IDNR Antidegradation Rules - Extension of Comment Period on Proposed Revision

The Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has extended the public comment period on the proposed antidegradation rules to March 4. The antidegradation policy, required by Iowa law, would set minimum requirements for the conservation, maintenance and protection of water quality and existing uses of surface waters.

Antidegradation policy is one of the three components of water quality standards - 1) designated uses, 2) water quality criteria to protect those uses, and 3) antidegradation policy). The DNR is proposing a four-tiered approach, including creating a guidance document that establishes procedures for implementing the antidegradation policy.

The changes being proposed include the following:

1. Incorporate by reference the document entitled “Iowa Antidegradation Implementation Procedure,” which proposes an approach to be followed in assessing and minimizing degradation of Iowa’s surface waters


2. Update antidegradation policy language with four tier approach, and


3. Remove High Quality (Class HQ) and High Quality Resource (Class HQR) designated uses and add several waters to the newly proposed Outstanding Iowa Water (OIW) category.
   
   

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation and use of ambient water quality criteria, site-specific water quality standards, and permit limits. Caltha staff have prepared national Ambient Water Quality Criteria for US EPA and provide expert resources for permittees and/or their technical consultants as they address State and Federal water quality standards.

[Click here to request further information on water quality standards technical support.]

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Regional Low Carbon Fuel Standard - LCFS Initiative For 11 States

Eleven Northeast and Mid-Atlantic States have committed to developing a regional Low Carbon Fuel Standard in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from fuels for vehicles and other uses. These States will work together to create a common fuel standard that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions on a technology-neutral basis.

The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), as defined in the Letter of Intent for the initiative, is a market-based, technologically neutral policy to address the carbon content of fuels by requiring reductions in the average lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions per unit of useful energy. A LCFS could apply to transportation fuels, and also to fuels used for heating buildings, for industrial processes, and for electricity generation.

The participating States commit to an effort to analyze low carbon fuel supply options and develop a framework for a regional LCFS in the Northeast-Mid-Atlantic region. These States also agree to draft a Memorandum of Understanding concerning the development of a regional low carbon fuel standard program, to be forwarded for consideration by the governors of the States by December 31, 2009, or as soon thereafter as possible.


For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Maximum Residue Levels MRL for Pesticides - New EU Rules

Recently, new European Union (EU) rules setting enforceable Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) for pesticides came into force (Regulation No 396 / 2005). Rules set Maximum Residue Concentrations (MRL) for a wide range of pesticide in a variety of agricultural products. The MRLs are listed in a publicly available database. A European Commission database is now available to search for the MRL applicable to each crop and pesticide.

Caltha LLP assists companies in meeting various product stewardship requirements and meeting regulatory standards. Caltha staff provide specialized expertise in the assessment of chemicals, including agrichemicals, in the environment.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Water Quality Standards - Effluent Limits vs Permit Limits

The “standards” that can be applied to wastewater discharges, or any discharge regulated under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit in a number of different ways, and can be applied differently to different types of discharges. Three types of standards which are often confusing to permittees are 1) water quality standards, 2) effluent limits, and 3) permit limits. Here we provide a brief description to highlight some of the differences between these three types of standards and how they might interact.

Water Quality Standards
Water quality standards (also known as ambient water quality criteria) are specific standards set by States and apply to the quality of surface waters – lakes, rivers, streams, etc. Ideally, these standards reflect the highest concentration of a chemical that can be present in a given water body that will still allow it to meet its designated uses.

Effluent Limits
Effluent limits (sometimes called categorical standards, or categorical effluent limits) are standards that apply to the quality of wastewater discharges from a specific “category” of industry-type. These limits apply to all dischargers within that category, no matter where they discharge to.

Permit Limits
Permit limits are specific standards that apply to a given permittee and show up in their NPDES permit. They can reflect Effluent Limits that might apply to that permittee, if they are a categorical discharger. The permit limits will also reflect limits on specific chemicals that are needed to meet the water quality standards associated with the receiving water(sometimes refered to as "water quality-based effluent limits" or WQBEL). This does not mean that the discharger will be allowed a discharge that will begin the receiving water up to its Water Quality Standard. State Antidegradation Policies may require limits on specific chemicals that are well below their Water Quality Standards in the receiving water.

[Read more about Antidegradation Policies]


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation and use of ambient water quality criteria, site-specific water quality standards, and permit limits. Caltha staff have prepared national Ambient Water Quality Criteria for US EPA and provide expert resources for permittees and/or their technical consultants as they address State and Federal water quality standards.

Caltha LLP Aquatic Toxicology - Water Quality Standards Webpage


[Click here to request further information on water quality standards technical support.]


For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Water Effect Ratio and Ambient Water Quality Criteria

The water effect ratio (WER) is defined as the ratio of the toxicity of a chemical in site water to the toxicity of the same chemical in standard laboratory water. Because standard laboratory water would have been used to generate toxicity data used to calculate State or Federal Water Quality Criterion, a WER which is greater than or less than 1 would infer that the chemical would be more or less toxic in site water. Therefore, the ambient water quality standard might be adjusted to meet the same aquatic life protection goals. The water effect ratio is developed to compensate for site-specific biogeochemical factors such as hardness, alkalinity, organic carbon, etc. which can influence the bioavailability and toxicity of chemical.

In practice, WER are often used to generate site-specific water quality standards that are higher than State or Federal standards.

The process of generating and using WER in the NPDES permitting process requires close coordination with the permitting agency. Work to prepare acceptable WER may require water quality monitoring and laboratory toxicity tests. NPDES permits issued using a WER may also include additional receiving water monitoring requirements.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation and use of WER, and site-specific water quality standards. Caltha staff have prepared National Ambient Water Quality Criteria for US EPA and provide an expert resource for permittees and/or their technical consultants as they address State and Federal water quality standards.

[Click here to request further information on water quality standards technical support.]

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

EPCRA 311-312 Reporting For Fuels – Conditional Exemptions

Do facilities need to report fuels stored on-site under EPCRA 311 and 312?

In most cases, fuels must be considered under EPCRA 311 and 312, and must be reported on Tier I or Tier II forms if the maximum inventory during the reporting year exceeds the EPCRA reporting threshold of 10,000 pounds.

There are some limited exceptions for fuel storage. However, these apply only to retail establishments and only to storage in underground storage tanks (USTs). For such facilities, the condition exemption applies only to two fuel types:

• For gasoline at a retail gas station, the threshold level is 75,000 gallons, if storage meets some specific conditions
• For diesel fuel at a retail gas station, the threshold level is 100,000 gallons, again if storage meets some specific conditions.

Caltha LLP provides expert regulatory support to clients nationwide. Click here to request further information on State EPCRA Tier II reporting services.

For further information contact Caltha LLP atinfo@calthacompany.com
orCaltha LLP Website

Ohio Water Quality Standards - Antidegradation Rule Revision

The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) is currently in the process of revising State Rules relating to Water Quality Standards and Antidegradation (Non-Degradation) Rules. The draft Rules are being published independently; however, because all the Rules are interrelated, OEPA has extended the public comment period.

The draft Rules applying to Antidegradation were released for comment near the end of 2008. Some of the key revisions being proposed include:

• The definition of “best available demonstrated control technology” (BADCT) is being updated to include new design criteria and effluent limits for nitrogen and phosphorus.
• Definitions for “designated uses”, “existing uses”, and “threatened species” are being removed since these definitions are located in the Water Quality Standards Rule.
• Definitions for “local and regional drainage pattern”, “loss of use”, “preferred alternative”, and “40 C.F.R.” are being added.
• The types of alternatives to be considered under the definitions for “minimal degradation alternative” and “non-degradation alternative” are being clarified.
• The definition of “regulated pollutant” is being revised to clarify that parameters include narrative and numeric water quality criteria and those limited by best professional judgment in a NPDES permit.
• The rule exemption in paragraph for net increases from existing sources is being clarified.
  Applications for Section 401 water quality certifications for wetlands will be exempt from the submital of alternatives analysis and social and economic justification information
• Section 401 water quality certifications impacting Lake Erie or its shoreline will be exempt from the mandatory public hearing
• New language is included regarding what constitutes the loss of a beneficial use.
• The set aside revision process for special high quality waters in is being clarified.
• The tables of special high quality waters are being updated.

The deadline for comments on the draft rule has not been determined yet. A draft rule addressing mitigation requirements or impacts on streams will be made available for review and comment in early 2009. Because the content of that rule relates to part of the antidegradation rule, the comment deadline for both rules will be 60 days after the stream mitigation rule is made available.

Caltha LLP provides expert technical support to clients nationwide to address State water quality standards. Caltha provides specialized expertise in biomonitoring, aquatic toxicology and impacts to aquatic communities.

[Click here to request further information on water quality standards technical support.]

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Florida Nutrient Criteria – EPA Requires Quantitative Water Quality Criteria

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently announced that the agency is taking actions to develop the required Nutrient Water Quality Criteria within the State of Florida. These actions include EPA issuing a formal determination under the Clean Water Act that “numeric” nutrient water quality criteria are necessary in Florida, and concluding the State needs to accelerate its efforts to adopt numeric nutrient criteria.

Florida’s 2008 Integrated Water Quality Assessment estimated that at least 1,000 miles of rivers and streams, 350,000 acres of lakes, and 900 square miles of estuaries are impaired by nutrients. The new numeric nutrient water quality standards will help the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its water quality management tools, identify waters impaired because of nutrient pollution, establish total maximum daily loads and Basin Management Action Plans, and derive National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit limits.

EPA expects to propose numeric nutrient standards for lakes and flowing waters within 12 months, and for estuaries and coastal waters within 24 months.

Caltha LLP provides expert technical support to clients nationwide to address State water quality standards. Caltha provides specialized expertise in biomonitoring, aquatic toxicology and impacts to aquatic communities.

[Click here to request further information on water quality and aquatic community impact assessment]

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Toxic Release Inventory Reports - Change for Auxilary Facilities

In 2007, EPA issued a final rule requiring that facilities reporting under Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), commonly called the toxics release inventory (TRI), identify the nature of their business by using North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes. Beginning with reports submitted 2007, NAICS codes replaced Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes that have been in use since TRI was initiated in 1987.

Both the SIC and NAICS systems were developed to organize and track information the US economy. The basic difference in approach to the two systems is that the SIC system classifies establishments based on their economic output (i.e, what they produce or provide), and the NAICS classifies establishments according to the processes used to produce goods and services (i.e., what they do). With one exception, the switch to NAICS did not affect facilities already required to report under TRI. No industry groups were added to or deleted from the list as a result of the change.

The exception involves businesses classified as "auxiliary facilities" which, under SIC, are those facilities that provide support functions for a manufacturing activity. For example, a distribution center operated by a paper products manufacturer was assigned the same SIC code as the manufacturing operation it supported. Under NAICS, the same distribution center would be assigned a code reflecting the warehousing and logistics operations.

Auxiliary facilities traditionally reported to TRI using the SIC code of the establishment they supported. NAICS did not adopt the SIC concept of auxiliary establishments. Under NAICS, these facilities now report their TRI according to their own activities.

Caltha LLP is a professional EH&S consulting firm providing expert support to facilities nationwide in the development and implementation of cost effective regulatory compliance programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

ODEQ Biomonitoring – Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Changes

The Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) is proposing to modify its rules concerning biomonitoring (whole effluent toxicity, or WET) requirements for wastewater dischargers. Under the proposed rules, a sublethal test failure (failure to demonstrate growth or reproduction) will be handled the same as a lethal test failure (death to the test organisms). This change is required based on changes in US EPA requirements and has already been promulgated into Oklahoma’s Water Quality Standards. Additionally, the proposed rule modifications further refine when a facility may request a biomonitoring organism change from Daphnia pulex or Ceriodaphnia dubia to Daphnia magna. Finally, the proposed rule modifications would require monthly monitoring for phosphorus and/or nitrogen if a facility is discharging to a nutrient limited watershed as designated by Oklahoma’s Water Quality Standards.

Caltha LLP provides expert technical support to clients nationwide to address State water quality standards. Caltha provides specialized expertise in biomonitoring, aquatic toxicology and impacts to aquatic communities.

[Click here to request further information on aquatic toxicology and aquatic community impact assessment]

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Do I Need an SPCC Plan? SPCC Threshold Criteria Overview

The requirement for a formal Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan comes from a federal regulation - 40 CFR 112 ("SPCC Rule"). Certain States may have their own requirements for spill prevention and response, which are in addition to the SPCC Rule.

Whether or not a site needs to prepare and implement and SPCC Plan will depend on oil storage capacity at the site. If the capacity to storage oils exceeds 1,320 gallons, then an SPCC Plan may be required.

Some key considerations include:

• Oils regulated are not limited to petroleum and fuels - other types of oils, including food oils, hydraulic fluids, etc. may be regulated under SPCC Rules.


• All containers greater than 55-gallons need to be included (which includes 55-gal drum containers)


• Although underground storage tanks may be excluded, the types of oil storage goes well beyond fixed abovegound storage tanks; containers regulated under SPCC Rules can include oil-filled equipment (e.g., gear boxes, reservoirs), oil-filled electrical equipment, and mobile tanks.

Compliance with SPCC Rules begins with careful consideration of 40 CFR 112, and an in-depth inventory of regulated materials and containers.

[Read more about recent changes to SPCC Rules]

[Read more about State-specific SPCC Plan Templates]

Caltha LLP provides expert technical support to clients nationwide needing to comply with SPCC Rules and State spill prevention and response planning requirements.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

EPA Air Quality Index AQI for PM2.5 - New Significant Harm Level

On January 15, 2009 EPA proposed to revise its Air Quality Index (AQI) to update the values States use to report daily concentrations for fine particle matter (also known as PM2.5) to reflect changes to the fine particle standard made in 2006. The Agency also proposed to set a “significant harm level” (SHL) equal to the proposed AQI value of 500.

The AQI is EPA’s color-coded tool for communicating air quality to the public; values range from 0 to 500. The higher the AQI value, the greater the level of air pollution and the greater the health concern.

The proposed changes to AQI values include:

• Setting a PM2.5 AQI value of 100 (anything above 100 is unhealthy for sensitive groups) at 35 ug/m3, which is equal to the 24-hour PM2.5 standard.
• Setting an AQI of 150 (above 150 is unhealthy) would be set at 55 ug/m3
• The proposed rule would retain the current AQI values of 200, 300, 400 and 500 at their current levels.

EPA also is proposing to set a Significant Harm Level (SHL) for PM2.5 equal to the proposed AQI value of 500, which is 500 ug/m3. An SHL is a factor used in designing air pollution Emergency Episode Plans, which are required for certain areas of the country. These plans are used to establish procedures for delivering timely information to citizens potentially affected by elevated PM2.5 levels, and to curtail emissions from sources in the area that are potentially contributing to harmful PM2.5 levels.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Universal Waste Rule - Pharmaceutical Wastes and Take-back Programs

EPA has proposing to add hazardous pharmaceutical wastes to the Universal Waste Rule. The Universal Waste Rule, originally promulgated in 1995, modified hazardous waste regulations by establishing a set of streamlined requirements for the collection of certain widely dispersed hazardous wastes, called "universal wastes''. EPA expects that the proposed rule would facilitate better management of pharmaceutical wastes by streamlining the generator requirements and encouraging generators of hazardous pharmaceutical wastes to manage them under the provisions of the Universal Waste Rule. This Rule ensures that hazardous pharmaceutical wastes are properly disposed of and treated as hazardous wastes.

In addition, this proposed rule would facilitate the implementation of pharmaceutical take-back programs by removing RCRA barriers in the collection of pharmaceutical wastes from health care and other such regulated facilities, as well as facilitate the collection of pharmaceutical wastes from households, including non-hazardous pharmaceutical wastes.

Caltha LLP assists waste generators in developing cost effective waste management procedures that meet State and Federal waste management Rules.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Omnibus Amendments to Hazardous Waste Rules in Oregon

The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is proposing a number of revisions to the State hazardous waste rules. The revisions relate to a number of different aspects of hazardous waste rules and are being proposed in a single “2009 Hazardous Waste Omnibus Rulemaking”.

The revisions being proposed include:

• Amendments to Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) requiring macroencapsulation as treatment standard for certain contaminated mixed wastes, rather than retorting;
• Technical revisions to Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) for Hazardous Waste Combustors;
• Revision to rules related to identification and listing of hazardous waste, including Recycled Used Oil Management Standards;
• Instituting National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks ;
• Conditionally lists new K181 waste stream for non-wastewaters from production of dyes, pigments, and food, drug and cosmetic colorants;
• Modifies the hazardous waste manifest system;
• Amends testing and monitoring activities allowing for analytical methods other than SW-846 to be used under RCRA and CAA
• Expands Universal Waste listing for mercury-containing equipment to include mercury-containing barometers, manometers, switches and other equipment;
• Revises Wastewater Treatment Exemptions for Hazardous Waste Mixtures (“Headworks exemptions”);
• Shifts regulation of HAPs from Hazardous Waste Combustors to CAA authorities.;
• Reduces certifications, monitoring, and reporting under RCRA, including reduction of tank inspection frequency; option for TSDs of following the integrated contingency plan guidance; and option for TSDs to follow either RCRA or OSHA standards for emergency response training; and
• Modifies the Hazardous Waste Program to exempt used, intact CRTs from the definition of solid waste, and conditionally excludes used, broken CRTs and glass removed from CRTs from the definition of solid waste.
  
  

Caltha LLP assists waste generators in developing cost effective waste management procedures that meet State and Federal waste management Rules.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

EPCRA 311 - 312 Reporting - Recent Changes To Reporting Requirements

In November 2008, US EPA published a revision to rules under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) Sections 311 and 312. These revisions may affect reporting for some facilities in 2009.

The key revisions included the following:

• Clarification on acceptable calculation methods for mixtures containing EPCRA chemicals to determine if reporting thresholds are exceeded;


• Defining the time allowed to report changes at the facility relevant to EPCRA chemicals to appropriate agencies. This includes notifying that the facility is no longer in operation, then new extremely hazardous substances (EHSs) are present at the facility, if EHSs are moved to a different location at the facility, if EHSs are no longer present at the facility, and other changes relevant to emergency planning.

For more information, refer to:

Regulatory Briefing - Revision to EPCRA Reporting Requirements

Caltha LLP provides expert technical support to facilities to meet their EPCRA and CERCLA reporting requirements, including EPCRA 311, EPCRA 312 and EPCRA 313 reporting.


For further information contact Caltha LLP atinfo@calthacompany.com
orCaltha LLP Website

EPCRA - CERCLA Reporting - Changes to Hazardous Substance Release Reporting

Effective January 20, 2009, US EPA is providing an administrative reporting exemption that applies to certain releases of hazardous substances from farm operations. The exemption applies to releases of hazardous substances to the air from animal waste at farms. The final rule reduces the burden of complying with Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) reporting requirements for the affected farms.

The final rule does not change the notification requirements if hazardous substances are released to the air from any source other than animal waste at farms (e.g., ammonia tanks), or if any hazardous substances from animal waste are released to any other environmental media, (e.g., soil, ground water, or surface water) when the release of those hazardous substances is at or above its reportable quantity.

Ammonia and hydrogen sulfide are the most common hazardous substances that are emitted from animal waste. Ammonia is a by-product of the breakdown of urea and proteins that are contained in animal waste, while hydrogen sulfide is another by-product of the breakdown of animal waste under anaerobic conditions. However, other hazardous substances, such as nitrogen oxide and certain volatile organic compounds may also be released from animal waste. This rule extends the administrative reporting exemption to all hazardous substances emitted to the air from animal waste at farms.

Caltha LLP assists facilities regulated under CERCLA and EPCRA in meeting their reporting requirements, including EPCRA 311 – EPCRA 312 reporting of releases of hazardous substances.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Regulatory Compliance and ISO 14001 - Are They Equivalent?

“A manufacturing facility has worked for nearly two years to develop programs and procedures to become ISO 14001 registered. At the end of a three-day registration audit they gain registration under ISO 14001 through a well respected third-party registrar.

The following month, the facility is subject to a routine compliance audit directed by its corporate EH&S Department. The audit identifies numerous deficiencies and findings in the facility’s compliance with environmental regulations.”

The obvious question asked by plant management is "does ISO 14001 registration have any relationship to compliance with environmental regulations"?

The answer is certainly yes, however it can not be assumed that simply because a facility is ISO 14001 registered it is also in compliance with applicable regulations.

In the example described above, the compliance audit is actually part of the environmental management system (EMS), not an independent measure of the effectiveness of the EMS. An ISO 14001 compliant EMS requires that the organization periodically assess its compliance with applicable regulations. The key measure of the effectiveness of the EMS is how the corrective actions are addressed once a compliance issue was identified, and were corrective actions effective.

If similar compliance issues continue to be identified during subsequent audits, there may be a breakdown of the EMS that needs to be addressed. However, the organization should not be surprised if compliance issues are identified during audits moving forward. Overall, by assessing compliance and responding appropriately, the organization will be on track to continuously improve of its EMS.

Caltha LLP provides expert technical assistance to organizations wanting to become registered under ISO 14001 or to improve their EMS. For more information go to ISO 14001 and Environmental Management Systems Services website.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

SPCC Template Plan - Revised SPCC Rule 40 CFR 112

Effective February 3, 2009, US EPA streamlined SPCC Rule (40 CFR 112) becomes effective. The amended rule tailored the SPCC requirements for a subset of qualified facilities. Now the owner or operator of a qualified facility has the option to self-certify their SPCC Plan and comply with other streamlined requirements.

This final rule designates a subset of qualified facilities (“Tier I qualified facilities”) as those that meet the current criteria to self-certify their SPCC Plan and that have no oil storage containers with an individual aboveground storage capacity greater than 5,000 gallons. A Tier I qualified facility has the option to complete a self-certified SPCC Plan template instead of a full SPCC Plan. By completing the SPCC Plan template, an owner or operator of the facility will certify that the facility complies with a set of streamlined SPCC rule requirements. All other qualified facilities will be designated “Tier II qualified facilities.”

For more information on Caltha LLP SWPPP services, go to the Environmental Health & Safety Plan | Spill Plan Information Request Form.