Compliance Just Got Easier: Stay ahead of regulatory changes with instant notifications on updates that matter.

FREE TRIAL UPGRADE!
Thank you for investing in EnvironmentalHazmatHuman ResourcesHuman Resources, Hazmat & Environmental related content. Click 'UPGRADE' to continue.
CANCEL
YOU'RE ALL SET!
Enjoy your limited-time access to the Compliance Network!
A confirmation welcome email has been sent to your email address from ComplianceNetwork@t.jjkellercompliancenetwork.com. Please check your spam/junk folder if you can't find it in your inbox.
YOU'RE ALL SET!
Thank you for your interest in EnvironmentalHazmatHuman ResourcesHuman Resources, Hazmat & Environmental related content.
WHOOPS!
You've reached your limit of free access, if you'd like more info, please contact us at 800-327-6868.
You'll also get exclusive access to:
Already have an account? .

What would you do if you were working at a chemical plant on a platform five stories up when suddenly a white, gaseous cloud of corrosive hydrogen chloride (HCl) spews out of a pipe in front of you? You quickly slip on your “escape” respirator, but the gas is now burning your skin because you’re not wearing a chemical protective suit.

Every second of exposure seems like an eternity. You realize you face three hard choices:

  • Rush directly into the blinding, corrosive cloud to access the single staircase on the other side of the platform to exit; or
  • Go over the guardrail on your side of the platform and attempt to climb down 70 feet of piping without fall protection; or
  • Stay put and suffer through the chemical release for who knows how long until it runs out of gas and dissipates enough for you to evacuate via the staircase.

Real workers, real casualties

This sounds like something out of a movie, but it happened in real life at a silicone manufacturing plant in Tennessee four years ago. Seven workers were on the platform:

  • Three workers fell while attempting to climb down the piping, with one worker fatally and two seriously injured.
  • One worker ran toward the staircase, only to bump into equipment and have his respirator knocked off. He was seriously burned and moved back to the opposite side of the platform, where three workers placed him in a safety shower.
  • The remaining three workers tried their best to shield each other as they waited three minutes until all the gas escaped the system.

All four on the platform then evacuated using the staircase.

See it for yourself

The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) released a new 17-minute animated video, “No Way Down,” about the incident, its causes, and recommendations. The video follows a final investigation report dated June 15, 2023.

While both the video and the report are specific to the incident, the lessons learned can be applied broadly at other chemical plants and even other work facilities nationwide. CSB member Catherine Sandoval said, “The CSB believes that our findings and recommendations will … prevent another needless tragedy.”

Safety issues

The Board explains that the cause of the incident was the inadvertent over-torquing of bolts on an HCl piping flange connection to a heat exchanger. This resulted in a pipe fracture and the release of the gas in the vicinity of seven contract workers. However, the latest video and report address four key safety issues that CSB found contributed to the incident:

  • Missing written procedures — The company tasked a contractor (consisting of three workers on a pipefitter crew) to torque bolts on active chemical piping. The company did not have a written procedure to execute the task. Instead, it relied on the equipment manual to communicate torque requirements. The manual did not include torque requirements for some of the bolts. As a result, the contractor ended up over-torquing them.
  • No control of hazardous energy — The company did not consider the torquing operation to be a line break or an activity that required isolation of hazardous energy. The company thought since it was not opening the line, lockout/tagout was not needed. Therefore, the company did not assess the risk of the task or implement precautions. Such precautions might have restricted a second contractor from being in the area.
  • Simultaneous operations — The company did not have a policy/procedure for evaluating simultaneous operations (SIMOPs). A pipefitter crew was working on one end of the 19x38 foot platform while a pipe insulation crew was working on the opposite end of the platform. The company did not evaluate the risks associated with the simultaneous tasks in near proximity. Also, the pipe insulation crew had insufficient personal protective equipment and was unnecessarily exposed to the HCl release created by the torquing operation.
  • Limited means of egress — The fifth-floor platform was equipped with only a single point of egress. This was based on building codes for an “unoccupiable equipment platform.”

CSB recommendations

The Board made 10 recommendations. Note that CSB urges OSHA to add or modify regulations to require employers to coordinate SIMOPs, including:

  • Identifying potential SIMOPs and hazardous interactions,
  • Implementing safeguards to allow for safe SIMOPs,
  • Communicating between SIMOPs, and
  • Involving emergency response personnel in planning/coordinating SIMOPs.

CSB suggests OSHA also issue guidance for SIMOPs. In addition, the investigation report calls on the International Code Council and the National Fire Protection Association to address conditions which require multiple means of egress from elevated structures containing hazardous materials.

Key to remember

CSB urges OSHA to add or modify regulations to require employers to coordinate SIMOPs. The Board also calls on others to address the need for multiple means of egress on elevated structures.

Specialized Industries

Go beyond the regulations! Visit the Institute for in-depth guidance on a wide range of compliance subjects in safety and health, transportation, environment, and human resources.

J. J. Keller® COMPLIANCE NETWORK is a premier online safety and compliance community, offering members exclusive access to timely regulatory content in workplace safety (OSHA), transportation (DOT), environment (EPA), and human resources (DOL).

Interact With Our Compliance Experts

Puzzled by a regulatory question or issue? Let our renowned experts provide the answers and get your business on track to full compliance!

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.

SAFETY & COMPLIANCE NEWS

Keep up with the latest regulatory developments from OSHA, DOT, EPA, DOL, and more.

REGSENSE® REGULATORY REFERENCE

Explore a comprehensive database of word-for-word regulations on a wide range of compliance topics, with simplified explanations and best practices advice from our experts.

THE J. J. KELLER INSTITUTE

The Institute is your destination for in-depth content on 120+ compliance subjects. Discover articles, videos, and interactive exercises that will strengthen your understanding of regulatory concepts relevant to your business.

ADD HAZMAT, ENVIRONMENTAL, & HR RESOURCES

Unlock exclusive content offering expert insights into hazmat, environmental, and human resources compliance with a COMPLIANCE NETWORK EDGE membership.

DIRECT ACCESS TO COMPLIANCE EXPERTS

Struggling with a compliance challenge? Get the solution from our in-house team of experts! You can submit a question to our experts by email, set up a phone or video call, or request a detailed research report.

EVENTS

Register to attend live online events hosted by our experts. These webcasts and virtual conferences feature engaging discussions on important compliance topics in a casual, knowledge-sharing environment.

Most Recent Highlights In Environmental

2026-06-26T05:00:00Z

Multi-media inspections are back: How to prepare for comprehensive EPA and state audits

Regulators have returned to routine, in-person inspections, and many are no longer limited to a single program. EPA and state agencies are again conducting multi-media inspections that review air, water, and hazardous waste compliance in one visit. For facilities, this shift raises the stakes. An issue in one program can quickly lead inspectors into others, especially when records or operations do not align.

Most inspectors now arrive with background data already reviewed. Electronic submissions, air reports, discharge monitoring reports, and hazardous waste filings are compared against what they see on site. When numbers, dates, or practices do not match, the scope of the inspection often expands.

What inspectors are really evaluating

While documents are important, inspectors focus on whether procedures match actual operations. They will often start with a walk-through of the facility, tracing how materials move through production and become emissions, discharges, or wastes.

For example:

  • Air compliance may be checked by reviewing fuel use, hours of operation, or control device logs.
  • Stormwater compliance often involves visual checks for exposed materials and condition of controls.
  • Hazardous waste inspections typically focus on labeling, container condition, and accumulation practices.

The common thread is consistency. If a plan says one thing but operators do another, it is likely to result in a finding.

Common gaps seen during multi-media inspections

Across industries, several issues appear repeatedly:

  • Records that do not match across programs (e.g., waste logs vs. manifests)
  • Missing or incomplete inspection logs for air or stormwater systems
  • Assumptions about exemptions without supporting documentation
  • Satellite accumulation areas managed informally outside environmental oversight
  • Housekeeping issues that create unintended stormwater exposure

Many of these are not complex violations. They are breakdowns in communication, training, or follow-through.

A practical way to prepare

Facilities can improve readiness by conducting an internal, cross-media review that mirrors an actual inspection. This is more effective than reviewing each program in isolation.

Start with a process-based walk-through:

  1. Identify where raw materials enter the facility
  2. Follow how they are used, stored, and handled
  3. Note where wastes, emissions, or discharges are generated
  4. Confirm how each is managed and documented

At each step, ask two questions:

  • Is this activity reflected accurately in our records and plans?
  • Would an operator explain it the same way it is written?

This approach often reveals gaps that are not obvious during a desk review.

A recent case: How one issue expands the scope

At a mid-sized manufacturing facility, inspectors began with a routine hazardous waste review. They noticed that waste logs showed periodic disposal of solvent residues, but there were no related air records for emissions tied to cleaning operations.

This led inspectors to review the facility’s air permit assumptions. They found that solvent use had increased over time, but the facility had not updated its potential-to-emit calculations. What started as a simple waste review expanded into an air applicability concern.

The facility ultimately faced findings in both programs, not because of a single major violation, but because information did not align across systems.

Strengthening compliance across programs

Preparation does not require building new systems. It requires making sure existing ones are aligned and consistently followed.

Focus on:

  • Clear ownership of compliance tasks across departments
  • Regular cross-checks between records (air, water, waste)
  • Training staff on how their daily tasks affect compliance
  • Maintaining documentation that supports assumptions, exemptions, and limits

Facilities that treat compliance as a connected system, not separate programs, are better positioned during inspections.

Key to remember: A multi-media inspection looks for consistency across air, water, and waste programs, not just isolated compliance. If your records and operations tell the same story, you are far less likely to face expanded scrutiny.

2026-06-26T05:00:00Z

Multi-media inspections are back: How to prepare for comprehensive EPA and state audits

Regulators have returned to routine, in-person inspections, and many are no longer limited to a single program. EPA and state agencies are again conducting multi-media inspections that review air, water, and hazardous waste compliance in one visit. For facilities, this shift raises the stakes. An issue in one program can quickly lead inspectors into others, especially when records or operations do not align.

Most inspectors now arrive with background data already reviewed. Electronic submissions, air reports, discharge monitoring reports, and hazardous waste filings are compared against what they see on site. When numbers, dates, or practices do not match, the scope of the inspection often expands.

What inspectors are really evaluating

While documents are important, inspectors focus on whether procedures match actual operations. They will often start with a walk-through of the facility, tracing how materials move through production and become emissions, discharges, or wastes.

For example:

  • Air compliance may be checked by reviewing fuel use, hours of operation, or control device logs.
  • Stormwater compliance often involves visual checks for exposed materials and condition of controls.
  • Hazardous waste inspections typically focus on labeling, container condition, and accumulation practices.

The common thread is consistency. If a plan says one thing but operators do another, it is likely to result in a finding.

Common gaps seen during multi-media inspections

Across industries, several issues appear repeatedly:

  • Records that do not match across programs (e.g., waste logs vs. manifests)
  • Missing or incomplete inspection logs for air or stormwater systems
  • Assumptions about exemptions without supporting documentation
  • Satellite accumulation areas managed informally outside environmental oversight
  • Housekeeping issues that create unintended stormwater exposure

Many of these are not complex violations. They are breakdowns in communication, training, or follow-through.

A practical way to prepare

Facilities can improve readiness by conducting an internal, cross-media review that mirrors an actual inspection. This is more effective than reviewing each program in isolation.

Start with a process-based walk-through:

  1. Identify where raw materials enter the facility
  2. Follow how they are used, stored, and handled
  3. Note where wastes, emissions, or discharges are generated
  4. Confirm how each is managed and documented

At each step, ask two questions:

  • Is this activity reflected accurately in our records and plans?
  • Would an operator explain it the same way it is written?

This approach often reveals gaps that are not obvious during a desk review.

A recent case: How one issue expands the scope

At a mid-sized manufacturing facility, inspectors began with a routine hazardous waste review. They noticed that waste logs showed periodic disposal of solvent residues, but there were no related air records for emissions tied to cleaning operations.

This led inspectors to review the facility’s air permit assumptions. They found that solvent use had increased over time, but the facility had not updated its potential-to-emit calculations. What started as a simple waste review expanded into an air applicability concern.

The facility ultimately faced findings in both programs, not because of a single major violation, but because information did not align across systems.

Strengthening compliance across programs

Preparation does not require building new systems. It requires making sure existing ones are aligned and consistently followed.

Focus on:

  • Clear ownership of compliance tasks across departments
  • Regular cross-checks between records (air, water, waste)
  • Training staff on how their daily tasks affect compliance
  • Maintaining documentation that supports assumptions, exemptions, and limits

Facilities that treat compliance as a connected system, not separate programs, are better positioned during inspections.

Key to remember: A multi-media inspection looks for consistency across air, water, and waste programs, not just isolated compliance. If your records and operations tell the same story, you are far less likely to face expanded scrutiny.

2026-06-26T05:00:00Z

Multi-media inspections are back: How to prepare for comprehensive EPA and state audits

Regulators have returned to routine, in-person inspections, and many are no longer limited to a single program. EPA and state agencies are again conducting multi-media inspections that review air, water, and hazardous waste compliance in one visit. For facilities, this shift raises the stakes. An issue in one program can quickly lead inspectors into others, especially when records or operations do not align.

Most inspectors now arrive with background data already reviewed. Electronic submissions, air reports, discharge monitoring reports, and hazardous waste filings are compared against what they see on site. When numbers, dates, or practices do not match, the scope of the inspection often expands.

What inspectors are really evaluating

While documents are important, inspectors focus on whether procedures match actual operations. They will often start with a walk-through of the facility, tracing how materials move through production and become emissions, discharges, or wastes.

For example:

  • Air compliance may be checked by reviewing fuel use, hours of operation, or control device logs.
  • Stormwater compliance often involves visual checks for exposed materials and condition of controls.
  • Hazardous waste inspections typically focus on labeling, container condition, and accumulation practices.

The common thread is consistency. If a plan says one thing but operators do another, it is likely to result in a finding.

Common gaps seen during multi-media inspections

Across industries, several issues appear repeatedly:

  • Records that do not match across programs (e.g., waste logs vs. manifests)
  • Missing or incomplete inspection logs for air or stormwater systems
  • Assumptions about exemptions without supporting documentation
  • Satellite accumulation areas managed informally outside environmental oversight
  • Housekeeping issues that create unintended stormwater exposure

Many of these are not complex violations. They are breakdowns in communication, training, or follow-through.

A practical way to prepare

Facilities can improve readiness by conducting an internal, cross-media review that mirrors an actual inspection. This is more effective than reviewing each program in isolation.

Start with a process-based walk-through:

  1. Identify where raw materials enter the facility
  2. Follow how they are used, stored, and handled
  3. Note where wastes, emissions, or discharges are generated
  4. Confirm how each is managed and documented

At each step, ask two questions:

  • Is this activity reflected accurately in our records and plans?
  • Would an operator explain it the same way it is written?

This approach often reveals gaps that are not obvious during a desk review.

A recent case: How one issue expands the scope

At a mid-sized manufacturing facility, inspectors began with a routine hazardous waste review. They noticed that waste logs showed periodic disposal of solvent residues, but there were no related air records for emissions tied to cleaning operations.

This led inspectors to review the facility’s air permit assumptions. They found that solvent use had increased over time, but the facility had not updated its potential-to-emit calculations. What started as a simple waste review expanded into an air applicability concern.

The facility ultimately faced findings in both programs, not because of a single major violation, but because information did not align across systems.

Strengthening compliance across programs

Preparation does not require building new systems. It requires making sure existing ones are aligned and consistently followed.

Focus on:

  • Clear ownership of compliance tasks across departments
  • Regular cross-checks between records (air, water, waste)
  • Training staff on how their daily tasks affect compliance
  • Maintaining documentation that supports assumptions, exemptions, and limits

Facilities that treat compliance as a connected system, not separate programs, are better positioned during inspections.

Key to remember: A multi-media inspection looks for consistency across air, water, and waste programs, not just isolated compliance. If your records and operations tell the same story, you are far less likely to face expanded scrutiny.

2026-06-25T05:00:00Z

Hazardous waste episodic events: What to do when a bad month happens

Every generator has that month. A tank clean-out gets scheduled; a forklift punctures a tote, and suddenly you've generated way more hazardous waste than you normally would. If you're a Very Small Quantity Generator (VSQG) or Small Quantity Generator (SQG), that one bad month could technically bump you into Large Quantity Generator (LQG) status, potentially subjecting the facility to LQG requirements such as contingency planning, personnel training, and biennial reporting.

The good news is that EPA built in an escape hatch. The 2016 Generator Improvements Rule added 40 CFR Part 262, Subpart L (the "episodic event" provision), which lets you keep your normal generator category for that month, if you follow the rules in 40 CFR 262.232 exactly.

Scenario 1: The planned tank clean-out

Picture a metal finishing shop that's normally an SQG, generating about 400 kg/month of spent plating solution. They finally get around to cleaning out an old process tank that's been sitting idle for three years. That clean-out produces about 1,800 kg of sludge in one shot and enough to push them into LQG numbers for the month.

Since this is something the facility planned and scheduled for, it's a planned episodic event. Here's what the employer would need to do:

  • Notify EPA (or the delegated state agency) at least 30 calendar days before the clean-out starts, using EPA Form 8700-12. Include the start/end dates, why the event is happening, estimated waste types and quantities, and a 24-hour emergency contact.
  • Double-check the facility's EPA ID number to make sure it is current.
  • Stage the waste properly with compliant containers or tanks and labeled with the episodic event start date.
  • Get it manifested and shipped off-site within 60 calendar days of the start date.
  • Hang onto every record including the notification, manifests for 3 years after the event ends.

Scenario 2: The unplanned spill

Next, picture a packaging plant. They are a VSQG generating around 80 kg/month. They have a forklift punch a hole in a 275-gallon tote of listed solvent and by the time cleanup is done, they're looking at about 900 kg of contaminated absorbent and solvent residue. Nobody planned this. It's not part of normal operations. That makes it an unplanned episodic event. Here is what they should do:

  • They have 72 hours to notify EPA or the state by phone, email, or fax. There will be no time to fill out paperwork first.
  • Follow that up by submitting EPA Form 8700-12 after the fact, documenting what happened since you couldn't give advance notice.
  • Keep the spill cleanup waste separate from your routine waste streams and label it with the episodic start date.
  • The same 60-day shipping window and 3-year recordkeeping requirement apply here too.

The things you can't skip

Whether the event is planned or unplanned, there are a handful of conditions that apply across the board and missing any one of them could cost you the episodic event relief entirely.

  • One event per year, period. Both VSQGs and SQGs get exactly one episodic event a year unless they petition the Regional Administrator under 40 CFR 262.233 for a second. That second one must be the opposite type, so if your first was planned, the next must be unplanned.
  • The clock doesn't wait. Exactly 30 days out for planned and 72 hours for unplanned are required. Miss either window or you lose the relief entirely, meaning full LQG status kicks in for that period.
  • The 60-day shipping clock starts on day one of the event, not when you send the notification, so make sure to track it immediately.
  • Manifest the waste properly. Episodic waste can ship under the standard Subpart B manifest rules, even in the same load as your regular waste.
  • Write everything down. Three years of solid records such as dates, causes of event, quantities, and where it went is what separates a clean inspection from an enforcement headache.

Keys to remember: The episodic event provision rewards generators who plan, classify the event correctly, notify on time, ship within 60 days, and document everything for three years.

2026-06-25T05:00:00Z

Hazardous waste episodic events: What to do when a bad month happens

Every generator has that month. A tank clean-out gets scheduled; a forklift punctures a tote, and suddenly you've generated way more hazardous waste than you normally would. If you're a Very Small Quantity Generator (VSQG) or Small Quantity Generator (SQG), that one bad month could technically bump you into Large Quantity Generator (LQG) status, potentially subjecting the facility to LQG requirements such as contingency planning, personnel training, and biennial reporting.

The good news is that EPA built in an escape hatch. The 2016 Generator Improvements Rule added 40 CFR Part 262, Subpart L (the "episodic event" provision), which lets you keep your normal generator category for that month, if you follow the rules in 40 CFR 262.232 exactly.

Scenario 1: The planned tank clean-out

Picture a metal finishing shop that's normally an SQG, generating about 400 kg/month of spent plating solution. They finally get around to cleaning out an old process tank that's been sitting idle for three years. That clean-out produces about 1,800 kg of sludge in one shot and enough to push them into LQG numbers for the month.

Since this is something the facility planned and scheduled for, it's a planned episodic event. Here's what the employer would need to do:

  • Notify EPA (or the delegated state agency) at least 30 calendar days before the clean-out starts, using EPA Form 8700-12. Include the start/end dates, why the event is happening, estimated waste types and quantities, and a 24-hour emergency contact.
  • Double-check the facility's EPA ID number to make sure it is current.
  • Stage the waste properly with compliant containers or tanks and labeled with the episodic event start date.
  • Get it manifested and shipped off-site within 60 calendar days of the start date.
  • Hang onto every record including the notification, manifests for 3 years after the event ends.

Scenario 2: The unplanned spill

Next, picture a packaging plant. They are a VSQG generating around 80 kg/month. They have a forklift punch a hole in a 275-gallon tote of listed solvent and by the time cleanup is done, they're looking at about 900 kg of contaminated absorbent and solvent residue. Nobody planned this. It's not part of normal operations. That makes it an unplanned episodic event. Here is what they should do:

  • They have 72 hours to notify EPA or the state by phone, email, or fax. There will be no time to fill out paperwork first.
  • Follow that up by submitting EPA Form 8700-12 after the fact, documenting what happened since you couldn't give advance notice.
  • Keep the spill cleanup waste separate from your routine waste streams and label it with the episodic start date.
  • The same 60-day shipping window and 3-year recordkeeping requirement apply here too.

The things you can't skip

Whether the event is planned or unplanned, there are a handful of conditions that apply across the board and missing any one of them could cost you the episodic event relief entirely.

  • One event per year, period. Both VSQGs and SQGs get exactly one episodic event a year unless they petition the Regional Administrator under 40 CFR 262.233 for a second. That second one must be the opposite type, so if your first was planned, the next must be unplanned.
  • The clock doesn't wait. Exactly 30 days out for planned and 72 hours for unplanned are required. Miss either window or you lose the relief entirely, meaning full LQG status kicks in for that period.
  • The 60-day shipping clock starts on day one of the event, not when you send the notification, so make sure to track it immediately.
  • Manifest the waste properly. Episodic waste can ship under the standard Subpart B manifest rules, even in the same load as your regular waste.
  • Write everything down. Three years of solid records such as dates, causes of event, quantities, and where it went is what separates a clean inspection from an enforcement headache.

Keys to remember: The episodic event provision rewards generators who plan, classify the event correctly, notify on time, ship within 60 days, and document everything for three years.

See More

Most Recent Highlights In Transportation

2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

Indiana adds permanent underground carbon dioxide storage rules

Effective date: June 10, 2026

This applies to: Entities that seek to participate in carbon sequestration projects

Description of change: The Natural Resources Commission adopted rules for permanent underground carbon dioxide storage, establishing:

  • The rules for entities seeking to petition the Indiana Department of Natural Resources to issue involuntary integration orders for pore spaces, and
  • The rules for storage operators seeking to apply for certificates of project completion.

These regulations add options for entities; the requirements apply only if the options are utilized.

The rules impact entities seeking to participate in carbon sequestration projects. The regulations also affect pore space owners and surface owners.

2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

Virginia reinstates power plant CO2 budget program

Effective date: April 24, 2026

This applies to: Power plant owners

Description of change: The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality reinstated the Virginia CO2 Budget Trading Program Regulation, which implements the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). Participation in the RGGI was stopped in 2023, but the state will resume participation on July 1, 2026, the same date on which the compliance requirements take effect.

The regulation requires fossil fuel-fired units that serve an electricity generator with a capacity of 25 megawatts or more to obtain enough allowances to cover CO2 emissions, which they can purchase in the September and December RGGI auctions.

The department also adopted amendments to the regulations, including establishing a one-time 6-month control period from July 1, 2026, to December 31, 2026.

Related state info: Clean air operating permits state comparison

2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

New Hampshire updates sludge management rules

Effective date: May 15, 2026

This applies to: Owners and operators of drinking water and wastewater treatment plants that generate sludge; land application sites; and facilities that treat, manage, or dispose of sludge

Description of change: The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services amended sludge management rules. Major changes include:

  • Reinstating 5-year site and facility permit renewals (instead of 10 years),
  • Adding annual reporting requirements for sludge haulers (which already apply to septage haulers), and
  • Requiring all applications to be submitted electronically.

The rule also codifies per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) sampling (implemented in 2019 for the sludge quality certificate program).

2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

New Jersey adopts permanent remediation standards for PFAS

Effective date: June 15, 2026

This applies to: Contaminated sites subject to the remediation regulations for contaminated groundwater, soil, and soil leachate

Description of change: The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) formally adopted its interim remediation standards for specific per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), including:

  • Groundwater quality standards for hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid and its ammonium salt (GenX chemicals); and
  • Soil and soil leachate remediation standards for:
    • Perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA);
    • Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS);
    • Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA);
    • GenX chemicals; and
    • Methanol.

The interim standards have been in place since 2022 and 2023, requiring regulated entities to conduct remediation to ensure these PFAS are cleaned up.

Additionally, the NJDEP amended the technical requirements to mandate analyses of the following chemicals in all media when contaminants are unknown or not well documented at a contaminated site:

  • PFNA,
  • PFOS,
  • PFOA,
  • GenX chemicals, and
  • 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin.
2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

Indiana adds permanent underground carbon dioxide storage rules

Effective date: June 10, 2026

This applies to: Entities that seek to participate in carbon sequestration projects

Description of change: The Natural Resources Commission adopted rules for permanent underground carbon dioxide storage, establishing:

  • The applicability of carbon sequestration projects, and
  • The rules for the Department of Natural Resources issuing involuntary integration orders and certificates of project completion.

The rules impact entities seeking to participate in carbon sequestration projects under IC 14-39. The regulations also affect pore space owners and surface owners.

See More

Most Recent Highlights In Safety & Health

2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

Nevada adds requirements for hazardous waste recyclers

Effective date: June 8, 2026

This applies to: Hazardous waste recyclers

Description of change: The State Environmental Commission adopted regulations to add requirements for entities that recycle certain hazardous waste, including compliance with:

  • Certain federal requirements;
  • Local zoning requirements, if applicable;
  • Specific reporting and notification requirements; and
  • Other particular regulations of the commission.

The rules also:

  • Exempt owners and operators of certain facilities that recycle certain hazardous materials without storing those materials before they’re recycled from the above requirements, and
  • Add fees for written determinations (required to construct or operate a facility or mobile unit for hazardous waste recycling) and for the facilities that recycle certain hazardous materials without storing those materials before they’re recycled.
2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

Virginia reinstates power plant CO2 budget program

Effective date: April 24, 2026

This applies to: Power plant owners

Description of change: The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality reinstated the Virginia CO2 Budget Trading Program Regulation, which implements the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). Participation in the RGGI was stopped in 2023, but the state will resume participation on July 1, 2026, the same date on which the compliance requirements take effect.

The regulation requires fossil fuel-fired units that serve an electricity generator with a capacity of 25 megawatts or more to obtain enough allowances to cover CO2 emissions, which they can purchase in the September and December RGGI auctions.

The department also adopted amendments to the regulations, including establishing a one-time 6-month control period from July 1, 2026, to December 31, 2026.

Related state info: Clean air operating permits state comparison

2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

New Hampshire updates sludge management rules

Effective date: May 15, 2026

This applies to: Owners and operators of drinking water and wastewater treatment plants that generate sludge; land application sites; and facilities that treat, manage, or dispose of sludge

Description of change: The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services amended sludge management rules. Major changes include:

  • Reinstating 5-year site and facility permit renewals (instead of 10 years),
  • Adding annual reporting requirements for sludge haulers (which already apply to septage haulers), and
  • Requiring all applications to be submitted electronically.

The rule also codifies per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) sampling (implemented in 2019 for the sludge quality certificate program).

2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

New Jersey adopts permanent remediation standards for PFAS

Effective date: June 15, 2026

This applies to: Contaminated sites subject to the remediation regulations for contaminated groundwater, soil, and soil leachate

Description of change: The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) formally adopted its interim remediation standards for specific per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), including:

  • Groundwater quality standards for hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid and its ammonium salt (GenX chemicals); and
  • Soil and soil leachate remediation standards for:
    • Perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA);
    • Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS);
    • Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA);
    • GenX chemicals; and
    • Methanol.

The interim standards have been in place since 2022 and 2023, requiring regulated entities to conduct remediation to ensure these PFAS are cleaned up.

Additionally, the NJDEP amended the technical requirements to mandate analyses of the following chemicals in all media when contaminants are unknown or not well documented at a contaminated site:

  • PFNA,
  • PFOS,
  • PFOA,
  • GenX chemicals, and
  • 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin.
2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

Nevada adds requirements for hazardous waste recyclers

Effective date: June 8, 2026

This applies to: Hazardous waste recyclers

Description of change: The State Environmental Commission adopted regulations to add requirements for entities that recycle certain hazardous waste, including compliance with:

  • Certain federal requirements;
  • Local zoning requirements, if applicable;
  • Specific reporting and notification requirements; and
  • Other particular regulations of the commission.

The rules also:

  • Exempt owners and operators of certain facilities that recycle certain hazardous materials without storing those materials before they’re recycled from the above requirements, and
  • Add fees for written determinations (required to construct or operate a facility or mobile unit for hazardous waste recycling) and for the facilities that recycle certain hazardous materials without storing those materials before they’re recycled.
See More

Most Recent Highlights In Human Resources

2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

Virginia reinstates power plant CO2 budget program

Effective date: April 24, 2026

This applies to: Power plant owners

Description of change: The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality reinstated the Virginia CO2 Budget Trading Program Regulation, which implements the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). Participation in the RGGI was stopped in 2023, but the state will resume participation on July 1, 2026, the same date on which the compliance requirements take effect.

The regulation requires fossil fuel-fired units that serve an electricity generator with a capacity of 25 megawatts or more to obtain enough allowances to cover CO2 emissions, which they can purchase in the September and December RGGI auctions.

The department also adopted amendments to the regulations, including establishing a one-time 6-month control period from July 1, 2026, to December 31, 2026.

Related state info: Clean air operating permits state comparison

2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

New Hampshire updates sludge management rules

Effective date: May 15, 2026

This applies to: Owners and operators of drinking water and wastewater treatment plants that generate sludge; land application sites; and facilities that treat, manage, or dispose of sludge

Description of change: The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services amended sludge management rules. Major changes include:

  • Reinstating 5-year site and facility permit renewals (instead of 10 years),
  • Adding annual reporting requirements for sludge haulers (which already apply to septage haulers), and
  • Requiring all applications to be submitted electronically.

The rule also codifies per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) sampling (implemented in 2019 for the sludge quality certificate program).

2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

New Jersey adopts permanent remediation standards for PFAS

Effective date: June 15, 2026

This applies to: Contaminated sites subject to the remediation regulations for contaminated groundwater, soil, and soil leachate

Description of change: The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) formally adopted its interim remediation standards for specific per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), including:

  • Groundwater quality standards for hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid and its ammonium salt (GenX chemicals); and
  • Soil and soil leachate remediation standards for:
    • Perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA);
    • Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS);
    • Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA);
    • GenX chemicals; and
    • Methanol.

The interim standards have been in place since 2022 and 2023, requiring regulated entities to conduct remediation to ensure these PFAS are cleaned up.

Additionally, the NJDEP amended the technical requirements to mandate analyses of the following chemicals in all media when contaminants are unknown or not well documented at a contaminated site:

  • PFNA,
  • PFOS,
  • PFOA,
  • GenX chemicals, and
  • 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin.
2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

Nevada adds requirements for hazardous waste recyclers

Effective date: June 8, 2026

This applies to: Hazardous waste recyclers

Description of change: The State Environmental Commission adopted regulations to add requirements for entities that recycle certain hazardous waste, including compliance with:

  • Certain federal requirements;
  • Local zoning requirements, if applicable;
  • Specific reporting and notification requirements; and
  • Other particular regulations of the commission.

The rules also:

  • Exempt owners and operators of certain facilities that recycle certain hazardous materials without storing those materials before they’re recycled from the above requirements, and
  • Add fees for written determinations (required to construct or operate a facility or mobile unit for hazardous waste recycling) and for the facilities that recycle certain hazardous materials without storing those materials before they’re recycled.
2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

Virginia reinstates power plant CO2 budget program

Effective date: April 24, 2026

This applies to: Power plant owners

Description of change: The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality reinstated the Virginia CO2 Budget Trading Program Regulation, which implements the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). Participation in the RGGI was stopped in 2023, but the state will resume participation on July 1, 2026, the same date on which the compliance requirements take effect.

The regulation requires fossil fuel-fired units that serve an electricity generator with a capacity of 25 megawatts or more to obtain enough allowances to cover CO2 emissions, which they can purchase in the September and December RGGI auctions.

The department also adopted amendments to the regulations, including establishing a one-time 6-month control period from July 1, 2026, to December 31, 2026.

Related state info: Clean air operating permits state comparison

See More
New Network Poll
What's your opinion on using Performance Improvement Plans (PIPs) as an employee performance management tool?

What's your opinion on using Performance Improvement Plans (PIPs) as an employee performance management tool?

No active poll
Please come back soon!
See More
See More
See More
See More
Saved to my EVENT CALENDAR!
View your saved links by clicking the arrow next to your profile picture located in the header. Then, click “My Activity” to view the Event Calendar on your Activity page.