, corn, cotton, sorghum, soybeans, wheat, and sunflowers. EPA’s registration classified this product as a “restricted use pesticide” because of environmental risks associated with its active ingredients. The restriction prohibits the sale and use of this product by anyone other than certified applicators or persons under their direct supervision. Additionally, all advertisements are required to identify the product as a restricted use pesticide.

According to EPA’s complaint, FMC failed to identify the restricted use classification of this pesticide on its own website, other online marketing, advertisements in print publications and in direct mailers to retailers and farmers. EPA also alleged that after EPA specifically denied FMC’s request to use the alternative brand name, “Stallion Insecticide,” on grounds it was false and misleading, FMC unlawfully distributed the product using the disapproved brand name. EPA subsequently approved the name “Stallion Brand Insecticide.”

EPA alleged 12,379 violations of FIFRA requirements in its complaint, based on the number of separate unlawful advertisements and distributions at issue. EPA will propose a specific penalty after the company has an opportunity to respond to the complaint and discuss the alleged violations with EPA.

MassDEP Penalizes Developer $23,010 for Violating Cleanup Regulations

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) penalized an out-of-state corporate owner of a redevelopment project due to violations of the cleanup regulations during work on conjoining lots in Cambridge. The work was conducted on a parcel of land that borders Binney, Rogers and Sixth streets during 2012 and 2013.

ARE-MA Region No. 34 LLC, a California-based company that has a local office in Cambridge, was penalized $23,010 for failing to notify MassDEP that additional contaminants were found during utility-related work and cleanup of the site, and two other violations of state regulations.

“MassDEP strongly supports and encourages the redevelopment of sites like this - commonly known as ‘Brownfields’ - but there are still requirements that must be met when doing these redevelopments to ensure that they are conducted safely and in compliance with state law,” said Eric Worrall, director of MassDEP’s Northeast Regional Office in Wilmington.

This section of Cambridge has a long commercial and industrial history that preceded environmental regulations and as a result, the presence of oil and hazardous materials in the environment from historic spills may be encountered during redevelopment. MassDEP’s waste site cleanup program has strict requirements to ensure that the agency is notified when such historical contamination is discovered. MassDEP’s site cleanup requirements help ensure that public health and the environment are protected, while allowing the redevelopment to proceed.

ARE-MA Region No. 34, LLC, has built a life science building on the site and will pay the entire $23,010 penalty for the violations committed during the construction work.

Pennsylvania DEP Reminds Residents to Maintain Home Heating Oil Tanks

On the first day of autumn, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) encourages residents to take precautions before filling their home heating oil tanks. Poorly maintained or leaking home heating oil tanks can pose a fire risk, diminish indoor air quality, or contaminate groundwater.

One in five Pennsylvania homes uses heating oil to stay warm in the winter. Owners of home heating oil tanks should consider inspecting indoor and outdoor home heating oil tanks for potential problems prior to refilling them. Preventing leaks will save owners energy and money, in addition to protecting owners’ health.

Cleaning up a spill caused by a heating oil tank can cost up to $50,000 and may not be covered by homeowner’s insurance. Homeowners can check with their insurance provider to see whether coverage is available.

DEP encourages homeowners to consider these tips:

• For safety reasons, always assume the tank contains at least some oil
• Routinely inspect the exterior of the tank and all attached equipment
• Check for signs of rusting on the tank and its structural supports
• Examine the tank’s fill line and feed line to the furnace for leaks
• Never tip over or empty a tank onto the ground
• Enlist a professional to perform maintenance or alterations to a heating oil tank system
• Recognize that wet spots or odors near the tank may signal a problem

When fuel is delivered, make certain that the home address is clearly visible and the tank’s fill line is clearly marked. If a resident cannot be home when fuel oil is delivered, mark the fill pipe with a red flag or marker and inform the oil company of the location. Ensure that any disconnected fill pipes are permanently sealed and cannot be opened.

Residents who think their oil tank may have a problem should immediately contact their oil company for help.

For more information about maintaining a home heating oil tank, click here or call DEP’s Division of Storage Tanks at 717-772-5599.

$10,000 Fine for Hazardous Waste Violations

State Department of Ecology inspectors documented numerous issues at a leased business property, vacated in January 2015 by Western Metal Art and Sign, at 1505 South Central Ave. King County’s Industrial Waste Program referred the case to Ecology earlier this year.

The inspectors who visited the property reported seeing:

• 21 drums of unlabeled waste materials
• Four open containers of waste, two of which were outdoors
• Dozens of 1- to 5-gallon containers of undesignated waste
• Absorbent material used on a rust-colored liquid and left on floors throughout a large part of the facility
• Tanks and totes containing unknown liquids

In August 2015, Ecology ordered the company to evaluate within 30 days whether waste materials still on the property should be identified as hazardous waste. If so, Ecology’s order directed the company to follow state requirements for storing and disposing of the waste.

“We made repeated requests, and then issued a formal order. Proper identification and management of waste is a basic safety and environmental need for all businesses with waste products.”

Penalties issued by Ecology may be appealed within 30 days of receipt to the Washington State Pollution Control Hearings Board.

Environmental News Links

Trivia Question of the Week

How many gallons of water flow out of the average faucet every minute?

a) 1

b) 2

c) 3

d) 4