Call: 800.246.9021
Client Alerts
Hazardous Chemical Reporting: Revisions to the Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory Forms (Tier I and Tier II)
40 CFR Part 370
Effective January 1, 2014, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will revise the Tier I and Tier II Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory Forms by adding some mandatory data elements and some optional data elements in the facility identification and contact information sections of both forms. This final rule will also revise some existing data elements in the chemical reporting section of the Tier II inventory form.
Specifically, the following mandatory and optional fields will be added to the forms:
- Facility phone number (optional)
- Latitude and longitude
- Maximum number of occupants that may be present at the facility at any one time, instead of number of full-time employees
- Facility identification numbers assigned under the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) and the risk management program
- Whether the storage location of the hazardous chemicals is manned or unmanned
- Contact information for the facility emergency coordinator
- Tier I and Tier II contact information
- Email addresses of the owner or operator and emergency contact(s).
- Emergency coordinator contact information for facilities subject to EPCRA section 302
- Parent company information (optional)
- Separate data fields for reporting pure chemical and mixtures in the chemical reporting section of the Tier II inventory form
- A description for the storage types and conditions, rather than reporting codes
This rule will also add data elements to indicate if the facility is subject to EPCRA section 302 and if the facility is subject to Clean Air Act (CAA) section 112(r), also known as the Risk Management Program. Page one of the revised Tier II inventory form will also include the table of range codes and amounts for reporting maximum amount and average daily amount.
Additionally, this rule will revise the Tier II inventory form for facilities to report any additional state or local reporting requirements or to voluntarily report hazardous chemicals below the reporting thresholds.
EPA Issues Long-Anticipated Bulk Product Waste Reinterpretation
Do you own a commercial building? If so, you may be interested in a recent EPA Memorandum entitled PCB Bulk Product Waste Reinterpretation that was issued on October 24, 2012 and posted on EPA’s website at http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/tsd/pcbs/pubs/caulk/reinterpret.htm.
This reinterpretation now allows certain contaminated building materials to be managed and disposed of as a PCB bulk product waste, provided that the substrate material is removed at the same time as the original source PCB bulk product waste. These contaminated building materials include those containing PCBs at a concentration greater than one part-per-million resulting from contact with a greater than 50 part-per-million PCB bulk product waste (i.e. a caulk).
By making this change, EPA is allowing for cleanups of PCB building-related source materials to proceed in a more efficient and cost effective manner, in most cases, without unnecessary delays. The focus on PCB caulk testing was originally in school buildings, but in recent years this issue has emerged as one for commercial buildings, particularly in the New England states that are overseen by EPA Region I. This issue typically comes up for sites where renovations and/or demolitions are proposed for buildings constructed or renovated between circa 1950 and 1980, and the owner wishes to appropriately characterize and manage wastes that will be generated.
For more information or to discuss how this reinterpretation may affect you, please contact Steve Brown, PG, LEP, Senior Project Manager at 860-674-9570.
Are There Chemical Hazards in Your Workplace?
The Globally Harmonized System (GHS) Regulation Prevails
The Massachusetts Right to Know (RTK) Law became effective in 1984. The workplace portion of the law requires that information on chemical hazards be given to all state, county, and municipal employees. The state must provide employees with access to Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), label containers of chemicals, and train on chemical hazards and safe work procedures.
Although OSHA regulates the private sector in Massachusetts, changes have occurred that will affect anyone subject to the Massachusetts RTK Law. In March, OSHA announced that it had adopted the new Globally Harmonized System (GHS), thereby aligning OSHA’s Hazard Communication standard with the United Nations’ GHS of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS standards).
What this regulatory change means to you is that there will be alterations to:
- The format of Material Safety Data Sheets (now called Safety Data Sheets)
- The types of labels on chemical containers (the use of pictograms) to depict hazards
- The content of Safety Data Sheets, especially those associated with new hazard descriptions
To learn more about how HRP can meet your training needs and support your environmental health and safety objectives, contact: Jeff Sotek at 855-866-3934 x 101.
PA DEP Implements Improved Policy for Reviewing/Processing Department Permits
Effective November 2, 2012 the Pennsylvania DEP began implementing a new policy that establishes a standardized review process and processing times for all Department permits. For the permits contained in the Permit Decision Guarantee, the DEP guarantees to provide permit decisions within the published time frames, provided applicants submit complete, technically adequate applications that address all applicable regulatory and statutory requirements in the first submission. DEP staff will follow a Department-wide standard process for receiving, prioritizing, accepting, reviewing, denying, and approving applications for permits or other authorizations.
The purpose is to establish a standard process for permit application reviews that:
- Provides certain and predictable review time frames for applicants who submit complete, technically adequate applications that address all applicable regulatory and statutory requirements;
- articulates clearly and concisely expectations for applicants that result in complete, technically adequate applications that address all applicable regulatory and statutory requirements;
- establishes expectations for Department staff aimed at achieving greater efficiency, clarity and consistency across regions and programs;
- improves the Department’s internal tracking and coordination of permit applications; and
- rescinds and replaces the Policy for Implementing the DEP Money-Back Guarantee Permit Review Process 013-2000-001, as amended
You may click this link to review DEP’s list of Frequently Asked Questions regarding this policy: http://files.dep.state.pa.us/LicensingPermitsCertification/PermitDecisionGuaranteePortalFiles/External_FAQ_update_0928.pdf
If you would like more information on this policy or would like to speak with someone regarding your environmental requirements, please contact Scott Durnin at 717-945-6084.
How Certain Is FR?
USEPA’s Quest to Follow That Star
A Message from Carolyn Hoskinson Director, USEPA’s Office of Underground Storage Tanks
Article courtesy of New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission (NEIWPCC)
Few people find underground storage tank (UST) financial responsibility (FR) a fascinating discussion topic. There are so few, in fact, that I think we all know each other. Yet, I’d be hard pressed to think of a subject more essential to a successful leaking underground storage tank (LUST) program than ensuring there are resources available to pay for cleanups. Fortunately, the UST program’s founding fathers recognized the importance of financial responsibility. In the mid-1980s, lawmakers amended Subtitle I of the Solid Waste Disposal Act and directed the U.S. Environmental Pro¬tection Agency (USEPA) to develop financial responsibility regulations for UST owners and operators. Congress wanted UST owners and operators to be able to show that they have the financial resources to clean up a site if a release occurs, correct environmental damage, and compensate third parties for injury to their property or themselves. In 1988, USEPA pro¬mulgated the final UST FR regulation.
Like most aspects of the tanks program, the federal FR regulation provides UST owners and operators with compli¬ance options such as obtaining insurance coverage; dem¬onstrating self-insurance using a financial test; obtaining corporate guarantees, surety bonds, or letters of credit; or relying on state financial assurance funds (a.k.a. state funds), as well as a host of options for local governments.
Currently, UST owners primarily use insurance or state funds as their financial responsibility mechanism.
So, how was this supposed to work? In an ideal world, FR would mean that the moment a release is confirmed, the money is in hand to immediately begin to address the prob¬lem. Also, ideally, the resources are sufficient to fully address the cleanup needs as well as compensate third parties. When USEPA drafted the FR regulation and approved each individual state fund as an approved FR mechanism, we did our best to ensure this ideal was met. Of course, we all know that very few things in life work perfectly and as envisioned.
To read the full article, click here.
Hazard Alert: OSHA Requirements & Respirable Crystalline Silica
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recently determined that workers may be exposed to high levels of respirable crystalline during hydrofracking operations. As you are aware, employers are required to take actions to reduce worker exposures if air samples show levels above OSHA’s Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL).
Experience indicates that there are seven primary sources of silica dust exposure during hydraulic fracturing operations:
- Dust ejected from thief hatches (access ports) on top of the sand movers during refilling operations while the machines are running (hot loading)
- Dust ejected and pulsed through open side-fill ports on the sand movers during refilling operations
- Dust generated by on-site vehicle traffic
- Dust released from the transfer belt under the sand movers
- Dust created as sand drops into, or is agitated in, the blender hopper and on transfer belts
- Dust released from operations of transfer belts between the sand mover and the blender
- Dust released from the top of the end of the sand transfer belt (dragon’s tail) on sand movers
Under 1910.134, OSHA requires the employer to “develop and implement a written respiratory protection program with required worksite-specific procedures and elements for required respirator use.” In order to determine if employees are overexposed to Silica and would therefore require respirators, air quality testing needs to be conducted. Since no two job sites are alike, OSHA has stated that it is required at each individual job site.
For more information please contact: Thomas Seguljic, P.E. at 888-823-6427.
Grant Funds Available for Safety Training & Education
On May 3, 2012, the Massachusetts Department of Industrial Accident’s Office of Safety released the Workplace Safety Training & Education Grant Program Application for fiscal year 2013. The objective of this program is to promote safe and healthy conditions in the workplace. To accomplish this, the department will award state funds to eligible applicants who demonstrate they will provide and improve safety education and training in Occupational Safety and Health to employers/employees within the Commonwealth who are covered by the Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Law.
In HRP’s experience, the greatest success obtaining these grants originates from applications that detail specific training needs that will ultimately lead to a reduction in injuries which could be reduced or avoided by safety training performed through the grant program.
Applications will be accepted electronically on a rolling basis beginning May 1, 2012 through March 29, 2013.
HRP has been very successful assisting organizations in obtaining grants. If you would like more information about the Workplace Safety Training & Education Grant Program or need assistance with grant preparation or safety training, please contact Jeff Sotek, PE, CIH, CSP at 855-866-3934.
OSHA Announces Local Emphasis Programs. Are You Ready if OSHA Comes Knocking?
OSHA has updated its Local Emphasis Program (LEP) to reflect high-risk hazards in the workplace.
What is an LEP? LEPs are OSHA directives that are designed and implemented at the local and regional levels to reduce or eliminate specific health and safety hazards that pose a particular risk to workers in the OSHA office’s jurisdiction. Therefore, LEPs will vary, depending on the OSHA regional/local office, and may be specific to an industry or a specific hazard (i.e. noise, falls, etc.). The LEPs are often based on injury/illness data and information obtained during OSHA inspections, which may result in an unexpected visit from OSHA if one falls under the targeted industry.
HRP has vast experience helping clients address health and safety standards. If you think you may be subject to any of these LEPs and need help determining whether you are in compliance, or if you have questions on how to prepare your organization, please contact Jeffrey Sotek at 855-866-3934.
Changes Based on Region
The LEPs currently being enforced for Region I (CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, and VT) are:
- Ship building and repairing and boat building and repairing (workplaces under the jurisdiction of the Augusta and Bangor, ME area offices only)
- Health high hazard – Top 100 DART NAICSs (workplaces under the jurisdiction of the Hartford, CT area office only)
- Fall hazards
- Stone slabs and stone products (workplaces under the jurisdiction of the Concord, NH and Springfield, MA area offices only)
- Crane operation in construction
- Residential construction
- Mast climbing work platforms (workplaces under the jurisdiction of the Braintree, MA; Andover, MA; and Springfield, MA area offices only)
- Silica exposure in construction
- Powered industrial trucks
- Underground construction and tunneling operations (workplaces under the jurisdiction of the Braintree, MA area office only)
Some of the LEPs currently being enforced for Region II (NJ, NY, and VT) are:
- Fall hazards in construction
- Logging operations (all workplaces under the jurisdiction of the Syracuse, NY area office only)
- Gut rehabilitation and demolition
- Amputations relating to machine guarding
- Warehousing and refuse handlers and haulers
- Construction worksites – local targeting
- Landscape and horticultural service worksites
- Health high hazard – Top 50 DART NAICSs
- Isocyanate
- Natural gas drilling operations (all workplaces under the jurisdiction of the Syracuse, NY area office only)
- Federal agencies
- Metal recycling industry (all workplaces under the jurisdiction of the Syracuse, NY area office only)
- Scheduling of never-before-inspected high hazard manufacturing establishments (all workplaces under the jurisdiction of the Albany, NY; Avenel, NY; and Syracuse, NY area offices only)
- Crystalline Silica
- Car wash facilities
LEPs currently being enforced for Region IV (AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, and TN) are:
- Inspection of stimulus-funded (American Recovery & Investment Act 2009) construction activities
- Lead
- Silica
- Health hazards in scrap and waste materials recycling operations
- Falls in construction
- Sanitation and cleanup operations in meat packing, poultry, and fish processing industries
- Landscaping and horticultural services
- Electrical hazards
- Noise health hazards (workplaces under the jurisdiction of the Atlanta-West, GA area office only)
- Ship/boat building and repair (workplaces under the jurisdiction of the Columbia, SC; Frankfort, KY; Nashville, TN; and Raleigh, NC area offices only)
- High noise industries (Atlanta-East area office only)
- Reducing formaldehyde exposure in the funeral service and crematories industries (workplaces under the jurisdiction of the Atlanta-West, GA area office only)
- Noise hazards
- Reducing the number of sharps injuries in urgent care centers, medical clinics, and ambulatory surgical centers
- Powered industrial trucks
- Methylene Chloride
The LEPs currently being enforced for Region VI (AR, LA, NM, OK, and TX) are:
- Oil and gas well industries
- Construction
- Marine operations
- Demolition activities
- Logging (all workplaces under the jurisdiction of the Baton Rouge, LA area office only)
- Work zone safety and health
- Cranes used in construction
- Safety and health hazards in the manufacture of fabricated metal products
- High noise industries (including SIC codes 328, 242, 327, 244, and 308)
- Fall hazards in general industry (all SIC codes except SIC 15XX – 17XX/NAICS 236XXX)
- Heat illnesses
- Grain handling facilities
- Methylene Bishenyl Isocyanate (MDI) inspections of spray-on bed lining operations