8 Why recycle electronics? EPA Region

August 2012
Issue 369
Why recycle electronics?
Around the Region ..............2
WY fills inspector spots
States can end Stage II gas vapor
Compliance Report ............3
Identifying legal requirements and
setting objectives and targets
Around the Bend..................5
From the Hill........................5
CourtWatch ........................6
Court disallows citizen suit in
CAA case
Q&A ......................................6
Import/export TSCA requirements
Expert Tips ..........................7
Enforcement Alert ..............7
Rule Changes ......................7
Montana does not have any legislation
requiring that electronic equipment be
recycled or banning electronics from
landfills. Nevertheless, there are many
reasons for you to consider recycling
your electronic wastes (e-wastes), such as
computers, televisions, and cell phones.
Here are a few:
cause serious damage to human health
and pollution of water, air, and soil.
E-waste is a direct consequence of our
ongoing desire to communicate from anywhere; connect more often; and compute
from home, office, or on the road. Add an
increasing demand for electronic gaming,
higher definition televisions, or smart
cars, and the result is a tragic accumula• Electronics contain valuable metals and tion of e-waste.
components that can be used again in
E-wastes did not even exist as a wasteanother manufacturing process.
stream in the 80s. Today, e-waste is one
of the fastest growing hazardous waste• Cadmium, hexavalent chromium,
mercury, chromium, barium, beryllium, streams.
and brominated flame-retardant mate- Information on e-waste solutions is
rials are components that can pollute
available at http://deq.mt.gov/recycle/
water and air resources.
• When e-waste crosses borders illegally
and is dumped or dismantled, it can
INFO: Contact DEQ’s Sandra Boggs at
406-841-5217. 15868/ae
Compliance tip: LO/TO step by step
Want to go green?
Visit the BLR Green Team
blog for tips and discussions on going green:
Read what we are doing to
create a sustainable workplace. Don’t be shy, leave
comments, and share ideas!
Here are six basic steps for safe lockout/
tagout (LO/TO) recommended by the
Environmental Safety and Health Department at the University of California:
Think, plan, and check.
a. Identify all parts of any systems that
need to be shut down.
b. Determine what switches, equipment,
and workers will be involved.
a. Notify all those who need to know that
a LO/TO is taking place.
Lock out all power sources.
a. Each worker should have a personal
Tag out all power sources and machines.
a. These include controls, pressure lines,
starter switches, and suspended parts.
b. Tags should include your name, department, how to reach you, the date and
time of tagging, and the reason for the
Restart safely.
a. After work is completed, remove only
your own locks and tags.
a. Disconnect electricity.
b. Make sure workers in the area are notified of restart.
b. Release or block spring energy.
c. Drain or bleed hydraulic and pneumatic c. Turn on the power and make sure
equipment is running properly. 15860/ae
Neutralize all appropriate power at the
© 2012 BLR®—Business & Legal Resources
Around Region 8
WY fills inspector
The Wyoming Department of
Workforce Services (DWS) has hired
seven OSHA safety consultants and
has filled an OSHA compliance officer position.
Filling the vacant positions was part
of implementation of a new state law.
The new staff members will undergo
an extensive 6 months of training
before performing consultations and
inspections in the field.
An early 2012 state-commissioned
report highlighted the lack of a safety
culture and the fact that proper procedures were not followed in most fatality cases.
As in other states, Wyoming’s OSHA
consultation program primarily serves
small businesses. Safety consultants
target potential hazards and improve
occupational safety and health management systems at no cost to the
The program is separate from
compliance/enforcement programs,
and no citations are issued or penalties
proposed. 15896/ae
States can end Stage II
gas vapor recovery
One top item in EPA’s August 2011
Final Plan for Periodic Retrospective
Reviews was elimination of the Clean
Air Act’s (CAA) Stage II vapor recovery requirements for higher throughThe state was found to have the high- put gasoline dispensing facilities
est workplace fatality rate in the coun- (GDF). The Agency has now followed
try for every year but one between
through with a final rule that allows
2003 and 2008. The oil and gas boom states in current or former ozone
brought a large influx of workers to
nonattainment areas to seek EPA
the state during that period.
approval of state implementation plan
(SIP) revisions that remove the Stage
II requirements.
Just for Fun
BLR’s cartoon is in need of a caption.
Send us your caption. We’ll select the
best and publish it for all to enjoy!
This is your chance to have some fun
on the lighter side! E-mail your caption to [email protected], and you
may see it in an upcoming issue!
As specified in the 1990 CAA
Amendments, states in ozone nonattainment areas were required to adopt
Stage II programs, which ensured that
gasoline vapors forced out of a vehicle’s tank during fueling were circulated into the GDF’s underground
storage tank (UST) and not emitted
into the atmosphere. New Stage II
equipment is normally required to
achieve 95 percent control effectiveness. Stage II programs were required
in approximately 40 areas nationwide.
The CAA also allows the EPA to
waive Stage II requirements when use
of onboard refueling vapor recovery
(ORVR) becomes widespread. ORVRs
cause gasoline vapors that would otherwise escape into the atmosphere to
be drawn into the vehicle engine,
where they are burned as fuel.
Based on emissions tests of more
than 1,100 in-use ORVR-equipped
vehicles, the EPA has concluded that
the average in-use efficiency of
ORVR is 98 percent, bettering the
legal requirement of 95 percent efficiency for ORVRs. In addition, the
EPA has been concerned that some
states were not ensuring that Stage II
equipment was being properly maintained and that control effectiveness
was dropping far below the 95 percent requirement.
The Agency estimates that implementation of the rule will result in recurring cost savings of about $3,000 per
year for a typical GDF and an annual
nationwide savings of up to $91 million if Stage II is phased out of
approximately 30,600 GDFs.
INFO: Contact Lynn Dail at 919-5412363. 15893/ae
Compliance Quiz
The EPA has registration requirements
covering substances used as additives in
gasoline and diesel fuel. Currently over
7,500 fuel additives registered with the
Agency. To register an additive, a manufacturer must provide the EPA with each
of the following, except:
a. The volume of the additive expected to
be sold annually in the United States.
b. The chemical structure of each compound in the additive.
c. Description of any technique that can
be used to detect the additive in a
d. Public health or welfare effects of
emissions produced by the additive.
Answer on page 8.
Ed Keating, Chief Content Officer; Robert L. Brady, J.D., Founder; Clare Condon, Managing Editor; Ana Ellington, Senior Editor; Elizabeth Dickinson, J.D., Tim Fagan, David Galt, Nancy
Teolis, J.D., Amanda Czepiel, J.D., Contributing Editors; Joan Carlson, Sandra Fisher, Corinne Weber, Proofreaders; Linda Costa, Quality Control Associate; Darlene Francis, Product
Manager; Rebecca MacLachlan, Graphic Designer; Sheryl Boutin, Content Production Specialist. Contact Customer Service for reprints at 800-727-5257. Environmental Compliance is issued
by BLR—Business & Legal Resources, 100 Winners Circle, Suite 300, P.O. Box 41503, Nashville, TN 37204-1503. ©2012 BLR®—Business & Legal Resources.
Issued 12 times per year. Annual subscription rate to the complete service is $595.00 per year. Periodicals postage paid at Old Saybrook, CT 06475-9998. Postmaster: Send address changes
to Environmental Compliance, 100 Winners Circle, Suite 300, P.O. Box 41503, Nashville, TN 37204-1503.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use or the internal or personal use of specific clients is granted by BLR®—Business & Legal Resources. For permission to reuse
material from Environmental Compliance, ISSN #1066-2553, please go to http://www.copyright.com or contact the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive,
Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400. CCC is a not-for-profit organization that provides licenses and registration for a variety of uses.
© 2012 BLR®—Business & Legal Resources (MT 369)
Compliance Report
Identifying legal
requirements and
setting objectives
and targets
and end up being fined by an agency
for failing to adhere to certain reporting requirements. If you are the corporate environmental manager, you
may need to summarize the permit
requirements for your plant. If there
ISO 14001 requires an organization to are certain permit conditions that you
are not sure about, contact the agency
identify its legal requirements for
right away and obtain clarification.
compliance and set environmental
objectives and targets. Note that you Don’t wait for the agency inspector to
do not have to be in actual compliance clarify them for you in the middle of
to get ISO 14001 certification. What an inspection.
is required is for you to have a proOther sources from which your
gram in place to bring your organiza- employees can obtain legal requiretion into compliance. As part of this
ments include Title 40 Code of Federal
program, you must identify the legal
Regulations (paper copies or CD),
requirements that affect or govern
agency websites, industrial association
your operation.
newsletters, commercial subscription
services (such as BLR®), etc. Many
Identifying legal requirements industrial associations have their own
The most practical approach is to ask environmental committees that monithe who, what, when, where, and how tor regulations that may affect their
questions. Ask yourself: Who tracks industries. This is an excellent source
of information that comes with your
your organization’s legal requirements? Is it the legal department? If association membership. For example,
so, how is that information transmitted many industrial associations have been
to the plants? What do they track, and working with the EPA in developing
how often do they track it? Where do the maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards required
they obtain their information?
under the Clean Air Act’s National
There are many ways you can identify Emissions Standards for Hazardous
your requirements. The most obvious Air Pollutants program for their indusand direct way is to review all your
tries. These new standards have sigenvironmental permits. Read the fine nificant costs and compliance
print, including the boilerplate lanimplications for the affected industries.
guage. Very often this is where many
Don’t forget local and state legal
requirements are embedded. It is
requirements. Many state and local
amazing how many permitholders
never bother to read their own permits agencies have legal requirements in
addition to the federal requirements.
This is because federal programs allow
states and local agencies to impose
Tips on setting environmental
more stringent requirements. Always
objectives and targets
check with your state agencies.
• Get senior management buy-in.
The manner by which your employees
• Tell employees about your
gain access to legal requirements
objectives and targets.
often plays a critical role in your orga• Don’t be overly ambitious the
nization’s environmental performance.
first year.
The issue here is ownership. Do your
• Set realistic targets.
plant personnel have ownership of
• Get employees to decide how to
such information? Do they take
meet targets.
proactive steps to obtain such information themselves, or do they rely on
• Communicate your results
corporate headquarters to feed them
the information? Worse yet, do they
wait for the agency inspector to tell
them? Plants that have some level of
information ownership by employees
generally perform better than those
that rely solely on others.
Setting environmental
objectives and targets
ISO 14001 standards are very explicit
about setting environmental objectives and targets and incorporating
them into your written environmental
policy. Environmental objectives are
goals that you would like to meet in
the future. Targets are the means of
providing verifiable evidence that
you have actually met the objective.
For example, your environmental
objective may be to reduce the generation of hazardous wastes. Your may
then set your target at 20 percent
reduction within 12 months. In the
parlance of ISO 14001, objectives are
“documents,” whereas targets are
“records.” Documents can be modified, while records cannot. For
example, you can modify your objectives, but you cannot change having
missed your targets.
In setting your targets, make sure you
are not overly ambitious—especially
during the first year of implementation. Set a target that is realistic and
reasonably easy to achieve in the first
year. You don’t want your organization to fail the first time it tries to
meet an environmental target. Failure
can be very demoralizing to your team
members. It is much better to set an
achievable target and meet it the first
year and then set progressively more
aggressive targets in following years.
Remember that the fundamental basis
of an effective environmental management program consists of top-down
support and bottom-up involvement.
Always get senior management to buy
in on the objectives and targets, and
make sure you communicate the
objectives clearly to the employees.
After all, the employees are the ones
who are going to make it happen.
(continued on page 4)
© 2012 BLR®—Business & Legal Resources (MT 369)
continued from page 3
Here are some examples of environmental objectives:
✔ Minimize raw material use.
✔ Minimize releases of air contaminants to the environment.
✔ Comply with all applicable environmental laws.
✔ Use recycled products where
✔ Stop purchasing chemicals that
contain carcinogens.
✔ Safeguard the environment for
future generations.
✔ Be a responsible neighbor.
✔ Foster openness with employees
and the public.
Listed below are some examples of
environmental objectives and specific
target dates:
Depending on the objectives, different
groups of employees will be involved.
For the water consumption objective,
all production and maintenance personnel must be involved in the
process, since they are the end users
of water. Engineering staff will be
required to set the baseline and come
up with engineering solutions (such as
automatic shutoff valves and individual water meters) to help conserve
water. Maintenance staff will be
trained on more efficient ways of
cleaning the facility. Accounting staff
will be responsible for billing the production department for water usages.
In the case of buying chemicals that
do not contain carcinogens, the product development group and purchasing department will take the lead role.
Someone in the product development
group must evaluate various alternatives to ensure that they do not affect
the quality of the final products.
Purchasing agents must look for vendors of acceptable alternatives. Senior
management will then have to
approve the new policy. 15863/ae
In the case of reducing chemical
spills, you must get the support of
Examples of environmental targets:
✔ Reduce sanitary waste from routine everyone who handles chemicals. Set
up an awareness program so that all
operations by 25 percent by 2014,
your employees understand the safe
using a 2005 baseline.
handling procedures and the various
✔ Recycle 45 percent of sanitary
reporting requirements in the event of
wastes from all operations by 2014 a spill. For example, you may want to
and 50 percent by 2020.
assign someone in the receiving
department the responsibility of
✔ Reduce fleet petroleum consumption by 20 percent by 2014, using a reviewing the material safety data
sheet/safety data sheet for safe storage
2000 baseline.
requirements before a new chemical is
✔ Ensure that 75 percent of new lightstored in the warehouse.
duty vehicles purchased each year
are alternative-fuel vehicles.
The EMS process
Do you have a success (or horror)
story about the EMS process? We’d
like to hear from you. Jot down your
thoughts and send them to Ana
Ellington, Senior Editor, at [email protected] Or go to our EHS forum
and join a discussion or start a new
one at http://community.blr.com/
Involved Parties
Reduce water
Set water use baseline by 12/1/2012.
Benchmark each plant by 3/1/2013.
Put program in place by 7/1/2013.
Production and maintenance staff
Engineering department
Accounting department
Reduce chemical spills.
Train all employees by 9/1/2012.
Reduce number of spills 50% by 1/1/2013.
Production and maintenance
Shipping and receiving
Environmental training group
Stop buying chemicals
that contain carcinogens.
Evaluate alternatives by 1/1/2013.
Set purchase policy by 3/1/2013.
Product development group
Purchasing department
Improve employee
Train employees within a year.
All staff
© 2012 BLR®—Business & Legal Resources (MT 369)
Around the Bend
10 tips for managers of telecommuters
Case studies show that establishing a telecommuting program for your business is a win-win situation. Employers
win with increased productivity, lower turnover, and
enhanced bottom-line profitability. Participating employees
win with increased job satisfaction, greater flexibility, and
reduced commuting costs. Yet a major concern is managing
telecommuters. But according to one state agency, it’s manageable with the right plan.
The Connecticut Department of Transportation’s
Commuter Services offers the following tips to help you
successfully manage your telecommuters. These tips are
valuable in any state.
1. Agree on a schedule. Create a viable workday schedule; allow for breaks; post a telecommuting schedule;
and revisit the schedule issues as needed.
2. Clarify objectives. Evaluate existing objectives to
ensure they are measurable and quantifiable; measure
productivity. Expect professionalism—telecommuting
should be invisible to those at the other end of the
phone or computer line; know what will be performed
at telecommuting sites versus traditional worksites.
3. Set expectations. Clarify not only what is expected of
telecommuters but also how and how well it is to be
done. Such expectations should be no different than
those at the traditional worksite—as with all expectations, they should be documented rather than assumed.
4. Uphold standards. Ensure that telecommute sites meet
organizational standards for safety, security, efficiency,
and confidentiality; see that needed equipment, technology, and supplies are made available.
5. Monitor performance. Focus on evaluating results
rather than activities; provide regular feedback on performance; stay in contact with telecommuters; set
expectations that telecommuters keep you updated; find
a balance that is right for managers and telecommuters.
6. Maintain communications. Keep telecommuters
informed of events and information from the traditional
worksite; encourage coworkers to keep telecommuters
“in the loop” on formal and informal work events; initiate communications and hold telecommuters accountable for the same.
7. Recognize performance. Let telecommuters know that
you value their work and that others recognize their
achievements; support career growth and opportunities;
promote telecommuters to on-site management; reward
positive results.
8. Maintain the team. Hold telecommuters and coworkers accountable for achievement of goals. Ensure they
support one another.
9. Handle problems right away. Early, equitable resolution
of conflict is key; take immediate measures to address
issues or perceptions that will impact performance.
© 2012 BLR®—Business & Legal Resources (MT 369)
10. Assess/adjust. Solicit feedback periodically on what
is working and what isn’t; allow open discussion and
private conversation; remain objective and make
appropriate adjustments.
Remember that no new initiative is without a few bumps in
the road, but with your leadership, telecommuting can be a
successful organizational initiative.
INFO: Contact BLR’s Ana Ellington at 800-727-5257,
Ext. 2169. 15858/ae
From the Hill
U.S., EU begin organic trade
As of June 1, 2012, the United States and the
European Union (EU) officially opened up
their markets to each other’s organic products.
“The U.S.-EU equivalency partnership should create
more opportunities for small businesses and result in
good jobs for Americans who grow, package, ship,
and market organic productions,” said Agriculture
Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan.
Previously, producers and companies wanting to trade
products on both sides of the Atlantic had to obtain
separate certifications to two standards, which
resulted in a double set of fees, inspections, and
paperwork. The partnership eliminates these significant barriers, which is especially helpful for smalland medium-sized organic farmers, says the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA).
All products traded under the partnership must be
shipped with an organic import certificate, which
shows where production occurred, identifies the
organization that certified the product, and verifies
that growers and handlers did not use prohibited substances and methods. The certificates also allow
traded products to be tracked. Both parties state that
they are committed to ensuring that products traded
under the agreement retain their organic integrity
from farm to market.
Later this year, representatives from both markets
will compare USDA’s organic wine standards with the
recently published EU wine standards and determine
how wine can fit into the trade partnership.
According to the USDA, estimates show the market
for U.S. organics sales to the EU could grow substantially within the first few years of the arrangement.
Today, more than two-thirds of U.S. consumers buy
organic products at least occasionally, and 28 percent
buy organic products weekly.
Information is at http://www.ams.usda.gov/
AMSv1.0/NOPTradeEuropeanUnion. 15859/ws
Court disallows citizen
suit in CAA case
filed an amicus curiae brief, OEPA’s
failure to administer the BAT
requirement with respect to small
emitters is itself a “violation of . . .
The citizen suit provision of the
Clean Air Act (CAA) does not allow an emission standard or limitation,”
as those terms are used in the citizen
a case against a state environmental
suit provision of the CAA. The state
agency for failure to implement
terms of that state’s state implemen- responded that the sentence structation plan (SIP). The provision spec- ture of a provision further along in
ifies that a citizen suit is permissible the CAA makes clear that citizen
when an emissions standard or limi- suits apply only to standards or limitations that are set forth in a pertation is allegedly violated. In other
words, if the state itself had violated mit—which would mean the term
does not include the state’s obligaNational Ambient Air Quality
tion to enforce the BAT requireStandards (NAAQS), any person
ment, since that obligation is set
could have lawfully sued under the
forth only in the SIP.
CAA. But an alleged failure by a
state regarding administration of the
Appeals court reverses
SIP is not technically a CAA violalower court
tion and, therefore, is not actionable
under the CAA citizen suit provision. The district court that first heard
the case agreed with the state but
Those are the key points made by
decided to rule for the plaintiffs
two of three judges for the 6th U.S.
based on a 1980 6th Circuit opinion
Circuit Court of Appeals in Sierra
(United States v. Ohio Department
Club v. Korleski.
of Highway Safety) that involved
another section of the CAA. In that
It happened in Ohio
case, the 6th Circuit construed the
The case involves a decision by the
term “violation” as used in the CAA
Ohio EPA (OEPA) and its director,
provision to include Ohio’s refusal
Christopher Korleski, in 2006 to
“to withhold registration from vehiissue an amendment to its SIP that
cles which have not passed emission
allows issuance of new source air
inspection.” However, in its current
permits to smaller emissions sources opinion, the 6th Circuit points to a
(those producing less than 10 tons of subsequent case in 1997 (Bennett v.
emissions per year) without first
Spear) in which the U.S. Supreme
determining whether those sources
Court held that language in another
will employ best available technol“nearly identical” portion of the
ogy (BAT) to control those emisCAA did not permit a citizen suit
sions. The OEPA had required BAT
against a federal agency for its failfor several decades before allowing
ure to perform a regulatory duty.
the exception for small sources. In
As the 6th Circuit points out, the
June 2008, the OEPA requested that
Supreme Court’s 1997 ruling indithe U.S. EPA approve the SIP
cates that highway safety “is no
amendment. The U.S. EPA denied
longer good law.”
the request but has not chosen to use
The 6th Circuit also points out that
any of the tools provided under the
CAA to induce the OEPA to enforce if the OEPA were found in violation
of a CAA emissions limitation, it
the BAT requirement for small
would be subject to penalties of up
sources. Neither has the U.S. EPA
to $25,000 a day as well as a possiexercised authority also available
under the Act to enforce the require- ble criminal violation because intent
is present. “We doubt that the CAA
ment itself.
should be read to authorize the head
of the federal EPA to impose those
Sierra Club balks
According to the Sierra Club, other penalties against the head of the
Ohio EPA,” said the 6th Circuit. In
plaintiffs, and the U.S. EPA, which
addition, the 6th Circuit again
TSCA requirements
Q: We are trying to understand
the complexities of TSCA. Can
you help us understand the
import/export requirements
of this law?
A: TSCA applies to manufacturers,
importers, and processors of chemical substances. TSCA covers any new or existing
commercial chemical substances and mixtures. More than 83,000 existing chemicals are listed in EPA’s TSCA Chemical
Substance Inventory (TSCA Inventory).
The TSCA Inventory consists of substances originally reported under TSCA
regulations (40 CFR 710) and substances
added as a result of PMN filings.
TSCA requires that the EPA be notified
at least 90 days before the manufacture
or import of a new chemical substance
for commercial purposes. For the purposes of TSCA, a new chemical substance
is one that is not listed in the Master File
of the TSCA Inventory. These new substances trigger the law’s PMN requirements, along with other TSCA mandates.
The EPA also has authority under TSCA
to regulate the import and export of specific chemical substances and mixtures
that pose an “imminent hazard,” such as
asbestos and PCBs.
There is a topic on www.enviro.blr.com
devoted to TSCA, and there is a section in
the TSCA analysis that discusses additional
Import and Export Notification requirements, including import certification and
export notice requirements. 15864/ae
Editor’s note: These questions are
from the EPA documents or BLR® subscribers. Do you have a question or comment concerning a particular regulation
we could answer in this newsletter?
Contact Ana Ellington by phone at 800727-5257, Ext. 2169; fax at 860-5107224; or e-mail at [email protected]
referred to Bennett, in which the
Supreme Court stated that it was aware of
no precedent in which a violation was
interpreted in a way to apply to those
who administer, as opposed to those who
are regulated by, a substantive law.
© 2012 BLR®—Business & Legal Resources (MT 369)
Reduce waste at work
The U.S. EPA compiled a list of ideas that businesses have used for reducing waste. Here are
some that can be adapted for reducing waste at
your facility or office.
Writing/printing paper
• Establish a companywide double-sided copy•
ing policy, and be sure future copiers purchased
by your company have double-sided capability.
Reuse envelopes or use two-way (send-’nreturn) envelopes.
Keep mailing lists current to avoid duplication.
Make scratch pads from used paper.
Circulate (rather than copy) memos, documents, periodicals, and reports.
Use outdated letterhead for in-house memos.
Put company bulletins on voice or electronic
mail or post on a central bulletin board.
Save documents on hard drives or CDs instead
of making paper copies.
Use central files to reduce the number of hard
copies your company retains.
Proof documents on the computer screen
before printing.
Eliminate unnecessary reports.
Donate old magazines and journals to hospitals, clinics, or libraries.
• Rent equipment that is used only occasionally.
• Reuse worn out tires for landscaping,
swings, etc.
Purchase remanufactured office equipment.
Establish a regular maintenance routine to
prolong the life of such equipment as copiers,
computers, and heavy tools.
Use rechargeable batteries where practical.
Install reusable furnace and air-conditioner
Reclaim usable parts from old equipment.
Recharge fax and printer cartridges or return
them to the supplier for remanufacture.
Sell or give old furniture and equipment to
other businesses, local charitable organizations,
or employees.
INFO: Contact Ana Ellington at 800-727-5257,
Ext. 2169. 15861/ae
© 2012 BLR®—Business & Legal Resources (MT 369)
Enforcement Alert
Workers must understand training
Requirements for employers to train employees exist
throughout U.S. OSHA standards. However, some
employers and, apparently, some OSHA inspectors,
are not aware that training must be conducted in a manner that
the employee can understand.
OSHA’s general policy is that if an employee receives job
instructions in a language other than English, training and
information must also be conveyed in that language. Similarly,
if employees are not literate, telling them to read training materials will not satisfy the employer’s training obligation.
OSHA adds that its training provisions contain a variety of specific requirements to ensure that employees are comprehending
instruction. For example, standards covering LO/TO, respiratory protection, and bloodborne pathogens each require that
employers take measures to ascertain the level to which the
employee has comprehended the safety provisions.
In its instructions to inspectors, OSHA states, “If a reasonable
person would conclude that the employer had not conveyed the
training to its employees in a manner they were capable of
understanding, then the violation may be cited as serious.” 15857/ae
Emissions flexibility for emergency
To ensure the needed level of performance by emergency response vehicles, the EPA has issued a direct
final rule that authorizes manufacturers of engines for
these vehicles to install devices that allow vehicle operators to
decrease the effectiveness of air pollution control equipment so
that vehicle performance will not be compromised during an
emergency. “Emergency vehicles” are defined in the rule as
ambulances or fire trucks.
The rule amends EPA’s regulations for heavy-duty diesel
engines, which set limits on NOx and PM in vehicle exhaust.
To meet the PM standard, manufacturers install diesel particulate filters (DPFs) into their engines. DPFs capture and combust nonmetallic PM in a process called regeneration.
But the Agency has been informed by emergency response entities that engine features intended to ensure the proper use and
maintenance were limiting the performance of emergency vehicles to such an extent that an indirect risk to public health and
safety was occurring. For example, several fire chiefs informed
the Agency that when computers in fire trucks directed the
engine to regenerate the DPF, power was diverted from the
capacity of the truck to pump water to extinguish a fire.
EPA’s direct final rule revising required for heavy-duty emergency vehicles was published in the June 8, 2012, FR. 15862/ws/ae
Pitfalls of Noncompliance
You can avoid violations like these by knowing how to comply with federal and state environmental laws.
Food distributor releases chemical
Pesticide maker violates FIFRA
Large food distributor
New Hampshire
Pesticide distributor
EPA Region 1
Risk management violation: According to the EPA,
the facility had an inadequate risk management plan that
lacked clear procedures to aid emergency responders
when they arrived at the scene, leading to a
delay in shutting down the system.
Penalty: $126,700 fine
No sweet penalty
Sugar company
EPA Region 3
Penalty: $200,000 fine
EPA Region 5
OSHA violations: According to OSHA, a 19-year-old
had just finished locating an existing waterline in the
trench using a handheld shovel when a sidewall caved
in, killing him. Another worker in the 6-foot-deep trench
was not injured.
Penalty: $102,000 fine
Natural gas producer
EPA Region 8
CAA violations: According to the EPA, in violation of
the CAA, the producer failed to control hazardous air
pollutant emissions from its plant and failed to implement a program for leak detection and repair.
Penalty: $20,000 fine
Companies violate cesspool ban
Pump contractor cites in trench fatality
Pump contractor
FIFRA violations: According to the EPA, inspections
of the distributor’s facility found that the company had
received 16 imported shipments of Azoxystrobin
Technical, a fungicide, whose bags were not
labeled with an accepted EPA label.
Gas producer violates CAA
CAA violations: According to the EPA, the sugar refinery violated its Title V operating permit requirements
related to permit conditions that restricted the operation
of boilers that are not equipped with postcombustion
control devices to limit emissions of SO2, NOx, or particulate matter.
EPA Region 7
Penalty: $137,000 fine
Three companies
EPA Region 9
CWA violations: According to the EPA, the companies
allegedly failed to close their large-capacity cesspools
on the Big Island. Large-capacity cesspools are used by
restaurants, hotels, office complexes, and multiple
dwellings, such as duplexes, apartments, and condominiums, to dispose of their sanitary waste.
Penalty: $141,200 fine
Poor fracking practices
Property manager violates lead rules
Natural gas and oil driller
Property management company
EPA Region 6
CWA violations: According to the EPA, a tank leaked
an estimated 400 to 700 gallons of hydrochloric acid
onto the earthen pad surface of the well site. The
earthen pad was also flooded with water from recent
heavy rainfall. In order to remove the rainwater from the
well site, the crew supervisor drove a pickup truck
through an earthen berm, causing the rainwater contaminated with hydrochloric acid to flow off the well pad
and down into Dry Creek.
EPA Region 10
Lead disclosure violations: According to the EPA and
HUD inspectors, from 2007 to 2010, the property management firm leased 35 units and failed to produce
records showing they notified tenants about the potential
presence of lead paint and lead-based paint hazards, as
required by the Lead Disclosure Rule.
Penalty: $10,000 fine
Penalty: $140,000 fine
Answer to quiz: a
© 2012 BLR®—Business & Legal Resources (MT 369)