Safety Advisory On Transportation of Lithium Batteries

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) published a safety advisory on October 7, 2009, alerting shippers and carriers to the importance of transporting lithium batteries safely.

They issued the advisory guidance to:

• Inform persons of recent aviation incidents involving fires aboard both passenger and cargo aircraft and the potential hazards that shipments of lithium batteries may present while in transportation,
• Provide information concerning the current requirements for the transportation of lithium batteries, and
• Inform persons of the actions they have taken to date and plan to take in the future to address the hazards of these batteries.
  

The Hazardous Materials Regulations, or HMR, (49 CFR parts 171-180) include requirements for packaging, hazard communication, and handling lithium batteries. The HMR also impose additional restrictions on the transport of lithium batteries in the air mode, including a limited prohibition on the transport of lithium metal batteries as cargo on board passenger aircraft. Additionally, damaged, defective, or recalled lithium batteries (including those being returned to the manufacturer as part of a safety recall) should not be transported aboard aircraft.

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

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

Final EPA Greenhouse Gas GHG Rules - Emission Reporting

EPA has issued its final rule that mandates annual reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from several sectors of US industry. Effective Jan. 1, 2010, many US industrial facilities will have to start tracking their greenhouse gas emissions. The gas emissions that will have to be tracked include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) and others.

The EPA estimates that about 13,000 industrial facilities nationwide will be regulated under this new rule. Specific industries that will be required to track and report GHG emissions include electric power generation, cement manufacturing, glass makers, iron/steel/ferroalloy producers, lime producers, oil refiners, petrochemical processors, pulp and paper, most suppliers of industrial gases and others.

In addition, large stationary fuel combustion sources like industrial boilers, furnaces and ovens will be affected regardless of the industry in which they are used. This requirement falls only on facilities with aggregate stationary fuel combustion sources that have a total rated capacity of 30 million BTU/hr or greater and that have the potential to emit over 25,000 MTs of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) per year. However, the rule applies regardless of fuel type (coal, natural gas, propane, heating oil, residual fuel, bio-fuels, etc.).

Affected facilities will have to submit their first reports to the EPA for the calendar year 2010 by March 31, 2011 and annually thereafter. These facilities will have to come up with estimates of their GHG emissions and most will have to speciate their emissions (i.e., they cannot just group all GHGs together). EPA is expected to develop some estimating tools but these are not yet available except for certain industries. EPA is offering a series of webinars on the Rule and how to comply with it.

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

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

OSHA - Proposed Globally Harmonized System GHS for MSDS

OSHA has proposed to modify its existing Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) to conform with the United Nations’ (UN) Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). The Agency anticipates this improved information will enhance the effectiveness of the HCS in ensuring that employees are apprised of the chemical hazards to which they may be exposed, and in reducing the incidence of chemical-related occupational illnesses and injuries.

The proposed modifications to the standard include:

• revised criteria for classification of chemical hazards;
• revised labeling provisions that include requirements for use of standardized signal words, pictograms, hazard statements, and precautionary statements;
• a specified format for safety data sheets; and related revisions to definitions of terms used in the standard, requirements for employee training on labels and safety data sheets.

OSHA is also proposing to modify provisions of a number of other standards, including standards for flammable and combustible liquids, process safety management, and most substance-specific health standards, to ensure consistency with the modified HCS requirements.

Written comments by December 29, 2009.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation hazardous material hazards, developing handling procedures, and preparing cost-effective waste management programs.

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

Wastewater Discharges From Power Plants - New Rules Planned

The U.S. EPA has announced plans to revise the existing standards for water discharges from coal-fired power plants. Earlier this year, EPA completed a multi-year study of power plant wastewater discharges. This study concluded that current regulations, which were issued in 1982, have not kept pace with changes that have occurred in the electric power industry over the last three decades. As part of the multi-year study, EPA measured the pollutants present in the wastewater and reviewed treatment technologies, focusing mostly on coal-fired power plants. Many of the toxic pollutants discharged from these power plants come from coal ash ponds and the flue gas desulfurization systems used to scrub sulfur dioxide from air emissions.

Once the new rules for electric power plants is finalized, EPA and States would incorporate the new standards into wastewater discharge permits.

Caltha LLP provides expert consulting services to public and private sector clients nationwide to address water quality standards, wastewater permitting and assessing potential impacts of chemicals in the aquatic environment.

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

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