EPA: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Updates Related to the Use of Ozone-Depleting Substances as Process Agents

HOME NEWS REGSENSE INSTITUTE EDGE EXPERT HELP FORUMS

EPA: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Updates Related to the Use of Ozone-Depleting Substances as Process Agents

2023-10-19T05:00:00Z

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish recordkeeping and reporting requirements for uses of ozone-depleting substances as process agents and to update definitions to reflect current practice. Codified recordkeeping and reporting requirements would provide clear and consistent notice each year of information EPA collects, aggregates, and reports as a party to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer; effectively monitor these narrow uses in a more routine and consistent manner under the Clean Air Act; and enhance understanding of emissions of substances harmful to the ozone layer.

DATES: Comments on this notice of proposed rulemaking must be received on or before December 4, 2023, published in the Federal Register October 19, 2023, page 72027.

View proposed rule.

DATES: Comments on this notice of proposed rulemaking must be received on or before December 4, 2023, published in the Federal Register October 19, 2023, page 72027.

View proposed rule.

RELATED NEWS

EPA’s Fall 2023 Regulatory Agenda released

86 FR 62917 Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical Substances (20-10.B)

EPA: Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Management of Certain Hydrofluorocarbons and Substitutes under Subsection (h) of the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020

        SAFETY & COMPLIANCE NEWS
    
Keep up to date on the latest developments affecting OSHA, DOT, EPA, and DOL regulatory compliance.
Build your Profile

        RegSense®Regulatory Reference
    
Explore a comprehensive database of word-for-word regulations and best practices on a wide range of topics.
Build your Profile

        THE J. J. KELLER INSTITUTE
    
The J. J. Keller INSTITUTE is your destination for in-depth content on hundreds of topics. Browse by subject to gain foundational knowledge and confirm best practices on the topics that matter to you. You'll find articles, videos, and interactive exercises that help you become an expert and apply key concepts in practical scenarios. There are almost 130 subjects covering 100s of topics.
Build your Profile

        Add Premium Hazmat & Environmental Resources
    
Unlock premium content offering expert insight into hazmat and environmental regulations with a COMPLIANCE NETWORK EDGE membership.
Schedule a Call

        INTERACT WITH A COMPLIANCE EXPERT
    
In search of an answer? Try our FAQ Library or engage with an Expert for help!
Message an expert

        Upcoming Events
    
Reference the Compliance Network Safety Calendar to keep track of upcoming safety and compliance events. Browse by industry or search by keyword to see relevant dates and observances, including national safety months, compliance deadlines, and more.
Add to my calendar

Most Recent Highlights In Environmental

2024-02-21T06:00:00Z

Final Rule: Fees for the Administration of the Toxic Substances Control Act

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing amendments to the 2018 final rule that established fees for the administration of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Specifically, EPA is finalizing changes to the fee amounts and EPA's total costs for administering TSCA; exemptions for entities subject to the EPA-initiated risk evaluation fees; exemptions for test rule fee activities; modifications to the self-identification and reporting requirements of EPA-initiated risk evaluation and test rule fees; modifications to EPA's proposed methodology for the production-volume-based fee allocation for EPA-initiated risk evaluation fees in any scenario in which a consortium is not formed; expanded fee requirements to companies required to submit information for test orders; modifications to the fee payment obligations of processors subject to test orders and enforceable consent agreements (ECA); and extended timeframes for certain fee payments and notices.

DATES: This rule is effective on April 22, 2024, published in the Federal Register February 21, 2024, page 12961.

View final rule.

§700.43 Definitions applicable to this subpart.
Definitions of “Production volume” and “Small quantities solely for research and development.”	Added	View text
§700.45 Fee payments
(a)(2), (3)	Revised	View text
(b)(5), (7)	Revised	View text
(b)(10)	Added	View text
(c)-(d)	Revised	View text
(f)(2)(i)	Revised	View text
(f)(3)(i)	Revised	View text
(f)(4)-(5)	Revised	View text
(f)(6)	Added	View text
(g)(3)(i)	Revised	View text
(g)(3)(iv)	Revised	View text
(g)(5), (6)	Revised	View text

New Text

§700.45 Fee payments

(a)* * *

(2) Manufacturers and processors of chemical substances and mixtures required to submit information for these chemical substances and mixtures under a TSCA section 4(a) test order or enforceable consent agreement, or manufacturers of chemical substances and mixtures required to submit information for these chemical substance and mixtures under a TSCA section 4(a) test rule, shall remit for each such test rule, order, or enforceable consent agreement the applicable fee identified in paragraph (c) of this section in accordance with the procedures in paragraphs (f) and (g) of this section. Manufacturers of a chemical substance subject to a test rule under TSCA section 4(a) are exempted from fee payment requirements in this section, if they meet one or more of the exemptions under this paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (v) of this section on or after the certification cutoff date identified in paragraph (b)(6) of this section and do not conduct manufacturing outside of those exemptions after the certification cutoff dates or if they meet the exemptions under paragraph (a)(2)(vi) of this section for the five-year period preceding publication of the preliminary list and do not conduct manufacturing outside of that exemption during the five-year period preceding publication of the preliminary list; and the exemptions are only available if the manufacturer will meet one or more of the exemptions in this paragraph (a)(2)(i) through (vi) in the successive five years; and will not conduct manufacturing outside of the exemptions in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (v) of this section in the successive five years or will meet the exemption in paragraph (a)(2)(vi) of this section in the successive five years:

(i) Import articles containing that chemical substance;

(ii) Produce that chemical substance as a byproduct that is not later used for commercial purposes or distributed for commercial use;

(iii) Manufacture that chemical substance as an impurity as defined in 40 CFR 704.3;

(iv) Manufacture that chemical substance as a non-isolated intermediate as defined in 40 CFR 704.3;

(v) Manufacture small quantities of that chemical substance solely for research and development, as defined in 40 CFR 700.43; or

(vi) Manufacture that chemical substance in quantities below a 1,100 lbs annual production volume as described in §700.43, unless all manufacturers of that chemical substance manufacture that chemical in quantities below a 1,100 lbs annual production volume as defined in §700.43, in which case this exemption is not applicable.

(3) Manufacturers of a chemical substance that is subject to a risk evaluation under section 6(b) of the Act, shall remit for each such chemical risk evaluation the applicable fee identified in paragraph (c) of this section in accordance with the procedures in paragraphs (f) and (g) of this section. Manufacturers of a chemical substance subject to risk evaluation under section 6(b) of the Act are exempted from fee payment requirements in this section, if they meet one or more of the exemptions under paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (v) of this section on or after the certification cutoff date identified in paragraph (b)(6)(i) of this section and do not conduct manufacturing outside of those exemptions after the certification cutoff dates or if they meet the exemptions under paragraph (a)(3)(vi) of this section for the five-year period preceding publication of the preliminary list and do not conduct manufacturing outside of that exemption during the five-year period preceding publication of the preliminary list; and the exemptions are only available if the manufacturer will meet one or more of the exemptions in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (vi) of this section in the successive five years and will not conduct manufacturing outside of the exemptions in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (v) of this section in the successive five years or will meet the exemption in paragraph (a)(3)(vi) of this section in the successive five years:

(i) Import articles containing that chemical substance;

(ii) Produce that chemical substance as a byproduct that is not later used for commercial purposes or distributed for commercial use;

(iii) Manufacture that chemical substance as an impurity as defined in 40 CFR 704.3;

(iv) Manufacture that chemical substance as a non-isolated intermediate as defined in 40 CFR 704.3;

(v) Manufacture small quantities of that chemical substance solely for research and development, as defined in §700.43; or

(vi) manufacture that chemical substance in quantities below a 2,500 lbs annual production volume as described in §700.43, unless all manufacturers of that chemical substance manufacture that chemical in quantities below a 2,500 lbs annual production volume as defined in §700.43, in which case this exemption is not applicable.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(5) Self-identification. All manufacturers other than those listed in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (iii) and (a)(3)(i) through (iii) of this section who have manufactured (including imported) the chemical substance in the previous five years must submit notice to EPA, irrespective of whether they are included in the preliminary list specified in paragraph (b)(3) of this section. The notice must be submitted electronically via EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX), the Agency's electronic reporting portal, using the Chemical Information Submission System (CISS) reporting tool, and must contain the following information:

(i) Contact information. The name and address of the submitting company, the name and address of the authorized official for the submitting company, and the name and telephone number of a person who will serve as technical contact for the submitting company and who will be able to answer questions about the information submitted by the company to EPA.

(ii) Certification of cessation. If a manufacturer has manufactured in the five-year period preceding publication of the preliminary list but has ceased manufacture prior to the certification cutoff dates identified in paragraph (b)(6) of this section and will not manufacture the substance again in the successive five years, the manufacturer may submit a certification statement attesting to these facts. If EPA receives such a certification statement from a manufacturer, the manufacturer will not be included in the final list of manufacturers described in paragraph (b)(7) of this section and will not be obligated to pay the fee under this section.

(iii) Certification of no manufacture. If a manufacturer is identified on the preliminary list but has not manufactured the chemical in the five-year period preceding publication of the preliminary list, the manufacturer may submit a certification statement attesting to these facts. If EPA receives such a certification statement from a manufacturer, the manufacturer will not be included in the final list of manufacturers described in paragraph (b)(7) of this section and will not be obligated to pay the fee under this section.

(iv) Certification of meeting exemption. If a manufacturer is identified on the preliminary list and exclusively meets one or more of the exemptions as described in paragraph (a)(2) or (a)(3) of this section, the manufacturer must submit a certification statement attesting to these facts in order to not be included in the final list of manufacturers described in paragraph (b)(7) of this section. If a manufacturer is not on a preliminary list and exclusively meets one or more of the exemptions as described in paragraph (a)(2) or (a)(3) of this section, the manufacturer may submit a certification statement attesting to these facts. If EPA receives such a certification statement from a manufacturer, the manufacturer will not be included in the final list of manufacturers described in paragraph (b)(7) of this section and will not be obligated to pay the fee under this section, unless all manufacturers of that chemical substance meet the exemption as described in (a)(2)(vi) or (a)(3)(vi) of this section.

(v) Production volume. If a manufacturer has not submitted certification of cessation, as described in paragraph (b)(5)(ii) of this section, or certification of no manufacture, as described in paragraph (b)(5)(iii) of this section, for purposes of identifying manufacturers subject to fees for TSCA section 6 EPA-initiated risk evaluations and does not meet one or more of the exemptions in paragraph (a)(3)(i) through (v) of this section, the manufacturer must submit their production volume as defined in 40 CFR 700.43 for the applicable substance for the three calendar years prior to publication of the preliminary list. Only production volume reported to EPA prior to the final list being published will be used in determining fees described in §700.45(f).

* * * * *

(7) Publication of final list. EPA expects to publish a final list of manufacturers to identify the specific manufacturers subject to the applicable fee. This list will indicate if additional manufacturers self-identified pursuant to paragraph (b)(5) of this section, if other manufacturers were identified through credible public comment, and if manufacturers submitted certification of cessation, no manufacture, or meeting exemption pursuant to paragraph (b)(5)(ii), (iii), or (iv) of this section. The final list will be published no later than concurrently with the final scope document for risk evaluations initiated by EPA under TSCA section 6, and with the final test rule for test rules under TSCA section 4. EPA may modify the list after the publication of the final list.

* * * * *

(1) Small business concerns. Small business concerns shall remit fees as follows:

(i) Premanufacture notice and consolidated premanufacture notice. Persons shall remit a fee totaling $6,480 for each premanufacture notice (PMN) or consolidated PMN submitted in accordance with part 720 of this chapter.

(ii) Significant new use notice. Persons shall remit a fee totaling $6,480 for each significant new use notice (SNUN) submitted in accordance with part 721 of this chapter.

(iii) Exemption application. Persons shall remit a fee totaling $2,180 for each of the following exemption requests submitted under TSCA section 5:

(A) Low releases and low exposures exemption or LoREX request submitted to EPA pursuant to section 5(a)(1) of the Act in accordance with §723.50(a)(1)(ii) of this chapter.

(B) Low volume exemption or LVE request submitted to EPA pursuant to section 5(a)(1) of the Act in accordance with §723.50(a)(1)(i) of this chapter.

(C) Test marketing exemption or TME application submitted to EPA pursuant to section 5 of the Act in accordance with §§725.300 through 725.355 of this chapter.

(D) TSCA experimental release application or TERA application submitted to EPA pursuant to section 5 of the Act for research and development activities involving microorganisms in accordance with §§725.200 through 725.260 of this chapter.

(E) Tier II exemption application submitted to EPA pursuant to section 5 of the Act in accordance with §§725.428 through 725.455 of this chapter.

(iv) Instant photographic film article exemption notice. Persons shall remit a fee totaling $2,180 for each instant photographic film article exemption notice submitted in accordance with §723.175 of this chapter.

(v) Microbial commercial activity notice and consolidated microbial commercial activity notice. Persons shall remit a fee totaling $6,480 for each microbial commercial activity notice (MCAN) or consolidated MCAN submitted in accordance with §§725.25 through 725.36 of this chapter.

(vi) Persons shall remit a total of twenty percent of the applicable fee under paragraph (c)(2)(vi), (vii) or (viii) of this section for a test rule, test order, or enforceable consent agreement.

(vii) Persons shall remit a total fee of twenty percent of the applicable fee under paragraphs (c)(2)(ix) of this section for an EPA-initiated risk evaluation.

(viii) Persons shall remit the total fee under paragraph (c)(2)(x) or (xi) of this section, as applicable, for a manufacturer-requested risk evaluation.

(2) Others. Persons other than small business concerns shall remit fees as follows:

(i) PMN and consolidated PMN. Persons shall remit a fee totaling $37,000 for each PMN or consolidated PMN submitted in accordance with part 720 of this chapter.

(ii) SNUN. Persons shall remit a fee totaling $37,000 for each significant new use notice submitted in accordance with part 721 of this chapter.

(iii) Exemption applications. Persons shall remit a fee totaling $10,870 for each of the following exemption requests, and modifications to previous exemption requests, submitted under section 5 of the Act:

(A) Low releases and low exposures exemption or LoREX request submitted to EPA pursuant to section 5(a)(1) of the Act in accordance with §723.50(a)(1)(ii) of this chapter.

(B) Low volume exemption or LVE request submitted to EPA pursuant to section 5(a)(1) of the Act in accordance with §723.50(a)(1)(i) of this chapter.

(C) Test marketing exemption or TME application submitted to EPA pursuant to section 5 of the Act in accordance with §§725.300 through 725.355 of this chapter, unless the submitting company has graduated from EPA's Sustainable Futures program, in which case this exemption fee is waived.

(E) Tier II exemption application submitted to EPA pursuant to section 5 of the Act in accordance with §§725.428 through 725.455 of this chapter.

(iv) Instant photographic film article exemption notice. Persons shall remit a fee totaling $10,870 for each exemption notice submitted in accordance with §723.175 of this chapter.

(v) MCAN and consolidated MCAN. Persons shall remit a fee totaling $37,000 for each MCAN or consolidated MCAN submitted in accordance with §§725.25 through 725.36 of this chapter.

(vi) Test rule. Persons shall remit a fee totaling $50,000 for each test rule.

(vii) Test order. Persons shall remit a fee totaling $25,000 for each test order.

(viii) Enforceable consent agreement. Persons shall remit a fee totaling $50,000 for each enforceable consent agreement.

(ix) EPA-initiated chemical risk evaluation. Persons shall remit a fee totaling $4,287,000.

(x) Manufacturer-requested risk evaluation of a Work Plan Chemical. Persons shall remit an initial fee of $1,414,924, a second payment of $1,414,924, and final payment to total 50% of the actual costs of this activity, in accordance with the procedures in paragraph (g) of this section. The final payment amount will be determined by EPA, and invoice issued to the requesting manufacturer.

(xi) Manufacturer-requested risk evaluation of a non-work plan chemical. Persons shall remit an initial fee of $2,829,847, a second payment of $2,829,847, and final payment to total 100% of the actual costs of the activity, in accordance with the procedures in paragraph (g) of this section. The final payment amount will be determined by EPA, and invoice issued to the requesting manufacturer.

(d) Fees for 2026 fiscal year and beyond. (1) Fees for the 2026 and later fiscal years will be adjusted on a three-year cycle by multiplying the fees in paragraph (c) of this section by the current PPI index value with a base year of 2024 using the following formula:

FA = F × I

Where:

FA = the inflation-adjusted future year fee amount.

F = the fee specified in paragraph (c) of this section.

I = Producer Price Index for Chemicals and Allied Products inflation value with 2024 as a base year.

(2) Updated fee amounts for PMNs, SNUNs, MCANs, exemption notices, exemption applications, and manufacturer-requested risk evaluation requests apply to submissions received by the Agency on or after October 1 of every three-year fee adjustment cycle beginning in fiscal year 2024 (October 1, 2023). Updated fee amounts also apply to test rules, test orders, enforceable consent agreements and EPA-initiated risk evaluations that are “noticed” on or after October 1 of every three-year fee adjustment cycle, beginning in fiscal year 2026.

(3) The Agency will initiate public consultation through notice-and-comment rulemaking prior to making fee adjustments beyond inflation. If it is determined that no additional adjustment is necessary beyond for inflation, EPA will provide public notice of the inflation-adjusted fee amounts through posting to the Agency's web page by the beginning of each three-year fee adjustment cycle (October 1, 2026, October 1, 2029, etc.). If the Agency determines that adjustments beyond inflation are necessary, EPA will provide public notice of that determination and the process to be followed to make those adjustments.

* * * * *

(f) * * *

(2) * * *

(i) The consortium must identify a principal sponsor and provide notification to EPA that a consortium has formed. The notification must be accomplished within 90 days of the publication date of a test rule under section 4 of the Act, or within 90 days of the effective date of a test order under section 4 of the Act, or within 90 days of the signing of an enforceable consent agreement under section 4 of the Act. EPA may permit additional entities to join an existing consortium after the expiration of the notification period if the principal sponsor provides updated notification.

* * * * *

(3) * * *

(i) Notification must be provided to EPA that a consortium has formed. The notification must be accomplished within 90 days of the publication of the final scope of a chemical risk evaluation under section 6(b)(4)(D) of the Act or within 90 days of EPA providing notification to a manufacturer that a manufacturer-requested risk evaluation has been granted. EPA may permit additional entities to join an existing consortium after the expiration of the notification period if the principal sponsor provides updated notification.

* * * * *

(4) If multiple persons are subject to fees triggered by section 4 or 6(b) of the Act and no consortium is formed, EPA will determine the portion of the total applicable fee to be remitted by each person subject to the requirement.

(i) Each person's share of the applicable fees triggered by section 4 of the Act specified in paragraph (c) of this section shall be in proportion to the total number of manufacturers and/or processors of the chemical substance, with lower fees for small businesses:

Where:

P _s = the portion of the fee under paragraph (c) of this section that is owed by a person who qualifies as a small business concern under §700.43 of this chapter.

P _o = the portion of the fee owed by a person other than a small business concern.

F = the total fee required under paragraph (c) of this section.

M _t = the total number of persons subject to the fee requirement.

M _s = the number of persons subject to the fee requirement who qualify as a small business concern.

(ii) Each person's share of the applicable fees triggered by section 6(b) of the Act specified in paragraph (c) of this section shall be in proportion to the total number of manufacturers and their reported production volume as described in §700.45(b)(v) of the chemical substance, with lower fees for small businesses:

(iii) Remaining manufacturers ( i.e., those that do not qualify as a small business concern) are then ranked in ascending order (from lowest to highest) based on reported production volume as described in §700.45(b)(v). Each remaining manufacturer is assigned a number with 1 for lowest production volume, 2 for second lowest production volume, etc.

Table 1 to Paragraph(f)(4)(iii)—Example of Placing Manufacturers That Do Not Qualify as a Small Business Concern in Ascending Order
Manufacturer(s)	Assigned No. (N)
Manufacturer with lowest production volume	1
Manufacturer with 2nd lowest production volume	2
Manufacturer with 3rd lowest production volume	3
. . . etc.

Where:

P _s = the portion of the fee under paragraph (c) of this section that is owed by a person who qualifies as a small business concern under §700.43 of this chapter.

P _≥20th = the portion of the fee owed by a person other than a small business concern in the top 20th percentile.

P _<20th = the portion of the fee owed by a person other than a small business concern not in the top 20th percentile.

F = the total fee required under paragraph (c) of this section.

M _t = the total number of persons subject to the fee requirement.

M _s = the number of persons subject to the fee requirement who qualify as a small business concern.

N _20th = The assigned number as illustrated in Table 1 to the manufacturer(s) with a production volume as described in §1.45(b)(v) at which the manufacturers with production volume greater than or equal to are in the top 20th percentile.

M _≥20th = the total number of persons with production volume as described in 700.45(b)(v) greater than or equal to the manufacturer(s) with a production volume as N _20th .

M _<20th = the total number of persons with production volume as described in 700.45(b)(v) less than the manufacturer(s) with a production volume as N _20th .

F _o = the total fee required under paragraph (c) of this section by all person(s) other than a small business concern.

(iv) In the event there are three or less manufacturers identified for a chemical substance, EPA will distribute the fee evenly among those three or less fee payers, regardless of production volume.

(v) In the event the number assigned to the top 20th percentile is not an integer, EPA will round to the nearest integer to determine the manufacturer(s) with the reported production volume as described in §700.45(b)(v) greater than or equal to the top 20th percentile.

(vi) In the event multiple manufacturers report the same production volume as described in §700.45(b)(v) and are greater than or equal to the top 20th percentile, EPA will include all manufacturers with that same production volume in the fee calculation for the top 20th percentile group.

(5) If multiple persons are subject to fees triggered by section 4 of the Act and some inform EPA of their intent to form a consortium while others choose not to associate with the consortium, EPA will take the following steps to allocate fee amounts:

(i) Count the total number of manufacturers, including the number of manufacturers within any consortia; divide the total fee amount by the total number of manufacturers; and allocate equally on a per capita basis to generate a base fee;

(ii) Provide all small businesses who are either not associated with a consortium, or associated with an all- small business consortium, with an 80% discount from the base fee referenced previously;

(iii) Calculate the total remaining fee and total number of remaining manufacturers by subtracting out the discounted fees and the number of small businesses identified;

(iv) Reallocate the remaining fee across those remaining individuals and groups in equal amounts, counting each manufacturer in a consortium as one person; and

(v) Inform consortia and individuals of their requisite fee amount. Small businesses in a successfully-formed consortium, other than a consortium of all small businesses, will not be afforded the 80% discount by EPA, but consortia managers are strongly encouraged to provide a discount for small business concerns.

* * * * *

(g) * * *

(3) * * *

(i) Test orders and test rules. The applicable fee specified in paragraph (c) of this section shall be paid in full not later than 180 days after the effective date of a test rule or test order under section 4 of the Act.

* * * * *

(iv) Risk evaluations. (A) For EPA-initiated risk evaluations, the applicable fee specified in paragraph (c) of this section shall be paid in two installments, with the first payment of 50% due 180 days after publishing the final scope of a risk evaluation and the second payment for the remainder of the fee due 545 days after publishing the final scope of a risk evaluation under section 6(b)(4)(D) of the Act.

(B) For manufacturer-requested risk evaluations under section 6(b)(4)(C)(ii) of the Act, the applicable fees specified in paragraph (c) of this section shall be paid as follows:

( 1 ) The applicable fee specified in paragraph (c) of this section shall be paid in three installments. The first payment shall be due no later than 180 days after EPA provides the submitting manufacture(s) notice that it has granted the request.

( 2 ) The second payment shall be due no later than 545 days after EPA provides the submitting manufacturer(s) notice that it has granted the request.

( 3 ) The final payment shall be due no later than 30 days after EPA publishes the final risk evaluation.

* * * * *

(5) Small business certification. (i) Each person who remits the fee identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this section for a PMN, consolidated PMN, or SNUN shall insert a check mark for the statement, “The company named in part 1, section A is a small business concern under 40 CFR 700.43 and has remitted a fee of $6,480 in accordance with 40 CFR 700.45(c).” under “CERTIFICATION” on page 2 of the Premanufacture Notice for New Chemical Substances (EPA Form 7710–25).

(ii) Each person who remits the fee identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this section for a LVE, LoREX, TERA, TME, or Tier II exemption request under TSCA section 5 shall insert a check mark for the statement, “The company named in part 1, section A is a small business concern under 40 CFR 700.43 and has remitted a fee of $2,180 in accordance with 40 CFR 700.45(c).” in the exemption application.

(iii) Each person who remits the fee identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this section for an exemption notice under §723.175 of this chapter shall include the words, “The company or companies identified in this notice is/are a small business concern under 40 CFR 700.43 and has/have remitted a fee of $2,180 in accordance with 40 CFR 700.45(c).” in the certification required in §723.175(i)(1)(x) of this chapter.

(iv) Each person who remits the fee identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this section for a MCAN or consolidated MCAN for a microorganism shall insert a check mark for the statement, “The company named in part 1, section A is a small business concern under 40 CFR 700.43 and has remitted a fee of $6,480 in accordance with 40 CFR 700.45(c).” in the certification required in §725.25(b) of this chapter.

(6) Payment certification statement. (i) Each person who remits a fee identified in paragraph (c)(2) of this section for a PMN, consolidated PMN, or SNUN shall insert a check mark for the statement, “The company named in part 1, section A has remitted the fee of $37,000 specified in 40 CFR 700.45(c).” under “CERTIFICATION” on page 2 of the Premanufacture Notice for New Chemical Substances (EPA Form 7710–25).

(ii) Each person who remits a fee identified in paragraph (c)(2) of this section for a LVE, LoREX, TERA, TME, or Tier II exemption request under TSCA section 5 shall insert a check mark for the statement, “The company named in part 1, section A has remitted the fee of $10,870 specified in 40 CFR 700.45(c).” in the exemption application.

(iii) Each person who remits the fee identified in paragraph (c)(2) of this section for an exemption notice under §723.175 of this chapter shall include the words, “The company or companies identified in this notice has/have remitted a fee of $10,870 in accordance with 40 CFR 700.45(c).” in the certification required in §723.175(i)(1)(x) of this chapter.

(iv) Each person who remits the fee identified in paragraph (c)(2) of this section for a MCAN for a microorganism shall insert a check mark for the statement, “The company named in part 1, section A has remitted the fee of $37,000 in accordance with 40 CFR 700.45(c).” in the certification required in §725.25(b) of this chapter.

Toxic Release Inventory Reporting Form A TSCA Section 313 Reporting Toxic Chemical Release Reporting TRI Reporting Form R SMS Essential SMS Trial Enterprise SMS Trial SMS Premium SMS Advanced r40CFR700 40 CFR 700 40 CFR 700 General

2024-02-16T06:00:00Z

EPA Final Rule: Requirements for Polymer Exemption Reports and Accompanying Claims; Extension of Deadline for 2024

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) regulations for polymers manufactured under the terms of the polymer exemption by extending the submission deadline for reporting. The regulations require that manufacturers (includes importers) of polymers manufactured under the terms of the exemption submit a report of manufacture or import by January 31 of the year subsequent to initial manufacture. On June 7, 2023, EPA amended the exemption reporting requirement to require that the exemption report and accompanying confidentiality claims be submitted electronically. Because EPA experienced technical difficulties with the launch of the new electronic reporting tool, EPA is extending the reporting period for 2024 from January 31 to March 31 to allow manufacturers additional time to submit their reports and accompanying claims to EPA using the electronic reporting tool.

DATES: This final rule is effective on February 16, 2024, published in the Federal Register February 16, 2024, page 12248.

View final rule.

§723.250 Polymers.
(f) introductory text	Revised	View text

Previous Text

§723.250 Polymers.

* * * * *

(f) Exemption report for polymers manufactured under the terms of this section. For substances exempt under paragraphs (e)(1) through (3) of this section a report of manufacture or import must be submitted by January 31 of the year subsequent to initial manufacture. The report and accompanying claims must be submitted via CDX (https://cdx.epa.gov/), using the TSCA Section 5 Notices and Supports—ePMN application. See §720.40(a)(2)(ii) of this subchapter for information on how to access e-PMN software. The notice must include:

* * * * *

TSCA SMS Trial Enterprise SMS Advanced SMS Premium SMS Essential SMS Trial r40CFR723 40 CFR 723 40 CFR 723 Premanufacture notification exemptions

2024-02-16T06:00:00Z

EPA Final Rule: Deletion From the National Priorities List

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announces the deletion of one site and partially deletion of two sites from the Superfund National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL, created under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an appendix of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and the States, through their designated State agencies, have determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA have been completed. However, this deletion does not preclude future actions under Superfund.

DATES: The document is effective February 16, 2024, published in the Federal Register February 16, 2024, page 12246.

Appendix B to Part 300—National Priorities List
Table 1 entry for “NJ”, “Universal Oil Products (Chemical Division”, “East Rutherford”	Revised	View text
Table 2 entry for “ME”, “Portsmouth Naval Shipyard”, “Kittery”	Removed	View text

Previous Text

Appendix B to Part 300—National Priorities List

Table 1—General Superfund Section
State	Site name	City/county	Notes (a)
* * * *	* * * *	* * * *	* * * *
NJ	Universal Oil Products (Chemical Division)	East Rutherford
* * * *	* * * *	* * * *	* * * *
*P = Sites with partial deletion(s).

2024-02-14T06:00:00Z

EPA Final Rule: New Source Performance Standards Review for Steel Plants

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking interim final action on corrections and clarifications to the new source performance standards (NSPS) for electric arc furnaces and argon-oxygen decarburization vessels in the steel industry. The corrections and clarifications are being made to address unintended and inadvertent errors in the recently finalized standards.

DATES: This interim final rule is effective on February 14, 2024, published in the Federal Register February 14, 2024, page 11198.

View final rule.

§60.273 Emission monitoring.
(c) and (d)(2)	Revised	View text
§60.274 Monitoring of operations.
(b)(1), (b)(3), and (c)	Revised	View text
(i)(9)	Revised	View text
§60.276 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
(a)	Revised	View text
§60.273a Emission monitoring.
(c) and (d)(2)	Revised	View text
§60.274a Monitoring of operations.
(b)(1), (b)(3), and (c)	Revised	View text
(h)(9)	Revised	View text
§60.276a Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
(c)	Revised	View text
§60.271b Definitions.
definition “Shop opacity”	Revised	View text
§60.272b Standard for particulate matter.
(a)(3)	Revised	View text
§60.273b Emission monitoring.
(c), (d)(2), (d)(3), and (e) introductory text	Revised	View text
§60.274b Monitoring of operations.
(b) and (c)	Revised	View text
(h)(9)	Revised	View text
§60.276b Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
(c)	Revised	View text

Previous Text

§60.273 Emission monitoring.

* * * *

(c) A continuous monitoring system for the measurement of the opacity of emissions discharged into the atmosphere from the control device(s) is not required on any modular, multi-stack, negative-pressure or positive- pressure fabric filter or on any single-stack fabric filter if observations of the opacity of the visible emissions from the control device are performed by a certified visible emission observer and the owner installs and operates a bag leak detection system according to paragraph (e) of this section whenever the control device is being used to remove particulate matter from the EAF. Visible emission observations shall be conducted at least once per day of the control device for at least three 6-minute periods when the furnace is operating in the melting and refining period. All visible emissions observations shall be conducted in accordance with EPA Method 9 of appendix A to this part, or, as an alternative, according to ASTM D7520–16 (incorporated by reference, see §60.17), with the caveats described under Shop opacity in §60.271. If visible emissions occur from more than one point, the opacity shall be recorded for any points where visible emissions are observed. Where it is possible to determine that a number of visible emission points relate to only one incident of the visible emission, only one set of three 6-minute observations will be required. In that case, the EPA Method 9 observations must be made for the point of highest opacity that directly relates to the cause (or location) of visible emissions observed during a single incident. Records shall be maintained of any 6-minute average that is in excess of the emission limit specified in §60.272(a)(2).

(d) * * *

(2) No less than once per week, commencing from the tap of one EAF heat cycle to the tap of the following heat cycle. A melt shop with more than one EAF shall conduct these readings while both EAFs are in operation. Both EAFs are not required to be on the same schedule for tapping.

* * * *

§60.274 Monitoring of operations.

* * * *

(b) * * *

(1) Monitor and record on a continuous basis the rolling 15-minute average furnace static pressure (if a DEC system is in use, and a furnace static pressure gauge is installed according to paragraph (f) of this section) and either:

(i) Install, calibrate, and maintain a monitoring device that continuously records the capture system fan motor amperes and damper position(s);

(ii) Install, calibrate, and maintain a monitoring device that continuously records on a rolling 15-minute average basis either the volumetric flow rate through each separately ducted hood; or

(iii) Install, calibrate, and maintain a monitoring device that continuously records the volumetric flow rate at the control device inlet and continuously record damper position(s).

* * * *

(3) Parameters monitored pursuant to this paragraph, excluding damper position, shall be recorded on a rolling averaging period not to exceed 15 minutes.

(c) When the owner or operator of an affected facility is required to demonstrate compliance with the standards under §60.272(a)(3) and at any other time that the Administrator may require (under section 114 of the CAA, as amended), the owner or operator shall determine during periods in which a hood is operated for the purpose of capturing emissions from the affected facility subject to paragraph (b) of this section, either:

(1) Monitor and record the fan motor amperes at each damper position, and damper position consistent with paragraph (i)(5) of this section;

(2) install, calibrate, and maintain a monitoring device that continuously records the volumetric flow rate through each separately ducted hood; or

(3) install, calibrate, and maintain a monitoring device that continuously records the volumetric flow rate at the control device inlet and monitor and record the damper position consistent with paragraph (i)(5) of this section.

(4) Parameters monitored pursuant to this paragraph, excluding damper position, shall be recorded on a rolling averaging period not to exceed 15 minutes.

(5) The owner or operator may petition the Administrator or delegated authority for reestablishment of these parameters whenever the owner or operator can demonstrate to the Administrator's or delegated authority's satisfaction that the EAF operating conditions upon which the parameters were previously established are no longer applicable. The values of the parameters as determined during the most recent demonstration of compliance shall be the appropriate operational range or control set point throughout each applicable period. Operation at values beyond the accepted operational range or control set point may be subject to the requirements of §60.276(a).

* * * *

(i) * * *

(9) Parameters monitored pursuant to paragraphs (i)(6)–(8) of this section shall be recorded on a rolling averaging period not to exceed 15 minutes.

* * * *

§60.276 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

(a) Continuous operation at a furnace static pressure that exceeds the operational range or control setting under §60.274(g), for owners and operators that elect to install a furnace static pressure monitoring device under §60.274(f) or operation at flow rates lower than those established under §60.274(c) may be considered by the Administrator or delegated authority to be unacceptable operation and maintenance of the affected facility. Operation at such values shall be reported to the Administrator or delegated authority semiannually.

* * * *

§60.273a Emission monitoring.

* * * *

(c) A continuous monitoring system for the measurement of the opacity of emissions discharged into the atmosphere from the control device(s) is not required on any modular, multi-stack, negative-pressure or positive-pressure fabric filter or on any single-stack fabric filter if observations of the opacity of the visible emissions from the control device are performed by a certified visible emission observer and the owner installs and operates a bag leak detection system according to paragraph (e) of this section whenever the control device is being used to remove particulate matter from the EAF or AOD. Visible emission observations shall be conducted at least once per day of the control device for at least three 6-minute periods when the furnace is operating in the melting and refining period. All visible emissions observations shall be conducted in accordance with EPA Method 9, or, as an alternative, according to ASTM D7520–16 (incorporated by reference, see §60.17), with the caveats described under Shop opacity in §60.271. If visible emissions occur from more than one point, the opacity shall be recorded for any points where visible emissions are observed. Where it is possible to determine that a number of visible emission points relate to only one incident of the visible emission, only one set of three 6-minute observations will be required. In that case, the EPA Method 9 observations must be made for the point of highest opacity that directly relates to the cause (or location) of visible emissions observed during a single incident. Records shall be maintained of any 6-minute average that is in excess of the emission limit specified in §60.272a(a)(2).

* * * *

(d)* * *

* * * *

§60.274a Monitoring of operations.

* * * *

(b) * * *

(i) Install, calibrate, and maintain a monitoring device that continuously records the capture system fan motor amperes and damper position(s);

(ii) Install, calibrate, and maintain a monitoring device that continuously records on a rolling 15-minute average basis either the volumetric flow rate through each separately ducted hood; or

(iii) Install, calibrate, and maintain a monitoring device that continuously records the volumetric flow rate at the control device inlet continuously record damper positions(s).

* * * *

(3) Parameters monitored pursuant to this paragraph, excluding damper position, shall be recorded on a rolling averaging period not to exceed 15 minutes.

(c) When the owner or operator of an affected facility is required to demonstrate compliance with the standards under §60.272a(a)(3) and at any other time that the Administrator may require (under section 114 of the CAA, as amended), the owner or operator shall determine during periods in which a hood is operated for the purpose of capturing emissions from the affected facility subject to paragraph (b) of this section, all damper positions and either the:

(1) Monitor and record the fan motor amperes at each damper position, and damper position consistent with paragraph (h)(5) of this section;

(2) Install, calibrate, and maintain a monitoring device that continuously records the volumetric flow rate through each separately ducted hood; or

(3) Install, calibrate, and maintain a monitoring device that continuously records the volumetric flow rate at the control device inlet and monitor and record the damper position consistent with paragraph (h)(5) of this section.

(4) Parameters monitored pursuant to this paragraph, excluding damper position, shall be recorded on a rolling averaging period not to exceed 15 minutes.

(5) The owner or operator may petition the Administrator or delegated authority for reestablishment of these parameters whenever the owner or operator can demonstrate to the Administrator's or delegated authority's satisfaction that the affected facility operating conditions upon which the parameters were previously established are no longer applicable. The values of the parameters as determined during the most recent demonstration of compliance shall be the appropriate operational range or control set point throughout each applicable period. Operation at values beyond the accepted operational range or control set point may be subject to the requirements of §60.276a(c).

* * * *

(h) * * *

(9) Parameters monitored pursuant to paragraphs (h)(6) through (8) of this section shall be recorded on a rolling averaging period not to exceed 15 minutes.

§60.276a Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

* * * *

(c) Continuous operation at a furnace static pressure that exceeds the operational range or control setting under §60.274a(g), for owners and operators that elect to install a furnace static pressure monitoring device under §60.274a(f) or operation at flow rates lower than those established under §60.274a(c) may be considered by the Administrator or delegated authority to be unacceptable operation and maintenance of the affected facility. Operation at such values shall be reported to the Administrator or delegated authority semiannually.

* * * *

§60.271b Definitions.

* * * *

Shop opacity means the arithmetic average of 24 observations of the opacity of any EAF or AOD emissions emanating from, and not within, the shop, during melting and refining, and during tapping, taken in accordance with EPA Method 9 of appendix A of this part, and during charging, according to the procedures in section 2.5 of Method 9 in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter, with the modification to determine the 3-minute block average opacity from the average of 12 consecutive observations recorded at 15-second intervals. For the daily opacity observation during melting and refining, during charging, and during tapping, facilities may measure opacity by EPA Method 22 of appendix A of this part, modified to require the recording of the aggregate duration of visible emissions at 15 second intervals. Alternatively, ASTM D7520–16 (incorporated by reference, see §60.17), may be used with the following five conditions:

(1) During the digital camera opacity technique (DCOT) certification procedure outlined in Section 9.2 of ASTM D7520–16 (incorporated by reference, see §60.17), the owner or operator or the DCOT vendor must present the plumes in front of various backgrounds of color and contrast representing conditions anticipated during field use such as blue sky, trees, and mixed backgrounds (clouds and/or a sparse tree stand);

(2) The owner or operator must also have standard operating procedures in place including daily or other frequency quality checks to ensure the equipment is within manufacturing specifications as outlined in Section 8.1 of ASTM D7520–16 (incorporated by reference, see §60.17);

(3) The owner or operator must follow the recordkeeping procedures outlined in §60.7(f) for the DCOT certification, compliance report, data sheets, and all raw unaltered JPEGs used for opacity and certification determination;

(4) The owner or operator or the DCOT vendor must have a minimum of four independent technology users apply the software to determine the visible opacity of the 300 certification plumes. For each set of 25 plumes, the user may not exceed 15 percent opacity of anyone reading and the average error must not exceed 7.5 percent opacity;

(5) Use of this approved alternative does not provide or imply a certification or validation of any vendor's hardware or software. The onus to maintain and verify the certification and/or training of the DCOT camera, software, and operator in accordance with ASTM D7520–16 (incorporated by reference, see §60.17) and these requirements is on the facility, DCOT operator, and DCOT vendor.

* * * *

§60.272b Standard for particulate matter.

(a) * * *

(3) Exit from a shop and, due solely to the operations of any affected EAF(s) or AOD vessel(s) during melting and refining exhibit greater than 0 percent opacity, and during charging exhibit greater than 6 percent opacity, as measured in accordance with EPA Method 9 of appendix A of this part, and during charging, exhibit greater than 6 percent opacity, as measured according to the procedures in section 2.5 of Method 9 in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter, with the modification of this section of Method 9 to determine the 3-minute block average opacity from the average of 12 consecutive observations recorded at 15-second intervals; or, as an alternative, according to ASTM D7520–16 (incorporated by reference, see §60.17), with the caveats described under Shop opacity in §60.271 or, for the daily opacity observations, exhibit 0 seconds of visible emissions as measured by EPA Method 22 of appendix A of this part, modified to require the recording of the aggregate duration of visible emissions at 15 second intervals. Shop opacity shall be recorded for any point(s) during melting and refining, during charging, and during tapping where visible emissions are observed. Where it is possible to determine that a number of visible emission sites relate to only one incident of visible emissions during melting and refining, during charging, or during tapping, only one observation of shop opacity or visible emissions will be required during melting and refining, during charging, or during tapping. In this case, the shop opacity or visible emissions observations must be made for the point of highest emissions during melting and refining, during charging, or during tapping that directly relates to the cause (or location) of visible emissions observed during a single incident.

* * * *

§60.273b Emission monitoring.

* * * *

(c) A continuous monitoring system for the measurement of the opacity of emissions discharged into the atmosphere from the control device(s) is not required on any modular, multi-stack, negative-pressure or positive-pressure fabric filter or on any single-stack fabric filter if observations of the opacity of the visible emissions from the control device are performed by a certified visible emission observer and the owner installs and operates a bag leak detection system according to paragraph (e) of this section whenever the control device is being used to remove particulate matter from the EAF or AOD. Visible emission observations shall be conducted at least once per day on the control device for at least three 6-minute periods when the furnace is operating in the melting and refining period. All visible emissions observations shall be conducted in accordance with EPA Method 9, or, as an alternative, according to ASTM D7520–16 (incorporated by reference, see §60.17), with the caveats described under Shop opacity in §60.271. If visible emissions occur from more than one point, the opacity shall be recorded for any points where visible emissions are observed. Where it is possible to determine that a number of visible emission points relate to only one incident of the visible emission, only one set of three 6-minute observations will be required. In that case, the EPA Method 9 observations must be made for the point of highest opacity that directly relates to the cause (or location) of visible emissions observed during a single incident. Records shall be maintained of any 6-minute average that is in excess of the emission limit specified in §60.272b(a)(2).

(d)* * *

(3) Shop opacity shall be determined as the arithmetic average of 24 consecutive 15-second opacity observations of emissions from the shop taken in accordance with EPA Method 9 during melting and refining and during tapping; and during charging determined according to the procedures in section 2.5 of Method 9 in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter, with the modification to determine the 3-minute block average opacity from the average of 12 consecutive observations recorded at 15-second intervals; or, as an alternative, according to ASTM D7520–16 (incorporated by reference, see §60.17), with the caveats described under Shop opacity in §60.271, or as the total duration of visible emissions measured according to EPA Method 22 over a six minute period, modified to require the recording of the aggregate duration of visible emissions at 15 second intervals. Shop opacity shall be recorded for any point(s) where visible emissions are observed. Where it is possible to determine that a number of visible emission points relate to only one incident of visible emissions, only one observation of shop opacity will be required. In this case, the shop opacity observations must be made for the point of highest opacity that directly relates to the cause (or location) of visible emissions observed during a single incident. Shop opacity shall be determined daily during melting and refining, during charging, and during tapping.

(e) A bag leak detection system must be installed on all fabric filters and operated on all single-stack fabric filters whenever the control device is being used to remove particulate matter from the EAF or AOD vessel if the owner or operator elects not to install and operate a continuous opacity monitoring system as provided for under paragraph (c) of this section. In addition, the owner or operator shall meet the visible emissions observation requirements in paragraph (c) of this section. The bag leak detection system must meet the specifications and requirements of paragraphs (e)(1) through (8) of this section.

§60.274b Monitoring of operations.

* * * *

(b) Except as provided under paragraph (e) of this section, the owner or operator subject to the provisions of this subpart shall conduct the following monitoring of the capture system to demonstrate continuous compliance:

(1) If a DEC system is in use, according to paragraph (f) of this section, monitor and record on a continuous basis the furnace static pressure and any one of (2) through (4) in this paragraph:

(2) Monitor and record the fan motor amperes at each damper position, and damper position consistent with paragraph (h)(5) of this section;

(3) Install, calibrate, and maintain a monitoring device that continuously records the volumetric air flow rate or static pressure at each separately ducted hood; or

(4) Install, calibrate, and maintain a monitoring device that continuously records the volumetric flow rate at the control device inlet and monitor and record the damper position consistent with paragraph (h)(5) of this section.

(5) The static pressure monitoring device(s) shall be installed in an EAF or DEC duct prior to combining with other ducts and prior to the introduction of ambient air, at a location that has no flow disturbance due to the junctions.

(6) The volumetric flow monitoring device(s) may be installed in any appropriate location in the capture system such that reproducible flow rate monitoring will result. The flow rate monitoring device(s) shall have an accuracy of ±10 percent over its normal operating range and shall be calibrated according to the manufacturer's instructions. The Administrator may require the owner or operator to demonstrate the accuracy of the monitoring device(s) relative to EPA Methods 1 and 2 of appendix A of this part.

(7) Parameters monitored pursuant to this paragraph, excluding damper position, shall be recorded on a rolling averaging period not to exceed 15 minutes.

(c) When the owner or operator of an affected facility is required to demonstrate compliance with the standards under §60.272b(a)(3) and at any other time that the Administrator may require (under section 114 of the CAA, as amended), the owner or operator shall determine during all periods in which a hood is operated for the purpose of capturing emissions from the affected facility subject to paragraph (b) of this section, either:

(1) Monitor and record the fan motor amperes at each damper position, and damper position consistent with paragraph (h)(5) of this section;

(2) install, calibrate, and maintain a monitoring device that continuously records the volumetric flow rate through each separately ducted hood; or

(4) Parameters monitored pursuant to this paragraph, excluding damper position, shall be recorded on a rolling averaging period not to exceed 15 minutes.

(5) The owner or operator may petition the Administrator or delegated authority for reestablishment of these parameters whenever the owner or operator can demonstrate to the Administrator's or delegated authority's satisfaction that the affected facility operating conditions upon which the parameters were previously established are no longer applicable. The values of the parameters as determined during the most recent demonstration of compliance shall be the appropriate operational range or control set point throughout each applicable period. Operation at values beyond the accepted operational range or control set point may be subject to the requirements of §60.276b(c).

* * * *

(h) * * *

(9) Parameters monitored pursuant to paragraphs (h)(6)–(8) of this section shall be recorded on a rolling averaging period not to exceed 15 minutes.

§60.276b Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

* * * *

(c) Operation at a furnace static pressure that exceeds the operational range or control setting under §60.274b(g), for owners and operators that elect to install a furnace static pressure monitoring device under 60.274b(f) or operation ranges or control settings outside of those established under §60.274b(c) may be considered by the Administrator or delegated authority to be unacceptable operation and maintenance of the affected facility. Operation at such values shall be reported to the Administrator or delegated authority semiannually.

* * * *

CAA Clean Air Act SMS Premium SMS Advanced SMS Essential SMS Trial SMS Trial Enterprise r40CFR60 40 CFR 60

2024-02-14T06:00:00Z

Clearing the air: EPA's latest move to combat fine particulate matter

On February 7, 2024, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) made a significant move to improve air quality by finalizing a rule that lowers the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for fine particulate matter (PM_2.5). This marks the first time in a decade that such a change has been implemented. The new rule reduces the primary annual PM_2.5 standard from 12.0 micrograms per cubic meter to 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter.

It's important to note that this adjustment focuses on the primary annual PM_2.5 standard. Other air quality standards for PM remain unchanged, including the primary 24-hour PM_2.5 standard, the primary 24-hour coarse PM (PM₁₀) standard, and the secondary PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ standards. This development underscores EPA's commitment to safeguarding public health and the environment.

Key changes

The final rule:

Lowers the primary annual PM_2.5 standard. This stricter standard reflects the latest scientific evidence and is expected to prevent thousands of premature deaths and improve public health across the country.
Makes targeted improvements. EPA is also taking steps to address air quality disparities by focusing on monitoring and pollution-reduction efforts in communities disproportionately affected by PM_2.5.
Enhances communication. The agency is revising the Air Quality Index to better communicate the health risks associated with different PM_2.5 levels.

EPA establishes standards for six harmful pollutants (called criteria pollutants), including carbon monoxide, lead, PM, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and sulfur dioxide. These standards are based solely on protecting public health and welfare without considering the cost of making changes.

PM_2.5, also known as "soot," comes from various sources, such as vehicles, industrial facilities, construction sites, and fires. It’s associated with serious health issues like heart attacks, respiratory illnesses, and premature death. EPA estimates the new standard will prevent around 4,500 premature deaths and 290,000 lost workdays annually by 2032. Additionally, it’s expected to generate approximately $46 billion in net health benefits each year.

Regulatory process

The Clean Air Act requires that EPA review the NAAQS every five years to ensure their adequacy. The process is a multistage, robust review of the current science that requires significant expert input. If a standard is tightened, there’s a cascading effect on air quality policies and programs across the country. States and local regions must ensure that the sources of pollution in their area decrease their emissions so that the region can meet the new, more stringent national standard.

The effective date of the strengthened PM_2.5 standard isn’t immediate. The rule becomes officially effective 60 days after it’s published in the Federal Register. This is expected to happen sometime in April 2024.

Implementation is a multiphase process driven by requirements in the Clean Air Act. In the first phase, EPA makes initial designations of whether areas meet the revised standards. States then develop and submit State Implementation Plans (or SIPs) outlining how to achieve the new standards. This phase, which must be done within three years, involves identifying emission sources, setting regulations, and implementing control measures.

Potential impacts

An industrial source with high emissions must apply for a permit to build a facility or expand operations in a way that increases air pollution. Here’s how your facility may be affected:

If your facility has a final permit in hand before the effective date of the new standard, no new permitting requirements will apply.
If your facility has a permit in process when the new standard takes effect, you must conduct an air quality analysis that considers the revised standard.
If you have plans to build a new facility or expand an existing one, you need to work with the permitting agency to estimate how much particle pollution will be emitted and choose the best available air pollution control technology to meet the new standard.

Key to remember: EPA finalized a rule to tighten the NAAQS for fine particulate matter, lowering the primary annual standard from 12.0 to 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter.

Most Recent Highlights In Transportation

2024-02-13T06:00:00Z

Cash-strapped EPA hikes TSCA fees for chemical activities

Inside EPA, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) program may have, for years, looked much like a scene from an episode of “I Love Lucy,” where Lucy and Ethel take jobs at a chocolate factory. Instead of wrapping chocolates that whizzed by on a production line, however, EPA scientists faced an avalanche of new chemical submissions. A final rule, though, set to appear in the Federal Register may give these scientists some relief.

Funding problem

Prior to 2016, the agency had been reviewing just 20 percent of all new chemicals in 90 days before they entered commerce. The remaining 80 percent sailed through the new chemical submittal process without as much scrutiny and were stamped approved in 90 days.

Then, in 2016, a new law stepped things up. It mandated the review of 100 percent of new chemical submissions in the 90-day time frame. Despite the increase in duties, the agency suffered insufficient funding and staffing for the TSCA program. That meant many chemicals were stuck in review and could not go to market. Even those chemicals needed for modern technologies like semiconductors, batteries, and biotech faced the same bottleneck. Stakeholders on all sides were frustrated.

In a Congressional hearing on January 24 this year, EPA Assistant Administrator Michal Freedhoff, Ph.D., concluded: “The truth is we’re not able to achieve all that TSCA was expected to. The problem’s clear. TSCA’s underfunded … We don’t need to change the law. We need funding to implement the law we have.”

New final rule

Now, though, EPA posted a pre-publication version of a final rule to increase TSCA fees, as authorized under the law. The rule updates how EPA will recover authorized costs and ensure that collected fees provide the agency with 25 percent of authorized costs. It takes effect 60 days after the rule is published in the Federal Register.

Fee triggers

The rule would require payment of fees for eight categories of activities or events under TSCA sections 4, 5, and 6:

Test rules under TSCA section 4;
Enforceable consent agreements under TSCA section 4;
Test orders under TSCA section 4;
Pre-manufacture notices (PMNs), significant new use notices (SNUNs), and microbial commercial activity notices (MCANs) under TSCA section 5;
New chemical exemption applications (for low volumes, test marketing, TSCA environmental releases, etc.) under TSCA section 5;
EPA-initiated risk evaluations under TSCA section 6;
Manufacturer-requested risk evaluations for chemicals on the TSCA work plan; and
Manufacturer-requested risk evaluations for chemicals not on the TSCA work plan.

Who pays?

Most fee responsibilities under the rule are assigned to chemical manufacturers (including importers). In certain cases, fees may also apply to chemical processors. An example would be when a processor submits a SNUN under TSCA section 5 or is identified in a TSCA section 4 test order.

Entities that meet the definition of a “small business concern,” as defined, can receive a discount of approximately 80 percent.

Where multiple entities are subject to a fee, the final rule allows those entities to pay individually or through a consortium of payers. EPA will divide the total fee amongst responsible individual and joint payers per a formula and process described in the rule.

Fees may change in the future

During fiscal years 2024-2026, EPA says it will work to track actual TSCA implementation costs and use that data to adjust future fees, if appropriate. As required by law, EPA will evaluate and re-adjust the fees, if necessary, every three years. Note that the TSCA program is also funded, in part, by the Congressional budget.

More information

For TSCA funding and fees information, visit our TSCA Fees discussion and EPA’s “Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Administration Fees” webpage.

Also check out the archived webcast, “Oversight of Toxic Substances Control Act Amendments Implementation,” a hearing held by the Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works on January 24. That hearing covered “all things TSCA related,” including the ever-controversial topic of worker protections.

In fact, when asked by one Senator why the TSCA Program is suffering “mission creep” into the OSHA arena, Freedhoff explained, “TSCA says that we have to consider the risks to ‘potentially exposed and susceptible subpopulations,’ and that term is explicitly defined to include workers.” She added that OSHA standards don’t protect everyone. By that she meant they don’t cover self-employed workers nor public workers that are not subject to a state OSHA plan. TSCA, then, can fill that gap.

The Senator replied that given the funding issues, “staying in the lane would probably be helpful.”

Key to remember

EPA posted a pre-publication version of a final rule to increase TSCA fees. It takes effect 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.

EHS Monthly Round Up - January 2024

In this monthly video, we'll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll go over the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news. Please view the content links in the transcript for more information about the topics I’ll be covering today. Let’s get started!

Effective January 15, OSHA penalties increased 3.2 percent for inflation. Most penalties increased to $16,131. Willful and serious violations, however, increased to $161,323.

Construction workers aged 45 and older suffer more severe injuries and higher associated costs than other age groups. Most injuries are due to slips, trips, and falls.

Washington State updated its process safety management rules to better protect workers in petroleum refineries from the hazards of volatile chemicals. The rules take effect December 27, 2024.

Bloodborne pathogens topped the list of OSHA violations for the healthcare industry in 2023. Hazard Communication was the second most cited standard, followed by respiratory protection.

OSHA Region 2 launched a regional emphasis program that targets tree trimming, tree removal, and land clearing operations. Region 2 includes New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

EPA continues to strengthen its regulation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl — or PFAS — substances. A new rule prevents facilities from using any of the 300+ inactive PFAS before EPA conducts a risk determination and, if necessary, regulates the activity.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!

2024-02-08T06:00:00Z

EPA strengthens fine particulate matter air quality standards

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized its reconsideration of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter (NAAQS PM), strengthening the annual primary emissions limit of fine particulate matter (PM_2.5), also known as soot.

What changed?

Under the Clean Air Act, EPA sets primary and secondary NAAQS. Primary standards focus on protecting human health, while secondary standards concentrate on protecting public welfare (e.g., preventing environmental damage).

In the finalized NAAQS, EPA strengthened the primary annual PM_2.5 standard from 12 micrograms per cubic meter to 9 micrograms per cubic meter. The agency also:

Revised the Air Quality Index to improve public communications about health risks from PM_2.5 exposures, and
Added a monitoring factor to better protect air quality in communities overburdened by air pollution.

What didn’t change?

The agency maintained:

The secondary annual PM_2.5 standards,
The primary and secondary 24-hour PM_2.5 standards, and
The primary and secondary coarse particulate matter (or PM₁₀) standards.

Does this affect my facility?

Upon the effective date of the final rule, all applicants for permits to construct a new major source or make a major modification to an existing stationary source must conduct an air quality analysis that considers the revised PM_2.5 NAAQS. Facilities with a Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit in progress must show the new or modified source won’t violate or cause a violation of the new annual primary PM_2.5 NAAQS.

When EPA establishes a new NAAQS or revises an existing one, it begins a years-long process to implement the new standards in states:

EPA designates areas as either meeting (attainment) or not meeting (nonattainment) the new standards.
State and local air agencies develop and submit to EPA infrastructure State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to confirm air quality management programs are in place.
Once EPA designates areas, state and local air agencies with nonattainment areas develop and submit to the agency SIPs with the strategies and emissions control measures planned to meet the NAAQS.
EPA then reviews the SIPs. It either approves all or parts of a SIP or disapproves the plan. Any control measures EPA approves are immediately enforceable in federal court.

Now is the time to proactively consider ways your facility can further limit PM_2.5 emissions. Your organization will be better prepared to comply with any future PM emissions control regulations.

Key to remember: EPA strengthened the annual primary standards for fine particulate matter, also known as soot.

2024-02-08T06:00:00Z

EPA Proposed Rule: Listing of Specific PFAS as Hazardous Constituents

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is proposing to amend its regulation under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) by adding nine specific per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), their salts, and their structural isomers, to its list of hazardous constituents. These nine PFAS are perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS), hexafluoropropylene oxide-dimer acid (HFPO–DA or GenX), perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS), perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA), perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA), and perfluorobutanoic acid (PFBA). EPA's criteria for listing substances as hazardous constituents under RCRA require that they have been shown in scientific studies to have toxic, carcinogenic, mutagenic, or teratogenic effects on humans or other life forms. EPA reviewed and evaluated key toxicity and epidemiological studies and assessments for the nine PFAS to determine whether the available data for these PFAS meet the Agency's criteria for listing substances as hazardous constituents under RCRA. Based on EPA's evaluation, the above nine PFAS, their salts, and their structural isomers meet the criteria for being listed as RCRA hazardous constituents. As a result of this proposed rule, if finalized, when corrective action requirements are imposed at a facility, these PFAS would be among the hazardous constituents expressly identified for consideration in RCRA facility assessments and, where necessary, further investigation and cleanup through the RCRA corrective action process at RCRA treatment, storage, and disposal facilities.

DATES: This proposed rule is published in the Federal Register February 8, 2024, page 8606.

View proposed rule.

Retail Healthcare Mining Manufacturing (33/Durable)Wholesale Distribution Utilities Manufacturing (32/Non-Durable)Transportation Waste Management Construction Personal Services Public Administration Real Estate Warehousing Professional Services Manufacturing (31/Food/Textiles)Entertainment Repair Services Acute Waste U Codes CERCLA Hazardous Substances Resource Conservation and Recovery Toxic Substances Precious Metals Extremely Hazardous Substances Reactivity Corrosivity Landfilling Used Batteries Conditionally Excluded Waste Chemicals P Codes Cathode Ray Tubes HazWaste Solvent Waste Chemical Lists Toxicity Solvent Contaminated Wipes Residues Listed Waste Toxic Chemicals Characteristic Waste CRTs Waste Codes Oily Rags Trash Pharmaceutical Waste HHC Hazardous Secondary Materials Garbage Aerosol Cans Shop Rags Non-Acute Waste Municipal Solid Waste Recycling EHSs RCRA Hazardous Chemicals Highly Hazardous Chemical Ignitability SMS Trial Enterprise SMS Premium SMS Trial SMS Essential SMS Advanced r40CFR271 r40CFR261 40 CFR 271 40 CFR 261 40 CFR 271 Requirements for authorization of state hazardous waste programs 40 CFR 261 Identification and listing of hazardous waste

2024-02-08T06:00:00Z

EPA Proposed Rule: Revision to Hazardous Waste Definition

This proposed rule would amend the definition of hazardous waste applicable to corrective action to address releases from solid waste management units at RCRA-permitted treatment, storage, and disposal facilities and make related conforming amendments, thereby providing clear regulatory authority to fully implement the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) statutory requirement that permitted facilities conduct corrective action to address releases not only of substances listed or identified as hazardous waste in the regulations but of any substance that meets the statutory definition of hazardous waste. The proposed rule would also provide notice of EPA's interpretation that the statutory definition of hazardous waste applies to corrective action for releases from solid waste management units at permitted and interim status facilities.

DATES: This proposed rule is published in the Federal Register February 8, 2024, page 8598.

View proposed rule.

Personal Services Waste Management Transportation Real Estate Wholesale Distribution Healthcare Manufacturing (31/Food/Textiles)Mining Public Administration Repair Services Manufacturing (33/Durable)Warehousing Utilities Manufacturing (32/Non-Durable)Entertainment Construction Professional Services Retail Chemicals Ignitability Waste Treatment Toxic Substances Conditionally Excluded Waste Toxic Chemicals Pharmaceutical Waste Receiving Facilities CRTs Waste Storage Hazardous Chemicals Solvent Contaminated Wipes P Codes Landfilling Used Batteries Waste Codes Trash Highly Hazardous Chemical Oily Rags Cathode Ray Tubes Garbage HazWaste Recycling Municipal Solid Waste Listed Waste Precious Metals Residues RCRA Hazardous Secondary Materials Shop Rags EHSs HHC Extremely Hazardous Substances Solvent Waste Reactivity TSDFs CERCLA Hazardous Substances Treatment Storage and Disposal Resource Conservation and Recovery U Codes Interim Status Toxicity Corrosivity Chemical Lists Aerosol Cans Characteristic Waste Waste Disposal Acute Waste Non-Acute Waste SMS Advanced SMS Trial SMS Essential SMS Trial Enterprise SMS Premium r40CFR260 r40CFR261 r40CFR270 40 CFR 260 40 CFR 261 40 CFR 270 40 CFR 260 Hazardous waste management system: general 40 CFR 261 Identification and listing of hazardous waste 40 CFR 270 EPA administered permit programs: the hazardous waste permit program

Most Recent Highlights In Safety & Health

2024-02-08T06:00:00Z

EPA Final Rule: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program for South Dakota

The State of South Dakota Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources has applied to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for final authorization of the changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The EPA has determined that these changes satisfy all requirements needed to qualify for final authorization, and is authorizing the State's changes through this direct final action. The EPA uses the regulations entitled, “Approved State Hazardous Waste Management Programs” to provide notice of the authorization status of State programs and to incorporate by reference those provisions of State statutes and regulations that will be subject to the EPA's inspection and enforcement. This rule also codifies in the regulations the approval of South Dakota's hazardous waste management program and incorporates by reference authorized provisions of the State's regulations.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective on April 8, 2024 is published in the Federal Register February 8, 2024, page 8540.

§272.2101 South Dakota State-administered program: Final authorization.
Entire section	Revised	View text
Appendix A to Part 272—State Requirements
Listing for “South Dakota”	Revised	View text

New Text

§272.2101 South Dakota State-administered program: Final authorization.

(a) History of the State of South Dakota authorization. Pursuant to section 3006(b) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), South Dakota has final authorization for the following elements as submitted to EPA in South Dakota's base program application for final authorization which was approved by EPA effective on November 2, 1984. Subsequent program revision applications were approved effective on June 17, 1991, November 8, 1993, March 11, 1994, September 23, 1996, June 8, 2000, May 24, 2004, March 8, 2006, August 8, 2012, August 23, 2016, and April 8, 2024.

(b) Enforcement authority. The State of South Dakota has primary responsibility for enforcing its hazardous waste management program. However, EPA retains the authority to exercise its inspection and enforcement authorities in accordance with sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6927, 6928, 6934, and 6973, and any other applicable statutory and regulatory provisions, regardless of whether the State has taken its own actions, as well as in accordance with other statutory and regulatory provisions.

(c) State statutes and regulations —(1) Incorporation by reference. The South Dakota regulations cited in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section are incorporated by reference as part of the hazardous waste management program under Subtitle C of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq. The Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. This material is available for inspection at the EPA and at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). You may inspect a copy at EPA Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado, phone number (303) 312–6667. For information on the availability of this material at NARA, email: fr.inspection@nara.gov, or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. You may obtain copies of the South Dakota regulations that are incorporated by reference in this paragraph from South Dakota Legislative Research Council, 3rd Floor, State Capitol, 500 East Capitol Avenue, Pierre, SD 57501, phone number 605–773–3251.

(i) EPA-Approved South Dakota Regulatory Requirements Applicable to the Hazardous Waste Management Program, dated June 2022.

(ii) [Reserved]

(2) Legal basis. The following provisions provide the legal basis for the State's implementation of the hazardous waste program, but they are not being incorporated by reference and do not replace Federal authorities:

(i) South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL), as amended, 2021 Revision, Title 1, State Affairs and Government: Chapter 1–26, Administrative Procedures and Rules, sections 1–26–1(1), 1–26–1(4), 1–26–1(8) introductory paragraph, 1–26–1(8)(a), 1–26–2, 1–26–6.6, 1–26–16 through 1–26–19, 1–26–19.1, 1–26–19.2, 1–26–21, 1–26–27, 1–26–29, 1–26–30, 1–26–30.1, 1–26–30.2, 1–26–30.4, 1–26–31, 1–26–31.1, 1–26–31.2, 1–26–31.4, 1–26–35 and 1–26–36; Chapter 1–27, Public Records and Files, sections 1–27–1, 1–27–3, 1–27–9(2) and 1–27–28, 1–27–31; Chapter 1–32, Executive Reorganization, section 1–32–1(1); Chapter 1–41, Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources, sections 1–41–3.4, 1–41–18, 1–41–24 and 1–41–25.1.

(ii) SDCL, as amended, 2021 Revision, Title 15, Civil Procedure: Chapter 15–6, Rules of Procedure in Circuit Courts, section 15–6–24(a)–(c).

(iii) SDCL, as amended, 2021 Revision, Title 19, Evidence: Chapter 19–13, Privileges, sections 19–19–502(1), 19–19–502(5), 19–19–502(b), 19–19–507 and 19–19–509.

(iv) SDCL, as amended, 2021 Revision, Title 21, Judicial Remedies: Chapter 21–8, Injunction, section 21–8–1.

(v) SDCL, as amended, 2021 Revision, Title 22, Crimes: Chapter 22–6, Authorized Punishments, sections 22–6–1 introductory paragraph and 22–6–1(7).

(vi) SDCL, as amended, 2021 Revision, Title 23, Law Enforcement: Chapter 23–5, Criminal Identification, sections 23–5–1, 23–5–10(1), 23–5–10(3), 23–5–10(4) and 23–5–11 first sentence; Chapter 23–6, Criminal Statistics, section 23–6–4.

(vii) SDCL, as amended, 2021 Revision, Title 34, Public Health and Safety: Chapter 34–21, Radiation and Uranium Resources Exposure Control, section 34–21–2(7).

(viii) SDCL, as amended, 2021 Revision, Title 34A, Environmental Protection: Chapter 34A–6, Solid Waste Disposal, section 34A–6–1.3(17); Chapter 34A–10, Remedies for Protection of Environment, sections 34A–10–1, 34A–10–2, 34A–10–2.5, 34A–10–5, 34A–10–11, 34A–10–14 and 34A–10–16, Chapter 34A–11, Hazardous Waste Management, sections 34A–11–1, 34A–11–2 through 34A–11–4, 34A–11–5, 34A–11–8 through 34A–11–12, 34A–11–13 through 34A–11–16, 34A–11–17 through 34A–11–19, 34A–11–21 and 34A–11–22; Chapter 34A–12, Regulated Substance Discharges, sections 34A–12–1(8), 34A–12–4, 34A–12–6, 34A–12–8 through 34A–12–13, 34A–12–13.1 and 34A–12–14.

(ix) SDCL, as amended, 2021 Revision, Title 37, Trade Regulation, Chapter 37–29, Uniform Trade Secrets Act, section 37–29–1(4).

(x) Administrative Rules of South Dakota (ARSD), Article 74:08, Administrative Fees, effective April 19, 2021: Chapter 74:08:01, Fees for Records Reproduction, sections 74:08:01:01, 74:08:01:03, 74:08:01:04, 74:08:01:05.

(3) Related legal provisions. The following statutory provisions are broader in scope than the Federal program, are not part of the authorized program, are not incorporated by reference, and are not federally enforceable:

(i) SDCL, as amended, 2021 Revision, Title 34A, Environmental Protection, Chapter 34A–11, Hazardous Waste Management, sections 34A–11–12.1, 34A–11–16.1, 34A–11–25 and 34A–11–26.

(ii) [Reserved]

(4) Unauthorized State amendments. South Dakota has adopted but is not authorized for the following Federal final rules:

(i) Hazardous Waste Management System; User Fees for the Electronic Waste Manifest System and Amendments to Manifest Regulations (Non-HSWA), published in the Federal Register of 1/3/18.

(ii) Management Standards for Hazardous Waste Pharmaceuticals and Amendment to the P075 Listing for Nicotine (HSWA/Non-HSWA), published in the Federal Register of 2/22/19.

(iii) Those Federal rules written under RCRA provisions that predate HSWA (non-HSWA) which the State has adopted, but for which it is not authorized, are not federally enforceable. In contrast, EPA will continue to enforce the Federal HSWA standards for which South Dakota is not authorized until the State receives specific authorization from EPA.

(5) Memorandum of Agreement. The Memorandum of Agreement between EPA Region 8 and the State of South Dakota, signed by the Secretary of the South Dakota Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources Secretary on March 20, 2023, and by the EPA Region 8 Regional Administrator on March 10, 2023, although not incorporated by reference, is referenced as part of the authorized hazardous waste management program under subtitle C of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.

(6) Statement of legal authority. “Attorney General's Statement for Final Authorization”, signed by the Attorney General of South Dakota on May 24, 1984, and revisions, supplements and addenda to that Statement dated January 14, 1991, September 11, 1992, September 25, 1992, April 1, 1993, September 24, 1993, December 29, 1994, September 5, 1995, October 23, 1997, October 27, 1997, October 28, 1997, November 5, 1999, June 26, 2000, June 18, 2002, October 19, 2004, May 11, 2009, May 5, 2015, and November 29, 2021, although not incorporated by reference, are referenced as part of the authorized hazardous waste management program under subtitle C of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.

(7) Program Description. The Program Description and any other materials submitted as supplements thereto, although not incorporated by reference, are referenced as part of the authorized hazardous waste management program under subtitle C of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.

Appendix A to Part 272—State Requirements

* * * * *

South Dakota

The regulatory provisions include:

Administrative Rules of South Dakota (ARSD), Article 74:28, Hazardous Waste, as amended effective April 19, 2021, adopting by reference the Federal regulations as of July 1, 2018, and 83 FR 61552 (November 30, 2018).

Sections 74:28:21:01 (except the reference to “260.4 and 260.5” at 74:28:21:01(3)(b)(xii), and (14)(f)), 74:28:21:02, 74:28:21:03, 74:28:22:01 (except the phrase “; and 84 FR 36, 5938–5950 (February 22, 2019)”), 74:28:23:01, 74:28:24:01, 74:28:25:01 (except the phrase “; and 84 FR 36, 5938–5950 (February 22, 2019)”), 74:28:25:02 through 74:28:25:05, 74:28:26:01 (except the phrase “; and 84 FR 36, 5938–5950 (February 22, 2019)” in the introductory paragraph), 74:28:27:01 (except the phrase “; 84 FR 36, 5938–5950 (February 22, 2019)” in the introductory paragraph), 74:28:28:01 (except the phrase “; and 84 FR 36, 5938–5950 (February 22, 2019)”), 74:28:28:02 through 74:28:28:05, 74:28:29:01, 74:28:30:01 (except the phrase “; and 84 FR 36, 5938–5950 (February 22, 2019)”) and 74:28:33:01 (except the phrase “; and 84 FR 36, 5938–5950 (February 22, 2019)”); Article 74:36, Air Pollution Control Program, section 74:36:11:01.

Copies of the South Dakota regulations that are incorporated by reference are available from South Dakota Legislative Research Council, 3rd Floor, State Capitol, 500 East Capitol Avenue, Pierre, SD 57501, (Phone: 605–773–3251).

* * * * *

2024-02-05T06:00:00Z

Avoid NESHAP Mishaps: Determine whether your facility must comply

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) recently completed its review of the proposed rule to expand the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for lime manufacturing plants. If the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalizes the rule, it will regulate four additional hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). The OMB also has many other proposed NESHAP-strengthening rules queued for review.

This news likely brings up some questions. What exactly is a NESHAP? Is your facility subject to NESHAP regulations? Let’s take a closer look.

Defining NESHAP terms

EPA limits the amount of HAPs a facility can release into the air (or emit) through NESHAPs. The regulations apply to stationary sources, which are any buildings, structures, facilities, or installations that emit or may emit a HAP.

The agency puts stationary sources into industrial groups called source categories. Examples of the categories include asbestos, lead acid battery manufacturing, and petroleum refineries. EPA provides on its website a complete list of the source categories and where to find each category in the regulations.

Is my facility subject to NESHAPs?

The first potential mishap a facility faces is not knowing whether it’s covered by a NESHAP.

EPA controls HAP emissions in two ways. The rules under 40 CFR Part 61 regulate emissions by the type of HAPs released through specific activities, like removing asbestos when renovating a building. Part 63 regulates emissions based on the source categories, such as integrated iron and steel manufacturing.

To determine whether any NESHAPs apply to your facility, answer these questions.

1. Does your facility conduct any of the activities regulated under Part 61?

If your facility conducts any activities covered by Part 61, you must comply with the NESHAP for that specific activity and HAP. For example, a plant that produces vinyl chloride by any process is subject to the NESHAP for vinyl chloride (Part 61 Subpart F).

If your facility does not conduct any activities covered under Part 61, it’s not subject to the NESHAP regulations under Part 61.

2. Does a source category under Part 63 cover your facility?

If your facility does not fall under any source category identified in Part 63, it’s not subject to a NESHAP. However, if your facility is covered by a source category, you must then determine whether your facility is a major source or an area source.

Note that most source categories are regulated under Part 63, but a few are regulated under Part 61 in Subparts BB, C, D, E, F, FF, L, M, N, O, and P.

3. Does your facility qualify as a major source or an area source under Part 63?

A major source is any facility or group of facilities located on the same property under common control that emits or has the potential to emit either:

10 tons or more per year of any HAP, or
25 tons or more per year of any combination of HAPs.

An area source is any facility or group of facilities that emit HAPs below the major source thresholds.

It’s important to distinguish between major and area sources because both types have applicable NESHAPs based on different standards. Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards apply to major sources and reflect the maximum degree of HAP emission reduction possible. Some area sources are subject to Generally Available Control Technologies standards, which are typically less stringent than MACT standards and require minimum management practices to reduce HAP emissions.

If your facility falls under a source category and is either a major source or an area source with an applicable NESHAP, it’s subject to the NESHAP regulations under Part 63.

Tips to avoid NESHAP mishaps

Help keep your facility compliant with these tips:

Remember that NESHAPs are different from Title V operating permits, which require different compliance actions. Major sources and some area sources are required to obtain Title V operating permits.
Check EPA’s Federal Register page regularly for proposed and final rules about NESHAPs. Determine whether your facility could or will be affected. Note any new NESHAP compliance deadlines to ensure your facility stays on track to meet the requirements.
Evaluate the state requirements. EPA has delegated authority to many states to implement and enforce NESHAPs, and states may make minor changes to the rules.

Key to remember: The first step of compliance with the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants is to determine whether your facility is covered by the regulations.

haps neshaps clean air act toxic air pollutants caa air toxics sms trial sms advanced sms premium sms essential sms trial enterprise r40cfr61 r40cfr63 40 cfr 61 40 cfr 63

2024-01-30T06:00:00Z

EPA Final Rule: Safe Drinking Water Act Test Procedures Amendments

This action announces the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) approval of alternative testing methods for use in measuring the levels of contaminants in drinking water to determine compliance with national primary drinking water regulations. The Safe Drinking Water Act authorizes EPA to approve the use of alternative testing methods through publication in the Federal Register . EPA is using this streamlined authority to make 93 additional methods available for analyzing drinking water samples. This expedited approach provides public water systems, laboratories, and primacy agencies with more timely access to new measurement techniques and greater flexibility in the selection of analytical methods, thereby reducing monitoring costs while maintaining public health protection.

DATES: This action is effective January 30, 2024, published in the Federal Register January 30, 2024, page 5773.

View final rule.

Appendix A to Subpart C of Part 141—Alternative Testing Methods Approved for Analyses Under the Safe Drinking Water Act
Table Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1)	Revised	View text
Table Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 141.24(e)(1)	Revised	View text
Table Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 141.25(a)	Revised	View text
Table Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 141.74(a)(1)	Revised	View text
Table Alternative Testing Methods for Disinfectant Residuals Listed at 40 CFR 141.74(a)(2)	Revised	View text
Table Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 141.131(b)(1)	Revised	View text
Table Alternative Testing Methods for Disinfectant Residuals Listed at 40 CFR 141.131(c)(1)	Revised	View text
Table Alternative Testing Methods for Parameters Listed at 40 CFR 141.131(d)	Revised	View text
Table Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 141.402(c)(2)	Revised	View text
Table Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 141.852(a)(5)	Revised	View text
Table Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 143.4(b)	Revised	View text

Previous Text

Appendix A to Subpart C of Part 141—Alternative Testing Methods Approved for Analyses Under the Safe Drinking Water Act

* * * *

Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1)
Contaminant	Methodology	EPA method	SM 21st edition ¹	SM 22nd edition ²⁸	SM 23rd edition ⁴⁹	SM Online ³	ASTM ⁴	Other
Alkalinity	Titrimetric		2320 B	2320 B	2320 B		D1067-06 B, 11 B, 16 B
Antimony	Hydride—Atomic Absorption						D 3697-07, -12, -17
	Atomic Absorption; Furnace		3113 B	3113 B	3113 B	3113 B-04, B-10
	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2 ²
Arsenic	Atomic Absorption; Furnace		3113 B	3113 B	3113 B	3113 B-04, B-10	D 2972-08 C, -15 C
	Hydride Atomic Absorption		3114 B	3114 B	3114 B	3114 B-09	D 2972-08 B, -15 B
	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2 ²
Barium	Inductively Coupled Plasma		3120 B	3120 B	3120 B
	Atomic Absorption; Direct		3111 D	3111 D	3111 D
	Atomic Absorption; Furnace		3113 B	3113 B	3113 B	3113 B-04, B-10
	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2 ²
Beryllium	Inductively Coupled Plasma		3120 B	3120 B	3120 B
	Atomic Absorption; Furnace		3113 B	3113 B	3113 B	3113 B-04, B-10	D 3645-08 B, -15 B
	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2 ²
Cadmium	Atomic Absorption; Furnace		3113 B	3113 B	3113 B	3113 B-04, B-10
	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2 ²
Calcium	EDTA titrimetric		3500-Ca B	3500-Ca B	3500-Ca B		D 511-09, -14 A
	Atomic Absorption; Direct Aspiration		3111 B	3111 B	3111 B		D 511-09, -14 B
	Inductively Coupled Plasma		3120 B	3120 B	3120 B
	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2 ²
	Ion Chromatography						D 6919-09, -17
Chromium	Inductively Coupled Plasma		3120 B	3120 B	3120 B
	Atomic Absorption; Furnace		3113 B	3113 B	3113 B	3113 B-04, B-10
	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2 ²
Copper	Atomic Absorption; Furnace		3113 B	3113 B	3113 B	3113 B-04, B-10	D 1688-07, -12 C, -17 C
	Atomic Absorption; Direct Aspiration		3111 B	3111 B	3111 B		D 1688-07, -12 A, -17 A
	Inductively Coupled Plasma		3120 B	3120 B	3120 B
	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2 ²
	Colorimetry							Hach Method 8026. ³⁵ Hach Method 10272 ³⁶
Conductivity	Conductance		2510 B	2510 B	2510 B		D 1125-14 A
Cyanide	Manual Distillation with MgCl ₂ followed by:		4500-CN C	4500-CN C	4500-CN C	4500-CN C-99	D 2036-06 A
	Spectrophotometric, Amenable		4500-CN G	4500-CN G	4500-CN G		D 2036-06 B
	Spectrophotometric Manual		4500-CN E	4500-CN E	4500-CN E		D2036-06 A
	Selective Electrode		4500-CN F	4500-CN F	4500-CN F
	Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry Headspace							ME355.01. ⁷
Fluoride	Ion Chromatography		4110 B	4110 B	4110 B		D 4327-11, -17
	Manual Distillation; Colorimetric SPADNS		4500-F B, D	4500-F B, D	4500-F B, D
	Manual Electrode		4500-F C	4500-F C	4500-F C		D 1179-04, 10 B, 16 B
	Automated Alizarin		4500-F E	4500-F E	4500-F E
	Arsenite-Free Colorimetric SPADNS							Hach SPADNS. 2 Method 10225. ²²
Lead	Atomic Absorption; Furnace		3113 B	3113 B	3113 B	3113 B-04, B-10	D 3559-08 D, -15 D
	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2 ²
	Differential Pulse Anodic Stripping Voltametry							Method 1001, Rev. 1.1 ⁵⁷
Magnesium	Atomic Absorption		3111 B	3111 B	3111 B		D 511-09, -14 B
	Inductively Coupled Plasma		3120 B	3120 B	3120 B
	Complexation Titrimetric Methods		3500-Mg B	3500-Mg B	3500-Mg B		D 511-09, -14 A
	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2 ²
	Ion Chromatography						D 6919-09, -17
Mercury	Manual, Cold Vapor		3112 B	3112 B	3112 B	3112 B-09	D 3223-12, -17
Nickel	Inductively Coupled Plasma		3120 B	3120 B	3120 B
	Atomic Absorption; Direct		3111 B	3111 B	3111 B
	Atomic Absorption; Furnace		3113 B	3113 B	3113 B	3113 B-04, B-10
	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2 ²
Nitrate	Ion Chromatography		4110 B	4110 B	4110 B		D 4327-11, -17
	Automated Cadmium Reduction		4500-NO ₃ F	4500-NO ₃ F	4500-NO ₃ F
	Manual Cadmium Reduction		4500-NO ₃ E	4500-NO ₃ E	4500-NO ₃ E
	Ion Selective Electrode		4500-NO ₃ D	4500-NO ₃ D	4500-NO ₃ D
	Reduction/Colorimetric							Systea Easy (1-Reagent). ⁸ NECi Nitrate-Reductase. ⁴⁰
	Colorimetric; Direct							Hach TNTplus ^TM 835/836 Method 10206. ²³
	Capillary Ion Electrophoresis						D 6508-15
Nitrite	Ion Chromatography		4110 B	4110 B	4110 B		D 4327-11, -17
	Automated Cadmium Reduction		4500-NO ₃ F	4500-NO ₃ F	4500-NO ₃ F
	Manual Cadmium Reduction		4500-NO ₃ E	4500-NO ₃ E	4500-NO ₃ E
	Spectrophotometric		4500-NO ₂ B	4500-NO ₂ B	4500-NO ₂ B
	Reduction/Colorimetric							Systea Easy (1-Reagent). ⁸ NECi Nitrate-Reductase. ⁴⁰
	Capillary Ion Electrophoresis						D 6508-15
Ortho-phosphate	Ion Chromatography		4110 B	4110 B	4110 B		D 4327-11, -17
	Colorimetric, ascorbic acid, single reagent		4500-P E	4500-P E	4500-P E	4500-P E-99
	Colorimetric, Automated, Ascorbic Acid		4500-P F	4500-P F	4500-P F	4500-P F-99		Thermo Fisher Discrete Analyzer. ⁴¹
	Capillary Ion Electrophoresis						D 6508-15
pH	Electrometric	150.3 ⁴⁸	4500-H + B	4500-H + B	4500-H + B		D 1293-12, -18
Selenium	Hydride-Atomic Absorption		3114 B	3114 B	3114 B	3114 B-09	D 3859-08 A, -15 A
	Atomic Absorption; Furnace		3113 B	3113 B	3113 B	3113 B-04, B-10	D 3859-08 B, -15 B
	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2 ²
Silica	Colorimetric						D859-05, 10, 16
	Molybdosilicate		4500-SiO ₂ C	4500-SiO ₂ C	4500-SiO ₂ C
	Heteropoly blue		4500-SiO ₂ D	4500-SiO ₂ D	4500-SiO ₂ D
	Automated for Molybdate-reactive Silica		4500-SiO ₂ E	4500-SiO ₂ E	4500-SiO ₂ E
	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2 ²
	Inductively Coupled Plasma		3120 B	3120 B	3120 B
Sodium	Atomic Absorption; Direct Aspiration		3111 B	3111 B	3111 B
	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2 ²
	Ion Chromatography						D 6919-09, -17
Temperature	Thermometric		2550	2550	2550	2550-10

Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 141.24(e)(1)
Contaminant	Methodology	EPA method	SM 21st edition ¹	SM 22nd edition, ²⁸ SM 23rd edition ⁴⁹	SM Online ³	ASTM ⁴	Other
Benzene	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
Carbon tetrachloride	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
Chlorobenzene	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
1,2-Dichlorobenzene	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
1,4-Dichlorobenzene	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
1,2-Dichloroethane	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
cis-Dichloroethylene	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
trans-Dichloroethylene	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
Dichloromethane	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
1,2-Dichloropropane	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
Ethylbenzene	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
Styrene	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
Tetrachloroethylene	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
1,1,1-Trichloroethane	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
Trichloroethylene	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
Toluene	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
1,1-Dichloroethylene	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
1,1,2-Trichlorethane	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
Vinyl chloride	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
Xylenes (total)	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.
2,4-D	Gas Chromatography/Electron Capture Detection (GC/ECD)		6640 B	6640 B	6640 B-01, B-06	D 5317-20.
2,4,5-TP (Silvex)	Gas Chromatography/Electron Capture Detection (GC/ECD)		6640 B	6640 B	6640 B-01, B-06	D 5317-20.
Alachlor	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3.
Atrazine	Liquid Chromatography Electrospray Ionization Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC/ESI-MS/MS)	²⁵ 536.
	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3, ²⁶ 523.
Benzo(a)pyrene	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3.
Carbofuran	High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with post-column derivatization and fluorescence detection		6610 B	6610 B	6610 B-04.
	Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry						⁵⁸ ME 531
Chlordane	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3
Dalapon	Ion Chromatography Electrospray Ionization Tandem Mass Spectrometry (IC-ESI-MS/MS)	¹⁴ 557.
	Gas Chromatography/Electron Capture Detection (GC/ECD)		6640 B	6640 B	6640 B-01, B-06.
Di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3.
Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3.
Dibromochloropropane (DBCP)	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3.
Dinoseb	Gas Chromatography/Electron Capture Detection (GC/ECD)		6640 B	6640 B	6640 B-01, B-06.
Endrin	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3.
Ethyl dibromide (EDB)	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3.
Glyphosate	High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) with Post-Column Derivatization and Fluorescence Detection		6651 B	6651 B	6651 B-00, B-05.
Heptachlor	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3.
Heptachlor Epoxide	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3.
Hexachlorobenzene	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3.
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3.
Lindane	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3.
Methoxychlor	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3.
Oxamyl	High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with post-column derivatization and fluorescence detection		6610 B	6610 B	6610 B-04.
	Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry						⁵⁸ ME 531.
PCBs (as Aroclors)	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3.
Pentachlorophenol	Gas Chromatography/Electron Capture Detection (GC/ECD)		6640 B	6640 B	6640 B-01, B-06	D 5317-20.
	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3.
Picloram	Gas Chromatography/Electron Capture Detection (GC/ECD)		6640 B	6640 B	6640 B-01, B-06	D 5317-20.
Simazine	Liquid Chromatography Electrospray Ionization Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC/ESI-MS/MS)	²⁵ 536.
	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3, ²⁶ 523.
Toxaphene	Solid Phase Extraction/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)	²⁴ 525.3.
Total Trihalomethanes	Purge &Trap/Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry	⁹ 524.3, ²⁹ 524.4.

Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 141.25(a)
Contaminant	Methodology	EPA method	SM 21st edition ¹	SM 22nd edition, ²⁸ SM 23rd edition ⁴⁹	ASTM ⁴	SM Online ³
Naturally Occurring:
Gross alpha and beta	Evaporation	900.0, Rev. 1.0 ⁵⁰	7110 B	7110 B
	Liquid Scintillation				D 7283-17	7110 D-17.
Gross alpha	Coprecipitation		7110 C	7110 C
Radium 226	Radon emanation	903.1, Rev. 1.0 ⁵³	7500-Ra C	7500-Ra C	D 3454-05, -18
	Radiochemical	903.0, Rev. 1.0 ⁵⁴	7500-Ra B	7500-Ra B	D 2460-07
	Gamma Spectrometry			7500-Ra E		7500-Ra E-07.
Radium 228	Radiochemical	904.0, Rev. 1.0 ⁶²	7500-Ra D	7500-Ra D.
	Gamma Spectrometry			7500-Ra E		7500-Ra E-07.
Uranium	Radiochemical		7500-U B	7500-U B
	ICP-MS		3125		D 5673-05, 10, 16
	Alpha spectrometry		7500-U C	7500-U C	D 3972-09
	Laser Phosphorimetry					D 5174-07
	Alpha Liquid Scintillation Spectrometry				D 6239-09
Man-Made:
Radioactive Cesium	Radiochemical		7500-Cs B	7500-Cs B
	Gamma Ray Spectrometry		7120	7120	D 3649-06
Radioactive Iodine	Radiochemical		7500-I B, 7500-I C, 7500-I D	7500-I B, 7500-I C, 7500-I D	D 3649-06.
	Gamma Ray Spectrometry		7120	7120	D 4785-08, -20.
Radioactive Strontium 89, 90	Radiochemical		7500-Sr B	7500-Sr B
Tritium	Liquid Scintillation		7500- ³ H B	7500- ³ H B	D 4107-08, -20
Gamma Emitters	Gamma Ray Spectrometry		7120, 7500-Cs B, 7500-I B	7120, 7500-Cs B, 7500-I B	D 3649-06, D 4785-08, -20

Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 141.74(a)(1)
Organism	Methodology	SM 21st edition ¹	SM 22nd edition ²⁸	SM 23rd edition ⁴⁹	SM Online ³	Other
Total Coliform	Total Coliform Fermentation Technique	9221 A, B, C	9221 A, B, C	9221 A, B, C	9221 A,B,C-06
	Total Coliform Membrane Filter Technique	9222 A, B, C		9222 A, B, C.
	ONPG-MUG Test	9223	9223 B	9223 B	9223 B-04.
Fecal Coliforms	Fecal Coliform Procedure	9221 E	9221 E	9221 E	9221 E-06.
	Fecal Coliform Filter Procedure	9222 D	9222 D	9222 D	9222 D-06.
Heterotrophic bacteria	Pour Plate Method	9215 B	9215 B	9215 B	9215 B-04.
Turbidity	Nephelometric Method	2130 B	2130 B	2130 B		Hach Method 8195, Rev. 3.0. ⁵²
	Laser Nephelometry (on-line)					Mitchell M5271, ¹⁰ Mitchell M5331, Rev. 1.2, ⁴² Lovibond PTV 6000. ⁴⁶
	LED Nephelometry (on-line)					Mitchell M5331, ¹¹ Mitchell M5331, Rev. 1.2 ⁴² , Lovibond PTV 2000. ⁴⁵
	LED Nephelometry (on-line)					AMI Turbiwell, ¹⁵ Lovibond PTV 1000. ⁴⁴
	LED Nephelometry (portable)					Orion AQ4500, ¹² Lovibond TB 3500, ⁶⁴ Lovibond TB 5000. ⁶⁵
	Laser Nephelometry (portable)					Lovibond TB 6000 ⁶³.
	360° Nephelometry					Hach Method 10258, Rev. 1.0, ³⁹ Hach Method 10258, Rev. 2.0. ⁵¹

Alternative Testing Methods for Disinfectant Residuals Listed at 40 CFR 141.74(a)(2)
Residual	Methodology	EPA methods	SM 21st edition ¹	SM 22nd edition ²⁸ , SM 23rd edition ⁴⁹	ASTM ⁴	Other
Free Chlorine	Amperometric Titration		4500-Cl D	4500-Cl D	D 1253-08, -14
	DPD Ferrous Titrimetric		4500-Cl F	4500-Cl F
	DPD Colorimetric		4500-Cl G	4500-Cl G		Hach Method 10260. ³¹
	Indophenol Colorimetric					Hach Method 10241. ³⁴
	Syringaldazine (FACTS)		4500-Cl H	4500-Cl H
	On-line Chlorine Analyzer	334.0 ¹⁶
	Amperometric Sensor					ChloroSense ¹⁷ , ChloroSense Rev. 1.1. ⁵⁹

Total Chlorine	Amperometric Titration		4500-Cl D	4500-Cl D	D 1253-08, -14
	Amperometric Titration (Low level measurement)		4500-Cl E	4500-Cl E
	DPD Ferrous Titrimetric		4500-Cl F	4500-Cl F
	DPD Colorimetric		4500-Cl G	4500-Cl G		Hach Method 10260. ³¹
	Iodometric Electrode		4500-Cl I	4500-Cl I
	On-line Chlorine Analyzer	334.0 ¹⁶
	Amperometric Sensor					ChloroSense ¹⁷ , ChloroSense, Rev. 1.1. ⁵⁹
	Indophenol Colorimetric	127. ⁵⁵
Chlorine Dioxide	Amperometric Titration		4500-ClO ₂ C	4500-ClO ₂ C
	Amperometric Titration		4500-ClO ₂ E	4500-ClO ₂ E
	Amperometric Sensor					ChlordioX Plus ³² , ChlordioX Plus, Rev. 1.1. ⁶⁰
Ozone	Indigo Method		4500-O ₃ B	4500-O ₃ B

Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 141.131(b)(1)
Contaminant	Methodology	EPA method	ASTM ⁴	SM online ³	SM 21st edition ¹	SM 22nd edition, ²⁸ SM 23rd edition ⁴⁹	Other
TTHM	P&T/GC/MS	524.3, ⁹ 524.4. ²⁹
HAA5	LLE (diazomethane)/GC/ECD			6251 B-07	6251 B	6251 B.
	Ion Chromatography Electrospray Ionization Tandem Mass Spectrometry (IC-ESI-MS/MS)	557. ¹⁴
	Two-Dimensional Ion Chromatography (IC) with Suppressed Conductivity Detection						Thermo Fisher 557.1. ⁴⁷
Bromate	Two-Dimensional Ion Chromatography (IC)	302.0. ¹⁸
	Ion Chromatography Electrospray Ionization Tandem Mass Spectrometry (IC-ESI-MS/MS)	557. ¹⁴
	Chemically Suppressed Ion Chromatography		D 6581-08 A.
	Electrolytically Suppressed Ion Chromatography		D 6581-08 B.
Chlorite	Chemically Suppressed Ion Chromatography		D 6581-08 A.
	Electrolytically Suppressed Ion Chromatography		D 6581-08 B.
Chlorite—daily monitoring as prescribed in 40 CFR 141.132(b)(2)(i)(A)	Amperometric Titration Amperometric Sensor				4500-ClO ₂ E	4500-ClO ₂ E	ChlordioX Plus ³² , ChlordioX Plus, Rev. 1.1. ⁶⁰

Alternative Testing Methods for Disinfectant Residuals Listed at 40 CFR 141.131(c)(1)
Residual	Methodology	SM 21st edition ¹	SM 22nd edition, ²⁸ SM 23rd edition ⁴⁹	ASTM ⁴	Other
Free Chlorine	Amperometric Titration	4500-Cl D	4500-Cl D	D 1253-08, -14
	DPD Ferrous Titrimetric	4500-Cl F	4500-Cl F
	DPD Colorimetric	4500-Cl G	4500-Cl G		Hach Method 10260. ³¹
	Indophenol Colorimetric				Hach Method 10241. ³⁴
	Syringaldazine (FACTS)	4500-Cl H	4500-Cl H
	Amperometric Sensor				ChloroSense ¹⁷ , ChloroSense, Rev. 1.1. ⁵⁹
	On-line Chlorine Analyzer				EPA 334.0. ¹⁶
Combined Chlorine	Amperometric Titration	4500-Cl D	4500-Cl D	D 1253-08, -14.
	DPD Ferrous Titrimetric	4500-Cl F	4500-Cl F
	DPD Colorimetric	4500-Cl G	4500-Cl G		Hach Method 10260. ³¹
Total Chlorine	Amperometric Titration	4500-Cl D	4500-Cl D	D 1253-08, -14
	Low level Amperometric Titration	4500-Cl E	4500-Cl E
	DPD Ferrous Titrimetric	4500-Cl F	4500-Cl F
	DPD Colorimetric	4500-Cl G	4500-Cl G		Hach Method 10260. ³¹
	Iodometric Electrode	4500-Cl I	4500-Cl I
	Amperometric Sensor				ChloroSense, ¹⁷ ChloroSense, Rev. 1.1. ⁵⁹
	On-line Chlorine Analyzer
	On-line Chlorine Analyzer				EPA 334.0. ¹⁶
Chlorine Dioxide	Amperometric Method II	4500-ClO ₂ E	4500-ClO ₂ E
	Amperometric Sensor				ChlordioX Plus, ³² ChlordioX Plus, Rev. 1.1. ⁶⁰

Alternative Testing Methods for Parameters Listed at 40 CFR 141.131(d)
Parameter	Methodology	SM 21st edition ¹	SM 22nd edition ²⁸	SM 23rd edition ⁴⁹	SM online ³	EPA	Other
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)	High Temperature Combustion	5310 B	5310 B	5310 B		415.3, Rev 1.2. ¹⁹
	Persulfate-Ultraviolet or Heated Persulfate Oxidation	5310 C	5310 C	5310 C		415.3, Rev 1.2. ¹⁹	Hach Method 10267. ³⁸
	Wet Oxidation	5310 D	5310 D			415.3, Rev 1.2. ¹⁹
	Ozone Oxidation						Hach Method 10261. ³⁷
Specific Ultraviolet Absorbance (SUVA)	Calculation using DOC and UV ₂₅₄ data					415.3, Rev 1.2. ¹⁹
Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC)	High Temperature Combustion	5310 B	5310 B	5310 B		415.3, Rev 1.2. ¹⁹
	Persulfate-Ultraviolet or Heated Persulfate Oxidation	5310 C	5310 C	5310 C		415.3, Rev 1.2. ¹⁹
	Wet Oxidation	5310 D	5310 D			415.3, Rev 1.2. ¹⁹
Ultraviolet absorption at 254 nm (UV ₂₅₄)	Spectrophotometry	5910 B	5910 B	5910 B	5910 B-11	415.3, Rev 1.2. ¹⁹

Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 141.402(c)(2)
Organism	Methodology	SM 20th edition ⁶	SM 21st edition ¹	SM 22nd edition ²⁸	SM 23rd edition ⁴⁹	SM online ³	Other
E. coli	Colilert		9223 B	9223 B	9223 B	9223 B-97, B-04
	Colisure		9223 B	9223 B	9223 B	9223 B-97, B-04
	Colilert-18	9223 B	9223 B	9223 B	9223 B	9223 B-97, B-04
	Readycult®						Readycult®. ²⁰
	Colitag						Modified Colitag ¹³ , Modified Colitag, Version 2.0. ⁶¹
	Chromocult®						Chromocult®. ²¹
	EC-MUG			9221 F	9221 F	9221 F-06
	NA-MUG				9222 I
	m-ColiBlue24 Test				9222 J
Enterococci	Multiple-Tube Technique					9230 B-04.
	Membrane Filter Techniques				9230 C.
	Fluorogenic Substrate Enterococcus Test (using Enterolert)				9230 D.
Coliphage	Two-Step Enrichment Presence-Absence Procedure						Fast Phage. ³⁰

Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 141.852(a)(5)
Organism	Methodology category	Method	SM 20th, 21st editions ^{1 6}	SM 22nd edition ²⁸	SM 23rd edition ⁴⁹	SM online ³
Total Coliforms	Lactose Fermentation Methods	Standard Total Coliform Fermentation Technique		9221 B.1, B.2	9221 B.1, B.2, B.3, B.4	9221 B.1, B.2-06.
		Presence-Absence (P-A) Coliform Test			9221 D.1, D.2, D.3
	Membrane Filtration Methods	Standard Total Coliform Membrane Filter Procedure using Endo Media			9222 B, C.
		Simultaneous Detection of Total Coliforms and E. coli by Dual Chromogen Membrane Filter Procedure (using mColiBlue24 medium)			9222 J.
		Simultaneous Detection of Total Coliform Bacteria and Escherichia coli Using RAPID' E.coli (REC2) in Drinking Water. ⁵⁶
	Enzyme Substrate Methods	Colilert®		9223 B	9223 B	9223 B-04
		Colisure®		9223 B	9223 B	9223 B-04.
		Colilert-18	9223 B	9223 B	9223 B	9223 B-04.
		Tecta EC/TC. ^{33 43}
		Modified Colitag ^TM , Version 2.0. ⁶¹
Escherichia coli	Escherichia coli Procedure (following Lactose Fermentation Methods)	EC-MUG medium		9221 F.1	9221 F.1	9221 F.1-06.
	Escherichia coli Partitioning Methods (following Membrane Filtration Methods)	EC broth with MUG (EC-MUG)			9222 H.
		NA-MUG medium			9222 I.
	Simultaneous Detection of Total Coliforms and E. coli by Dual Chromogen Membrane Filter Procedure	mColiBlue24 medium			9222 J.
	Membrane Filtration Method	Simultaneous Detection of Total Coliform Bacteria and Escherichia coli Using RAPID' E.coli (REC2) in Drinking Water. ⁵⁶
	Enzyme Substrate Methods	Colilert®		9223 B	9223 B	9223 B-04.
		Colisure®		9223 B	9223 B	9223 B-04.
		Colilert-18	9223 B	9223 B	9223 B	9223 B-04.
		Tecta EC/TC. ^{33 43}
		Modified Colitag ^TM , Version 2.0. ⁶¹

Alternative Testing Methods for Contaminants Listed at 40 CFR 143.4(b)
Contaminant	Methodology	EPA method	ASTM ⁴	SM 21st edition ¹	SM 22nd edition, ²⁸ SM 23rd edition ⁴⁹	SM online ³
Aluminum	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2. ²
	Atomic Absorption; Direct			3111 D	3111 D.
	Atomic Absorption; Furnace			3113 B	3113 B	3113 B-04, B-10.
	Inductively Coupled Plasma			3120 B	3120 B.
Chloride	Silver Nitrate Titration		D 512-04 B, 12 B	4500-Cl ^- B	4500-Cl ^- B
	Ion Chromatography		D 4327-11, -17	4110 B	4110 B
	Potentiometric Titration			4500-Cl ^- D	4500-Cl ^- D
Color	Visual Comparison			2120 B	2120 B.
Foaming Agents	Methylene Blue Active Substances (MBAS)			5540 C	5540 C.
Iron	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2. ²
	Atomic Absorption; Direct			3111 B	3111 B.
	Atomic Absorption; Furnace			3113 B	3113 B	3113 B-04, B-10.
	Inductively Coupled Plasma			3120 B	3120 B.
Manganese	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2. ²
	Atomic Absorption; Direct			3111 B	3111 B.
	Atomic Absorption; Furnace			3113 B	3113 B	3113 B-04, B-10.
	Inductively Coupled Plasma			3120 B	3120 B.
Odor	Threshold Odor Test			2150 B	2150 B.
Silver	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2. ²
	Atomic Absorption; Direct			3111 B	3111 B.
	Atomic Absorption; Furnace			3113 B	3113 B	3113 B-04, B-10.
	Inductively Coupled Plasma			3120 B	3120 B.
Sulfate	Ion Chromatography		D 4327-11, -17	4110 B	4110 B
	Gravimetric with ignition of residue			4500-SO ₄^- C	4500-SO ₄^- C	4500-SO ₄^- C-97.
	Gravimetric with drying of residue			4500-SO ₄^- D	4500-SO ₄^- D	4500-SO ₄^- D-97.
	Turbidimetric method		D 516-07, 11, 16	4500-SO ₄^- E	4500-SO ₄^- E	4500-SO ₄^- E-97.
	Automated methylthymol blue method			4500-SO ₄^- F	4500-SO ₄^- F	4500-SO ₄^- F-97.
Total Dissolved Solids	Total Dissolved Solids Dried at 180 deg C			2540 C	2540 C.
Zinc	Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP-AES)	200.5, Revision 4.2. ²
	Atomic Absorption; Direct Aspiration			3111 B	3111 B.
	Inductively Coupled Plasma			3120 B	3120 B.

Clean Water SDWA CWA SMS Trial Enterprise SMS Advanced SMS Premium SMS Trial SMS Essential r40CFR141SubpartCAppendixA 40 CFR 141 Subpart C Appendix A 40 CFR 141 Subpart C Appendix A Alternative Testing Methods Approved for Analyses Under the Safe Drinking Water Act

2024-01-29T06:00:00Z

From sunlight to sediment: EPA enforces the Clean Water Act

In a recent settlement case, the EPA alleges that a construction company violated the Clean Water Act (CWA) and related state laws during the construction of solar farms in Alabama, Idaho, and Illinois between 2016 and 2022. In total the company will pay just over two million dollars to resolve the allegations. The states of Alabama and Illinois joined the EPA in the settlement. The amount to be paid will include civil penalties, mitigation, and restoration projects.

Case Study

Specifically, the company failed to comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, designed to regulate construction site runoff. Solar farm construction involves clearing and grading large sections of land, which can lead to significant erosion and major runoff of sediment into waterways if stormwater controls at the site are inadequate. A complaint filed with the settlement alleges that during its construction of solar farms near American Falls, Idaho, Lafayette, Alabama, and Perry and White Counties, Illinois, the construction company failed to use proper stormwater controls, did not conduct regular site inspections by qualified personnel and did not accurately report and address stormwater issues. These are all requirements of the NPDES Construction General Permit. These combined breaches put waterways at risk from sediment-laden runoff, potentially harming aquatic life and jeopardizing downstream drinking water quality.

Learn more about stormwater in our EzExplanation

What is an NPDES permit?

The CWA bans discharging any type of industrial, municipal, and agricultural waste through a point source into a water of the United States unless they have an NPDES permit. The permit contains limits on what you can discharge, monitoring and reporting requirements, and other provisions to ensure that the discharge does not impact water quality. The permit interprets general requirements of the CWA into specific provisions tailored to the operations related to discharging pollutants. NPDES permits make sure that a state's mandatory standards for clean water and the federal minimums are being met.

CGP requirements

When it rains, water washes over the soil and things stored outside on a construction site. This water can pick up dirt, trash, and chemicals from the soil and carry them to nearby sewers or bodies of water. The CGP ensures that site operators have measures in place to prevent this pollution and keep the water clean for the community and the environment. Typically, if your construction activities disturb one or more acres of land, or will disturb less than one acre of land but are part of a common plan of development you will need to file for coverage under the CGP. Before submitting your Notice of Intent (NOI), the form you file to obtain coverage under the CGP, you must develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) outlines how you plan to implement erosion and sediment controls and meet other requirements of the permit on your construction site.

Additional CGP requirements include:

Inspections to verify compliance with permit. Inspections must be conducted by a qualified person who has either completed the EPA construction inspection course or similar program and passed the exam. Inspection records must be kept for at least three years after permit coverage is terminated or expires.
Routine maintenance and corrective action to fix problems with controls or discharges.
Turbidity monitoring requirements for dewatering discharges to sensitive waters (if applicable).
There might also be state, tribal or territory specific requirements.

Key to remember

Solar farms are important for helping to reduce the impact of climate change. However, the companies that build these solar farms need to follow certain rules to protect the environment, just like any other construction project.

2024-01-26T06:00:00Z

EPA Proposed Rule: Waste Emissions Charge for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing a regulation to implement the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) as specified in the Methane Emissions Reduction Program of the Inflation Reduction Act. This program requires the EPA to impose and collect an annual charge on methane emissions that exceed specified waste emissions thresholds from an owner or operator of an applicable facility that reports more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent of greenhouse gases emitted per year pursuant to the petroleum and natural gas systems source category requirements of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule. The proposal would implement calculation procedures, flexibilities, and exemptions related to the waste emissions charge and proposes to establish confidentiality determinations for data elements included in waste emissions charge filings.

DATES: This proposed rule is published in the Federal Register January 26, 2024, page 5318.

View proposed rule.

Clean Air Act CAA SMS Trial Enterprise SMS Trial 3-Month SMS Advanced SMS Premium SMS Essential SMS Trial

Most Recent Highlights In Human Resources

2024-01-23T06:00:00Z

EPA Proposed Rule: Revision of Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Meat and Poultry Products

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is proposing a regulation to revise the technology-based effluent limitations guidelines and standards (ELGs) for the meat and poultry products (MPP) point source category. The proposed rule would improve water quality and protect human health and the environment by reducing the discharge of nutrients and other pollutants to the nation's surface waters. EPA is proposing several regulatory options, including the preferred option discussed in this notice. The preferred option is estimated to cost $232 million annually and reduce pollutant discharges by approximately 100 million pounds per year.

DATES: This proposed rule is published in the Federal Register January 23, 2024, page 4474.

View proposed rule.

Clean Water CWA SMS Advanced SMS Essential SMS Trial Enterprise SMS Trial SMS Premium r40CFR432 40 CFR 432

2024-01-19T06:00:00Z

Inactive PFAS rule activated: EPA must review before use

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to add regulations to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The new rule finalized in January 2024 prevents facilities from using inactive PFAS before EPA reviews the planned use and makes a risk determination.

This significant new use rule (SNUR) applies to the 329 PFAS designated as inactive on the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Chemical Substance Inventory and aren’t yet subject to an existing SNUR. An inactive PFAS hasn’t been manufactured (including imported) or processed in the U.S. since June 21, 2006.

What are PFAS?

Also called “forever chemicals,” PFAS are a group of thousands of manufactured chemicals that are used widely in industry and consumer products. Many take a long time to break down and build up over time. They’re found nearly everywhere in water, air, soil, and consumer products, such as nonstick cookware, food packaging, clothing, and shampoo.

Some studies suggest that exposure to PFAS may lead to health issues. However, research continues since much remains unknown about the chemical substances. EPA regulates PFAS to prevent them from entering air, land, and water at levels that may harm human health and the environment.

What are the new SNUR requirements?

Under TSCA, EPA can determine that a certain use of a chemical substance is a “significant new use” and require anyone who wants to use the chemical substance for that purpose to first notify the agency. EPA will then conduct a review and risk determination. The new SNUR requires EPA to conduct reviews and risk determinations of the inactive PFAS before they can be used again.

If your facility wants to manufacture (including import) or process an inactive PFAS, notify EPA at least 90 days through a significant new use notice before beginning use. Once EPA receives the notification, the agency will:

Conduct a review to determine whether the new use presents an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment, and
Make a risk determination.

If the new use doesn’t present an unreasonable risk and EPA makes an affirmative determination, your facility can use the PFAS. However, if the new use presents an unreasonable risk, the agency must first regulate the activity before you can use the PFAS.

What are other recent regulations of PFAS?

Over the past three years, EPA has implemented the 2021–2024 PFAS Strategic Roadmap, the agency's comprehensive strategy to address the risks of PFAS exposure and contamination through specific regulatory actions. The agency focuses on three directives: researching the forever chemicals, restricting the release of them into the environment, and cleaning up PFAS-contaminated sites.

This final rule joins EPA’s other actions taken via the PFAS Strategic Roadmap. These include:

Designating all PFAS as chemicals of special concern, eliminating the de minimis reporting exemption that allowed facilities to avoid reporting PFAS used in small quantities;
Removing the de minimis supplier notification exemption for all listed chemicals of special concern to require suppliers to notify users of any chemicals of special concern present in mixtures; and
Requiring all manufacturers (including importers) of PFAS and PFAS-containing articles in any year since 2011 to report information on uses, production volumes, disposals, exposures, and hazards.

How does this affect you?

If your facility manufactures (including imports) or processes PFAS, you’ll likely face more regulations and reporting requirements. So, how can you remain compliant? Stay informed of EPA’s latest regulatory actions regarding PFAS. Consider these best practices:

Check EPA’s final rules published in the Federal Register regularly for PFAS-related regulations.
Review EPA’s proposed rules (also published in the Federal Register) to prepare for potential upcoming regulations.
Identify any applicable state PFAS regulations.

Also, consider the proactive approach to search for safer alternative chemicals you can substitute for PFAS. It’s vital to choose chemicals already reviewed by EPA to ensure the alternative option doesn’t also present an unreasonable risk to human health and the environment.

Key to remember: EPA continues to strengthen its regulation of PFAS. A new rule now prevents facilities from using any of the 300+ inactive PFAS before EPA conducts a risk determination and, if necessary, regulates the activity.

CERCLA Hazardous Substances Toxic Substances TSCA Toxic Chemicals Chemicals HHC Highly Hazardous Chemical Extremely Hazardous Substances EHSs Hazardous Chemicals Chemical Lists r40CFR721 40 CFR 721 40 CFR 721 Significant new uses of chemical substances

2024-01-18T06:00:00Z

EPA Final Rule: Mississippi: Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program Revisions

The State of Mississippi (Mississippi or State) has applied to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for final approval of revisions to its Underground Storage Tank Program (UST Program) under subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Pursuant to RCRA, the EPA is taking direct final action, subject to public comment, to approve revisions to the UST Program. The EPA has reviewed Mississippi's revisions and has determined that these revisions satisfy all requirements needed for approval. In addition, this action also codifies the EPA's approval of Mississippi's revised UST Program and inCcorporates by reference those provisions of the State statutes and regulations that the EPA has determined meet the requirements for approval.

DATES:

This rule is effective March 18, 2024, published in the Federal Register January 18, 2024, page 3354.

View final rule.

§282.2 Incorporation by reference.
(b)(4)	Revised	View text
§282.74 Mississippi State-Administered Program.
Entire section	Revised	View text
Appendix A to Part 282 - State Requirements Incorporated by Reference in Part 282 of the Code of Federal Regulations
Entry for Mississippi	Revised	View text

New Text

§282.2 Incorporation by reference.

* * * *

(b)(4) Region 4 (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee): 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960; Phone Number: (404) 562-9900.

§282.74 Mississippi State-Administered Program.

(a) History of the approval of Mississippi's program. The State of Mississippi (Mississippi or State) is approved to administer and enforce an underground storage tank (UST) program in lieu of the Federal program under subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6991 et seq. The State's Underground Storage Tank Program (UST Program), as administered by the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), was approved by EPA pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6991c and part 281 of this chapter. EPA approved the Mississippi UST Program on June 11, 1990, and it was effective on July 11, 1990. A subsequent program revision was approved by EPA and became effective March 18, 2024.

(b) Enforcement authority. Mississippi has primary responsibility for administering and enforcing its federally approved UST Program. However, EPA retains the authority to exercise its corrective action, inspection, and enforcement authorities under sections 9003(h), 9005, and 9006 of subtitle I of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991b(h), 6991d, and 6991e, as well as under any other applicable statutory and regulatory provisions.

(c) Retention of program approval. To retain program approval, Mississippi must revise its approved UST Program to adopt new changes to the Federal subtitle I program which make it more stringent, in accordance with section 9004 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991c, and 40 CFR part 281, subpart E. If Mississippi obtains approval for revised requirements pursuant to section 9004 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991c, the newly approved statutory and regulatory provisions will be added to this subpart and notice of any change will be published in the Federal Register .

(d) Final approval. Mississippi has final approval for the following elements of its UST Program submitted to EPA and approved effective June 11, 1990, and the program revisions approved by EPA effective on March 18, 2024:

(1) State statutes and regulations— (i) Incorporation by reference. The Mississippi materials cited in this paragraph (d)(1)(i), and listed in appendix A to this part, are incorporated by reference as part of the UST Program under subtitle I of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991 et seq. (See §282.2 for incorporation by reference approval and inspection information.) You may obtain copies of the Mississippi statutes and regulations that are incorporated by reference in this paragraph (d)(1)(i) from the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 2261, Jackson, MS 29335; Phone number: (601) 961–5171; website: https://www.mdeq.ms.gov/water/groundwater-assessment-and-remediation/underground-storage-tanks/.

(A) “Mississippi Statutory Requirements Applicable to the Underground Storage Tank Program,” dated September 5, 2023.

(B) “Mississippi Regulatory Requirements Applicable to the Underground Storage Tank Program,” dated September 5, 2023.

(ii) Legal basis. EPA considered the following statutes and regulations which provide the legal basis for the State's implementation of the UST Program, but do not replace Federal authorities. Further, these provisions are not being incorporated by reference, unless the provisions place requirements on regulated entities.

(A) Mississippi Underground Storage Tank Act (the UST Act) of 1988, Miss. Code Ann. sections 49–17–401 to 49–17–435 (2022).

(1) Section 49–17–409, as to the first sentence, insofar as it provides for compliance monitoring and the promulgation of regulations for the reporting of releases.

(2) Section 49–17–413(1), insofar as it provides for compliance monitoring, and the promulgation of regulations for the implementation of the State UST Program.

(3) Section 49–17–415, insofar as it provides for compliance monitoring and establishes authority to conduct inspections, tests, and obtain information from owners.

(4) Section 49–17–419, insofar as it establishes authority over corrective action.

(5) Section 49–17–425, insofar as it provides for the sharing of information with EPA.

(6) Section 49–17–427, insofar as it provides for enforcement response, enforcement of orders, assessment of penalties under the UST Act, proceedings before the commission, and limitations on liability.

(7) Section 49–17–431, insofar as it provides for appeal of any decision by the commission or the director.

(B) Mississippi Air and Water Pollution Control Law, Miss. Code Ann. sections 49–17–27 and 49–17–31 to 49–17–41 (2020).

(1) Section 49–17–27, insofar as it provides for enforcement response and injunctive relief.

(2) Section 49–17–31, insofar as it provides for enforcement response, notice of violations, enforcement of regulations and orders, procedures for contested cases, and assessment of penalties.

(3) Section 49–17–33, insofar as it provides for hearing procedures, issuance of orders, and penalties.

(4) Section 49–17–35, insofar as it provides for enforcement response, public participation, and citizen intervention.

(5) Section 49–17–37, insofar as it provides for hearing procedures and transcripts.

(6) Section 49–17–39, insofar as it provides for the sharing of information with EPA.

(7) Section 49–17–41, insofar as it provides for appeal rights for aggrieved parties.

(1) R. 2.3, 280.36, insofar as it provides for delivery prohibition and enforcement of the State UST Program.

(2) R. 2.6, 280.67, insofar as it provides for public participation in the corrective action process.

(D) Rule 24(a)(2) of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure (1982), insofar as it provides for citizen intervention and public participation in the State enforcement process.

(iii) Other provisions not incorporated by reference. The following statutory and regulatory provisions applicable to the Mississippi UST Program are broader in scope than the Federal program, external to the State UST program approval requirements, or are being excluded for other reasons as noted below. Therefore, these provisions are not part of the approved UST Program and are not incorporated by reference in this section:

(A) Mississippi Underground Storage Tank Act (the UST Act) of 1988, Miss. Code Ann. sections 49–17–401 to 49–17–435 (2022).

(1) 49–17–403(b) is broader in scope as to the definition of “Bonded distributor,” insofar as it is associated with the regulation of entities other than owners and operators as these terms are defined in 40 CFR 280.12.

(2) Section 49–17–403(o) is broader in scope as to the definition of “Response action contractor,” insofar as it is associated with the regulation of entities other than owners and operators as these terms are defined in 40 CFR 280.12.

(3) Section 49–17–403(p) is broader in scope as to the definition of “Retailer,” insofar as it is associated with the regulation of entities other than owners and operators as these terms are defined in 40 CFR 280.12.

(4) Section 49–17–403(q) is broader in scope as to the definition of “Substantial compliance,” insofar as it relates to a State fund.

(5) Section 49–17–405 is broader in scope insofar as it provides for the creation of the Mississippi Groundwater Protection Trust Fund (State Fund), promulgation of regulations regarding the State Fund, criteria for qualified expenditure of funds, and liability of owners for fund expenditures.

(6) Section 49–17–407 is broader in scope insofar as it creates an environmental protection fee, provides limits on use of the State Fund, and addresses third party claims.

(7) Section 49–17–409 is broader in scope, all except for the first sentence, insofar as it provides for the eligibility requirements of the State Fund and reimbursement of costs from owners.

(8) Section 49–17–421 is broader in scope insofar as it establishes an annual tank regulatory fee.

(9) Section 49–17–422 is broader in scope insofar as it creates an Underground Storage Tank Advisory Council.

(10) Section 49–17–423 is broader in scope insofar as it pertains to the commission's administration of funds from the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund.

(11) Section 49–17–429 is broader in scope insofar as it requires the certification of individuals to install, alter, or remove underground storage tanks and provides for the promulgation of regulations setting forth certification requirements.

(12) Section 49–17–433 is external insofar as it pertains to the severability of the State UST Act.

(13) Section 49–17–435 is external insofar as it contains reporting obligations on the State agency, not a regulated entity.

(B) Mississippi Air and Water Pollution Control Law, Miss. Code Ann. sections 49–17–27 and 49–17–31 to 49–17–41 (2020).

(1) Section 49–17–32 is external insofar as it does not pertain to the State UST Program.

(2) Section 49–17–34 is external insofar as it does not pertain to the State UST Program.

(3) Section 49–17–36 is external insofar as it does not pertain to the State UST Program.

(C) Mississippi's Groundwater Protection Trust Fund Regulations, 11 Miss. Admin. Code Pt. 5, Ch. 1 (2009) is broader in scope insofar as these provisions regulate Immediate Response Action Contractors, Environmental Response Action Contractors, and the State Fund.

(D) Mississippi's Underground Storage Tank Regulations, 11 Miss. Admin. Code Pt. 5, Ch. 2 (2018).

(1) R. 2.1, 280.12 is broader in scope as to the definition of “Ancillary equipment,” insofar as it pertains to dispensers.

(2) R. 2.1, 280.12 is broader in scope as to the definition of “Certificate of Operation,” insofar as it requires UST systems to be permitted by MDEQ and the payment of tank regulatory fees.

(3) R. 2.1, 280.12 is broader in scope as to the definition of “Motor fuel,” insofar as it includes 100% biodiesel or ethanol.

(4) R. 2.1, 280.12 is broader in scope as to the definition of “New tank system,” insofar as it includes dispensers as part of the new tank system.

(5) R. 2.1, 280.12 is broader in scope as to the definition of “Register,” insofar as it requires notification for installation, replacement, and change in operational status of a dispenser.

(6) R. 2.1, 280.12 is broader in scope as to the definition of “Replace,” insofar as it considers replacement of a dispenser to constitute a new UST system.

(7) R. 2.2, 280.20(j) is broader in scope insofar as it regulates shear valves.

(8) R. 2.2, 280.22(a) and (b) are broader in scope insofar as these provisions regulate dispensers.

(9) R. 2.3, 280.34(g) through (i) are broader in scope insofar as these provisions regulate dispensers.

(10) R. 2.3, 280.35(a)(4) is broader in scope insofar as it regulates dispensers.

(11) R. 2.3, 280.35(b)(1) is broader in scope insofar as it regulates shear valves.

(12) R. 2.3, 280.38(b)(1)(iii) is broader in scope insofar as it regulates shear valves.

(13) R. 2.8, 280.91(e) and (f), are excluded for other reasons. Paragraph (e) is excluded only insofar as it includes Indian tribes as a “local government entity,” and paragraph (f) is excluded insofar as EPA retains responsibility for implementing the Federal UST program in Indian country.

Note 1 to paragraph (d)(1)(iii)(D)(13).

MDEQ does not regulate any USTs on Indian lands and EPA retains responsibility for implementing the Federal UST program in Indian country. In a subsequent rulemaking, MDEQ will revise these provisions to remove references to the State's regulation of USTs in Indian country.

(14) R. 2.8, 280.92, is excluded for other reasons only insofar as the definition of “Local government” includes Indian tribes.

Note 2 to paragraph (d)(1)(iii)(D)(14).

MDEQ does not regulate any USTs on Indian lands and the EPA retains responsibility for implementing the Federal UST program in Indian country. In a subsequent rulemaking, MDEQ will revise the definition of “Local government” to exclude Indian tribes.

(15) R. 2.8, 280.100 is external insofar as it is not applicable in a State with an approved UST program.

(E) Mississippi's Underground Storage Tank Regulations for the Certification of Persons Who Install, Alter, and Remove Underground Storage Tanks, 11 Miss. Admin. Code Pt. 5, Ch. 3 (2018) is broader in scope insofar as these provisions provide for the certification and regulation of persons who install, alter, test, and permanently close underground storage tanks.

(2) Statement of legal authority. The Attorney General's Statement, signed by the Mississippi Attorney General on July 27, 2023, though not incorporated by reference, is referenced as part of the approved underground storage tank program under subtitle I of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991 et seq.

(3) Demonstration of procedures for adequate enforcement. The “Demonstration of Adequate Enforcement Procedures” submitted in the application dated July 31, 2023, as amended on August 17, 2023, though not incorporated by reference, is referenced as part of the approved underground storage tank program under subtitle I of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991 et seq.

(4) Program description. The program description submitted in the application dated July 31, 2023, as amended on August 17, 2023, though not incorporated by reference, is referenced as part of the approved underground storage tank program under subtitle I of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991 et seq.

(5) Memorandum of Agreement. The Memorandum of Agreement between EPA Region 4 and the MDEQ, signed by the EPA Regional Administrator on October 12, 2018, though not incorporated by reference, is referenced as part of the approved underground storage tank program under subtitle I of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991 et seq.

Appendix A to Part 282 - State Requirements Incorporated by Reference in Part 282 of the Code of Federal Regulations

* * * *

Mississippi

(a) The statutory provisions include:

Mississippi Underground Storage Tank Act (the UST Act) of 1988, Miss. Code Ann. sections 49–17–401 to 49–17–435 (2022):

49–17–401 Short Title.

49–17–403 Definitions, except (b), (o), (p), and (q).

49–17–411 Compliance with regulations.

49–17–413 Rules and regulations, except for (1).

49–17–417 Repealed.

Note to paragraph (a) of Appendix A to Part 282.

Miss. Code Ann. section 49–17–413(2) is approved as part of the State UST Program to the extent that Mississippi will not grant a variance that makes its UST Program less stringent than the Federal regulations. In practice, Mississippi does not grant variances for the UST Program. Mississippi has agreed to execute a revised Memorandum of Agreement with EPA stating that Mississippi will limit the scope of its variance authority to only those situations where the Federal regulations allow the implementing agency to approve flexibilities.

(b) The regulatory provisions include:

Mississippi's Underground Storage Tank Regulations, 11 Miss. Admin. Code Pt. 5, Ch. 2 (2018):

Rule 2.1 Program Scope and Interim Prohibition

280.10 Applicability.

280.11 Installation requirements for partially excluded UST systems.

280.12 Definitions, except for “dispensers” in the definition of “Ancillary equipment;” the definition of “Certificate of Operation;” “including 100% biodiesel or ethanol” from the definition of “Motor fuel;” “dispensers” and (c) from the definition of “New tank system;” “dispensers” from the definition of “Register;” “dispensers” and (c) from the definition of “Replace.”

280.13 Industry codes and recommended practices.

Rule 2.2 UST Systems: Design, Construction, Installation and Notification

280.20 Performance Standards for new UST systems, except for (j).

280.21 Upgrading of existing UST systems.

280.22 Notification requirements, except as applied to “dispensers” in (a) and (b).

Rule 2.3 General Operating Requirements

280.30 Operation and maintenance of spill and overfill prevention.

280.31 Operation and maintenance of secondary containment.

280.32 Operation and maintenance of corrosion protection.

280.33 Compatibility.

280.34 Repairs and replacements, except as applied to “dispenser(s)” in (g), (h), and (i).

280.35 Reporting recordkeeping, except as applied to “dispensers” in (a)(4); and except as applied to “shear valves” in (b)(1).

280.37 Operator training.

280.38 Operation and maintenance walkthrough inspections, except for (b)(1)(iii).

Rule 2.4 Leak Detection

280.40 General requirements for all UST systems.

280.41 Requirements for petroleum UST systems.

280.42 Requirements for hazardous substance UST systems.

280.43 Methods of leak detection for tanks.

280.44 Methods of leak detection for piping.

280.45 Leak detection recordkeeping.

Rule 2.5 Leak Reporting, Release Reporting, Investigation, and Confirmation

280.50 Reporting of leaks and suspected releases.

280.51 Investigation due to off-site impacts.

280.52 Release investigation and confirmation steps.

280.53 Reporting and cleanup of spills and overfills.

Rule 2.6 Release Response and Corrective Action for UST Systems Containing Petroleum or Hazardous Substances

280.60 General.

280.61 Initial response.

280.62 Initial abatement measures and site check.

280.63 Initial site characterization.

280.64 Free product removal.

280.65 Investigations for soil and ground-water cleanup.

280.66 Corrective action plan.

Rule 2.7 Out-of-Service UST Systems and Closure

280.70 Temporary closure.

280.71 Permanent closure and changes-in-service.

280.72 Assessing the site at closure or change-in-service.

280.73 Applicability to previously closed UST systems.

280.74 Closure records.

Rule 2.8 Financial Responsibility

280.90 Applicability.

280.91 Compliance dates, except for “including Indian tribes” in (e), and (f).

280.92 Definition of terms, except for “and includes Indian tribes” from the definition of “Local government.”

280.93 Amount and scope of required financial responsibility.

280.94 Allowable mechanisms and combinations of mechanisms.

280.95 Financial test of self-insurance.

280.96 Guarantee.

280.97 Insurance and risk retention group coverage.

280.98 Surety bond.

280.99 Letter of credit.

280.101 State fund or other State assurance.

280.102 Trust fund.

280.103 Standby trust fund.

280.104 Local government bond rating test.

280.105 Local government financial test.

280.106 Local government guarantee.

280.107 Local government fund.

280.108 Substitution of financial assurance mechanisms by owner or operator.

280.109 Cancellation or nonrenewal by a provider of financial assurance.

280.110 Reporting by owner or operator.

280.111 Recordkeeping.

280.112 Drawing on financial assurance mechanisms.

280.113 Release from the requirements.

280.114 Bankruptcy or other incapacity of owner or operator or provider of financial assurance.

280.115 Replenishment of guarantees, letters of credit, or surety bonds.

280.116 Suspension of enforcement. [Reserved]

Rule 2.9 Lender Liability

280.120 Definitions.

280.121 Participation in management.

280.122 Ownership of an underground storage tank or underground storage tank system or facility or property on which an underground storage tank or underground storage tank system is located.

280.123 Operating an underground storage tank or underground storage tank system.

Rule 2.10 UST Systems with Field-Constructed Tanks and Airport Hydrant Fuel Distribution Systems.

280.130 Definitions.

280.131 General requirements.

280.132 Additions, exceptions, and alternatives for UST systems with field-constructed tanks and airport hydrant systems.

Note to paragraph (b) of Appendix A to Part 282.

11 Miss. Admin. Code Pt. 5, Ch. 2, 280.42(b)(5) is approved as part of the UST Program only to the extent that Mississippi will not allow alternate release detection methods for hazardous substance UST systems installed on or after October 13, 2015. Sections 40 CFR 281.33(e) and 280.42(e) of the Federal regulations only allow alternate release detection methods for hazardous substance UST systems installed prior to October 13, 2015. Mississippi's section 280.42(b)(5) does not contain an analogous limitation on the use of alternative release detection methods. In practice, MDEQ does not allow alternative release detection methods for hazardous substance tanks installed after October 1, 2008. In a subsequent rulemaking, MDEQ will revise 11 Miss. Admin. Code Pt. 5, Ch. 2, R. 2.4, section 280.42(b)(5) to clarify this point.

(C) Copies of the Mississippi statutes and regulations that are incorporated by reference are available from the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 2261, Jackson, MS 29335; Phone number: (601) 961–5171; website: https://www.mdeq.ms.gov/water/groundwater-assessment-and-remediation/underground-storage-tanks/.

Trash Sumps Recycling Landfilling USTs Garbage Municipal Solid Waste SMS Premium SMS Trial Enterprise SMS Advanced SMS Trial SMS Essential r40CFR282 r40CFR281 40 CFR 282 40 CFR 281 40 CFR 282 Approved underground storage tank programs 40 CFR 281 Approval of state underground storage tank programs

2024-01-17T06:00:00Z

Smoke signals: Battling the hazy maze of wildfire smoke

The increase in unhealthy air pollution produced by wildfires has intensified the challenges associated with protecting workers from exposure to this health hazard. However, this exposure can be reduced with knowledge, safe work practices, and appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE). It’s important for employers to have a plan in place to protect workers by preventing or minimizing exposure to hazardous air quality.

Wildfire smoke is composed of harmful chemicals and tiny particles of partially burned material less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter, which present a significant health hazard for workers exposed to it. These particles can enter the lungs and even the bloodstream, and are linked to serious or even fatal health effects, such as:

Reduced lung function,
Bronchitis,
Worsening asthma, and
Heart failure.

Taking action to reduce exposure

There are currently three states with regulations that specifically address the air quality index (AQI) as it relates to wildfire smoke:

California (Title 8, CCR 5141.1),
Oregon (OAR 437-002-1081 and OAR 437-004-9791), and
Washington (Chapter 296-820 WAC).

Absent any standard, all employers across the country have an obligation under the General Duty Clause to protect their workers from exposure to unhealthy levels of air pollutants due to wildfire smoke emissions.

Employers should take protective measures to reduce smoke exposure for outdoor workers including:

Monitoring air quality: Make it a point to frequently check the AQI in the area(s) where their workplace is located. This can be done by visiting the EPA’s AirNow site or using air quality monitoring devices.
Developing a wildfire smoke policy: Implement a policy that identifies how the workplace will respond to wildfire smoke events. This should include preparation and monitoring, when and how to act, and communication with employees.
Training employees: At a minimum, train employees on the health effects of wildfire smoke, adverse symptoms associated with exposure, and ways to protect themselves. They should also clearly understand any state-specific requirements.
Reducing, relocating or rescheduling work tasks: During times of elevated concern due to the AQI, reduce levels of physical activity, relocate employees or adjust work schedules to minimize exposure.
Improving indoor air quality: Keep all building windows, doors, bays, and other structure openings closed whenever possible. Ensure air is filtered by a mechanical ventilation system. Company vehicles should be equipped with cabin air filters.
Providing or allowing PPE: Allow NIOSH-approved respirators for voluntary use, unless otherwise required.
Keeping employees informed: Establish a system of communication that informs employees of the current AQI, any reduced or rescheduled work tasks or locations, and what protective measures are available to reduce wildfire smoke exposure.

Understanding air quality index

Air quality is a complex and evolving challenge. The EPA has established an AQI for five major air pollutants regulated by the Clean Air Act. Each of these pollutants has a national air quality standard set by EPA to protect public health:

Carbon monoxide,
Ground-level ozone,
Nitrogen dioxide,
Particle pollution (i.e., PM2.5 and PM10), and
Sulfur dioxide.

Employers must create protective measures to reduce employee exposure to these major air pollutants. When AQI values are above 100, as listed on the EPA’s AirNow.gov website, air quality is unhealthy: first for certain sensitive groups of people, then for everyone as AQI values increase.

Key to remember

Employers should have a plan to prevent employee exposure to dangerous air quality levels.

2024-01-11T06:00:00Z

EPA Final Rule: Significant New Use Rule

Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), EPA is finalizing a significant new use rule (SNUR) for 329 per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that are designated as inactive on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory. PFAS are a group of chemicals that have been used in industry and consumer products since the 1940s because of their useful properties, such as water and stain resistance. Many PFAS break down very slowly and can build up in people, animals, and the environment over time. Exposure at certain levels to specific PFAS can adversely impact human health and other living things. Persons subject to the final SNUR are required to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing any manufacture (including import) or processing of the chemical substance for a significant new use. Once EPA receives a notification, EPA must review and make an affirmative determination on the notification, and take such action as is required by any such determination before the manufacture (including import) or processing for the significant new use can commence. Such a review will assess whether the new use may present unreasonable risk to health or the environment and ensure that EPA takes appropriate action as required to protect health or the environment.

DATES: This final rule is effective March 11, 2024, published in the Federal Register January 11, 2024, page 1822.

View final rule.

§9.1 OMB approvals under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Entry for §721.11777	Added	View text
§721.11777 Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl chemical substances designated as inactive on the TSCA Inventory.
Entire section	Added	View text

Extremely Hazardous Substances EHSs Highly Hazardous Chemical Hazardous Chemicals Toxic Chemicals HHC Chemicals TSCA Chemical Lists Toxic Substances CERCLA Hazardous Substances SMS Trial SMS Essential SMS Advanced SMS Trial Enterprise SMS Premium r40CFR721 40 CFR 721 40 CFR 721 Significant new uses of chemical substances

New Network Poll

For motor carriers, which option best describes your dash camera system?

No active poll

Please come back soon!

VIEW POLL ARCHIVE

Most Popular Highlights In Environmental

2023-06-16T05:00:00Z

Are you meeting OSHA’s requirements for CPR and AEDs in the workplace?

Quick action using cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillators(AEDs) can save the lives of the nearly 350,000 cardiac event victims each year outside of a hospital setting. But what does OSHA require for the workplace? What you didn’t know about OSHA regulations regarding AEDs may surprise you.

The importance of CPR and early defibrillation

For every minute a patient is in cardiac arrest, their chances of survival decrease dramatically. When a patient doesn’t have a pulse and isn’t breathing, CPR should be performed until an AED is available. It’s important to note that CPR alone does not restart the heart. CPR is an oxygen circulation procedure. AEDs, on the other hand, are meant for lifesaving intervention.

CPR and early defibrillation are vital components of the emergency medical services (EMS) chain of survival that increases the odds of cardiac patient survival. However, according to the American Heart Association (AHA), even the best CPR can’t provide enough circulation of oxygen to the brain and heart for more than a few minutes. In fact, a patient whose brain is deprived of oxygen for 10 minutes or more seldom recovers.

Signs and symptoms of cardiac compromise

Just like a reliable vehicle, the circulatory system is the human body’s blood transportation system, and the heart is the engine. Amazingly, the heart generates its own electrical impulses, pumping in a regular, rhythmic manner. As with any engine, the heart requires a certain amount of pressure to function and doesn’t work well when clogged with grease or debris. The most common causes of sudden cardiac arrest include a heart attack, electrocution, and asphyxiation — all of which could occur in the workplace. Common signs and symptoms include:

Chest pain accompanied by a crushing or squeezing sensation,
Pain that radiates to the jaw or arm,
Irregular pulse and/or abnormal blood pressure,
Shortness of breath,
Cool and sweaty skin,
Nausea and vomiting, and
Anxiety or feeling of impending doom.

CPR provides the pressure for the body’s “engine” to oxygen circulating, while an AED provides the electrical impulses to keep the engine pumping.

OSHA requirements regarding CPR

OSHA 1910.151 requires first aid treatment be provided in the absence of an infirmary, clinic, or hospital in near proximity to the workplace used to treat injured employees. This may include assisting a victim of cardiac arrest using CPR or defibrillation.

OSHA requirements for CPR and defibrillation differ considerably. Standards requiring CPR include:

1910.146 Permit-required Confined Spaces
1910.266 Appendix B: Logging Operations – First Aid and CPR Training
1910.269 Electric Power Generation, Transmission, and Distribution
1910.410 Qualifications of Dive Team and
1926.950 Construction Subpart V, Power Transmission and Distribution

OSHA recommends basic adult CPR refresher training and retesting every year, and first aid training at least once every three years. CPR training include facilitated discussion along with ’hands-on’ skills training that uses mannequins and partner practice.

OSHA requirements regarding AEDs — you might need a prescription

Though OSHA recognizes AEDs as important lifesaving technology that plays a role in treating cardiac arrest, the agency doesn’t currently require their use in the workplace. Instead, OSHA wants employers to assess their own requirements for AEDs as part of their first aid response.

AEDs are considered Class III medical devices which means the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has some oversight on their use. Almost all AEDs require the purchaser to obtain a prescription from a physician under FDA regulations. The prescription process is meant as a quality control mechanism to ensure AEDs are properly maintained, that all designated responders are properly trained, and assist employers with establishing an emergency response plan for their workplace AED program.

The AHA requires AED operators to also receive CPR training as an “integral part of providing lifesaving aid to people suffering sudden cardiac arrest.” Though easy to use, each AED is slightly different, so training helps users understand the unique traits and supplies for the individual units at their workplace. Additionally, AED users must be trained to understand the signs of a sudden cardiac arrest, when to activate the EMS system, and how to perform CPR.

AEDs are light, portable, easy to use, and inexpensive. They’re best placed near high-hazard areas such as confined spaces, near electrical energy, or in remote work areas. Response time to reach AEDs should be kept within 3–5-minutes.

Need more information on defibrillators in the workplace? See our ezExplanation on AEDs.

Training requirements

Many states require or encourage CPR and AED training from nationally recognized organizations. Any AED training should include CPR training. OSHA doesn’t offer first aid or CPR training, nor certify trainers. Training by a nationally recognized organization, such as AHA, the American Red Cross, or National Safety Council is recommended.

Keys to Remember

While OSHA doesn’t currently require the use of AEDs in the workplace, they do expect employers to assess their own AED requirements as part of their first aid response. AED training is required by most states and should include CPR with a hands-on practical component.

Mining Transportation Utilities Manufacturing (32/Non-Durable)Wholesale Distribution Commercial Services Public Administration Real Estate Waste Management Healthcare Food Services Communications Financial/Insurance Hospitality Retail Repair Services Construction Warehousing General Services Manufacturing (31/Food/Textiles)Company Management Professional Services Personal Services Postal/Courier Services Manufacturing (33/Durable)Education Agriculture Entertainment Stroke Anaphylaxis Trauma Stop Bleeding Burns Injuries Unconscious Abdominal Thrusts Heart Attack Seizures Muscle Strain Diabetes Emergency Responders Fractures Second-Degree Burn Broken Bones Third-Degree Burn Cardiac Arrest Joint Strain Insulin Sprains Emergency Kit Glucose Monitors Ambulance Bandages Diabetic Emergencies Tourniquet Stress Fracture EpiPen ERT Splint Unconsciousness Emergency Response Team Bacteria Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Blood Sugar Monitor Emergency Medical Services Infection 911 Compression Bandage/Wrap EMS Allergies Shock Auto-Injector First Response Head Injury First Responder Muscle Sprain Joint Sprain Cold Compress/Pack Heimlich Maneuver Non-Responsive Strains Choking Emergency Supplies Bone Fracture Medical Services Virus CPR Warm Compress/Pack Medicine Autoinjector Chest Compressions Concussion Epi-Pen

2023-04-06T05:00:00Z

Giving truck drivers rights to your restrooms

OSHA requires employers to provide all workers with immediately available and sanitary restroom or toilet facilities. But does this include truckers and delivery drivers that stop at your facilities? The sanitation standards (1910.141, 1926.51, and 1928.110) are meant to protect all workers from adverse health effects from unsanitary toilets facilities, or the unavailability of facilities when needed.

Proposed legislation

Bipartisan legislation has recently been introduced in the House that would require businesses to provide restroom access to truckers who are loading or delivering cargo at their warehouses, manufacturers, distribution centers, retailers, and ports.

Supported by leading organizations in the trucking industry, the Trucker Bathroom Access Act (H.R. 9592) was introduced on Dec. 15, 2022. The bill requires retailers, warehouses, and other establishments with existing restrooms to provide access to drivers who are loading or delivering cargo. Additionally, operators of ports and marine terminals must provide access for drayage and parking while accessing such restrooms.

This amendment to Title 49 would exempt some employers from the bill including filling and service stations, and restaurants 800-square feet or smaller with restrooms intended for employee use only. The bill doesn’t require employers to construct new restrooms but to give truck drivers the same access as employees or customers.

Your restroom availability affects their health

Commercial truckers and delivery drivers are the lifeline of our supply chain of supplies, products, and consumables. Working tirelessly all hours, during holidays and weekends, and throughout the pandemic, they continue to deliver critical food and emergency supplies to companies everywhere. Employers have the privilege of demonstrating gratitude to truckers and delivery drivers with a positive work environment.

The benefits of allowing truckers and delivery drivers the convenience and safety of readily available, sanitary restroom facilities are plenty. They’re able to rest and reset when necessary, which keeps them and others safer on the roads. Equally important, restroom availability prevents drivers from having to search for available facilities elsewhere, allowing them to keep a timely delivery schedule, limit supply chain delays, and ultimately lower costs for employers and customers.

Keys to remember

The proposed Trucker Bathroom Access Act will require retailers, warehouses, and other establishments with existing restrooms to provide access to truckers and delivery drivers who are loading or delivering cargo. Access to restrooms keeps them refreshed and ready to deliver essential supplies to companies across the country.

EHS Monthly Round Up - January 2024

In this monthly video, we'll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news.

Effective January 15, OSHA penalties increased 3.2 percent for inflation. Most penalties increased to $16,131. Willful and serious violations, however, increased to $161,323.

Construction workers aged 45 and older suffer more severe injuries and higher associated costs than other age groups. Most injuries are due to slips, trips, and falls.

Washington State updated its process safety management rules to better protect workers in petroleum refineries from the hazards of volatile chemicals. The rules take effect December 27, 2024.

Bloodborne pathogens topped the list of OSHA violations for the healthcare industry in 2023. Hazard Communication was the second most cited standard, followed by respiratory protection.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!

2023-10-10T05:00:00Z

Do your safety signs have your employees seeing red?

Safety has the workforce brimming with color. In fact, 29 CFR 1910.144 and 1910.145 tell us precisely what OSHA expects for safety color coding to identify hazards in the workplace. Signs, warning labels, symbols, and other color coding in your facilities should have your employees seeing red. But what if they can’t?

Though rare, color blindness is the inability to distinguish between colors as most people do. This makes it difficult for workers to see colors intended to protect them from harm. Color blindness can vary, making it difficult to distinguish between red and green or blue and yellow hues - the very shades of safety.

Some individuals can’t see any colors, which is called monochromacy. Workers with this type of color blindness may have trouble seeing clearly and may be more sensitive to light. Employers must collaborate with these employees to ensure alternative measures are taken to protect their eyes and clearly communicate warnings and hazards.

The colors of safety

The color identifiers below differentiate the various levels of risk and hazards for workplace safety. Employers must ensure workers with color blindness are able to understand hazards in the workplace and the meaning of signs and warning labels.

RED - identifies fire and fire protective apparatus, danger, and emergency stops. It marks areas near open flames or flammable materials, fire extinguishers, and where workers are directed to stop an action.

ORANGE - warns workers of hazardous parts of equipment that could physically harm people or the facility. Typically used as labels on machinery, orange may also be used on signs, hard hats, safety vests, and other objects.

YELLOW - designates caution and is used for marking physical hazards, such as falling, pinch points, contact hazards, and other similar hazards.

GREEN - identifies directional safety information. This includes pointing workers to emergency egresses, safety showers or eyewash stations, first aid stations, and other safety equipment.

BLUE - not always safety-related, provides information regarding a particular location, process, or item. Employers may use blue signs to convey workplace policies, instructions, or locations, such as “Employees Only.”

PURPLE - often combined with yellow, alerts workers to radiation hazards.

BLACK/WHITE - provides instructional and directional information. This includes speed limits, one-way traffic, and aisle markings.

Having a standardized color-coding system for safety is effective for alerting employees of workplace hazards - if they can see the colors properly. For those who can’t, employers must ensure these workers understand the hazards and warning signs throughout the workplace.

Interested in learning more? See our ezExplanation on Color Coding.

Are you contributing to color blindness?

Not only are employers required to ensure workers understand warning signs and colors, but they must also protect workers from becoming color blind. That’s right - color blindness can be acquired. Exposure to lead or carbon disulfide can cause color blindness, even at low levels. Terminal illness and alcohol consumption can also contribute to color blindness, so employers should promote health as part of their safety and health programs.

What does ADA have to say?

Color blindness is considered a disability according to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Employers are required to reasonably accommodate employees with disabilities.

Keys to remember

Employers must ensure employees with color blindness are able to understand hazards in the workplace and the meaning of signs and warning labels. The ADA requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for workers with disabilities, including color blindness.

2024-01-26T06:00:00Z

EPA Proposed Rule: Waste Emissions Charge for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems

DATES: This proposed rule is published in the Federal Register January 26, 2024, page 5318.

View proposed rule.

Clean Air Act CAA SMS Trial Enterprise SMS Trial 3-Month SMS Advanced SMS Premium SMS Essential SMS Trial

2023-12-15T06:00:00Z

2 weeks and counting: Don’t ring in the new year without meeting the CARB deadline

Don’t let holiday cheer turn to January blues. Make sure you meet the California Air Resources Board (CARB) program deadlines.

Several CARB programs have a January 1, 2024, deadline. They affect carriers that operate in California, regardless of where they are based.

The programs are:

The Clean Truck Check (also known as the HD I/M program)
Advanced Clean Fleet
Transportation Refrigeration Unit (TRU)

For more information CARB and related topics, check out these Compliance Network resources:

Click here to read a summary of each CARB program
Read an article on CARB truck registration and fees for 2024
Visit this article on upcoming Clean Truck Check program dates

Most Popular Highlights In Transportation

2022-08-29T05:00:00Z

The 150 air-mile short-haul exemptions: Widely used and widely misused

The 150 air-mile exemptions, which are in the regulations at 395.1(e)(1) and (2), allow a driver to use a time record in place of a log, provided that certain conditions are met. While this is possibly the most widely used hours-of-service exemption, it may be the most commonly misused exemption, as well.

The basics of logging exemptions

To be able to use this logging exemption in 395.1(e)(1), the driver must:

Stay within 150 air-miles of the work reporting location for the day (draw a 150 air-mile radius circle around the work reporting location for the day — the driver must stay within this circle),
Be back to — and released from — the work reporting location for his/her 8- or 10-hour break within 14 hours, and
Include the starting and ending times for the day and the total hours on duty on the time record for the day.

The company must retain the time record and have it available for inspection for six months.

Need more info? View our ezExplanation on the 150 air-mile exception.

What if the driver goes too far or works too many hours?

If the driver cannot meet the terms of the exemption (he or she goes too far or works too many hours), the driver must complete a regular driver’s log for the day as soon as the exemption no longer applies.

If the driver has had to complete a log 8 or fewer days out of the last 30 days, the driver can use a paper log for the day. If the driver had to complete a log more than 8 days out of the last 30 days, the driver needs to use an electronic log for the day (unless one of the ELD exemptions applies, such as operating a vehicle older than model year 2000).

30-minute break exemption

When a property-carrying driver is operating under the 150 air-mile exemption, the driver is also exempt from having to take the required 30-minute break (see 395.3(a)(3)(ii)).

If the driver began the day as a 150 air-mile driver and has driven more than 8 consecutive hours without a break, and something unexpected happens and the driver can no longer use the 150 air-mile exemption, the driver must stop and immediately take the 30-minute break as well as start logging. If the driver went outside of the 150 air-mile area before the driver had 8 hours of driving without a break from driving, the driver would be expected to take the break at the appropriate time.

Common myths

Here are some of the common myths and misunderstandings about the 150 air-mile exemption:

The driver must have the time records in the vehicle. Myth. The driver simply needs to explain to an officer during a roadside inspection that he/she does not have logs due to operating under the 150 air-mile exemption and that the required time records are back at the carrier’s office (just telling the officer, “I don’t have any logs” will lead to a violation, so the driver needs to know to provide the full explanation).
The driver must log the previous seven days if he/she had been using this exemption and suddenly can’t. Myth. If the driver cannot use the exemption on one particular day, that is the only day the driver must use a regular log (either paper or electronic).
Passenger-carrying drivers and drivers hauling hazardous materials cannot use this exemption. Myth. There are no restrictions on the use of this exemption, so any commercial driver can use it.
A driver that crosses state lines cannot use this exemption. Myth. As this exemption appears in the Federal Motor Carrier Administration (FMCSA) regulations, it can be used by interstate drivers.
Only drivers that operate out of a “company terminal” can use the 150 air-mile exemption. Myth. As long as the driver makes it back to the work reporting location for the day within the appropriate number of hours, the driver can use the exemption.
Drivers that move from one jobsite to another every few weeks cannot use this exemption. Myth. If a driver that normally uses this exemption switches work reporting locations, the day the driver switches work reporting locations is the only day the driver cannot use the exemption.
Drivers covered by this exemption are also exempt from the driver qualification (licensing and medical cards), driving, and vehicle inspection requirements. Myth. The only rules the driver is exempt from are the logging requirement in 395.8 and the 30-minute break requirement in 395.3.
The driver cannot drive more than 150 miles for the day. Myth. The driver can drive as many miles as he/she wants to or needs to, as long as the driver stays within the 150 air-mile radius circle and gets back to the work reporting location within the appropriate number of hours.
If a 150 air-mile driver gets into a vehicle with an ELD, the driver must use it. Myth. The carrier can have the driver log in and have the driver entered into the system as an “exempt driver,” or the carrier can request that the driver not log into the device and then attach a comment to the unassigned driving time generated by the driver’s movements. The comment would need to explain that the driver using the vehicle was a 150 air-mile driver who submitted a time record. It is up to the carrier to decide which option to use. If stopped for a roadside inspection, the driver will need to be able to explain to the inspector that he/she is an exempt driver using the 150 air-mile exemption, so using the electronic log is not required.

What’s different with the ‘150 air-mile non-CDL property-carrying drivers’

The 150 air-mile exemption at 395.1(e)(2) only applies to drivers that: Operate property-carrying vehicles that do not require a CDL to operate, and Stay within the 150 air-miles of their work reporting location.

If the driver stays within the 150 air-mile radius of the work reporting location, and returns to the work reporting location within 14 hours on 5 of the last 7 days, and 16 hours on 2 of the last seven days, the driver is allowed to use a time record in place of a log.

If the driver does not meet the terms of the exception, the driver will need to complete a log for the day. If the driver had to log more than 8 days out of the last 30 days, the driver will need to use an electronic log for the day. All of the other issues discussed above would apply to these drivers as well.

Managing the use

If you have drivers that use these exemptions, you will need to check time records to make sure they are complying with the appropriate time limits. You will also need to check movement records to verify that the drivers using these exemptions are staying within the mandated area (within 150 air-miles of the work reporting location for the day).

If a driver is over the hours limit, or has gone too far, you need to verify that the submitted a log for the day, either paper or electronic, depending on how many days the driver had to log out of the previous 30 days.

Verifying compliance is important

During an audit, if it is discovered that your drivers are using these exemptions incorrectly, you will be cited for not having drivers’ logs when required. Each day this occurred will be another violation, so the fine could be rather large if you are not managing the use of these exemptions!

2022-08-29T05:00:00Z

7 steps to return to duty following a DOT testing violation (updated)

When drivers fail a DOT test or engage in other prohibited drug or alcohol behavior, their commercial driving careers are stalled until specific steps in rehabilitation and treatment are completed.

Read our FAQ: What happens if a DOT return-to-duty or follow-up test is canceled?

What DOT violation behaviors require action?

A commercial driver is required to go through the DOT return-to-duty process if:

The driver:
- Tested positive on a DOT drug test,
- Failed a DOT alcohol test, or
- Refused a DOT-required drug or alcohol test.

The motor carrier has actual knowledge of the driver’s alcohol consumption:
- Within four hours of coming on duty,
- While on duty,
- During the immediate eight hours following a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) crash.

The motor carrier has actual knowledge that the driver used a drug that:
- Is listed on Schedule l (e.g., marijuana); or
- Is a non-Schedule I drug that affects the driver’s ability to safely operate a CMV. It is not a violation if the prescribing physician told the driver it would be safe to use while on duty.

Actual knowledge occurs when information is provided to the motor carrier indicating a DOT testing violation. This might be learned through:

The driver’s admission,
The carrier’s observed drug or alcohol use,
A traffic citation for driving a CDL CMV while under the influence of drugs or alcohol,
Responses from previous employers as a part of the DOT drug and alcohol inquiry, or
A CDL Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse query.

When a motor carrier learns of a testing violation on a new hire, it must obtain proof that the driver has completed the return-to-duty process. Otherwise, the motor carrier would have to begin the return-to-duty process or pick up where it left off.

To resume a safety-sensitive function, the driver must complete the following return-to-duty steps in Subpart O of Part 40.

1. Immediate response to DOT violations

When drivers engage in prohibited drug or alcohol behavior, they must be immediately removed from performing all safety-sensitive functions. If on a dispatch, a driver must be told of the test result and instructed to park the vehicle. This notification often involves making arrangements to get the driver home and continue the run with different driver.

The employer must present the driver with a list of substance abuse professionals (SAPs) who have the appropriate credentials and DOT training to perform driver evaluations. The list must be given without a fee and made available to the driver (or driver applicant) whether or not the carrier retains the driver.

If the motor carrier does not have another face-to-face meeting with the driver, this list may be mailed or emailed to the driver.

For drug test results, the medical review officer (MRO) will report the violation to the Clearinghouse. This includes shy bladder scenarios without a valid medical explanation.

Failed alcohol tests (.04 or greater BAC), actual knowledge, and certain refusal to test scenarios are reported by the motor carrier to the Clearinghouse.

2. SAP evaluation

After the SAP list is given to a driver, the motor carrier cannot force a driver to begin the process. Nevertheless, to resume safety-sensitive functions, the driver must seek a face-to-face evaluation from a qualified SAP as a first step.

Payment of the evaluation is not required of the employer. Instead, it is based on labor-management agreements and healthcare benefits.

3. Education and/or treatment

The SAP’s referral to an education and/or treatment program is based on a clinical evaluation of the driver during the face-to-face meeting. The SAP should have a working knowledge of what programs and counselors are available.

The SAP may take into consideration the driver’s ability to pay and insurance coverage. Once a SAP-approved provider has been agreed upon with the driver, the SAP will facilitate the referral and provide the program with the diagnostic determinations that led to the treatment plan. Programs range from outpatient treatment to partial or full in-patient resources.

4. Second SAP evaluation

Once the treatment plan has ended, the SAP will determine if it was a success. This decision is based on information provided by the education and/or treatment program and another face-to-face evaluation with the driver.

This second evaluation will result in one of three determinations:

Successful completion of the treatment plan. The driver can return to a safety-sensitive function;
Successful completion of the treatment plan, but additional aftercare or out-patient counseling is required. The driver can return to a safety-sensitive function; or
Unsuccessful completion of the prescribed treatment plan, and additional follow-up evaluations are necessary. The driver cannot return to a safety-sensitive function.

5. SAP report

If the SAP is satisfied with the driver’s ability to return to driving, the SAP will issue a report to the designated employer representative (DER). This report will list any continuing treatment and education, if required, and the number of DOT follow-up drug and/or alcohol tests required in a given time frame. The driver will be required to have a minimum of six unannounced follow-up tests in the first 12 months following the return to a safety-sensitive function. The SAP may require follow-up testing for up to five years.

For all Part 382 violations occurring since January 6, 2020, the SAP is required to report the successful completion of the evaluation and treatment to the Clearinghouse, provided the driver has designated the SAP in the driver’s personal Clearinghouse account.

6. Negative return-to-duty test(s)

The DER must wait for the go-ahead in the SAP report before sending the driver for the return-to-duty drug and/or alcohol test. All return-to-duty drug tests are performed under direct observation. The motor carrier must report a negative return-to-duty test to the Clearinghouse. In order for the “prohibited” status to be lifted from the driver’s record, both the SAP and motor carrier submission must be entered onto the driver’s record.

Once the Clearinghouse is no longer showing an unresolved testing violation, the driver can return to a safety-sensitive function.

Editor’s Note: Violations occurring prior to January 6, 2020, are not tracked in the Clearinghouse. Instead, the motor carrier would use the SAP report as a green light to perform the return-to-duty test, and once the negative test result is received, the driver can resume a safety-sensitive function.

7. Continued monitoring

After the driver returns to safety-sensitive functions, the motor carrier must carry out the unannounced follow-up tests under direct observation as prescribed in the SAP report. The DER must ensure that the tests do not have any discernible pattern.

The follow-up tests are in addition to any other DOT-required tests (e.g., random, post-accident). For instance, you cannot use a follow-up test as a substitute for a random test or vice versa.

If the driver leaves the motor carrier prior to the completion of the very last follow-up test, the next employer(s) must pick up where the process left off.

When the follow-up program is complete, the motor carrier under whose program the last test was performed must report this to the Clearinghouse. If the violation predates the Clearinghouse, the employer does not report the completed follow-up program to anyone.

Dangers of not acting on DOT violations

If the motor carrier fails to begin or continue with a driver’s DOT return-to-duty process and follow-up testing, it is an acute violation that could cost the company up to $15,876. Allowing this driver to operate a CMV puts the carrier at risk of negligent entrustment claims if there is a crash.

2022-08-29T05:00:00Z

DOT to test safety of 3-hour ’pause’ to HOS

FMCSA testing truck drivers to pause 14-hour on-duty limit

The FMCSA is planning to test the effects of letting commercial truck drivers “pause” their 14-hour on-duty limit by up to 3 hours per day.

The agency is hoping to enlist up to 400 drivers to participate in its three-year “Split Duty Period Pilot Program.” Participants would be allowed to use one off-duty break of between 30 minutes and 3 hours to pause the 14-hour driving window, as long as they take 10 consecutive hours off duty at the end of the day. The pause should enable drivers to reduce fatigue, avoid congestion, reduce the pressure to speed, and be more productive, the FMCSA says.

14-hour window closes fast

Normally, short breaks taken during a driver’s day must be subtracted from the driver’s 14-consecutive-hour window during which driving is allowed.

For more information, see our ezExplanation on the 14-hour on-duty rule.

Under new rules in effect on September 29, 2020, some truck drivers can pause their 14-hour limit with a break of 2 hours or more, but only if they also spend at least 7 hours in a sleeper berth (see below). Under the pilot program, drivers could pause the clock with off-duty time alone, without the need for a sleeper berth. This idea was proposed back in 2019 but didn’t find its way into the recent rule changes because the FMCSA didn’t have enough data to justify it.

Reg changes are a long way off

As required by law, the FMCSA is gathering public input on the proposal until November 2nd. It will then decide whether to implement the program. After the program concludes, the agency will need to report to Congress on its findings before it could proceed with any changes to the hours-of-service regulations.

Participation in the pilot program would be limited to between 200 and 400 commercial driver’s license (CDL) holders from companies of all sizes, with each driver participating for up to one year. Motor carriers that want to enroll in the program will need to apply via an FMCSA website which could be available late this year. Comments on the proposal may be submitted online at www.regulations.gov under docket number FMCSA-2020-0098.

Drivers can pause the 14-hour clock today

Truck drivers who fall under the federal hours-of-service rules can already pause their 14-hour clock with a short rest break, as of September 29, 2020 (see log image). This is known as the “split sleeper-berth” option, and it works like this:

The driver must take a break of at least 2 consecutive hours sometime during the day.
The break must be spent off duty or in a sleeper berth (or using a combination of the two).
The time before and after the break cannot include any driving after the 11th hour of driving or after the 14th hour of time. The break itself can be excluded from the 14-hour calculation (i.e., it “pauses” the clock).
The driver must have another break of at least 7 consecutive hours spent entirely in a sleeper berth, sometime before or after (but not necessarily connected with) the shorter break.
The two breaks together must add up to at least 10 hours (for example: 3 7, 2 8, 2 9, 2.5 7.5, etc.).

Key to remember: The FMCSA plans to test the safety of allowing truck drivers to pause their 14-hour clock with a rest break of up to 3 hours, even if they don’t have a sleeper berth. The pilot program could open later this year.

2022-08-15T05:00:00Z

2023 California ‘Truck and Bus’ requirements and an exception

As of January 1, 2023, heavy-duty trucks and buses with engines from model years 2007 to 2009 operating in California must be either:

Replaced, which involves replacing the vehicle with a vehicle that is equipped with an engine meeting the 2010 emissions requirements, or
Retrofitted, which involves replacing the vehicle’s engine with an engine meeting the 2010 emissions standards, including installing a diesel particulate filter and selective catalytic reduction unit.

This is the final step in the phase-in of the Truck and Bus regulation. Covered vehicles originally built with engines older than model year 2006 must have already been replaced or retrofitted.

Need more on CMV maintenance? See our ezExplanation Inspection and Maintenance.

But I can't find a vehicle!

One issue that has come up is new vehicles are not available for delivery before January 1, 2023. This means fleets that operate in California that cannot get a replacement vehicle will be faced with the choice of either retiring their 2007 to 2009 engine vehicles without a replacement or operating in violation as of January 1, 2023.

However, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the agency that oversees the Truck and Bus program, is aware of the situation and has provided an exemption. If the company has a written contract to purchase a new vehicle to replace a vehicle with a 2007 to 2009 engine in place before September 1, 2023, the existing vehicle can be operated until the replacement is placed in service.

Reporting requirements

To use this exemption, the company must register in CARB’s Truck Regulation Upload, Compliance, and Reporting System (TRUCRS) and report the use of the exemption. This is especially important to California-based companies as vehicle registration is tied to compliance with the Truck and Bus regulations requirements.

Also starting in 2023

As of January 1, 2023, California will be placing roadside emissions monitoring devices (REMD) at locations around the state. These devices check emissions on any vehicle that passes it. If the device determines a vehicle may be a high emitter, the owner will receive a Notice to Submit to Testing. This will require the vehicle to be brought in to a “referee” location where the emissions and emissions components can be inspected.

Key to remember

These Truck and Bus requirements go into effect on January 1, 2023, and only apply to vehicles operating in California.

2022-12-29T06:00:00Z

What does 392.2C mean on a roadside inspection report?

Most motor carriers review their roadside inspection reports for the obvious reasons: fixing mechanical defects and identifying unsafe or noncompliant driver behavior.

Some violations are easy to decipher, such as a burned-out light bulb or exceeding the speed limit by a specific range. Others take a little more to figure out, such as doing the math to determine when and how a driver exceeded hours-of-service (HOS) limits. Then there are all those 392.2 violations with suffixes. Some count against a carrier’s Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) scores, while others do not, depending on whether they contribute to causing a crash.

One that often baffles motor carriers is 392.2C.

What is 392.2C?

Section 392.2C is enforcement’s code for “failure to obey traffic control device.” The C stands for control.

The citation appears in the severity table for the Unsafe Driving BASIC (Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category). The violation has been assigned a value of 5 out 10, with 10 being the most severe. The violation is used when calculating both the carrier’s and driver’s Unsafe Driving BASIC scores.

In most instances, the traffic control device is not a signal light or stop or yield sign. Rather, it is the sign that instructs the driver to pull into a weigh station.

View our Weigh Stations ezExplanation for additional information.

Who must pull into a weigh station?

The vehicles that must stop at scales and inspection locations vary from state to state and even from location to location within a state. The “weigh scale ahead” or similar sign should be the driver’s guide.

If the sign reads:

All vehicles over 16,000 pounds, the driver can safely bypass the scale if under the weight threshold.
All commercial motor vehicles, the driver should pull in. It is far better to be waived or green lighted through than to be chased down.

Often those who operate commercial vehicles not requiring a commercial driver’s license, such as a large pickup truck or small box truck, mistakenly believe weigh scale inspections are just for larger rigs.

What happens when a driver ignores signage?

If a driver goes past a weigh station without pulling in as directed by a traffic control device, enforcement will pursue and pull over the driver. The officer will then escort the driver back to the weigh station for a roadside inspection.

Even if the driver was honestly confused whether the sign applied to the vehicle, it is too late. And more than likely enforcement’s interest has been piqued. It is highly unlikely the driver will be waived through at this point, and 392.2C will be entered on the roadside inspection report.

Handling violations

CSA’s enforcement model suggests finding the root cause of roadside inspection violations to prevent future occurrences and ultimately improve BASIC scores.

A violation of 392.2C may have one of several root causes, such as:

Confusion over applicability
Inattentiveness (missing the sign)
Running late
Risky behavior (taking the chance that no one will pursue)
Concern over other violations discovered once stopped

Whatever the reason, it must be addressed with the driver. Corrective actions range from refresher training to termination. If the driver was trying to avoid enforcement for other reasons (drugs, alcohol, over HOS limits), these other violations need to be addressed accordingly.

Key to remember: Failing to obey a traffic control device will be used in calculation of the CSA Unsafe Driving BASIC scores. Motor carriers should address the root cause of the violation so it does not recur.

2023-04-13T05:00:00Z

Workplace vs. FMCSA: What is a safety-sensitive position?

A workplace safety definition for “safety-sensitive position” may lead some motor carriers to mistakenly put employees who don’t qualify in their DOT drug and alcohol testing program.

FMCSA: Clearly defined

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) clearly defines a safety-sensitive position.

It is one where the employee is expected to operate a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) requiring a commercial driver’s license (CDL). Only these drivers can be placed in the motor carrier’s DOT drug and alcohol testing program under 49 CFR Part 382.

As a result, a carrier would not classify a forklift operator, driver helper, and other positions as safety sensitive for purposes of testing under Part

What about non-CDL CMV drivers?

A driver who operates an FMCSA-regulated vehicle that does not require a CDL fits within the scope of workplace safety-sensitive duties, but not FMCSA.

For property-carrying vehicles, a non-CDL CMV is one that is:

10,001-26,000 pounds inclusive of a towed trailer, and
Not transporting placardable quantities of hazmat.

For passenger carriers, a non-CDL CMV is designed to transport 9-15 passengers, including the driver, for compensation.

Even though the above vehicles and drivers are subject to the bulk of FMCSA’s safety regulations, the vehicles (and subsequently the drivers) do not qualify for CDL licensing or FMCSA testing.

If the driver happens to hold CDL, it still does not qualify as a safety-sensitive position. Applicability is always based on whether the employee is assigned to operate a CDL CMV.

Are non-CDL CMV drivers subject to any drug and alcohol prohibitions?

Non-CDL CMV drivers are prohibited from operating while impaired under 49 CFR 392.4 and 392.5, but there is no testing mechanism under DOT authority. Testing would be best practice (non-DOT) and managed under the workplace drug program.

Vague definition under OSHA

If a motor carrier mistakenly uses the workplace criteria for its DOT testing, the number and types of positions placed in the random pool far exceed commercial drivers.

For the general workforce, the term “safety sensitive” has been tossed around, but never clearly defined by OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration). Many safety professionals tie the term to OSHA’s General Duty Clause (GDC), which requires that employers provide all workers with a safe and healthful workplace.

Specifically, the GDC requires employers to recognize hazards that cause or likely will cause death or serious physical harm. Any job title that is likely to cause death or serious harm to someone — including the employee, coworkers, or the general public — is usually put on a list of safety-sensitive positions.

The employer must look at each job’s hazards and decide if the position is classified by its organization as safety sensitive. Examples may include:

Forklift drivers,
Heavy machinery operators, and
Crane operators.

Even someone who works as a roofer may be considered a safety-sensitive position because the employee could trip and fall from a high elevation, causing serious personal harm.

Key to remember: When assembling the list of names for your DOT testing program, only include those individuals who are expected to operate a CDL CMV.

Most Popular Highlights In Human Resources

2023-08-28T05:00:00Z

When to skip a PIP and move to terminate an employee

With the labor market still tight, employers might choose to hang onto employees even if they’re underperforming. But what about when complaints are rolling in from different angles? Take, for example, a lackluster supervisor who’s annoying employees and disappointing customers.

An employer could be hesitant to let the supervisor go, especially if there’s no documentation backing up claims of misconduct. The employer must weigh their options to decide if putting the supervisor on a performance improvement plan (PIP) or moving right to termination is the ideal choice.

At-will employment

For starters, in most states employers may terminate an employee at-will, meaning they can fire employees for pretty much any reason as long as it doesn’t discriminate against someone in a protected class based on sex, age, race, religion, etc. Employers also cannot terminate in retaliation for an employee making a claim of harassment, discrimination, or safety concerns.

Aside from these limits, employers can terminate employees for good cause, bad cause, or no cause at all.

PIP or terminate

Deciding whether to put an employee on a PIP or terminate must be decided on a case-by-case basis.

A PIP is usually for job performance issues (hence, performance improvement plan). This could mean anything from not making enough sales to being inept at the job’s essential functions. If job performance doesn’t improve under the PIP, termination may be the end result depending on company policies and practices.

Even if an employee has job performance issues, the employer can terminate without going through the PIP process first, unless the usual process is to implement a PIP with employees who have had similar problems. In that case, not doing a PIP could be seen as discrimination against an employee, especially if the person falls into a protected class.

Workplace misconduct, however, is another situation altogether. This could be anything from a one-off poor joke to pervasive harassment. Snapping at customers or coworkers (or worse), for example, is a conduct issue. An employer could issue a warning or move right to termination if the behavior is clearly illegal or a serious threat to workplace safety.

Read more: ezExplanation on discharging employees

Termination tips

If an employer decides to terminate, they should treat the employee as respectfully as possible during the termination process. Also, an employer should carefully and clearly communicate the job-related reasons for the termination to avoid any hint of discrimination. Lastly, an employer should document the reasons and reiterate the steps taken leading up to the termination and keep those records handy in case the employee files a wrongful termination lawsuit.

Key to remember: Employers sometimes struggle when making termination decisions. Having a process in place and documenting steps along the way can help if a case lands in court.

Firing

2022-08-30T05:00:00Z

Recouping overpaid wages: What employers need to know

Wage overpayment errors can and will occur

Wage overpayment errors happen for many reasons — from clerical mistakes to payroll system snafus.

Regardless of the reason, employees are not necessarily entitled to keep the extra money, and employers need to know their obligations for recouping it.

Under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), employers don’t need an employee’s permission to recoup wage overpayments. The extra money is seen as a loan or a wage advancement to the employee.

Because of this, employers are generally free to recoup the overpayment from the next paycheck — even if such a deduction cuts into the minimum wage or overtime pay due the employee under the FLSA.

State laws, however, may have greater restrictions. For example, New York employers may only make deductions from an employee’s wages for “an overpayment of wages where such overpayment is due to a mathematical or other clerical error by the employer.”

There are also limitations on the timing and duration, frequency, and method and amount of recovery.

The bottom line is, employers should try to avoid getting themselves into an overpayment situation in the first place. Supervisors should closely review their direct reports’ timesheets to catch errors before paychecks are issued

Also, employees should be encouraged to review their pay stubs for accuracy to help catch mistakes sooner rather than later.

If a mistake happens, employers should do their due diligence to communicate with the affected employees and make a reasonable plan to recoup the funds (provided it’s allowed under state law) so as not to cause any unnecessary financial harm to employees.

Key to remember

Wage overpayment errors can and will occur. Employers need to know their obligations under both federal and state laws before recouping money.

2022-09-06T05:00:00Z

How to collect premiums during unpaid FMLA leave

Payment options during unpaid FLMA leave

When an employee is on leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), the employer must maintain benefits under the company’s group health plan.

Thus, employees generally must continue paying their share of the health insurance premiums.

But how do employees pay their share of the premiums when FMLA leave is unpaid? Employers may offer three payment options:

Pre-pay
Pay-as-you-go
Catch-up

Employers may allow a combination of these options, such as pre-pay for part of the leave and catch-up for the remainder. Below is a breakdown of the three available payment options.

Option #1: Pre-pay

When unpaid FMLA leave is foreseeable, employers may allow employees to pre-pay their premiums. For example, if an employee is adopting a child and requests several weeks for bonding time but does not have enough vacation to cover the entire absence, an employer could allow the employee to pre-pay his or her premiums for the portion of the leave that would be unpaid.

Employers may not require an employee to pre-pay, so this cannot be the only option offered.

If an employee chooses this option, however, employers may collect premiums on a pre-tax basis – with one exception. If the absence will extend into the next tax year (such as leave from December through January), only the premiums for the current tax year may be pre-paid with pre-tax income. The IRS does not allow employees to defer untaxed income from one year to the next.

In this example, the premiums for January could either be pre-paid with after-tax income, or the employee could elect one of the other options (pay-as-you-go or catch-up).

Option #2: Pay-as-you-go

Under the pay-as-you-go option, employees pay their share of the premiums based upon the agreed terms made between the employer and employee. These payments are usually made on an after-tax basis.

For example, the employee might mail in a personal check every two weeks. If the employee fails to send in the checks, or otherwise fails to make payments using the agreed-upon system, the FMLA does allow employers to drop coverage after giving specified notices of non-payment.

Dropping coverage would likely cause some administrative headaches, and some insurers may refuse to do this because the employee would have to be reinstated to the health plan upon return from FMLA leave.

Therefore, employers may prefer to continue coverage by paying the employee’s share of the premiums, then use the catch-up option once the employee returns to work. Some insurance carriers recommend this as an alternative to dropping coverage.

Option #3: Catch-up

Under the catch-up option, the employer and employee agree that the employee will not pay premiums until he or she returns from leave.

This option might be used when the need for FMLA leave was not foreseeable, such as having to care for a parent who was unexpectedly hospitalized.

To use this option, the employer and employee must agree in advance that:

The employee elects to continue health coverage while on leave;
The employer will pay the employee’s share of premiums during the leave; and
The employee will repay those amounts when he or she returns.

When the employee returns, the employer collects the current premiums plus any catch-up payments, perhaps taking double premiums, until caught up. Contributions under the catch-up option may be taken on a pre-tax basis.

The IRS regulations indicate that, if the employee chooses the pay-as-you-go option, but fails to make the required payments, you may change to the catch-up option even without the employee’s prior agreement.

Key to remember

Employees on unpaid FMLA leave must still pay their share of health insurance premiums by either pre-paying, paying as they go, or making catch-up contributions upon returning to work.

2022-11-18T06:00:00Z

FMLA — What does (and doesn’t) count toward 1,250 hours worked?

Employers sometimes get tripped up on how to calculate the 1,250 hours worked eligibility criterion when employees need leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).

Does working overtime count toward the 1,250?

Recently, someone asked if overtime hours counted toward the 1,250 hours worked requirement (it does).

All hours actually worked apply to the 1,250, whether overtime or regular time, even if the overtime is not mandatory.

The 1,250 hours is calculated in relation to when the leave will begin, not when the employee puts an employer on notice of the need for leave.

Whether an employee is allowed to work overtime, however, is generally up to company policy. As far as pay goes, remember, if the employee is nonexempt (“hourly”) and works any overtime (mandatory or voluntary) the employee must be paid time and one-half for all hours worked over 40 within the workweek.

More about FMLA leave requirements

To be eligible to take FMLA leave, employees must:

Have worked at least 1,250 hours in the 12 months before leave is to begin,
Have worked for their employer at least 12 months, and
Work at a location with at least 50 company employees within 75 miles.

Whether an employee has worked the minimum 1,250 hours is calculated based on determining compensable hours or work under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

Calculating the 1,250 hours worked

When it comes to figuring out if an employee has worked at least 1,250 hours, it can get tricky. As was mentioned above, all hours worked, regular and overtime, must be counted.

Hours not worked should not be counted. The “not worked hours” include such time off as vacation time, sick leave, paid or unpaid holidays, or any other time in which an employee isn’t actually working — which can include disability, bereavement, FMLA and other forms of leave.

Once an employee meets the three eligibility criteria, including the 1,250 hours worked, for a particular leave reason, the employee remains eligible for the duration of the 12-month leave year period.

If the employee needs leave for another, different reason, eligibility would be recalculated.

Key to remember: All hours worked must be included in the 1,250 hours criterion when determining whether an employee is eligible for FMLA leave. Hours that aren’t worked (like vacation) are not included.

FLSA HIPAA HIPPA Wage and Hour

2023-01-12T06:00:00Z

Performance review timing and FMLA leave

A new year often begins a new round of employee performance reviews. Since the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) allows eligible employees to take up to 12 (or 26) weeks of leave, many events can occur during an employee’s leave, including the employee’s pre-scheduled performance review. Such reviews might take place on an annual or other scheduled basis. How you treat the timing of those reviews should include some thought.

If, for example, Jo Employee takes 12 weeks of FMLA leave, during which her annual performance review is scheduled, here are some questions to ponder:

Do you look at all 12 months of Jo’s performance?
What if she hasn’t worked a full 12 months because of leave?
When can you actual do the review?
Can you delay it so you can look at a full 12-months of work?

Delaying a review

An annual performance review generally takes into consideration a full years’ worth of work. Some employers think it’s best to delay the performance review by the same amount of time an employee took FMLA leave to capture an entire years’ work. This practice, however, might risk running afoul of one of the cornerstones of the FMLA: Returning the employee to his or her position, including the equivalent pay, benefits, and working conditions.

The issues can be particularly concerning if the performance review affects wage increases or other compensation.

What the regulations say

The FMLA regulations indicate that an equivalent position includes equivalent pay, which includes any unconditional pay increases that may have occurred during the FMLA leave period. Equivalent pay also includes bonuses or payments, whether discretionary or non-discretionary. FMLA leave cannot undermine the employee’s right to such pay.

Furthermore, “… employers cannot use the taking of FMLA leave as a negative factor in employment actions, such as hiring, promotions, or disciplinary actions; nor can FMLA leave be counted under no fault attendance policies.” [29 CFR 825.220(c)]

Avoiding a negative factor

Therefore, you would need to look at whether delaying an employee’s performance review could be seen as having a negative factor for the employee.

If, for example, Jo Employee took 12 weeks of leave from April through June, during which she would otherwise have obtained a pay increase in May, but you delayed this increase until September (so you could use a full 12 months of work), you may have violated the equivalent pay provision. If delaying a review creates a new review schedule going forward, the negative impacts could continue.

If, however, a pay increase is conditioned upon seniority, length of service, or work performed, you would grant it in accordance with your policy or practice as applied to other employees on an equivalent leave status for a reason that does not qualify as FMLA leave.

In other words, don’t treat an employee on FMLA leave differently than you would an employee on other forms of leave.

Key to remember: It might be less risky to keep the performance review on schedule and prorate wage increases to account for FMLA leave.

2023-04-04T05:00:00Z

6 steps to handling a remote work accommodation request

Recent news headlines say many employers are requiring employees to return to the physical office; some after employees have been working remotely for about three years.

Since the long arm of long COVID and other medical conditions (physical or mental) continue to haunt the workplace, employers could find employees asking to keep working remotely because of their condition.

To help with these requests, here are six steps to take when an employee asks to work remotely as a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA):

Determine if the request is related to a disability.
1. If your current remote work policy covers the request, grant the request without going through the entire ADA interactive process but proceed to step 5 in case accommodations are needed for the home office.
2. If your policy does not cover the request, can the employee’s job, or part of the job, be performed from home? If yes, proceed to step 2. If no, let the employee know that remote work is not possible in the current job and ask if the employee is interested in exploring options to work at the place of employment or reassignment to a job that the employee can do from home.
  1. If yes, conduct the interactive process to explore other options.
  2. If no, deny the employee’s request and proceed to Step 6.
Determine if you need medical documentation to support the request.
1. Is the disability or need for accommodation obvious or already documented?
  1. If yes, do not ask for medical documentation, proceed to step 3.
  2. If no, you may request documentation.
2. Does the medical information support the request?
  1. If yes, proceed to step 3.
  2. If no, let the employee know that the medical information is not sufficient and if requested, give the employee time to provide additional information.
Explore accommodation options.
1. Do you want to explore options other than remote work?
  1. If no, proceed to step 4.
  2. If yes, first try to understand why the employee is asking to work remotely. What are the employee’s limitations that led to the request? Once you have this information other options might be obvious, or it might be obvious that remote work is the only effective option. If neither is obvious, you and the employee can brainstorm ideas. Once you have a list of effective options, move on to step 4.
Choose an accommodation. (A best practice is to choose the employee’s preferred accommodation, but you may opt for any effective option).
1. Are you going to allow remote work?
  1. If yes, proceed to step 5.
  2. If no, meet with the employee to discuss the alternative option you chose.
Implement the accommodation. (Take whatever steps needed to make sure the accommodation is effective — absent undue hardship. For remote work, this might mean providing equipment, technical support, and additional accommodations).
1. If needed, can you provide the same equipment used in the work office for the home office?
  1. If yes, provide the equipment.
  2. If no, could you provide another effective alternative?
    1. If yes, provide the alternative.
    2. If no, consider whether there is another way to perform the job duty or if the duty is marginal, whether it can be removed.
      1. If yes, go through the interactive process if needed to determine effective options.
2. Is adequate technical support available?
  1. If no, assign someone with adequate technical skills to respond to the employee’s technical issues.
  2. If yes, make sure someone is available and responsive.
3. Does the employee need other accommodations for the home office?
  1. If no, proceed to step 6.
  2. If yes, go through the interactive process if needed to determine effective options.
Document and monitor the accommodation.
1. Document all agreed upon accommodations. If you will not grant the accommodation due to undue hardship, make sure you make detailed record of the request, the reason you deemed it a hardship, and alternative considerations that were made.
2. Make sure the accommodation continues to be effective by checking in with the employee periodically and letting the employee know who to contact if any problems arise. If an accommodation involves equipment that may need regular maintenance or upgrades, be sure that is scheduled and monitored to maintain effectiveness.

If this process looks familiar, it is because it’s pretty much the same process used for any accommodation request under the ADA. The goal is to find an effective solution for both employer and employee.

Key to remember: Having a process to follow can not only help comply with the ADA, but it can also help employees get their jobs done even while working remotely. Ensure employees are treated fairly, which can go a long way toward retention goals, as well as help avoid discrimination claims.

Most Popular Highlights In Safety & Health

2022-09-06T05:00:00Z

What are some alternatives to nitrile gloves?

The COVID-19 outbreak created a shortage of latex and nitrile gloves in many workplaces.

Latex and nitrile gloves are used extensively in health care, and their disposable (single use) nature meant that large quantities were consumed during the peak of the pandemic. The shortage was also worsened because of hoarding by some consumers. In addition, certain businesses and government agencies began using these gloves to protect employees, even if their workers didn’t normally require gloves on the job.

If you have trouble obtaining your staff’s usual gloves, be prepared to identify feasible alternatives. You don’t want to endanger them by having them wear any old gloves they find lying around.

To identify alternatives for workers who rely on latex or nitrile gloves as PPE, you must know which chemicals workers handle or come in contact with. That’s because all glove materials are not suitable for all hazards.

Evaluate which materials offer appropriate protection from the specific chemicals that workers handle to select appropriate alternative gloves.

Alternative glove selection for COVID-19

Here’s a summary of glove types and the protection given to help evaluate alternatives.

Butyl gloves protect against a variety of chemicals such as peroxide, highly corrosive acids, strong bases, alcohols, aldehydes, ketones, esters and nitrocompounds. Butyl gloves also resist oxidation, ozone corrosion and abrasion, and remain flexible at low temperatures. However, they do not perform well with aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons and halogenated solvents.

Natural (latex) rubber gloves have good elasticity and temperature resistance, and resist abrasions well. They protect against most water solutions of acids, alkalis, salts, and ketones. Latex gloves may cause allergic reactions and may not be appropriate for all employees. Hypoallergenic gloves, glove liners, and powderless gloves are possible alternatives for employees who are allergic.

Neoprene gloves protect against hydraulic fluids, gasoline, alcohols, organic acids, and alkalis. Their chemical and wear resistance are generally better than gloves of natural rubber.

Nitrile gloves are intended for jobs requiring dexterity, and they stand up even after prolonged exposure to substances that cause other gloves to deteriorate. They offer protection when working with greases, oils, acids, caustics, and alcohols but are not recommended for use with strong oxidizing agents, aromatic solvents, ketones, and acetates.

2023-06-09T05:00:00Z

Understanding the limitations of eyewash bottles

OSHA’s 1910.151(c) standard, Medical Services and First Aid, requires that employers provide emergency eyewashes when employees may be exposed to injurious corrosive materials during the course of their work. Employers have a wide range of eyewash types available to choose from on the market, including portable units (i.e., eyewash bottles). While many employers use bottles, OSHA says that they can’t be the only eyewash made available to employees, and their use should be limited.

Bottles vs. other eyewashes for emergency equipment

The OSHA standard does not provide a great deal of detail on eyewashes for employers. However, where the regulation is silent, OSHA refers employers to the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard Z358.1-2009, “Emergency Eyewash and Shower Equipment,” regarding installation, operation, and maintenance of emergency eyewashes. This includes capacity and flushing requirements. The ANSI standard states that an eyewash must deliver 0.4 gallons of flushing fluid per minute for at least 15 minutes.

As such, ANSI says that an eyewash bottle does not meet these criteria; therefore, it can only be used to support eyewashes that do (i.e., plumbed and self-contained units), but cannot replace them.

Capacity of eyewash bottles

The reason for this limitation is that eyewash bottles simply cannot provide the required 15 minutes of flushing. Eyewash bottles typically hold less than a gallon of water, which would supply the user with flushing fluid for approximately 1 minute. Even larger self-contained units (those with bladders) that have a capacity of 5 to 10 gallons would only provide maximum use of about 5 minutes.

In other words, eyewash bottles don’t provide an adequate amount of flushing fluid and cannot be considered a primary means of protection.

Limitations of using eyewash bottles

For this reason, OSHA warns that the use of eyewash bottles should be limited. In a 1986 memorandum to Regional Administrators, the agency states, “In general, squeeze bottles should not be used except where the hazard severity or distance from plumbed eyewash equipment requires personal equipment at work stations for immediate flushing prior to prolonged flushing at a plumbed or self-contained unit.”

In other words, employers can provide eyewash bottles in instances where plumbed or self-contained units can’t reasonably be provided (e.g., an outside yard) in the immediate work area, but only until they can reach a unit which can provide the amount of flushing fluid necessary to flush the eyes for at least 15 minutes.

OSHA expects the employer to determine the level of the potential risk to employees and provide eyewash (and/or shower) protection accordingly. The severity of the hazard(s) involved is a critical consideration when making this determination. In the past, OSHA has said that 1910.151(c)is meant to cover strong acids and alkalis, and the requirement to provide suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing depends on the exposure and the strength of the hazardous chemical. Chemicals and materials such as household detergents or cleaners, sawdust, metal filings, etc. would not require emergency eyewash (or shower) under the standard.

OSHA enforcement on eyewashes

If an employer determines that an eyewash is needed, then it must meet the provisions set forth in the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard Z358.1. The agency uses the ANSI standard as an enforcement tool. This is clarified in a November 1, 2002, Letter of Interpretation, which says, “If OSHA inspects a workplace and finds unsuitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body, a citation under 29 CFR 1910.151(c)would be issued. When determining whether the eyewash or shower facilities are suitable given the circumstances of a particular worksite, OSHA may refer to the most recent consensus standard regarding eyewash or shower equipment…”

Need information on eyewash inspections? See our Institute document on Inspections and Maintenance.

Without the ANSI standard, employers would find it difficult to demonstrate to OSHA exactly how their eyewash and shower units were suitable exclusive to the regulatory language under 1910.151(c) since it’s limited and vague.

Key to remember

Eyewash bottles don’t meet the requirement under 1910.151(c) to provide “suitable” facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes. They cannot be the only eyewash provided in the workplace.

2022-08-29T05:00:00Z

Don’t prop open fire doors on your jobsite

Propping open fire doors is a common violation

Each year, the National Fire Protection Agency (NFPA) reminds employers not to prop open fire doors for convenience. Propping open doors has become a common violation of fire codes after the pandemic because workers didn’t want to become exposed to germs on common touchpoints.

I know firsthand this is an issue at construction jobsites and remember telling workers not to prop open fire doors in our clients’ facilities. Workers were doing this out of convenience because they carried things into and out of the existing facility. Propping open a fire door, or wedging it open, are serious fire and safety hazards. Keep fire doors closed to prevent smoke and fire from spreading into the fire evacuation route, like a stairwell. OSHA and NFPA don’t prohibit propping open a fire exit door but caution employers against doing this for safety and security reasons.

Fire doors must remain closed, although some may be designed to automatically close when fire and smoke are sensed by jobsite fire detection equipment. To reduce the need to disinfect frequently touched points, workers can push open fire doors using their sleeves by pushing against the push bar instead of using their hands. You can also increase housekeeping efforts and the frequency that doorknobs, handles, and push bars are cleaned throughout the shift.

2023-11-02T05:00:00Z

First aid supplies: Lock ‘em up or leave ‘em out?

One way employers try to handle skyrocketing inflation is to manage first aid supplies. But do OSHA regulations allow employers to lock first aid supplies as a way to control costs?

Our experts are often asked whether OSHA permits locking first aid supplies. In a January 23, 2007, OSHA letter of interpretation (LOI), OSHA confirmed that first aid cabinets can be locked. The LOI stated, however, that first aid supplies must be readily accessible in the event of an emergency. Additionally, 29 CFR 1910.151(b) states: “In the absence of an infirmary, clinic, or hospital in near proximity to the workplace which is used for the treatment of all injured employees, a person or persons shall be adequately trained to render first aid. Adequate first aid supplies shall be readily available.”

What is “readily available”?

OSHA defines “readily available” as accessible within three to five minutes and warns that locking first aid supplies, whether kits or cabinets, may limit employee accessibility per the standard. The agency advises that if an employer was relying on first aid services not provided by a clinic, infirmary, or hospital and adequate first aid supplies were not available when needed, then the employer would be in violation of 1910.151(b).

But my supplies are disappearing at an alarming rate!

If you’re concerned with supplies being used in a manner not intended by the company, there are ways to manage supplies. For example, employers could use vending machines that allow employees to scan their badges and get basic supplies or personal protective equipment free of charge. This can help employers manage their supply chain and evaluate by whom and for what supplies are being used.

If opting to lock your first aid supplies, remember to make supplies readily accessible (within three to five minutes). This may require that additional keys for locks be made available to multiple personnel at all times when workers are present.

What supplies are required for my first aid kits?

Although their recommendations are non-mandatory, OSHA suggests using the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) for reference to determine what supplies you need to have. The contents for Class A kits listed in the ANSI standard should be adequate for small worksites. Class B kits are designed with a broader range and quantity of supplies to deal with injuries in more complex or high-risk environments (for example, larger operations or multiple operations conducted at the same location).

It’s important to note that although OSHA is still citing ANSI’s 1998 standard, an updated version of the standard, ANSI/International Safety Equipment Association (ISEA) Z308.1-2021, was approved on April 15, 2022, and went into effect on October 15, 2022. Major changes to the standard included:

Changing tourniquet type to ensure it meets first aid needs. The equipment intended to prevent blood loss should be at least 1.5 inches wide and be effective for limb sizes 7–33 inches around.
Making foil blankets mandatory. This measure was enacted after assessing similar international standards and recognizing “the multiple purposes that the item can serve to respond to first aid emergencies.”
Providing further guidance on bleeding control kits. According to ISEA, these “contain more advanced first aid supplies to immediately treat life-threatening external bleeding.”

Determining what first aid supplies should be accessible depends on the workplace hazards and potential injuries. A great place to begin is by assessing your Form 300 injury logs to see the types of injuries already reported. Most employers perform risk assessments, beginning with a review of the Form 300 logs, to drive their decisions. OSHA also provides guidance to employers in 1910.151 Appendix A.

Keys to Remember

Employers must understand the accessibility risks associated with locking first aid cabinets even though OSHA and ANSI do not prohibit this practice. First aid supplies must be readily accessible (within three to five minutes) in the event of an emergency.

Mining Transportation Utilities Manufacturing (32/Non-Durable)Wholesale Distribution Commercial Services Public Administration Real Estate Waste Management Healthcare Food Services Communications Financial/Insurance Hospitality Retail Repair Services Construction Warehousing General Services Manufacturing (31/Food/Textiles)Company Management Professional Services Personal Services Postal/Courier Services Manufacturing (33/Durable)Education Agriculture Entertainment Virus Abdominal Thrusts Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Emergency Supplies Auto-Injector Broken Bones Muscle Strain Bone Fracture Insulin Medicine 911 Strains Anaphylaxis Diabetic Emergencies Epi-Pen Infection First Responder Emergency Kit Joint Sprain Tourniquet Bandages Stroke Heart Attack Stop Bleeding Compression Bandage/Wrap ERT Heimlich Maneuver Choking Medical Services Second-Degree Burn First Response Emergency Responders Fractures Blood Sugar Monitor Non-Responsive Bacteria Ambulance Chest Compressions Sprains Cardiac Arrest Burns EpiPen Unconscious Muscle Sprain Seizures Emergency Response Team Head Injury Third-Degree Burn Trauma Cold Compress/Pack CPR Autoinjector Unconsciousness Allergies Stress Fracture Concussion Glucose Monitors Splint Shock Warm Compress/Pack Joint Strain Diabetes EMS Injuries Emergency Medical Services

2023-12-28T06:00:00Z

New marijuana testing restrictions in effect for 2024: How to handle them

As of January 1, California and Washington have new marijuana laws that restrict testing for the drug.

Both states, which have legalized recreational and medical use, put limits on pre-employment testing for cannabis at the start of the year.

Washington’s rationale for the new law is that a pre-employment marijuana test limits job opportunities for those who use cannabis, because an applicant will test positive for up to 30 days after using it. The new law is designed to prevent the restriction of job opportunities based on an applicant’s past cannabis use.

California’s law notes that a test for marijuana detects past use of the drug, but does not prove whether or not an individual is impaired by it. Its protections are broader than Washington’s, and apply to employees as well as applicants. As a result, they also restrict reasonable suspicion, post-accident, and random marijuana tests.

Testing restrictions in California and Washington

The new state laws take aim at tests measuring nonpsychoactive cannabis metabolites. These metabolites are created by the body after cannabis is smoked or consumed in an edible.

Their presence indicates that cannabis has been used, but the fact that they are present does not prove at a person is impaired by the drug.

The laws do not allow employers to make employment decisions based on marijuana tests that show the presence of nonspychoactive cannabis metabolites. While tests that do not detect these metabolites are technically allowed, from a practical standpoint they are difficult to find.

Current drug tests that detect the presence of THC (the chemical in marijuana causing impairment) are likely to detect nonpsychactive metabolites as well. Other tests that rely on baseline performance to prove impairment would be difficult to use for applicants, as there would be no previous information to use for comparison.

Exceptions to state laws

Both states have exceptions that allow employers to conduct marijuana tests under certain circumstances.

Washington’s restrictions do not apply to:

A position requiring a federal government background investigation or security clearance.
A position with a general authority for a Washington law enforcement agency.
A position with a fire department, fire protection district, or regional fire protection service authority.
A position as a first responder, including a dispatcher position with a public or private 911 emergency communications system or position responsible for the provision of emergency medical services.
A position as a corrections officer with a jail, detention facility, or the department of corrections.
A position in the airline or aerospace industries.
A safety-sensitive position for which impairment while working presents a substantial risk of death. (These positions must be identified by the employer prior to the applicant’s application for employment.)
Testing under state or federal laws requiring an applicant to be tested for controlled substances.

California’s law allows marijuana tests for:

An employee in the building and construction trades.

Applicants or employees hired for positions that require a federal government background investigation or security clearance in accordance with regulations issued by the U.S. Department of Defense or equivalent regulations applying to other agencies.

Testing conducted under state or federal laws requiring applicants or employees to be tested for controlled substances.

3 steps for employers to take

To make sure workplace drug testing in California and Washington is conducted appropriately, employers should:

Update pre-employment drug testing policies in California and Washington so they comply with the new laws.

Identify positions that are exempt from testing restrictions. When a position qualifies for an exception, make applicants aware that that marijuana testing will be conducted.

Train hiring managers and supervisors about the new requirements. Make sure they understand when marijuana testing is not allowed.

Key to remember: California and Washington have new marijuana testing restrictions that are in place as of January 1. Workplace policies and practices need to be updated to comply with the new laws.

EHS Monthly Round Up - November 2023

In this monthly video, we'll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news. Please view the content links in the transcript for more information about the topics I’ll be covering today. With that said, let’s get started!

For the 13th year in a row, fall protection for construction topped OSHA’s list of violations. In fiscal year 2023, there were over 7,000 recorded violations, up from 5,250 in fiscal year 2022.

Workers who are exposed to lead in industries such as painting, battery manufacturing, and building renovation risk bringing lead home on their clothing and personal items. Take-home lead can contaminate a worker’s car and home, posing an exposure risk to family members. A new NIOSH publication outlines steps workers can take to minimize this risk.

Private industry employers reported 2.8 million nonfatal workplace injuries and illnesses in 2022. This is a 7.5 percent increase over 2021. The increase is due to a rise in both illnesses, which were up 26.1 percent, and injuries, which were up 4.5 percent. Respiratory illness cases drove the spike in reported illnesses.

OSHA faces significant challenges in ensuring worker safety, particularly in high-risk industries. This is according to a report from the Office of Inspector General, or OIG. Among OSHA’s top challenges are verifying timely hazard abatement, employer reporting, completing inspections, workplace violence, and protecting workers from crystalline silica.

And finally, turning to environmental news, a recent EPA rule requires covered facilities to include all quantities of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, on their Toxics Release Inventory reports. The rule also mandates that suppliers notify product users of the presence of any chemicals of special concern contained in their mixtures and products.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!

About Notice at Collection Terms of Use Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information Support