EPA has added a nonylphenol ethoxylates (NPEs) category to the list of toxic chemicals subject to TRI reporting under section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) and section 6607 of the Pollution Prevention Act (PPA). EPA added this chemical category to the EPCRA section 313 list because the Agency has determined that NPEs meet the EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(C) toxicity criteria. EPA has determined that short-chain NPEs are highly toxic to aquatic organisms and longer chain NPEs, while not as toxic as short-chain NPEs, can break down in the environment to short-chain NPEs and nonylphenol, both of which are highly toxic to aquatic organisms.
This final rule goes into effect on November 30, 2018 and will apply for the reporting year beginning January 1, 2019 (reports due July 1, 2020).
Hazardous Waste Training
Update on Redefinition of Waters of the United States
On June 15, EPA and the Department of the Army (Army) sent a proposed “Step 2” rule that would redefine “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) to the Office of Management and Budget for interagency review. The agencies will issue the proposal for public comment after the interagency review process is complete.
“Farmers, ranchers, landowners, and other stakeholders are counting on EPA to listen to their input when it comes to defining ‘waters of the United States,’” said EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. “Today, we are taking an important step toward issuing a new WOTUS definition and answering President Trump’s call to ensure that our waters are kept free from pollution, while promoting economic growth, minimizing regulatory uncertainty, and showing due regard for the roles of the federal government and the states under the statutory framework of the Clean Water Act.”
“From day one we have been focused on bringing common sense and fairness back to the rulemaking process,” said Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works R.D. James. “Today’s action highlights our commitment to listening to public input, providing clear and transparent rules, and ensuring that our waters remain clean and our economy can continue to thrive.”
EPA and the Army are working through a two-step process to consider revisions to the definition of “waters of the United States,” consistent with the February 2017 Presidential Executive Order 13778.
Proposed Asbestos SNUR
Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), EPA has proposed in the June 11 Federal Register, a significant new use rule (SNUR) for asbestos as defined under the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act. The proposed significant new use of asbestos (including as part of an article) is manufacturing (including importing) or processing for certain uses identified by EPA as no longer ongoing.
Because EPA has found no information indicating that the following uses are ongoing, and therefore, the Agency has determined that following uses are subject to this proposed SNUR: Adhesives, sealants, and roof and non-roof coatings; arc chutes; beater-add gaskets; extruded sealant tape and other tape; filler for acetylene cylinders; high-grade electrical paper; millboard; missile liner; pipeline wrap; reinforced plastics; roofing felt; separators in fuel cells and batteries; vinyl-asbestos floor tile; and any other building material (other than cement).
Persons subject to the SNUR would be required to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing any manufacturing (including importing) or processing of asbestos (including as part of an article) for a significant new use. The required notification initiates EPA's evaluation of the conditions of use associated with the intended use within the applicable review period. Manufacturing (including importing) and processing (including as part of an article) for the significant new use may not commence until EPA has conducted a review of the notice, made an appropriate determination on the notice, and taken such actions as are required in association with that determination.
Comments on the proposal must be received on or before August 10, 2018.
What’s on EPA’s Regulatory Agenda?
All federal agencies that publish regulations are required to publish a semiannual regulatory agenda in order to inform the regulated community of pending, as well as recently completed regulatory actions. In the past, EPA published regulatory agendas spanning dozens of proposed rules. The Agency’s most recent agenda identifies just two pending rules, a TSCA Section 6(a) restriction on methylene chloride and N- methylpyrrolidone (NMP) paint removers and a separate 6(a) restriction on trichloroethylene (TCE) in vapor degreasers. The NMP and methylene chloride rule is classified as a long term action, with an anticipated final regulation not published until 2021. Although a notice of proposed rulemaking was published on TCE last year, EPA has listed the anticipated publication of the final rule as “to be determined.”
Washington Delays Pharmaceutical Waste Rule
While the EPA still plans to finalize its Pharmaceutical Rule in October 2018, the provisions of this final rule are not yet available and are subject to change. EPA has notified the Washingto State Department of Ecology that often there can be significant changes between proposed and final rules. Therefore, Ecology has decided to remove the draft state dangerous waste pharmaceutical rule from its current rule amendment package. The Agency has determined that waiting for a final EPA pharmaceutical rule is necessary to ensure Washington’s regulations remain as stringent as their federal counterparts; however, the rules will not align exactly because of Washington State’s state-only requirements.
To this end, in the near future Ecology will start a new, separate CR-101 rulemaking process just for dangerous waste pharmaceutical rules. Ecology plans to formally propose these rules after EPA adopts final regulations and adopt new state pharmaceutical regulations as soon as possible after proposal. Ecology’s hope was to have one rulemaking process that included these important pharmaceutical regulations. While the Agency awaits a final rule adoption by the EPA, Ecology will proceed with the current rule amendment process, including the Generator Improvement Rule, Solvent-contaminated Wipes, some parts of the Definition of Solid Waste rule, E-Manifest and Hazardous Waste Export-Import rules.
Court Rules the EPA Must Address Smog Pollution from Upwind States
Connecticut Governor Dannel P. Malloy and Attorney General George Jepsen announced that the State of Connecticut and the State of New York won their joint lawsuit in federal court against the EPA and its administrator, Scott Pruitt, over the agency’s failure to adequately control ozone pollution from other states that negatively impacts air quality in the two downwind states.
In the lawsuit, which Connecticut and New York filed in January, the states alleged that EPA failed to perform its mandatory duty to develop federal implementation plans that fully address requirements for upwind states under the Good Neighbor Provision of the federal Clean Air Act for the 2008 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
“The Clean Air Act protects the people of Connecticut from other states’ pollution and the EPA is obligated to enforce these commonsense air quality standards,” Governor Malloy said. “Today’s decision by the district court is welcomed news for the people of Connecticut. As a downwind state, our residents have suffered for too long from other states’ lax clean air standards. The EPA’s recent failure to hold upwind states accountable is not acceptable. We are grateful to have Attorney General Jepsen and his team fighting for the people of Connecticut by holding the EPA accountable and fighting to protect the air we breathe.”
“Connecticut suffers from air quality problems due to pollution sources in other states that are out of our control,” Attorney General Jepsen said. “Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA has a duty to take action when upwind states do not meet certain air quality standards and, in this case, the EPA clearly failed to do so. We are gratified by the district court’s ruling in this matter, and we will continue to work with our partners in New York to hold EPA accountable on this and other matters where it has not met its legal obligations.”
Read more on New Chemicals Added to EPCRA TRI Reporting.
No comments:
Post a Comment