EPA Finalizes National Primary Drinking Water Regulation for Certain PFAS
On April 10, 2024, EPA announced the final National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) for six PFAS.
On April 10, 2024, EPA announced the final National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) for six PFAS. To inform the final rule, EPA evaluated over 120,000 comments submitted by the public on the rule proposal, as well as considered input received during multiple consultations and stakeholder engagement activities held both prior to and following the proposed rule. EPA expects that over many years the final rule will prevent PFAS exposure in drinking water for approximately 100 million people, prevent thousands of deaths, and reduce tens of thousands of serious PFAS-attributable illnesses.
EPA is also making unprecedented funding available to help ensure that all people have clean and safe water. In addition to today’s final rule, $1 billion in newly available through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to help states and territories implement PFAS testing and treatment at public water systems and to help owners of private wells address PFAS contamination.
EPA finalized a National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) establishing legally enforceable levels, called Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), for six PFAS in drinking water. PFOA, PFOS, PFHxS, PFNA, and HFPO-DA as contaminants with individual MCLs, and PFAS mixtures containing at least two or more of PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA, and PFBS using a Hazard Index MCL to account for the combined and co-occurring levels of these PFAS in drinking water. EPA also finalized health-based, non-enforceable Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs) for these PFAS.
The final rule requires:
Public water systems must monitor for these PFAS and have three years to complete initial monitoring (by 2027), followed by ongoing compliance monitoring. Water systems must also provide the public with information on the levels of these PFAS in their drinking water beginning in 2027.
Public water systems have five years (by 2029) to implement solutions that reduce these PFAS if monitoring shows that drinking water levels exceed these MCLs.
Beginning in five years (2029), public water systems that have PFAS in drinking water which violates one or more of these MCLs must take action to reduce levels of these PFAS in their drinking water and must provide notification to the public of the violation.
Recent Posts
News Update: SEC Adopts Rules to Enhance and Standardize Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors
UPDATE, April 5, 2024
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has delayed the implementation of its climate-related disclosure rule in response to legal challenges from two fracking companies and various business groups. This decision awaits the judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on the appeals. Despite this, the SEC continues to assert its authority to mandate public companies to disclose their climate-related risks to investors and is prepared to defend the rule's validity in court. The stay temporarily halts the rule, which would first apply to large accelerated filers for fiscal years beginning in 2025, with other companies following at least a year later. Legal experts recommend companies continue preparing for compliance, while the appeals process could extend over months or years.
Washington D.C., March 6, 2024
The Securities and Exchange Commission today adopted rules to enhance and standardize climate-related disclosures by public companies and in public offerings. The final rules reflect the Commission’s efforts to respond to investors’ demand for more consistent, comparable, and reliable information about the financial effects of climate-related risks on a registrant’s operations and how it manages those risks while balancing concerns about mitigating the associated costs of the rules.
The adopting release is published on SEC.gov and will be published in the Federal Register. The final rules will become effective 60 days following publication of the adopting release in the Federal Register, and compliance dates for the rules will be phased in for all registrants, with the compliance date dependent on the registrant’s filer status.
Recent Posts
Combating Burnout: Key Strategies for a Healthier Workplace
Exploring the shadowy impact of workplace stress, this article delves into how pervasive job-related burnout threatens personal well-being and dampens productivity and communication. Discover essential strategies for employers to foster a supporti...
Workplace stress is a significant yet often overlooked safety risk that can impact a number of people. According to research by the American Institute of Stress, 83% of workers in the United States experience stress related to their jobs.1 Workplace stress causes, on average, 120,000 deaths each year.2 This stress doesn't just impact personal well-being; it also undermines job performance, productivity, and interpersonal communication.
There are many different causes of workplace stress. Concerns about job security, such as the fear of reduced hours or layoffs, can weigh on employees. Similarly, taking on additional responsibilities without adequate support or feeling unable to take sufficient breaks can increase stress levels. A significant stressor for many is being unable to maintain a healthy work-life balance, especially if there is an expectation to respond to work-related emails and answer work calls during personal time.
While the list of stressors extends beyond these examples, the collective impact can significantly affect your overall well-being. Fortunately, there are steps employers can take to alleviate workplace stress. A survey conducted by the American Psychological Association in 2021 revealed that over 87% of employees believe employers can help alleviate stress by offering flexible work hours, promoting the use of PTO, or encouraging employees to take regular breaks throughout the day.3 These proactive measures not only improve employee satisfaction but also foster a healthier and more productive work environment. The World Health Organization estimates that for every dollar an employer spends on mental health concerns, they receive a return of four dollars.1 Investing in mental health support benefits individuals and produces a return for employers, highlighting the importance of employee well-being in the workplace.
When we are stressed, fatigued, or mentally unwell, our ability to perform tasks safely and effectively is decreased. By addressing mental health concerns and providing support, employers promote a healthier work environment and enhance overall safety. Take some time to see what kinds of support your workplace offers.
1 World Health Organization. “Mental Health at Work.” 2022. https://www.who.int/teams/mental-health-and-substance-use/promotion-prevention/mental-health-in-the-workplace.
2 Goh, J., Pfeffer, J., & Zenios, S. A. “The relationship between workplace stressors and mortality and health costs in the United States.” March 13, 2015. Management Science, 62(2), 608-628
3 American Psychological Association. “Vacation Time Recharges US Workers, but Positive Effects Vanish within Days, New Survey Finds.” June 27, 2018. https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2018/06/vacation-recharges-workers.
Recent Posts
Using Artificial Intelligence to Interpret and Predict ESG Initiatives
I think there is a misunderstanding in today’s world regarding what AI is and what it can do. The latest trend is generative AI, a form of artificial intelligence capable of generating new content. This can be seen from things like ChatGPT, which can write entire novels when given a prompt on a particular subject, or DALL-E, which can create amazing images. Not every AI falls into this category, though. Other types of AI, such as predictive analytics and machine learning algorithms, are also relevant. This distinction is helpful in realizing that AI cannot independently generate completely new ideas; AI models are trained on existing data and patterns. Recognizing this fact will help set realistic expectations for what AI can and cannot do. It will not create an unknown product that the world has never seen.
“If the hot new fad is AI, surely there must be some way to incorporate that into our current business to make us more efficient.” The answer is yes! AI algorithms can analyze large datasets to identify trends, assess environmental impacts, or evaluate organizational social governance practices.
AI can make all aspects of your company’s environmental, health, and safety goals more efficient. You can leverage current AI tools with no platform by feeding it your data and asking for suggestions on improvements. For example, you can train generative AI with your current accident data. With a few of the correct prompts, it can generate a safety plan to help improve worker safety or perhaps identify vulnerabilities you haven’t even thought of.
In the future, AI will not only interpret existing data but also predict our future goals. Using predictive analytics and AI-driven forecasting models, we can anticipate environmental risks, forecast resource demands, and predict social trends. Looking further into the future, I can envision a scenario where workers wear AI components to help them identify hazards, prevent injuries, or even maximize their productivity.
There are some drawbacks to AI that also need to be considered. Ultimately, the predictive models are only as good as the data given to them. Companies are also responsible for protecting private individual data. It’s essential to make sure the data is high-quality and ethically handled. Companies must have a transparency and accountability policy regarding sensitive data.
AI technologies will have a positive and profound impact on sustainability, social responsibility, and corporate governance, and I encourage you to begin researching how AI data-driven models can help your company right now.
Recent Posts
SEC Rule on Climate-related Disclosures
In January 2023, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) cited April as the release date for a long-anticipated final action – a rule on companies' climate-related disclosures.
For reference:
Scope 1 emissions are considered direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from sources that are controlled by a company such as emissions from energy to run equipment, heating and cooling, and company vehicles.
Scope 2 emissions are indirect GHG emissions created by the production of energy (electricity, steam, heat, or cooling) the organization buys.
Scope 3 emissions are indirect GHG emissions that are not owned or controlled by the reporting organization. This category is much more encompassing as it addresses emissions generated by customers who use the products and by suppliers making products the company uses. Addressing Scope 3 involves tracking emissions across the entire value chain from suppliers to end users.
Scope 1 and 2 emissions tend to be easier to track, measure, and, to an extent, control. Options, such as solar and other renewable energy sources and switching company vehicles to electric models, are a few examples. With regard to Scope 3 emissions, EPA suggests that an “organization may be able to influence its suppliers or choose which vendors to contract with based on their practices.” For other companies, the focus can be less on suppliers and more about their customers’ use of products.
The reality is the upcoming SEC final rule release will regulate publicly traded companies; however, these publicly traded companies will be obligated to heighten their demands on the private sector suppliers to the companies subject to the SEC rule. Private companies will very likely be affected by new vendor or customer requirements. Small and mid-market organizations may not have the capability to effectively manage in-house. For those organizations already addressing Scope 1 and 2, it will be critical to ensure the process is accurate. A periodic third-party audit will be prudent. While not anticipated to have a reporting date before 2025 (for FY 2024), if not yet addressed, a plan to identify, manage and measure Scope 3 should be considered.
It is and will be critical for organizations to publicly communicate accurate, complete, and reliable environmental data, which includes environmental risks, opportunities, and practices as well as GHG emissions that are useful in decision-making for stakeholders.
A recent article in Environment+Energy Leader reminds us that there is good news. “…the good news is that these new standards and requirements are aligning around a common core, giving the markets more comparable information, and giving companies clearer direction. Organizations must understand that C-suites and Boards of Directors will be held accountable for disclosures and data management. It will be critical to ensure that data is reliable.”
Important Notes:
The proposed SEC rule would provide a safe harbor for liability from Scope 3 emission disclosure and exemption from Scope 3 emissions disclosure requirement for smaller reporting companies.
The proposed disclosures are anticipated to be similar to currently accepted disclosure frameworks such as ISSB (IFRS) and CDP.
Sources:
https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/ghg-inventory-development-process-and-guidance
Recent Posts
Setting Yourself Up for Success: Air Compliance Inspections
Picture this…. it’s a beautiful April day, and it’s the first warm day of the year. You walk into work feeling refreshed and energized, confident of the great day that lies ahead. You begin your morning routine… maybe you scroll through your email or daily schedule, or perhaps you enjoy a cup of coffee or tea and chat with a coworker. When out of nowhere, your phone rings. It’s security. There’s a state inspector is at your gate for a surprise air audit. Suddenly, you’re a little less confident in the great day that lies ahead and a lot more stressed out.
Sound familiar? Whether you call this an air audit or an air inspection, any EHS manager knows this exact scenario, as we have all been through it before. No matter what you call it, these unexpected visits from any regulatory agency can be a hassle. I worked as an environmental manager in industry for several years; however, prior to that, I worked as a state inspector. By seeing both sides of air inspections, I learned a lot… some of which I would like to pass along to you by offering advice on how to not only make air inspections go quicker, but also give the inspector exactly what they need.
1. Read your permit!
Although this may seem obvious, there are many managers who have either only partially read their permit or haven’t read it at all. Knowing what information an inspector will request and what machines they want to see will ensure a speedy inspection.
2. Ensure you are familiar with past inspection reports and corrective actions.
Before an inspector shows up at your door, review past inspection reports and ensure that corrective action has been taken from previous violations. This shows the inspector that you and your company take environmental compliance seriously. The state typically takes more aggressive action on violations that occur more than once.
3. Make yourself aware of regulations that are not contained in your permit.
Not knowing that you were applicable to regulations is not an excuse for non-compliance. Although most states do a sufficient job of including all applicable federal regulations in their air permits, what about the regulations that are passed between your facility’s permit cycles? The most common federal regulations affecting industrial sources are those concerning boilers and stationary generators. If you need assistance in determining your applicability to federal air regulations, Cornerstone offers a NESHAP and NSPS applicability determination to ensure your facility is in full compliance with all applicable air regulations.
4. Always have a hard copy of your most recent air permit somewhere that is easily accessible.
The inspector will most likely have their own hard copy with them when they request a tour of your facility. They will ask questions related to identifying the emissions units and operations listed in the permit. Having your own copy of the permit in front of you to field questions will make the tour go much more quickly and smoothly.
5. Know the terminology in your permit.
If you call a certain emission unit “Axle Refurbishment Booth” and IDEM calls it “Paint Booth #5” in your permit, it’s going to take both yourself and the inspector several minutes trying to match up emissions units to what is at your facility. Although this problem is easily resolved during permitting activity, it is of no help to you during a surprise inspection.
6. Keep all of your air recordkeeping in one place.
If you prefer to retain hard copies, keep all permit-required records (as well as the permit itself) in a labeled binder or file that is easily accessible. If you retain records digitally, ensure that all records are kept in one file that is easily accessible, regardless of internet availability. Storing all air recordkeeping in one place not only speeds up the inspection itself but also serves as a security blanket if you are on vacation when the inspector shows up and your second-in-command has to conduct the inspection.
7. Use the exact phrasing in your records as the permit.
This allows the inspector to quickly and easily skim your documents for compliance. Ensure that your units of measure match the units of measure in the permit limits and audit your own records to ensure that all permit-required information is reflected in the records. It is a good practice to highlight the “final” data such as tons of pollutants per year to draw the inspector to the most important information.
8. Regularly communicate with other departments about recordkeeping needs.
If the permit-required recordkeeping involves information from other departments in your company such as purchasing, don’t wait until the day of an inspection to request those records. On a monthly basis, send out a request for information (i.e., purchase records, usage information, etc.) to the necessary departments. This will ensure that you can provide an inspector with information in a timely manner.
9. Make note of any non-operational dates.
If you have daily records such as pressure drop readings, it is necessary to note which days your units were not in operation. If an inspector reviews records and sees days with nothing noted, they will assume that this is a missed record. A good rule of thumb to operate under is that it doesn’t count if it’s not written down.
10. It is important to speak with discretion during an audit.
Although it is important to be kind, allow the inspector to ask questions before providing technical answers. Air compliance is full of acronyms and jargon. If you accidentally say the wrong term, the inspector’s interest could pique and open a can of worms you did not mean to open.
During the peak of COVID lockdowns, most state agencies turned to alternative inspection protocols such as requesting records virtually and performing outdoor-only inspections. As we enter 2023, Cornerstone sees a mix of states who have maintained COVID protocols, states which have created hybrid in-person and virtual inspections, and some states that have gone back to full on-site unannounced inspections. It’s important to be prepared for any of these possibilities and respect the timeline that your inspector has provided.
Air inspections can be intimidating, but by setting yourself up for success and following audit best management practices, you can ensure that all future air inspections are quick and hiccup-free.
Recent Posts
West Virginia v EPA
On June 30, 2022, the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency was filed. In a 6-3 opinion, the Court ruled that Congress did not grant the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the Clean Air Act (CAA) the authority to devise emission caps on carbon emissions. Headlines swept the nation ranging from disappointment to outright misinformation.
How Did We Get Here?
The Clean Air Act was passed in 1970 as a comprehensive federal law that regulates air emissions from stationary and mobile sources. The CAA covers a wide scope of air topics including the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), State Implementation Plans (SIPs), and lays the groundwork for Major Source thresholds (a.k.a. the Title V Program). The CAA has been used by the EPA for decades to regulate sources of air pollution and create environmental programs, even if the CAA does not expressly mention the pollutant or program.
As society advanced and technology furthered our ability to evaluate sources of air pollution, many environmental leaders and researchers began to address carbon emissions throughout the country. Did you know that coal-fired power plants are the single-largest source of carbon emissions in the United States? In 2015, as a response to the growing need for regulations to curb carbon emissions, the EPA created the Clean Power Plan (CPP) in order to address carbon dioxide emissions from existing coal and natural gas-fired power plants. The EPA cited Section 111 of the Clean Air Act as the basis for the CPP. Although Section 111 promulgates New Source Performance Standards, certain pollutants from existing sources were regulated under Section 111(d). Under this section, individual states set the actual enforceable rules surrounding an environmental program, while the EPA set the emission limit with which the entity must comply. Interestingly, this section of the CAA has only been cited a handful of times since the CAA’s enactment in 1970. The CPP set emission limits based on three different criteria, most of which encouraged a shift in energy production from high-emitting sources to low-emitting sources (i.e., a change from coal to renewable energy).
As a result of both lobbying efforts and administration changes, the CPP was stayed by the Court in 2016 and underwent a cycle of repeals and rebranding for several years. The EPA reevaluated the regulatory authority of the plan (specifically the use of Section 111(d)) and replaced the CPP with the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule, based on a different Section 111 citation than before. With the promulgation of ACE, many states and industry leaders petitioned the courts on the legality of the EPA’s regulatory reach.
This issue was finally brought to the Supreme Court in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency. In a 6-3 opinion, SCOTUS invoked explicitly for the first time in court history the “major questions doctrine”. The major questions doctrine requires that Congress speak clearly when authorizing agency action in certain extraordinary cases to strike down an agency rule. In summary, the court ruled that because the CAA did not explicitly address carbon emissions, the EPA could not use the CAA to do so. In the future, Congress would have to either amend the CAA to explicitly include carbon emissions or pass an entirely new act.
This leads us to June 30, 2022. The SCOTUS opinion was handed down, and the news took the public by storm. Headlines ranged from “Supreme Court Limits EPA’s Power to Curb Emissions” (Harvard School of Public Health) to “US Supreme Court Deals Blow to Climate Action” (Human Rights Watch). I saw countless posts across social media platforms claiming that SCOTUS had taken away the government’s right to regulate any air pollutants, as well as concern for the future of global warming and carbon emissions. In light of the sensationalism that surrounded this court ruling, it is important to know the facts and how they may impact the future of our legal system, as well as the EHS (Environmental, Health and Safety) industry.
What did the court do?
SCOTUS ruled that Congress must pass explicit legislation giving the EPA authority to regulate carbon emissions from coal and natural gas-fired power plants.
What did the court NOT do?
West Virginia v. EPA did not limit the EPA’s power to regulate and control criteria air pollutants (carbon monoxide, ground-level ozone, lead, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide) and hazardous air pollutants.
What does this mean for me?
If your organization isn't a coal or natural gas-fired power plant, this regulation does not directly affect your operations or current regulatory requirements.
What does this mean for the future of the EPA?
The court’s precedent of the major questions doctrine will put all agency regulations under a microscope of scrutiny. Any agency regulation (whether it be the EPA, DHS, DOT (Department of Transportation), FCC, etc.) that does not derive from an explicit act of Congress will most likely not receive interpretive deference from the courts.
Recent Posts
Make Sure Your EHS Recordkeeping is "Turnover-Proof"
It happens all the time... an inspector from EPA or OSHA goes to a facility and asks for copies of required documentation and compliance records.
What happens if you are new to your position and are asked to produce those documents?
You're certain that the previous EHS Manager kept them ‘somewhere’, but you don’t know where. You fumble around at an unfamiliar desk, rifle through a couple of file cabinets, and frantically click files in your company’s shared hard drive. While you are doing that, the regulator is getting annoyed, looking around, and thinking of other questions he or she is now going to ask you.
If the information had been readily available, you could have had them out the door already but, instead, you’re scrambling to locate anyone who might know where the information is stored.
As the economy continues to return to normal and a demand for higher wages increases in many sectors, employee turnover has become one of the biggest issues manufacturing companies must address. It isn’t only hourly employees leaving for greener pastures. EHS personnel are finding new opportunities as well.
So, what happens when they leave and take all their knowledge with them?
Develop a Team to Manage EHS Recordkeeping
EHS recordkeeping requirements don’t stop just because you lose the expertise you’ve come to depend on. If your facility is still operating, you must continue to keep records as required by federal, state, and local regulations. One of the issues that I run into as an onsite environmental auditor is facility personnel not knowing where the records are kept. When longtime EHS personnel leave, many times you don’t know what you don’t know. So, you don’t know what to ask. In other words, when that employee is gone, so are years of institutional knowledge about who submits Tier II reports, who collects used oil bills of lading, who completes stormwater sampling, etc.
One way to prevent this is to create an internal storage system controlled by one person but accessible by many. Have your EHS Manager train two or three people on how to access information in your system. Have those two or three people assess the system and make changes based on their suggestions. One person controlling a recordkeeping system will almost always lead to confusion when someone else tries to use it. Use plain language in file descriptions and group things by media (air, water, hazardous waste, SDSs, HazCom, etc.) and by year.
Have your IT team create a file structure to store those records that is accessible by authorized personnel and regularly backed up to prevent file loss. Make sure that everyone who receives documents (EHS, purchasing, maintenance, quality) knows where those documents are stored. You could even use an outside vendor like Cornerstone and our electronic file cabinet system to help you maintain your documentation. Whatever method you choose to manage this information, ensure it is secure, regularly backed up and that multiple people understand how to access the system.
Turnover is inevitable but you don’t have to be caught scrambling when it happens. Plan for the future by creating redundancy and putting in place a system that can be handed down to the next person.
Recent Posts
Health and Safety Sustainability: Does Your Operation Go "Above Compliance"?
Earlier this year, I wrote an article entitled “Where the S in ESG intersects with HS in EHS.” While I stand behind the tenor of that piece, there is one thing I said that gives me some pause. I wrote “Today, compliance with Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS) regulations is a given. Employers must go beyond compliance.” That statement is true when viewed through the ESG and sustainability lens. But my history with clients, including recent work, has shown that sometimes even the most sophisticated of our clients still falls down when it comes to compliance with OSHA regulations. At times, companies within the regulated community have difficulty remaining in compliance with applicable regulations. So, how can they go beyond compliance to sustainability?
I’ll be the first to admit that compliance with governmental regulations doesn’t always equate to a healthy and safe workforce. Unfortunately, it doesn’t always work that way; however, when regulators discover violations and take enforcement action, investors, competitors, and employees will take notice. You simply cannot have strong ESG performance without a good compliance record.
Take the Hazard Communication Standard (HazCom) for example. Failing to properly label chemicals or not keeping an updated chemical list and corresponding Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) is always one of the Top 10 Most Frequently Cited Standards. In 2020, it was #2 on the list. HazCom has been around since the beginning of my career. You can do some research and see that is a very long time — over 30 years! What that means is that in three decades, many facilities still struggle with basic aspects of labeling and documentation. A recent project at a very large corporate client demonstrated this, when we discovered almost 99% of their chemical list was outdated or missing SDSs.
Another frequently cited Standard is Energy Control (a.k.a. Lockout/Tagout). It was #6 in 2020. We do dozens of projects each year with very large clients, and it is unanimous that if OSHA took even a cursory look at their procedures and training, violations could follow. Conducting lockout, training employees, writing procedures for each piece of equipment, and inspecting the procedures each year is required.
One reason more enforcement doesn’t occur is that OSHA is a very small agency. Inspections fell drastically in 2020 due to the pandemic. In 2019, over 33,000 inspections were conducted. This dropped to under 22,000 in 2020. In early 2021, the Department of Labor Office of Inspector General called OSHA out on this reduction, and everyone agreed that more and deeper inspections were needed. In short, expect more inspections and investigations.
Additionally, in October, Douglas Parker was confirmed as OSHA’s new leader. It bears mentioning that he is a past chief of California’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA). Anyone with experience in California knows the approach taken there to worker health and safety. It is a much more enforcement-focused regulatory scheme. It is likely that some of that scheme will follow Mr. Parker to the Federal OSHA he now leads.
So, the question is, are you ready to go beyond compliance? If you do not have a good feeling about your compliance program, the answer may be “no.” And, if that is the case, what are you risking beyond the health and safety of your workers? If sustainability and ESG performance are what you aspire to, you may be risking investment, growth, and the long-term outlook of your business.
Further Information
As ESG reporting becomes more vital and more publicly transparent, Cornerstone’s industrial health and safety experts can help ensure that your programs and data are ready for the spotlight. Contact us at info@corner-enviro.com or visit our website for more information regarding our ESG services.
Recent Posts
OSHA Frequency Requirements for Safety Training
Don’t let Worker Health and Safety Training slip through the cracks! The safety of your workplace depends on providing your employees relevant, up-to-date training — plus it is a key requirement to comply with OSHA regulations.
Is your workforce receiving the training they need when they need it?
Digging through OSHA’s website to find this information can be time-consuming, and often training requirements may still be unclear after reading the regulations.
Cornerstone’s worker safety team members have decades of experience from industry, agencies, and the military. We will work with your organization to deliver an effective worker safety program that helps ensure OSHA compliance and prevent workplace emergencies.
Recent Posts
Cornerstone's Waste Services Support RCRA Compliance
Many organizations are subject to the requirements outlined in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), yet they do not know if they are compliant. Cornerstone offers a variety of waste services to assist our clients in understanding their regulatory obligations, identifying areas of non-conformance, and developing a facility-specific plan to maintain compliance. Our goal is to ensure that compliance is not only met, but sustainable. Two of the services we offer can assist you with both, the Hazardous Waste Compliance Assessment and the Waste Compliance Program. There are a number of differences between these services. Our team of experts will work with your organization to guarantee your specific needs are met.
Hazardous Waste Compliance Assessment
Hazardous Waste Compliance Assessments are most beneficial to facilities with multiple hazardous waste streams. A Cornerstone waste team member will conduct a detailed review of your operations and practices to determine the status of compliance with applicable RCRA regulations. Specifically, labeling, storage, container management, disposal, recordkeeping, and reporting. These particular areas can lead to significant penalties if discovered during a regulatory inspection. Our Hazardous Waste Compliance Assessment is a proactive step to identify areas of gaps in compliance.
Waste Compliance Program
The Waste Compliance Program is a facility-specific program designed to provide clients with detailed information about their waste streams, applicable compliance requirements based on their generator status, and supporting documentation for maintaining compliance. This service is particularly useful for plants that are not sure how to manage their various waste streams. Even Small Quantity Generators (SQG) and Very Small Quantity Generators (VSQG) can benefit from this program since many sites do not receive the necessary guidance to fully comply with applicable regulations.
The Waste Compliance Program goes beyond the assessment and provides an actionable written plan with both required and recommended best practices to manage your waste streams. Based on the waste streams at your facility, Cornerstone will confirm that the necessary practices and procedures are in place to comply with regulatory requirements. The site-specific evaluation includes a thorough look at hazardous waste, non-hazardous waste, universal waste, used oil, and recyclable materials. The program provides information, tools, and resources to achieve and maintain compliance with generator requirements.
A Necessary First Step
With the current emphasis on Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG), many corporate executives understand the need to go beyond environmental regulatory compliance to satisfy stakeholder expectations. Their EHS Managers are being tasked with finding sustainability improvements including the evaluation of waste streams and identification of recyclable materials. Cornerstone’s Waste Compliance Program provides the necessary baseline information to move towards the Environmental Pillar of ESG. The identified processes, waste streams, and current disposal practices can then be used to identify targets for disposal alternatives, including waste to energy, reuse, recycling, and zero waste goals. Developing accurate baseline information for waste streams is the first step in determining realistic reduction goals and sustainable goal development. You cannot manage what is not measured.
Further Information
Contact us for more information on waste services that will benefit your organization.
Recent Posts
Emergency Generator Inspections and RICE MACT Compliance
This year was the first in my career in which EPA issued a Notice of Violation to a client due to non-compliance with a facility’s emergency generator maintenance and records.
The majority of my clients have an emergency generator on site. Many maintain them appropriately and keep the required records, but sometimes these requirements can slip through the cracks. Facilities should be aware of the requirements that apply to generators and ensure they are documenting compliance.
The potential consequences of non-compliance include inspection violations, fines, and required reporting in annual compliance certifications.
DOES YOUR FACILITY HAVE AN EMERGENCY GENERATOR?
The first step is to determine if your facility has generators on site. This may seem obvious, but I have seen several instances where a facility’s environmental team was either unaware they had a generator or did not know the specific requirements that applied to the units. I have also seen generators installed without the environmental team’s knowledge. If you are unsure, ask your maintenance department to verify.
ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN IF YOUR FACILITY HAS ONE OR MORE EMERGENCY GENERATORS
Determine what type of engine drives your emergency generator.
Find out when the unit was manufactured, what type of fuel it uses, and the unit’s horsepower rating. This information is often on the nameplate of the unit.Determine if your emergency generator must be permitted.
Depending on your state and its operational activities, your generator may or may not require an air permit. This is a state-by-state determination since each state has its own rules for handling emergency generator permitting. Some states may have a general permit for emergency generators at facilities that would otherwise not have an air permit. Others may have regulations that apply beyond the federal requirements.Determine what requirements apply to your generator(s).
Based on the above information, the generator will be subject to parts of 40 CFR 60, Subpart JJJJ, 40 CFR 60, Subpart IIII, and/or 40 CFR 63, Subpart ZZZZ. These regulations are referred to as the RICE MACT (Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine Maximum Achievable Control Technology).
WHAT ARE THE “NEW” OR “EXISTING” GENERATOR CATEGORIES?
The manufacturer date will determine if your emergency generator is considered “new” or “existing” with respect to the requirements. For example, a generator with a compression ignition (diesel) engine is considered new if it was manufactured after April 1, 2006.
“New” Emergency Generators
For most new units, owners achieve compliance by purchasing an engine that is certified by the EPA and by installing, configuring, operating, and maintaining the engine per the manufacturer’s instructions. To comply with regulations, it is necessary to maintain records of the certification and maintenance conducted.
If a facility that is already classified as a major source installs a generator with greater than 500 horsepower, EPA requires the facility to submit an initial notification to their agency. This is the only type of emergency generator that requires the notification submittal.
“Existing” Emergency Generators
Compliance for “existing” generators can be achieved by adhering to the following requirements and specific maintenance items on schedule:
Maintenance Items (Applies to all emergency generators except >500 HP at major sources)
Change oil and filter and inspect all hoses and belts every 500 hours of operation or annually, whichever comes first
Alternately, the operator may use oil an analysis program instead of prescribed oil change frequency
Compression Ignition (diesel) – Inspect air cleaner every 1,000 hours or annually, whichever comes first
Spark Ignition (natural gas, gasoline, propane, etc.) – Inspect spark plugs every 1,000 hours or annually, whichever comes first
Compliance Requirements
Operate/maintain engine and control device per manufacturer’s instructions or owner-developed maintenance plan
Emergency engines must have a meter and record hours of operation
Retain all maintenance records
OPERATING HOURS
Each emergency generator (except >500 HP at major sources) must have a non-resettable hour meter installed. This is critical to accurately record the hours of operation. For each operating event, owners must record the hours and distinguish if the event was used for emergency response or in a non-emergency situation.
Each generator may be operated for up to a maximum of 100 hours per calendar year for maintenance checks, readiness testing, emergency demand response, and non-emergency usage.
A limit of 50 of those hours can be non-emergency situations.
If either threshold is exceeded, EPA will reclassify the generator as a “non-emergency” unit, causing it to be subject to a different set of regulations including possible performance testing.
MAINTAINING COMPLIANCE
The most difficult part of emergency generator compliance is determining into which category your unit falls. Once you have made that determination, maintaining compliance is rather straightforward. You can conduct the prescribed maintenance at the established frequencies and record the hours of operation distinguishing between types of use.
The key is to maintain sufficient records demonstrating compliance with each requirement. This will help ensure your facility is in compliance with the RICE MACT generator requirements and avoid violations and possible fines in the future.
FURTHER INFORMATION
Contact Cornerstone for help regarding emergency generator inspections and RICE MACT compliance.