Compliance and Enforcement

Weekly Inspections of Hazardous Waste Containers in Central Accumulation Area

Weekly Inspections of Hazardous Waste Containers in Central Accumulation Area

The regulations of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) promulgated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) allow generators of hazardous waste to be exempt from many of the requirements applicable to a permitted or interim status treatment, storage, or disposal facility for hazardous waste (TSDF). To maintain this exemption, generators must comply with the regulations applicable to their generator category. One of those regulatory requirements for exemption is to conduct weekly inspections of hazardous waste containers at their facility.

The purpose of this article is to identify and describe the responsibilities of hazardous waste generators to conduct weekly inspections of hazardous waste containers in central accumulation areas.

Before we begin…

While the content of these regulations were not changed by the Generator Improvements Rule, their location was. Prior to the reorganization of USEPA regulations in the Generator Improvements Rule, the weekly inspection regulations were found at 40 CFR 265.174 referenced there by §262.34(b) for a large quantity generator of hazardous waste (LQG) and §262.34(d)(2) for a and small quantity generator of hazardous waste (SQG). After the Generator Improvements Rule the regulations are now found as indicated below:

  • 40 CFR 262.16(b)(2)(iv) for SQG
  • 40 CFR 262.17(a)(1)(v) for LQG

Not sure of your hazardous waste generator category?

Take this short survey

FYI: USEPA proposed in initial stages of the Generator Improvements Rule to require LQGs and SQGs to document the results of its inspections of hazardous waste accumulation areas. It did not adopt this proposed legislation.

Scope and Applicability:hazardous waste storage area
  • The weekly inspections described in this article are required for both the large quantity generator of hazardous waste (LQG) at 40 CFR 262.17(a)(1)(v) and small quantity generator (SQG) at 40 CFR 262.16(b)(2)(iv). Weekly inspections are not required for a very small quantity generator of hazardous waste (VSQG). A VSQG may wish to consider some form of periodic inspections of its accumulated hazardous waste.
  • It is only hazardous waste that requires inspections. None of the following waste require inspections of any kind:
    • Universal waste
    • Used oil
    • Non-hazardous waste

Like this article?

Subscribe to my Monthly Newsletter

No marketing emails!
The text of the regulations:

40 CFR 262.16(b)(2)(iv) for SQG reads:

Inspections. At least weekly, the small quantity generator must inspect central accumulation areas. The small quantity generator must look for leaking containers and for deterioration of containers caused by corrosion or other factors. See paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section for remedial action required if deterioration or leaks are detected.

40 CFR 262.16(a)(1)(v) for LQG reads:

Inspections. At least weekly, the large quantity generator must inspect central accumulation areas. The large quantity generator must look for leaking containers and for deterioration of containers caused by corrosion or other factors. See paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section for remedial action required if deterioration or leaks are detected.

What is weekly?

USEPA does not define what its use of the term weekly means; it has left the clarification of its meaning to the individual states. However, based on my experience, it is safe to assume that this does not mean once per calendar week, but rather every seven days. In other words, if you complete a weekly inspection on Wednesday December 21st and the next week on Thursday December 29th, eight days separate the inspections and you may have committed a violation. (Completing the 2nd inspection or or before the 28th would be within seven days and be in compliance). Also, the regulations do not say anything about suspending the requirement during facility shut-downs (either planned or unplanned). Therefore, the weekly inspections must be completed even when you are shut-down for the holidays or maintenance if hazardous waste remains in a CAA.

Contact me with any questions you may have about the generation, identification, management, and disposal of hazardous waste

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/
What areas are to be inspected?

The inspections are only to be of containers in a central accumulation area as the regulations clearly state. It does not apply to containers in a satellite accumulation area. The term central accumulation area was created by the Generator Improvements Rule as a matter of convenience by USEPA. It replaced a variety of other terms that had been used over the years. It simply refers to the area of the facility – LQG or SQG – where hazardous waste accumulates subject to the full regulations of the respective generator category. Read: FAQ: What is the central accumulation area?

What is the inspection looking for?

The sole purpose of the inspection is to look for:

  • Leaking containers.
  • Deterioration of containers caused by corrosion or other factors.

…and that’s it.

Hazardous waste container in poor condition

Weekly inspections can prevent situations like this

However, the following items may also be included in a weekly inspection of hazardous waste containers in a central accumulation area:

  • Container labeling.
  • Containers closed properly.
  • High liquid level or overflow of container.
  • Container structurally intact.
  • Wheels, if present, properly braked/chocked (remember: a 30,000 gallon rail tank car meets the definition of a container).
  • Containers located so as to minimize potential for puncture or release.
  • CAA pad, if present, free of chips, cracks, &etc.
  • Sump pump, if necessary, operative.
  • Check the date of initial accumulation to ensure sufficient time for on-site accumulation.

Also, the regulations of your state may be more stringent than those of the USEPA. It is possible state regulations may require some, or all, of the above recommendations; and may require even more.

What if leaks or deterioration are detected?

If leaks or deterioration of containers are detected during the weekly inspection, both SQG and LQG are referred to their respective remedial action regulations – §262.17(a)(1)(ii) for LQG and §262.16(b)(2)(i) for SQG. Response requirements are:

  • Immediately transfer the hazardous waste to a container in good condition.

Or…

  • Immediately manage the waste in some other way in compliance with the regulations of their generator category.

So, clearly the generator is required to immediately respond to correct leaking containers or signs of deterioration that may lead to a leak.

Interested in a Webinar that covers this topic, and more!

My Webinar Training Schedule
Is it necessary to document the inspection and keep a copy as a record?

Nope. Surprisingly, USEPA regulations do not require the weekly inspections to be documented nor does it have any recordkeeping requirements. However, it may be difficult to prove to an inspection (state or Federal) you are completing the inspections without some record to show for it. Therefore, as a best management practice it is recommended the LQG or SQG maintain a form that keeps a record of the following at a minimum:

  • Date and time of inspection.
  • Name of inspector.
  • Notation of observations made.
  • Date and nature of remedial actions if necessary.

Remember: USEPA proposed under the Generator Improvements Rule to require documentation of weekly inspections at a SQG or LQG but it did not adopt this proposal. Read: The Generator Improvements Rule and Weekly Inspections of Hazardous Waste Accumulation Units

Also, your state may be more stringent than USEPA regulations. It may require weekly inspections to be documented and may require even more than what is recommended above.

Conclusion:

Done weekly as required (some hazardous waste generators conduct bi-weekly inspections) and done correctly (don’t let it just be a “pencil-whipping exercise”) inspections of hazardous waste containers in a central accumulation area can help you to maintain compliance with the RCRA regulations at your facility.

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/

Michigan Electro-Plating Company and Owner Sentenced for Illegally Storing Hazardous Waste

The Bullet:

Electro-Plating Services Inc. (EPS), located in Madison Heights, Michigan, was sentenced in federal court in Detroit on November 6, 2019 to five years of probation, and was ordered to pay restitution of $1,449,963.94 joint and several with Gary Sayers to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Sayers, EPS’s owner, was sentenced to one year in prison followed by three years of supervised release. EPS and Sayers pleaded guilty on Feb. 14, 2018 to violating the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).

Not sure of your hazardous waste generator status?

Take this short survey
Who:
  • Gary Sayers, owner of Electro-Plating Services, Inc.
  • Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Bossert Clark for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division
  • U.S. Attorney Matthew Schneider of the Eastern District of Michigan
  • Special Agent in Charge Jennifer Lynn of the EPA’s criminal enforcement program in Michigan
What:
hazardous waste violation

Pit used to illegally store hazardous waste

  • The crime related to Sayers’s operation of EPS, which used chemicals such as cyanide, chromium, nickel, chloride, trichloroethylene, and various acids and bases, as part of the plating process. After these chemicals no longer served their intended purpose, they became hazardous wastes, which required handling in compliance with RCRA.
  • Rather than having EPS’s hazardous wastes legally transported to a licensed hazardous waste facility, Sayers stored the hazardous waste in numerous drums and other containers, including a pit dug into the ground in the lower level of the EPS building in Madison Heights. For years, Sayers stonewalled state efforts to get him to legally manage the hazardous wastes. Ultimately, the EPA’s Superfund program spent $1,449,963.94 to clean up and dispose of the hazardous wastes.
  • According to court records, Sayers—who owned and was the President of EPS—knew that such storage was illegal and had managed the company’s former Detroit facility where he kept hazardous wastes illegally.

Contact me with any questions you may have about the generation, identification, management, and disposal of hazardous waste

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/
When:
  • Starting in 1996, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) repeatedly sent Mr. Sayers warnings about his illegal handling of hazardous waste.
  • In 2005, Sayers was charged with and pleaded guilty to illegally transporting hazardous wastes in state court.
  • During the ensuing years, the MDEQ attempted to get Sayers and EPS to properly manage the amounts of hazardous wastes piling up at the Madison Heights location. The MDEQ issued numerous letters of warning and violation notices to the company regarding its hazardous wastes.
  • In 2016, the MDEQ identified over 5,000 containers of liquid and solid wastes at the Madison Heights location. That same year, the city of Madison Heights revoked the company’s occupancy permit.
  • In January 2017, the EPA initiated a Superfund removal action, after determining that nature and threats posed by the stored hazardous waste required a time-critical response.
  • The cleanup was completed in January 2018.
  • Sentencing November 6, 2019.
Where:
  • Electro-Plating Services Inc. (EPS), located in Madison Heights, Michigan
Illegal storage of hazardous waste

Illegal storage of hazardous waste

Why:
  • “This case shows that anyone who chooses to do business with dangerous materials must obey federal laws that protect our fellow Americans and the environment. These defendants’ knowing, illegal storage of waste cyanide, highly corrosive wastes, toxic chromium waste, and reactive wastes posed a significant danger and threat to nearby communities and the environment,”
  • “They disregarded the law and numerous warnings and requests by state authorities to comply with their legal obligations. The Department of Justice will act to protect public health and safety.”
How:
  • The case was investigated by EPA’s Criminal Investigation Division, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources-Environmental Investigation Section, the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE, formerly the MDEQ) and the Coast Guard Investigative Service.
  • The case was prosecuted by a DOJ litigation team.

Like this article?

Subscribe to my Monthly Newsletter

No marketing emails!
Conclusion:

The conclusion I draw from this is that you can avoid compliance with the hazardous waste regulations for a long time.  From its beginning in 1996 (and I would not be surprised if it started long before that) until sentencing in 2019 is 25 years!  Twenty five years of being in business, making a profit, and violating federal and state regulations.  I’d like to see a case like this settled long before twenty-five years had passed.  I think that persons who deliberately violate the law are few.  Many more are those who through ignorance violate a regulation and pay a civil penalty instead of criminal prosecution as in this case.

My training won’t keep you out of jail if you break the law but it can help you learn more about the regulations to which you are subject, and with some effort on your part, keep you in compliance.  RCRA training webinars are held regularly and Onsite Training is available.

U.S. Navy to pay $23,700 Penalty for Improper Management of Hazardous Waste

The Bullet:

Federal facility (U.S. Navy) found to be in violation of USEPA regulations.  Settlement reached with monetary penalty.

Who:
  • USEPA Region 9 Pacific Southwest Region.  CONTACT:  Soledad Calvino (News Media Only) / calvino.maria@epa.gov / 415-972-3512
  • Department of the Navy
What:
  • Operations at the facility include:
    • Research and development of explosive materials and weapons
    • Aircraft maintenance
    • Facilities maintenance operations
    • Metal fabrication operations
    • Storage of hazardous materials and waste.
  • Under the agreement the federal facility will pay a $23,700 penalty.
  • The facility has resolved the identified violations and is now in compliance with the RCRA requirements.
Where:

The Naval Air Weapons Station – China Lake is in the Western Mojave Desert region of California, approximately 150 miles north of Los Angeles.

When:
Why:
  • EPA’s 2018 inspections of the facility identified violations of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations.
  • Violations identified during the inspection included:
    • Failure to comply with a permit condition that requires deteriorating containers to be replaced or put inside larger containers in good condition at the point of generation.
    • Failure to keep hazardous waste containers closed.
    • Failure to properly manage universal wastes.
How:

The Federal Facilities Compliance Act (FFCA) of 1992 expanded the reach of RCRA to include Federal facilities within the Executive branch of the U.S. government.

Conclusion:

“It is critical for federal agencies to comply with laws that protect public health and our natural resources,” said EPA Pacific Southwest Regional Administrator Mike Stoker. “This agreement will bring the Department of the Navy into compliance with hazardous waste laws and help minimize the potential for hazardous waste releases to the environment.”

It may come as a surprise to some, but public institutions – Federal, state, & local – even the U.S. Navy! is subject to USEPA’s hazardous waste regulations.  If you work at or for a public facility make certain your operations comply with Federal and state regulations for the management of waste.  My Hazardous Waste Personnel training is a good way to learn the regulations, inform your employees, and meet the regulatory requirements to provide training.

Recycling Executive Sentenced to 3 Years in Prison for Scheming to Landfill and Re-Sell Potentially Hazardous Waste

The Bullet:

Recycling executive Brian Brundage was sentenced on April 12, 2019 to three years in federal prison for illegally landfilling potentially hazardous electronic waste as part of a scheme to re-sell the materials and avoid paying income taxes.

Who:

  • Brian Brundage 47, of Schererville, IN, formerly owned Intercon Solutions Inc. and was the owner of EnviroGreen Processing LLC at the time of his arrest, plea, and sentencing.
  • The sentence was announced by:
    • John C. Kocoras, First Assistant United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois.
    • Jennifer Lynn, Special Agent-in-Charge of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Criminal Investigation Division.
    • Gabriel L. Grchan, Special Agent-in-Charge of the Chicago office of the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation Division.
    • James M. Gibbons, Special Agent-in-Charge of the Chicago office of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations.
    • Jeffrey Ryan, Special Agent-in-Charge of the U.S. General Services Administration’s Office of Inspector General, Great Lakes Regional Investigations Office.
  • The Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department provided valuable assistance in the investigation.
  • The government was represented by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Sean J.B. Franzblau and Kelly Greening of the Northern District of Illinois, and Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Crissy Pellegrin of the EPA.

Google Page for Intercon SolutionsWhat:

  • Intercon Solutions Inc. and EnviroGreen Processing LLC, purported to recycle electronic waste on behalf of corporate and governmental clients.
  • The companies represented to their clients that the materials would be disassembled and recycled in an environmentally sound manner. In reality thousands of tons of e-waste (including lead-containing cathode ray tubes or CRTs) and other potentially hazardous materials were landfilled, stockpiled, or re-sold at a profit to companies who shipped the materials overseas.
  • Mr. Brundage admitted in a plea agreement that he caused employees of Intercon and EnviroGreen to sell some of the e-waste and other materials to vendors who he knew would ship the materials overseas. At one point in 2011, Intercon was publicly accused of shipping potentially hazardous materials to Hong Kong.  In response, Mr. Brundage began a fraudulent effort to publicly deny and conceal Intercon’s involvement in the shipment, the indictment states.  Mr. Brundage destroyed business records related to the shipment and made efforts to conceal other overseas shipments of large quantities of e-waste, according to the indictment.  The fraud scheme continued for another five years, the indictment states.
  • Mr. Brundage pleaded guilty to one count of wire fraud and one count of tax evasion.
  • U.S. District Judge Joan Humphrey Lefkow imposed a three-year prison sentence and ordered Brundage to pay more than $1.2 million in restitution to his victims.

Where:

Improper management of CRTs

This photo does not represent the subject of this article but it does show how CRTs can be managed improperly.

  • Intercon Solutions Inc. was based in Chicago Heights, IL.
  • EnviroGreen Processing LLC is based in Gary, IN.

When:

  • Fraudulent recycling activities took place from 2005 to 2016.
  • Mr. Brundage was arrested on December 19, 2016.
  • Mr. Brundage pleaded guilty September 18, 2018 to one count of wire fraud and one count of tax evasion.
  • Published in the EPA bulletin: Mar—Apr 2019

How:

  • The case was investigated by EPA’s Criminal Investigation Division, IRS, ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations, and GSA’s Office of Inspector General, with assistance from the Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department.
  • The case was prosecuted by a DOJ litigation team.

Why:

  • Mr. Brundage evaded $743,984 in federal taxes by concealing the income he earned from re-selling the e-waste and from paying himself funds that he falsely recorded as Intercon business expenses.
  • Mr. Brundage spent the purported expenses for his own personal benefit, including wages for a nanny and housekeeper, jewelry purchases, and payments to a casino in Hammond, IN.
  • “Improper management of cathode ray tubes can pose risk to human health and the environment, as they contain significant quantities of lead,” said Special Agent-in-Charge Lynn.
  • “This case demonstrates that EPA and our law enforcement partners are committed to protecting the environment and ensuring that companies follow the law.”
  • “The GSA Office of Inspector General will aggressively pursue contractors who make false representations in order to obtain federal business,” said Special Agent-in-Charge Ryan.
  • “This sentence should serve as a reminder that HSI will continue to work with its federal, state and local partners to pursue offenders who endanger others by engaging in fraud and deceit,” said Special Agent-in-Charge Gibbons.

Conclusion:

A generator of electronic waste is relieved to learn of a facility that will not only take their waste but will manage it in such a way through recycling and reuse that it is excluded or exempt from most of the “cradle-to-grave” regulations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).  However, it is the generator who must be wary of unscrupulous businesses who will not manage the waste properly.  The e-waste recycling industry – like any other – has its share of shady characters.  Make sure you perform an audit of any facility that manages your waste – even waste that is recycled – to ensure it is being managed properly.

Contact me with any questions you may have about the generation, identification, management, and disposal of hazardous waste

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/

More:

Defendants Sentenced For Scheme Involving Improper Disposal Of Toxic Chemicals

Defendants Sentenced For Scheme Involving Improper Disposal Of Toxic Chemicals

The Bullet:

A Minnesota company providing recycling and waste disposal services pleaded guilty to fraudulently disposing of PCB-containing fluorescent light ballast.  Both the company and two co-defendants were sentenced to imprisonment, fines, and probation.

Who:
  • Luminaire Environmental and Technologies, Inc.
  • John D. Miller Jr. is the owner of Luminaire.
  • Joseph V. Miller is an employee of Luminare and a co-defendant.
  • This case investigated by EPA’s Criminal Investigation Division and the Hennepin County Department of Environmental Protection.
  • Assistant U.S. Attorneys Benjamin F. Langner and Amber M. Brennan are prosecuting this case.
What:
PCB-containing lighting ballast

A lighting ballast made before 1979 may contain PCBs

  • After picking up loads of PCB ballasts from customers, John Miller instructed Luminaire employees to remove warning labels from the containers holding the PCB-ballasts, and then sell the PCB-ballasts as scrap metal to scrap yards and metal recycling facilities.
  • Luminaire was sentenced to five years probation with special conditions, including an Environmental Compliance Plan and fined $10,000.
  • John Miller was sentenced to 36 months imprisonment, fined $15,000 and ordered to pay $1,049,848.79 in restitution.
  • Joseph Miller was sentenced to two years probation and fined $3,000.

“Luminaire defrauded its customers and, in doing so, exposed the community to the toxic chemicals they had been paid to safely destroy. The United States will vigorously pursue those who steal and pollute for their own profit,” said U.S. Attorney Erica MacDonald in a statement.

Where:

The Luminaire facility is located in Plymouth, Minnesota,

When:
  • According to court documents the fraudulent activity took place between 2010 and 2015.
  • Charges were filed on September 20, 2017.
  • Guilty pleas were entered on October 12, 2018.
  • Luminaire and John Miller were sentenced on March 22, 2019.
  • Joseph Miller was sentenced on March 5, 2019.
Why:
  • Because the PCBs contained in the ballasts are considered a toxic chemical, TSCA mandates special procedures and documentation for the transportation and disposal of PCB waste.
  • As a result of the scheme, Luminaire fraudulently collected more than $1,000,000 in fees and additional profits.
How:

This case is the result of an investigation conducted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Hennepin County Department of Environmental Protection.

Contact me with any questions you may have about the generation, identification, management, and disposal of hazardous waste

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/
Conclusion:

 

 

Owners of Northwest’s Largest Electronics Recycling Firm Sentenced to Prison for Wire Fraud Conspiracy—Secretly Exposed Foreign Workers to Mercury Waste to Increase Corporate Profits and Enrich Themselves

The Bullet:

The owners and Chief Executive Officers of Total Reclaim, the Northwest’s largest recycler of electronic waste, were sentenced on April 23, 2019 in U.S. District Court in Seattle to 28 months in prison and three years of supervised release for conspiracy to commit wire fraud.

Who:
  • U.S. District Judge Richard A. Jones.
  • The case was investigated by the EPA’s Criminal Investigation Division and is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Seth Wilkinson.
  • Total Reclaim. A company owned by:
    • Craig Lorch, 61, of Seattle, WA
    • Jeff Zirkle, 55, of Bonney Lake, WA
  • The Basel Action Network (“BAN”) a non-governmental organization.

Contact me with any questions you may have about the generation, identification, management, and disposal of hazardous waste

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/
What:
  • Total Reclaim was the biggest participant in “E-Cycle Washington,” a program created by the Washington legislature to provide for the safe recycling of hazardous electronic products.
  • Under E-Cycle Washington, consumers drop off used electronics at stations such as Goodwill Industries free of charge. The program then paid Total Reclaim to recycle the electronics according to Washington Department of Ecology standards.
  • Those standards bar recyclers from sending hazardous electronics products overseas.
  • Total Reclaim signed a public pledge in which it promised not to “allow the export of hazardous E-waste we handle to be exported” to developing countries, where workers are known to disassemble electronics, which contain dangerous materials such as mercury, without safety precautions.
  • Total Reclaim signed agreements with customers, such as the City of Seattle, in which the customers agreed to pay Total Reclaim to recycle electronics in accordance with these standards.
  • The defendants secretly caused over 8 million pounds of mercury-containing flat screen monitors to be exported to Hong Kong.
  • To prevent customers and auditors from learning of the practice, Lorch and Zirkle falsified documents, made false statements to customers, and stored the monitors at an undisclosed facility while they awaited shipping.
  • Lorch and Zirkle have agreed to pay $945,663 in restitution.
Where:
  • The program operated within Washington state.
  • e-Waste was shipped to Hong Kong in China.
When:
  • The defendants’ fraud was discovered in 2014.
  • Lorch and Zirkle caused at least 8.3 million pounds of monitors to be shipped to Hong Kong between 2008 and 2015.
  • “Your conduct spanned seven years and only stopped because you were caught. You had multiple opportunities to say enough is enough,” Judge Jones said.
  • The pair were sentenced on April 23, 2019.

Interested in site specific training at your site that covers this topic, and more!

Ask me about my Onsite Training
Why:
  • Total Reclaim began secretly exporting flat screen monitors to Hong Kong to avoid the cost of safely recycling the monitors in the United States.
  • According to court filings, it would have cost Total Reclaim about $2.6 million to appropriately dispose of the monitors.
  • At the sentencing hearing, U.S. District Judge Richard A. Jones noted that with the men’s conduct could have impacted generations with mercury poisoning.
How:
Conclusion:

Read the full report from the USEPA Environmental Crimes Case Bulletin for March through April 2019.

Usually the violation of regulations and the improper management of waste results in fines alone. This case was different due to its scope and the level of deliberate deception involved.  Question: do you audit the companies that manage your waste (hazardous, non-hazardous, special, universal, used oil, recycled…whatever)?  If you don’t, you should.  The generator of a waste – any waste – has a cradle-to-grave responsibility for its management.

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/

Oregon DEQ Fines Citizen of Grants Pass for Violating Solid Waste Regulations

The Bullet:

A private homeowner – a person in the eyes of the regulations – was issued a civil penalty of $7,395 for the disposal of household waste on their property.

Who:

  • The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (OR DEQ, or just DEQ if you live in Oregon).
  • Contact:  Katherine Benenati / Public Affairs Specialist / Eugene, OR / 541-686-7997 / benenati.katherine@deq.state.or.us
  • A person of Grants Pass.  I won’t name the person in this article.  I will refer to them as person.  See the DEQ news release if interested.

What:

From on or about January 2017 through December 5, 2017, person disposed of approximately 80 cubic yards of household garbage and other debris at their property by open burning and burial.  Upon discovery and subsequent investigation by DEQ the person was issued a civil penalty of $7,395 for violation of Oregon state regulations.  DEQ also ordered that the person clean up the property within 30 days.  Person didn’t appeal the penalty.

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/

Where:

The violations took place at the person’s property in Grants Pass, OR.

When:

  • Violations took place from on or about January 2017 through December 5, 2017.
  • On March 13 2017, person burned household garbage.
  • On May 5, 2017, DEQ staff observed that the debris pile had been burned and some debris was buried on the property.
  • Enforcement letter from DEQ to person dated December 5, 2017.
  • DEQ News Release dated March 27, 2018.

Why:

From the DEQ News Release:

Burning household trash can pollute the air and threaten public health, especially for the young, elderly and those with respiratory conditions. Illegal dumps can pollute ground and surface water. Such dumps can also threaten human health by attracting insects and rodents.

How:

The act of discarding a material – such as by open burning or burial or other activities – causes it to be subject to federal and state regulations as a solid waste.  This includes materials discarded from a household by a private citizen.  Don’t be misled by the term “solid waste”, a solid waste may be in the form of a solid, semi-solid, liquid, or containerized gas (e.g. aerosol can).

Also, under federal and state regulations a “person” includes an individual as well as a corporation and others.  Read:  Who or What is a “Person” in the Eyes of the USDOT/PHMSA and the USEPA?

Oregon, like most states, has an authorized hazardous waste program.  This means that it may create and enforce its own state-specific regulations for the management of hazardous waste.  Further, under subtitle D of RCRA, the cradle-to-grave management of non-hazardous waste is largely left to the states.

Contact me with any questions you may have about the generation, identification, management, and disposal of hazardous waste

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/

Conclusion:

I believe this incident is significant due to the severity of the penalty ($7,395!) and the fact that it was levied against a private homeowner and not a business or government agency.  It’s clear to see that DEQ, like other state and federal agencies, takes its enforcement authority seriously.  While the creation of new legislation and regulations may lessen from one federal administration to another, the enforcement of existing regulations – especially at the state level – can proceed and even increase.

I think any business in Oregon that generates a waste should read this incident as it may have been intended: A warning from DEQ that existing regulations will be strictly enforced and there will be consequences for their violation.

Fortunately for this person, their solid waste is not regulated as a hazardous waste due to the Household Waste Exclusion from Definition as a Hazardous Waste per 40 CFR 261.4(b)(1).

What could this person have done differently?  Read: Proper Management of Household Hazardous Waste

 

Palmetto Health Fined for Mishandling Hazardous Waste

The Bullet:

The Palmetto Health Richland has been fined $28,000 by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) for mismanagement of hazardous waste.  Read the full article in The State.

Who:

What:

DHEC ordered the hospital to complete the following:

Palmetto Health Richland’s response:

A spokeswoman for the hospital said that the violation arose when the waste disposal company that handled the medical waste at Palmetto Health Baptist and Palmetto Health Richland went out of business and was purchased by a competitor.

The new company mislabeled and handled nonhazardous medical waste as though it were hazardous, spokeswoman Tammie Epps said, resulting in a fine because of the greater amount of waste that was erroneously processed as hazardous.

Palmetto Health has since hired a new company to handle its waste.

Where:

Palmetto Health Richland is one of several locations of Palmetto Health.  It is located in Columbia, SC.

When:

The article was published 08.15.17.  No reference is made to the date of the violations or the DHEC action.

Why:

Violations of the hazardous waste regulations documented by DHEC include:

How:

DHEC is the authorized regulatory and enforcement agency for the Federal regulations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) within the state of South Carolina.  It has the authority to enforce its state-specific regulations and those of the USEPA it has adopted within the state of South Carolina.  There is no mention of the involvement of the US Environmental Protection Agency in this enforcement action.  Read:  State Authorization Under RCRA

Conclusion:

“No hazardous medical waste was placed in the environment as a result of this processing error.”

-Tammie Epps

I see two fundamental errors made by Palmetto Health that led to these violations.

The first is the over-reliance of a hazardous waste generator on a contractor for their regulatory compliance.  All hazardous waste generators should note that the company Palmetto Health Richland held responsible for the errors paid no fine.  It was not even mentioned in the publication!   They are likely working for some other hazardous waste generator right now and possibly making the same – or worse – mistakes.  Remember:  as the generator of a waste – any waste – you have a “cradle-to-grave” responsibility for its management that continues through off-site transportation and beyond its final treatment, storage, or disposal.  Read:  Hazardous Waste Generator Cradle-to-Grave Responsibility

The second error is a failure to provide hazardous waste personnel training for employees responsible for the management of waste.  A large quantity generator of hazardous waste must provide initial training to its personnel followed by an annual review.  A small quantity generator need only ensure its personnel are “thoroughly familiar” with how to manage hazardous waste and how to respond to a hazardous waste emergency (more…).  A very small quantity generator has no training requirement at all.  However, no matter a company’s hazardous waste generator status, high-quality training like mine (either Onsite or Web-Based) provides the knowledge to ensure that violations such as this don’t occur.

Not sure of your hazardous waste generator status?

Take this short survey

Keep it simple!  Contact me to provide the training you need to ensure compliance with the regulations of the USEPA and your state.

More information:

Oregon DEQ Fines W.R. Grace & Co. $6,600 for Hazardous Waste Transport Violations

The Bullet:

The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (OR DEQ) has fined W.R. Grace & Co. $6,600 for illegally transporting hazardous waste to its Albany facility.

Who:

W.R. Grace and Company is an American chemical conglomerate based in Columbia, Maryland. Grace is divided into three business segments—Grace Catalysts Technologies, Grace Materials Technologies, and Grace Construction Products. Wikipedia

The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality is the chief regulatory agency of the government of the U.S. state of Oregon responsible for protecting and enhancing the state’s natural resources and managing sanitary and toxic waste disposal. Wikipedia

Daniels Training Services

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/
What:

The Oregon DEQ alleges that on June 10, 2015, W.R. Grace directed a hazardous waste transporter to transport hazardous waste from its warehouse in Portland, OR to its facility in Albany, OR.  The company didn’t prepare a uniform hazardous waste manifest as required by Federal USEPA (and USDOT) and state OR DEQ regulations for the transportation of hazardous waste in commerce.  The uniform hazardous waste manifest is a document that tracks a hazardous waste from “cradle-to-grave”, i.e. from the physical location of its initial generation and accumulation, through all phases of transportation – and transporters – to its destination.

Further, the W.R. Grace Albany facility is not a permitted Treatment, Storage or Disposal Facility (TSDF) of hazardous waste.  It is a violation for a generator of hazardous waste to arrange for the transport of a hazardous waste to any facility other than a permitted hazardous waste TSDF.

W.R. Grace & Co. was also cited for violating an emergency preparedness requirement by failing to maintain adequate aisle space to allow access for emergency personnel and equipment. That citation did not carry a fine.  Read more about the requirement to provide aisle space for emergency response.

Where:

The two W.R. Grace facilities involved in this alleged violation are located in Portland, OR and Albany, OR.

When:

The date of the alleged violation was June 10, 2015.

The company had until April 28 to appeal the penalty with the Oregon DEQ.

Why:

A generator of a waste – any waste not just a hazardous waste – is responsible for its “cradle-to-grave” management.  This includes its management at the point of generation, how and by whom it is transported, and to where it is transported for treatment, storage or disposal.

There are steps every hazardous waste generator should take to ensure proper “cradle-to-grave” management of its hazardous waste.  Read:  What’s a Hazardous Waste Generator to do About Cradle-to-Grave Management of its Hazardous Waste?

Federal and state agencies – in this case the Oregon DEQ – are authorized to enforce the regulations applicable to generators and transporters of hazardous waste and the hazardous waste TSDFs.

How:

The state of Oregon’s hazardous waste program is authorized by the USEPA as allowed by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976.  This means that the OR DEQ is the primary management and enforcement agency for the RCRA regulations in Oregon.  OR DEQ is allowed to adopt the Federal regulations as written, revise them to fit its own needs, and make them more strict as it desires.  The one thing OR DEQ cannot do is make its version of the RCRA regulations less strict or less broad than those of the USEPA.  Therefore it is the responsibility of the OR DEQ to ensure the proper “cradle-to-grave” management of hazardous waste (and universal waste, used oil, and non-hazardous waste) within the state of Oregon.

Conclusion:

Though not mentioned in the news release, I presume the W.R. Grace facility to be either a Large Quantity Generator (LQG) or Small Quantity Generator (SQG) of hazardous waste and not a Conditionally Exempt Generator (CEG).

Though - as of this writing - USEPA and most state regulations refer to the smallest hazardous waste generator status as a Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator (CESQG), the state of Oregon uses the term Conditionally Exempt Generator (CEG).

My suspicion was confirmed by a quick search on the USEPA’s website:  Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO).

USEPA ECHO database information for W.R. Grace facility in Albany, OF

Why did I presume LQG or SQG?  Simply because a Conditionally Exempt Generator is not required to use the uniform hazardous waste manifest, is not required to use a hazardous waste transporter, is not required to utilize a hazardous waste TSDF for the final destination of its waste and is not subject to the Emergency Preparedness and Prevention regulations of 40 CFR 265, Subpart C.

Not sure of your hazardous waste generator status?

Take this short survey

A simple oversight:  arranging for the transport of a hazardous waste without the proper paperwork, results in serious fines for another company.  You can avoid these fines and meet the regulatory training requirements of the USDOT for HazMat Employees and those of the USEPA (and your state) for Hazardous Waste Personnel by contracting for my Onsite Training or Web-Based Training.

Daniels Training Services

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/
More Information:

View the enforcement letter: https://www.oregon.gov/deq/nr/042016graceE.pdf

To view the full news release visit http://www.oregon.gov/newsroom/Pages/NewsDetail.aspx?newsid=1079.

Contact:
Sarah Wheeler, Environmental Law Specialist, Portland, 503-229-6927,wheeler.sarah@deq.state.or.us

Susan Shewczyk, Hazardous Waste Compliance Inspector, Salem, 503- 378-5310,

EPA Fines Kawasaki Rail Car for Improper Storage and Handling of Hazardous Waste

EPA Inspection Found Dozens of Containers of Hazardous Wastes

The Bullet:

A company is inspected, issued a notice of violation, and settles with USEPA to avoid a long costly legal process they will likely lose.  The cost to settle is high and this doesn’t include the costs to come into compliance.

Who:

Kawasaki Rail Car, Inc. (“Kawasaki”) of Yonkers, NY

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency – Region 2

What:

As part of the agreement, Kawasaki will come into compliance with all federal hazardous waste laws and pay a $71,120 penalty.

Where:

Kawasaki’s facility is at 29 Wells Avenue in Yonkers.

When:

Announced:  April 28, 2016

Why:

No indication in the press release of the specific alleged violations, just…

EPA inspections revealed the company had generated hazardous wastes and had stored these wastes without a permit.

and…

An EPA inspection revealed several dozen containers containing waste paints and solvents, discarded gasoline and unlabeled containers of hazardous wastes. A number of containers of hazardous waste were corroded and leaking.

My best guess is that the facility is a large quantity generator of hazardous waste and accumulated hazardous waste on-site for longer than 90 days or could not prove that the hazardous had not been there longer than 90 days.  Accumulation of hazardous waste for greater than 90 days cannot be done without a permit.  The release also mentions the condition of the containers which violates 40 CFR 265, subpart I.

Not sure of your hazardous waste generator status?

 Take this short survey
How:

Though New York has an authorized hazardous waste program under RCRA, the USEPA may still conduct inspections and enforcement of Federal regulations, as is the case here.

Curious about the status of your state?  RCRA Authorization in U.S. States

Conclusion:

Unlike other enforcement actions, this one did not indicate a multi-year process of inspections, NOVs, more inspections, &etc. before the fines are finally paid.  This appears to be a fairly brief and simple story, resulting in significant costs for the business.  Costs that could have been avoided with some simple steps that include my Onsite Training services.

Contact: John Martin, (212) 637-3662, martin.johnj@epa.gov

For more information about federal hazardous waste law, visit: http://epa.gov/osw/hazard

Contact me with any questions you may have about the generation, identification, management, and disposal of hazardous waste

Daniels Training Services

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/