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? .
Hello, the monthly round up video series will review the month’s most impactful regulatory proposals and changes, and we’ll discuss what you can do stay compliant. With that said, let’s get started!

Let’s start off this month by discussing a couple of recent FMCSA regulatory changes.

The FMCSA has made a series of technical corrections to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations.

Among the many changes: minor revisions to the medical examination form and certificate (effective January 16, 2024), and clarification that a person who rides along and supervises a commercial learner’s permit holder must be fully authorized to drive the vehicle, not just properly licensed.

Brokers who refuse to pay motor carriers for services rendered could have their operating authority suspended under new financial-responsibility rules that go into effect in January.

The new rules, found in 49 CFR parts 386 and 387, include two compliance deadlines for brokers, surety providers, and financial institutions. The deadlines are January 16, 2025, and January 16, 2026.

IFTA just decided to publish their recordkeeping change that is effective January 1, 2024. They revised the requirements for electronic distance records to tightly define what data elements are required and what formats are acceptable.

The changes affect distance records produced by a vehicle tracking system that utilizes latitudes and longitudes, such as an ELD or GPS. Under the new requirements, a record must be created and maintained at a minimum every 10 minutes when the vehicle’s engine is on.

This action is even more stringent than recent changes for electronic records under the International Registration Plan (IRP), which require minimum record creation rate of every 15 minutes while the engine is on.

Carriers using ELDs or GPS to comply with IFTA and/or IRP recordkeeping requirements should review their recordkeeping practices to prepare for the changes and communicate with their service providers to ensure the new standards are in place on January 1, 2024.

In a few short weeks, intrastate drivers in California will be required to use electronic logging devices (ELDs). The California Highway Patrol (CHP) has issued a final rule, requiring ELD use by intrastate drivers on and after January 1, 2024.

The final rule requires the use of devices that meet the requirements in Part 395, Subpart B of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) by drivers who currently use paper records of duty status to record their hours of service.

While the final rule requires the use of ELDs for most intrastate drivers in California, CHP did not make any changes to the intrastate hours-of-service limits (on-duty, driving, and off-duty time) or applicability (who must comply).

That’s it for this month’s roundup. Stay safe, and thanks for watching.

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

EHS Monthly Round Up - August 2023

EHS Monthly Round Up - August 2023

In this monthly roundup 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 to take a deeper dive into the topics I'll be covering today. With that said, let's get started!

In response to soaring temperatures across the country, OSHA issued a heat hazard alert reminding employers of their obligation to protect workers against heat illness. OSHA also ramped up enforcement activities in high-risk industries like construction and agriculture.

OSHA's annual Safe and Sound Week was held the week of August 7. It highlighted the importance of workplace safety and health programs. This year's focus was on mental health and well-being.

OSHA wants to know how you use your safety and health program to ensure a positive workplace safety culture. The agency has drawn up questions related to work safety values, safety messaging, and more, and will use your feedback to develop educational materials. November 30 is the deadline for comments.

Though the current hurricane season has been relatively quiet, it's important to be prepared as the height of the season approaches. Both OSHA and NIOSH have provided resources to help emergency responders, recovery workers, and employers prepare in advance for anticipated weather disasters.

Workplace deaths due to unintentional overdoses of fentanyl and methamphetamine continue to rise. In 2021, there were 464 such fatalities, a 19.6 percent increase over 2020.

And finally, turning to environmental news, receiving facilities will see increased user fees for the e-Manifest system in fiscal years 2024 and 2025. EPA sets these user fees based on how the manifest is submitted and processing costs for each manifest type. Using fully electronic waste manifests will cost significantly less.

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

EHS Monthly Roundup - March 2023

EHS Monthly Roundup - March 2023

This monthly video spotlights EHS news highlights from March 2023.

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 to take a deeper dive into the topics I’ll be covering today. With that said, let’s get started!

First, let’s take a look at what’s happening in safety and health. OSHA revised its combustible dust national emphasis program. It adds several industries with a higher likelihood of having combustible dust hazards.

California’s Safety and Health Appeals Board says drinking water must be “as close as practicable” to outdoor employees.

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration says that some forklift operators may be considered hazmat employees. If operators handle hazmat cargo, such as moving it from the truck to an aircraft, they need hazmat training.

OSHA posted a letter of interpretation that answers hazard communication questions related to lithium batteries. The agency says workers may be exposed to hazards during storage, handling, and maintenance activities.

Stand Up 4 Grain Safety Week was held the week of March 27. Employers were encouraged to hold toolbox talks or safety demonstrations related to grain handling and storage.

Turning to environmental news, EPA issued significant new use rules for chemical substances that were the subject of premanufacture notices. This change brings added reporting and recordkeeping.

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

EHS Monthly Round Up - September 2024

EHS Monthly Round Up - September 2024

In this September 2024 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. Let’s get started!

OSHA published its proposed heat illness rule on August 30. It applies to both indoor and outdoor work in general industry, construction, agriculture, and maritime. Comments on the proposal will be accepted until December 30. OSHA encourages both employers and workers to submit comments.

Fall protection for construction remained number one on OSHA’s list of Top 10 violations for the 14th year in a row. There was little movement among the other Top 10 entries, with Hazard Communication at number 2 and ladders at number 3.

OSHA may exclude volunteer emergency response organizations from its proposed emergency response rule. During the rule’s public comment period, the agency received numerous comments that raised serious economic feasibility concerns.

During its silica enforcement inspections, OSHA also found violations of the hazard communication, respiratory protection, and noise standards. Over 200 companies were targeted as part of the agency’s respirable crystalline silica emphasis program.

Employers can view workplace injury and illness trends using OSHA’s Severe Injury Report dashboard. This new online tool allows users to search the agency’s severe injury report database. Severe injuries and illnesses are those that result in inpatient hospitalization, amputation, or loss of an eye.

And finally, turning to environmental news, an EPA final rule impacts facilities that reclassify from major to area source status under the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants program. These facilities must continue to meet the major source emission standards for seven hazardous air pollutants.

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

EHS Monthly Round Up - April 2024

EHS Monthly Round Up - April 2024

In this monthly roundup video, we’ll review the most impactful environmental, safety, and health 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!

OSHA’s worker walkaround rule takes effect May 31st. It expands the criteria for who employees can authorize to act as their representative during an inspection.

Between 2015 and 2022, there were about 1,500 worker injuries involving food processing machinery. A new OSHA alert raises awareness of these hazards. It addresses hazard recognition, corrective measures, and workers’ rights.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) seeks stakeholder input on protecting outdoor workers from wildfire smoke. The agency intends to develop a hazard review document that provides recommendations to protect workers.

The Mine Safety and Health Administration published a final rule that lowers miners’ exposure to silica dust. It also revises the standard to reflect the latest advances in respiratory protection and practices.

OSHA released 2023 injury and illness data. The agency provides public access to this information in an effort to identify unsafe conditions and workplace hazards that may lead to injuries and illnesses.

And turning to environmental news, EPA finalized a rule to designate two widely used PFAS as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, or CERCLA. The rule requires immediate release notifications for the two PFAS. It also gives EPA the authority to hold polluters responsible for contamination.

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

EHS Monthly Roundup - February 2023

EHS Monthly Roundup - February 2023

This monthly video spotlights EHS news highlights from February 2023.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental, safety, and health news.

First, let’s take a look at what’s happening in safety and health. Machine guarding and hazard communication topped OSHA’s list of most frequently cited serious violations in fiscal year 2022. Over 1,300 citations were issued for machine guarding and over 1,800 were issued for HazCom.

Effective March 26, OSHA will cite certain types of violations as “instance-by-instance” citations, when inspectors identify high-gravity, serious violations specific to the following: falls, trenching, machine guarding, respiratory protection, permit required confined space, and lockout/tagout, as well as other-than-serious violations specific to recordkeeping.

California’s COVID-19 prevention non-emergency regulations, which require employers to protect workers from the hazards related to COVID-19, took effect February 3, and will remain in effect for two years.

A new OSHA fact sheet outlines measures to protect shipyard employees from the physical hazards of confined spaces. In the maritime sector, physical hazards in confined spaces can increase a worker’s risk of injury.

OSHA says it will withdraw its proposal to revoke Arizona’s State Plan. The state has taken measures to remain compliant with federal OSHA. However, OSHA continues to work closely with Arizona to address other state-plan concerns that weren’t part of its original withdrawal proposal.

And turning to environmental news, EPA issued a rule that finalizes first-time standards for inorganic hazardous air pollutants in miscellaneous coating manufacturing that will limit emissions and require effective controls. Final amendments include provisions for inorganic hazardous air pollutant standards for process vessels. The rule took effect February 22.

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

See More

Most Recent Highlights In Transportation

EHS Monthly Round Up - March 2024

EHS Monthly Round Up - March 2024

In this monthly roundup video, we’ll review the most impactful environmental, safety, and health 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! The Office of Management and Budget completed its review of OSHA’s worker walkaround final rule on March 20. The next step is publication in the Federal Register. The rule expands the criteria for who employees can authorize to act as their representative during an OSHA inspection.

Stand Up 4 Grain Safety Week was held the week of March 25. This annual event brings attention to hazards in the grain handling and storage industry and encourages employers to focus on safe work practices.

Over 100 people die in ladder-related deaths each year, and thousands more suffer disabling injuries. During Ladder Safety Month, which is held each March, the American Ladder Institute promotes ladder safety to decrease the number of injuries and fatalities.

Between 2010 and 2023, 11 miners drowned in incidents involving submerged mobile equipment. In response, the Mine Safety and Health Administration issued a safety alert. It recommends measures miners should take when operating equipment near water.

And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA finalized amendments to its Risk Management Program in an effort to improve safety at facilities that use and distribute hazardous chemicals. The rule seeks to improve chemical process safety; assist in planning for, preparing for, and responding to accidents; and increase public awareness of chemical hazards at regulated sites.

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

EHS Monthly Round-Up - August 2024

EHS Monthly Round-Up - August 2024

In this August 2024 roundup, 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. Let’s get started!

Two State Plan agencies allegedly provided advance notice of workplace inspections to employers, a practice that’s prohibited under the Occupational Safety and Health Act. Now, lawmakers have requested that the Department of Labor’s acting secretary address the allegations and explain what challenges OSHA faces when monitoring and enforcing State Plan compliance.

A recent study shows jobs in agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting are among California’s most dangerous, accounting for the highest number of fatalities among full-time workers. Transportation and utilities jobs ranked second and construction was third.

Remote isolation of process equipment can quickly stop the release of hazardous materials, which can help prevent fatalities and injuries, limit facility damage, and better protect communities and the environment. A U.S. Chemical Safety Board study explores their use and makes recommendations for their utilization in chemical facilities.

A National Safety Council report explores the role of diversity, equity, and inclusion on work-related musculoskeletal disorders, or MSDs. MSDs are the most common workplace injury and often lead to worker disability, early retirement, and employment limitations.

And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA published a final rule that revises its hazardous waste export manifest regulations. All hazardous waste shipments and manifest-related reports will be managed electronically through the agency’s e-Manifest program.

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

Section 404 permits: Does your project need a permit to fill?
2025-01-03T06:00:00Z

Section 404 permits: Does your project need a permit to fill?

Some commercial and industrial projects place materials (called fill) in a body of water for various reasons, such as building a facility, adding a road to a facility site, or installing intake and outfall pipes at a power plant. If the project affects any of the waters of the United States (WOTUS), you must first obtain a permit.

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act requires a permit to discharge dredged or fill material into any WOTUS (including wetlands). Before conducting any activities at your facility’s site, it’s crucial to find out whether your project requires a permit to fill.

What’s considered fill material?

The regulations at 40 CFR 232.2 define fill material as any material placed in WOTUS that:

  • Replaces any part of WOTUS with dry land, or
  • Changes the bottom elevation of WOTUS.

Fill material excludes trash and garbage. Common examples of fill material are:

  • Construction debris,
  • Materials used to create a structure/infrastructure,
  • Rock,
  • Sand, and
  • Soil.

Whenever fill material is dumped, placed, or deposited in WOTUS, a “discharge of fill material” occurs. Examples (according to 232.2) range from road fills to commercial and industrial site development fills.

The Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) jointly administer the Section 404 permit program. The USACE typically issues the permits unless a state or tribal program is authorized to issue them.

Does your project require a permit to fill?

To answer this question, you’ll need to address a few more questions:

1. Will fill materials enter WOTUS?

The first step is to determine whether Section 404 regulations cover any on-site waterbodies.

The Aquatic Resource Delineation Report is a required part of the permitting process. It identifies any on-site aquatic resources (i.e., waterbodies or wetlands) subject to permitting rules. Businesses typically hire consultants to develop the report.

If you need help figuring out the status of your aquatic resources, you can request the USACE to make a written jurisdictional determination of whether Section 404 rules apply to any on-site waterbodies or wetlands.

2. Is the planned discharge of fill exempt?

Not all fill discharges require a Section 404 permit. Examples include:

  • Conducting ongoing farming and ranching activities (such as minor drainage and harvesting);
  • Maintaining drainage ditches, dams, and levees; and
  • Building and maintaining irrigation ditches, farm and stock ponds, and farm and forest roads.

See 232.3 for the comprehensive list of discharge activities that don’t require a permit.

3. What impact will the fill discharge have?

The potential impact that your project will have on WOTUS determines the type of permit you need: general or individual.

General permits are issued for discharges that have only minimal adverse effects on WOTUS. They’re based on specific activities and typically require much less processing time, allowing projects to begin sooner. The types of general permits include:

  • Nationwide permits (authorize activities across the U.S.),
  • Regional general permits (authorize activities in a specific area), and
  • Programmatic general permits (authorize activities already regulated by existing state, local, or federal programs).

Individual permits are issued for discharges that may have significant impacts on WOTUS. They require case-by-case evaluations of each project.

When starting the Section 404 permitting process, keep these things in mind:

  • The permit requirements apply both to permanent and temporary projects, like using fills to access a work area for a limited time.
  • You can request to meet with the USACE before applying for a permit. It’s an informal meeting during which the USACE offers guidance and insights that could help reduce your application’s processing time.
  • Check with the state to identify any state-level permitting requirements.

Key to remember: If a project’s discharges of fill material could impact the waters of the United States, it may require a Section 404 permit under the Clean Water Act.

The next 5: EPA's latest step in chemical risk evaluations
2024-12-31T06:00:00Z

The next 5: EPA's latest step in chemical risk evaluations

Are the chemicals in your home and workplace safe? The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is working to answer this question with the recent launch of risk evaluations for five chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA):

  • Acetaldehyde,
  • Acrylonitrile,
  • Benzenamine,
  • 4,4’-methylene bis(2-chloroaniline) (MBOCA), and
  • Vinyl chloride.

EPA selected the chemicals through a rigorous process (under TSCA section 6(b)(1)(A)) that considers potential hazards, exposure levels, and other relevant factors. A critical component of this process is the prioritization of chemicals for risk evaluation.

The prioritization process is the cornerstone of EPA's TSCA implementation. It ensures that the agency's resources are directed toward chemicals with the greatest potential to cause harm. This systematic approach allows the agency to efficiently evaluate a vast number of existing chemicals and make informed decisions about their safety.

Prioritizing existing chemicals under TSCA can include up to seven stages:

  1. Approach to prioritization EPA selects a prioritization approach that’s appropriate for the purposes of the evaluation.
  2. Candidate selection In this stage, EPA identifies potential candidates for prioritization using a variety of sources, including industry reports, scientific studies, and public input.
  3. Initiation Once the agency selects a candidate chemical, it initiates the prioritization process by gathering relevant information on the chemical's hazards, exposures, and potential risks.
  4. Screening review During this stage, EPA conducts a screening-level risk assessment to evaluate the potential risks of the chemical.
  5. Proposed designation Based on the screening review, the agency proposes a designation for the chemical as either high- or low-priority for further evaluation. Chemicals designated as High-Priority Substances enter the TSCA risk evaluation process.
  6. Final designation After considering public comments, EPA finalizes the chemical’s designation.
  7. Revision of designation EPA may revise the designation of a low-priority substance as high-priority if new information suggests that the chemical may present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment.

Risk evaluation: Assessing unreasonable risks

Following prioritization, EPA immediately starts risk evaluations for chemicals designated as High-Priority Substances. The evaluations involve a comprehensive assessment of potential hazards, exposure pathways, and potential risks to human health and the environment. The goal is to determine whether a chemical presents an "unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment."

If a risk evaluation identifies an unreasonable risk, EPA can take various regulatory actions under TSCA. These actions may include restrictions on the use, manufacture, or distribution of the chemical. The agency tailors the regulatory approach to the unique characteristics and risks of each chemical.

Key to remember: EPA recently announced the initiation of risk evaluations for five chemicals under TSCA. The chemicals were selected through a rigorous prioritization process that considers potential hazards, exposure levels, and other relevant factors.

Agency adds new temporary hazardous waste storage, transfer codes
2024-12-30T06:00:00Z

Agency adds new temporary hazardous waste storage, transfer codes

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has added new Management Method Codes to describe how hazardous waste will be managed after temporary storage and transfer. The codes are used for Biennial Hazardous Waste Reports and e-Manifests required by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).

What are the changes?

The new “S Codes” are effective as of January 1, 2025. The S Codes will ultimately replace code H141 for Storage and Transfer for the RCRA Biennial Reports and e-Manifests. EPA will remove Code H141 from the Biennial Report and e-Manifest on January 1, 2027.

Hazardous waste handlers will use the S Codes on the Biennial Report Waste Generation and Management (GM) forms. The S Codes indicate that (a) hazardous waste was received to be stored or transferred and (b) the hazardous waste will later be managed by a final receiving facility using a specific method.

What are the new codes?

The new Management Method Codes include the following:

S CodeDescription
S010Stored and transferred for metals recovery
S011Stored and transferred for mercury recovery
S015Stored and transferred for deployment/deactivation of airbag waste
S020Stored and transferred for solvents recovery
S039Stored and transferred for other recovery or reclamation for reuse
S040Stored and transferred for incineration
S041Stored and transferred for open burning/open detonation
S042Stored and transferred for thermal desorption
S070Stored and transferred for chemical treatment
S081Stored and transferred for biological treatment
S090Stored and transferred for polymerization
S100Stored and transferred for physical treatment only
S110Stored and transferred for stabilization
S113Stored and transferred for stabilization to remove HW characteristics or to achieve delisting levels
S120Stored and transferred for comb. of chemical, biological, and/or physical TRT
S121Stored and transferred for neutralization only
S122Stored and transferred for evaporation
S129Stored and transferred for other treatment
S130Stored and transferred for surface impoundment that will be closed as landfill
S131Stored and transferred for land treatment or application
S132Stored and transferred for landfill (with prior treatment and/or stabilization)
S134Stored and transferred for deepwell or underground injection

When do the new codes apply?

Handlers may use the new S Codes on the 2025 Biennial Report GM form, on the 2026 Annual Report in some states, and for e-Manifests. While handlers may continue using code H141, EPA recommends shifting to S Codes before January 1, 2027, when code H141 will be removed.

Key to remember: EPA’s new S Codes for Biennial Reports and e-Manifests indicate how the final receiving facility will manage temporarily stored and transferred hazardous waste.

See More

Most Recent Highlights In Safety & Health

EPA's Fall 2024 regulatory agenda impacts air, land, water rules
2024-12-16T06:00:00Z

EPA's Fall 2024 regulatory agenda impacts air, land, water rules

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the Fall 2024 Semiannual Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions on December 13, 2024. The agenda reveals the agency’s upcoming regulatory actions and where each action is in the rulemaking process.

The agenda includes major EPA updates, such as:

  • Finalizing a rule to add 16 individual per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and 15 PFAS categories to the Toxics Release Inventory as chemicals of special concern, making them subject to reporting (final rule expected August 2025);
  • Establishing greenhouse gas emission guidelines for existing fossil fuel-fired combustion turbine electric generating units (proposed rule expected February 2025);
  • Lowering the 2024 cellulosic biofuel volume and associated percentage standard requirements under the Renewable Fuel Standard program (final rule expected in March 2025);
  • Issuing renewal decisions for each of the six applications of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) prioritized under the HFC allowance allocation program starting in calendar year 2026 (final rule expected in July 2025); and
  • Proposing and finalizing regulations to control unreasonable risks from multiple chemical substances regulated under the Toxic Substances Control Act, like:
    • C. I. Pigment Violet 29 (proposed rule expected in April 2025),
    • N-methylpyrrolidone (final rule expected in August 2025), and
    • 1,4-dioxane (proposed rule expected in October 2025).

This article highlights some of the major rules we’re watching closely. You’ll want to review the entire agenda to learn about all the rulemakings on EPA’s docket. Please note that the agenda dates are tentative; they're when the agency seeks to publish the rulemakings in the Federal Register.

Final Rule Stage
Project Publication DateTitle
December 2024New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and Emission Guidelines (EG) for Large Municipal Waste Combustors (MWCs)  
December 2024Removal of Affirmative Defense Provisions From Specified New Source Performance Standards and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
January 2025Water System Restructuring Assessment Rule
March 2025Regulatory Requirements for New HAP Additions to Part 63
July 2025Listing of Specific PFAS as Hazardous Constituents 
August 2025Clean Water Act Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Meat and Poultry Products Point Source Category 
October 2025Revisions to Standards for the Open Burning/Open Detonation of Waste Explosives
November 2025Stationary Combustion Turbines New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) Technology Review
Proposed Rule Stage
Projected publication date of Notice of Proposed RulemakingTitle
December 2024Reconsideration of Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed and Modified Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and Natural Gas Sector Climate Review 
January 2025National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the Polyether Polyols Production Industry
March 2025Clean Water Act Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for PFAS Manufacturers Under the Organic Chemicals, Plastics and Synthetic Fibers Point Source Category
April 2025Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Reconsideration of Technology Transitions Final Rule Under the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020 
May 2025National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Stationary Combustion Turbines; Amendments 
June 2025Improving Recycling and Management of Renewable Energy Wastes: Universal Waste Regulations for Solar Panels and Lithium Batteries
June 2025PFAS Requirements in NPDES Permit Applications
June 2025Tiered Data Reporting to Inform Prioritization, Risk Evaluation and Risk Management Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 
November 2025Revisions to Establish the Sixth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 6) for Public Water Systems
November 2025Revise/Update the Standards of Performance and Emission Guidelines for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills 
Pre-Rule Stage
Projected publication date or other actionTitle
December 2024 (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking)Lead Wheel Weights; Regulatory Investigation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
January 2025 (End Review)610 Review of Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heathers, New Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces
January 2025 (Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Comment Period End)Regulatory Investigation of N-(1,3-Dimethylbutyl)-N′-phenyl-p-phenylenediamine ("6PPD") and its Transformation Product, 6PPD-quinone Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
Key to remember: EPA’s Fall 2024 regulatory agenda includes upcoming actions with possible impacts on industry compliance with air, land, and water rules.
New chemical review: What are the 5 possible results?
2024-12-11T06:00:00Z

New chemical review: What are the 5 possible results?

Before a new chemical substance can enter the marketplace, it first travels through the New Chemicals Review Program. Section 5 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to review new chemicals for any unreasonable risk of injury they may pose to human or environmental health. The agency determines (a) whether the substances can enter the marketplace and (b) if they require restrictions to manage any unreasonable risk.

To manufacture (including import) a chemical for commercial purposes that’s not on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory (i.e., a new chemical), you have to submit a premanufacture notice (PMN) to EPA. In December 2024, EPA finalized the new chemicals review rule. It clarifies that when you submit a PMN, you may not manufacture the new chemical substance until the agency issues a safety determination and completes any associated actions (like developing rules to limit its use).

Start the PMN process by conducting your own review! Evaluate and prepare for the possible determinations EPA will make for your new chemical substance.

Safety determinations

Submitting a PMN sparks the beginning of the new chemicals review process. EPA completes the review process by making one of five possible safety determinations for the new chemical.

It’s important to note that three types of determinations fall under the scope of Section 5(e) actions. If EPA makes any determination under Section 5(e), it must issue a Section 5(e) order with requirements that limit or ban the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, or disposal of the new chemical. Examples include toxicity testing, personal protective equipment for exposed workers, and environmental release restrictions.

Let’s take a look at each one.

Section 5(a)(3)(C): Not likely to present an unreasonable risk

In the most straightforward scenario, EPA can find that the new chemical isn’t likely to pose an unreasonable risk.

In this case, the agency will notify you and publish its findings in the Federal Register. Once you receive the Section 5(a)(3)(C) notice from EPA, you may begin manufacturing the new chemical substance, even if the applicable review period isn’t over.

Section 5(f): Presents an unreasonable risk

The agency may find that a new chemical presents an unreasonable risk of injury.

It will use Section 5(f) to limit or ban the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, or disposal of the new chemical through either:

  • A proposed rule that takes immediate effect, or
  • An issued order.

Section 5(e): Insufficient information

The agency may determine that it doesn’t have enough information to make a “reasoned evaluation” of the new chemical’s impact on health and the environment.

EPA will issue a Section 5(e) order with restrictions to mitigate or eliminate the unreasonable risk.

Section 5(e): May present an unreasonable risk

If EPA doesn’t have enough information, it can alternatively determine that the new chemical poses an unreasonable risk due to insufficient information.

The agency will issue a Section 5(e) order with restrictions to mitigate or eliminate the unreasonable risk.

Section 5(e): Presents unreasonable risk due to quantity

On the other hand, EPA may determine that the new chemical will be produced in substantial quantities that could (a) be released in large amounts to the environment or (b) result in significant human exposure.

EPA will issue a Section 5(e) order with restrictions to mitigate or eliminate the unreasonable risk.

Regulatory action

In December 2024, EPA finalized changes to the rule for new chemical reviews. It clarifies that the agency must make one of five statutory determinations for each PMN, significant new use notice, and microbial commercial activity notice it receives.

The final rule also:

  • Eliminates full review exemptions for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (or PFAS) as well as for persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) chemicals if environmental releases of or potentially unreasonable exposures to PBT chemicals are expected;
  • Clarifies the information required in new chemical notices;
  • Changes EPA’s procedures for reviewing notices with incomplete information or errors;
  • Updates the application form on the EPA Central Data Exchange; and
  • Streamlines the suspension request process for submitters.

Key to remember: EPA reviews each new chemical and makes one of five possible safety determinations that dictate both if and how the substance can enter the marketplace.

Chemical management: Minimizing risks, maximizing compliance
2024-12-10T06:00:00Z

Chemical management: Minimizing risks, maximizing compliance

In 2022, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) reported a staggering 658,000 workers were exposed to harmful chemicals, resulting in 839 fatalities. These statistics highlight the significant health and safety risks that an unexpected exposure to a hazardous chemical, or a substantial threat of a hazardous substance release, can pose to workers, organizations, and communities. A thorough understanding of chemical management regulations is crucial to ensure potential hazardous exposures are minimized.

Hazard communication (HazCom)

OSHA’s HazCom standard (29 CFR 1910.1200) is designed to inform workers about chemical hazards and how to protect themselves.

Key definitions: A "hazardous chemical" is any chemical which is classified as a physical hazard or a health hazard, a simple asphyxiant, combustible dust, or other hazards not that may not be classified but still pose a serious danger.

Indicators: Any workplace where hazardous chemicals are used, stored, or processed needs a hazard communication program. Labels, safety data sheets (SDSs), and employee training are essential components.

Training requirements: Training must cover how to read and understand labels, the purpose and location of SDSs, and specific protective measures when handling hazardous chemicals. Training must be provided upon initial assignment and updated whenever new chemical hazards are introduced.

Hazardous materials (Hazmat)

The DOT’s hazmat regulations (DOT 49 CFR Parts 171-180) include substances that, if transported improperly, can harm people, property, or the environment. By correctly handling and moving these materials, organizations can avoid accidents and safeguard both public health and the environment.

Key definitions: A "hazardous material" is any substance or material capable of posing an unreasonable risk when transported in commerce. This can include flammable, toxic, and reactive substances.

Indicators: Activities involving the loading, unloading, and handling of hazardous materials require adherence to hazmat regulations. This requirement also applies to organizations that make or maintain packaging, or a part of packaging, that's marked or sold as suitable for transporting hazardous materials commercially.

Training requirements: Workers handling hazmat must undergo specific training on material classification, safe handling, emergency response, and transportation. Training must be provided within 90 days of initial assignment and a refresher at least once every three years. Training must also be documented and retained for a minimum of three years.

Hazardous waste (Hazwaste)

The EPA’s hazwaste regulations (40 CFR Parts 260-299) refer to any waste material that could potentially harm the environment or human health if not managed correctly. Additionally, many states have hazardous waste requirements beyond EPA regulations.

Key Definitions: Hazardous waste includes materials classified as toxic, ignitable, corrosive, or reactive, based on specific criteria.

Indicators: Managing hazardous waste follows the material’s entire lifecycle including the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal, known as "cradle-to-grave." Requirements are based on the quantity of waste generated.

Training requirements: Employees involved in hazardous waste management must receive training on waste handling, storage, labeling, and disposal procedures. Annual training requirements are based on generator quantity status.

Hazardous waste operations and emergency response (HAZWOPER)

OSHA’s HAZWOPER standard (29 CFR 1910.120) protects workers involved in hazardous waste management and emergency response. HAZWOPER covers a wide range of activities, including cleanup operations and responses to hazardous substance releases.

Key definitions: A hazardous substance is any material that can harm health and safety if released into the environment. In the context of HAZWOPER, this includes materials that pose risks in emergencies, such as spills, leaks, or other uncontrolled releases.

Indicators: Workers and organizations tasked with hazardous waste cleanup, spill response, and emergency operations require specialized training, equipment, and procedures.

Training requirements: HAZWOPER training is intensive and includes specific requirements depending on job roles. Training levels include 24-hour, 40-hour, and 8-hour refresher courses for different exposure risks. Employees learn about hazardous substance properties, emergency response procedures, PPE use, and decontamination processes.

Process Safety Management (PSM)

OSHA’s PSM standard (29 CFR 1910.119) aims to prevent accidental chemical releases that could seriously harm employees or the environment by including safety measures, risk assessments, and employee training to ensure safe operations. It is especially important in industries handling highly hazardous chemicals including facilities with high-risk chemical processes.

Key definitions: OSHA defines a "highly hazardous chemical" as any substance that poses a significant risk of causing serious harm to people, property, or the environment due to its toxic, reactive, flammable, or explosive properties.

Indicators: Any workplace handling large volumes of hazardous chemicals or using complex chemical processes including chemicals that are specifically listed by OSHA in appendix A of the standard, are present in quantities above specified thresholds, or exhibit properties that make them likely to cause a major incident.

Training requirements: PSM training covers safe operating procedures, hazard analysis, and incident investigation for employees involved in high-risk processes. Training must be provided at initial assignment and a refresher at least once every three years.

Key to remember: Chemical management is a complex task. Understanding what regulatory requirements apply will ensure compliance as well as minimize the chance for dangerous incidents.

Deadliest chemical disaster still haunts, decades later
2024-12-03T06:00:00Z

Deadliest chemical disaster still haunts, decades later

December 2024 marks the 40th anniversary of one of history’s worst industrial incidents — the release of a deadly gas at a chemical plant in Bhopal, India. This incident, along with another in West Virginia in 1985, spurred U.S. legislative and regulatory action. However, some might say that work is not finished.

Think of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) of 1986, the EPA Risk Management Program (RMP) standard, and the OSHA Process Safety Management (PSM) standard, for example. You’ll find roots to the Bhopal disaster.

What happened in Bhopal?

It was late on December 2, 1984, at a chemical facility. A faulty valve leaked water into a tank of methyl isocyanate (or MIC). This prompted a violent reaction inside the tank. History tells us that at about 1:00 a.m. on that fateful December 3, the failure of a safety valve triggered a massive release. A dense, lethal cloud of MIC and other chemicals drifted over the city of Bhopal.

By dawn, thousands of residents were dead, along with birds, dogs, cows, and other animals. The injured flocked to hospitals in overwhelming numbers. A lack of information about just what the chemicals were, however, compounded the catastrophe.

India officials reported half a million or more chemical exposures. Estimates vary, but as many as 10,000 people perished in the initial few days. Tens of thousands died prematurely in the decades to follow, according to sources.

What happened in West Virginia?

In August 1985, a chemical release in Institute, West Virginia, showed Americans that a “Bhopal-like” incident could happen here. Aldicarb oxime and other chemicals released from the facility, and over 125 residents landed in the hospital. Again, a lack of available chemical information was noteworthy. Many U.S. citizens began to fear they faced catastrophic risks.

What happened next?

In the wake of the incidents, Congress enacted laws:

Together, they required EPA and OSHA to issue regulations to:

  • Increase community chemical emergency preparedness,
  • Require companies to report worst-case release scenarios,
  • Require companies to develop RMPs and PSM programs to protect communities and workers, respectively.

Congress also established the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) to investigate chemical incidents and recommend measures to prevent them. Despite these actions, the U.S. continues to experience serious chemical incidents. A visit to the CSB or National Response Center (NRC) websites reveals countless incident reports since 1990. A look at the 2024 data finds:

CSB video

Ten years ago, on the 30th anniversary of the Bhopal disaster, CSB posted a six-minute video explaining how the tragedy occurred. The video also examines more recent U.S. incidents. It emphasizes what more could be done to prevent similar incidents.

CSB investigations around the time of the video found deficiencies in design and PSM, similar to those uncovered in Bhopal! CSB Chairperson Rafael Moure-Eraso argued: “Process safety management regulations are in need of reform. There must be more emphasis on preventing the occurrence of major chemical accidents through safer design. Responding to emergencies and punishing people after the fact are not enough.”

Push for regulatory reform

Another headline-making incident in April 2013 involved a massive explosion of ammonium nitrate at a fertilizer storage/distribution facility in West, Texas. It fatally injured 12 volunteer firefighters and two members of the public and caused hundreds of injuries. The incident prompted the Executive Order on Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security (EO 13650) on August 1, 2013. The order directed the federal government to:

  • Improve operational coordination with state and local partners;
  • Enhance federal agency coordination and information sharing;
  • Modernize policies, regulations, and standards; and
  • Work with stakeholders to identify best practices.

The feds held listening sessions and issued a flurry of fact sheets, alerts, and enforcement policy changes (See here and here.). Note that the RMP regulation at 40 CFR 68 was eventually amended this year on March 11, 2024. The PSM standard remains unchanged, despite a request for information on December 9, 2013. In an about-face, Congress allowed the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards program (at 6 CFR 27) to expire on July 28, 2023, but many in Congress and industry would like to see its return.

Key to remember

This month marks the 40th anniversary of the Bhopal chemical disaster. It sparked the U.S. Congress to take steps back then to prevent such a disaster from occurring here. Those actions did not spell the end to all chemical disasters in the U.S. In response, a renewed push for regulatory reforms popped up in the last decade.

5 key release detection requirements for underground storage tanks
2024-11-26T06:00:00Z

5 key release detection requirements for underground storage tanks

Leak detection on an underground tank storing petroleum or other hazardous materials can be the factor that prevents a release from turning into a contamination catastrophe. A leak (or release) detection system alerts tank operators and owners of potential releases, allowing them to respond and limit contamination quickly.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires regulated underground storage tanks (USTs) to have release detection systems. Here are five things you should know about complying with UST leak detection requirements.

1. The rules cover the entire UST system.

EPA’s release detection requirements (40 CFR Part 280 Subpart D) apply to USTs and any underground piping connected to the tanks.

Owners and operators must equip each regulated UST and piping with leak detection that:

  • Detects a release from any part of the tank or its piping that routinely contains petroleum or hazardous waste;
  • Meets the manufacturer’s instructions for proper installation and calibration;
  • Follows the operation, maintenance, and testing requirements of the manufacturer’s instructions, a nationally recognized code of practice, or the implementing agency; and
  • Complies with federal performance standards.

2. Tank release detection methods depend on the installation or replacement date.

The UST’s date of installation or replacement determines the release detection methods that owners and operators can use for the tank. There are three categories of release detection methods:

  • Interstitial (e.g., secondary containment with interstitial monitoring),
  • Internal (e.g., automatic tank gauging systems), and
  • External (e.g., groundwater monitoring).

Owners and operators of USTs installed on or before April 11, 2016, choose at least one leak detection method from the range of interstitial, internal, and external options (or another method approved by the implementing agency). However, owners and operators of USTs installed or replaced after April 11, 2016, must use secondary containment with interstitial monitoring.

3. Piping release detection methods depend on two factors.

The release detection methods for piping that UST owners and operators can use are based on (a) the date of installation or replacement and (b) the type of piping.

Pressurized piping installed on or before April 11, 2016, must:

  • Have an automatic line leak detector that shuts off or restricts product flow or triggers an alarm, and
  • Receive annual line testing or monthly monitoring.

Pressurized piping installed or replaced after April 11, 2016, must also have an automatic line leak detector and use secondary containment with interstitial monitoring.

Suction piping installed on or before April 11, 2016, must use monthly monitoring or line testing every three years (unless the piping is exempt from requirements). Suction piping installed or replaced after April 11, 2016, must use secondary containment with interstitial monitoring (unless the piping is exempt from requirements).

4. Secondary containment with interstitial monitoring is the standard.

EPA revised the UST regulations in 2015, requiring all new and replaced tanks and piping to use secondary containment with interstitial monitoring for release detection. For example, say you have a UST installed before April 11, 2016, but you have to replace its piping. You must use secondary containment with interstitial monitoring for the replaced piping.

Secondary containment refers to a physical barrier between the UST and the environment, such as a double-walled tank or internally fitted liner. If the UST leaks, the barrier holds the leak between the tank and the barrier so it can be detected.

The interstitial monitor detects leaks between the tank and the barrier and alerts owners and operators of a potential leak. Monitoring devices range from physical dipsticks to high-tech pressure and liquid-detecting sensors.

5. State requirements may differ.

Many states implement the UST regulatory program. State requirements must be at least equal to EPA’s, and in some cases, they may be more stringent.

Whether you have one UST at a facility or several at facilities across the country, it’s vital to check state requirements to ensure you comply with all applicable standards.

UST release detection systems can help your facility prevent potential leaks from turning into environmental — and compliance — disasters.

Key to remember: EPA requires underground storage tanks to have release detection systems that alert owners and operators quickly to potential leaks.

See More

Most Recent Highlights In Human Resources

EPA airs interim Good Neighbor Plan rules for power plants and industrial facilities
2024-11-13T06:00:00Z

EPA airs interim Good Neighbor Plan rules for power plants and industrial facilities

Future emission requirements for certain power plants and other industrial sources across 23 states remain up in the air. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the Third Final Interim Rule for its Good Neighbor Plan (GNP) in October 2024, officially pausing the federal emissions-control program in all affected states as legal battles continue.

So, the GNP requirements are paused, but what does that mean for the facilities covered by the rule?

What’s the GNP rule? Who does it impact?

The GNP is a federal program for 23 states that requires fossil fuel-fired power plants and other industrial facilities (such as manufacturers and solid waste incinerators) to lower emissions of ozone-forming nitrogen oxides (NOx) that hinder downwind states’ ability to achieve and maintain the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

Interim GNP rules set

EPA issued the First and Second Interim Final Rules in 2023 in response to a judicial order to partially stay the agency’s disapproval of State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for implementing the NAAQS. The rules temporarily stopped enforcement of the GNP in 12 states.

In July 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order of stay for three other states challenging the GNP rule in a separate case. EPA responded to the Supreme Court with the Third Interim Final Rule. Although the Supreme Court’s order addresses only the states involved in the case, the rule pauses the GNP’s requirements for the emissions sources in all remaining 11 states.

Interim rule requirements

Until the GNP rule is settled, power plants and industrial facilities must meet the less stringent 2008 Ozone NAAQS. Two rules address interstate emissions for this standard:

  • The 2016 Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS (CSAPR), and
  • The 2021 Revised CSAPR.

Power plants

For the interim, power plants in states with previous interstate air pollution requirements for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS are subject to equivalent requirements established by the CSAPR and Revised CSAPR rules:

  • Power plants covered by the CSAPR’s NOx Ozone Season “Group 2” Trading Program before the GNP remain subject to the state emissions budgets and unit-level allowances set in the CSAPR. These include power plants in Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas. Further, power plants in Wisconsin transfer back to the Group 2 trading program.
  • Power plants covered by the Revised CSAPR’s NOx Ozone Season “Group 3” Trading Program before the GNP transfer back to the Group 2 trading program. However, the emissions budgets and unit-level allowances set in the Revised CSAPR’s Group 3 trading program apply. These affect power plants in Kentucky, Louisiana, and West Virginia.
  • Other power plants covered by the Revised CSAPR’s NOx Ozone Season “Group 3” Trading Program before the GNP transfer to the Group 2 trading program. But, the emissions budgets and unit-level allowances set in the Revised CSAPR’s Group 3 trading program apply.

The interim rules also make allowances interchangeable for power plants in some states for Group 2 trading program compliance, including Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia.

Power plants in Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas retain their banked Group 2 allowances. Also, Kentucky, Louisiana, and West Virginia may convert banked 2021–22 Group 3 allowances to Group 2 allowances.

Power plants in Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin may convert their 2021–23 Group 3 allowances to Group 2 allowances. However, EPA will recall the 2024 Group 3 allowances issued before the stay order.

Power plants in Minnesota, Nevada, and Utah weren’t covered by previous ozone NAAQS requirements, so they maintain the status quo. Additionally, California power plants aren’t subject to GNP requirements.

Industrial sources

Most of the GNP’s requirements for industrial facilities don’t begin until the start of the 2026 ozone season (May 1, 2026). EPA won’t enforce the deadlines that occur before then for procedural requirements, such as submitting optional case-by-case emissions limits requests.

What’s the future of the GNP?

For now, the future of the GNP remains unclear due to ongoing litigation. EPA’s administrative stay remains in effect until:

  • The U.S. Supreme Court lifts its stay order,
  • Other courts lift judicial stay orders for SIP disapprovals, and
  • EPA establishes rulemaking aligned with any judicial rulings on the merits of the GNP.

Plus, if a state’s judicial stay order due to SIP disapproval is lifted, the agency won’t remove the stay for the state’s emissions sources until the Supreme Court lifts its stay order.

Key to remember: EPA’s final interim rules establish temporary compliance requirements for power plants and other industrial sources while the Good Neighbor Plan remains paused.

EHS Monthly Round Up - October 2024

EHS Monthly Round Up - October 2024

In this October 2024 roundup 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. Let’s get started!

A Government Accountability Office report says OSHA can do more to protect warehouse and delivery workers from ergonomic injuries. The report recommends several steps for OSHA to consider, including ensuring compliance officers can easily obtain data on when musculoskeletal disorders occurred.

OSHA updated its inspection guidance for animal slaughtering and processing industries. Inspections will focus on several hazards, including sanitation, ergonomics, and machine guarding. Among other changes, compliance officers will conduct inspections during off-shift times and identify workplace activities that impact employees most at risk such as temporary employees.

OSHA urges workers involved in hurricane cleanup and recovery efforts to be mindful of hazards, especially those associated with restoring electricity, removing debris, and trimming trees. Proper training, experience, and familiarity with related equipment helps ensure worker safety.

And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA extended the 2024 Chemical Data Reporting deadline to November 22 due to technical difficulties with its electronic reporting tool. The 2024 report covers activities that occurred between calendar years 2020 and 2023.

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

Expert Insights: End-of-year environmental checklist
2024-11-07T06:00:00Z

Expert Insights: End-of-year environmental checklist

As the year draws to a close, it’s essential for environmental professionals to take proactive steps to ensure a smooth transition into the new year. As an environmental professional working in the industry, I always took this time to address key tasks to avoid last-minute stress and position my organization for a successful environmental compliance year. Here are a few tips and reminders for you to consider.

Verify expiration dates

It’s a good time to verify expiration dates and to ensure all permits and licenses are current and valid. Identify renewal requirements and gather necessary documentation and information for upcoming renewals. Take corrective actions to rectify any violations or deficiencies.

Get ready to report

If Tier II reporting applies to your facility, start gathering information on hazardous chemicals stored or handled on-site. The March 1 deadline will approach quickly, and you’ll want to be prepared.

Assess performance

The end of the year provides an opportunity to review and assess your organization’s environmental performance and identify areas for improvement. Use your experience throughout the year to guide you as you develop corrective action plans. Review and update emergency response plans. Verify that contact information, procedures, and equipment are up to date.

Get organized

File documents and store all environmental records in a systematic and organized manner. Consider scanning important documents to create electronic copies. Establish guidelines for retaining environmental records to comply with legal requirements.

Things can change rapidly during the year, and much-needed tasks can fall by the wayside. By carving out time at the end of the year to complete these tasks, you can set a strong foundation for a successful and compliant new year.

EPA alert clamps down on oil storage tank overfills
2024-10-28T05:00:00Z

EPA alert clamps down on oil storage tank overfills

Are your aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) engineered to avoid overfills during oil transfers? EPA issued a technical alert to highlight the importance of overfill prevention measures. Having these systems is not enough, though. They must be properly designed, operated, maintained, and inspected.

The 13-page alert (EPA 540-S-24-001) aims at owners and operators of “substantial harm oil storage facilities.” These facilities are often covered by 40 CFR 112, including both the oil Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) regulations and oil Facility Response Plan (FRP) regulations.

Implementing overfill prevention is mandated by part 112. That’s because these critical systems alert you to potential container overfills. Overfills are often the cause of oil discharges.

Overfill dangers

Overfills of large ASTs during high-volume oil transfers have led to:

  • Discharges of oil to the land, air, and waterways;
  • Fires and explosions;
  • Injuries; and
  • Damage to nearby tanks, facilities, and communities.

The alert showcases two headline-making incidents to illustrate the danger:

  • October 2009 — A 5-million-gallon AST overflowed during a routine gasoline transfer operation from a marine tanker vessel to an onshore tank farm. The aerosolized gasoline spray created a vapor cloud that ignited. This resulted in a massive explosion. The automated overfill prevention system was not operable. Other factors like open dike drain valves and inadequate nighttime lighting contributed to the extent of the incident.
  • December 2005 — An AST overfilled at an oil storage depot. This created a vapor cloud that ignited. A subsequent explosion caused multiple tank fires and loss of containment. It also damaged 22 ASTs and neighboring properties and injured 43 people. The overfill prevention mechanisms were not operable.

Overfills are preventable

Overfills can happen, but they are preventable! The alert explains that overfill prevention systems commonly used at facilities monitor liquid levels in tanks. These prevention systems include:

  • Audible or visual high-liquid-level alarms,
  • Automatic high-liquid-level pump shutoff devices,
  • Gauges with attendants, and
  • Direct communication procedures during product transfers.

The trouble is, when these systems fail, overfills can still occur. Therefore, it’s critical to take other measures. Adequate system maintenance, inspection, implementation, nighttime security lighting, training, and procedures are examples.

So, oil discharges to the environment and waterways may be prevented and/or minimized with the help of overfill prevention systems. At the same time, however, owners and operators need to implement:

  • Standardized oil handling and transfer procedures,
  • Proper operation and maintenance of dike drainage valves,
  • Routine inspection and testing procedures, and
  • Security lighting that’s maintained.

More information in the alert

EPA’s technical alert addresses adequately designed, implemented, and maintained overfill prevention systems. The alert explores:

  • EPA’s regulations,
  • Historical overfill incidents,
  • Regulatory requirements,
  • Associated standards and practices, and
  • Technical considerations to lower risks.

Thirteen references and their links are included. Two worth noting are:

If you have an SPCC- and/or FRP-regulated facility, EPA urges you to review the alert. You should also consider whether more action is needed to address these requirements at your oil storage facility.

Key to remember

EPA issued a technical alert to highlight the importance of overfill prevention measures. The agency says they must be properly designed, operated, maintained, and inspected.

TSCA Section 4 Test Orders: What are your facility’s options?
2024-10-25T05:00:00Z

TSCA Section 4 Test Orders: What are your facility’s options?

Did you know that the chemicals your facility makes and processes could be subject to additional testing requirements? Through a Section 4 Test Order under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) can require manufacturers (including importers) and processors to test and submit information on existing chemicals and mixtures through the agency’s Central Data Exchange (CDX).

For example, EPA issued the fifth TSCA Section 4 Test Order for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in October 2024. Five companies must submit information on the PFAS commonly known as 6:2 FTAc (used to manufacture plastics, resins, textiles, apparel, leather, and other chemicals), which the agency found may present an unreasonable risk of injury to human health or the environment.

How will your facility respond if it receives a TSCA Section 4 Test Order? Let’s look at the four response options.

First, submit the identification response

Entities that receive a test order must first submit an identification response within 30 days of the order’s effective date. You can identify as a manufacturer, processor, or both.

If you don’t manufacture or process the chemical or believe EPA mistakenly sent you the order, you may claim that you’re not subject to the order. Provide supporting information with the claim in the identification response.

Next, choose the initial response

Companies subject to the test order then submit an initial response to tell EPA how it will comply. There are four response options:

  • Develop and submit the information,
  • Submit information from an existing study,
  • Apply for an exemption, and
  • Join a consortium.

You can choose a different response for every test required by the order. Let’s zoom in on each option.

Option 1: Develop the information

The most straightforward response is to conduct the test(s) and generate the information. The order contains everything you need to know, including:

  • The tests required,
  • The methodologies and protocols you can use, and
  • The applicable deadlines.

Option 2: Submit existing information

Alternatively, if you believe EPA hasn’t considered relevant information, you can submit an existing study and/or other relevant information. Include a rationale document that explains how the existing information you present fulfills the test order’s requirements and which information it covers (i.e., Does it provide parts of or all the needed information?).

If EPA finds any of the existing data you submit acceptable, the agency will remove the obligations in the test order that the existing information fulfills. However, if the agency determines the existing information isn’t acceptable, you must submit a different response option within 10 days of EPA’s rejection.

Option 3: Request an exemption

EPA grants exemptions to avoid duplicating information. You may be exempt from a test order if:

  • Information on an equivalent chemical was already submitted or is being developed, or
  • Information on an equivalent chemical is being developed for a TSCA Section 4(a) rule, order, or consent agreement.

Include with your exemption application a rationale document that identifies:

  • The chemical substance subject to the order,
  • The testing requirements from which you seek exemption,
  • Which companies submitted or are developing information for an equivalent chemical substance if your exemption request relies on information generated by others,
  • The chemical identity of the equivalent substance,
  • The required equivalence data, and
  • Contact information.

You must also include a sworn statement of financial responsibility to reimburse the entity(ies) that paid the costs to submit the testing information if your exemption is granted.

Option 4: Join a consortium

EPA allows companies subject to the same test order to form a consortium to share the costs of generating the required information (including testing and fees).

To begin, inform EPA individually of the specific chemicals and tests you plan to address through a consortium. The individual designated as the lead in the consortium then submits the initial response on behalf of all entities in the group.

Organizations interested in joining a consortium must contact EPA’s TSCA Hotline by email (tsca-hotline@epa.gov) or phone call ((202) 554-1404).

Test order tips

Consider these helpful tips when choosing how to respond to a TSCA Section 4 Test Order:

  • All communications for test orders occur through EPA’s CDX system, so ensure your company has registered with CDX and assigned the appropriate roles to each user.
  • Keep a record of the automated email from CDX confirming receipt of your initial response.
  • You’ll receive a response from EPA that either:
    • Requests more information to support and/or clarify your response, or
    • Confirms receipt of a well-substantiated response requiring no further action.

Key to remember: EPA’s TSCA Section 4 Test Orders require manufacturers (including importers) and processors to develop information on existing chemicals. Companies subject to the order have four response options.

See More
New Network Poll
​What is the most effective step you take to help curb FMLA leave abuse?

​What is the most effective step you take to help curb FMLA leave abuse?


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.