POLLUTION CONTROL SOLUTIONS SOLU FOR AIR, WATER, SOLID & HAZARDOUS WASTE WAST
JUNE 2011
Cost of Carelessness Pg 22
Old Spill Needs New Fix Pg 25
Calculating ROI Pg 29 www.pollutionengineering.com
GE Energy
I prom se – Jim Plummer, Product Application Manager Filtration Technologies
I promise With the demands you’re facing, you can’t risk a supplier who will just drop off a product, hope it works, then disappear. GE Energy’s Filtration Technologies team leverages our 40 years of application expertise to think beyond simple product-based solutions. Instead, we offer a complete system approach that can help lower your energy and maintenance costs. So you can rely on us for long-term solutions that help make you more profitable. That’s not just a promise. It’s the promise of something better. See what our team can do for you at PeopleBehindThePromise.com/Jim
INSIDE
JUNE 2011
VOLUME 43
NO. 6
COLUMNS The Editor’s Desk
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 07 Subsidies help control user costs while helping companies in need stay solvent. By Roy Bigham
Legal Lookout. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Disastrous oil and gas pipeline failures are increasing and the DOT is ready to make changes. By Lynn L. Bergeson
Casebook Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 The question of what is more important, quantity or quality, is answered. By Dr. Dianne Saxe
Practical Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Hazardous waste generators must have a plan in case of an emergency and that plan must be communicated. By Norman Wei
Air Monitor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
25 FEATURES
EPA has awarded $32 million this year to fund four Clean Air Research Centers. By Sarah Sajedi and Ross O’Lochlainn
State Rules. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Environmental Rules change daily. BLR brings a few of the latest changes needed to stay in compliance. By BLR
DEPARTMENTS
16
EnviroNews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
An overview of the current state of U.S. air pollution control policy, the dates, deadlines, and outlook for 2011 through 2015.
PE Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
The Consequential Cost of Carelessness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Computer Controlled Equipment. . . . . . . 44
Control: The Next Five Years . . . . . . . . . .
22
Properly handling liquid hazardous wastes may not be rewarding but it can save a ton of money.
Air Pollution Control Equipment . . . . . . . . 44 PE Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Classified Marketplace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Advertisers Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
The Green Frontier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 25 The cleanup of a North Dakota diesel spill required expertise, patience and above all, collaboration.
Calculating Software ROI . . . . . . . . . . . .
POLLUTION CONTROL SOLUTIONS SOLU FOR AIR, WATER, SOLID & HAZARDOUS WASTE WAST
29
JUNE 2011
Modern environmental management systems can save money and help environmental managers, but the approval road is not an engineer’s blueprint.
Fashionable Water Treatment. . . . . . . . .
ON THE COVER
34
Darker clothes are quite fashionable these days. However as the use of strong dyes increases, treating the resulting wastewater becomes an ever-greater challenge.
Cost of Carelessness Pg 22
Old Spill Needs New Fix Pg 25
Calculating ROI Pg 29 www.pollutionengineering.com
Member
Designed by PE's Art Director Tammie Gizicki.
May 16-19, 2011
Subscribe to Pollution Engineering and our electronic newsletters at www.pollutionengineering.com.
ISO 9001 Certified Quality Management System
Dan Codispot, Eastern Production Manager
Technology waits for no man. That’s why at Robinson Fans, our expert engineers are constantly advancing the air movement industry with innovative products and services. But as we move forward, it’s important to know we haven’t forgotten our past. With over one hundred years of experience, we’re still leading the way with high-performance equipment and proven solutions that make your operations and processes more productive. Robinson nson Fans. Fan ns. The The name nam ame e behind what’s wha hat at s ahead. ahead. ah
Find out what keeps Robinson Fans moving forward.
RobinsonFans.com
|
724-452-6121
E x h a u s t i v e re s e a rc h yields laboratory
[
air
]
b re a k t h ro u g h .
2
Meet the Vektor family! 1
Vektor-H 270 cfm - 24,000 cfm
1
2
Vektor-MD 1,500 cfm - 80,000 cfm
3
Vektor-CD 500 cfm - 140,000 cfm
3
Safely discharge fumes from any size lab with a reliable Greenheck lab exhaust system. Vektor-MD mixed flow inline and Vektor-CD centrifugals use multi-stage nozzles that dilute fumes and discharge them safely, high above pharmaceutical, university, or biomedical research applications. Vektor-H is ideal for high school labs, hospital isolation rooms and forensic labs. Vektor-MD and CD units can be integrated with the Greenheck Vektor-ERS Energy Recovery System to reduce energy usage and operating costs. Do some research — visit greenheck.com or contact your Greenheck representative. All Vektor units meet ANSI Z9.5 and ASHRAE laboratory design guidelines and are UL/cUL 705 Listed. Vektor-MD and CD fans are AMCA 260 tested.
Prepared to Support Green Building Efforts
Autodesk® Revit® Models Available
715.359.6171 • greenheck.com
Vektor-H Vektor-MD is certified. and Vektor-CD are certified.
Centrifugal & Vane Axial Fans | Fans & Ventilators | Energy Recovery Ventilators | Make-up Air Units | Kitchen Ventilation Systems | Dampers | Louvers | Lab Exhaust Systems | Coils g gy y p y p y
EDITOR'SDESK Do Subsidies Really Help? Subsidies help control user costs while helping companies in need stay solvent.
T
his is shaping up to be a major topic right now. California requires utilities to provide at least 33 percent of the energy generation from renewable sources by 2020. Most states require 10 to 20 percent of their energy be produced from such sources. Support groups say we need such a move to avoid the egregious impacts that carbon-based energy will be sure to cause. Opponents say there is too much disparity in the costs to make major moves to renewable sources a viable alternative. In his State of the Union address in January 2011, President Obama promised to submit a budget to Congress that would include funding for clean energy support. In February, he proposed adding $8 billion in clean energy subsidies in 2012. Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu recently pledged nearly $4 billion to California for alternative power technology development. Currently most clean energy technologies cannot supply energy as cost efficiently as fossil fuel sources. Countries across the pond sought to increase the use of renewable sources through high subsidies. Renewable sources were expected to be available at higher efficiencies and lower costs and allow more adoption. Unfortunately that is not happening. Countries are beginning to pull back on subsides for various reasons but mostly because the costs are remaining too high. Here is a scary thought: What if our government suddenly dropped subsidies for all energy sources? Costs would dramatically escalate. Such a proposal is not completely out of right field: a dramatic shift
toward libertarianism within conservative politics in the U.S. in recent years has led several prominent candidates to include ending subsidies on their platforms. They are making a strong case against the wisdom of subsidization, but as yet nobody seems to know how to wean us off them without skyrocketing prices. Currently energy supplies are strictly controlled as permits are required to gather the energy, build processing plants, run wires, store the power, etc. Permit negotiations are handled by large, expensive law firms and many layers of politicians and bureaucrats in order to get permissions to sell their product. On the other hand, nearly anybody can start a business growing food and selling it. While there may be some paperwork involved, a room filled with lawyers and stacks of forms filled out in triplicate are not needed. That results in more supply and lower prices. Personally I think we should drop subsidies and remove the mountain of bureaucrats that have to be climbed. Improve the oversight mechanisms, whether EPA or DOE. With more energy companies and energy product available, the prices will naturally be competitive and consumers will have a proper choice. PE
Roy Bigham is Editor of Pollution Engineering. He can be contacted at
[email protected] Pollution Engineering Masthead 2401 West Big Beaver, Ste. 700, Troy, Michigan 48084 | Phone: (248) 362-3700 | www.pollutionengineering.com PUBLISHING & EDITORIAL STAFF
ADVERTISING & SALES STAFF
Tom Esposito | Senior Group Publisher
Larry Maher | Midwest/West Coast Sales Manager 630-616-7271 |
[email protected] Seth Fisher | Publisher 248-244-6248 |
[email protected] Roy Bigham | Editor 248-244-6252 |
[email protected] Contributing Editors Erin Manitou-Alvarez Lynn L. Bergeson, Esq., Neginmalek Davapanah Barbara Quinn
Sarah Sajedi Dr. Dianne Saxe Norman Wei Christopher Young
Lori Koning | East Coast Sales 814-833-9303 |
[email protected] Lydia Stewart | Inside Sales Manager and Classified Sales 248-758-0137 |
[email protected] LIST RENTAL Kevin Collopy | Postal Contact 800-223-2194 x 684|
[email protected] Tammie Gizicki | Art Director
[email protected] Michael Costantino |Email contact 800-223-2194 x748 |
[email protected] John Talan | Production Manager 248-244-8253 |
[email protected] Direct line: (800) 223-2194 Fax: (845) 620-9035 Web: www.edithroman.com
MARKETING/REPRINTS/RESEARCH Jill DeVries | Editorial Reprints 248-244-1726 |
[email protected] Michele Raska | Marketing & Promotions Manager 248-786-1694 |
[email protected] Michelle Maki | Project Manager
[email protected] CORPORATE DIRECTORS Timothy A. Fausch - Publishing John R. Schrei – Publishing Rita M. Foumia – Corporate Strategy Vince M. Miconi – Production Lisa L. Paulus – Finance Michael T. Powell – Creative Holly Banks – Marketing Directories Nikki Smith - Directories Marlene J. Witthoft - Human Resources: Emily Patten – Conferences & Events Beth A. Suroweic – Clear Seas Research
AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT Hayat Ali-Ghoneim | Audience Development Coordinator Alison Illes | Multimedia Specialist Catherine M. Ronan | Corporate Audience Audit Manager For subscription information or service, please contact Customer Service at: Tel. (847) 763-9534 or Fax (847) 763-9538 or e-mail
[email protected] BNP Media Helps People Succeed in Business with Superior Information
JUNE2011
www.pollutionengineering.com
7
KEY PERFORMANCE FACTORS for Laboratory Selection
HOW TO: Choose a Laboratory for the Analysis of Environmental Samples BY DAVID SPEIS, Vice President, Technical Support Accutest Laboratories Selecting qualified laboratories for environmental sample analysis can be a daunting and expensive process. The cost of poor selection can have broad impacts on analytical data and remedial costs if the selection process is conducted without regard to the key factors reflective of a solidly performing laboratory. Commercial programs may offer shortcuts to improved laboratory selection at reduced costs using narrow, imprecise methodology and criteria that is subject to interpretation errors. Abbreviated approaches are contrary to the comprehensive national approach developed for the accreditation of environmental laboratories. Laboratory services purchasers should always employ selection processes that incorporate key laboratory qualification elements. Typically, this process relies upon existing laboratory qualification information that is available from the laboratory without cost. An effective laboratory selection process must be comprehensive, incorporating the following key elements. This approach assures that selection is based on essential laboratory performance factors instead of single factors which may be misrepresented or misinterpreted:
Identify Potential Candidates. Candidate laboratories that are capable of delivering the data and services needed by the purchaser are identified. These laboratories are typically identified based on size, reputation and geographical proximity to the buyer or buyer’s project. Qualified consultants can contribute recommendations based on their experiences. The entire laboratory qualification process can be managed internally or through an engineering or quality assurance consultant.
Pre-Qualification. Candidate laboratories should be asked to submit a qualifications package tailored to the buyer’s needs. These qualifications are evaluated by individuals experienced in laboratory accreditation and operations. • ACCREDITATIONS. A list of accreditations and accreditation venues should be provided. The buyer compares this information to his accreditation needs for the analysis being performed. An accreditation is the laboratory’s license to report regulatory data and is granted on a method, matrix and analyte basis. • PRODUCTS. Product listings, including all sample preparation and analysis methods, data delivery formats, including electronic products must be provided. Laboratory capability should be evaluated in relationship to project needs, validation needs or regulatory agency requirements.
44
Pollution Engineering APRIL2011
• CAPACITY. Laboratory capacity data provides the buyer with a measure of a laboratory’s size with quantitative information on their ability to deliver data for specific analyses. Turnaround information informs the buyer how quickly data is delivered. Assuring that a laboratory has sufficient capacity to perform the required analysis within a desirable turnaround period is essential to project success. • EXPERIENCE. The laboratory’s staff credentials and experience reflect broad, in-depth knowledge of environmental analytical chemistry and longevity with the organization. A relevant project experience summary to obtain a flavor for the types of projects the laboratory performs provides a perspective on their ability to perform to the buyers needs. • QUALITY SYSTEM. All laboratories maintain a documented quality system manual, which they will provide to clients freely on request. The majority of laboratories have NELAC quality systems which are based on ISO/IEC Standard 17025. Descriptions of active quality system programs should be evaluated to determine if they reflect industry standard, regulatory and buyer expectations and that the system fosters an environment where data of known and documented quality is being produced. • STANDARD OPERATION PROCEDURES. Standard operating procedures (SOPs) are required for all laboratory activities. Key process SOPs that are within the scope of analytical activities required for client projects can be requested and should be reviewed to assure that the laboratory’s methods applications are compliant with the published method and laboratory activities conform to standard practices. • ACCREDITATION AUDIT. Accredited laboratories receive a comprehensive on-site assessment from their Accrediting Body (AB - State). The laboratory will provide a copy of the latest laboratory audit performed by their primary AB. Laboratories are required to prepare corrective action responses to audit findings, which they will also provide. Audit findings can be evaluated to determine if they could jeopardize data or program execution. • STATISTICAL PERFORMANCE DATA. Laboratories generate annual statistical data based on previous performance that defines the criteria which is used to assess method control. This data includes performance ranges for quality control parameters and method detection limits for every method. It can be obtained for methods of interest and reviewed to verify that the laboratory’s method execution complies with expected performance requirements and method sensitivity is sufficient for buyer needs. • PERFORMANCE METRICS. Performance metrics provide an overview of delivery timeliness, which can be essential to meeting regulatory reporting commitments or limiting downtime awaiting analytical data for remedial activities. Performance metrics can be extended to other performance areas including error rates and client complaints. Each provides specific information regarding laboratory performance and client satisfaction.
PRACTICALMANAGEMENT By Norman Wei
• PAST PROFICIENCY TEST (PT) SCORES. Laboratories regularly perform comprehensive PT studies to maintain their accreditation. They frequently are requested to provide PT data reports to clients, which they do without cost. Each PT vendor employs a different format to report PT results. Although general information about a laboratories performance can be obtained from PT scores, they are of limited value in demonstrating a labs true performance in “real world” situations. The international community recommends that PT data not be used to rank laboratories in ISO/IEC Guide 43-1:1997 (E) 6.6.5 stating that “Reporting of performance by ranking laboratories in a table according to their performance is not recommended in proficiency testing. • CLIENT SERVICES SYSTEM. The relationship between the buyer and the laboratory is critical to project management. Understanding the processes a laboratory uses to manage clients and their projects indicates how that client can be expected to be treated. The client services system should be clearly documented and reflect the level of communication the client expects from the laboratory. • REFERENCES. Buyer assessments of laboratories provide valuable information on the laboratory’s performance and relationships with clients even though the feedback may be biased by the laboratory’s selection of the reference. Nonetheless, feedback on the attributes and shortcomings of a client’s interaction with the laboratory may be obtained through brief interviews with the referenced individual.
Site Visits. Sufficient information to qualify a laboratory can be obtained through a pre-qualification information package. However, it behooves buyers to conduct a formal laboratory site visit to verify operational functionality and the quality system described in the pre-qualification package. Site visits can be as brief or as comprehensive as the buyer desires and can also take the form of a qualification audit where the laboratory is evaluated to existing accreditation and performance standards. • QUALITY SYSTEM VERIFICATION. Verify the functional ele-
ments of the quality system with the laboratory demonstrating through documentation or action that the system is in use or functional. Verifying documentation practices assures that all
analysis conducted by the laboratory is traceable and can be reconstructed upon challenge. • SAMPLE MANAGEMENT. Proper sample handling upon labo-
ratory receipt is essential to the production of valid environmental data. Sample management activities should be assessed to assure that incoming samples are properly documented on arrival, are checked for thermal and chemical preservation, maintained under custody, properly preserved until analyzed and disposed in accordance with Resource Conservation and Recovery Act requirements. Improper sample management practices may invalidate data and/or create waste disposal liabilities for the buyer. • ANALYTICAL COMPETENCY. Assessing analytical compe-
tency through an evaluation of paper documents only provides limited information on the laboratory’s application of a method. Assessments of individual methods of importance to the buyer can be evaluated through analyst interviews, designed to obtain information on sample handling at the bench, method application, data review, documentation and corrective action for quality control failures. Assessments include a review of relevant data packages to obtain a first hand view of the procedures, process and outcome of all data production activities. • HEALTH & SAFETY. A strong health and safety program not
only protects individual employees, but also protects the laboratory from liability associated with insufficient health and safety training. This philosophy can be extended to the buyer with a strong health and safety program insulating them from liability as well. It also reflects a higher level of operational discipline consistent with a well functioning quality assurance system. Although there are strong economic incentives to employ qualification programs that rely on limited factors for the basis of laboratory selection, these types of processes are likely to result in the selection of unqualified organizations because they fail to consider essential information that contributes to the accreditation process. Accordingly, it is essential to rely on a laboratory selection process that is based on an accreditation system which is designed to foster the generation of environmental data of known and documented quality.
CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS 2235 US Highway 130 • Dayton, NJ 08810 P: (732) 329-0200 • F: (732) 329-3499 Locations Nationwide www.accutest.com Read the entire paper on PE's White Paper website section.
APRIL2011
www.pollutionengineering.com
45
ENVIRONEWS Coal Gets Renewed Respect With the recent disaster at the nuclear plant in Japan and studies indicating gas-fired generating plants will emit more greenhouse gases than new coal generators, countries around the globe are taking another look at coal-fired electrical generation. Of the $1.9 trillion now planned for new fossil and nuclear power in 2011-20 period 62 percent will be coal based. This is the new forecast in Fossil and Nuclear Power Generation, a continuously updated report published by the McIlvaine Company. The biggest investments in new coalfired electrical generation will be in Asia. Gas Turbine, However, ultra supercritical coal-fired Coal, 350 power plants will replace aging inefficient 600 coal-fired power plants in much of the rest of the world. Nuclear, Replacing old coal power plants with new 90 coal power plants will have very large environmental benefits while not increasing the cost of electricity. Plants built prior to 2020 can be replaced in 2045 with whatever is the best choice at that time. Solar and wind could be competitive by that date. Nuclear could be viewed as safer than it is today. Coal with CO2 sequestration may also be an option, but not in the near term. More info is available at mcilvainecompany.com.
Worldwide New Construction Power Plants. Thous. MW 2011-2020
Correction April State Rules Item 8 -
UL Offers to Detect Chromium-6 Contamination
We reported in the April issue on page 50 that the state Air Management Services Division recently finalized regulations to limit exposures from drycleaning facilities. The original information from Business & Legal Reports Inc. correctly mentioned that it was Philadelphia’s Air Management Services Division and was not a state regulation. We would like to thank Lynda Rebarchak, the community relations coordinator for the Department of Environmental Protection for pointing out our error and allowing us to correct it. The Philadelphia Health Department has authority to regulate air quality within the city.
Underwriters Laboratories Inc. (UL) is offering municipalities and customers across the country access to its globally recognized testing and certification services to detect Chromium-6, also known as hexavalent chromium, in drinking water supplies. UL has begun testing water samples using EPA Method 218.6 revision 3.3, which allows detection limits down to 0.02 ppb. The company can also use EPA Method 200.8 to measure total chromium to a detection limit of 0.1 ppb. Based on study results released by the Environmental Working Group last fall, the EPA has warned that chromium-6 may be more prevalent in drinking water that previously thought. The group reported finding hexchrome in 31 of the 35 municipal water systems that were tested, though not at levels currently considered dangerous by the EPA. Most current permits only require total chromium testing and the EPA is changing that with new permits and requirements. For more information on UL’s testing and analytical services for the water industry, visit www.ul.com/water.
10
Pollution Engineering JUNE2011
LEGALLOOKOUT By Lynn L. Bergeson
Pipeline Safety Action Plan Disastrous oil and gas pipeline failures are increasing and the DOT is ready to make changes. ccording to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, more than 2.5 million miles of pipelines are responsible for delivering oil and gas to communities and businesses across the United States. Much of the pipeline network is old and in a state of disrepair. The Obama Administration launched on April 4, 2011, a national pipeline safety initiative to repair and replace aging pipelines to prevent potentially catastrophic incidents. As discussed below, the initiative contains other elements comprising its pipeline safety action plan.
A
Background Over the last three years, according to DOT statistics, annual fatalities have risen from nine in 2008, to 13 in 2009 to 22 in 2010. The ten-year average number of fatalities is 15. Following several fatal pipeline accidents, LaHood called upon U.S. pipeline owners and operators to conduct a comprehensive review of their oil and gas pipelines to identify areas of high risk, and urged each to accelerate critical repair and replacement work. DOT has agreed to provide technical assistance in helping to identify high-risk pipelines. Pipeline safety is a key priority for the current administration in light of the high-profile pipeline accidents over the past several years. Serious pipeline incidents are down nearly 50 percent over the last 20 years but the recent spike in fatalities is alarming. According to DOT, there are three major causes of significant pipeline failures resulting in oil spills or gas explosions. These are: damage from digging; corrosion; or failure of the pipe material, welds, or equipment. DOT has announced a multi-faceted action plan to bolster pipeline safety. The White House announced federal legislation designed to strengthen pipeline safety oversight. Pipeline Safety Forum in Washington, D.C., is also being planned. The forum would enable stakeholders, including state officials, industry leaders and others involved in pipeline safety to discuss steps for improving the safety and efficiency of the nation’s pipeline infrastructure. The legislation would increase the maximum civil penalties for pipeline violations from $100,000 per day to $250,000 per day, and from $1 million for a series of violations to $2.5 million for a series of violations. LaHood urged Congress to authorize DOT to close regulatory loopholes, strengthen risk management requirements,
increase the number of pipeline inspectors, and improve data reporting to help identify potential pipeline risks early. The department’s pipeline safety action plan seeks to address immediate concerns such as ensuring that pipeline operators know the age and condition of their systems; proposing new regulations to strengthen reporting and inspection requirements; and making information about pipelines and the safety record of pipeline operators easily accessible to the public.
“
The legislation would increase the maximum civil penalties for pipeline violations from $100,000 per day to $250,000 per day, and from $1 million for a series of violations to $2.5 million for a series of violations.
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration also intends to create a new web page to provide the public with immediate access to information about their local pipeline networks. DOT believes that ensuring the public has access to information about local pipelines will help keep people safe and reduce the potential for serious accidents. These measures should go a long way to blunt the recent spike in pipeline accidents causing catastrophic injury or death. While the adage “safety first” is the number one rule to follow to avert disaster, the likelihood of adverse incidents significantly increases when ancient pipelines are involved that lack maintenance. The action plan is properly directed at providing leadership and resources to address this latent problem. PE
”
Lynn L. Bergeson is managing director of Bergeson & Campbell, P.C., a Washington, D.C., law firm focusing on conventional and engineered nanoscale chemical, pesticide, and other specialty chemical product approval and regulation, environmental health and safety law, chemical product litigation, and associated business issues, and President of The Acta Group L.L.C. and The Acta Group EU Ltd. with offices in Washington, D.C., and Manchester, U.K.
JUNE2011 www.pollutionengineering.com
11
Chart Your Course to Real
SUCCESS At Clear Seas Research we develop customized research solutions to identify:
The outlook for new/existing products Customer needs and expectations Optimal product price points Marketing messages with impact Your position in the industry Areas of customer satisfaction Opportunities for new solutions/products . . . and much more
CLEAR SEAS RESEARCH. Making the Complex Clear.
Find out how we can customize a research solution to help your bottom line. 248.786.1683
[email protected] www.clearseasresearch.com
An industry-focused market research company
As a CASRO member, we subscribe to the Code of Standards and Ethics for Survey Research established by the Council of American Survey Research Organizations.
CASEBOOKCANADA By Dianne Saxe, Ph.D.
From Paperwork to Atom Smashing The question of what is more important, quantity or quality, is answered. Properly completed forms are essential he Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) has reminded all potential appellants that they must correctly file their appeals if they want their case to be heard. In Waterdown Gardens v MOE, a prolonged dispute between the ministry and the company resulted in two separate orders that ended up suspending their certificate of approval. The company then appealed the first suspension. During mediation by the ERT, they reached Minutes-of-Settlement with the MOE to allow them to reopen. Under the Minutes, the ERT retained jurisdiction, and either side could ask to reopen the mediation action. Unfortunately, the company failed to completely comply with the settlement, which prompted the MOE issue a second suspension order. The company, which was self represented, protested in writing Nuclear Liability Act: to the MOE that the issue was http://www.canlii.org/ already before the ERT, and en/ca/laws/stat/rscshould be resolved there as 1985-c-n-28/latest/rscstated under the first order. 1985-c-n-28.html The MOE did not respond to the letter, and the company thought that meant the MOE had agreed to proceed under the first order. Thus they did not file a formal appeal of the second
T
“
Because of their misunderstanding of the legal process, Waterdown Gardens is out of luck.
”
order, and were shocked to discover that the ministry now considered their original appeal to be moot. This month, the ERT issued their decision. They cannot hear an appeal from the second suspension, because no notice of appeal was filed on time. Also they would not be allowed to hear the appeal from the first order, because it is now considered to be
moot. That is, the original appeal and the first order are irrelevant, because the certificate has now been suspended by the second order. Because of their misunderstanding of the legal process, Waterdown Gardens is out of luck.
“
If a nuclear incident were to happen here, who would be responsible to cover the costs for containment and cleanup?
What if a nuclear meltdown happened in Canada? As Japan battles to prevent a nuclear catastrophe at the Fukushima nuclear energy power plant, with the assistance of the International Atomic Energy Agency, anxious eyes around the globe are turning to nuclear safety in other countries. Canadian constructed reactors boast a relatively safe design, but still require cooling, and are therefore vulnerable to a major earthquake. If a nuclear incident were to happen here, who would be responsible to cover the costs for containment and cleanup? To induce the private sector to invest in nuclear plants, the Nuclear Liability Act of Canada allows the federal government to cap the liability of a nuclear plant operator at $75 million, and to require taxpayers to pick up all additional losses. In other words, all Canadians guarantee the unlimited financial (and health) losses that could result from a public or private nuclear incident. I continue to be amazed that this provokes less than a 1,000th of the public opposition currently directed at wind power. PE
”
Dianne Saxe is one of Canada’s leading environmental lawyers, is a certified specialist in environmental law and member of the Ontario Bar Association Environmental Section Executive. She also holds one of Canada’s only Doctorates of Jurisprudence (Ph.D.) in environmental law.
JUNE2011 www.pollutionengineering.com
13
PRACTICALMANAGEMENT By Norman Wei
10 Steps for Emergency Preparedness Hazardous waste generators must have a plan in case of an emergency and that plan must be communicated. enerators of more than 100 kg of hazardous wastes in a calendar month must determine if they are small or large-quantity generators as defined by federal regulations. A large-quantity generator generates more than 1,000 kg of hazardous wastes in a calendar month. That is roughly equal to five 55-gallon containers a month. As a waste generator, there are certain requirements pertaining to preparedness and prevention that must be followed: 1. Have an accessible communication or alarm system capable of providing emergency instructions to plant personnel. In the event of an emergency, instruct plant personnel to evacuate to a safe area.
G
“
My advice is to make a written plan regardless of generator status.
”
2. A two-way communication device is needed to communicate the emergency and request assistance from local authorities, such as the police department, fire department or emergency response teams. 3. The preparedness plan must clearly identify the locations of fire extinguishers, water hose stations, automatic sprinklers and other forms of fire control equipment. It should also include a plant layout showing all exit routes. 4. Have a complete, up-to-date list of on-site spill control equipment such as pumps and absorbents. 5. Include a description of routine procedures to test and maintain emergency equipment, so that they are always in a state of operational readiness. It is critical to assign someone the responsibility of replenishing any expended spill control material. 6. All on-site hazardous wastes storage areas must maintain adequate aisle space to allow access for emergency and spill response personnel. The federal regulation does not specify how large the aisle space needs to be. As a general rule of thumb, the space should be at least 24 inches, or wide enough for a 55-gallon container to pass through.
14
Pollution Engineering JUNE2011
7. Store waste containers in such a manner that each container is easily accessible to an inspector. The inspector must be able to read and inspect every label on each container without having to go through some physical contortion. 8. Have documented procedures in place to minimize the possibility of fire, explosion or spills. That includes required emergency and warning signage. 9. The federal rule requires previous arrangements with local authorities on providing emergency response. That means is that a copy of the emergency plan must be on file with the local fire department, police station and hospital, and that these institutions know what kind of wastes are stored at the facility. Make sure to document any effort made to reach out to these local authorities because it is your responsibility to do so under federal law. Not all local authorities are aware of the requirements. 10. If there are contractual arrangements with a private emergency response company to handle any spills at the facility, make sure to include the contract in the preparedness plan. One last point: the rule requires only large quantity generators need to have a written plan. A small-quantity generator does not have to have a written plan – but must have a qualified plan nonetheless. My advice is to make a written plan regardless of generator status. A large quantity generator must designate an Emergency Coordinator who must have delegated authority from senior management to shut down operation in case of an emergency. This person must be accessible and reachable at all times. The Contingency Plan must also be kept up-to-date. Failure to do so is one of the more frequently cited violations during Resource Conservation and Recovery Act inspections. PE
Norman Wei Norman Wei is the founder and principal instructor at Environmental Management and Training LLC. based in Cape Coral, Fla. He does consulting work for companies and also conducts environmental seminars throughout the country. His company website is www. proactenv.com and he writes a blog at www.normanswei.wordpress.com. His email address is
[email protected].
THE AIRMONITOR By Sarah Sajedi and Ross O'Lochlainn
EPA Expands Air Research EPA has awarded $32 million this year to fund four Clean Air Research Centers. uch of the research will focus on health impacts generated by air pollution mixtures. Currently the Air Quality Index, used to grade the quality of air we breathe, is scaled by the concentration levels of only a single pollutant that is classified as most harmful. This does not address health risks associated with concurrent exposure to multiple air pollutants. As with most health related topics, the effects on those most at risk in our societies will be the primary focus. Impacts of pollution mixtures on children and older citizens will be used to determine the varying degrees of health effects that occur at different life stages. Also of keen interest during the studies will be at-risk populations, including those with pre-existing conditions and people living in communities where the health risks associated with air pollution are greater. Four research institutions will each receive $8 million over five years.
M
Research focus The research at the University of Washington’s Center for Clean Air Research (CCAR) will be focused on the cardiovascular health effects of near-roadway pollution. Near-road pollution is emissions composed of components that can vary by vehicle-type, road surface, extent of physical aging, and atmospheric conditions. The CCAR expects that “identifying the most hazardous components of near-roadway exposures will allow more focused, coordinated and effective air pollution health policy based on sound science to reduce health impacts of this multi-pollutant exposure.” Michigan State University’s Great Lakes Air Center for Integrative Environmental Research (GLACIER) sets out to explore the interrelationships between facets of the cardio-metabolic syndrome (CMS) and air pollution. CMS is among the leading causes of death worldwide, and has been on the increase since first being defined by the World Health Organization in 1998. Exposure to air pollution, most notably fine particle matter, also remains highly prevalent and ranks among the leading causes of global mortality. GLACIER expects to address issues that contribute to CMS, ranging from time-based effects, to the effects of ozone and fine particulate matter mixtures in different locations, and the role of pre-existing conditions in individual susceptibility.
The Southeastern Center for Air Pollution and Epidemiology in Georgia is proposing to address the “critical issues relating to the public health impacts of ambient air pollution.” The center brings together researchers with significant access to rich air quality and health outcome databases to focus on characterizing ambient air pollution mixtures and uncovering their role in the development of human health risks. It is intending to address the biological considerations of oxidants and the impacts of correct management of various sources of pollution by using evidence-based traffic emissions.
“
Impacts of pollution mixtures on children and older citizens will be used.
Harvard University’s research aims to investigate “the acute and chronic health effects across life stages of six exposure metrics.” These include short- and long- term exposures to individual pollutants, various pollutant sources and also multi-pollutant mixtures. The effects these have on neuropsychological function, cardiovascular function, early human development and CVD-related hospitalization will act as the primary focus. Additionally it will aim to identify susceptibility and vulnerability factors that modify these effects in the general population. They expect these to be a mixture of gender, diabetes, obesity, socioeconomic disparities, stress, depression, violence, smoking, and omega-3 fatty acid intake in children, adults and elderly conditions. As with all areas of this research grant, regional and temporal differences in air pollution risks are also expected to play a part. PE
”
By Sarah Sajedi & Ross O'Lochlainn Sarah Sajedi is the Director of Research and Development. Ross O’Lochlainn attended University of Limerick, Ireland where he graduated with honors in mechanical engineering, completing a thesis in wavelet analysis of turbulent flows, and an internship with processor-chip giant, Intel Ireland Ltd. After graduating, he relocated to Montreal, Canada to complete his Masters in environmental engineering with a focus in Water Resources.
JUNE2011
www.pollutionengineering.com
15
AIR CONTR
The Next Five Y An overview of the current state of U.S. air pollution the dates, deadlines, and outlook for 2011 By ROY BIGHAM
E
arlier this year EPA air chief Gina McCarthy told a gathering of power industry professionals that she is quite aware agency dithering on air regulations has retarded meaningful investment, and vowed to stick to current deadlines. The candor is appreciated, but the regulated community can be forgiven for feeling a bit skeptical when the agency is pursuing wholly new emission controls while a decade or more behind on some old ones. Air issues have been top priorities for people around the globe for a long time. The damage wrought from poor air quality is well documented. It often seems that 16
Pollution Engineering JUNE2011
solutions are just out of our reach. Results from study after study in every country on the planet have demonstrated that poor air quality directly causes respiratory ailments, heart ailments, neurological damage, productivity loss, and increased health and hospital expenditures. At the extreme end of the spectrum, it can lead to death as was demonstrated in the Bhopal disaster in 1984. Few places are not touched in some way by air pollutants. Environmental damage can be aggravated by poor air quality. Emissions can lead to acid rain, eutrophication, smog formation, damage to buildings, crop damage, forest damage and many would argue climate alteration.
Air pollution controls are nothing new. This month the industry will get together in Orlando for the Air & Waste Management Association’s 104th meeting. Even before that first meeting in 1907, Progressives had spent nearly two decades lobbying for controls on “smoke.” Were one of those early municipal smoke inspectors to come to this year’s meeting he might be forgiven for thinking he had stepped into a fantasyland, and not just because the show is at Disney World. The serious legwork began in the 1960s. People around the world were highly concerned over the obvious damage resulting from air and water pol-
AIR CONTROL
ROL:
GDP Up; Pollution Down
Years
Figure 1
control policy, through 2015.
lution. Death rates and illnesses were increasing. Buildings and statues were suffering deterioration much quicker than should be expected. Fish populations were drastically impacted. Water was noticeably dirtier. The United States under then President Nixon formed a new federal agency called the Environmental Protection Agency in 1969 to turn the tide.
Status of the ‘Crit-Six’ Gaining control over what appeared to be a runaway issue of pollution control seemed overwhelming. The first EPA administrator, organizational guru William D. Ruckelshaus, methodically
set about the task as required by the 1970 Clean Air Act. That legislation required the EPA to establish national ambient air quality standards through original research. In 1990, Congress realized that the regulations needed to be tightened in order to achieve improved control over air quality. The 1990 Clean Air Act required the EPA to address additional problems such as acid rain. As a result of the agency’s efforts, the list of six “criteria” pollutants were compiled: groundlevel ozone, particulate matter, lead, NO2, CO and SO2. Since 1970, the EPA reports that through 2008 the level of the six common emissions has dropped by about 60 percent, despite population and energy use increases of about 48 percent, and a GDP increase of 209 percent (see Figure 1) over that same time. This is a direct result of regulations put in place by the agency in cooperation with the states. Every engineer involved with air permitting or reporting is (or should be) familiar with EPA’s AP-42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors. An emissions factor is a representative value that attempts to relate the quantity of a pollutant released to the atmosphere with an activity associated with the release of that pollutant. These fac-
Source: USEPA
tors are usually expressed as the weight of pollutant divided by a unit weight, volume, distance, or duration of the activity emitting the pollutant (e.g., kilograms of particulate emitted per megagram of coal burned). Such factors facilitate estimation of emissions from various sources of air pollution. In most cases, these factors are simply averages of all available data of acceptable quality, and are generally assumed to be representative of long-term averages for all facilities in the source category (i.e., a population average). The agency will continue to develop additional emission factors for other industries and tweak existing ones over time. It is very important for an air pollution control engineer to make certain the latest updates are included in his or her copy of AP-42.
2005 Standings: Judges 2, Regulations 0 In the past decade, the EPA did pass new regulations to control air pollutants. Most notable were those controlling fine particulates and ozone pollution that can cross state lines – the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) – and controlling mercury – the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR). However in 2005 the courts found that each of these rules were legally flawed. The JUNE2011 www.pollutionengineering.com
17
AIR CONTROL
Stationary Source Emissions of NOX, SO2 and GHGs Power Plants 100% Residential Combustion 90%
Pulp & Paper Other
80%
Oil and Gas Production & Distribution Metals/ Iron & Steel and NonFerrous Consumer/Commercial Prod. Mfct & Services Crop Production
70%
60%
50%
Chemical Manufacturing Boilers & IC Engines
40%
Minerals (incl. Cement) 30%
Petroleum Refining
20%
10%
0% NOX Emissions
SO2 Emissions
GHG Emissions
† For GHG bar, boilers are within each industry sector.
NOx and SO2 emissions from draft 2005 NEI version 2 GHG emissions from 2006 GHG inventory
Figure 2
agency was ordered to replace the CAIR rule – leaving the old one in place until the “Heir to CAIR” could be approved, but CAMR rule was vacated, meaning the future of the agency’s mercury regulations were once again mercurial. The new Transport Rule is due to be announced this month, June 2011. As for mercury, a consent decree required the agency to propose an air toxic rule to control releases from coaland oil-fired electric utility steam generating units by March 2011, to be finalized by November 2011. The agency met its obligation by proposing a national standard for mercury pollution from power plants and air toxics standards on March 16, 2011. The new rule would control mercury in addition to the following hazardous air pollutants (HAPs): HCl, HF, arsenic, chromium, nickel and acid gases. The regulation would establish numerical emission limits, but include alternative standards, e.g., tighter controls of SO2 instead of HCL, and other more dangerous air toxics instead of mercury. This means the standard will effectively change regulations for PM, SO2 and NOX, or at least reward companies who currently control their emissions to a higher standard. More information on the proposal is available at www.epa.gov/ airquality/powerplanttoxics. 18
P Pollution ll ti ll E Engineering i i JUNE2011
4
Source: USEPA
States refused to ratify it. None of them denied the importance of pollution control but the major emitting nations could not agree as to the details. In 2007, the Supreme Court determined that the EPA did have authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate any air pollutant that might pose a danger to human health or the environment and that could include the so-called greenhouse gas (GHG) list. The agency did conduct further studies and with recommendations from their research groups declared that there was cause for concern over GHG emissions and have moved to required business to track and report such emissions as CO2 equivalents. New Source Performance Standards are expected to be released in 2012.
The new challenge
Focus on power industry
In 1997 representatives from around the globe met in Kyoto, Japan, to discuss air issues. Out of that meeting came the Kyoto Protocols, better known for calling to reduce CO2 emissions to set levels below 1990 emissions, but including many more air issues. As countries signed on and agreed to meet the stipulations of the protocols, it was most notable that China, India and the United
Emissions from power companies burning fossil fuel are the largest single emitter of NOX, SO2 and GHGs, and it’s not even close (see Figure 2). That industry is also the single largest source of Hg emissions as shown in Figure 3. The New Source Review (NSR) provisions of the Clean Air Act were meant to grandfather older plants until they had enough money to make the neces-
Mercury Air Emissions Estimates for Stationary Sources (2005) Coal-fired Power Plants Residential Combustion 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Pulp and Paper Other Metals/Iron & Steel & Non-ferrous Waste Management Consumer/Commercial Prod. Manuf. Chemical Manufacturing Boilers and IC Engines Minerals (including Cement) Petroleum Refineries
Figure 3
5
Source: USEPA
AIR CONTROL
Industry Capacity to Add New Emissions Controls Added 20+ GW of SO2 scrubbers per year 2008 - 2010
Figure 4
Source: USEPA
sary upgrades; for the power industry the result was a lot of older plants that have avoided making major upgrades for decades. There are 991 power plants
capable of producing a total of more than 300 gigawatts of power by burning coal. Of these, 821 or 83 percent are more than 30 years old. Most of the older plants are
grandfathered from requirements to add controls such as SO2 exhaust air scrubbers. Thanks to NSR and generations of managers anxious not to trip it, there are in the U.S. today 425 plants that are over 30 years old that do not have adequate air pollution control gear in place. While the U.S. has an abundance of coal reserves, only seven coal-fired plants have been built in the past 10 years. Many plans were put on hold or cancelled due to the idea that the plants might not be able to afford to control some emissions, and it was unclear just what some of those required controls might be at the time. On the other hand, the power industry has seen an increase in the number of controls added to their systems. Although the world economic slowdown did cause a pullback in investment, there has been a trend since 2006 to add controls such as Selective Catalytic Reduction and Flue Gas Desulfurization systems to power supply plants. See Figure 4.
FHWFRFRPUWJ
,1129$7,9(5(0(',$7,217(&+12/2*,(6 )2586(21/$1'$1',1:$7(5 $SSOLFDWLRQVLQFOXGH ɻ9DSRU,QWUXVLRQ6\VWHPV
ɻ6ROLGLÀFDWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ
ɻ6HGLPHQW5HPHGLDWLRQ
ɻ(QJLQHUHG5HPHGLDO%DUULHUV
:LWKPRUHWKDQ\HDUVRIH[SHULHQFH &(7&2LVDQLQGXVWU\OHDGHULQVLWHDQG VHGLPHQW UHPHGLDWLRQ WHFKQRORJLHV DQGVROXWLRQV )RUD)5((3URMHFW(VWLPDWHSOHDVH JRWRFHWFRFRPUWJDQGVHOHFW³5HTXHVW D4XRWH´IURPWKHPHQXRSWLRQV
&DOO WRVSHDNZLWKDWHFKQLFDOUHSUHVHQWDWLYHWRGD\
JUNE2011 www.pollutionengineering.com
19
AIR CONTROL
Rulemaking Schedule Criteria air pollutant rules: driven by statutory and judicial deadlines Toxics rule and GHG NSPS: court ordered deadlines
Transport Rule II (F) GHG NSPS (F)
2013
2014
2012 2011
Transport Rule (P)
2010
F = Final Rulemaking P = Proposed Rulemaking GHG_Green house gases NSPS= New Source Performance Standard
Transport Rule (F) Transport rule II (P) Toxics Rule (P & F) GHG NSPS (P) 8
Figure 5
Additionally, the power industry has sought out new energy sources to enable them to meet an ever-increasing demand. In the past decade, there was a resurgence of natural gas power plants but since 2006, renewable sources such as biomass, wind and solar have seen a significant increase in numbers. Many states require companies to produce specific percentages of power from renewable sources by a certain date. California recently increased their requirement to 33 percent by 2020. The previous goal had been 20 percent by 2020. The current requirement is the highest in the nation at this point. Additional research is under way to develop cleaner means of using coal as a fuel.
EPA's new direction In the late 2000s, first came $4.00 gas at the pump. Then came “Green.” As the color of the year became regulatory policy, this was translated into a core focus on 20
Pollution Engineering JUNE2011
Source: USEPA
pollution prevention through energy efficiency. The concept was hardly new to this industry, but the widespread greening of America has produced a bevy of funded mandates and new ways that companies can meet regulations (and save money) by reducing power consumption of their processes. EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson set the following guiding principles for her agency regulators: • Promote common-sense strategies that encourage investment in energy efficiency and updated technologies • Use similar strategies to capture multiple pollutants • Set clean, achievable standards while maintaining maximum flexibility on how to get there • Seek input from citizens, industry, affected entities, other stakeholders, and partners in state, local and tribal governments. • Set the standards that make the most sense – focusing on getting the most
meaningful results through the most cost-effective measures. The agency plans to continue to educate business and the citizenry about energy conservation. The agency believes that the largest impact on carbon emission control can come from Americans using less energy. According to a report from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, funding for energy efficiency programs will increase by 250 to 400 percent by 2020 and is expected to provide a savings of electrical demand by up to 8.6 percent.
The future The EPA has set in motion plans to reduce a number of emission controls and more are in the works. Many of the coming rule changes are to meet requirements established by the courts and many are mandated by the rules. A glimpse of that schedule can be seen in Figure 5. The planned steps will set the pace for other nations to follow. PE
PE Events JUNE 2011 12-16 AWWA Annual Conference and Exposition 2011,
Washington, D.C., www.awwa.org/ace11 21-24 A&WMA 104th Annual Conference & Exhibition,
Orlando, Fla., www.awma.org
JULY 2011 4-8
Singapore International Water Week, Singapore, www.siww.com
18-21 Plug-in 2011 Conference & Exposition, Raleigh, N.C., www.plugin2011.com
AUGUST 2011 25-27 2011 China International Environmental Protection Fair, Dalian, China, www.sinoexhibition.com/ep/en
SEPTEMBER 2011 13-15 10th International Conference on Filtration, Leogong, Austria, www.p84.com/product/p84/en/about/ events-fairs/Pages/default.aspx 14-16 Excellence in Building Conference & Expo, Las Vegas, www.eeba.org/conference 14-16 Biorefining Conference and Trade Show, Houston, http://2011ibct.biomassconference.com/ema/ DisplayPage.aspx?pageId=Home 20-22 Hydrovision Brazil, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, www.hydrovisionbrazil.com 20-22 RETECH 2011, Washington, D.C., www.retech2011.com 25-29 XIVth IWRA World Water Congress, Recife, Brazil, www.worldwatercongress.com/en 27-29 Waste & Recycling Expo Mexico, Mexico City, www.wasterecyclingmexico.com 28-29 Geotec Event 2011, Vancouver, B.C., www.geoplace.com 28-30 tcbiomass 2011 International Conference on
Thermochemical Biomass Conversion Science, Chicago, www.gastechnology.org/tcbiomass2011
29-01 Water Philippines 2011, Manila, the Philippines, www.waterphilippines.merebo.com
OCTOBER 2011 3-9
28th International Activated Carbon Conference, Pittsburgh, www.pacslabs.com
14-16 10th International Exhibition &Seminars on Bag Filter
Technology and Equipment, Suzhou, China, www.bagfilter.net/english/englishi.html Visit the Calendar of Events at www.pollutionengineering.com for information.
JUNE2011 www.pollutionengineering.com
21
THE
CONSEQUENTIAL COST OF S S E N S S E E L R CA Properly handling liquid hazardous wastes may not be rewarding but it can save a ton of money.
By GLEN CARTER, Chief Technology Officer, Justrite Manufacturing Co.
n December 2010, the EPA announced that in the 2010 fiscal year they “took enforcement actions that require polluters to pay more than $110 million in civil penalties.” In that time the agency’s criminal enforcement program opened 346 new environmental crime cases. The cases led to 289 defendants charged for allegedly committing environmental crimes, the highest number in five years. One-hundred ninety-eight criminals were convicted and $41 million was assessed in fines and restitution. The federal government can make it expensive to ignore regulations. However these costs may only be the tip of the iceberg. Any spill requires some cleanup time depending on the volume and location of the occurrence. Time spent on cleanup operations is non-productive, resulting in
I
22
Pollution Engineering JUNE2011
reduced output and lower profits. When injuries occur costs quickly escalate. Slips and falls are common when spills create slippery floors. A typical minor slip or fall accident requiring medical attention averages about $5,000 on the low side. Add to this another $2,800 for lost time and perhaps six to eight weeks of medical care and treatment, along with a Worker’s Compensation settlement of $7,000, and it is easy to see how a simple slip quickly adds up to nearly $15,000. For more severe cases, lost time accidents can average $40,000. Many hazardous liquids are flammable. Flammable liquids, and the release or spill of flammable vapors create a significant danger of fire. The costs from industrial and commercial fires are staggering. Indeed, government regulations are only one reason to treat hazardous liquids with respect.
Containment the key A drum, tank or intermediate bulk container (IBC) used to store a free liquid that is considered to be hazardous must be inspected for its integrity on a regular basis. Such inspections must be properly documented as well. When found to be leaking the contents should immediately be transferred to another container. Again, make certain to document the transfer. To prevent the spread of a leaking liquid, every drum, tank or IBC must rest on a properly engineered form of containment system as required by EPA regulation 40 CFR 264.175. A spill-containment pallet can be used to store 55-gallon drums containing hazardous liquids. This type of pallet is designed with a leak-proof sump to capture leaks from a damaged drum or a spill that might occur when filling or pumping from the drum. The pallet features a removable grate
COST OF
S CARELES SNE S
that allows easy access to the sump area to visually check if any leak has occurred and subsequent cleanup as needed. Containment pallets are available in two, three or four drum capacities. Square or space-saving linear styles are also available. The containment standard is a minimum sump capacity of 66 gallons. When specifying spill containment pallets for their facilities users also should be aware of the Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) rule, which applies to facilities with 1,320 gallons or more of above ground storage or 42,000 gallons of buried storage of petroleum oils, non-petroleum oils, animal fats, oils and greases and fish oils, marine mammal oils, and vegetable oils (including oils from seeds, nuts, fruits or kernels). An owner or operator must demonstrate in their SPCC plans all considerations for secondary containment solutions for containers 55 gallons and larger. Each secondary containment area shall be as follows: (1) to hold the entire capacity of the largest container and (2) to have sufficient “freeboard” to hold precipitation. Freeboard refers to the vertical distance to the lowest point of overflow. Adequate freeboard needs to be determined by the owner, the operator or their engineer as outlined in their plan. Pallets that are sheltered do not require freeboard to hold precipitation. This would be implied under good engineering practices.
Additional green objectives Saving oil, electricity and landfill space are additional objectives to be considered. By specifying spill control pallets constructed of recycled polyethylene, it is possible to achieve a double good impact for the environment. Not only do containment pallets protect against ground water contamination; but their material of construction conserves resources and saves landfill space. Wellengineered spill control products made of recycled resin have undergone an extensive review process and some suppliers have obtained recycled content validaA pallet like the one from Justrite shown above can safely contain spills from leaking drums to transfer errors.
JUNE2011 www.pollutionengineering.com
23
COST OF
S CARELES SNE S tion by a recognized third-party auditor, such as UL Environment. This independent validation assures customers that a product claiming to be green, really is; and therefore assures a positive impact on the environment. Why the use of recycled resin? Consider this: one ton of recycled plastic saves: • 6.3 barrels of oil • 5,774 kwh of electricity • 30 cubic yards of landfill space Considering these types of savings, it is no wonder the federal government, under Executive Order 13514 as signed by President Obama last October, is required to establish an integrated strategy towards sustainability. EO 13514 requires agencies to ensure that 95 percent of federal purchases, amongst other initiatives, contain recycled content. PE Glen Carter, chief technology officer, Justrite Manufacturing Co., is a recognized authority on flammable liquids storage and handling. He is currently a member of the NFPA 30 Technical Committee and sits on three UL Standards Committees.
24
Pollution Engineering JUNE2011
40 CFR 264.175 - Containment (a) Container storage areas must have a containment system that is designed and operated in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section, except as otherwise provided by paragraph(c) of this section. (b) A containment system must be designed and operated as follows: (1) A base must underly the containers which is free of cracks or gaps and is sufficiently impervious to contain leaks, spills, and accumulated precipitation until the collected material is detected and removed; (2) The base must be sloped or the containment system must be otherwise designed and operated to drain and remove liquids resulting from leaks, spills, or precipitation, unless the containers are elevated or are otherwise protected from contact with accumulated liquids; (3) The containment system must have sufficient capacity to contain 10% of the volume of containers or the volume of the largest container, whichever is greater. Containers that do not contain free liquids need not be considered in this determination; (4) Run-on into the containment system must be prevented unless the collection system has sufficient excess capacity in addition to that required in paragraph (b)(3) of this section to contain any run-on which might enter the system; and (5) Spilled or leaked waste and accumulated precipitation must be removed from the sump or collection area in as timely a manner as is necessary to prevent overflow of the collection system. (c) Storage areas that store containers holding only wastes that do not contain free liquids need not have a containment system defined by paragraph (b) of this section, except as provided by paragraph (d) of this section or provided that: (1) The storage area is sloped or is otherwise designed and operated to drain and remove liquid resulting from precipitation, or (2) The containers are elevated or are otherwise protected from contact with accumulated liquid. (d) Storage areas that store containers holding the wastes listed below that do not contain free liquids must have a containment system defined by paragraph (b) of this section: (1) FO20, FO21, FO22, FO23, FO26, and FO27.
The GREEN
FRONTIER
By TIM KENYON, Senior Vice President at Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc
The cleanup of a North Dakota diesel spill required expertise, patience and above all, collaboration. he official slogan of Mandan, North Dakota is Where the West Begins. It is situated directly across the Missouri River from the state's capital city. Founded in the late 1800s, it served as a hub for the western expansion of the railroad. But while its pioneering days are long gone, the city is currently facing an environmental challenge that was a long time in the making. They are coping with diesel contamination throughout the downtown business district that has required a complex, multi-million dollar remediation effort. In 1984, technicians undertaking soil tests for the construction of a new law enforcement center in the downtown area smelled diesel. Results of the subsequent assessment revealed that the long-term release of an estimated three million gallons of diesel from the adjacent railyard had spread beneath 12 city blocks of the town’s business district. Some 20 years
T
later, following several partially successful cleanup attempts by the railroad, the city and the North Dakota Department of Health jointly won a nearly $30 million settlement from the railroad, $24 million of which was earmarked to finish the cleanup. Realizing the detrimental effect that pollution was having on real estate values and investments in the impacted area, the city and the state sought a solution that would address the issue once and for all. In response to a Request for Proposals, Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Sioux Falls, N.D., quickly assembled a project team, prepared a $11 million proposal to remove the diesel fuel and was awarded a contract to design and install a comprehensive system to remediate a nearly 21-acre plume of free-phase diesel fuel and contaminated groundwater in the downtown area. The project called for installation of the largest remediation system in the state.
Above photo showing placement of the MPE and SVE system piping in the area near the main remediation building in the foreground with an extraction well completion in the background.
In for the long haul Information gained from more than 100 existing monitor wells showed that site conditions were very amenable to remediation techniques the engineering consulting firm had successfully applied on other largescale projects. Installation of the remediation system, including a total of three remediation buildings, 15 remote manifold structures, and multi-phase and soil vapor extraction (SVE) wells along with water and air treatment systems, was a threeyear process. The reason: the project was not being undertaken on a remote industrial site, but rather in a densely developed downtown business district. Partnership with city officials and close coordination with local residents was required in order to JUNE2011 www.pollutionengineering.com
25
The
GREEN
FRONTIER
install the nearly 300 remediation wells that were necessary to extract the product, and over 20 miles of piping to connect them all. The city purchased a number of distressed downtown buildings where extraction wells could be housed. In addition, two satellite treatment buildings were constructed, one of them at the fire station, which will be utilized as an additional truck bay after the remediation process is complete. Extraction wells were installed in several basements to reach diesel fuel beneath some of the buildings. To get at diesel fuel beneath the recently repaved, four-lane main street without disrupting the traffic flow, slant wells were installed to extend beneath the street from the right–of-way. The system was designed to utilize SVE and multi-phase extraction (MPE) to remove the diesel product. Initially the subsurface conditions were strongly anaerobic, with considerable concentrations of methane present. The use of SVE has resulted in the conversion to aerobic conditions, providing substantial removal
Photo showing a computer-controlled remote manifold system that allows automated switching between MPE and SVE modes.
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
GREEN JOBS ARE A GROWTH INDUSTRY. Today’s fastest-growing job opportunities are green. Companies need professionals who can improve corporate safety, efficiency and compliance with government regulations. Be ready, with a bachelor’s or master’s degree or a certificate in environmental management from University of Maryland University College (UMUC).
Enroll now. Copyright © 2011 University of Maryland University College
26
Pollution Engineering JUNE2011
BH^c:ck^gdcbZciVaBVcV\ZbZci^hgZXd\c^oZYWni]Z8djcX^ad[
