California Industrial Storm Water Permit Update

The California State Water Board posted a revised draft industrial stormwater general permit in January 2011 and accepted public comments through April 2011. Since that time the Board has been working to address the comments received on the previous draft.

The California State Water Board currently expects to release a new draft of the industrial permit and its attachments and supporting documents in early 2012. The Board anticipates at least a 60 day comment period, during which they plan to provide at least two, informal staff workshops and one, formal public hearing.

Caltha LLP provides expert environmental consultant services in California to obtain environmental permits, evaluate regulatory requirements, and to develop cost effective compliance programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Methyl Bromide Use Agreement With CDPR

U.S. EPA has entering into an agreement with the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) to resolve a civil rights complaint filed in 1999 under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI). Title VI prohibits intentional discrimination and discriminatory effects on the basis of race, color, and national origin by recipients of federal financial assistance. The complaint alleged that CDPR’s annual renewal of the registration of methyl bromide in 1999 discriminated against Latino school children based on the health impacts of this pesticide. The Office of Civil Rights’ analysis of pesticide use in California from 1995 to 2001, raised concerns that there was an unintentional adverse and disparate impact on Latino children resulting from the use of methyl bromide during that period. This concern was based on the high percentage of Latino children in schools near fields where methyl bromide was applied for the period from 1995-2001. EPA communicated its concerns to CDPR on April 22, 2011.

CDPR has agreed through this Agreement to expand on-going monitoring of methyl bromide air concentrations by adding a monitor at or near one of the Watsonville, CA area schools named in the original complaint. The purpose of the additional monitor is to confirm that there will be no recurrence of earlier conditions. CDPR will share the monitoring results with EPA and the public and will also increase its community outreach and education efforts to schools that are in high methyl bromide usage areas.

Caltha LLP provides expert environmental consultant services in California to obtain environmental permits, evaluate regulatory requirements, and to develop cost effective compliance programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

California Industrial General Permit For Stormwater Discharge

The California Water Board has released on update on the status of the State industrial stormwater permit. On January 28, 2011, the California Water Board released a draft Industrial Activities Storm Water General Permit (IGP) for public comment. State Water Board staff are working on a new draft of the California industrial permit based on the comments received on the January 28, 2011, draft IGP. Currently the Water Board plans to release the new draft IGP before September 1, 2011. The Board expects to post the new draft IGP along with a hearing notice prior to September 1, 2011.

At the present time the California Water Board anticipates they will schedule a hearing for the new draft IGP in October or November of 2011.

Caltha LLP provides expert environmental consultant services in California to obtain environmental permits, evaluate regulatory requirements, and to develop cost effective compliance programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

EPA Approves South Coast and San Joaquin Valley PM 2.5 Plans

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is proposing to approve California's air quality plans for fine particles (PM2.5) in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley. These plans will reduce particulate emissions to the level required by the health based 1997 PM2.5 standard by 2015.

Over the past 10 years, PM2.5 has improved by 14% in the San Joaquin Valley and by 43% in the South Coast. Diesel mobile sources such as trucks, construction equipment and marine vessels are the largest source of PM2.5 in California. Trucks and buses account for about 40 percent of diesel emissions from all mobile sources.

In November 2010, EPA proposed to disapprove the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 air quality plans because the agency believed they relied heavily on emissions reductions from several State diesel and marine vessel rules that had not been finalized or submitted to the EPA for review. Since then, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has finalizing these rules,including the In-Use Diesel Truck and Bus rules, the Drayage Truck Rules and the Ocean Going Vessels Clean Fuels rule.

In addition, CARB has revised the plans that were originally submitted to EPA to account for the original overestimation of activity and emissions from trucks and construction equipment as well as the economic recession. As a result, future emissions are forecasted to be lower and fewer emissions reductions are needed to meet the standard. For the San Joaquin Valley, the effect is that about 5% fewer reductions are needed due to the recession and about 18% fewer reductions are needed because of better emissions estimates. For the South Coast, about 5% fewer reductions are needed due to the recession and about 5% fewer reductions are needed due to better emissions estimates.

However, EPA is proposing to disapprove the plans’ contingency measures because the agency believes they do not provide sufficient emissions reductions. EPA is continuing to work with the State to demonstrate and deploy near zero emitting technologies.

The proposed actions will be published in the Federal Register and will include a 30-day public comment period from the date of publication

Caltha LLP provides expert environmental consultant services in California to obtain environmental permits, evaluate regulatory requirements, and to develop cost effective compliance programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Construction General Permit Proposed By US EPA

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is asking for public comment its draft permit regulating the discharge of stormwater from construction sites. The proposed Construction General Permit (CGP) includes a number of new requirements on owners and operators of construction sites, including new provisions to protect impaired and sensitive waters. The current permit is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2011; however, EPA is proposing to extend the current permit until January 31, 2012 to provide sufficient time to finalize the new permit.

Some of the significant proposed permit modifications include new requirements for:

• Eligibility for emergency-related construction


• Required use of the electronic notice of intent (NOI)process


• Sediment and erosion controls


• Natural buffers or alternative controls


• Soil stabilization


• Pollution prevention


• Site inspections


• Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP)


• Permit termination (NOT)

Many of the new permit requirements implement new effluent limitations guidelines and new source performance standards for the construction and development industry that became effective on February 1, 2010. These requirements include a number of erosion and sediment controls and pollution prevention measures that apply to all permitted construction sites.

The permit will be effective in areas where EPA is the permitting authority, including four states (Idaho, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and New Mexico); Washington, D.C.; most territories; and most Indian country lands. However, in practice, EPA general permits are used by authorized States as a template for revised State general NPDES permits, and therefore, conditions of the EPA permit will likely be reflected in State permits in the future.

The public will have 60 days to comment on the draft permit. EPA anticipates that it will issue the final construction general permit by January 31, 2012.

Caltha LLP provides expert environmental consultant services in California to obtain environmental permits, evaluate regulatory requirements, and to develop cost effective compliance programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

40 CFR 112 Excemption For Milk and Milk Containers

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has exempted milk and milk product containers from the Oil Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) rule, potentially saving the milk and dairy industries more than $140 million per year. Based on input from the milk industry, EPA had previously delayed SPCC compliance requirements for milk and milk product containers until the mandated regulatory process could be completed. In January 2009, EPA proposed the rule to exempt milk containers from the SPCC rule.

The SPCC regulations require facilities with the capacity to store more than the threshold quantity of oils and fats to create and implement plans to prepare, prevent and respond to spills. The current exemption for milk does not apply to fuel oil and other applicable oils stored on farms; farms that store above the regulatory threshold of fuel oil and other applicable oils are covered under the SPCC.

Caltha LLP provides expert environmental consultant services in California to prepare SPCC Plans, evaluate regulatory requirements, and to develop cost effective compliance programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.com

or Caltha LLP Website

Vapor Intrusion Proposed For Superfund Hazard Ranking System

U.S. EPA is proposing to amend the ranking system used to assess potential “Superfund” sites to include potential vapor intrusion. The Hazard Ranking System (HRS), required by the Superfund statute, is the primary mechanism used by EPA to assess the relative threat associated with actual or potential releases of hazardous substances. Sites that score 28.50 or greater under the HRS are eligible for inclusion on the National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL is intended primarily to guide the EPA in determining which sites warrant further investigation. A score of 28.50 does not represent a specified level of risk but is a cutoff point that serves as a screening-level indicator of the highest priority releases or threatened releases.

The HRS includes four scoring pathways - ground water, surface water, air and soil exposure. Additional pathways have been identified by EPA as posing significant threats to human health and the environment, and one such pathway is vapor intrusion. Vapor intrusion occurs when contaminants enter into indoor spaces, generally residences, from environmental sources such as contaminated ground water or contaminated soil.

Historically, EPA's Superfund program has responded to vapor intrusion contamination by two mechanisms: (1) through its emergency response program at sites not on the NPL, or (2) through sites placed on the NPL because of other pathway-related risks. In May 2010, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report that concluded that if vapor intrusion sites are not assessed and, if needed, listed on the NPL, some seriously contaminated hazardous waste sites with unacceptable human exposure may not otherwise be cleaned up. In response, EPA is proposing to add a new HRS pathway so that sites with vapor intrusion contamination can be evaluated for inclusion on the NPL.

EPA initiated rulemaking in January 2011, and current expects final rules to be completed by January 2012.

Caltha LLP provides expert environmental consultant services in California to obtain environmental permits, evaluate regulatory requirements, and to develop cost effective compliance programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

SWPPP Developer - SWPPP Practitioner Requirements In Draft Industrial Permit

On January 28, 2011, the California State Water Resources Control Board released its draft General Permit for stormwater discharges associated with industrial activities. The draft NPDES permit proposes several changes from the existing California General Permit. One of the important changes will be especially significant for facilities that have in the past prepared their own stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP). Under the proposed permit, all dischargers will need to appoint a Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD) to prepare, write, and make any revisions to the SWPPP, and appoint a Qualified SWPPP Practitioner (QSP) to help implement the SWPPP.

The minimum requirements to become a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer includes have one of the following registrations for certifications, and appropriate experience, as required for:

• California registered professional civil engineer;
• California registered professional geologist or engineering geologist;
• California registered landscape architect;
• Professional hydrologist registered through the American Institute of Hydrology;

In addition, the QSD must successfully complete the State Water Board-sponsored or approved QSD training course within one year after the effective date of this General Permit.

The minimum requirement to become a certified Qualified SWPPP Practitioner is to successfully completes the State Water Board-sponsored or approved QSP training course within one year from the effective date of the General Permit.

Caltha LLP provides expert environmental consultant services in California to obtain environmental permits, evaluate regulatory requirements, and to develop cost effective compliance programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Corrective Action Level Triggers and Numeric Effluent Limits In Draft Industrial Storm Water Permit

On January 28, 2011, the California State Water Resources Control Board proposed a draft industrial stormwater discharge general permit. The draft General Permit amends a number of the existing requirements for permitted facilities and adds some new requirements.

One of the more significant changes to the California General NPDES Permit is the incorporation of quantitative Action Levels and Effluent Limits which could apply to any discharger. In 2006, the State Water Board convened a blue ribbon panel of storm water experts that submitted a report entitled, “The Feasibility of Numeric Effluent Limits Applicable to Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Municipal, Industrial and Construction Activities,”. The panel concluded that numeric limits or action levels are technically feasible to control industrial storm water discharges, provided that certain conditions are considered. The draft permit incorporates two types of quantitiative action levels/limits:


Numeric Action Levels (NALs) are derived from the US EPA Multi-Sector General Permit’s benchmarks, and are used as numeric thresholds for corrective action. Exceedances of an NAL are not a violation of the permit; however, exceedance of specific NAL Corrective Action Triggers requires the facility to enter into Level 1 Corrective Action.

[More information on US EPA benchmarks, and comparison to historic industrial sector monitoring results]


Numeric Effluent Limits (NELs) are could also apply to any facility. Dischargers in Corrective Action Level 3 (see below) are subject to a numeric effluent limitation (NEL) that will be the same value as the applicable pollutant NAL. A daily average exceedance of the NEL is a violation of the General Permit and may subject the discharger to mandatory minimum penalties.

NAL Corrective Action Triggers are defined in the draft general permit as follows:
1. The Daily Average (DA) for any one constituent exceeds the NAL value for two or more storm events of a reporting year, or;
2. The DA for any two constituents exceed the NAL values for any single storm event within a reporting year, or;
3. The concentration for any one constituent exceeds 2.5 times the NAL value for any one individual or allowable combined sample (or is more than one pH unit outside the NAL pH range)

In the event that any of the NAL Corrective Action Triggers are met, the facility will need to complete Level 1 Corrective Actions. The need to do further corrective actions will depend on subsequent monitoring results.


Level 1 - Operational Source Control Corrective Actions
Upon the first occurrence meeting any of the NAL corrective action triggers, the discharger will be required to valuate areas of the facility to identify where additional operational source control BMPs and/or SWPPP implementation measures are necessary to prevent or reduce pollutants in storm water discharges in compliance with BAT/BCT. Based upon the facility evaluation, the facility will certify that the pollutant source(s) have been identified and 1) additional operational source control BMPs and/or SWPPP implementation measures have been included in the SWPPP , 2) no additional operational source control BMPs or SWPPP implementation measures are required , or 3) pollutant source(s) causing the exceedance are not related to the facility’s industrial activities. A Level 1 NAL Exceedance Evaluation Report will need to be prepared and submitted.
Level 2 Structural and/or Treatment Corrective Actions
If in any subsequent reporting year the sampling results meet an NAL corrective action trigger, the discharger is require to take addition action. If the NAL corrective action trigger is for a constituent that had not been included in a previous Level 1 NAL Exceedance Evaluation Report, the discharger go through Level 1 Corrective Actions.
If the NAL corrective action trigger is for one or more of the constituents previously addressed in a Level 1 NAL Exceedance Evaluation Report, the discharger would need to evaluate and select additional structural source control BMPs and/or treatment BMPs with the goal of achieving the applicable NAL value(s) in future discharges. A Level 2 NAL Exceedance Evaluation Report will need to be prepared and submitted and more frequent monitoring is required.
Level 3 Imposition of Numeric Effluent Limits
If in any subsequent reporting year the sampling results meet an NAL corrective action trigger for the same constituents subject to the Level 2 corrective actions, the discharger shall the applicable NAL(s) will become an NEL(s), and starting October 1 of the following compliance year, the discharger will be required to sample every qualifying storm event.

Caltha LLP provides expert environmental consultant services in California to obtain environmental permits, evaluate regulatory requirements, and to develop cost effective compliance programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.com

or Caltha LLP Website

HPV Chemical Testing Requirements Issued By EPA

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is issuing a final rule under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requiring manufacturers of nineteen high production volume (HPV) chemicals to test the health and environmental effects of the chemicals and submit the data to the agency.

The chemicals covered under the final rule have wide spread consumer and industrial applications. For example, diphenylmethanone is used in consumer products and may be found in personal-care products; 9, 10-anthracenedione is used to manufacture dyes; C12-C24 chloroalkenes are used as metalworking fluids; pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN) is a blasting and demolition agent; and leuco sulfur black is a fingerprinting agent.

The rule follows up on the voluntary HPV Challenge Program Chemical List launched by EPA that included chemicals used in household products such as hobby/craft glues, personal-care products, home cleaning products, home maintenance products, and automotive products. Companies voluntarily supplied data on more than 2,200 HPV chemicals under the voluntary program. However, no health and environmental effects data was provided on the 19 chemicals in the rule. Through this final rule, EPA is now requiring testing be conducted. In 2011, EPA expects to require testing of additional chemicals for which the agency has not received data.

Caltha LLP provides expert environmental consultant services in California to obtain environmental permits, evaluate regulatory requirements, and to develop cost effective compliance programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website