Environmental, Health and Safety Compliance Newsletter
May 17 , 2007
MACTEC's Environmental, Health and Safety Compliance Newsletter is a bi-weekly newsletter highlighting regulatory updates and the latest legal and technical news for Environmental and Occupational Safety and Health professionals. This newsletter is also available for printing and downloading here. (122kb PDF)
In this issue
On May 10, 2007 EPA Administrator Steve Johnson signed a rule to extend the compliance dates for owners and operators of facilities preparing or amending and implementing spill prevention, control, and countermeasure (SPCC) plans. This final rule extends the dates by which a facility must prepare or amend and implement its SPCC plan until July 1, 2009. EPA expects to propose further revisions to the SPCC rule in 2007. EPA has extended the compliance dates in order to provide the time necessary for the regulated community to comply with the revised requirements that EPA expects to propose in 2007.
For facilities (other than a farm) that started operations on or before Aug. 16, 2002, the facility must maintain its existing SPCC plan and amend and implement the plan no later than July 1, 2009. If the facility began operations after Aug. 16, 2002 through July 1, 2009, it must prepare and implement an SPCC plan no later than July 1, 2009. If the facility starts operations after July 1, 2009, it must prepare and implement an SPCC plan before beginning operations.
If a farm started operations on or before Aug. 16, 2002, it must maintain its existing SPCC plan and amend and implement the plan when EPA promulgates a rule specific for farms. If a farm began operations after Aug. 16, 2002, then it must prepare and implement an SPCC plan when EPA promulgates a rule specific for farms.
A new factsheet is available explaining changes in the regulation of animal fats and vegetable oils under the SPCC rule: http://epa.gov/oilspill/spcc_dec06.htm#factsheets.
<Top>
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has issued a Final Rule for Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards, promulgated at 6 CFR Part 27. The regulation requires any facility that manufactured, used, stored, or distributed chemicals listed in the “Appendix A to Part 27 - DHS Chemicals of Interest” at or above the screening threshold quantity (STQ) must complete and submit an Internet based "Top-Screen" analysis using the DHS Chemical Security Assessment Tool (CSAT). DHS estimates approximately 40,000 facilities will have to complete this initial Top-Screen user registration. Top-Screens are due within 60 calendar days of the effective date of the final "Appendix A to part 27 - DHS Chemicals of Interest" or within 60 calendar days of coming into possession of any such Chemical of Interest at or above the STQ. This
regulation is effective June 8, 2007, except for Appendix A, which will be finalized in the very near future.
Once DHS reviews a facility’s Top-Screen, the facility will be categorized into one of four tiers by DHS and will notified by DHS if it must evaluate the 19 elements of vulnerability and complete a Security Vulnerability Assessment (SVA) or if the facility can develop an Alternative Security Program (ASP). The DHS will oversee the facility’s development of acceptable layering of measures used to meet the standards of the risk-based tier assigned to the facility. The facility will need to develop appropriate countermeasures and policies to meet DHS risk standards and complete a Site Security Plan (SSP). DHS will assign an agent to work with each facility to develop a schedule to implement site specific measures.
Failure to complete a CSAT Top-Screen within the timeframe provided may result in civil penalties of $25,000 per day, a Department of Homeland Security audit and inspection, or an order to cease operations.
Weblinks are as follows:
Text of Final Rule: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/E7-6363.htm
Appendix A – DHS Chemicals of Interest:
http://www.dhs.gov/xprevprot/laws/gc_1175537180929.shtm
DHS Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Fact Sheet:
http://www.dhs.gov/xprevprot/programs/gc_1177002415803.shtm
For compliance assistance, contact Gerald Mueller at GRMUELLER@mactec.com or Kelly Murray at KRMURRAY@mactec.com
<Top>
Despite promises to consult with Congress before proceeding with dismantlement of its library system, the U.S. EPA has ordered its libraries to “disperse or dispose of their…contents,” according to agency directives released by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). The move to eliminate physical collections comes as EPA’s own enforcement branch warns about the risks of hampering environmental prosecutions.
New “interim” policies issued by EPA on April 10 (http://www.peer.org/docs/epa/07_2_5_library_dispersal_policy.pdf):
- Directs EPA libraries to “disperse or dispose of” their physical collections and lays out procedures for offering EPA holdings to outside libraries and for recycling journals and other technical documents;
- Places all EPA libraries, including those serving agency laboratories, under a single political appointee, Molly O’Neill, the Chief Information Officer; and
- “Discourage establishment of divisional or branch ‘mini-libraries’” to prevent the physical accumulation of technical materials except at pre-designated “repositories.”
“Significantly, the end users of the EPA libraries – the agency’s own specialists as well as the academic community and the public – have been excluded from all decisions about the future of this incomparable network,” stated PEER Associate Director Carol Goldberg, pointing to the fact that a major labor union is pursuing an unfair labor practice complaint over EPA’s failure to even consult with agency scientists over library closures.
To illustrate the dangers of EPA’s plan to rely solely upon centrally-maintained digitized documents, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance (OECA), in a memo dated April 9, 2007 (http://www.peer.org/docs/epa/07_2_5_oeca_issues.pdf), lays out its concerns about the negative effects on ongoing pollution prosecutions. The memo outlines the “three primary issues that OECA is concerned about”—1) information access, especially to original documents; 2) timeliness of services, worrying that the centralized system EPA is espousing may not be able to meet tight court-imposed deadlines; 3) cost and funding, pointing out that uncertainties surround how much EPA’s centralized all-digital system will cost and how it will be funded.
“EPA is determined to leap before it looks as it barrels ahead to shut libraries,” added Goldberg, noting that nearly one-third of EPA’s 27-library network has been closed or had services reduced. “EPA has declared war on libraries and the services they provide without offering an adequate substitute.”
In an extraordinary mass letter of protest last June, labor representatives for more than half of all EPA staff ascribed the agency’s drive to remove physical collections from libraries as an attempt to “suppress information on environmental and public health-related topics.”
<Top>
EPA has issued two final guidelines for states to implement key provisions of the UST amendments of the Energy Policy Act of 2005--the guidelines will affect inspections and state compliance reports on government USTs.
USTs not inspected since Dec. 22, 1998 must undergo an on-site inspection before Aug. 8, 2007 and then undergo an on-site inspection at least once every three years thereafter. The guidelines identify which underground storage tanks require an on-site inspection, the requirements for inspection, who can perform the inspection, and what information needs to be reported to EPA. EPA is giving states considerable flexibility to establish their own inspection programs. See http://www.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws/epact_05.htm#Final. States must report to EPA no later than Aug. 8, 2007 on the compliance status of federal, state, and local government-owned and government-operated USTs. The guidelines include what information a state's compliance report must include and when a state must submit its report. EPA will make the states' reports available to the public. See http://www.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws/epact_05.htm#Final.
<Top>
Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., proposed a bill May 14 that would amend the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (EPCRA) to require facilities to track and report their greenhouse gas emissions (S. 1387). Klobuchar argues that establishing a greenhouse gas registry to track emissions is a necessary first step toward regulating the pollutants.
"If you don't know what you are looking at and can't measure it, you can't fix it," Klobuchar said. "If weight watchers can have a calorie counter, we should be able to put in place a national 'carbon counter' so we can figure out the best way to reduce emissions that is good for businesses and good for the environment."
While several states have established registries, there is currently no uniform, national system for counting carbon emissions, Klobuchar explained. With a cap-and-trade program to regulate greenhouse gases pending, "consistent, high-quality data is needed across all economic sectors," Klobuchar said.
Klobuchar cited industry support for the bill and explained that adding a "carbon counter" under EPCRA is a simple approach to calculating greenhouse emissions. Under the bill, facilities would include estimates of greenhouse gases emissions in their annual reports. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency would collect the data and make an economy-wide estimate of emissions. After three years, the legislation requires that greenhouse gas emissions estimates be certified by a third party.
The so-called Carbon Counter Bill is being co-sponsored by Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine. It has been referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.
<Top>
The Supreme Court last week refused to entertain pleas by the EPA and industry to resurrect a Clean Air Act loophole that the federal appellate court in Washington struck down unanimously in March 2006. The loophole would have allowed more than 20,000 power plants, refineries and other industrial facilities to replace equipment with "functionally equivalent" equipment without first undergoing the required clean air reviews. The exemption would have applied even if a facility's air pollution increased by thousands – or tens of thousands – of tons as a result of the new equipment.
The 2006 appellate court decision had denounced EPA for violating the plain terms of the Clean Air Act. The court went so far as to observe that EPA's approach to the law would make sense "only in a Humpty Dumpty world."
The plaintiffs winning the case included Alabama Environmental Council, American Lung Association, Clean Air Council, Communities for a Better Environment, Delaware Nature Society, Environmental Defense, Group Against Smog and Pollution, Michigan Environmental Council, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Ohio Environmental Council, Scenic Hudson, Sierra Club, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, and U.S. PIRG. The groups were represented by Earthjustice, the Clean Air Task Force and NRDC. A group of 15 state attorneys general, led by the State of New York, was also part of the successful lawsuit.
<Top>
Ohio EPA has proposed new rules to significantly reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from large fossil-fuel-burning power plants and industrial boilers. The rules will be the subject of a public meeting on May 17, 2007.
The rules would establish a cap and trade program for nitrogen oxide emissions and set a total nitrogen oxide emissions “cap” for the state of Ohio. The rules also establish a mechanism for discounting sulfur dioxide allowances under the existing acid rain program.
Ohio's proposed rule would adopt a model rule that U.S. EPA provided to states. The federal rules are known as the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). The rules would set the first cap at 2009, and a more stringent cap in 2015. By 2015, NOx emissions would decrease by 77% and sulfur dioxide emissions would decrease by 82% from 2003 levels.
Comments or questions regarding the proposed CAIR rules may be mailed to Ohio EPA Division of Air Pollution Control, P.O. Box 1049, Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049, no later than May 17, 2007. Ohio EPA will consider all comments before any rule changes are adopted.
<Top>
Utah, Michigan, Montana, and Missouri are joining with thirty other states as charter members of The Climate Registry, marking the largest multi-state effort to address climate change. The newly formed organization will assist in measuring, tracking, and verifying emissions of greenhouse gases, the gases that cause climate change. It also will provide the measurement and reporting infrastructure to support voluntary, mandatory, market-based, and emissions reduction programs that are consistent across borders and industry sectors. The Registry will begin to accept reporting data in January 2008.
Dianne Nielsen, executive director of the Utah Department of Environmental Quality, has been tapped to represent Utah on the Registry. “Utah is proud to be among the founding members of the Climate Registry. This is a positive step in building collaborative and responsive options for addressing the issue of climate change,” Governor Huntsman said. “The Climate Registry is Earth-friendly and business-friendly and shows state leadership to address climate change. Utah is proud to be a founding member and looks forward to taking actions to protect our children's future.”
“This is an important step for Michigan, and for the nation, in encouraging the reduction of greenhouse gases,” said Department of Environmental Quality Director Steven E. Chester. “We look forward to continuing our partnership with companies around the state to improve the quality of our air and the environment.”
“We are pleased to be a part of this effort,” said Missouri Department of Natural Resources Director Doyle Childers. “It makes sense for states to work together to jointly develop a platform for greenhouse gas reporting. By pooling our efforts, we will save money and end up with a more useful program.”
“Participating in The Climate Registry is another important step forward in Montana's efforts to address climate change,” stated Richard Opper, director of the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. “Formation of The Climate Registry is another example of state's taking the leadership we've failed to see yet from the federal government.”
Opper said the joining the registry will complement the work already being done by the Governor's Climate Change Advisory Committee. Using a registry to obtain and share data on GHG emissions has already emerged as one of the committee's preliminary recommendations for addressing climate change in Montana because it lays the foundation for further actions.
The list of charter members also includes the states of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Main, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming and the Campo Kumeyaay Nation. Two Canadian provinces, British Columbia and Manitoba, also have committed to participate.
This is a voluntary program for states and businesses with the opportunity to get credit for early reductions of greenhouse gases. By working together, registry members are laying the foundation for climate actions that will benefit generations to come.
The inspection plan is available online at http://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/Directive_pdf/CPL2_06-01.pdf.
<Top>
OSHA’s new policy states that employee training required by OSHA standards must be presented in a manner that employees can understand. It also is to provide enforcement guidance to the area and regional offices relative to the agency’s training standards. This position applies to all of the agency’s agriculture, construction, general industry, and maritime training requirements.
Many OSHA standards require that employees receive training so that work will be performed in a safe and healthful manner. Some of these standards require “training” or “instruction,” others require “adequate” or “effective” training or instruction, and still others require training “in a manner” or “in language” that is
understandable to employees. It is the OSHA’s position that, regardless of the precise regulatory language, the terms “train” and “instruct,” as well as other synonyms, mean to present information in a manner that employees receiving it are capable of understanding. This follows from both the purpose of the standards - providing employees with information that will allow work to be performed in a safe and healthful manner that complies with OSHA requirements - and the basic definitions of training and instruction.
The new policy statement is available online at http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=25658.
<Top>
The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is proposing to revise the personal protective equipment (PPE) sections of its general industry, shipyard employment, longshoring and marine terminals standards regarding the use of eye and face protective devices, and head and foot protection. A notice of proposed rulemaking was published in today's Federal Register and the agency is seeking public comments until July 16, 2007.
"PPE must be strong enough to protect employees from the hazards they face in the workplace. It also must be constructed and tested in accordance with sound and accepted principles that will ensure the safety of employees," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Edwin G. Foulke, Jr.
These proposed revisions are a continuation of OSHA's effort to update references to specific consensus and industry standards located throughout the agency's standards. The proposed revisions replace the existing references to specific, out-of-date consensus standards with performance language that requires PPE to be constructed in accordance with good design standards. The proposed revisions include appendices that may be used to identify good design standards.
OSHA is also proposing to delete paragraphs in its ventilation standard as well as its welding, cutting and brazing standard that currently reference outdated PPE consensus standards. In proposing to delete these paragraphs, OSHA is continuing the process of consolidating all PPE requirements in Subpart I, and intends for all safety equipment to comply with the performance language design provisions in revised Subpart I of the general industry standards.
Interested parties are invited to submit comments on the proposed rule by July 16, 2007. They may submit comments electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, the federal eRulemaking Portal; by sending three copies to the OSHA Docket Office, Room N-2625, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave., N.W., Washington, DC, 20210; telephone (202) 693-2350; or by FAX to (202) 693-1648. Comments must include the agency name and the Docket Number for this rulemaking, Docket No. OSHA-2007-0044. See the Federal Register notice for more information on submitting comments.
<Top>
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cleared for marketing the first respirators that can help reduce the user’s exposure to airborne germs during a public health medical emergency, such as an influenza pandemic.
These two filtering facepiece respirators, manufactured by St. Paul, Minn.-based 3M Company (and called the 3M Respirator 8612F and 8670F), will be available to the general public without a prescription.
The devices are also certified as N95 filtering facepiece respirators by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). NIOSH certifies respirators for use in occupational settings in accordance with an appropriate respiratory protection program.
An N95 filtering facepiece respirator is a type of face mask that fits tightly over the nose and mouth. It is made of fibrous material that is designed to filter out at least 95 percent of very small airborne particles. The filter and a proper fit determine the effectiveness of the product.
“While the exact nature and concentration of the biological agent or germ may not be known in a public health medical emergency, we believe that minimizing exposure will help reduce risk,” said Daniel Schultz, M.D., director, FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health. “These respirators are only one part of a combination of approaches that can be used to help reduce the spread of infection between individuals during such events.”
Many companies make N95 respirators for workplaces, including health care settings. However, the 3M respirators are the first devices to receive FDA clearance for use by the public during public health medical emergencies to reduce exposure to airborne germs.
Under Occupational Safety and Health Administration and other occupational health regulations, respirators used in the workplace must be individually selected for each worker and tested to ensure a proper fit. This kind of fit testing is not generally employed outside the workplace now and would probably not be feasible during a public health medical emergency.
FDA is requiring those who want to market respirators for use during public health medical emergencies to assure that they are certified by NIOSH to provide adequate filtration without hampering people’s ability to breathe. In addition, companies must conduct fit assessment testing, conduct biocompatibility testing to reduce the chance for allergic skin reaction, and provide instructions that will enable wearers to achieve a protective fit and use the devices properly.
3M evaluated fit characteristics in healthy adults to determine that a user could achieve a protective fit following the instructions on the label. They measured how many airborne test particles were able to get inside the respirator through small leaks between the edges of the respirator and the wearer’s face. While individual results varied, all participants tested achieved some reduction in exposure to airborne test particles.
The 3M respirators are sized for adults and may not form a proper fit on children. Anything that comes between the respirator and the face, such as facial hair, may interfere with its fit. Persons with pre-existing heart or lung disease or other health conditions may have difficulty breathing through a respirator. The devices are for single use. Wearers should not wash, disinfect, reuse or share their respirator with others. The respirators should be discarded after use.
FDA will soon issue a guidance document outlining its regulatory approach to this new type of device.
Inhaling particles is just one route of exposure to disease-causing organisms. Others include touching contaminated surfaces and coming into close contact with those who have infectious diseases. A total approach to personal protection includes hand hygiene, cough etiquette and other protection practices such as avoiding crowded settings.
<Top>
DOT’s Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration amended the hazardous material registration and fee assessment program that applies to persons who transport or offer for transportation certain categories and quantities of hazardous materials. In this final rule, PHMSA eliminated the 24-hour, seven-days-per-week telephonic expedited registration option. DOT found that the telephonic system is no longer necessary now that there is an internet option. In addition, the agency adopted an explicit exception from registration requirements for Indian Tribes. DOT did not increase registration fees in this final rule, which becomes effective on June 30, 2007. The full text of the rule is available online at… http://hazmat.dot.gov/regs/rules/final/72fr/72fr-24536.htm.
<Top>
RECENTLY PROMULGATED FEDERAL REGULATIONS
Toxic Substances
CEC Chemicals Working Group Focuses on Electronics Sector
The Commission for Environmental Cooperation (“CEC”) Sound Management of Chemicals (“SMOC”) Working Group is poised to target the electronics industry as the first sector for regional action on chemicals of concern under its new strategy entitled “Strategy to 2020 under the Puebla Priority Areas” (the “Strategy”). On April 18-19, 2007, the SMOC Working Group held a stakeholder workshop in Monterrey, Mexico to define initial priority areas for future work under its new Strategy. Pre-meeting documents and stakeholder comments concentrated on addressing lifecycle management of electronics products as a potential priority work area. The SMOC Working Group has called for additional stakeholder input on initial program activities, with comments due May 23, 2007.
Hazardous Materials/Waste
Definition of Solid Waste
Notice of the EPA announces an extension of the comment period for a March 26, 2007, supplemental proposed rule (72 FR 14172) that would amend regulations under 40 CFR 260 and 261 to revise the definition of solid waste to exclude certain recyclable hazardous secondary materials from regulation under RCRA Subtitle C. The proposal also would address regulatory criteria for determining whether recycling of hazardous secondary materials is legitimate. Comments now are due June 25, 2007.
<Top>
RECENTLY PROMULGATED STATE REGULATIONS
Hazardous Waste
California - Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management
Final rule of the California EPA amends regulations under 27 CCR 15100 through 15290 (nonconsecutive) and adopts regulations under new Sections 27 CCR 15186, 15187, and 15188 to reorganize the provisions that implement the Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulation Program (Unified Program). The rule also clarifies language, deletes unnecessary language, and makes technical and editorial corrections. The rule is effective May 13, 2007.
California - Hazardous Waste Management
Final rule of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Commission for Health Services, amends regulations under 15A NCAC 13A.0106 regarding the hazardous waste management program. The rule incorporates federal standards under 40 CFR 261 to provide conditional exclusions from the federal hazardous waste management standards for cathode ray tubes (CRTs) and CRT glass for recycling. The rule also allows an increase in the collection and recycling of CRTs and reduces the amount of lead in landfills by allowing the lead to be reused to make new CRT glass or be sent to lead smelters. The rule is effective April 1, 2007.
Idaho - Standards for Hazardous Waste
Final rule of the Department of Environmental Quality amends regulations under IDAPA 58.01.05.002 through .354 (nonconsecutive) to incorporate by reference revisions to federal hazardous waste management standards as of July 1, 2006. The pending rule is effective March 30, 2007.
Maryland Enacts Law to Expand Scope of Devices Under Electronics Recycling Program
On April 24, 2007, Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley signed into law HB 488, an act that expands the existing statewide computer recycling program to include certain video display devices. The recycling program previously only applied to “computers” which were defined to include all desktops, laptops and computer monitors sold in the state. However, HB 488 expanded the scope of the recycling program to cover all “covered electronic devices” (“CEDs”) which includes not only computers, but also “video display devices” with screens greater than 4 inches measured diagonally. The law, including the requirements for the expanded product scope, takes effect on October 1, 2007, with the registration and fees due on January 1, 2008.
Wisconsin - Hazardous Waste Management/Manifest Requirements
Final rule of the Department of Natural Resources amends regulations under WAC NR 660 through 666 regarding hazardous waste management. The rule incorporates federal hazardous waste manifest requirements under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, eliminates state-specific manifest requirements, and requires the use of national uniform manifest forms. The rule is effective April 1, 2007.
Alabama - Standards Applicable to Generators of Hazardous Waste
Final rule of the Department of Environmental Management amends regulations under AAC 335-14-3-.02 through -.05, -.09, and Appendix I regarding standards for generators of hazardous waste, including requirements for manifests, pre-transport, recordkeeping and reporting, export, and transfrontier shipments. The rule incorporates amendments to federal standards and adds and clarifies state-specific requirements for the management of hazardous waste. The rule is effective April 3, 2007.
Alabama - Hazardous Waste Management System
Final rule of the Department of Environmental Management, Land Division, amends regulations under AAC 335-14-1-.02 and -.03 regarding the hazardous waste management system. The rule incorporates amendments to federal standards and adds and clarifies state-specific requirements for the management of hazardous waste. The rule is effective April 3, 2007.
Alabama - Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste
Final rule of the Department of Environmental Management, Land Division, amends regulations under AAC 335-14-2-.01, -.03, -.04 and Appendices VII, VIII, and IX and adopts regulations under a new Section AAC 335-24-2-.05 regarding the identification and listing of hazardous waste. The rule incorporates amendments to federal standards and adds and clarifies state-specific requirements for the management of hazardous waste. The rule is effective April 3, 2007.
Alabama - Specific Hazardous Waste/Specific Types of Facilities
Final rule of the Department of Environmental Management amends regulations under AAC 335-14-7-.06 regarding recyclable materials used for precious metals recovery. The rule incorporates amendments to federal standards and adds and clarifies state-specific requirements for the management of hazardous waste. The rule is effective April 3, 2007.
Alabama - Standards for Universal Waste Management
Final rule of the Department of Environmental Management amends regulations under AAC 335-14-11-.01, -.02, and -.03 regarding standards for universal waste management. The rule incorporates revisions to federal standards and adds and clarifies state-specific requirements for the management of hazardous waste. The rule is effective April 3, 2007.
Alabama - Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste
Final rule of the Department of Environmental Management, Land Division, amends regulations under AAC 335-14-2-.01, -.03, -.04 and Appendices VII, VIII, and IX and adopts regulations under a new Section AAC 335-24-2-.05 regarding the identification and listing of hazardous waste. The rule incorporates amendments to federal standards and adds and clarifies state-specific requirements for the management of hazardous waste. The rule is effective April 3, 2007.
Ohio - Hazardous Waste Rules/General Provisions
Final rule of the Ohio EPA amends regulations under OAC 3745-50-31 through -279-01 (nonconsecutive) and rescinds regulations under OAC 3745-50-47 regarding exemptions, fees, permits, recordkeeping, and reporting related to hazardous waste management. The rule adds, revises, deletes, and clarifies language; corrects references; revises rule amplification and statutory authority sections; and addresses fees. The rule is effective May 13, 2007.
Wisconsin - Hazardous Waste Management/Manifest Requirements
Final rule of the Department of Natural Resources amends regulations under WAC NR 660 through 666 regarding hazardous waste management. The rule incorporates federal hazardous waste manifest requirements under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, eliminates state-specific manifest requirements, and requires the use of national uniform manifest forms. The rule is effective April 1, 2007.
Minnesota - Hazardous Waste Manifests
Final rule of the Pollution Control Agency amends regulations under MNR 7045.0020 through .0675 (nonconsecutive) to incorporate amendments to federal hazardous waste standards and update the state's system for notification, tracking, and reporting hazardous waste shipments. The rule reflects the federally mandated system and associated revisions to the rules for the use of a uniform hazardous waste manifest. The rule also addresses the transfrontier shipment of hazardous waste to foreign countries. The rule is effective March 26, 2007.
Arizona - Hazardous Waste Standards
Notice announces the intention of the Department of Environmental Quality to amend regulations under R18-2-260 through -280 to incorporate changes to federal hazardous waste standards as of June 30, 2006. A comment due date is not specified.
Connecticut: Bills on Collection and Recycling of Electronic Devices at General Assembly
The Connecticut General Assembly Joint Committee on Environment has raised three bills concerning the collection and recycling of covered electronic devices.
On March 21, 2007, the Committee voted to pass Raised House Bill No. 7249, "An Act Concerning the Collection and Recycling of Covered Electronic Devices" and on April 2, 2007, the bill was reported out of the Legislative Commissioner's Office. H.B. 7249 was referred with a favorable recommendation to the Joint Committee on Finance, Revenue and Bonding on April 3, 2007. The favorable report of the Joint Environment Committee was published on April 10, 2007.
Two other raised bills have not yet been voted upon by the Committee. A public hearing on Raised Senate Bill No. 1225, "An Act Concerning the Recycling of Electronic Devices" was held on February 28, 2007. The Committee also held a public hearing on Raised House Bill No. 7123, "An Act Establishing the Connecticut Electronic Products Recycling Authority" on March 3, 2007.
Occupational Health and Safety
Kentucky - Noise Exposure
Final rule of the Department of Labor, Office of Occupational Safety and Health, amends regulations under 803 KAR 2:306 to incorporate by reference federal standards as of July 1, 2006, under 29 CFR 1910.94 through .98 regarding occupational noise exposure. The rule also makes technical corrections. The rule is effective April 6, 2007.
Kentucky - Occupational Safety and Health/General Industry Standards
Final rule of the Department of Labor, Office of Occupational Safety and Health, amends regulations under 803 KAR 2:300 regarding general industry standards to incorporate Sept. 13, 2006, federal standards under 29 CFR 1910. The rule updates references to national consensus and OSHA standards. The rule is effective March 9, 2007.
Kentucky - Occupational Safety and Health/Portable Powered Tools
Final rule of the Department of Labor, Office of Occupational Safety and Health, amends regulations under 803 KAR 2:315 to incorporate Sept. 13, 2006, federal standards under 29 CFR 1910 regarding hand and portable powered tools and other hand-held equipment. The rule also deletes outdated provisions regarding certain power lawnmowers. The rule is effective March 9, 2007.
<Top>
Web Sightings
World Bank Group Begins Use of IFC EHS Guidelines for Semiconductors & Other Electronics Manufacturing
The World Bank Group announced on April 30, 2007 that it will begin using as part of its social and environmental review process for lending projects the revised International Finance Corporation (“IFC”) Environmental, Health and Safety (“EHS”) Guidelines, including the final guidelines for “Semiconductor and Other Electronics Manufacturing.”
These EHS Guidelines will not only set the pollution control and performance standards expected for World Bank Group projects but also serve as the EHS performance standards used by many of the world’s largest financial institutions for global project financing as part of their commitment to the “Equator Principles.” It is also likely that NGOs and many developing countries will look to these EHS Guidelines as endorsed “best practice” standards against which electronics and semiconductor manufacturers and their suppliers will be measured for all manufacturing operations. Visit the IFC website for further details: http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/enviro.nsf/Content/EnvironmentalGuidelines.
Top 10 Stupid Environmental Policies
The editors of Environmental Science and Technology, a journal that normally sticks to the publication of scholarly and applied environmental research, has published a list of what its editors call the top 10 stupid environmental policies. Read the list at http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/esthag-w/2007/may/policy/js_comment.html. Also read their lament on the shrinking EPA budget.
<Top>
Ask an Expert
Bernd Haneke, Project Manager, MACTEC’s Research Triangle Park, NC Office
What minimum elements should be addressed in an Emergency Action Plan?
According to 29 CFR 1910.38(c), an Emergency Action Plan must include, at a minimum, the following elements:
- Procedures for reporting a fire or other emergency
- Procedures for emergency evacuation, including type of evacuation and exit route assignments
- Procedures to be followed by employees who remain to operate critical plant operations before they evacuate
- Procedures to account for all employees after evacuation
- Procedures to be followed by employees performing rescue or medical duties
- The name or job title of every employee who may be contacted by employees who need more information about the plan or an explanation of their duties under the plan
For compliance assistance, contact Bernd at BHHANEKE@mactec.com, or contact your local MACTEC office.
<Top>
|
