Expert Insights: Connecting environmental compliance and employee safety

The compliance puzzle: Federal, state, and global layers

In the U.S., environmental laws are enforced at both federal and state levels. While EPA sets national standards, states often go further. For example:

• California requires Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions reporting for large companies starting in 2027.
• New York and Vermont have enacted climate superfund laws that hold fossil fuel companies financially liable for climate-related damages.
• Louisiana successfully challenged the EPA’s use of environmental justice criteria in permitting decisions, resulting in a federal court ruling that blocks Title VI enforcement in the state.

Internationally, U.S. companies face additional hurdles. The European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) requires companies to identify and mitigate environmental risks across their global supply chains. This means a U.S. firm with operations or suppliers in Europe must meet stricter standards, even if those standards differ from U.S. law.

Environmental Management Systems (EMS): A strategic solution

To manage this complexity, many companies adopt Environmental Management Systems such as ISO 14001. An EMS provides a structured framework to:

• Identify applicable regulations across jurisdictions,
• Set environmental goals and track performance,
• Conduct internal audits and drive continual improvement, and
• Ensure consistent documentation and training.

EMS tools help companies centralize oversight, reduce compliance gaps, and respond quickly to regulatory changes. For example, a company using EMS software can assign location-specific tasks, monitor progress, and generate reports tailored to each jurisdiction’s requirements.

Practical strategies for multi-jurisdictional success

• Centralize compliance oversight: Use a unified system to track permits, deadlines, and reporting across all sites.
• Leverage EMS tools: Automate alerts, audits, and documentation to stay ahead of changes.
• Train staff by location: Tailor training to reflect the specific rules and risks of each jurisdiction.
• Conduct routine audits: Internal reviews help catch issues before regulators do.

Key to Remember: Multi-jurisdictional compliance isn’t just about knowing the rules—it’s about building systems that adapt to them. An Environmental Management System, paired with proactive planning and location-specific training, helps companies stay compliant, reduce risk, and operate confidently across borders.

Who must report?

TSCA Section 8(e) requirements apply to both organizations and individual employees engaged in manufacturing (including importing), processing, or distributing in commerce a chemical substance or mixture.

Tip: The statute offers no applicability exemptions for a facility’s size, production or import volumes, or commercial activities.

Those in the company who manage Section 8(e) obligations (“officers”) should ensure that the organization meets the requirements. Officers have personal civil and/or criminal liability to verify that SRNs are submitted.

Facilities may assume responsibility from employees and officials for reporting substantial risk information directly to EPA if they establish and implement internal procedures for employees to submit information to the company. The procedures should include:

• What information must be submitted;
• How submissions are prepared and who in the company receives them;
• The federal penalties for failing to report; and
• How officers and employees receive prompt written notification of whether the report was submitted to EPA (if information isn’t reported, the written notification has to mention the right of officers and employees to report the information directly to EPA).

If a business doesn’t have established SRN procedures, all of its employees and officials are individually responsible and liable for ensuring that substantial risk information is submitted directly to EPA.

Regardless of who submits the SRN to the agency, the report should be made within 30 calendar days of obtaining information about a substantial risk of injury.

What qualifies as a substantial risk?

The SRN guide defines substantial risk as “a risk of considerable concern” due to:

• The seriousness of the effect on human or environmental health (health effect), and
• The fact or probability that it will occur (level of exposure).

The type of health effect determines the weight of importance assigned to both factors. For instance, if the chemical’s health effect is severe (like causing birth defects), less weight is given to the level of exposure.

The types of health effects include:

• Human health effects (such as serious or prolonged incapacitation);
• Environmental effects from nonemergency environmental contamination (like widespread accumulation of a chemical substance in the air or water); and
• Emergency environmental contamination that seriously threatens:
  • Humans with cancer, birth defects, mutation, incapacitation, or death; or
  • Nonhuman organisms (e.g., fish, algae, etc.) with significant population destruction.

How are SRNs submitted?

You should submit SRNs electronically through the Chemical Information Submission System (CISS), which is accessed via the Chemical Safety and Pesticide Programs (CSPP) service on EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX).

Tip: Reference EPA’s CDX Chemical Safety and Pesticide Programs (CSPP) Registration User Guide for detailed registration instructions.

If your SRN includes confidential business information claims, you’re required to submit the notice electronically.

Key to remember: If your facility obtains information that a chemical you handle poses a substantial risk to human or environmental health, you must report the information to EPA immediately.

Where compliance and safety intersect

Several OSHA and EPA standards overlap, yet facilities often treat them as separate worlds. OSHA’s Hazard Communication standard requires clear labeling and training while EPA’s hazardous waste rules demand compatible labeling, containment, and emergency planning. Both sets of regulations aim for the same outcome, which is to prevent harm to people and the environment.

When environmental and safety programs coordinate using unified labels, joint inspections, and shared training, compliance becomes simpler and safer. The goal is not to double the paperwork; it is to eliminate the gaps between programs where accidents tend to happen.

The pitfalls and how to fix them

Many facilities unintentionally create risk through small, everyday habits. A “temporary” container sits too long and becomes a forgotten storage drum. Workers mix incompatible residues, not realizing how reactive they can be. Gloves designed for a certain chemical do not protect against concentrated waste. All too often, basic housekeeping is overlooked like open funnels, overfilled containers, or clutter blocking access around drums. These issues rarely start with negligence; they start with assumptions. When waste handling feels routine, people stop seeing it as hazardous. That is when accidents occur. The solution is a unified, proactive approach. Waste areas should be treated as active work zones, not as storage closets. That means safety and environmental staff walking the same floor, inspecting the same containers, and addressing both compliance and ergonomics together. Training should connect the dots between RCRA waste management, hazard communication, and PPE; helping workers understand that residues can behave differently than the materials they started with.

Physical improvements also matter. Adding spill pallets, proper lighting, mechanical drum lifters, and ventilation can reduce both environmental violations and injuries. Like safety, when something goes wrong such as a leak, overfill, or a missing label, it should be handled as a near-miss. Treating these events with the same attention as a near-miss will prevent recurrence and reinforces accountability.

Waste reduction = risk reduction

Waste prevention is not just an environmental initiative; it is one of the strongest safety strategies a company can adopt. Fewer materials used means fewer containers stored, moved, or disposed of. Choosing less hazardous chemicals, ordering smaller quantities, and tracking where waste originates all reduce exposure opportunities. Every gallon of solvent avoided is one less gallon that can leak, spill, or ignite.

Keys to remember: When OSHA and EPA priorities are treated as one, the workplace becomes not only more compliant, but genuinely safer for everyone.

Defining stationary sources under the Clean Air Act

The Clean Air Act defines a stationary source as any building, structure, facility, or installation that emits (or has the potential to emit) air pollutants. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) further clarifies that portable equipment becomes stationary if it remains at a single location for more than 12 consecutive months. This rule applies regardless of whether the equipment was originally designed to be mobile.

For example, a portable diesel engine used to power a rock crusher may be considered stationary if it operates at the same site for over a year. Once reclassified, the equipment may be subject to federal standards such as New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) or National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP).

State-level interpretations and variations

While EPA provides overarching guidance, individual states often implement their own rules and permitting frameworks. These can vary significantly depending on local air quality concerns, industrial activity, and enforcement priorities.

California’s Portable Equipment Registration Program allows certain engines and equipment to operate statewide without obtaining site-specific permits, provided they meet emission standards and are properly registered. In contrast, Texas requires a permit for rock crushers that operate at a site for more than 12 months, aligning closely with EPA’s definition of stationary sources. Maine uses a Crusher Identification Number system to track emissions from portable units and ensure compliance with state regulations.

Some states also impose thresholds based on horsepower, fuel type, or emission potential. Equipment that exceeds these thresholds may require a stationary source permit even if it's moved periodically.

Compliance challenges and enforcement risks

Misunderstanding the distinction between portable and stationary sources can lead to significant compliance issues. Operators may assume that mobility exempts equipment from permitting, only to discover that prolonged use at a single site has triggered regulatory oversight. Failure to obtain the proper permits or meet emission standards can result in fines, enforcement actions, and operational delays.

Recordkeeping is another common challenge. Regulators often require documentation showing how long equipment has been at a site, its emission characteristics, and any relocations. Without accurate records, operators may struggle to prove that their equipment qualifies as portable.

Best practices for operators

To be compliant, operators should:

• Monitor and record how long each unit remains at a location,
• Understand the emissions profile and horsepower of their equipment,
• Review both federal and state regulations before deploying portable units,
• Maintain detailed records of equipment movement and usage, and
• Consult with environmental agencies when planning long-term projects.

Proactive communication with regulators can help clarify requirements and avoid costly surprises. In some cases, applying for a general or portable permit may be the simplest way to ensure compliance.

Key to Remember: Portable equipment doesn’t stay exempt forever. If it remains at one site too long, it may be regulated as a stationary source, bringing new rules, responsibilities, and risks.

OSHA HazCom

HazCom applies to “any chemical which is known to be present in the workplace in such a manner that employees may be exposed under normal conditions of use or in a foreseeable emergency.” The OSHA regulation has requirements for hazardous chemical manufacturers, importers, distributors, and employers.

HazCom-covered employers must ensure containers of non-exempt hazardous chemicals are labeled, SDSs are readily accessible to employees in their work areas, and effective information/training is provided for exposed employees. They must also prepare and implement a written HazCom program (which includes a chemical inventory), unless they only have exempted operations under 1910.1200(b)(3) and/or (b)(4).

Covered employees have a right to understand the chemical hazards in their workplace. Training is key to ensuring employees have that understanding. Employees must be trained prior to initial assignment with hazardous chemicals and whenever a new chemical hazard is introduced. Employers must cover the elements in 1910.1200(h).

DOT Hazmat

The hazmat regulations apply to those involved in three primary types of activities: pre-transportation functions, transportation functions, and hazmat packaging. Pre-transportation functions include activities performed by the hazmat shipper and deal largely with paperwork. Transportation functions, on the other hand, include activities performed by those directly involved in transporting hazmat, including drivers.

“Hazmat employees” must be trained per 49 CFR 172.704 within 90 days of employment or job function assignment, and refresher training is mandated at least once every three years. Employees are considered hazmat employees if they directly affect hazmat transportation safety. See 49 CFR 171.8 for a detailed definition of hazmat employee.

The DOT says, “Training conducted by OSHA, EPA, and other Federal or international agencies may be used to satisfy the training requirements in 172.704(a) to the extent that such training addresses the components specified in paragraph (a) of this section (general awareness/familiarization; function-specific; safety; security awareness; in-depth security training, if a security plan is required; and driver training for each hazmat employee who will operate a motor vehicle).”

EPA HazWaste

Every business deals with waste and must know how to properly dispose of it. Most states are authorized to run their own HazWaste programs, so a facility needs to be aware of state (and often local) HazWaste regulations. When waste is generated, the facility must identify the waste and determine if it is HazWaste by definition.

EPA’s HazWaste generator regulations at 40 CFR 262 apply differently depending upon the “generator category” (large quantity (LQG), small quantity (SQG), and very small quantity (VSQG)), which is determined by how much HazWaste a facility generates each month. Therefore, under Part 262, employee training requirements too are based on the generator category.

SQGs must train employees according to 40 CFR 262.16. SQGs have basic training requirements. They must ensure employees are thoroughly familiar with proper waste handling and emergency procedures relevant to their responsibilities during normal facility operations and emergencies. LQG personnel training requirements are found at 40 CFR 262.17. Being large, these generators are required to meet much more extensive training requirements. It’s a best practice for VSQGs to train employees to safely handle HazWaste, but it’s not specifically called out in EPA’s HazWaste generator regulations. However, other training regulations, such as those for OSHA and DOT may come into play.

Key to remember: No matter what you call them, hazardous chemicals are regulated by OSHA, DOT, and EPA depending what you’re doing with those chemicals. Employers must understand what regulations apply to their situation and train employees accordingly.

Why compliance still matters, even without enforcement

Environmental compliance isn’t just about avoiding fines. It’s about protecting worker health, community trust, and long-term operational stability. During a government shutdown, the temptation to defer environmental investments or relax internal standards can grow. But doing so risks more than future penalties; it undermines the credibility of your environmental program and can lead to reputational damage.

It’s also important to note that state programs are still typically operational and active during federal shutdowns, so inspections and compliance activities for state-authorized programs continue.

Making the business case for continued investment

To convince management and stakeholders, frame environmental excellence as a strategic asset:

• Risk management: Environmental lapses can still be discovered post-shutdown, and penalties may be retroactive.
• Operational efficiency: Many environmental controls improve process reliability, reduce waste, and lower energy costs.
• Brand and stakeholder trust: Investors, customers, and communities increasingly expect companies to go beyond compliance.
• Permit renewals and expansions: Agencies may scrutinize historical performance when reviewing future applications.

Use real-world examples or internal metrics to show how environmental investments have paid off — even when enforcement wasn’t the driver.

Strategies for promoting excellence during a shutdown

Environmental professionals can lead by example and keep the momentum going:

• Maintain internal audits and inspections: Show that oversight continues, even if external reviews pause.
• Communicate proactively: Share updates with leadership about ongoing compliance efforts and environmental performance.
• Highlight cost savings: Quantify how environmental initiatives reduce resource use, waste disposal costs, or downtime.
• Engage employees: Reinforce the company’s environmental values through training, recognition, and involvement.

Turning downtime into opportunity

A shutdown can be a chance to strengthen internal systems:

• Review and update environmental management plans.
• Conduct training or tabletop exercises.
• Evaluate historical data to identify trends and areas of improvement.
• Prepare for future inspections with mock audits or gap analyses.

These efforts demonstrate commitment and prepare your team for when oversight resumes.

Key to remember: Environmental excellence isn’t just about avoiding fines. It’s about building a resilient, responsible, and respected operation. Even when enforcement pauses, your commitment shouldn’t.

What are the types of pretreatment standards?

IUs must obtain permits or comply with other control mechanisms to discharge wastewater to a POTW. Let’s look at the three kinds of pretreatment standards that may apply.

Prohibited discharge standards are national standards consisting of general and specific prohibitions that forbid facilities from discharging certain pollutants.

• The general prohibitions ban IUs from discharging any pollutants to a POTW that can cause pass through or interference (defined at 40 CFR 403.3).
• The specific prohibitions ban IUs from discharging eight kinds of pollutants (defined at 403.5(b)), such as those that pose a fire or explosion hazard to the POTW.

Categorical pretreatment standards are national limits that apply to wastewater discharged by facilities in specific industrial categories.

EPA sets effluent limitations guidelines and standards (ELGs) for the covered industrial categories to prevent discharges from IUs that can pass through or interfere with the works or otherwise disrupt POTW operations. ELGs give numerical, technology-based limits for the quantity, concentration, or properties of a pollutant that IUs can discharge to a POTW.

Local limits are established by POTWs and are specific to each site, so requirements vary across different POTW pretreatment programs. Local limits prevent pollutant discharges from IUs that can pass through or interfere with the works, contaminate sludge, and/or endanger worker health and safety.

POTWs set effluent discharge limits, which can be numerical or narrative (for example, no discharging toxics in toxic amounts). Standards may also include best management practices, such as taking actions to control plant site runoff.

Who enforces the pretreatment standards?

Generally, POTWs implement the NPDES National Pretreatment Program at the local level. EPA requires large POTWs and smaller POTWs with significant industrial discharges to develop local pretreatment programs. Through EPA-approved local programs, POTWs enforce the national standards and requirements in addition to any stricter local regulations that apply.

Where EPA hasn’t approved a POTW’s local pretreatment program, it's administered by the state (if approved to do so) or EPA regional office.

Where does my facility start?

If your facility is subject to the NPDES National Pretreatment Program, first identify the kind of IU your facility is: an IU, a significant IU, or a categorical IU. The category determines the requirements that may apply.

Keep in mind that all IUs must comply with the applicable federal pretreatment program requirements:

• Regardless of whether the POTW has an approved pretreatment program, and
• Regardless of whether the IUs have been issued a permit or control mechanism.

Significant IUs (defined at 403.3(v)) and categorical IUs (i.e., facilities subject to one of the categorical standards in Parts 405–471) have additional federal requirements. Generally, these facilities must also meet local limits.

Key to remember: Industrial and commercial facilities must comply with the National Pretreatment Program before discharging pollutant-containing wastewater to a publicly owned treatment works facility.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)

It’s generally business as usual for the FMCSA. Roadside inspections are considered an essential safety function. Both federal and state enforcement partners perform these inspections, and most weigh stations are run by state Department of Transportation (DOT) agencies, which aren’t directly affected by a federal shutdown.

Drivers should assume inspections will continue as normal. Violations will still result in citations, out-of-service orders, and compliance reviews.

While the day-to-day enforcement likely won’t change, some aspects of the FMCSA and DOT operations may slow down, such as:

• Rulemaking and new initiatives: Any changes to federal regulations will pause.
• Audits and investigations: Compliance reviews and safety audits may take longer, although the enforcement of violations will continue.
• Administrative support: Processing non-urgent matters, permits, or correspondence may be slower.

New registrations and filings, such as new USDOT numbers, new authority, and Unified Carrier Registration filings, will likely experience delays until the shutdown is resolved.

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)

The picture is more complex at PHMSA. The DOT plan says about one-third of the agency's 580 employees are expected to be furloughed. Inspections of hazardous materials shippers, carriers, and other entities will continue, as will enforcement of the hazardous materials safety regulations. However, a variety of administrative functions are expected to be impacted, including non-emergency approvals and permits, rulemaking activities, research, grants, outreach, and the hazmat registration and fee-collection program.

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

OSHA will continue only its essential functions, including:

• Inspections for imminent danger situations, workplace fatalities, and catastrophes;
• Review and referral of whistleblower complaints tied to imminent threats;
• Follow-up inspections of serious violations without abatement; and
• Enforcement actions needed to meet statutory deadlines on high-risk cases.

All other agency activities such as rulemaking, programmed inspections, compliance assistance, website updates, and outreach programs are suspended. Only employees designated as essential may continue working, and the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission halts all operations for the duration of the shutdown.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

EPA has implemented its contingency plan, resulting in a significant reduction in operations. Approximately 90 percent of EPA staff have been furloughed, leaving around 1,700 personnel to continue essential functions, including emergency response operations, law enforcement, criminal investigations, maintenance of critical laboratory assets, and Superfund site work only if halting it poses an imminent threat to human life.

Most routine EPA functions have been suspended (like issuing permits and regulations). The agency has also paused work on climate-related regulations and restructuring efforts unless deemed essential or funded through exempted sources (e.g., Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act or specific fee-based programs).

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)

The EEOC, which investigates discrimination claims, is closed during the shutdown. The agency won’t be responding to inquiries during this time, but a limited number of services will still be available. If employees want to file a discrimination charge, they should be aware that time limits for filing a charge won’t be extended due to the shutdown.

Additional information on filing new charges, the status of pending charges, or other existing business with the EEOC, etc., will likely be delayed. During the shutdown, information on the EEOC website won’t be updated. In addition, transactions submitted via the website won’t be processed, and EEOC staff won’t be able to respond to requests or questions submitted to the EEOC, including those submitted by email or through its website, until the shutdown is over. 

Members of the public who call the EEOC during the government shutdown will be able to access the pre-recorded information available on the EEOC's Interactive Voice Response System, but EEOC staff will not be available to assist them. Email inquiries sent to the agency will be monitored for urgent matters but generally not addressed during the shutdown.

National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)

NLRB offices are closed during the shutdown, and hearings are postponed. Because documents may not be filed on the NLRB website during the shutdown, due dates for filing documents will be extended.

As the 6-month statute of limitations for filing unfair labor practice charges remains in effect, the agency recommends mailing or faxing a copy of the charge to the regional office during the shutdown.

Department of Labor (DOL)

The DOL is also shut down, except for activities such as those needed to protect life and property. All regulatory work has ceased, including the final rules on independent contractors and joint employers.

The Wage and Hour Division (WHD), which enforces laws such as the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act, dropped from 1,270 employees to 7. Employees won’t be able to file claims under such laws.

The agency will monitor and respond to child labor investigations and will pursue and address legal cases or investigations in jeopardy of being lost due to a statute of limitations or as otherwise ordered by the court. It will also continue to process certain benefits payments and support federal and state unemployment programs.

The Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) generally stopped its research activities, audits, compliance assistance, and IT support.

The Veterans’ Employment and Training Service (VETS) stopped conducting investigations of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)

Employers must continue to use the Form I-9 during the shutdown to verify that an employee is eligible to work in the United States. The form must be completed within 3 business days after the employee’s first day of employment.

The form may be downloaded from the USCIS website. The agency expects to retain the majority of its employees during the shutdown.

Employers who use the online E-Verify system to confirm an employee’s eligibility to work in the United States may experience a system shutdown, however. In the event of an E-Verify shutdown, employers won’t be able to create E-Verify cases, run reports, or resolve tentative non-confirmations.

E-Verify employers should continue to complete a Form I-9 for each new employee. After the shutdown ends and the E-Verify system is operational, employers should create E-Verify cases for employees who were hired when the website was not available.

In the event of an E-Verify system shutdown, it’s likely that the USCIS will extend deadlines for creating E-Verify cases and resolving tentative non-confirmations. The agency is expected to provide further guidance.

Federal contractors and government employees

Federal contractors and government employees from shut-down agencies are either furloughed — prohibited from work and unpaid — or required to work without pay if their roles are deemed essential to public safety.

Payments to companies with a federal contract may be delayed, and they may receive a stop-work order. Contracts will not be issued or extended during the shutdown.

The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs website is not being updated during the shutdown.

What are the preconstruction permit requirements?

Under the New Source Review (NSR) regulations (40 CFR Part 51 Subpart I and Part 52 Subpart A), businesses that build a new facility or make major modifications to an existing one have to obtain a preconstruction permit to “begin actual construction.” EPA defines “begin actual construction” as “physical on-site construction activities on an emissions unit which are of a permanent nature.” It covers activities including (but not limited to) installing building supports and foundations, laying underground pipework, and constructing permanent storage structures.

There are three types of preconstruction permits: Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permits, nonattainment NSR permits, and minor source permits. The permits define:

• What construction is allowed,
• Emissions limits, and
• How the source must be operated (if applicable).

It’s important to note that most preconstruction permits are issued at the state or local levels. The requirements must be at least as stringent as EPA’s.

What’s the case?

A county air quality district in Arizona asked EPA to assess whether it may allow a company to start the first phase of construction on a semiconductor manufacturing facility before obtaining an NSR permit if no emissions units are involved.

EPA answered the request with TSMC Arizona Begin Actual Construction — EPA Response Letter (September 2, 2025) and published the letter as new guidance.

Facts of the case

The company builds its facilities in three phases and doesn’t install the semiconductor manufacturing equipment until all phases are complete.

The first phase of construction consists of building the core and shell of the facility, which includes the foundation, a steel superstructure, and external walls. The building will eventually house emissions units (semiconductor manufacturing equipment). However, the company stated that the first phase of construction doesn’t involve any air pollution control devices, emissions units, or foundations for emissions units.

The county air quality district agreed that if a structure contains no emissions unit, it’s not subject to NSR permitting because it doesn’t emit or have the potential to emit pollutants.

EPA response to the case

In the September 2025 response letter, EPA recognized that the definition of “begin actual construction” prohibits on-site construction of an emissions unit without a permit, but it doesn’t prohibit on-site construction of the parts of a facility that don’t qualify as an emissions unit.

The agency determined that the county air quality district may allow the company to start the first phase of construction (even if it’s of a permanent nature) before it obtains an NSR permit as long as it doesn’t involve construction on an emissions unit.

What are EPA’s regulatory plans?

The agency will conduct rulemaking to clarify what construction activities need an NSR permit and what construction activities can proceed without one. It plans to amend the NSR regulations in 2026 by:

• Revising the definition of “begin actual construction," and
• Establishing how permitting authorities may distinguish parts of a facility that are and aren’t emissions units or parts of emissions units.

Until then, EPA will address preconstruction permitting issues on a case-by-case basis.

How should facilities respond?

If you’re planning to build a new facility or make a major modification to one, consider these tips to help you comply with the NSR regulations:

• Check whether the state and local requirements are the same as or stricter than federal rules. The state environmental department’s website is a good place to start.
• Contact the permit-issuing agency (likely the state or local air pollution control agency) for direct help with your specific project.
• Watch EPA news announcements for updates on rulemaking. You can also track the Federal Register, where the agency publishes proposed and final rules.

Key to remember: EPA plans to conduct rulemaking to help distinguish which construction activities need a preconstruction permit for air emissions and which activities don’t.

The catastrophic incident

Picture an 80,000-barrel aboveground storage tank. On March 17, 2019, the circulation pump on the tank failed, allowing the release of a flammable butane-enriched naphtha blend. The release was undetected, as vapor accumulated in the area for 30 minutes. The vapor then ignited, resulting in a large-scale fire that spread to 14 other tanks. Fire crews were unable to extinguish it for three days. Black smoke cascaded into the community that was sheltering in place.

Then the petrochemicals, firefighting foams, and contaminated water broke past the secondary containment wall. An estimated 500,000 barrels of the materials then entered an adjacent bayou and reached a shipping channel contaminating a seven-mile stretch.

What did investigators find?

The CSB investigation found technical failures. The video identifies three important but missing things:

• Procedures to maintain the mechanical integrity of the pump,
• Flammable gas detection systems, and
• Remotely operated tank valves.

Outdated tank farm design was also a factor. Tanks were spaced close together and did not have subdivided containment systems.

Despite the process issues, regulatory shortfalls played a prominent role in the board’s findings. CSB Chairperson Steve Owens remarks, “A serious gap in federal regulations also contributed to the severity of this event.”

OSHA regulatory gap

The CSB video, "Terminal Faiure," points out that 29 CFR 1910.119, the OSHA Process Safety Management (PSM) standard, does not cover all flammable liquids. Those stored in atmospheric tanks and kept below their normal boiling point without chilling or refrigeration are not subject to the standard. This is referred to in industry as the “flammable liquid atmospheric storage tank exemption.” See 1910.119(a)(1)(ii)(B).

The terminal facility company took the position that the storage of the butane-enriched naphtha product in the tank was excluded from PSM coverage. It based this stance on the exemption. According to CSB, had the OSHA PSM standard applied to the tank and its equipment, the terminal facility would have been required to implement a formal PSM system.

That system would have given the company a better chance to identify and control hazards for the tank and its equipment. Had the terminal facility put a comprehensive PSM system in place that effectively identified and controlled the tank/equipment hazards, the company could have prevented this incident, argues CSB.

EPA regulatory gap

Unlike the PSM standard, the Risk Management Program (RMP) standard at 40 CFR 68 does not include an exemption for atmospheric storage of flammable liquids. However, CSB highlights that 68.115(b)(2)(i) has a significant loophole. It reads, “[I]f the concentration of the substance is one percent or greater by weight of the mixture, then, for purposes of determining whether a threshold quantity is present at the stationary source, the entire weight of the mixture shall be treated as the regulated substance unless the owner or operator can demonstrate that the mixture itself does not have a National Fire Protection Association [NFPA] flammability hazard rating of 4.”

The terminal facility determined that the butane-enriched naphtha product contained in the tank was not subject to RMP because it was an NFPA-3a rated material. While the CSB is not validating the terminal’s NFPA “3” finding, the board speculates that had the EPA RMP standard applied to the tank and its pump, this incident likely would not have occurred.

CSB recommends closing the regulatory loopholes

In the recently released video, CSB recommends that:

• OSHA eliminate the atmospheric storage tank exemption from the PSM standard — The board insists that the atmospheric storage tank exemption in the OSHA standard continues to allow for catastrophic incidents to occur. Without PSM coverage, necessary safeguards are not being implemented for equipment that should otherwise be covered, CSB says.
• EPA modify 68.115(b)(2)(i) to expand coverage of its RMP standard to include all flammable liquids, including mixtures, with a flammability rating of NFPA-3 or higher — NFPA-3 flammability rated materials have resulted in significant explosions and fires similar to those contemplated to occur from NFPA-4 rated materials, observes CSB.

Owens emphasizes, “We believe that our recommendations, particularly to OSHA and EPA, to expand regulatory oversight of these kinds of chemicals and facilities will help ensure that a similar incident does not occur in the future.”

Key to remember

A new CSB video recounts the events involved in a massive storage tank fire. At the same time, the video warns of blind spots in OSHA PSM and EPA RMP regulations that may lead to other incidents in the U.S.

Single-use plastics: New bans and restrictions

Several states have enacted new bans on polystyrene foam containers, plastic straws, and produce bags:

• California SB 54, as of January 1, 2025, bans expanded polystyrene (EPS) food containers unless they meet a 25 percent recycling rate. Precheckout bags must be compostable or made of recycled paper (SB 1046).
• Delaware SB 51 bans foam containers and plastic stirrers unless requested by the customer.
• Oregon SB 543 bans EPS containers and food packaging with intentionally added PFAS.
• Virginia bans food vendors from using EPS as of July 1, 2025.

Compliance tip: Audit your packaging inventory and supplier certifications. Ensure alternatives meet compostability or recyclability standards.

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR): Expanding nationwide

EPR laws now apply in several states. These laws require companies to help pay for recycling and report packaging data:

• Maryland SB 901 allows multiple Producer Responsibility Organizations (PROs) and mandates cost-sharing for recycling.
• Washington SB 5284 targets consumer packaging with compliance deadlines starting in 2028.
• Colorado bans unregistered producers from selling covered products as of July 1, 2025.
• California's SB 54 revised draft rules released in May 2025 include new compliance dates and exemptions.

Compliance tip: Register with your state’s PRO, submit packaging data, and prepare for fee schedules. Track deadlines and exemptions closely.

Chemical recycling: Regulatory reclassification and impacts

States like Texas and Pennsylvania now classify chemical recycling as manufacturing, not waste management. This shift encourages investment but also changes permitting and emissions reporting obligations.

Compliance tip: If your facility uses or contracts chemical recycling, review air and water permits. Ensure alignment with manufacturing regulations.

Per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS): Phaseouts and hazardous waste updates

More states are banning PFAS in packaging, cookware, and more:

• Minnesota, Oregon, Rhode Island, and New Mexico have banned or phased out PFAS in consumer products.
• Illinois SB 727 aligns PFAS limits in drinking water with the Environmental Protection Agency standards.

Compliance tip: Update product Safety Data Sheets and conduct PFAS audits. Prepare for new reporting under TSCA Section 8(a)(7), including data on manufacture, use, and disposal.

Circular economy and composting: Recent mandates

States are setting zero-waste goals and requiring composting:

• Hawaii HB 750 launches a statewide recycling needs assessment.
• Maine LD 1065 requires large food waste generators to compost by 2030.

Compliance tip: Evaluate organics diversion programs and infrastructure. Consider partnerships with composting facilities.

EHS teams: What to do now

• Map your regulatory exposure: Identify which state laws apply to your operations.
• Engage with PROs: Register, report, and participate in rulemaking.
• Train staff: Ensure procurement, operations, and legal teams understand new requirements.
• Audit packaging and waste streams: Replace banned materials and optimize recycling.
• Monitor emerging legislation: Stay ahead of new bills and compliance deadlines.

Key to remember: Staying compliant in 2025 means more than avoiding fines. EHS teams must lead efforts to meet new waste laws and support sustainability goals.

e-Manifest compliance check

Use this checklist to help you ensure that your business is set to comply with the rest of the Third Rule’s requirements that take effect in December.

Use e-Manifest resources for additional help

EPA has multiple resources to help regulated hazardous waste handlers comply with e-Manifest regulations, including the upcoming Third Rule’s requirements that take effect on December 1, 2025. Consider using the resources the agency provides on “The Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest (e-Manifest) System” website, such as:

• Webinars,
• Demonstration videos,
• General and user-specific FAQs about the e-Manifest program, and
• The e-Manifest Helpdesk for industry users.

The compliance checklist and e-Manifest resources can help you ensure that your facility will be ready to comply with the rest of the Third Rule’s requirements by December.

Key to remember: The remaining e-Manifest Third Rule requirements take effect on December 1, 2025. Facilities should confirm that they’re prepared to comply.

Key requirements for end users

1. Leak detection and repair

• Automatic leak detection systems (ALDs) are mandatory for systems with 1,500 pounds or more of refrigerant.
• Leaks must be repaired within 30 days or a retirement/retrofit plan must be submitted
• Leak rate thresholds:
  • Industrial process refrigeration: 30%
  • Commercial refrigeration: 20%
  • Transport & comfort cooling: 10%

2. Refrigerant reclamation

• Repairs must use reclaimed refrigerants in supermarket systems, refrigerated transport, and commercial ice makers
• Reclaimed HFCs must contain no more than 15% virgin HFCs and be properly labeled

3. Recordkeeping and reporting

• Businesses must maintain detailed logs of:
  • Refrigerant purchases and usage
  • Leak events and repairs
  • Equipment servicing and disposal
• Records must be available for EPA audits at any time.

4. Disposal and recycling

• HFCs must be recovered from disposable cylinders before disposal
• Fire suppression systems must be recycled prior to disposal, and technician training is required

Sector-specific impacts

Grocery retailers

• Must retrofit or replace systems using restricted HFCs like R-404A or R-22
• Natural refrigerants (CO₂, ammonia) are encouraged but require new equipment and trained technicians
• Legacy systems may become costly to maintain due to refrigerant scarcity

Refrigerated transport

• Subject to leak repair thresholds and reclamation rules
• Must track refrigerant use across fleets and ensure timely repairs

Repair shops

• Must use reclaimed refrigerants for servicing regulated systems
• Required to follow EPA labeling and documentation standards

All end users: what you must do now

• Inventory your equipment: Identify all systems with refrigerants over 15 lbs and GWP greater than 53
• Install ALDs: For large systems, ensure real-time leak monitoring is in place
• Train staff: Ensure technicians understand new servicing, reporting, and disposal rules
• Upgrade Recordkeeping: Use digital tools to automate tracking and reporting

Looking ahead: state-level rules may be stricter

States like California, Washington, and New York are implementing stricter refrigerant rules that may exceed federal AIM Act standards. Businesses operating across state lines must monitor local regulations and prepare for additional reporting and inspections.

Key to remember: If your business uses refrigerants, the AIM Act likely applies to you. Start preparing now to avoid penalties and ensure compliance by 2026.