Rules On Disposal Of Aerosols, Antifreeze, Paint Wastes In Ohio

The Ohio EPA adopted Ohio-specific universal waste rules allowing hazardous non-empty aerosol containers, hazardous antifreeze, hazardous paint and hazardous paint-related wastes to be classified and managed as a universal waste in Ohio. The rules will be effective on December 21, 2017. These rules will eventually be moved to Ohio Administrative Code chapter 3745-273.

This action designating waste that would otherwise be classified as hazardous waste as a universal waste promotes proper handling, recycling or disposal of the waste by streamlining the applicable regulations. The new Ohio-specific universal wastes will be subject to specific requirements detailed in the rule to address the risks the wastes may pose. The requirements include:

• labeling,
• tank and container standards,
• limited treatment provisions,
• accumulation time limits,
• employee training requirements,
• emergency response requirements and
• transportation according to U.S. Department of Transportation rules.

Universal wastes do not count towards a generator’s monthly hazardous waste accumulation rate and they are not required to manifested as a hazardous waste in Ohio EPA or reported on the generator’s hazardous waste biennial report.

Click here to review other regulatory updates for Ohio

Certified Environmental Health and Safety Audit Services

Caltha LLP provides IAA-BEAC certified auditors to perform internal EH&S audits to support ISO 14001 registered organizations or to support routine internal audit programs implemented as part of an overall governance system. Caltha can provide:

• Single auditors to support audit teams as a media or regulatory expert,
• Audit teams to address multiple program areas, or
• Due diligence auditors / audit teams.

Caltha auditors can act as adjunct auditors to augment your existing internal audit team, or can act as an independent third party auditor.


Caltha auditors have conducted assessments in all 50 US States, Canada, Mexico, South America, Europe and Asia.


Click here for more information on Caltha Compliance Audit, Management System Audit and Due Diligence Assessment services

EPA Proposes Review of SIPs For SSM Requirements

The EPA is proposing to take action on a petition for rulemaking filed by the Sierra Club in 2011 concerning the treatment of excess emissions in state rules by sources during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction (SSM). EPA is proposing to grant in part and to deny in part the request to rescind its policy interpreting the Clean Air Act (CAA) to allow states to have appropriately drawn state implementation plan (SIP) provisions that provide affirmative defenses to monetary penalties for violations during periods of SSM. The EPA is also proposing either to grant or to deny the Petition regarding existing SIP provisions related to SSM in each of 39 states identified in the petition.

For each of those states where EPA proposes to grant the petition concerning specific provisions, EPA also is proposing to find that the existing SIP provision is substantially inadequate to meet CAA requirements and proposes a "SIP call." For those affected states EPA will require the states to submit a corrective SIP revision. Comments on the proposed actions must be received on or before March 25, 2013.

Through this rulemaking, EPA intends to clarify its interpretation of the CAA regarding excess emissions during SSM events. EPA may find specific SIP provisions to be substantially inadequate to meet CAA requirements; if a state's existing SIP provision allows an automatic exemption for excess emissions during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction, then the EPA may determine that the SIP provision is substantially inadequate because the provision is inconsistent with requirements of the CAA.
The affected States include:

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
Colorado
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wyoming

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs. For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Ohio Revises Rules For Underground Storage Tanks

Ohio has changed its underground storage tank regulations to align with federal rules.Under Ohio Rule OAC 1301-7-9-06, all new UST Systems must have secondary containment. Previously, only UST Systems in sensitive areas had to secondary containment. Further, when the cumulative replacement of an existing UST system exceeds 50%, then the entire system must have secondary containment. When new dispensers are installed or when existing dispensers are repaired and did not have containment pans under the dispenser, containment must be then installed under the dispenser.

Under Rule OAC 1301-7-9-19, by August 8, 2012, Owners and operators had to designate, train and document the training of Class A, B and C operators. This training was for operators of UST systems and is in addition to the licensure requirements for UST installers. Licensed UST installers automatically qualify as Class A operators.

Class A Operators have the primary responsibility for achieving and maintaining compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements and standards necessary to operate and maintain the UST system at one or more UST Sites. Class B Operators have the primary responsibility for implementing applicable requirements and standards for UST systems at one or more UST sites. Class A and B Operators have to undergo training from a state Fire Marshal approved trainer using formats approved by the state.

Class C operators (often being at least one attendant at the facility during working hours) are responsible for the initial response to alarms and other indications of emergencies caused by spills or releases from a UST system and for notifying the Class A or Class B Operators or emergency response personnel of the same. Class C operators may be trained by Class A or Class B operators using formats approved by the state.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs. For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website