SCS Engineers welcomes Russell Wharton, PE, to SCS Engineers as our new Project Director in Nashville, Tennessee. Russ will run the office that serves the state and brings to diverse SCS clients over three decades of expertise in civil engineering design, municipal, environmental, and geotechnical engineering, architecture, alternative energy (including renewable natural gas), and consulting.
With his years of experience in civil and environmental engineering, Russ’s expertise includes construction management and quality assurance, saving clients time and money. His ability to incorporate LEED elements and sustainability procedures with minimal cost impacts brings more value when applying design elements in the field. These strategies help avoid cost overruns and project delays.
While having experience working on national accounts spanning from the West to East coasts, Russ’s work experience includes counties and cities throughout Tennessee, serving as the client contact and managing regulatory needs, including federal and state agencies and Authority Having Jurisdiction requirements for entitlements (rezoning, special use, variances, design review approvals), and permitting, including such clients as New York City, the Port Authority of NY and NJ, and various international airports.
His broad development design experience – facility siting, grading/drainage, utility (water, sewer, stormwater), pavement, erosion, and sediment control is especially helpful for many businesses and facilities facing stricter regulatory policies necessary to comply with Clean Water regulatory actions.
As a professional engineer and general contractor licensed in Tennessee, Russ earned a Vanderbilt B.E. in civil and environmental engineering. He is also an active member of Rotary International.
Addition of PFAS with final toxicity values
On January 3, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced the automatic addition of nine per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances to the list of chemicals covered by the Toxics Release Inventory. The nine PFAS were automatically added for reporting due to EPA having finalized a toxicity value during 2024, and whose identity is not claimed as confidential business information. These nine PFAS are:
Addition of PFAS no longer claimed as confidential business information
Under NDAA section 7321(e), EPA must review CBI claims before adding a PFAS to the TRI list if the chemical identity is subject to a claim of protection from disclosure under 5 U.S.C. 552(a). EPA previously identified Acetic acid, [(γ-ω-perfluoro-C8-10-alkyl)thio] derivs., Bu esters for addition to the TRI list based on the NDAA’s provision to include specific PFAS upon the NDAA’s enactment. Due to CBI claims related to its identity, this PFAS was not added to the TRI list at that time. The identity of this chemical was subsequently declassified in an update to the Toxic Substances Control Act Inventory in May 2024. Because its identity is no longer confidential, it was added to the TRI list.
These nine newly added PFAS, along with the previous 196 TRI-listed PFAS, are also subject to EPA’s action in October 2023 to classify all PFAS subject to TRI reporting as chemicals of special concern. Among other impacts, this removes the use of a reporting exemption that allowed facilities to avoid reporting information on PFAS when those chemicals were used in small concentrations.
Additional TRI Reporting Resources:
On Tuesday, September 25, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued two enforcement alerts addressing regulatory requirements and associated compliance issues at municipal solid waste landfills (MSW landfills). The alerts address Clean Air Act requirements that control the release of landfill gases (LFG), particularly methane, from MSW landfills.
These reminders represent compliance issues that EPA has flagged during enforcement actions. EPA thought they were important enough to publish these alerts for the benefit of landfill OM&M; expect state and local agencies to focus on these during their regulatory inspections.
The alerts provide an overview of the Clean Air Act regulatory requirements related to landfill air emissions and aim to help landfill owners, operators, and contractors comply with the law and take the necessary steps to avoid potential EPA enforcement actions.
The first enforcement alert, “EPA Investigations Find Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Operators are Failing to Properly Conduct Compliant Monitoring and Maintenance of Gas Collection and Control System,” is intended to remind MSW landfill owners, operators, and their consultants to conduct routine monitoring and maintenance of gas collection systems to ensure all landfill emissions are being properly captured and controlled.
The second enforcement alert, “MSW Landfill Operators Fail to Include Wastes from Total Degradable Waste-in-Place and Properly Sample Landfill Gas, Resulting in Underreported Emissions,” is intended to remind MSW landfill operators, owners, and their consultants to identify and document nondegradable wastes excluded in calculations properly and to collect representative LFG samples for non-methane organic compounds analysis and emission calculations.
If you are operating a landfill that gets an EPA Section 114 request for data, is having or has had an EPA inspection, or has received an EPA NOV, you may want to contact the compliance experts at SCS Engineers to seek advice on EPA’s perspective on rule history, interpretation, and assist how best to prevent or defend against enforcement actions.
Additional Resources
EPA announces final rules intended to reduce pollution from fossil fuel-fired power plants, which the Agency claims will not disrupt reliable electricity delivery. These rules, finalized under separate authorities including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, aim to reduce climate, air, water, and land pollution from the power sector.
The power sector has been investing long-term to transition to a clean energy economy based on rule changes like those recently announced by the EPA. This technical compliance alert summarizes four key rule changes, including:
Clean Air Act – NSPS
40 CFR Part 60
EPA Fact Sheet: https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-04/cps-111-fact-sheet-overview.pdf
Clean Air Act – MATS and TRI
The EPA is updating the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) for coal- and oil-fired power plants to reduce hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions, with standards reflecting the latest advancements in pollution control technologies.
The final rule reduces the mercury emissions limit last set in 2020 by 70 percent for lignite-fired units and reduces the filterable particular emissions limit (a surrogate for other toxic metals) by 67 percent for all coal plants—while also requiring the use of continuous emission monitoring systems to provide real-time, accurate data to regulators, facility operators, and the public to ensure that plants are meeting these lower limits and that communities are protected year-round from pollution exposure.
For more information: https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/mercury-and-air-toxics-standards
Clean Water Act – Effluent Limitations Guidelines (ELG)
40 CFR Part 423
Wastewater discharge standards that apply to coal-fired power plants under the Clean Water Act are intended to reduce the possibility of toxic metals and other pollutants in wastewater entering lakes, streams, and other water bodies.
EPA’s final rule establishes technology-based discharge standards—known as Effluent Limitation Guidelines and Standards (ELGs)—that apply to four types of wastewater:
Recognizing that some coal-fired power plants are in the process of closing or switching to less polluting fuels such as natural gas or renewable natural gas, the regulation includes flexibilities to allow these plants to continue to meet the 2015 and 2020 regulation requirements instead of the requirements contained in this final regulation. The EPA is creating a new subcategory for energy-generating units (EGUs) that permanently cease coal combustion by 2034.
EPA Fact Sheet: https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-04/steam-electric-final-rule-fact-sheet_508.pdf
RCRA – Coal Ash/CCR Disposal and Impoundments
40 CFR Part 257
Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, EPA is finalizing a rule for controlling and cleaning up contamination from the disposal of coal combustion residuals (CCR), or coal ash. The Agency is finalizing regulations for managing coal ash at inactive surface impoundments at inactive power plants and historical coal ash disposal areas. Inactive coal ash surface impoundments at inactive facilities are called “legacy CCR surface impoundments.”
This final rule extends a subset of EPA’s existing CCR requirements to these historic disposal units to remediate contamination and prevent further impacts. These requirements apply to all active and inactive facilities with legacy CCR surface impoundments. EPA is strengthening established groundwater monitoring, corrective action, closure, and post-closure care requirements for CCR management units (regardless of how or when that CCR was placed) at regulated facilities.
This rule becomes effective six months after publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. The compliance deadlines in the final rule provide additional time beyond the effective date for facilities to comply with certain technical criteria based on the amount of time EPA projects that facilities need to complete them, such as installing a groundwater monitoring system or developing a groundwater sampling plan and analysis program.
EPA Fact Sheet: https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-04/legacy_ccrmu_final-_fact_sheet_april2024.pdf
Power Sector Compliance, Operations, and Reporting Resources:
EPA’s final action, also known as a risk management rule under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), is the second risk management rule to be finalized using the process created by the 2016 TSCA amendments.
Methylene chloride is used by consumers for aerosol degreasing and paint and coating brush cleaners, in commercial applications such as adhesives and sealants, and in industrial settings for making other chemicals. For example, methylene chloride is used in the production of more climate-friendly refrigerant chemicals.
Since 1980, at least 88 people have died from acute exposure to methylene chloride, largely workers engaged in bathtub refinishing or other paint stripping, even, in some cases, while fully trained and equipped with personal protective equipment. While EPA banned one consumer use of methylene chloride in 2019, use of the chemical has remained widespread and continues to pose [a] significant and sometimes fatal danger to workers. EPA’s final risk management rule requires companies to rapidly phase down manufacturing, processing, and distribution of methylene chloride for all consumer uses and most industrial and commercial uses, including its use in home renovations.
Consumer use [of methylene chloride] will be phased out within a year, and most industrial and commercial uses will be prohibited within two years.
For a handful of highly industrialized uses, EPA has created a Workplace Chemical Protection Program. This workplace chemical protection program has strict exposure limits, monitoring requirements, and worker training and notification requirements that will protect workers from cancer and other adverse health effects caused by methylene chloride exposure.
Uses that will continue under the Workplace Chemical Protection Program are highly industrialized and important to national security and the economy. These are uses for which EPA received data and other information that shows workplace safety measures to fully address the unreasonable risk could be achieved. These uses include:
Additionally, specific uses of methylene chloride required by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Department of Defense, and the Federal Aviation Administration will also continue with strict workplace controls because sufficient reductions in exposure are possible in these highly sophisticated environments, minimizing risks to workers.
Compliance Under the Risk Management Rule
For uses of methylene chloride continuing under the Workplace Chemical Protection Program, most workplaces will have 18 months after the finalization of the risk management rule to comply with the program and would be required to periodically monitor their workplace to ensure that workers are not being exposed to levels of methylene chloride that would lead to an unreasonable risk. In consideration of public comments on the proposal, EPA extended the compliance timeframe to give workplaces ample time to put worker protections in place.
EPA also revised several other aspects from the proposal including ensuring the Workplace Chemical Protection Program applies to the same uses whether they are federal or commercial uses, establishing a de minimis concentration, and provisions to strengthen and clarify aspects of the Workplace Chemical Protection Program such as monitoring requirements.
EPA will also host a public webinar to explain what is in the final rule and how it will be implemented. The agency will announce the date and time in the coming weeks.
For More Information
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalized a rule that strengthens its process for conducting risk evaluations on chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). These improvements to EPA’s processes advance the goals of this important chemical safety law, ensure that TSCA risk evaluations comprehensively account for the risks associated with a chemical, and provide a solid foundation for protecting public health, including workers and communities, from toxic chemicals. The rule also includes changes to enhance environmental protections in communities overburdened by pollution, complementing the Administration’s environmental justice agenda.
The 2016 TSCA amendments require that EPA establish a procedural framework rule on the process for conducting chemical risk evaluations. TSCA risk evaluations are the basis for EPA’s risk management rules. Although EPA finalized a risk evaluation framework rule in 2017, that rule was challenged in court. EPA’s final rule includes revisions made to respond to the court’s ruling, as well as several changes to improve EPA’s process for TSCA risk evaluations, including:
EPA announced many of the changes included in the final rule in 2021 and has incorporated them into TSCA risk evaluation activities over the past three years. EPA then proposed a revised procedural framework rule in October 2023 and, after considering public comment on the proposed rule, released today’s final rule. EPA is submitting this document for publication in the Federal Register (FR).
The procedures outlined in the rule apply to all risk evaluations initiated 30 days after the date of publication of the final rule or later. For risk evaluations that are currently in process, EPA expects to apply the new procedures to those risk evaluations to the extent practicable, taking into consideration the statutory requirements and deadlines.
TSCA Risk Evaluation Process
The Risk Evaluation process is the second step, following Prioritization and before Risk Management, in EPA’s existing chemical process under TSCA. The purpose of risk evaluation is to determine whether a chemical substance presents an unreasonable risk to health or the environment, under the conditions of use, including an unreasonable risk to a relevant potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation. As part of this process, EPA must (1) evaluate both hazard and exposure, (2) exclude consideration of costs or other non-risk factors, (3) use scientific information and approaches in a manner that is consistent with the requirements in TSCA for the best available science, and (4) ensure decisions are based on the weight-of-scientific-evidence. Learn more about the TSCA risk evaluation process.
Additional Resources
On April 10, the Federal Administration issued the first-ever national, legally enforceable drinking water standard to protect communities from exposure to harmful per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as ‘forever chemicals.’ Exposure to PFAS has been linked to deadly cancers, impacts to the liver and heart, and immune and developmental damage to infants and children. This final rule represents the most significant step to protect public health under EPA’s PFAS Strategic Roadmap.
EPA is also making funding available to help ensure that all people have clean and safe water. In addition to today’s final rule, EPA is announcing nearly $1 billion in newly available funding to help states and territories implement PFAS testing and treatment at public water systems and to help owners of private wells address PFAS contamination. This is part of a $9 billion investment through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to help communities with water impacted by PFAS and other emerging contaminants – the largest-ever investment in tackling PFAS pollution. An additional $12 billion is available through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for general drinking water improvements, including addressing emerging contaminants like PFAS.
The enforceable drinking water PFAS regulations are finalized today and posted here. EPA PFAS regulations under the Safe Water Drinking Act page.
EPA finalized a National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) establishing legally enforceable levels, called Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), for six PFAS in drinking water. PFOA, PFOS, PFHxS, PFNA, and HFPO-DA as contaminants with individual MCLs, and PFAS mixtures containing at least two or more of PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA, and PFBS using a Hazard Index MCL to account for the combined and co-occurring levels of these PFAS in drinking water. EPA also finalized health-based, non-enforceable Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs) for these PFAS.
The final rule requires:
EPA estimates that between about 6% and 10% of the 66,000 public water systems subject to this rule may have to take action to reduce PFAS to meet these new standards. All public water systems have three years to complete their initial monitoring for these chemicals. They must inform the public of the level of PFAS measured in their drinking water. Where PFAS is found at levels that exceed these standards, systems must implement solutions to reduce PFAS in their drinking water within five years.
The new limits in this rule are achievable using a range of available technologies and approaches including granular activated carbon, reverse osmosis, and ion exchange systems. Drinking water systems will have flexibility to determine the best solution for their community and essential services that require wastewater treatment.
Additional Resources:
Proposed PFAS Hazardous Constituents Under RCRA
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to amend its regulation under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) by adding nine specific per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), their salts, and their structural isomers to its list of hazardous constituents. EPA’s criteria for listing substances as hazardous constituents under RCRA require that they have been shown in scientific studies to have toxic, carcinogenic, mutagenic, or teratogenic effects on humans or other life forms.
Entities potentially affected by this action include hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) with solid waste management units (SWMUs) that have released or could release any of the PFAS proposed to be listed as RCRA hazardous constituents. EPA has identified 1,740 such facilities, which could be subject to additional corrective action requirements (under RCRA section 3004(u) and (v)) to address releases not already subject to corrective action under EPA’s corrective action regulations.
The nine PFAS and common uses are as follows:
EPA will collect comments on this PFAS to RCRA’s hazardous constituents proposal for 60 days once published in the Federal Register. Read a prepublication copy of this proposal.
Submit your comments on the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov and identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OLEM-2023-0278.
As a result of this proposed rule, if finalized, when imposing corrective action requirements at a facility, these PFAS would be among the hazardous constituents expressly identified for consideration in RCRA facility assessments and, where necessary, further investigation and cleanup through the RCRA corrective action process at RCRA treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. Contact SCS Engineers for guidance about your facility at .
Additional Resources:
For additional information regarding EPA’s proposed RCRA PFAS rules, see:
Partial reprint of EPA’s Announcement dated January 11, 2024
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday announced a proposal to strengthen Clean Air Act standards for large facilities that burn municipal solid waste. If finalized, the updated standards would reduce emissions of nine pollutants, including smog- and soot-forming sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, by approximately 14,000 tons per year, improving air quality for overburdened communities living near these facilities. These proposed standards reflect current technologies available to control pollution in a cost-effective fashion.
The proposed standards would apply to 57 facilities with 152 units that have the capacity to combust more than 250 tons per day of municipal solid waste. Nearly 4 million Americans live within 3 miles of these large facilities, which are disproportionately located in low-income communities and communities of color.
The proposed standards are based on emission levels achieved by the best controlled and lower-emitting sources, and limit emissions of nine pollutants: particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, lead, cadmium, mercury, and dioxins/furans.
The Clean Air Act requires EPA to evaluate these standards every five years in order to take into account developments in pollution control technologies and techniques. EPA last revised these standards in 2006.
After accounting for compliance costs of the rule, EPA estimated the net present value of health benefits from the proposed rule, due to reductions in particulate matter and ozone alone, to be up to $14 billion over 20 years. Reductions of mercury, lead, and other hazardous air pollutants required by the proposal are expected to result in additional unquantified economic and public health benefits.
EPA will accept comment on the proposal for 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. EPA will hold an informational webinar and will announce details on its website shortly.
Additional Resources:
This year’s annual Illinois Manufacturers Association Environment and Energy Conference attracted many attendees and presenters from industry, consultants, and regulatory officials. Notable takeaways included a passionate appeal from the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) to be patient and proactive on permitting issues as the agency expands its workforce to support Illinois manufacturers’ economic growth and expansion plans. IEPA notes that they seek a partnership with industry rather than an antagonistic relationship and strongly support the state’s development while acknowledging they are bound to federal regulations. The more timely, accurate, and clear permit applications can be prepared, the faster the approval process.
Clean Air Act Changes
Major focuses of the IEPA remain on tracking current and proposed National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), which currently designate East St. Louis and Chicago areas as non-attainment zones for ozone and portions of Madison County as non-attainment zones for sulfur dioxide. Proposed reductions in the allowable limits for particulate matter (PM) 2.5 micrometers (µg/m³) under the Clean Air Act, which could go into effect at any time, will result in the designation of additional non-attainment areas in Illinois and, accordingly, far greater difficulty in air permitting for new or expanding facilities. The current annual average primary standard for PM 2.5 is 12 µg/m³, whereas the proposed standard will likely fall to between 9-10 µg/m³.
Permitting and Enforcement of NPDES
Presenters also noted that in Illinois, the IEPA issues National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits rather than the USEPA. However, USEPA can still issue enforcement violations. Furthermore, many wastewater treatment plants have pre-treatment effluent requirements for industrial users to address potential pollution problems as part of their NPDES permits. These requirements will become increasingly strict when/if PFAS are declared a hazardous substance under CERCLA.
Extended Producer Responsibility
Another noteworthy topic was the burgeoning practice of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). Much like RCRA, which requires cradle-to-grave tracking of hazardous materials, EPR deals with tracking non-hazardous materials, such as packaging, from creation through disposal with the goal of reducing landfill wastes via industry-subsidized source reduction and recycling programs. While Illinois is not currently one of the six states (California, Colorado, Maine, Oregon, New Jersey, and Washington) with mandated EPR or equivalent laws, multiple bills proposed in Illinois and elsewhere would require these types of programs for many market segments. Manufacturers are considering what steps they would need to take if a similar bill passes in Illinois. Particularly noteworthy is that these laws apply to states where products are distributed, not merely produced.
Sustainability and Decarbonization in the Energy Sector
Finally, presenters from various energy companies and consulting firms spoke about the path forward for sustainability and decarbonization in the energy sector, noting that it must combine natural gas, nuclear power, and traditional renewables like wind and solar to meet customer needs. SCS’s very own Dr. Charles Hostetler spoke on carbon capture methods (such as geologic sequestration of carbon in Class VI wells) and other operational strategies of manufacturers, electric utilities, solid waste facility owners/operators, and other property owners/developers to address the evolving landscape of environmental regulations.
Industry/Manufacturing Essentials
Keep close tabs on new legislation and regulation changes to assure compliance and avoid costly fines or operational delays. Partnerships with environmental consultants who have strong, established relationships with federal, state, and local agencies and have their finger on the pulse of the environmental landscape are the best way to accomplish your goals as the regulatory scene changes.
About the Author: Rachel McShane, LEP, has over 15 years of experience in environmental due diligence projects (Phase I, II and III Environmental Site Assessments) as well as Brownfields redevelopment, risk-based corrective action, and remediation projects. She is familiar with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) environmental assessments, vapor investigations and mitigation, radon, asbestos, lead-based paint surveys, and leachate monitoring/solid waste management. Reach Ms. McShane at or via LinkedIn.
Corporate Headquarters
3900 Kilroy Airport Way Suite 300
Long Beach, CA 90806
Telephone
1 (800) 767-4727
1 (562) 427-0805 | FAX
Contact Us
