In a Motion filed on November 7, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) requested remand of five provisions of the Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR) Rule (40 CFR Parts 257 and 261), which would allow the agency to reconsider the provisions. This SCS Engineers Technical Bulletin covers the five provisions and the basis for their reconsideration. Read the full text here.
Oral arguments on EPA’s motion took place on November 20, 2017. EPA had asked that oral arguments be postponed, and all other aspects of the litigation are suspended until it could rule, but the court did not agree. The current provisions in this Technical Bulletin remain in place unless and until USEPA revises or rescinds them in a future rulemaking.
SCS Engineers will continue to track these issues and keep you informed. Join our Technical Bulletin email list by clicking here, or follow SCS on LinkedIn, Facebook, or Twitter .
By keeping open lines of communication between industry stakeholders and the U.S. EPA at a federal level, both parties have been able to improve the quality of GHG emissions data reported under the GHGRP while reducing the monitoring burden.
Read this SCS Engineer’s abstract that discusses the cooperation between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and solid waste industry stakeholders in developing, revising, and implementing the landfill reporting requirements as part of the federal GHG Reporting Program (GHGRP) (40 CFR Part 98). The paper covers:
MasterMold, LLC makes component parts for manufacturers of recreational vehicles, utility equipment, and agricultural equipment who use the components in their end products. Because of the wide variety of industries and customers it serves, MasterMold must be poised to respond to its customers’ growth by increasing production levels on demand.
Executive Vice President Jon Butts manages environmental compliance at three production facilities. “Environmental management is just one of the many hats I wear,” says Butts. MasterMold has multiple environmental needs. Permitting is high on Butts’ list, and so is passing routine inspections.
To help MasterMold meet its environmental compliance needs, the SCS Engineers team assessed the company’s air permitting needs with an eye toward future increases in customer demand. The team helped turn around a permit application quickly so MasterMold could continue to meet its customers’ production expectations without interruption and remain compliant with environmental rules and regulations. Butts stated:
Then SCS Engineers helped me collect and organize data for emission calculations in one place. They created an easy-to-use tool that my staff updates monthly so we’re prepared for an on-site inspection anytime. I can demonstrate compliance, pass inspections quickly, and get back to focusing on my customers.
Butts got the opportunity to test the new tool during the company’s latest inspections. MasterMold has undergone routine inspections by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Both agencies checked the company’s compliance status with its air permit at its largest plants. “I had everything organized right at my fingertips,” Butts says. “I was ready for the inspections. I now know exactly where all of our emissions come from and exactly how they change over time.”
Thanks to the tool SCS Engineers helped me build, MasterMold passed its latest inspections in just a few hours with no citations. I’m confident I will pass on-site inspections and gain and grow inspectors’ trust in MasterMold’s business practices. Now I’m in a position to influence the process, take proactive steps, and partner with my inspector instead of responding reactively.
—Jon Butts, Executive Vice President, MasterMold, LLC | Johnson Creek, WI
Reprinted from SWANA Alert:
On Tuesday, August 1, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will be holding a public hearing in Washington, DC on the proposed rule, ‘‘Renewable Fuel Standard Program: Standards for 2018 and Biomass-Based Diesel Volume for 2019.’’ In keeping with SWANA’s previous advocacy efforts in regards to the renewable fuel standard (RFS) program, we intend to submit a short written statement to be introduced into the hearing record.
The RFS program is a national policy that requires a certain volume of renewable fuel to replace or reduce the quantity of petroleum-based transportation fuel, heating oil or jet fuel. These amounts are set by EPA each year and the proposed rule will set those levels for 2018. One of the four fuel category amounts that will be set by the RFS is cellulosic biofuels, which includes compressed and liquefied renewable natural gas (RNG) produced from landfill biogas.
As a member of the SWANA Core Advocacy Group, we are notifying you that SWANA intends to submit comments to EPA on the RFS program as part of the August 1st hearing, and in post-hearing comments that EPA will be accepting through August 31st as necessary. These comments will support the testimony of other solid waste industry leaders and ask the EPA set the 2018 RVO standard for cellulosic biofuel at a level that takes into account increased generation of fuel from both existing registered projects and from new projects that will begin generating fuel in 2018. By setting the levels based upon actual current and future capacity instead of on historical data and trends, EPA will ensure that the levels set actually spur demand consistent with increased production. A failure to set the levels high enough would result in a lack of appropriate demand for these fuels, which would undercut the purpose of the RFS program
By setting the levels based upon actual current and future capacity instead of on historical data and trends, EPA will ensure that the levels set actually spur demand consistent with increased production. A failure to set the levels high enough would result in a lack of appropriate demand for these fuels, which would undercut the purpose of the RFS program.
If you or the Chapter or Technical Division members have any questions or concerns about these comments, or if you would like to discuss them further, please contact David Biderman at SWANA.
Today, most people have heard of the possible impact of ambient air quality issues such as smog, ozone, and air toxins. However, they are not aware of the potential dangers and health issues that can be a direct result of emissions in their home or office space.
According to the US EPA, indoor air quality (IAQ) problems are not limited to homes. In fact, many office buildings have significant air pollution sources. Some of these buildings may be inadequately ventilated. For example, mechanical ventilation systems may not be designed or operated to provide adequate amounts of outdoor air. People have less control over the indoor environment in their offices than they do in their homes. As a result, there has been an increase in the incidence of reported health problems.
Are employees missing more work days or have decreased productivity due to headaches or illness? It may be time to have the air quality in your home, or office building tested because getting air ducts cleaned or buying an air filter likely won’t solve the potential health problems. Professional indoor air investigations and chemical-specific sampling accomplish the following:
1. Determine possible pollutant sources and exposure pathways.
2. Measure the concentration of indoor air pollutants relative to greatest potential health threats at locations which there are known pollutant sources or exposure pathways.
3. Compare the measured concentrations of these pollutants to published threshold limit values (TLVs), permissible exposure limits (PELs), Ceiling Values (CVs), and recommended exposure limits (RELs).
4. Determine if the measured concentrations indicate the presence of a possible health hazard to employees, students, or occupants.
5. Provide recommendations for mediating any identified health hazards.
Homes and commercial buildings can be tested for numerous parameters including carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, temperature, relative humidity, particulate matter, air toxins such as formaldehyde and volatile organic carbons, and bioaerosols (mold spores, pollen, insect parts, and skin cells) using specialized monitoring equipment.
Filter-based time-averaged samples are analyzed by an accredited laboratory and compared to recommendations set by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).
Based on the air quality evaluation of your home or commercial building, an SCS scientist or engineer will provide you with recommendations for air quality improvement and remediation. If you suspect an indoor air quality problem, please contact one of our indoor air specialists like Katie Youngstrom and Paul Schafer, qualified professionals who will thoroughly inspect your indoor environment and determine if and where the pollution is originating along with the most efficient remediation actions.
About the Authors: Mr. Paul Schafer is a Vice President and Project Director at SCS Engineers, and our National Expert on Ambient Air Monitoring. During his technical career at SCS and SCS Tracer Environmental, Mr. Schafer has assumed key roles on several nationally significant monitoring efforts. Paul is also a Certified Indoor Environmental Consultant (CIEC) and has conducted multiple indoor air quality investigations.
Diane Samuels directs corporate communications at SCS and has expertise in medical and health communications; outreach strategies; and infographics.
Related services at SCS Engineers:
Risk Management Plans and Process Safety Management
By Chris Jimieson, PE and Jared Omernik, PE
Do you know how much oil and fuel you store in aboveground containers at your facility? If you have more than 1,320 gallons, you may need an SPCC Plan. What is an SPCC Plan? SPCC stands for Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure, and it is a federal rule (40 CFR 112 in the Federal Register) designed to prevent oil-based products from entering navigable waterways of the U.S. But it’s about more than just compliance. It’s an important tool to help you limit your liability.
Facilities covered under the SPCC rule are subject to agency inspections and potential enforcement actions if the facility’s practices are found to be out of compliance.
Does the SPCC rule apply to me?
The 1,320-gallon threshold isn’t the only trigger for an SPCC Plan. One of the keys to take away from the SPCC rule is that it does not count oil/fuel storage in containers less than 55-gallons in size. Another trigger is that a facility must reasonably be expected to discharge oil into navigable waters or adjoining shorelines of the U.S.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not define what “reasonably be expected” means. Rather, the responsibility is on the facility owner or operator to determine the potential for discharge. In reality, it’s usually easy to think of a scenario where spilled oil could reach a waterway. Even if you think a spill would never reach the stream, what if there was a significant rain event that washed away spilled oil on the ground through a storm sewer? Often the “reasonably to be expected” is not challenged, so it is best to err on the side of caution.
The SPCC rule applies to my facility, now what?
There are three options: 1) Prepare the plan yourself. 2) Use a third party provider to prepare your plan, or 3) Have a licensed professional engineer develop your plan. The option you choose depends on how much oil you store at your facility and your working knowledge of the SPCC rule.
If you have less than 10,000 gallons of oil and no single aboveground oil storage container with a capacity greater than 5,000 U.S. gallons, you may be able to prepare your own SPCC Plan, following the EPA’s Tier I qualified facility template.
You can download the EPA’s Tier I qualified facility template here: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-05/documents/tier1template.pdf. The template is the least expensive way to comply with the SPCC rule. However, some users feel it is a little confusing.
If you have less than 10,000 gallons of oil and have a single aboveground oil storage container with a capacity greater than 5,000 U.S. gallons, you could qualify under the EPA’s Tier 2 qualified facility category. The EPA does not provide a plan template for a Tier II qualified facility. You can still prepare the plan yourself, or you may hire a third party or professional engineer to develop the plan for you.
If your facility has greater than 10,000 gallons of oil storage, you must have a licensed professional engineer prepare your facility’s SPCC Plan.
Working on an SPCC Plan with a Third Party Provider
If you decide to work with a third party provider, here are some things you can expect as part of the process. The provider will conduct a facility site visit to review the oil storage. Prepare to have a staff member familiar with the oil storage escort the provider to each of the sources. The provider will ask questions about spill prevention features at each source location, including secondary containment, overfill protection, and interstitial monitoring, if applicable.
After visiting the oil sources, the provider may ask to see any available tank data such as specifications, current inspection protocol, and tank repair or integrity testing documentation. You can eliminate follow-ups and help keep costs down by having this data available for review.
Following the site visit, the provider will prepare an SPCC Plan that you should review for accuracy before implementation.
The Value of an SPCC Plan for Your Facility
An SPCC Plan is about more than just compliance. An SPCC Plan contains inspection forms and protocols that can help to prevent a spill at your facility. It identifies the single point of contact, an “SPCC Coordinator” for the facility. If there is a spill, the Plan contains steps necessary to contain the spill initially and control the discharge, and the proper contacts to notify internally and externally.
The SPCC rule requires all oil-handling personnel receive annual training to respond appropriately to spills in their work areas. The annual training requirement is another key element to spill prevention, but also covers aspects on how to properly take control and countermeasure actions in the event of an oil spill.
Work with your staff to determine if the SPCC rule applies to you. An SPCC Plan is a required document for certain facilities to help you comply with the SPCC rule and gain the benefits of having a plan in place. However, more than that, it is a practical document that’s designed to assist with training and inspections and to help prevent spills from occurring. Moreover, if spills do occur, an SPCC Plan provides the guidance to help control the spill and limit your liability.
Chris Jimieson and Jared Omernik have more than 26 years’ combined experience helping various types of clients with environmental compliance. Chris and Jared have extensive experience helping customers build and review SPCC and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) projects. For questions about the SPCC rule or how to comply, Contact Chris at
For questions about the SPCC rule or how to comply, Contact Chris at or 608-216-7367, or contact Jared at or 608-216-7348 in the Upper Midwest.
To find an office near you click here.
According to the U.S. EPA, approximately 561,000 underground storage tanks (USTs) nationwide store petroleum or hazardous substances. The greatest potential threat from a leaking UST (LUST) is contamination of groundwater, the source of drinking water for nearly half of all Americans. EPA, states, and tribes work in partnership with industry to protect the environment and human health from potential releases.
Randy Bauer, a project director with SCS Engineers in Arizona stated, “We have seen a significant increase in the number of storage tank failures nationwide, primarily from single-walled fiberglass tanks installed in the 1990s.” He went on to say, “Some fuel additives, such as ethanol, are known to eventually dissolve the epoxy used in the fiberglass tanks, leading to cracks and failures.”
SCS currently has seven soil and groundwater remediation systems in operation in Arizona because the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) has a proactive program. As the state’s environmental regulatory agency under the Environmental Quality Act of 1986, ADEQ is a separate, cabinet-level agency that directs all of Arizona’s environmental protection programs. Their mission is to protect and enhance public health and the environment in Arizona. The department does this by overseeing the state’s environmental laws and authorized federal programs to prevent pollution of the air, water, and land, and to ensure clean up of pollution, such as LUSTs when it occurs.
About Randy Bauer:
Mr. Bauer has nearly 30 years of experience conducting environmental site assessments, subsurface investigations, groundwater monitoring programs, soil and groundwater remediation, and geotechnical investigations at industrial hazardous waste and solid waste facilities. His responsibilities include supervision, planning, and conducting of numerous Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessments (ESAs) and underground storage tank (UST) removals. Mr. Bauer has planned and directed the characterization and remediation of several large projects involving soil and groundwater contamination. He also directed several hydrogeologic characterizations, including the collection of soil and groundwater samples and interpretation of aquifer tests. He has prepared several Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) reports, and prepared, designed, and implemented treatability studies, Remedial Action Plans (RAPs), and groundwater monitoring programs. He has been directly responsible for the preparation of several Aquifer Protection Permits (APPs) for wastewater treatment plants and solid waste disposal facilities. Mr. Bauers duties included
Mr. Bauer has planned and directed the characterization and remediation of several large projects involving soil and groundwater contamination. He also directed several hydrogeologic characterizations, including the collection of soil and groundwater samples and interpretation of aquifer tests. He has prepared several Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) reports, and prepared, designed, and implemented treatability studies, Remedial Action Plans (RAPs), and groundwater monitoring programs. He has been directly responsible for the preparation of several Aquifer Protection Permits (APPs) for wastewater treatment plants and solid waste disposal facilities. Mr. Bauers duties included
He has been directly responsible for the preparation of several Aquifer Protection Permits (APPs) for wastewater treatment plants and solid waste disposal facilities. Mr. Bauer’s duties include the senior technical review of documents, as well as negotiation and coordination with the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ).
Read and share the full article by David Greene, PE, here.
EPA recently established expansive new air rules affecting MSW Landfills. Implementation of the new rules places new responsibilities on both the regulated community and regulators alike. However, some of these responsibilities are unclear and have created unresolved issues that should be addressed in close consultation now with your state/local regulatory authority.
For example, if a landfill is “new,” the facility is now subject to NSPS Subpart XXX, which is fully effective. A design capacity and NMOC emissions rate report should already have been submitted.
If NMOC emissions from a facility exceed 34 Mg/yr, then the landfill will need to submit a GCCS design plan within 12 months of the date of exceedance and install and operate within 30 months (no later than May 2019 for those triggering with the promulgation of the rule). If a landfill is an “existing emissions source,” it will be subject to the new EG rule (Subpart Cf).
Landfill owners should maintain close contact with their state/local regulatory authority regarding the status of the regulator’s state implementation plan, due by November 2017. That state implementation plan will prescribe the required compliance dates for an existing landfill, likely to be no later than the 2018/2020 time period. In either case, owners should become familiar with the rule and stayed tuned as compliance guidance evolves to address the unresolved issues.
Contact SCS Engineers to discuss the regulatory status in your state at , or call your local representative.
Are you approaching the required five-year review/plan re-certification for your facility’s Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan? Even if you’ve been through several cycles of performing five-year tune-ups on your SPCC Plan, you can make your next review easier and prepare yourself for future SPCC Plan re-certifications if you follow these five tips.
Start Early
Late renewals are a consistent pain point for many companies. To avoid being late with your next re-certification, start your review six months before your SPCC Plan is due for its 5-year review. If you are conducting the review internally, start by identifying the person who will be doing the review. If you are using a third party, this approach will help you go through the proposal/contracting process, so you are ready to conduct the actual review and complete the re-certification before the Plan expires.
Simplify Data Collection
One of the keys to a compliant SPCC Plan is to collect accurate data in the field about your facility’s oil sources. Streamlined data collection is of particular importance if you have a large facility or your oil storage changes regularly. The key to simplifying data collection is to make sure your reviewer has organized information to evaluate the compliance aspects of each source. Accurate data collection can limit the follow-up required from plan preparers to verify information, as well as minimize the potential for discrepancies. Moreover, particularly useful if a third party is auditing your Plan or if it is in review during an EPA inspection.
Reduce Redundancy with a Summary Table
One way to simplify your Plan is to use an oil source summary table to cover as much information as possible. A table can include each oil source and the aspects of how the oil source is compliant with the SPCC Rule. There may be areas in the Plan where you need to provide additional text discussion regarding oil sources to explain a compliance matter. In general, try to avoid duplicating information within the Plan.
Watch Out for Commonly Overlooked Areas
While secondary containment and overfill protection are key elements to review at each oil source, some reviewers forget to measure the size of containment structures. Dimensions need to be carefully measured in the field to verify and show sufficient secondary containment capacity in your facility’s SPCC Plan.
Another commonly overlooked area is facility drainage; specifically the overland flow in the proximity of each oil source, which is key to determining the potential receptors where spilled product can travel. These receptors could be storm sewers, ditches, wetlands, or waterways. You can discuss the protection of these receptors during your facility’s annual SPCC training. Swift action and concise communication during a spill can help limit your liability.
Use Targeted Annual Training
Many companies struggle to comply with the annual training requirement. One of the tripping points is trying to train all employees who handle oil for example. To avoid this pitfall, implement a tiered training program so you can focus the training content based on an employee’s responsibility level.
Spill recognition and notification through proper internal channels to get a spill cleaned up is an essential message for employees that occasionally handle oil. These employees could also be trained to aid with the initial control and response to a spill. A second tier may include team members who manage the SPCC Plan; they have additional responsibilities such as inspections of oil sources and spill reporting.
By Chris Jimieson, SCS Engineers
Chris Jimieson has over 17 years of experience supporting industrial, commercial, military, federal, state, municipal, and solid waste companies with environmental compliance. He has extensive experience building and reviewing SPCC and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP) and manages compliance assignments, providing computer-based training modules to meet employer training needs. Contact Chris at or 608-216-7367.
Listed here are the names and short bios of those currently serving on the transition team and new members announced by Catherine McCabe on Monday, January 23.
Catherine R. McCabe is EPA’s Acting Administrator. Previously, she served as the Deputy Regional Administrator of EPA’s Region 2 in New York City. In this position, she assisted the Regional Administrator in overseeing the Region’s operations and regional implementation of all EPA programs in the States of New York and New Jersey, in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. She has also been a member of the national EPA’s Executive Management Council.
Mike Flynn serves as the Acting Deputy Administrator of EPA. Previously, he was EPA’s Associate Deputy Administrator, serving as a key advisor to the Deputy Administrator on management and policy issues. He was the Director of the Office of Radiation and Indoor Air in OAR for six years, where he expanded federal action to address health risks from radon exposure indoors, enhanced EPA’s preparedness for radiation emergencies and played a role in the Agency’s response to the 2011 Japanese nuclear incident.
Newly Announced:
Layne Bangerter is an Idaho native who most recently worked with Sen. Crapo. He has experience in the natural resources world related to farming and ranching.
Don Benton, Senior White House Advisor, is from Washington State and served in the State Senate there for 20 years. Don has a history in the private sector in addition to his service as the head of a large county environmental office in Washington.
Patrick Davis is a political consultant and strategist. Since 1992, he has advised candidates for President, Governor, U.S. Senate, Congress, and state/local offices. Patrick is an organizational, strategic, and communications consultant to corporations, issue committees, and non-profits.
Doug Ericksen, Communications Director, is a Washington State native and a current member of the Washington State Senate. Senator Ericksen has a background in energy and environmental policy. He holds a B.A. in Government from Cornell University and an M.A. in Environmental Policy.
Holly Greaves, Budget Issues, has a background in government accounting and Federal financial management. Ms. Greaves previously worked as a senior manager with KPMG and with the public accounting firm EY. She is a licensed CPA, CISA, and CGFM.
David Kreutzer finished nine years with the Heritage Foundation as Senior Research Fellow in Energy, Economics, and Climate Change. David taught economics at Ohio University for three years and at James Madison University for 22 years. His academic research has been published in numerous professional publications.
Charles Munoz, White House Liaison, comes to the EPA from Nevada, where he served in key capacities for Americans for Prosperity. For the last two years, Charles served The Donald J. Trump campaign in several high-level positions.
David Schnare, Esq., Ph.D., is an attorney and environmental scientist returning to EPA after a 41-year career in the field of environmental science, with 33 of those years at EPA. Most recently, Dr. Schnare has been associated with the Free-Market Environmental Law Clinic, The Energy and Environment Legal Institute and the Center for Environmental Stewardship at the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy.
Justin Schwab, Legal Advisor, is an environmental and regulatory lawyer currently practicing in the Washington, D.C., area. Justin will be serving as a legal advisor on several fronts including environmental health and safety, in addition to other key areas of implementing EPA’s core mission.
George Sugiyama brings over 30 years of EPA experience with him to the transition team. George will be serving as a senior advisor to the team.
If you have questions about how regulatory policies could impact your business or service, please contact SCS Engineers for answers. SCS is a leader in environmental compliance solutions for business and industry.
