In the previous article of this series I described the requirements of 40 CFR 265.34 – Access to Communications or Alarm Systems.  That section of Part 265 specified what was required of a large quantity generator (LQG) or a small quantity generator (SQG) of hazardous waste to provide immediate access to communications and alarm systems for its personnel.

The purpose of this article: identify and explain the requirements of 40 CFR 265.35 – Required aisle space for generators of hazardous waste under the emergency preparedness and prevention regulations of 40 CFR 265, subpart C.  This article is the sixth in a series that will look closely at each section of 40 CFR 265, Subpart C and explain its requirements, how they apply to generators of hazardous waste, and what is required for compliance.  Keep in mind that the regulations of your State may differ from these Federal regulations.

Hold on a minute!  These regulations were revised and moved to a new location within Title 40 of the CFR by the Generator Improvements Rule.  If your state has not yet adopted the Generator Improvements Rule, then this article is still applicable to you (but it won’t be for much longer).  If your state has adopted and been authorized to enforce the Generator Improvements Rule, then these regulations no longer apply to you.  Read: What is the status of the Generator Improvements Rule in my state?

To see an explanation of these regulations as revised by the Generator Improvements Rule you must refer to the following:

• Large quantity generator of hazardous waste (LQG)
• Small quantity generator of hazardous waste (SQG)

To see an explanation of the regulations prior to the revisions of the Generator Improvements Rule, please continue reading this article. (more…)

Colleges and universities are subject to the hazardous waste regulations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) the same as any other business within the US.  The regulations of a state with an authorized hazardous waste program may be more strict and more broad than the Federal regulations.  The violations noted below are derived from USEPA Region 1 which includes the New England states.  The information compiled below may be of some use in attaining compliance at your university or college.  It is not, however, meant to be an all-inclusive list and does not provide guidance to comply with applicable State or Federal regulations.

• Failure to clearly label and mark satellite accumulation containers with the words “hazardous waste” and other words that identify the contents of the containers, such as the chemical name [40 CFR 262.34(a)(3)]
• Failure to clearly mark and date the period of accumulation for each accumulation container. [40 CFR 262.34(a)(2)]
• Failure to provide and document initial hazardous waste training. [40 CFR 265.16]
• Failure to separate or otherwise protect containers of hazardous waste from other containers storing incompatible materials or wastes [40 CFR 265.177(c)]
• Failure to make hazardous waste determinations. [40 CFR 262.11, 40 CFR 268.7(a), 40 CFR 268.9(a)
• Failure to accumulate hazardous waste in a closed container except when adding or removing waste. [40 CFR 265.173(a)]
• Failure to obtain a permit when storing hazardous waste for greater than 90 days. [40 CFR 262.34(a), 270.10]
• Failure to inspect hazardous waste containers, specifically failure to inspect on a weekly basis. [40 CFR 265.15(a), 40 CFR 265.174]
• Failure to have an adequate Contingency Plan for new operations. [40 CFR 265.54(c)]
• Failure to provide secondary containment around hazardous waste container storage areas in an area with a functional floor drain. [40 CFR 264.175 and 264.193]
• Failure to maintain and operate the facility in a manner to minimize the possibility any planned or unplanned release of hazardous constituents to air, soil, or surface water which could threaten human health or the environment. [40 CFR 265.31]
• Failure to maintain adequate aisle space to allow the unobstructed movement of personnel or emergency equipment in the container storage areas. [40 CFR 265.35]

Not only is the lack of training a violation in itself, if properly conducted Hazardous Waste Personnel training can help to eliminate the remainder of the above violations.  My Onsite Training is  a great way to meet the RCRA training requirements and to learn what is required to maintain compliance with all of the RCRA regulations.  Please don’t hesitate to contact me for a free training consultation.

Healthcare facilities may generate a variety of wastes, though due to the nature of their operations, these waste may fall into one of several common categories.  Each of these wastes will require special on-site handling and off-site disposal depending on their characteristics and the applicable regulations of the USEPA or a state with an authorized hazardous waste program.  In addition to state or federal hazardous waste regulations, these wastes will also be subject to the Hazardous Material Regulations (HMR) of the PHMSA/USDOT when transported or offered for transportation.  In either case it is the responsibility if the generator of the waste and/or the shipper of the hazardous material to make the proper classification and comply with the applicable regulations.

Common healthcare waste are identified below:

You  may also generate a waste that is not regulated by USEPA or your state under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) but may be regulated in transportation by the PHMSA/USDOT as an Infectious Substance (Hazard Division 6.2).  Please read this article regarding the Exception for the Transportation of Regulated Medical Waste to ensure compliance.

PHILADELPHIA (June 5, 2013) — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has ordered Century Aluminum of West Virginia to develop an updated cleanup plan for a former industrial facility in Ravenswood, W.Va., that was used for the storage and disposal of hazardous materials that were byproducts of aluminum production.

EPA is currently overseeing cleanup activities at the site, located on Route 2 South, Century road, Ravenswood, W.Va., where soil and groundwater is contaminated with cyanide, fluoride, lead, arsenic and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). Cleanup work includes restoration of contaminated groundwater to drinking water standards and to control human and environmental exposure to hazardous wastes in the soil that remain in place at the plant.

Under the order announced today, the company must develop a plan, known as a materials management plan, that identifies specific locations at the plant where contaminants remain, and put in place procedures and safeguards for any future construction or excavation in those areas. The plan must be approved by EPA and the West Virginia Department of the Environmental Protection. The plan must include a health and safety section for the safety of workers and contractors doing excavation or construction work in these known contaminated areas.

The order also restricts using groundwater beneath the property for drinking water. Using the property for any purpose other than industrial is prohibited unless it is demonstrated that there is no threat to human health or the environment.

Aluminum production began at the site in 1957 when Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corporation began operations. The facility included a plant that produced aluminum from alumina ore, and a plant that produced plate and coil aluminum alloy. The former Kaiser plant was sold in 1989 to Ravenswood Aluminum Corporation, which later changed its name to Century Aluminum of West Virginia. In 1999, Century Aluminum sold 500 acres of the facility to Pechiney Rolled Products but Century Aluminum retained the plant that produces aluminum, which covered approximately 350 acres. In February 2009, Century Aluminum shut down the aluminum production operation due to the low demand for aluminum.

For more information about EPA’s civil enforcement of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), go to: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/cleanup/rcra/

It is interesting to note that this enforcement action is being handled under the authority of RCRA and not under the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) which amended the earlier Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA).  While SARA has the authority to clean-up abandoned sites and spills where ownership cannot be established, RCRA has the authority to recover contaminated sites where ownership is known, as in this case.

The hazardous waste regulations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) require certain generators of hazardous waste (large quantity generators and small quantity generators) to conduct regular inspections of hazardous waste accumulation containers and tanks.  While you may be aware of the inspection requirements, you may not be aware of your responsibility to maintain a record of those inspections. (more…)

News Release:
06/05/2013

If you have doubts about your compliance with environmental regulations (Federal or State) then you may live in fear of an inspection by an inspector of those agencies.  In Michigan, however, a business has the option to take part in a voluntary program administered by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Office of Environmental Assistance.  Its purpose is to encourage  Michigan businesses and public entities to self-initiate and conduct audits of their compliance with state environmental laws.  Its name:  Michigan’s Environmental Audit Privilege & Immunity Law (Part 148, PA 451 of 1994). (more…)

[slideshare id=22140769&doc=40cfr261-4a8-130529111506-phpapp02]

WASHINGTON – Wal-Mart Stores Inc. pleaded guilty today in cases filed by federal prosecutors in Los Angeles and San Francisco to six counts of violating the Clean Water Act by illegally handling and disposing of hazardous materials at its retail stores across the United States. The Bentonville, Ark.-based company also pleaded guilty today in Kansas City, Mo., to violating the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) by failing to properly handle pesticides that had been returned by customers at its stores across the country.

As a result of the three criminal cases brought by the Justice Department, as well as a related civil case filed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Wal-Mart will pay approximately $81.6 million for its unlawful conduct. Coupled with previous actions brought by the states of California and Missouri for the same conduct, Wal-Mart will pay a combined total of more than $110 million to resolve cases alleging violations of federal and state environmental laws.

According to documents filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, from a date unknown until January 2006, Wal-Mart did not have a program in place and failed to train its employees on proper hazardous waste management and disposal practices at the store level. As a result, hazardous wastes were either discarded improperly at the store level – including being put into municipal trash bins or, if a liquid, poured into the local sewer system – or they were improperly transported without proper safety documentation to one of six product return centers located throughout the United States. 

“By improperly handling hazardous waste, pesticides and other materials in violation of federal laws, Wal-Mart put the public and the environment at risk and gained an unfair economic advantage over other companies,” said Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “Today, Wal-Mart acknowledged responsibility for violations of federal laws and will pay significant fines and penalties, which will, in part, fund important environmental projects in the communities impacted by the violations and help prevent future harm to the environment.”

“Federal laws that address the proper handling, storage and disposal of hazardous wastes exist to safeguard our environment and protect the public from harm,” said André Birotte Jr., the U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California. “Retailers like Wal-Mart that generate hazardous waste have a duty to legally and safely dispose of that hazardous waste, and dumping it down the sink was neither legal nor safe. The case against Wal-Mart is designed to ensure compliance with our nation’s environmental laws now and in the future.”

“As one of the largest retailers in the United States, Wal-Mart is responsible not only for the stock on its shelves, but also for the significant amount of hazardous materials that result from damaged products returned by customers,” said Melinda Haag, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California. “The crimes in these cases stem from Wal-Mart’s failure to comply with the regulations designed to ensure the proper handling, storage, and disposal of those hazardous materials and waste. With its guilty plea today, Wal-Mart is in a position to be an industry leader by ensuring that not only Wal-Mart, but all retail stores properly handle their waste.”

“This tough financial penalty holds Wal-Mart accountable for its reckless and illegal business practices that threatened both the public and the environment,” said Tammy Dickinson, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Missouri. “Truckloads of hazardous products, including more than 2 million pounds of pesticides, were improperly handled under Wal-Mart’s contract. Today’s criminal fine should send a message to companies of all sizes that they will be held accountable to follow federal environmental laws. Additionally, Wal-Mart’s community service payment will fund important environmental projects in Missouri to help prevent such abuses in the future.”

“The FBI holds all companies, regardless of size, to the same standards,” said FBI Special Agent in Charge David J. Johnson of the San Francisco Field Office. “We will continue to work closely with our law enforcement partners to ensure there is a level playing field for all businesses and that everyone follows the rules.”

“Today Wal-Mart is taking responsibility for violating laws that protect people from hazardous wastes and chemicals,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “Walmart is committing to safe handling of hazardous wastes at all of its facilities nationwide, and action that will benefit communities across the country.” 

Wal-Mart owns more than 4,000 stores nationwide that sell thousands of products which are flammable, corrosive, reactive, toxic or otherwise hazardous under federal law. The products that contain hazardous materials include pesticides, solvents, detergents, paints, aerosols and cleaners. Once discarded, these products are considered hazardous waste under federal law.

Wal-Mart pleaded guilty this morning in San Francisco to six misdemeanor counts of negligently violating the Clean Water Act. The six criminal charges were filed by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Los Angeles and San Francisco (each office filed three charges), and the two cases were consolidated in the Northern District of California, where the guilty pleas were formally entered before U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero. As part of a plea agreement filed in California, Wal-Mart was sentenced to pay a $40 million criminal fine and an additional $20 million that will fund various community service projects, including opening a $6 million Retail Compliance Assistance Center that will help retail stores across the nation learn how to properly handle hazardous waste.

In the third criminal case resolved today, Wal-Mart pleaded guilty in the Western District of Missouri to violating FIFRA. According to a plea agreement filed in Kansas City, beginning in 2006, Wal-Mart began sending certain damaged household products, including regulated solid and liquid pesticides, from its six return centers to Greenleaf LLC, a recycling facility located in Neosho, Mo., where the products were processed for reuse and resale. Because Wal-Mart employees failed to provide adequate oversight of the pesticides sent to Greenleaf, regulated pesticides were mixed together and offered for sale to customers without the required registration, ingredients, or use information, which constitutes a violation of FIFRA. Between July 2006 and February 2008, Wal-Mart trucked more than 2 million pounds of regulated pesticides and additional household products from its various return centers to Greenleaf. In November 2008, Greenleaf was also convicted of a FIFRA violation and paid a criminal penalty of $200,000 in 2009. 

Pursuant to the plea agreement filed in Missouri and accepted today by U.S. District Judge John T. Maughmer, Wal-Mart agreed to pay a criminal fine of $11 million and to pay another $3 million to the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, which will go to that agency’s Hazardous Waste Program and will be used to fund further inspections and education on pesticide regulations for regulators, the regulated community and the public. In addition, Wal-Mart has already spent more than $3.4 million to properly remove and dispose of all hazardous material from Greenleaf’s facility.

In conjunction with today’s guilty pleas in the three criminal cases, Wal-Mart has agreed to pay a $7.628 million civil penalty that will resolve civil violations of FIFRA and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). In addition to the civil penalties, Wal-Mart is required to implement a comprehensive, nationwide environmental compliance agreement to manage hazardous waste generated at its stores. The agreement includes requirements to ensure adequate environmental personnel and training at all levels of the company, proper identification and management of hazardous wastes, and the development and implementation of Environmental Management Systems at its stores and return centers. Compliance with this agreement is a condition of probation imposed in the criminal cases.

The criminal cases announced today are a result of investigations conducted by the FBI and the EPA, which received substantial assistance from the California Department of Substance and Toxics Control, and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources.

In Missouri, the case was prosecuted by Deputy U.S. Attorney Gene Porter and ENRD Senior Trial Attorney Jennifer Whitfield of the Environmental Crimes Section of the Environment and Natural Resources Division. In California, the cases were prosecuted in Los Angeles by Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph O. Johns and in San Francisco by Assistant U.S. Attorney Stacey Geis. 

Release Date: 05/28/2013

Contact Information: Dale Kemery (News media only) kemery.dale@epa.gov 202-564-7839 202-564-4355

More information about the case: URL http://www.epa.gov/enforcement/waste/cases/walmart.html

In addition to conducting a hazardous waste determination on your lamps which may exhibit the hazardous characteristic of Toxicity for either Lead (D008) or Mercury (D009), you must also determine the hazardous waste status of the lamp ballasts.  There are two possible constituents of a lighting fixture’s ballast that may affect its disposal:  Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and Diethylhexyl Phthalate or Di (2-ethylhexyl) phathatlate (DEHP).
(more…)