U.S. EPA (epa.gov)

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of the Army (“the agencies”) published a final rule to repeal the 2015 Clean Water Rule: Definition of “Waters of the United States” (“2015 Rule”), which amended portions of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), and to restore the regulatory text that existed prior to the 2015 Rule. The agencies will implement the pre-2015 Rule regulations informed by applicable agency guidance documents and consistent with Supreme Court decisions and longstanding agency practice.

CalEPA (calepa.ca.gov)

    • CUPA (https://calcupa.org/)

        • Preliminary Industry TAG Concerns
        • Mission: ITAG is a coalition of industry stakeholders that work hand in hand with regulators to provide clear, uniform and realistic rules so that we may efficiently achieve compliance for the betterment of public health, safety and the environment.

        o Lean Six Sigma (LSS) Breakout session at CUPA Forum

        o Working Group subgroups include: HW, HMBP, APSA, UST, and General

        o Updates from subgroups will be provided next CICC meeting and on website

        o Identified issues with CERS and CERS NextGen is a Possible Solution

        ▪ Concerns: Unable to do universal changes to multiple plans (contingency plans, emergency coordinators, etc); lack of simple method to remove facilities from CERS creates inefficiencies and inaccuracies, etc.  2020 CUPA Leadership

        • At CalEPA: Jason Boetzer, Assistant Secretary for Local Program Coordination and Emergency Response (Speaker at CICC 2019 Annual Meeting)
        • At CUPA Forum Board: Eric Scott, Glenn County Environmental Program Manager (Glenn County CUPA Director) – Chair of CUPA Forum Board
        • CUPA Regulatory Review Pilot Survey (link provided)
        • Please completer survey of industry concerns regarding adjustments needed to the CUPA process ‘In order to continue collaborating with regulators to assist in identifying how we can make our programs more efficient and effective, the CFB is conducting Phase II of the original survey with the understanding that the intent of this review is to be “smarter” in our program implementation while still maintaining current levels of public health, safety and environmental protection. We are soliciting your response to substantially the same questions we used in 2012 to help us in our regulatory review and possible revision.’
        • January “CUPA Newsletter” has issued (link provided)
        • Assembly Bill (AB) 1429 in effect January 1, 2020 changes HMBP (haz mat’l business plan) reporting timeframes for facilities.
        • In brief, starting January 1, 2020, Handlers not subject to EPCRA and APSA requirements must still provide annual certification, but may submit their business plan every three years rather than annually; Handlers subject to EPCRA or APSA requirements must submit their business plan annually.
        • CERS 3 , SWRCB and DTSC Biennial reporting updates in Newsletter CalEPA Regulated Site Portal (RSP)

        o Facility-specific (non-confidential) Federal and State regulatory data. All sites subject to CERS, UST, EPCRA reporting will be available for viewing on this site by location

    • DTSC (dtsc.ca.gov)

        • Newsom budget recently included a 5-member oversight board for DTSC in near future
        • Jared Blumenfeld, Secretary CalEPA detailed his concerns over chaotic DTSC for past decade or so
        • AB 995 – C. Garcia – DTSC Structural Change – Governor Newsom and Secretary Blumenfeld support “Strong Board” model with focus on legacy waste/ cleanup issues and financial burden. 2-step process for changes proposed to fee structure; legislature would transfer authority to governor appointed board and beginning in 2022, Board would recoup fees to clean up >150,000 orphan sites .
        • 2020 budget would restructure hazardous waste generator fees by raising the minimum fees per company; switch to a per ton fee for hazardous waste generation and eliminate smaller fees. May impact all hazardous waste generators
        • DTSC recently completed audited budget – both major funding sources (fee-driven) are insolvent – forcing bailouts by Legislature
        • Board to “complement” Secretary and DTSC Director activity, with focus on permit appeals, permit types, fee structures and overall goals
        • CICC participated actively in discussion in 2019 at annual meeting, noting particularly role of DTSC to ensure active functional hazardous system to service States Economy; and importance of providing for Safer Consumer Product Program to State’s overall efforts. DTSC Draft Strategic Plan. (link provided)
        • Draft 2019-2023 strategic plan being re-evaluated per public input
        • “…ensure our environment and all our communities are protected from toxic harm.”
        • Emphasized almost entirely “protection” element of DTSC responsibility – little or no attention to DTSC responsibility for ensuring State’s need for hazardous waste disposal can be met Safer Consumer Product Program. (link provided)

        o Final 2018-2020 Work Plan

        ▪ Current focus on PFAs and personal care products

        • January meeting on PFAs
        • AGs from multiple states requesting expedited rule making at EPA level

        o February meeting on Nail Products containing toluene/salon products

        ▪ Other focus on Cleaning Products, Furnishings and Décor, building products, Consumable Office, School, and Business Supplies, Food Packaging, Lead-Acid Batteries

        o Priority Product Determinations

        • Adopted: Children’s Foam Padded Sleeping Products, Spray Polyurethane Foam w Unreacted MDI
        • Proposed:

        ▪ Carpets and Rugs with Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs)

        ▪ Laundry Detergents Containing the Surfactants Nonylphenol Ethoxylates (NPEs)

        ▪ Paint and Varnish Strippers and Graffiti Removers Containing N-Methylpyrrolidone

        ▪ Nail Products Containing Toluene

        o Safer Consumer Process Illustrated

        o Green Ribbon Science Panel


Hazardous Waste Program

DTSC Generator Improvement Rule (GIR) (link provided)

      • DTSC presently developing rules to integrate Federal GIR regs into CA HW regulations
      • Feds adopted GIR May 2017; State plan update by Q2 2020 TSDF Permitting: (no updates, links are provided)
      • Track 1: FINAL Hazardous Waste Facility Permitting Criteria (Link provided)

o Adopts significant new permitting criteria per mandate from SB 673 (2015), re more explicit attention to EJ communities (effective 1/1/2019)

o DTSC is now putting into effect the “Violation Scoring Procedure” called for in the Regulation, to rank facilities based upon compliance history.

▪ Of 78 facilities ranked, 64 were “Acceptable”, 9 “Conditionally Acceptable” and only 5 were ranked as “unacceptable”

▪ Permitting – Track 2: Vulnerable Communities and Cumulative Impacts (link provided)

▪ DTSC currently reviewing comments on the its Concept Paper on regulatory approaches to cumulative impact considerations required under SB 673.

▪ Highly problematic from industry perspective

o DTSC issued update clarifying significant elements of current thinking for Track 2

▪ Appears aimed at better integrating “cumulative burden” into adopted permitting regulation

▪ Frames OEHHA EnviroScreen as “screening tool” to make initial (but not final) determination of “vulnerable communities”.

▪ Public draft anticipated late in year with first formal public review 2nd Qtr 2020 Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Proposition 65 –(no update, Link provided)

      • OEHHA has abandoned consideration of use of “averaging” in calculating reproductive toxicity exposure for food

o Problematic scientific approaches

▪ industry coalition letter opposing precedent setting “averaging”

o Previously abandoned similar proposal re arithmetic mean in food applications

▪ industry coalition letter supporting this move away from Mean

      • Safe harbor levels (No Significant Risk Levels (NSRLs) for cancer-causing chemicals and Maximum Allowable Dose Levels (MADLs) – Updated listing (link provided) Public Health Goals
      • OEHHA accepted comments through December 2019 on a revised proposal to second public review describing Proposed Public Health Goals (PHGs) for four trihalomethanes (THMs) found in drinking water as a result of disinfection methods

Note: Per ACC Chlorine Chemistry Division, The PHGs are much lower than current national limits. If implemented, these limits could seriously impact water treatment facilities using chlorine/bleach; in some cases, additional water treatment technology (filtration, ozone, UV, ClO2, etc.) would be required to meet the new limits. Dept. of Occupational Safety & Health (Cal OSHA (No updates)

CalOSHA: (dir.ca.gov/dosh)

  • Indoor Heat Illness Regulations 
    • Cal OSHA still preparing language for Final Rulemaking. Industry thinks major progress in past two years, significant concerns Worker Protection from Wildfire Smoke
    • Cal OSHA evaluation of new regulation for workers exposed to wildfire smoke
    • Response to petition from Labor with aim of establishing more specific standards to be applied – Interim Rule adopted
    • Control by Respiratory Protective Equipment (where AQI >150 and <500: NIOSH approved devices that effectively protect from inhalation of PM2.5, such as N95 filtering face piece respirators. An N95 filtering face piece respirator as minimum protection for wildfire smoke

CARB: (arb.ca.gov)

  • Preliminary information and pre-regulatory updates meant for discussion only!
    • Criteria & Toxics Rule Requirements – https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/rulemaking/2018/proposedregulation-reporting-criteria-air-pollutants-and-toxic-air-contaminants

    Late last year CARB passed the Regulation for the Reporting of Criteria Air Pollutants and Toxic Air Contaminants (CTR Rule). It was effective as of January 2020 even though it was passed on December 13th . Initially those subject to the regulation for reporting were those that fell into one of three categories:

    • Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reporter Applicability (GHG Facility). A facility that is required to report to the state board the facility’s greenhouse gas emissions pursuant to H&SC section 38530 at the beginning of the data year. For determining applicability under section 93401(a)(1), a facility includes any onshore petroleum and natural gas production facility.
    • Criteria Emissions Greater Than 250 Tons per Year (tpy) Applicability (Criteria Facility). A facility that is located in an air district for which any portion of the air district has been designated as nonattainment with respect to either the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) or the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), and that is authorized by one or more permit(s) issued by an air district to emit 250 or more tpy of any applicable nonattainment pollutant or its precursors at the beginning of the data year.
    • Elevated Prioritization Toxics Applicability (Elevated Toxics Facility). A facility that is categorized by the air district as high priority for toxic air contaminant emissions at the beginning of the data year, based on cancer or noncancer health impacts pursuant to H&SC section 44360.

    Developing Issue – Important.  On February 4th, CARB released a draft amendment to this regulation that would include a 4th category:

    • Additional Applicability (Additional Applicability Facility). A facility with one or more permits to operate issued by an air district with actual emissions or activity levels exceeding any of the thresholds specified in (A) through (C) below, within a data year. The applicability determination must include the data year emissions from all permitted processes and devices at the facility. Emissions from unpermitted processes and devices, including unpermitted processes and devices releasing fugitive emissions, are not to be included in the applicability determination.

    (A) 4 tpy of any criteria air pollutant (except for carbon monoxide).

    (B) 100 tpy of carbon monoxide.

    (C) Activity levels published in Appendix A, Table A-3 for a permitted emissions process at a facility classified with a matching primary or secondary Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code or North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code listed for the permitted emissions process. If the SIC or NAICS codes have a designation of “Any” in Table A-3 for a permitted process, then reporting for the process is required regardless of the SIC or NAICS designation for the facility performing the process, if the listed activity level reporting threshold is exceeded. You can find the language at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-02/ctr-regulation-draftfebruary2020.pdf. Please note that this is pre-regulation language and is meant for discussion purposes only (i.e. there is no for

    • Scoping Plan – Revised to deliver 2030 mandated reductions
      • Very ambitious targets beginning to ripple through economy
    • Sustainable Freight Strategy – Actively pursued as integral to 2030 goal
    • New regs being prepared for Seaports; Railyards; and Warehouses/Distribution Centers
  • AB 617 Community Air Protection Program (CAPP) – Webinar scheduled for October 30.
    • AB 617 Community Air Protection Program (CAPP) –(links provided) Board approved CAPP Blueprint in September
    • CARB staff had proposed “Designated Communities” as well as their “Final Draft Community Air Protection Blueprint”
    • Communities now defined and advisory process being developed under regional boards
    • CICC submitted comments directly on earlier drafts, and joined broader industry coalition comments (Industry Comments)
    • Next round under Revised Community Air Protection Program Selection Process – ▪ Final Staff Recommendations issued for communities to be added to program in 2020
    • Portside EJ Neighborhoods (San Diego)
    • Southwest Stockton (San Joaquin Valley)
    • Eastern Coachella Valley (South Coast)
    • South East Lost Angeles (South Coast)
    • Additions will function along with communities designated in 2018.
    • Ongoing programs supplement effort beyond targeted communities, including:
      • Regulatory actions for clean transportation;
      • Air district implementation of best available retrofit control technology (BARCT);
      • AB 617 incentive funding;
      • New emissions reporting regulation; and
      • Community air grants.
    • Community Air Grants Draft Guidelines issued
    • Statewide Reporting Reg on Criteria Pollutants and CA Toxics
    • CARB Board has adopted Final Proposed Regulation. Some improvement from earlier draft
      • Moderates several of the broader mandates but remains problematic in several definitional issues
      • industry coalition letter praising some of the changes but revisiting concerns over definitional issues.
  • On Road Heavy-Duty Vehicle Program
    • On Road Heavy-Duty Vehicle Program. Current major program to push toward Heavy-Duty Low NOx engines, driving NOx emissions.  Changes considered to heavy-duty engine and vehicle emission standards
      • Program Elements:
        • Proposed Engine Standards
        • Revised Heavy-Duty In-Use Testing
        • Low Load Cycle
        • Warranty Step 2 and Lengthened Useful Life
        • Emission Warranty Information Requirements (EWIR)
        • OBD, Durability Demonstration Procedures and Credit Provisions
        • Powertrain Test Procedures
        • Phase 2 GHG Amendments
  • CalRecycle
    • 75% Reduction Target – programs for regulated businesses increasing
      • Major push on organic waste – 50% by 2020 and 75% by 2025
      • CalRecycle challenged by major changes in recycling marketplace due to shift in China policy
      • Key recyclers and recycling facilities abandoning California and creating unmet demand in key markets
    • Legislature continues to be enraptured with mandatory recycling programs and even-more aggressive recycling goals (EG: AB 1080 and SB 54 calls for 75% reduction in single-use packaging and products, with no consideration of infrastructure obstacles).
      • AB 1080 and SB 54 were suspended during last session and will return in February. These are sister bills to mandate CalRecycle to develop regulations to require single use packaging and products to be reusable, recyclable or compostable by 2030; industry coalition opposing legislation as written pending revisions Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) (no updates, links provided)

    Water Conservation – Urban Strategy

    • Water conservation – industrial, commercial, institutional (CII) users
    • Major Urban Conservation program taking shape per 2018 compromise Legislation signed into law (SB 606/AB 1668)
    • Conservation demands will increase for commercial, industrial and institutional users, but “process water” protected from mandatory performance measures.
    • DWR and SWRCB released “Primer” on the Urban Strategy
    • SWRCB in process of developing various implementing regulations


    Storm Water Regulations (link provided)

    • Court-mandated amendments —> Mandatory TMDLs, many in conjunction with Numeric Effluent Limits (NELs) – Major impacts in LA, a few in San Diego, just a couple in SF and Santa Ana
    • Useful IGP TMDL Guidance Flow Chart available from SWRCB
    • SWRCB has also issued a proposed Water Quality Control Plan amending Aquatic Toxicity Testing Provisions for NPDES Facilities.
      • Adopts specific standard protocols for testing and determining water quality for purposes of NPDES compliance
      • Fact Sheet on Aquatic Toxicity Provisions
    • Board adopted Dredge & Fill Regulation. Challenging standards for wetlands

    Water Board focus on PFAS

    • Growing industry concern re SWRCB attention to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
      • SWRCB hosted a two-day technical seminar on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) jointly with DTSC on December 4.
      • Trial attorneys reportedly amping-up concerns on multiple fronts.
      • Request from AGs to expedite PFA regulation (see letter on CICC website)