Monday, September 26, 2011

What is a Toxic Organic Management Plan?

Seven federally regulated industrial categories have pretreatment standards established for total toxic organics (TTO). The term TTO is defined as the sum of specific toxic organic compounds found in the process discharge at a concentration of 0.01 mg/l (10 ppb) or more.

Categories affected by a TTO limit include:

• Electroplating (40 CFR 413),
• Metal Finishing (40 CFR 433),
• Electrical and Electronic Components (40 CFR 469),
• Metal Molding and Casting (40 CFR 464),
• Coil Coating (40 CFR 465),
• Aluminum Forming (40 CFR 467), and
• Copper Forming (40 CFR 468).

In addition to these seven categories, Pharmaceutical Manufacturing (40 CFR 439) is subject to a specific list of toxic organics with individual discharge limits.

Compliance with the pretreatment standards may be demonstrated in several different ways, including to develop and certify the implementation of a toxic organic management plan (TOMP). The TOMP details Best Management Practices or BMPs to be used to implement the general prohibitions listed in 40 CFR 403.5(a)(1) and specific prohibitions listed in 40 CFR 403.5(b). BMPs could include treatment requirements, operating procedures, and practices to control plant site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal, or drainage from raw materials storage.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EH&S compliance procedures, and preparing pollution prevention and spill control plans, including toxic organic management plans.



For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website


Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Illinois Increases Enforcement and Penalties For Illegal Dumping of Solid Wastes

On August 10, 2011, the State of Illinois passed a law that increased enforcement and fines associated with illegal dumping. The new law provides for increased penalties for dumping more than 250 cubic feet of waste or 50 waste tires, and makes it a Class 4 felony. It also increases the felony penalty for open dumping from $5,000 to $25,000.

Previously, the penalty for a first violation of the open dumping prohibition was a Class A misdemeanor, regardless of the quantity of waste dumped.


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





For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website




Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Publication of Final Hazard Communication Rule Delayed

The U.S. Department of Labor - Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) has announced that its final Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS) rule, originally scheduled for released in August 2011, has been delayed for a few weeks due to the extensive review of the final standard. The final standard is not expected to be published in September 2011. The final Hazard Communication rule is entering final Departmental review and will be sent to OMB once this review is complete

OSHA had proposed a three-year implementation period to phase in compliance with the revised hazard communication rule. During the rulemaking comment periods and at the public hearings, stakeholders submitted recommended implementation periods ranging from 3 to 15 years. OSHA has indicated that it has considered all of these comments and the implementation period will be announced when the final rule is published. However, a company may opt to classify the products now according to GHS as long as it also follows the current Hazard Communication Standard. OSHA did not propose any changes in the language requirements in the Hazard Communication Standard. However, GHS is designed to enable workers of limited literacy in the English language to understand the information.

OSHA’s preliminary estimate is that updating the Hazard Communication Standard will create a substantial annualized savings for employers of at least $585 million. The majority of these benefits will be realized through increases in productivity for health and safety managers as well as for logistics personnel.

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



For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website


Thursday, September 8, 2011

Spill Plan and Above Ground Tank Rules In Wisconsin

One of the most common questions Caltha receives from facilities in Wisconsin is “Can Wisconsin facilities self-certify their SPCC Plans?” and “Can my facility in Wisconsin use the SPCC Template format to comply with 40 CFR 112?”. The confusion regarding the self-certification of SPCC Plans in Wisconsin is due primarily to the overlapping Federal and State regulations involving aboveground storage tanks (AST).

Two rules can apply to facilities with above ground tanks, 1) Federal SPCC Rules (40 CFR 112), and 2) Wisconsin Rules on Storage of Flammable, Combustible and Hazardous Liquids (Chapter Comm 10). For any given facility, some tank systems may only be subject to SPCC Rules, some may only need to comply with Wisconsin Chapter Comm 10, and still other tanks may actually need to comply with both sets of rules.

There is a significant amount of over lap and similarity between the two rules; however, they differ in many aspects, included when a written spill plan is required and in situations where documents need to be prepared by and certified by a Wisconsin-licensed professional engineer. Whether or not a facility needs to use a PE to approve their plans will depend on a number of factors, including the size and location of their tanks, and the specific liquids being stored in them.

If you want further information on above ground tank rules and SPCC rule compliance in Wisconsin, email Caltha at info@calthacompany.com


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




For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website



Wednesday, September 7, 2011

When Is My Boiler MACT Notification Due?

In a May 18, 2011 Federal Register notice US EPA announced that it was delaying the "effective dates" relative to the Boiler MACT rule for existing sources. Some potentially affected facilities have since been inquiring if this delay mean that potentially affected facilities do not need to submit a notification of applicability by Sept. 17, 2011.

According to EPA, notifications for major sources are not due by September 17, 2011. The agency plans to complete the reconsideration proposal by the end of October 2011 and issue a revised final rule by the end of April 2012. The final rule will include revised compliance due dates, including dates by which facilities will need to submit a notification of applicability.

Notifications for area sources , which includes most smaller sources, are due by September 17, 2011.

Have questions regarding the Boiler MACT or other air emission regulations, email Caltha at info@calthacompany.com



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

For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Wednesday, August 31, 2011

Electronic GHG Reporting Tool (e-GGRT) Released

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is launching a new tool to allow 28 industrial sectors to submit their 2010 greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution data electronically. Prior to the electronic system being finalized, it was tested by more than 1,000 stakeholders, including industry associations, states and NGOs tested the electronic GHG Reporting Tool (e-GGRT) to ensure clarity and user-friendliness.

EPA expects to receive 2010 GHG data from approximately 7,000 large industrial GHG emitters and suppliers, including power plants, petroleum refineries and landfills. EPA’s GHG Reporting Program, launched in October 2009, requires the reporting of GHG data from large emission sources across a range of industry sectors. Suppliers of products that would emit GHGs if released, combusted, or oxidized are also required to report GHG data. Under this program, covered entities are required to submit GHG data to EPA annually and the first round of data will be submitted electronically by September 30, 2011. EPA plans to publish non-confidential GHG data collected through the GHGRP by the end of 2011.

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



For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website



Sunday, August 14, 2011

New EPCRA Tier I & Tier II Reporting Forms Proposed

US EPA has proposed a significant revision to the forms and types of information required to be submitted under EPCRA Tier I and Tier II. Title III of SARA (EPCRA) established authorities for emergency planning and preparedness, emergency release notification reporting, community right to-know reporting, and toxic chemical release reporting. It is intended to encourage State and local planning and preparedness for releases of extremely hazardous substances (EHSs) and to provide the public, local governments, fire departments and other emergency officials with information concerning chemical releases and the potential chemical risks in their communities.

As background, under the emergency planning provisions of EPCRA (40 CFR part 355), a facility is required to provide a one-time notification to the State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) and the local emergency planning committee (LEPC) if the facility has any EHS present at the site in excess of its threshold planning quantity (TPQ). Reporting requirements under the community right-to-know provisions, sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA are ongoing obligations. Sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA apply to owners and operators of facilities that are required to prepare or have available a material safety data sheet (MSDS) for a hazardous chemical defined under the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) Hazard Communication Standard (HCS). If the hazardous chemical is present at or above the reporting thresholds, the facility owner or operator is required to submit a MSDS to the SERC and LEPC. Under section 312 of EPCRA, if a hazardous chemical is present at or above the reporting threshold, the facility owner or operator is required to submit an emergency and hazardous chemical inventory form (Tier I or Tier II) to the SERC, LEPC and the local fire department annually by March 1.

Request information on EPCRA reporting support services provided by Caltha

The Tier I and Tier II forms were first published in 1987 and were amended in
1990. Recently, State and local agencies requested that EPA modify these forms to include new data elements and revise existing data elements to make it more useful for emergency planning and response.

What is the difference between Tier I and Tier II reporting requirements under EPCRA?

One of the important changes proposed for the EPCRA Tier I and Tier II reporting forms helps clarify how quantities of EHS chemicals were determined. In a final rule published in 2008, EPA clarified how to report a hazardous chemical mixture. The facility has to aggregate all amounts of that EHS present throughout the facility in mixtures and in pure form to determine if the reporting threshold for EHS has been met or exceeded. If the reporting threshold for that EHS is exceeded, then the facility would have an option to report the mixture or the EHS component.

The current Tier I and Tier II reporting form requires facilities to report the name of the mixture, indicate whether the mixture contains an EHS, indicate the physical and health hazards of the mixture, and report the amount present on-site, as well as the type of storage and storage locations. The regulated community and the state and local agencies, however, are unsure if the amount present on-site refers to the mixture or the non-EHS hazardous chemical or the EHS in the mixture. In order to clarify the reporting of pure chemicals vs. mixtures, the proposed Tier II form has separate entries for mixtures and pure chemicals.

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


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