I don’t mean to scare you, but this is important and I had to get your attention with the title.  I’ve provided training and seen businesses all over this country in the past few  years and I’ve observed these same violations time and again.

The bad news?  An agency inspection – State or Federal – that results in the discovery of these violations could result in serious fines, even if no one was hurt or the environment damaged.

The good news?  These violations – if you have them – are so easy to fix!  Just an hour or two of time dedicated to them and you can be back in compliance before you go home today.

Disclaimer and Limitations:

I haven’t seen your facility (though I’d love to!  Contact me for a free consultation and site visit that accompanies your Onsite Training) so I don’t know for sure what your status is with the environmental regulations.  Also, I can only address the regulations of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in this article.  You may have more strict – or at least different – regulations of your state of which I am not aware.  Once again, my Onsite Training is a great way to be trained on, and receive help coming into compliance with, state regulations if you do business in a state with an authorized hazardous waste program.

So, in no particular order, those violations and the simple fixes:

Violation #1:

Identifying a used oil tank or container as anything other than “Used Oil”.  Unless you do business in Pennsylvania where it is identified as “Waste Oil” or California where it is “Hazardous Waste Used Oil”, the Federal regulations, and every state I am aware of, require a used oil generator to label containers, tanks and fill pipes for used oil as “Used Oil”.  40 CFR 279.22(c) couldn’t be more clear:

(c) Labels. (1) Containers and aboveground tanks used to store used oil at generator facilities must be labeled or marked clearly with the words “Used Oil.”

(2) Fill pipes used to transfer used oil into underground storage tanks at generator facilities must be labeled or marked clearly with the words “Used Oil.”

The Fix for Violation #1:

Print out “Used Oil” labels and affix them to every container or tank that contains used oil.  That will do for today.  Tomorrow, have someone create a stencil for “Used Oil” or devise some more durable form of identification.

Learn more!

• Read here about your on-site management options for used oil

Violation #2:

Not marking hazardous waste containers with the date of initial hazardous waste accumulation; i.e. the calendar date that the “first drop” of hazardous waste was placed in the container and the words “Hazardous Waste”.  It’s simple really, the day that hazardous waste is first placed in a container it must be marked with the words “Hazardous Waste” and the date.  This requirement applies to a large quantity generator of hazardous waste (LQG) per 40 CFR 262.34(a)(2 & 3):

(2) The date upon which each period of accumulation begins is clearly marked and visible for inspection on each container;

(3) While being accumulated on-site, each container and tank is labeled or marked clearly with the words, “Hazardous Waste”; and

It also applies to a small quantity generator of hazardous waste (SQG) per 40 CFR 262.34(d)(4), which refers back to the LQG responsibility at §262.34(a)(2 & 3):

(4) The generator complies with the requirements of paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3) of this section, the requirements of subpart C of part 265, with all applicable requirements under 40 CFR part 268; and

The following are not subject to these regulations:

• A conditionally exempt small quantity generator of hazardous waste (CESQG).
• An LQG or SQG that accumulates hazardous waste in a what’s commonly known as a “satellite accumulation area” pursuant to 40 CFR 262.34(c).

The Fix for Violation #2:

If you’re and LQG or SQG, take a walk around and make sure that every hazardous waste container – unless in a satellite accumulation area – is marked with the accumulation start date and “Hazardous Waste”.  It doesn’t have to be fancy, it doesn’t have to be a pre-printed label, it doesn’t have to have any information other than what is indicated here (check with your state to be sure).  Just make sure it is visible to your Hazardous Waste Personnel and to an inspector.

Violation #3:

Hazardous waste containers at an LQG or SQG that are not closed as required by 40 CFR 265.173(a), a section within 40 CFR 265, subpart I which is referred to as a requirement for both an LQG and an SQG.

(a) A container holding hazardous waste must always be closed during storage, except when it is necessary to add or remove waste.

“Closed” sounds like it should be easy to describe, but it’s not.  It can be summarized as a performance standard that requires the container to be vapor-tight so there is no detectable release of vapors without the use of instruments and to be spill-proof so there will be no release of a hazardous waste even when the container is knocked over.  That’s a pretty high standard and requires more than just a container’s lid held snugly in place.

The Fix to Violation #3:

If a container uses bungs or bolts for its closure, ensure they are in use at all times.  Long-term training employees and providing them with the right tools will help ensure you stay in compliance.  These latching lids from New Pig are one way to ensure compliance without hindering your employees access to the containers.

Learn more!

• An interpretation of the EPA regulations for closed container

Violation #4:

A small quantity generator of hazardous waste that has not posted emergency contact information near its external communication devices.  While a good idea for all hazardous waste generators – and indeed, all businesses regardless of the hazardous waste generated – EPA regulations at 40 CFR 262.34(d)(5)(ii) mandate this simple measure only for the SQG:

(ii) The generator must post the following information next to the telephone:

(A) The name and telephone number of the emergency coordinator;

(B) Location of fire extinguishers and spill control material, and, if present, fire alarm; and

(C) The telephone number of the fire department, unless the facility has a direct alarm.

The Fix for Violation #4:

You may want to check with your state environmental agency, but below I’ve provided a document from the Michigan DEQ website that meets the EPA requirements and likely that of your state as well.  Just be sure to remove the reference to the “Michigan Pollution Emergency” phone number at the bottom of the page.

• Hazardous Waste Emergency Information posting from the MDEQ

You must post this information near any communication device that would be used in an emergency to contact emergency response personnel outside of the facility.

Violation #5:

Universal waste containers not identified with one of the following options:

• “Universal Waste xxxxx”
• “Waste xxxxx”
• “Used xxxxx”

“xxxxx” in the above could be: “Battery(ies)”, “Lamp(s)”, “Mercury-Containing Device(s)”, or “Pesticides”.  Or it could be a universal waste specific to your state.  Both a small quantity handler and a large quantity handler of universal waste must comply with this simple requirement per 40 CFR 173.14(a) or §173.34(a):

(a) Universal waste batteries (i.e., each battery), or a container in which the batteries are contained, must be labeled or marked clearly with any one of the following phrases: “Universal Waste—Battery(ies),” or “Waste Battery(ies),” or “Used Battery(ies);”

The Fix for Violation #5:

“Simple” and yet so often done incorrectly.  Don’t label your universal waste containers as “Bad lamps” or “Batteries to Recycle”, or “spent batteries”, or whatever else you can think of that is not one of the three available options.

No fancy labels are required.  Just print them and slap them on the container, or nearby if you have a distinct storage area.

That’s enough for now!

Sure there are more, for starters:

• Not managing your hazardous waste container at or near the point of generation when in a satellite accumulation area per 40 CFR 262.34(c).
• Not including the home address and phone numbers of the emergency coordinators identified in your contingency plan.
• Accumulating hazardous waste on-site in excess of the time and/or volume limits of your hazardous waste generator status.
• Not completing a documented hazardous waste determination for all waste generated.
• More…

Those violations are more complicated to explain and the solutions will take more of your time.  The five I’ve identified here are common occurrences with simple fixes.  If you have any other questions regarding your compliance with the hazardous waste regulations of the USEPA or of your state, please don’t hesitate to contact me.  I’ll help you with the easy stuff and the hard stuff.

The Bullet:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has reached a settlement with the U.S. Army for alleged violations of its hazardous waste permit at Fort Wainwright, Alaska. As part of the settlement, the Army has agreed to pay $59,220 in penalties for violations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).

Who:

U.S Environmental Protection Agency Region 10.

Fort Wainwright, a U.S Army base.

What:

EPA alleges that the Army violated its RCRA permit by failing to notify the Agency when an old munitions and explosives dump was discovered within the Fort’s Small Arms Range Complex in June 2013.

The U.S Army paid $59,220 in penalties as part of the settlement.

Where:

The U.S Army base Fort Wainwright is located on the eastern border of Fairbanks, encompassing over 900,000 acres and includes a range complex, maneuver areas, missile sites, and a garrison.

When:

• EPA listed Fort Wainwright on the Superfund National Priorities List:  1990.
• Initial investigation of the site:  2013.
• Old munitions and explosives dump discovered within the Fort’s Small Arms Range Complex:  June 2013.
• Army required to notify EPA of its knowledge of the dump:  within 15 days.
• EPA learned of the dump in a technical memo from the Army’s contractor:  more than a year later.
• The Army conducted a partial cleanup at the site:  2015.
• Settlement announcement published by EPA: 12/08/2015
• The Army to conduct additional cleanup:  2016.

Why:

“Failure to notify EPA could have delayed and impeded our ability to ensure timely, appropriate actions were taken to protect people and the environment.” said Ed Kowalski, Directo of EPA’s Pacific Northwest Office of Compliance and Enforcement.

How:

Alaska does not have an authorized hazardous waste program under RCRA (neither does Iowa, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, nor the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianna Islands), therefore the Federal regulations of the EPA are in effect and enforced by EPA.

Conclusion:

What I find interesting about this situation is that Fort Wainwright has a permit under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and does not operate as do most generators of hazardous waste: under the permit-by-rule regulations of 40 CFR 262 and elsewhere.  Their permit allows the base to do more with its hazardous waste, e.g. store it for greater than 90 days, perhaps but also comes with more strict responsibilities and is subject to more oversight by state and Federal agencies.

The other interesting aspect of this announcement is that the U.S. Army is subject to EPA regulations under RCRA.  Got that?  There is no exclusion from regulation under RCRA even for our armed forces.  (Last month I published an announcement of NASA’s alleged violations of RCRA).  If you’re curious about RCRA and its application to government agencies read this article:  Military Munitions, RCRA, and the Federal Facilities Compliance Act of 1992.

Read the press release:  Army settles with EPA for hazardous waste violations at Fort Wainwright, Alaska

EPA Contact Information: Suzanne Skadowski, 206-553-2160, 206-900-3309

Learn more about EPA’s RCRA compliance and enforcement work at: http://www2.epa.gov/enforcement/waste-chemical-and-cleanup-enforcement.

The Bullet:

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration has agreed to pay a $50,660 penalty to settle alleged violations of federal environmental regulations of the USEPA at the Goddard Space Flight Center, Wallops Island, VA.

Who:

United State Environmental Protection Agency – Region 3

Contact: Roy Seneca, seneca.roy@epa.gov 215-814-5567

What:

EPA cited NASA for violations of the Clean Air Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).

As part of the settlement, NASA has neither admitted nor denied liability for the alleged violations, but has certified its compliance with applicable RCRA and Clean Air Act requirements

Where:

The alleged violations occurred at the Goddard Space Flight Center, Wallops Island, VA.

When:

Published by EPA on November 10, 2015.

No indication in the article of when the alleged violations took place or when enforcement actions began.

Why:

Violations of RCRA hazardous waste regulations cited by EPA include:

• Requirements for labeling and dating hazardous waste containers used for waste lead solder and alcohol rags.  Hazardous waste containers must be marked with the words “Hazardous Waste” and the date of initial accumulation.
• Inadequate packaging and labeling of universal wastes (e.g., discarded lamps that may contain mercury or other hazardous substances).  Read my article about universal waste.

NASA also allegedly did not comply with a Clean Air Act permit requirement to obtain a certification from its fuel supplier on the sulfur content and compliance with industry standards for fuel oil used at the facility.

How:

The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) is authorized by the USEPA to administer the hazardous waste program under RCRA in Virginia.  However, in this situation the regulations were enforced by the USEPA and not VDEQ.  Whichever Agency pursued the enforcement and whatever regulations – state or Federal – they enforced, what cannot be missed here is that a unit of the Federal government – and NASA, no less! – is subject to the same regulations, and the same penalties, as a private business.

Conclusion:

The take-away from this whole matter is that a government agency – state or Federal – is subject to the regulations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act enforced by the USEPA or a state with an authorized hazardous waste program.

Read this article I wrote on the USEPA and USDOT definition of a “Person” or refer to the definition of a person in the Federal USEPA regulations at 40 CFR 260.10:

Person means an individual, trust, firm, joint stock company, Federal Agency, corporation (including a government corporation), partnership, association, State, municipality, commission, political subdivision of a State, or any interstate body.

You hear from guys like me all the time that the regulations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) – both State and Federal – are important.  But which ones are the most important?  Which of all of the regulations are the ones most likely to result in you receiving a Notice of Violation?  While I can’t answer that, I can provide you with a list of what the USEPA – Region 1 considers to be the most common RCRA violations and the citations of the Code of Federal Regulations where the regulation appears. (more…)

The Bullet:

A firm that applies rust-resistant coating to iron and steel has corrected past environmental violations, but will pay a $24,000 fine for having allowed the non-compliance to occur.  More…

Who:

Washington State Department of Ecology

• Larry Altose, communications, 425-649-7009, @ecySeattle
• Daylin Davidson, regional hazardous waste compliance unit leader, 426-649-7090

Ace Galvanizing Inc.

What:

Repeated violations included:

• Not properly labeling dangerous waste containers.
• Not keeping the containers closed.
• Not dating containers to ensure disposal within a required 90-day limit for a Large Quantity Generator of dangerous waste.

Ace Galvanizing has since cooperated with Ecology and come into compliance with the regulations.

Where:

Facility is located at:  429 South 96th St. Seattle, WA 98108

When:

Violations were found by Department of Ecology inspectors during four site visits in 2012, 2013, and 2014.

News Release – September 30, 2014

Why:

“Improper handling of dangerous wastes can expose workers, the public and the environment to safety and health hazards.”

How:

It appears that State of Washington Department of Ecology inspectors were patient with this facility and its past ownership.  But it finally determined that the threat to human health and the environment was not going to be addressed without a formal enforcement action.

Conclusion:

My RCRA training does more than just meet the regulatory requirements at 40 CFR 265.16.  It will also answer your questions and shed a lot of light on the hazardous waste regulations of your state.  At the conclusion of my Onsite Training, all of your facility personnel will know what compliance means and will have the tools to obtain and maintain it.  Contact me for a free training consultation.