Volume XII, Edition 10

October 1, 2012

GATEKEEPER NEWSLETTER
Arizona Emergency Response Commission
5636 East McDowell Road
Phoenix, Arizona 85008-3495

Lou Trammell, Chair

Janice K. Brewer, Governor
http://www.governor.state.az.us/

http://www.dem.azdema.gov/
Mark Howard, Executive Director
http://www.azserc.org

Inside this
issue:
EPA Adds 12 Hazardous Waste Sites to
Superfund’s National
Priorities List:

2

EPA Awards Almost
$11 Million to Advance Chemical
Safety Research:

4

Officals concerned
about collection of
hazardous chemicals
in old Slinger factory:

6

11 Container Compliance Tips:

8

Scotts Miracle-Gro
Will Pay $12.5 Million in Criminal Fines
and Civil Penalties for
Violations of Federal
Pesticide Laws:

10

Mapping Alternative
Routes to CFATS
Compliance - ACC
working with DHS on
alternative security
programs:

12

The Most Common
Container Violations:

14

Why You Need a Crisis Communication
Plan:
Being prepared means you should
already have a plan that addresses
crisis communication. Why? Companies that isolate themselves in
times of crisis will be blamed by a
distrustful public. Companies that
openly and honestly deal with the
press and the community are apt to
receive fair coverage resulting in
improved public perception and trust
--even in the face of problems.
What’s In the Plan?
A crisis communications plan should
outline the steps that ensure an adequate facility response to the press
and the community at large in the
event of an accident. Adequate planning provides the essential foundation upon which successful crisis
communication is built. The crisis
communications plan should address:
Company policy on public communication
Company background document
Spokesperson and duties
Media contacts development
Interview policy
Practice
Crisis planning for a chemical emergency is 95 percent of the game.
Effective on the-scene crisis communications depends on the preplanning: the choice of a spokesperson,
the ability to follow the plan, and
ability to perform well during interviews and press conferences.
Practice the Plan

Ok so you’ve got your plan
together but without practice,
attempts at crisis communication are often unsuccessful.
Without a plan, the chances of
success diminish.
Planning alone is not enough.
The plan must be practiced.
Written exercises and simulations are both excellent training
tools to ensure that the plan
works, that the thinking among
management officials is sound
and consistent, and that interviews will be conducted successfully.
The following hypothetical
crisis exercise is an example of
a useful and painless training
tool.
A truck carrying a volatile
chemical intermediate that your
facility uses in pesticide formulations overturns en route to
your facility. Four drums in the
shipment are breached. Containment and cleanup are well
under way without further mishap when the local newspapers
and TV camera crews arrive.
The camera person, who, of
course, is wearing no protective
gear, strays too close to the
leaking drums and is overcome
by the vapors. He is quickly
taken to the hospital, where he
is resting comfortably the next
day.
Answer these questions:

How do you deal with the irate
TV station manager? What do
you tell the rest of the media
about the mishap?
How do you address the fears of
local parents whose children
attend school one-quarter mile
away from the accident scene?
How could the injury to the camera person have been avoided?
What would you do differently
next time?
This type of exercise, together
with emergency response simulations, is invaluable. With practice, you will know better when
to activate your plan and increase the chances that you will
follow the plan that you worked
so diligently to develop.
If you need information about an
important environmental issue,
Enviro.BLR.com provides all
the information you need, 24/7.
This essential online environmental management tool puts
practical RCRA, CAA, CWA,
hazardous waste regulatory
analysis and activity, news, and
compliance tools at your fingertips whenever you need it. With
instant access, your expensive
calls to lawyers and consultants,
and the risk of costly mistakes
from "not knowing," are a thing
of the past.

Page 2

EPA Corner

GATEKEEPER

EPA Adds 12 Hazardous Waste Sites to Superfund’s
National Priorities List:
Eight Other Sites Proposed To
Be Added
WASHINGTON - The U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is adding 12
new hazardous waste sites that
pose public health and environmental risks to the National
Priorities List (NPL) for
cleanup under the Superfund
program. EPA is also proposing
to add another eight sites to the
list.
Superfund is the federal program that investigates and
cleans up the most complex,
uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites in the country. For each of the 20 sites
announced today, EPA has received letters of concurrence
from state officials supporting
the NPL listing.
“Cleaning up contamination is
vitally important to the health
of America’s communities,"
said Mathy Stanislaus, assistant
administrator for EPA’s Office
of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response. “Putting clean land
back into productive use leads
to increases in property values,
generates new jobs and creates
a stronger local economy that
will strengthen these communities for years to come.”
Since 1983, 1,676 sites have
been listed on the NPL. Of
these sites, 360 sites have been
cleaned up resulting in 1,316
sites currently on the NPL
(including the 12 sites added
today). There are 54 proposed
sites (including the eight announced today) awaiting final
agency action.

Contaminants found at the
sites include acetone, arsenic,
benzene, cadmium, chromium, copper, dichloroethene
(DCE), hexavalent chromium,
lead, mercury, methyl ethyl
ketone (MEK), polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), tetrachloroethylene (PCE), pentachlorophenol (PCP), trichloroethane
(TCA), trichloroethylene
(TCE), xylene and zinc.
With all NPL sites, EPA
works to identify companies
or people responsible for the
contamination at a site, and
requires them to conduct or
pay for the cleanup. For the
newly listed sites without
viable potentially responsible
parties, EPA will investigate
the full extent of the contamination before starting significant cleanup at the site. Therefore, it may be several years
before significant EPA clean
up funding is required for
these sites.
The following 12 sites have
been added to the National
Priorities List:
• Alabama Plating Company, Inc. (former electroplater) in Vincent, Ala.
• Cedar Chemical Corporation (former chemical manufacturer) in West Helena, Ark.
• Fairfax St. Wood Treaters
(former wood treating operation) in Jacksonville, Fla.
• Bautsch-Gray Mine
(former lead and zinc mine) in
Galena, Ill.
• EVR-Wood Treating/
Evangeline Refining Company (former wood treating

operation) in Jennings, La.
• Leeds Metal (abandoned
scrap metal facility) in
Leeds, Maine
• Holcomb Creosote Co
(former wood treating operation) in Yadkinville, N.C.
• Orange Valley Regional
Ground Water Contamination (contaminated ground
water plume) in Orange/
West Orange, N.J.
• Peters Cartridge Factory
(former ammunition manufacturer) in Kings Mills,
Ohio
• West Troy Contaminated
Aquifer (contaminated
ground water plume) in
Troy, Ohio
• Circle Court Ground Water Plume (contaminated
ground water plume) in Willow Park, Texas
• U.S. Oil Recovery
(former used oil recovery
operation) in Pasadena,
Texas

• Riverside Industrial Park
(former paint manufacturer)
in Newark, N.J.
• Clinch River Corporation (former pulp and paper
mill) in Harriman, Tenn.
• 700 South 1600 East
PCE Plume (ground water
plume) in Salt Lake City,
Utah

The following eight sites
have been proposed for addition to the National Priorities
List:

Federal Register notices
and supporting documents
for the final and proposed
sites: http://www.epa.gov/
superfund/sites/npl/
current.htm

• Pike and Mulberry
Streets PCE Plume (former
dry cleaner) in Martinsville,
Ind.
• Former United Zinc &
Associated Smelters (former
zinc smelter) in Iola, Kan.
• Creese & Cook Tannery
(former tannery and finishing
facility) in Danvers, Mass.
• Walton & Lonsbury Inc.
(former chrome plating operation) in Attelboro, Mass.
• Matlack, Inc. (former
chemical transportation business) in Woolwich Township, N.J.

EPA is also withdrawing its
earlier proposal to add the
Evergreen Manor Ground
Water Contamination site in
Winnebago County, Illinois
to the NPL because remedial action has been completed. Affected residences
have been connected to the
public water supply, a
county ordinance is in place
which restricts the installation of private wells in the
affected area, and contaminants of concern have remained below cleanup standards since 2006.

Information about how a
site is listed on the NPL:
http://www.epa.gov/
superfund/sites/npl/
npl_hrs.htm
Superfund sites in local
communities: http://
www.epa.gov/superfund/
sites/index.htm

Volume XII, Edition 10

Page 3

U.S. EPA recognizes the Guam Environmental Education
Committee:
Contact: Dean Higuchi, 808-541-2711,
higuchi.dean@epa.gov
Group given leadership award for environmental education and outreach
HONOLULU - The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency recognized the Guam
Environmental Education Committee for
their work to further environmental awareness throughout Guam as part of the EPA
Pacific Southwest Region’s environmental
awards program.
“EPA is pleased to recognize the Guam
Environmental Education Committee for
its commitment to unify Guam’s environmental education efforts,” said Jared Blumenfeld, EPA’s Regional Administrator
for the Pacific Southwest. “Their activities
and efforts have and continue to reach
thousands of island residents in an effort
to protect the quality of Guam’s air, water
and land.”
The Guam Environmental Education
Committee has transformed environmental

education and outreach on Guam
since its inception in 2004. The
Committee – whose members
include local and federal government agencies, nonprofit groups,
teachers, students, and the private
sector – organizes over a dozen
environmental education and outreach events each year. The Committee's success is due to the commitment and dedication of its organizers and participants, and also
to the comprehensive approach
that the group has taken to unify
the island's environmental education resources.
The Committee organizes the annual island-wide Earth Day activities, which in 2012 expanded to a
full month of events. They also
hold regular free, public events
such as snorkeling tours and litter
cleanups, and also organize speak-

ers for classrooms and produces outreach materials.
The Committee has three subgroups
focusing on different areas: Tano
(land), Tasi (sea), and Hanom (water).
In 2011, it developed a comprehensive
environmental education strategy for
Guam, the first of its kind for the island.
The EPA Pacific Southwest Region’s
Environmental Awards program acknowledges commitments and significant contributions to the environment
in California, Arizona, Nevada, Hawaii, Pacific Islands and tribal lands.
Groups and individuals were selected
from nominees received this year from
businesses, local, government officials,
tribes, media, environmental organizations and community activists.
For more information on the other
2012 award winners please visit: http://
epa.gov/region9/awards

Electro-Coatings of Cedar Rapids agrees to pay
EPA fine, install new equipment:
Associated Press – (Iowa)
Electro-Coatings of Cedar
Rapids agrees to pay EPA
fine, install new equipment.
Electro-Coatings of Iowa Inc.
in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, agreed
to pay more than $19,000 in
fines, and to spend at least
$110,000 to install new
equipment to reduce the
amount of chrome waste it

generates following violations
of hazardous waste regulations,
the Associated Press reported
July 26. The chrome, nickel,
and zinc plating operation
reached an agreement with the
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) to pay the civil
penalty. EPA documents stated
a May 2011 inspection revealed
many violations of the federal

act that regulates hazardous
waste. Violations included storage of hazardous waste for longer
than 90 days without a permit,
and hazardous waste container
management violations. Source:
http://www.therepublic.com/
view/
story/8005ac79dbac4251b87b338
d1ccb2d24/IA--Chrome-WasteViolation

GATEKEEPER

Page 4

EPA Awards Almost $11 Million to Advance Chemical
Safety Research:
WASHINGTON - Today the
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) announced
nearly $11 million in grants to
eight universities through
EPA’s Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program. These
grants will help the universities
develop fast and effective methods to test chemicals’ toxicity to
people and the environment.
These innovative testing methods will be used to predict a
chemical’s potential to interact
with biological processes that
could lead to reproductive and
developmental problems, and
disruption of the endocrine system.
The grantees will focus on developing methods and models to
predict how exposure to environmental and synthetic (manmade) chemicals and chemical
mixtures may harm the public.
Some synthetic chemicals are
known endocrine disruptors,
which interfere with or even
mimic natural hormones and
cause damage to the development and function of vital organs, particularly in young children and developing fetuses.
There are currently thousands of
chemicals in use and hundreds
more introduced every year.

“These projects highlight
EPA’s commitment to protecting people’s health and
the environment by developing innovative methods
that are on the cutting edge
of chemical toxicity research,” said Lek Kadeli,
acting assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of
Research and Development.
The grantees are:
• University of Texas at
Austin – testing chemicals
that impact fertility and
embryonic development,
and developing a model to
classify chemicals according to the risks they pose
• North Carolina State
University – developing
innovative methods to understand how chemicals
influence the regulation of
development, reproduction,
and metabolism
• University of Oregon –
using zebrafish testing
methods to determine if
they have results similar to
traditional toxicity tests and
to determine if these meth-

ods could be used as alternatives for existing toxicity
tests
• University of California
Davis – investigating the
effect of environmental
agents on thyroid hormones
and modeling how the
chemicals affect organism
health
• Battelle Memorial Institute, Pacific Northwest Division, state of Washington –
working with assay systems
of the rainbow trout pituitary, liver and ovary to
screen for environmental
toxins and measure reproductive endocrine functions
impaired by these toxins
• University of North
Carolina at Chapel Hill –
developing chemical effect
testing for in vitro systems
and computational toxicology solutions to measure
risk in populations, and creating models based on the
resulting data

and modeling adverse reproductive effects associated
with toxic exposure in wildlife
• University of South Carolina – developing a targeted
innovative animal imaging
method to screen and identify
chemicals that exhibit abnormal development in the cardiovascular and nervous systems that lead to indirect adverse effects on muscle development within zebrafish
larvae
EPA’s STAR grant program
supports human health, ecology, economics and engineering sciences through grants,
centers, and fellowships.
More information on the
grant awards: http://
www.epa.gov/ncer/
hi_thruput_assays
More information on STAR
grants: http://epa.gov/ncer/
More information on EPA’s
chemical safety research: http://www.epa.gov/
research/chemicalscience/

• University of Michigan –
improving upon an existing
in vitro, neurochemical
screening assay platform,

CAMEO Companion is now available for printing please contact:
State of Arizona Department of Corrections
Dirk Johnson, Account Manager
3107 W. Cambridge Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85009
602-272-7600 Ext. 207
Toll Free: 800-992-1738
Fax: 602-272-1007
Cell: 602-388-7230
djohnso1@azcorrections.gov

Volume XII, Edition 10

Page 5

Three Southern California Metal Companies to spend more
than $196,000 for Federal Violations:
Los Angeles, Compton Companies improperly discharge
wastewater, fail to treat hazardous waste
Media Contact: Nahal
Mogharabi,
mogharabi.nahal@epa.gov
LOS ANGELES—The U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency today announced the
conclusion of three recent investigations of Southern California
metal finishing companies
which will collectively spend
more than $196,650 for hazardous waste and Clean Water Act
violations. All three facilities
are located along the I-710 freeway corridor where the effects
of pollution are disproportionately higher than in other areas
of Los Angeles County.
AAA Plating and Inspection,
located in Compton, Calif. has
agreed to pay $74,000 in fines
for failure to treat their industrial wastewater to federal standards before discharge into the
Los Angeles County sewer system. Morrell’s Electro Plating,
also located in Compton, Calif.,
will pay $19,500 in fines for the
improper management and
treatment of hazardous waste. In
addition, Morrell’s will spend at
least $100,000 on the purchase
and installation of a sludge
dryer, reducing hazardous waste
generated at the facility by 336
pounds a day. Service Plating
Co. Inc., located in Los Angeles, Calif., will pay $3,150 for
failure to properly label hazardous waste containers at its facility.
“The violation of federal regula-

tions at metal finishing
companies poses a
risk to workers, as
well as surrounding
residents,” said Jared Blumenfeld,
EPA’s Regional
Administrator for
the Pacific Southwest. “EPA will continue to
rigorously enforce against
facilities like these especially those located in the I710 corridor, a priority area
for the agency.”
AAA Plating, located in the
city of Compton, is a metal
finishing company that
cleans, plates, coats, paints,
and tests various parts for
the aerospace industry. In
March, 2010, an EPA investigation discovered that
the facility had discharged
industrial wastewater to the
Los Angeles County sewer
system above federal limits
for toxics such as chromium, cadmium, nickel and
cyanide —a violation of the
Clean Water Act. EPA’s
standards are designed to
protect municipal sewer
systems and wastewater
treatment plants from adverse effects of toxic discharges, including the potential pass through of toxic
metals to the Pacific Ocean.
AAA Plating has installed
equipment to reduce liquid
from the wastewater, leaving only solids which are
hauled away for proper
disposal off site. This will
result in the facility becom-

ing a zero-discharge permitted facility.
Morrell’s,
also located
in the city of
Compton, is
a metal finishing/
chemical
processing company which
does work primarily for the
aerospace industry. In an
October 27, 2010 inspection, EPA found several
violations including failure
to properly label and cover
hazardous waste and conducting treatment of hazardous waste without a permit.
In addition, Morrell’s failed
to properly identify waste
generated at its facility as
federally regulated hazardous waste -- resulting in its
mismanagement.
Morrell’s will also spend at
least $100,000 to purchase
and install a sludge dryer at
its facility. Used to remove
water and reduce volume,
the sludge dryer will improve efficiency and reduce
the amount of hazardous
waste that must be disposed.
The addition of the sludge
dryer will result in the reduction of hazardous waste
generated at Morrell’s by
336 pounds a day, approximately 85% of the facility’s
daily production — reducing the potential for similar
violations in the future.
Service Plating is a metal
finishing company located
in the city of Los Angeles.

During a routine inspection in
October 4, 2011, EPA investigators discovered federal violations including failure to
properly close and label hazardous waste containers. In
addition, the company failed to
properly label, contain and
date discarded fluorescent
lamps, a violation of federal
regulations for universal
waste.
Southern California’s I-710
freeway passes through 15
cities and unincorporated areas
where the effects of pollution
are disproportionately higher
than in other areas of Los Angeles County. Approximately
1 million people, about 70% of
whom are minority and lowincome households, are severely impacted by industrial
activities and goods movement
in the area. In a multiyear effort, federal, state, and local
governments and nonprofit
organizations are working
together to improve the environmental and public health
conditions for residents along
this corridor.
For more information on The
Clean Water Act, please visit:
http://www.epa.gov/lawsregs/
laws/cwa.html
For more information on the
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act, please visit:
http://www.epa.gov/
compliance/civil/rcra/
index.html
For more information on
EPA’s work at the I-710 corridor, please visit: http://
www.epa.gov/region9/

LEPC Corner

Page 6

GATEKEEPER

Evacuation order still in effect surrounding
Braithwaite chemical plant:
WWL 4 New Orleans – (Louisiana)
Evacuation order still in effect surrounding Braithwaite chemical plant.
People in Braithwaite, Louisiana, who
live half a mile north or south of the
Stolthaven chemical plant remained
under an evacuation order September
10 because officials are still cleaning up
damage caused by Hurricane Isaac.
State police have been working to repair the facility for days. Flooding at
the facility pushed more than 100 rail
cars off tracks, some of which carried
hazardous material. Some tanks were
also knocked off their foundations; oth-

ers carried chemicals that can become explosive if they exceed a
certain temperature, a big concern
because the plant lost power.
HAZMAT teams brought in chillers and inhibitors to curb chemical
reactions. A State police spokesman said there was no immediate
threat and no evidence of a chemical release, but the potential remained. An attorney filed a class
action lawsuit against Englandbased Stolthaven September 4 on
behalf of residents impacted by the
situation. Much of the water in

Braithwaite receded, and officials
should have results of surface water
tests later the week of September 10,
said a Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality spokesman. Air
quality samples had not revealed dangerous levels of chemicals, he added.
Stolthaven’s Web site said the firm
provides integrated transportation solutions for bulk liquid chemicals, edible oils, and acids. Source: http://
www.wwltv.com/home/Evacuationorder-still-in-effect-surroundingBraithwaite-chemical-plant169125596.html

Officals concerned about collection of
hazardous chemicals in old Slinger factory:
WTAQ 1360 AM / 97.5 FM
Green Bay – (Wisconsin)
Officals concerned about
collection of hazardous
chemicals in old Slinger
factory. A inspection showed
dozens of drums and barrels
containing hazardous chemicals in an abandoned metal
plating factory in Slinger,
Wisconsin, WTAQ Green
Bay reported September 9.
Federal regulators and contractors want to get inside that

building in the next 2 weeks to
assess the threat. Washington
County emergency management officials are worried a fire
could release the toxic chemicals or that vandals could get
inside and damage containers
causing spills. So far, nothing
has been done since the August
20 inspection. It has been estimated there are 750 pounds of
copper cyanide, nearly 14 tons
of nickel sulfate, almost 4,200
pounds of nitric acid, and 3,500

pounds of sodium cyanide in the
building, which is surrounded by
homes and only a few blocks
from three Slinger schools. The
owner reportedly signed an agreement giving the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency access
to the property. Source: http://
wtaq.com/news/articles/2012/
sep/09/officals-concerned-aboutcollection-of-hazardouschemicals-in-old-slinger-factory/

Firefighter injured in Tonawanda chemical fire:
Buffalo News – (New York)
Firefighter injured in Tonawanda chemical fire. A
HAZMAT team was called as a
precaution to a two-alarm fire
September 9 at a Town of Tonawanda, New York chemical

plant. Smoke was reported
on the second floor of the
FMC plant where firefighters found a machine on fire.
The machine contained a
hazardous material known
as ammonium persulfate,

which is capable of intensifying a fire. FMC, a worldwide company based in
Philadelphia, produces industrial chemicals at the
plant. One firefighter suffered burns to his hand in

battling the blaze and was
taken to a hospital. Source:
http://
www.buffalonews.com/
article/20120909/
CITYANDREGION/120909554/1010

Volume XII, Edition 10

Page 7

Chemical Industry Disputes Claim That Security Program
is Burdensome: By Douglas P. Guarino
WASHINGTON – Suggestions
by an influential conservative
group that a federal chemical
security program ought to be discontinued is creating a stir
amongst industry officials, who
widely regard participation in the
initiative as the most efficient
way to protect their facilities from
terrorist attacks.
Congress created the Homeland
Security Department’s Chemical
Facility Antiterrorism Standards
initiative in 2007, after years of
debate on Capitol Hill regarding
how best to ensure that chemical
manufacturing plants and other
high-risk facilities could not be
used as tools of terrorism in the
post-9/11 world.
Industry lobbied against a proposal that would have required
plants to use specific “inherently
safer technology” less vulnerable
to attacks that what companies
might already be using. Ultimately they got behind the enacted DHS program in which
government can set security standards, but cannot dictate the specific technology that a company
uses to meet those mandates.
Congressional authorization for
the program is due to expire in
October, and industry groups are
backing legislation in the Republican-controlled House that would
extend the initiative.
An Aug. 14 report released by the
Heritage Foundation argues, however, that the regulations imposed
by the DHS program “are the
wrong approach to chemical facility security and only represent an
unnecessary burden on the chemical industry.”
The assessment says the CFATS
effort overprescribes “federal
solutions with which the private
sector must comply, threatening
innovation and economic expan-

sion.” Rather than continue
the program, the Homeland
Security Department “and
Congress should collaborate
to develop common-sense,
market-conscious policy
solutions for U.S. chemical
security.”
Jessica Zuckerman, the report’s author, told Global
Security Newswire that the
organization does not support continuing the program
in its current form and that
the document is meant to
convey that fact to the
Obama administration and
Congress.
Industry officials are concerned, however, that discontinuing the program could
backfire. Labor and environmental groups are pushing
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to develop
chemical security rules that
are more stringent than the
existing DHS regulations -an effort one industry official
says could be bolstered by a
cancellation of the current
DHS program.
“If you were to sort of move
away from CFATS it might
encourage EPA or some
other entity to occupy that
space,” Scott Jensen, director
of issues communication for
the American Chemistry
Council, told GSN.
Bill Allmond, vice president
of government relations for
the Society of Chemical
Manufacturers & Affiliates
trade group, also suggested
that canceling the DHS program would be bad for business.
“A lot of our companies have
spent a lot of money to implement” the DHS initiative,

Allmond said. “Industry
[assisted] DHS in establishing
these standards and … we are
committed to ensuring what is
currently required gets implemented.”
Allmond said the Heritage
Foundation’s report was “full
of assumptions, inaccuracies
and contradictions” and,
along with other industry
officials, disputed the claim
that the DHS regulations are
unnecessarily demanding.
“Seventy percent of our members are small businesses and
none of them have come to us
and said CFATS is overly
burdensome” or that “we
should do everything on a
voluntary basis,” Allmond
said. “None of our members
have suggested that.”
Similarly, Jensen, of the
American Chemistry Council,
said surveys have shown
companies regulated under
the DHS initiative are supportive of the current situation. “I
think industry has been pretty
clear,” he said.
Zuckerman, the Heritage
Foundation author, defended
her conclusions. Even if industry officials support the
program and say that it is not
burdening their businesses “it
still doesn’t mean that its
good policy,” Zuckerman told
GSN.
“We’ve seen a lot of programmatic issues that really have
made this overly burdensome
on the private sector in our
view at little added value to
the security,” she said. Zuckerman said that she had spoken to industry officials who
shared this view, but declined
to identify them.

The DHS program has been
under scrutiny since an internal
report detailing a host of problems with the initiative was
leaked to the media late last
year. The reported issues included a failure by DHS officials to conduct inspections of
chemical facilities that could
be targeted by terrorists and to
approve security plans submitted by the plants.
The Heritage Foundation paper
references these and other implementation problems that
have reportedly plagued the
initiative. It notes that many of
the issues are thought to be
related to the Homeland Security Department’s “inability to
adequately conduct hires, or to
properly train those that it does
hire within the CFATS program.”
Industry officials say they
agree with the report’s assessment of the implementation
problems with the chemical
security program but argue that
the suggestion that it be replaced with “common-sense,
market-conscious policy solutions” is contradictory.
The report “gives little indication what these [solutions]
would be, and it is hard to
imagine because CFATS was
intended precisely to be a simple, market-based approach,”
argued James Conrad, a former
security lawyer for the American Chemistry Council who
now represents individual companies on chemical security
matters.
According to Conrad, the
“logical recommendation
would be that DHS needs to fix
its implementation,” rather
than abandon the current regulatory framework.

Page 8

GATEKEEPER

Feds settle claims over radioactive waste disposal:
Associated Press – (Kentucky)
Feds settle claims over radioactive waste disposal. The federal
government and a U.S. Department
of Energy contractor reached a
$230,000 settlement over allegations that the company improperly
handled and disposed of radioactive
waste from a nuclear reprocessing
plant in Paducah, Kentucky, between 1998 and 2004, the Associated Press reported August 24. The
settlement ends a 10-year legal

battle started by two former employees at the Paducah Gaseous
Diffusion Plant on behalf of the
federal government. The employees sued in 2002, claiming the contractor, Bechtel Jacobs, mishandled
waste from the plant over a 6 year
period. This included hazardous
waste being handled as nonhazardous, lack of proper licenses and
permits on the part of a subcontractor, disposing of “no radiation
added” waste at a radioactive waste

site instead of the plant‟s sanitary
landfill, and disposing of waste at
the same landfill with excessive
amounts of free liquids. The plant
produces enriched uranium for use
at nuclear power plants. Source:
http://www.chem.info/
News/2012/08/EnvironmentalControls-Feds-Settle-Claims-overRadioactive-Waste-Disposal/

Industry Corner
11 Container Compliance Tips:
Hazardous waste handlers LOVE containers that’s why they are the most common
unit used to store and transport hazardous
waste. Why? Containers are relatively
cheap and easy to handle compared to
tanks and surface impoundments. Also,
containers are a good option for hazardous waste handlers who want to store,
transport, and dispose of hazardous waste
without changing the unit.
But that doesn’t mean complying with
RCRA container management regulations
doesn’t come with their own set of headaches. Here are 11 expert container compliance tips to help you out.
#1 Ensure containers are sturdy and strong
enough to withstand side or bottom shock,
when full, without leaking waste. Rust,
other corrosion, or dents in seam areas
indicate a container may not be strong
enough to use.
#2 Ensure that a full container will not
release waste even when dropped or overturned. To meet this requirement, any containers that hold free liquid must be liquidtight, even when overturned.
#3 Is the container lid easily closable for
employees? The additional cost of springloaded snap rings, funnels with valves, or
similar equipment may be a cost-effective
means of ensuring containers are closed.
#4 To prevent waste spills from destroying
a label, place the label on the side of the

container, but not directly under
the bung. To protect labels, cover
them with clear packing tape or a
clear finish or enclose them in a
plastic pouch designed for that
purpose.
#5 For quick identification, put all
marks and labels on the same side
of the container (but not under the
bung).
# 6 Before shipping, check to
make sure containers and labels
meet DOT requirements for that
waste.
#7 Hang your container inspection
log on a clipboard in the storage
area. When it is full, file it in your
permanent records for at least 3
years.
#8 When storing an empty container outside, place it on its side
to prevent accumulation of rainwater and melting snow.
#9 Snow can fill curbed outdoor
storage areas; remove it when
sidewalks are shoveled.
#10 A rule of thumb to differentiate satellite accumulation containers from storage containers: Satellite accumulation containers will
generally be either emptied into
another container or moved to a
storage area when full, while storage containers will generally be

shipped off-site as is when full.
#11 You may choose to place a date on
a satellite accumulation container
when you begin to use it to help you
track how quickly the waste is generated. If you do, clearly identify the
container as a satellite accumulation
container to avoid confusing it with a
storage container.
Note: These tips are from Fact Sheet
No. 1.04/1.05, Label and Store Hazardous Wastes prepared by the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
This fact sheet summarizes the Minnesota hazardous waste container rules
for generators found in Minnesota
Rules 7045.0270 and 7045.0292. However, because the Minnesota regulations closely follow the federal rules,
with some more stringent requirements, the compliance tips should apply to most persons using a container
to store or accumulate hazardous
waste. Although the tips reflect the
requirements of many states, they can
also stand on their own as good business practices.
See tomorrow’s Advisor to find out
what NOT to do when managing containers. We’ll have a compilation of
the most common container violations
found by EPA inspectors.

Volume XII, Edition 10

Page 9

Crushing Hazardous Waste is Regulated as Treatment [40
CFR 260.10]:
If you are a hazardous waste
generator that crushes hazardous waste as part of your management practices, you are conducting a form of hazardous
waste treatment.
Treatment is defined as any
method, technique, or process,
including neutralization, designed to change the physical,
chemical, or biological charac-

ter or composition of any
hazardous waste so as to
neutralize such waste, or so
as to recover energy or material resources from the
waste, or so as to render
such waste non-hazardous,
or less hazardous; safer to
transport, store, or dispose
of; or amenable for recovery, amenable for storage,
or reduced in volume (40

CFR 260.10).

treatment.

EPA has previously noted that
crushing aerosol cans (EPA
Memorandum, Petruska to
Citizen; September 12, 1989
(RCRA Online 11466)) and
decanning and crushing operations (EPA Memorandum,
Skinner to Scarborough; April
26, 1984 (RCRA Online
12214)) meet the definition of

However, hazardous waste
generators may conduct
treatment, including crushing, in regulated units without a permit as long as they
are not conducting thermal
treatment (56 FR 10146,
10168; March 24, 1986).

TRANSCAER® (Transportation Community Awareness and Emergency Response) is a voluntary national outreach effort
that focuses on assisting communities prepare for and respond to a possible hazardous material transportation incident. TRANSCAER® members consist of volunteer representatives from the chemical manufacturing, transportation, distributor, and emergency response industries, as well as the government. Visit: http://www.transcaer.com/state.aspx for more information.

How to Get Out of OSHA’s Severe Violator Enforcement
Program:
OSHA has published criteria for
removing employers from the
agency’s Severe Violator Enforcement Program (SVEP).
SVEP has been in effect since
June 18, 2010, and is intended
to focus agency resources on
employers that demonstrate
indifference to their responsibilities under the Occupational
Safety and Health Act with willful, repeat, or failure-to-abate
violations.

On August 16, 2012,
OSHA issued employer
removal criteria from the
SVEP program to all federal OSHA offices. Generally, an employer may be
considered for removal
from the program by an
OSHA Regional Administrator after:
• A period of three years
from the date of the final

disposition of the SVEP inspection citation items including: failure to contest, settlement agreement, Review
Commission final order, or
court of appeals decision.
All affirmed violations have
been abated, all final penalties
have been paid, the employer
has abided by and completed
all settlement provisions, and
has not received any additional serious citations related

to the hazards identified in
the SVEP inspection at the
initial establishment or at
any related establishments.
In the event an employer
fails to adhere to the terms
and provisions of the
agreement, the employer
will remain in the program
for an additional three
years and will then be reevaluated.

Page 10

GATEKEEPER

Scotts Miracle-Gro Will Pay $12.5 Million in Criminal Fines
and Civil Penalties for Violations of Federal Pesticide Laws:
WASHINGTON – The Scotts
Miracle-Gro Company, a producer of pesticides for commercial and consumer lawn and garden uses, was sentenced today in
federal district court in Columbus,
Ohio, to pay a $4 million fine and
perform community service for
eleven criminal violations of the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA),
which governs the manufacture,
distribution, and sale of pesticides. Scotts pleaded guilty in
February 2012 to illegally applying insecticides to its wild bird
food products that are toxic to
birds, falsifying pesticide registration documents, distributing pesticides with misleading and unapproved labels, and distributing
unregistered pesticides. This is the
largest criminal penalty under
FIFRA to date.
In a separate civil agreement with
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Scotts agreed to
pay more than $6 million in penalties and spend $2 million on
environmental projects to resolves
additional civil pesticide violations. The violations include distributing or selling unregistered,
canceled, or misbranded pesticides, including products with
inadequate warnings or cautions.
This is the largest civil settlement
under FIFRA to date.
“The misuse or mislabeling of
pesticide products can cause serious illness in humans and be toxic
to wildlife,” said Cynthia Giles,
assistant administrator for EPA’s
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “Today’s sentence and unprecedented civil
settlement hold Scotts accountable for widespread company
noncompliance with pesticide
laws, which put products into the
hands of consumers without the
proper authorization or warning
labels.”
“As the world’s largest marketer

of residential use pesticides,
Scotts has a special obligation to make certain that it
observes the laws governing
the sale and use of its products. For having failed to do
so, Scotts has been sentenced
to pay the largest fine in the
history of FIFRA enforcement," said Ignacia S. Moreno, assistant attorney general for the Environment and
Natural Resources Division
of the Department of Justice.
“The Department of Justice
will continue to work with
EPA to assure that pesticides
applied in homes and on
lawns and food are sold and
used in compliance with the
laws intended to assure their
safety.”
In the plea agreement, Scotts
admitted that it applied the
pesticides Actellic 5E and
Storcide II to its bird food
products even though EPA
had prohibited this use.
Scotts had done so to protect
its bird foods from insect
infestation during storage.
Scotts admitted that it used
these pesticides contrary to
EPA directives and in spite
of the warning label appearing on all Storicide II containers stating, “Storcide II is
extremely toxic to fish and
toxic to birds and other wildlife.” Scotts sold this illegally
treated bird food for two
years after it began marketing its bird food line and for
six months after employees
specifically warned Scotts
management of the dangers
of these pesticides. By the
time it voluntarily recalled
these products in March
2008, Scotts had sold more
than 70 million units of bird
food illegally treated with
pesticide that is toxic to
birds.

Scotts also pleaded guilty to
submitting false documents to
EPA and to state regulatory
agencies in an effort to deceive them into believing that
numerous pesticides were
registered with EPA when in
fact they were not. The company also pleaded guilty to
having illegally sold the unregistered pesticides and to
marketing pesticides bearing
labels containing false and
misleading claims not approved by EPA. The falsified
documents submitted to EPA
and states were attributed to a
federal product manager at
Scotts.
In addition to the $4 million
criminal fine, Scotts will contribute $500,000 to organizations that protect bird habitat,
including $100,000 each to
the Ohio Audubon’s Important Bird Area Program, the
Ohio Department of Natural
Resources’ Urban Forestry
Program, the Columbus Metro
-Parks Bird Habitat Enhancement Program, the Cornell
University Ornithology Laboratory, and The Nature Conservancy of Ohio to support
the protection of bird populations and habitats through
conservation, research, and
education.
At the time the criminal violations were discovered, EPA
also began a civil investigation that uncovered numerous
civil violations spanning five
years. Scotts’ FIFRA civil
violations included the nationwide distribution or sale of
unregistered, canceled, or
misbranded pesticides, including products with inadequate
warnings or cautions. As a
result, EPA issued more than
40 Stop Sale, Use or Removal
Orders to Scotts to address
more than 100 pesticide prod-

ucts.
In addition to the $6 million
civil penalty, Scotts will complete environmental projects,
valued at $2 million, to acquire,
restore and protect 300 acres of
land to prevent runoff of agricultural chemicals into nearby
waterways.
The criminal case was investigated by EPA’s Criminal Investigation Division and the
Environmental Enforcement
Unit of the Ohio Attorney General's Office, Bureau of Criminal Identification & Investigation. It was prosecuted by Senior Trial Attorney Jeremy F.
Korzenik of the Justice Department’s Environmental Crimes
Section of the Environment and
Natural Resources Division, by
Michael J. McClary, EPA
Criminal Enforcement Counsel
and Special Assistant U.S. Attorney and by Assistant U.S.
Attorney J. Michael Marous.
The civil case was investigated
by U.S. EPA Region 5’s Land
and Chemicals Division and
Office of Regional Counsel,
and the U.S. EPA Headquarters
Office of Civil Enforcement,
assisted by the Office of Pesticides Program.
More information about the
civil settlement and recalled
products: http://www.epa.gov/
compliance/resources/cases/
civil/fifra/scottsmiraclegro.html
More information about EPA’s
criminal enforcement program:
http://www.epa.gov/
enforcement/criminal/
index.html
More information about EPA’s
pesticide program: http://
epa.gov/pesticides/

Volume XII, Edition 10

Page 11

10 Mistakes Everybody Makes When Communicating an
Enviro Crisis:
For the environmental manager,
the task of communicating environmental risk to a wary or unsuspecting public is going to be
one of the biggest challenges of
EPCRA compliance.
Citizens, local officials, and the
media annually receive information about hazardous substances and the potential threats
to the community posed by
these chemicals. There is usually an onslaught of questions
and concerns when the information is publicly available.
Here are the 10 most common
mistakes environmental managers make when they are communicating with the public
about the event of an environmental incident.
1. You have not accepted responsibility for real and perceived environmental risks.
2. You have not effectively
communicated the actual risks
at your facility.

3. You have underestimated
the media and community
action groups.
4. You do not have a written community public relations policy.
5. You have missed opportunities to reach out to the
community and press to
cultivate relationships.
6. You do not have a facility spokesperson assigned
in the event of an emergency.
7. Your workers are not
aware of emergency response activities and risk
reduction measures at your
facility.
8. You do not have a prepared background document about your facility.
9. You do not have a prepared list of press contacts,
local officials, and concerned citizens.
10. You do not have an

interview policy.
Crisis Communications
Checklist
The key component of successful crisis communications is planning. This
checklist will help you
gauge how well you have
prepared for the emergency
and the onslaught of questions and concern that will
surely follow.
___ Do you have a written
community public relations
policy?
___ Does the plan address
emergencies?
___ Has a facility spokesperson been assigned?
___ Do employees know
who this person is?
___ Have the spokesperson’s duties been defined?
___ Are workers aware of
emergency response activities and risk-reduction
measures at the facility?
___ Has a background document on the company and/or
facility been prepared?
___ Has chemical or techni-

cal information about the facility been translated into everyday language?
___
Have risks been defined relative
to other risks that the press,
local representatives, or citizens
can understand?
___ Has a list of press contacts,
local officials, and concerned
citizens been prepared?
___ Have opportunities to meet
with local civic, business, public interest groups, and the press
been identified?
___ Has management been encouraged to reach out to the
community and to the press to
cultivate relationships? How?
___ Have you conducted a media briefing/training session?
___ Has an interview policy
been defined?
___ Have interviewing techniques been practiced?
___ Have written exercises
been provided?
___ Has the crisis communications plan been tested under a
simulated emergency response
exercise?

PCB Manifest Revised to Match RCRA
Hazardous Waste Manifest:
The EPA has issued a direct
final rule (http://
www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR2012-09-06/html/201221674.htm )to update and
clarify several sections of the
Polychlorinated Biphenyl
(PCB) regulations associated
with the manifesting require-

ments, which uses the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) Uniform Hazardous
Waste Manifest, under the
Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA).
These changes are to match, as
much as possible, the manifest-

ing requirements for PCBs under
TSCA to the manifesting requirements for hazardous waste under
RCRA, of which the regulatory
changes to implement the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest
form were promulgated on March
4, 2005.

GATEKEEPER

Page 12

Mapping Alternative Routes to CFATS Compliance - ACC
working with DHS on alternative security programs:
Chemical companies seeking to
comply with federal Chemical
Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) regulations
have focused almost entirely on
using the Department of Homeland Security's Web-based
Chemical Security Assessment
Tool (CSAT) to create and submit a Site Security Plan.

CFATS regulations is being
revisited as a route to compliance. DHS defines an
ASP as a security initiative
that a “third party” has developed and that the Assistant Secretary of DHS has
determined meets the requirements of the CFATS
Site Security Plan process.

The American Chemistry Council (ACC) is now reviving interest in an alternative. The chemical association is working with
the Department of Homeland
Security to revamp the Alternative Security Program (ASP) to
make it a useful tool for CFATS
compliance. A new ASP Guidance Document will complement the current Site Security
Plan (SSP) process and help to
accelerate plan approvals by
clarifying aspects of the process
that remain undefined, such as
what level of detail to include in
the SSP. The new alternative
approach will enhance the information provided to better guide
security enhancements for a
faster and more efficient route
to CFATS compliance.

Many chemical security
professionals have witnessed firsthand the limitations of the online DSAT
and the resulting SSPs. For
example, the Web-based
DSAT asks hundreds of
“yes” or “no” questions
about the generic elements
of a facility's security posture, such as “Does the
facility have a CCTV system?” One-word answers to
such questions may provide
inadequate information to
enable the DHS to assess a
facility's real security posture.

Although the Alternative Security Program (ASP) route has
been part of the CFATS regulation from the beginning, it has
previously been rarely used, and
the industry – with the full encouragement of the DHS – has
instead focused mostly on using
the CSAT. However, SSPs do
have certain deficiencies, and
the ASP option allowed by

In fact, a survey of 1,000
high-risk chemical facilities
by the American Chemistry
Council in 2011 agreed that
the SSP process is unwieldy and provides limited
value to a facility or DHS
inspectors.
To enhance the security
assessment process, the
American Chemistry Council's proposed Alternative
Security Program includes
examples of security meas-

ures deployed at various
facilities to make aspects of
the assessment process as
clear as possible.
The proposed ASP Guidance Document will also
include:
A general overview of the
ASP process;
An actual ASP template
that security directors may
be able to use to gather and
present relevant information;
Specific guidance on the
“level of detail” required;
Checklists on the required
security measures to be
documented and associated
with the corresponding Risk
-Based Performance Standards (RBPS), which cover
requirements such as securing site assets, screening and
controlling access, sabotage
and dealing with specific
threats, vulnerabilities or
risks;
Examples of potential
security measures; and
A “cross-walk” between
CFATS and ACC's Responsible Care Security Code.
ACC has actively promoted
chemical facility security
since it created the stringent
Responsible Care Security
Code within months of the
terrorist attacks of 9/11.
ACC says its member companies have invested more
than $11.2 billion to further

enhance site, transportation
and cyber security at their
facilities under the Security
Code, which has become a
gold standard for the industry
and served as a model for
regulatory programs. Clarifying and facilitating continuing compliance with CFATS
is a logical extension of that
effort.
ACC and DHS plan to start a
pilot ASP program this summer, and the progress of the
pilot is being shared during
the DHS Chemical Security
Summit this summer in Baltimore.
CFATS also includes provisions addressing inspections
and audits, record keeping
and the protection of chemical vulnerability information.
The DHS has staffed up with
additional manpower to aggressively enforce compliance with CFATS regulations. Non-compliance can
result in fines of $25,000 per
day and closure of a facility,
so clearly there is a lot at
stake. Any initiative that can
provide additional clarity to
the current SSP process is a
good idea and may be the
solution to CFATS' greatest
challenge: clear, concise and
unambiguous guidance on
what to do and what not to do
in connection with security
measures.

Volume XII, Edition 10

Page 13

PHMSA Moves to Implement Tougher Pipeline Safety
Regulations:
.Seeks public input on doubling
maximum civil penalties, amending enforcement procedures
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Transportation’s
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration is moving
forward to implement its new
statutory authority to strengthen
federal pipeline safety regulations.
This notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) is the first step to
implement the Pipeline Safety,
Regulatory Certainty, and Job
Creation Act of 2011, which
toughened pipeline safety regulations and PHMSA’s ability to
enforce them.
“There are 2.6 million miles of
pipeline crisscrossing this nation
that impact each and every one of
us. Our job at the Department of
Transportation is to make sure
they operate safely,” said U.S.
Department of Transportation
Secretary Ray LaHood. “I encourage the public to provide input on
this NPRM as we move forward
to improve pipeline safety and
hold violators accountable.”

The Act authorizes PHMSA to

increase the maximum civil penalty for pipeline safety violations
from $100,000 to $200,000 per
violation per day. In addition, the
agency will be able to collect a
maximum of $2,000,000 for a
related series of violations, up
from $1,000,000. PHMSA proposes to apply the new maximums
in cases that occur after Jan. 3,
2012, the date President Obama
signed the act into law.
Proposed amendments to the
Pipeline Safety Regulations also
include technical changes and
other minor corrections, including
returning PHMSA’s authority to
enforce the provisions of the Oil
Pollution Act of 1990, which had
been transferred to the Coast
Guard during the establishment of
the Department of Homeland Security.
PHMSA seeks public comment
on these proposed amendments.
The NPRM is available in the
Federal Register, and comments
can be made using the link provided at the top of the notice. All

comments must include the agency
name and docket number PHMSA2012-0102 at the beginning of the
comment and must be submitted by
September 12, 2012. The NPRM
also provides instructions for submitting comments by fax or by mail.
Pipeline safety is a top priority at
PHMSA. In April 2011, Secretary
LaHood issued a Call to Action on
pipeline safety, asking pipeline operators to replace and rehabilitate
aging pipelines. PHMSA closed a
record number of enforcement cases
in 2011 and is collecting more data
about pipelines and stepping up efforts to educate the public about
staying safe around pipelines.

“There are 2.6
million miles of
pipeline
crisscrossing this
nation that
impact each and
every one of us.
Our job at the
Department of
Transportation is
to make sure they
operate safely,”
said U.S.
Department of
Transportation
Secretary Ray
LaHood.

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration develops
and enforces regulations for the
safe, reliable, and environmentally
sound operation of the nation's 2.6
million mile pipeline transportation
system and the nearly 1 million
daily shipments of hazardous materials by land, sea, and air. Please
visit http://phmsa.dot.gov for more
information.

Governor's Tribal Community Outreach:
Visit: http://azgovernor.gov/eop/TribalOutreach.asp for agency contact information.
Tribal Program Link:
http://www.epa.gov/region09/indian

Tribal news:
http://www.navajohopiobserver.com/

Tribal Program Newsletter:
http://www.epa.gov/region09/indian/newslet.html

GATEKEEPER

Page 14

The Most Common Container Violations:
The majority of regulatory violations found by state EPA inspectors are in connection with hazardous waste containers, particularly those used by hazardous waste generators. Not listed
by severity, or frequency of findings, here are the most common
container violations.
-Failure to keep containers
closed. Inspectors often observe hazardous waste drums
that have been left open during
the entire work shift, or drums
with open funnels. See this
Environmental Daily Advisor
post for more information on
closed containers.
-Failure to mark the accumulation start date on the container.
Generators accumulating hazardous waste on-site without a
permit must be sure to clearly
mark on each container the
date on which each period of
accumulation begins.

-Failure to document inspections. Generators as
well as TSDF owners and
operators are required to
inspect, at least weekly,
areas where containers are
stored. These facilities
often cannot produce documentation that such inspections have occurred. Inspectors may ask to review
up to 3 years of inspection
records.
-Containers missing the
words "Hazardous Waste"
or other required information on the container.
Some states also require
additional information on
the container, such as the
hazardous waste number or
chemical name that identifies the container's contents.
-Using improper containers,
or containers in poor con-

dition. Containers must be in
good condition and lined with
material that will not react
with the hazardous waste
being stored therein.
-Failing to comply with the
special satellite accumulation
area rules. Generators accumulating hazardous waste onsite without a permit in accordance with the accumulation time rules may accumulate up to 55 gal of hazardous
waste or one quart of acutely
hazardous waste in their satellite accumulation area, provided specific requirements
are met. Violations include
an absence of operator control of the process generating
the waste, failure to list the
date the satellite container
reaches its accumulation limit
(55 gal for hazardous waste
or 1 quart of acutely hazardous waste), and failure to

remove the waste from the
satellite area within 3 days
of exceeding the quantity
limitations.
These violations can result
in the state EPA assessing
civil and/or criminal penalties, and earn a generator or
TSDF owner or operator the
dubious distinction of being
known as a facility that will
need to be carefully examined during future visits by
the agency's inspectors. A
history of noncompliance
can affect the severity of
future penalties too. Handlers should be aware that
many inspectors will make
the hazardous waste accumulation or storage area
their first stop in your facility inspection.

UPCOMING EVENTS:
•

October 18-21, 2012 - HOTZONE
Conference; Houston, Texas at the
Crowne Plaza Hotel. For more information go to: http://hotzone.org/
HotzoneMain.aspx

LET’S HEAR FROM YOU!
Send us your inputs and feedback on the newsletter; including, exercises and other LEPC related activities in which
you've been involved. Let us know what you’d like to see in future editions. Talk to us! We appreciate your input
and look forward to hearing from you!
Sincerely,
Mark Howard
Executive Director
Commercial products and services are mentioned for informational purposes only and should not be construed as
AZSERC endorsements.

COMMISSIONERS:

ARIZONA EMERGENCY RESPONSE COMMISSION
5636 E. MCDOWELL ROAD
PHOENIX, AZ 85008-3495
PHONE: (602) 464-6346
FAX:
(602) 464-6519

Visit us on the web:www.azserc.org
AZSERC STAFF
Mark Howard

Executive Director

Roger Soden

HAZMAT Program
Coordinator

Paul Culberson

Sylvia Castillo

Will Humble

ADHS Acting Director

Henry Darwin

ADEQ Director

John Halikowski

ADOT Director

Robert Halliday

ADPS Director

DESIGNEES:
Mark Howard

ADEM

Don Herrington

ADHS

Veronica Garcia

ADEQ

David Denlinger

ADPS

Sonya Herrera

ADOT

ADVISORY COMMITTEE:
Corporation Commission

- Tom Whitmer

Industrial Commission

- Darin Perkins

Admin Asst III

State Mine Inspector

- Joe Hart

State Fire Marshal

- Bob Barger

Radiation Regulatory Agency

- Aubrey Godwin

Department of Agriculture

- Jack Peterson

our Organization

The AZSERC was established by
Arizona Law (Arizona Revised Statutes-Title 26, Chapter 2, Article 3)
and is tasked with the implementation of the Emergency Planning and
Community Right to Know Act
(EPRCA) in Arizona.
This Commission oversees 15
Local Emergency Planning Committees and supports community, industry and government and academia
in: planning, release and incident
reporting, data management guidance for inventory reporting, public
disclosure of information about hazardous chemicals in Arizona as well
as development of training and outreach programs.
The Commission supports individual agency goals and objectives.

ADEM Director (Chair)

Web Portal/
Technology
Coordinator

Chrissy McCullough Admin Asst III

About

Lou Trammell

This is accomplished through the
receipt and coordination of emergency notifications of chemical releases, collection and provision of
chemical inventory information to
interested parties, training and grants
programs.
Additionally, the AZSERC provides consultative services, conducts
and participates in workshops and
coordinates development and review
of plans and programs for 15 Local
Emergency Planning Committees.
Further, the AZSERC serves as a
state clearinghouse for hazardous
chemical emergency preparedness
and planning activities and information through coordination with federal, tribal, state, local governments,
industry and community interest

Arizona Fire Chiefs Association
-Mesa FD

- Brady Leffler

-Yuma FD

- Jack McArthur

Asst. State Attorney General

- Jeffrey Cantrell

SRP

- Daniel Casiraro

Intel Corporation

- Randy Holmes

APS

- Monica Ray

Private Sector

- David
McWilliams

GATEKEEPER NEWSLETTER:
MARK HOWARD – EDITOR IN CHIEF
CHRISSY MCCULLOUGH - EDITOR