Environmental Management Systems Audit Compared To Regulatory Compliance Audits

Recently, there has been an increased interest in conducting “Systems Audits” especially within businesses or agencies already familiar with “Compliance Audits”. In this article, we will compare Systems Auditing to traditional Compliance Auditing.

Compliance auditing tends to be a straight-forward process. Objective evidence is collected to determine the status of compliance relative to specific requirements. Often these will be regulatory requirements, but compliance audits can be conducted relative to company or agency policies or procedures. To conduct a compliance audit, the auditor needs to know what the specific requirements are. Based on documentation review and observations made by the auditor, compliance with these requirements is evaluated.

Compliance auditing tends to develop a “snap-shot” of compliance on the day the audit was conducted. The purpose is to determine whether or not the auditee is in compliance, and not how compliance is attained.

Systems audits extend beyond strict compliance on the day of the audit. Although compliance with requirements is an important factor in a systems audit, providing an indication of system effectiveness, auditing the process leading to compliance is just as important.

For systems audits, the auditor needs to not only understand the specific compliance requirements, but also needs to understand the system the auditee uses to attain compliance. To pass a systems audit, the auditee must be in compliance with requirements and must demonstrate that an effective system is in place and being implemented to continuously be in compliance.

Systems audits will assess the compliance assurance system, and not simply assess the status of compliance on the day of the audit. Because a systems audit requires more intimate knowledge of the systems being used by the auditee, typically a systems auditor will request more information prior to the audit, including documents such as written plans and procedures, training requirements, etc. Often, systems audits will focus on specific areas, rather than being a site-wide assessment.

Systems audits offer a clear advantage beyond compliance audits – they address the underlying processes in place to assure on-going compliance. Systems audits also require a higher level of effort by the auditor and involve a broader range of personnel at a facility.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the conducting compliance audits and environmental management systems audits, training internal auditors, and preparing cost-effective compliance management programs.

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

WI DNR Environmental Compliance Audit Program

The State of Wisconsin has extended its program to encourage regulated entities within the State to conduct environmental compliance audits and to self-report non compliance issues. The program had been scheduled to sunset on July 1, 2009.

The Environmental Compliance Audit Program (section 299.85) provides enforcement relief to public or private sector regulated facilities if they:
1) Notify the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) at least 30 days in advance of a scheduled environmental compliance audit;
2) Conduct the audit in accordance with WDNR requirements; and
3) Submit the audit report to WDNR within 45 days of completion.

If violations are found during the audit, the audit report would include a plan and schedule for corrective actions.

The WDNR would defer enforcement action for facilities that self report violations and meet their approved plan and schedule to come into compliance.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the conducting environmental compliance audits, developing compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EH&S compliance management programs.

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

State SPCC Spill Prevention Requirements vs EPA 40 CFR 112

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. States may also have State above ground storage tank rules, "permit by rule", or individual or general tank permitting requirements, which are outside the scope of the SPCC Rule.

Whether or not a site needs to prepare and implement and SPCC Plan, as defined under the SPCC Rule, 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. State requirements may still apply for facilities with less than 1,320 gallons.

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. Additional materials, which might not be regulated as oils may also need to be included to comply with individual State requirements.


• 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, the additional requirements for the individual State where the site is located, 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]

Have a question regarding SPCC Compliance? Click here to email your SPCC questions to Caltha

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

Revised SNUR Rule - EPA Amendment to TSCA

EPA is promulgating Significant New Use Rules (SNURs) under section 5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for 23 chemical substances which were the subject to premanufacture notices (PMNs). Four of these chemical substances are subject to TSCA section 5(e) consent orders issued by EPA.

The amended rules require persons who intend to manufacture, import, or process any of these 23 chemical substances for an activity that is designated as a significant new use by this rule to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing that activity. According to EPA, the notification is needed to provide EPA with the opportunity to evaluate the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit or limit that activity before it occurs.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective compliance management programs.

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

Revised Waste Management Rules for Renovation or Demolition Projects

The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has finalized waste and material removal rules that apply to all renovation or demolition projects. According to the revised Rules, the following items and materials must be removed prior to the commencement of renovation or demolition:

A. items that would normally be disposed of as mixed municipal solid waste, such as furniture, carpeting, bedding, mattresses, clothing, small appliances, food, and food waste;
B. household hazardous waste including;
F. items that may contain elemental mercury:
G. items that may contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs);
H. items that may contain chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs):
I. oils, including used oil, hydraulic oils, and oils located in heating oil tanks, piping, sumps, and traps;
J. lead-containing items, including lead-acid batteries, lead pipes, lead sheeting, lead flashing in roof vents, and lead paint that is not firmly adhered to the substrate; and
K. electronic products containing a cathode ray tube, including televisions and computers;

An exemption from this requirement exists for items or materials that are within components of the structure, such as elevators, vertical lifts, or lighting, that need to remain intact are being used during the course of renovation or demolition, provided that the items or materials are removed after use of the component is no longer required for renovation or demolition work.

If the owner, person authorizing renovation or demolition, or person conducting the renovation or demolition knows or has reason to know that portions of the structure may be contaminated by hazardous substances or petroleum based on past uses of the structure, such as a medical building, laboratory, or manufacturing facility, they must obtain appropriate samples and receive results from laboratory analysis as necessary to ensure the proper management and disposal of contaminated structural elements and any resulting debris generated.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the pre-demolition surveys, developing waste handling procedures, and preparing cost-effective waste management programs.

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

Definition of Waters of US - Proposed Revision

The "Clean Water Restoration Act", has been approved by the US Senate Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. The proposed law would clarify the scope of the Clean Water Act definition of "waters of the United States". Under the bill, waters of the US would be defined as including:

(A) all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(B) all interstate waters, including interstate wetlands;
(C) all other waters, such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds;
(D) all impoundments of waters of the United States;
(E) tributaries of the aforementioned waters;
(F) the territorial seas; and
(G) wetlands adjacent to the aforementioned waters;

The draft bill specifically excludes groundwaters from the definition of waters subject to the Clean Water Act.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation of environmental, health & safety rules, developing cost effective compliance procedures, and management programs.

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

US EPA Extends SPCC Rule Deadline

Facilities subject to Spill Prevention, Control & Countermeasure (SPCC) requirements have more time to amend their programs. On June 11, 2009, EPA again extended the compliance date for compliance with the federal "SPCC Rule". Facilities subject to the SPCC Rule now have until to November 10, 2010 to come into either amend their existing SPCC Plan or prepare an inital Plan, if they are newly subject to the Rule.

Facilities must amend or prepare, and implement SPCC Plans by the compliance date in accordance with revisions to the SPCC rule promulgated since 2002. Farms that are also subject to the Rule must also amend or prepare their SPCC Plans, and implement those Plans by the same date.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective compliance programs.

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