By now you are likely aware that the Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan (SPCC) rules (for agriculture) went into full effect…pretty much. While the rules were final in May 2013, essentially the enforcement was delayed until after September 23rd.
While that date has come and gone, the Senate and House have each passed different version of proposals with SPCC exemption language. To our knowledge, that is as far as the exemption discussions have reached.
SPCC rules aside, a June 28, 2013, Ohio Court of Appeals ruling from a spill on a farm is a reminder about the cost of spills.
According to the court documents:
On the night of February 13, 2008, the Jefferson Township Fire Department received a call reporting an odor of fuel oil and a visible “sheen” on a local waterway, Swisher Creek. The department responded to the call and followed the leak back from the creek to a machine shop on defendant’s property where two 250-gallon fuel oil tanks were being stored behind the building. Jefferson Township Fire Chief Dale S. Ingram was able to ascertain the source of the leak through stains in the snow and observed that the suspect tank was rusted through and completely drained. Ingram contacted defendant and learned the empty tank was filled a few days before with 250 gallons of fuel oil…
What resulted was a nearly $16,000 cleanup (which is relatively minor in the grand scheme of environmental cleanups). You can read the ruling here.
With the aforementioned in mind…
- Whether you do or don’t need an SPCC, make sure you know the conditions of your storage tanks and maintain them properly.
- If you do need an SPCC, don’t wait for enforcement. Fines, regardless of whether or not you have had any leaks, can get real ugly real fast, and be more expensive than if you have a release.
- Don’t get lulled into complacency. Big fines are not just for smoke stack industries anymore. Consider the EPA’s enforcement action under the Clean Air Act against Safeway Grocery Stores…they were tagged with a settlement in excess of $4 million!
- Finally, don’t forget EPA’s recent “Criminal Enforcement Alert” directed at agriculture.
Are you up against a tough environmental regulatory issue now? Are you facing unreasonable requests by regulators? If you don’t think your current environmental consultants are acting in your best interest, we can help. Ask senior environmental advisor Jeffrey Bolin, M.S., CHMM about a Peer Review.
Over the past several months, we have been asked to assist a long-time client with some continuing education programs. We have completed more than a half-dozen training sessions relating to environmental cleanup/environmental due diligence developments in Michigan.
During our hour-long environmental update, we share why understanding environmental acronyms such as HRECs, CRECs, BFPP, NAPL, and DNAPL are more important than ever. We also discuss vapor intrusion (or VI) and why proper assessment of neighboring properties can be the difference between a great deal and a great deal of grief.
We then put the information into context with a case study that shows how we helped keep the lid on Pandora’s Box. Finally, we provide three environmental due diligence “musts” for assessing sites in Michigan.
If you would like to see some of what we covered at this seminar, follow this link to view the PowerPoint Presentation. If you know of anyone that is conducting environmental site assessments in Michigan, please share this important information with them.
Do you need more information? Contact Jeffrey Bolin (firstname.lastname@example.org) at 248-932-0228.
Last week, we held our seminar in Cambridge, Ontario, where we considered environmental site assessments in light of the Kawartha Lakes decision. After spending about 90 minutes discussing the possible “fallout” from this landmark legal/environmental decision, as well as some published comments by legal counsel, there was a tone of concern among the participants.
To put the issues in perspective, we considered five case studies of recently completed environmental site assessments/property transactions. We then considered each of these projects in context of the Kawartha Lakes decision.
As we wrapped up our time together, we shared the Five Leading Best Practices that are “musts” as we consider environmental assessments going forward in Ontario.
As one of the participants shared with us, “Technical competence of one’s consultant/advisor is so, so important.” We agree; surrounding yourself with excellent advisors from various disciplines, is increasingly important.
If you would like to see some of what we covered at this seminar, follow this link to view the PowerPoint. Do you have colleagues or clients involved in environmental site assessments that might benefit from this information? Please consider sharing this with them as well.
If you would like more information about what we covered at this seminar, contact Christopher Pare (email@example.com) or Jeffrey Bolin (firstname.lastname@example.org) at 519-979-7300.