| [ Home ] | [ Services ] | [ Areas of Expertise ] | [ Shared Responsibility ] | [ E-mail ] |
ENVIRONMENTAL DUE DILIGENCE
Background Issues
In order to shed light on the potential liabilities involved in real estate transaction, an environmental site assessment (ESA) of the property to be sold is often performed by an outside expert. The passage of laws such as the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA – more commonly known as "Superfund"), brought introduced the legal doctrine of joint and several liability. Potential purchasers and lenders are understandably concerned about acquiring environmental liabilities along with the commercial and/or industrial properties that they wish to purchase or finance. No one wants to become a "deep pocket" with respect to litigation and cleanup costs. If properly performed, many "brownfield" properties can be acquired without acquiring the liability of previous owners or operators.
AVIA Project Descriptions
BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT
Background Issues
Brownfields, or historically developed and often contaminated industrial properties, represent an opportunity for businesses and municipalities to utilize existing buildings and infrastructure in the development of additional business centers and corresponding jobs and tax revenue. Past problems and stigmas associated with the redevelopment of brownfields has been reduced as a result of the acceptance of risk-based evaluations by regulatory agencies and also by the reduction or elimination of liability for purchasers of already contaminated properties.
AVIA Project Descriptions
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AUDITS
Background Issues
Improper operational practices can result in significant corporate and personal liability for the management of facilities regulated under the numerous state and federal environmental regulations. Understanding the various regulations and the manner in which they apply at a given facility is often a difficult and time-consuming task that can keep management from completing their other assigned responsibilities. Management can be placed at risk of substantial personal fines, and even potential jail time, for poor environmental practices or judgements made at their facilities. The EPA and many states offer immunity to companies who proactively conduct audits to identify and remedy shortcomings in their environmental practices and programs.
AVIA Project Descriptions
The new management team at a Texas soft drink bottling plant was concerned about the lack of environmental awareness and concern exhibited by staff at the plant. After preliminary discussions with management and production team leaders, AVIA was contracted to complete an environmental compliance audit focusing on wastewater and storm water related issues. The environmental compliance audit was set up to take advantage of privileges and immunity granted to companies who proactively audit and improve their operations under the Texas Environmental, Health & Safety Audit Act.
A thorough review of plant records and practices indicated several areas of noncompliance with local, state, or federal regulations. AVIA worked with plant management and staff to develop and implement procedures and training programs that would improve compliance with regulatory requirements, minimize future liability, and decrease operational costs by reducing the number of fines from permit exceedances associated with discharged wastewater.
PETROLEUM STORAGE TANKS
Background Issues
Owners of petroleum storage tanks are subject to spill prevention requirements under a number of state and federal laws. Facilities that have available petroleum storage capacity as low as 660 gallons are subject to these requirements. Facilities are subject to random inspections and substantial fines for failure to maintain required spill prevention procedures, training, operational and inspection documentation.
AVIA Project Descriptions
AVIA was contracted by a Texas trucking company to prepare a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) plan for the facility's petroleum storage tanks in preparation for an upcoming inspection by the EPA. AVIA updated the facility's SPCC plan and assisted with the update of training and inspection documentation. Additionally, AVIA recommended several housekeeping activities to improve the EPA inspector's first impressions when arriving at the facility.
The activities conducted or recommended by AVIA and implemented by the trucking company resulted in an "in-compliance" inspection determination by the EPA inspectors.
STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLANS
Background Issues
Storm water runoff is a major source of water pollution. Most industrial facilities are required to obtain storm water discharge permits at the state or federal level. These permits establish requirements designed to reduce or eliminate the introduction of pollutants into storm water runoff. An additional requirement is the development of Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP). The primary objectives of the SWPPP are to identify potential sources of storm water pollution at the facility and to describe and facilitate implementation of practices designed to reduce potential pollutants in storm water discharges. New storm water regulations will affect all industrial facilities with the next few years.
AVIA Project Descriptions
AVIA was contracted to complete SWPPPs at fertilizer manufacturing facilities located in Texas, Georgia, and Florida. Individual state's regulations were reviewed to ascertain required actions and operational flexibility at each facility. Consistent SWPPPs, spill response plans, and pollution prevention team training programs were developed to allow plant and corporate personnel to effectively manage regulatory requirements at each facility.
AVIA was contracted to complete SWPPPs at truck terminal facilities located in Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, and West Virginia. Individual state's regulations were reviewed to ascertain required actions and operational flexibility for each facility. Consistent SWPPPs, spill response plans, and pollution prevention team training programs were developed to allow plant and corporate personnel to effectively manage regulatory requirements at each facility.
AVIA was contracted to complete SWPPPs at soft drink bottling facilities located in New Mexico and Texas. Individuals states regulations were reviewed to ascertain required actions and operational flexibility at each facility. Consistent SWPPPs, spill response plans, and pollution prevention team training programs were developed to allow plant and corporate personnel to effectively manage regulatory requirements at each facility.
AIR PERMIT EVALUATIONS AND EMISSIONS INVENTORY REPORTING
Background Issues
For more than 20 years, the states and federal government have regulated business, industry, and municipalities in an effort to promote clean air. Through the years, the CAA has gone through a number of interpretations and amendments. Following and understanding these modifications can be difficult and confusing. Even though all geographical areas are responsible for meeting the same basic national air quality standards, regulations can vary from state to state - and even within a state - if individual areas have significant air quality problems. Failure to understand, comply with, and appropriately utilize available regulatory options can result in significant penalties, increased operational efforts, and unnecessary fees and expenses.
AVIA Project Descriptions
AVIA was contracted to complete emissions inventory calculations and documentation for a Texas activated charcoal manufacturing facility. The project included the tabulation and accounting of all emission units at the facility, the assignment of appropriate emission rates, and the calculations of emissions based upon these variables as well as stack monitoring results and facility production rates. A relational database was developed to track the emissions units and to perform the complex calculations. Upon completion of the project, it was found that the facility had been over-estimating emissions for several years. The database and documentation collected during the project allowed the facility to substantiate its decrease in reported emissions to the state regulatory agency.
AVIA was contracted to evaluate permitting requirements for a Texas facility with a sawdust bunker. State operating permit requirements were evaluated, along with AP-42, to establish permit thresholds and standard emission rates. Based on production volumes documented by the facility, AVIA determined the facility was eligible for a standard permit exemption. Establishing standard exemption eligibility allowed the facility to avoid permit registration, and the permit annual fees and reporting requirements required of permitted facilities.
AVIA was contracted to evaluate Title V Federal Operating Permit (FOP) requirements for a Texas activated charcoal manufacturing facility. AVIA reviewed potentially applicable state and federal requirements, identified and completed appropriate unit attribute forms, and completed the necessary general information requirements. AVIA documented applicable regulatory requirements, including testing and monitoring requirements that the facility was required to implement in order to be in compliance with the Title V FOP and with state regulations.
WASTEWATER PERMITTING, MONITORING, AND PRE-TREATMENT
Background issues
Facilities that discharge industrial and agricultural wastewater to publicly or privately owned treatment works (POTWs) are subject to local, state, and federal permit requirements. These permits can be complicated and are often require significant negotiations to obtain permits that meet a facility's discharge needs. Further, facility's waste streams may not be desirable to a POTW, resulting in prohibitive discharge and treatment fees. Creative recycling approaches can often result in decreased waste disposal fees.
AVIA Project Descriptions
AVIA was contracted to complete a wastewater discharge permit renewal for a Texas soft drink bottler. Information required for the permit included descriptions of activities that would result in the generation of the wastewater to be discharged, wastewater pretreatment activities to be conducted, and characteristics of the wastewater to be discharged. AVIA worked with plant personnel and management to identify anticipated production volumes and potential product changes for the upcoming permit period. The permit application was approved with no revisions.
AVIA was contracted to complete a wastewater discharge permit renewal for a Texas emulsified sulfur manufacturer. The plant owner desired a permit that did not require periodic compliance monitoring. AVIA worked with plant personnel and management to implement a zero-discharge wastewater recovery process. The proposed process and associated permit application were both approved with no revisions. The zero-discharge approach resulted in the elimination of almost all wastewater discharge fees.
Background Issues
Facilities that discharge industrial and agricultural wastewater are subject to regulations requiring the characterization and periodic monitoring of wastewater discharges to demonstrate compliance with permit limitations. Frequently, regulatory agencies will conduct their own sampling to establish wastewater discharge costs and to verify the accuracy of the information received from the discharging facility. Any discrepancies between the dischargers sampling results and the POTWs' sampling results can result in increased scrutiny by the POTW along with potential fines.
AVIA was contracted by a Texas soft drink bottling company that was being penalized by a POTW for wastewater discharges outside of permitted limits. AVIA worked with facility and City personnel to identify and remedy the non-compliant discharges. AVIA recommended cost-effective modifications to existing pre-treatment equipment that resulted in discharges that stayed within permitted limits. Ongoing monitoring demonstrated that the modifications had achieved compliance objectives and had reduced operational costs associated with fines for non-compliant discharges.
SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
Background Issues
Compliance with solid and hazardous waste laws is a complex and confusing process. Companies that work with solid and hazardous waste every day can have problems in maintaining compliance while disposing of wastes legally and cost-effectively. Even regulatory agencies can have difficulties in determining compliance in a consistent manner. Non-compliance can be expensive, and improper classification can result in unnecessary operational and disposal costs.
AVIA Project Descriptions
AVIA was contracted by a West Virginia trucking company to assist in negotiations with a state agency concerning solid and hazardous waste activities at one of its terminals. Citations had been written during an inspection for improper characterization, labeling, and storage of hazardous waste, improper generator status, improper training documentation, and lack of emergency procedures.
AVIA reviewed waste characterization data for the facility and determined that many of the drums of waste alleged to be hazardous by the state agency were not hazardous. A further review of facility operations and procedures revealed that several waste streams from the facility that had been disposed of as hazardous waste by the operator could have been disposed as non-hazardous solid waste.
Following a presentation of AVIA's findings to the state agency, the state reduced the proposed fines from $29,000 to $17,500. The facility was able to retain its small-quantity generator (SQG) status and realized a reduction in waste disposal fees of several thousand dollars per year.
AVIA was contracted by the new owner of a Texas fertilizer manufacturing facility to assist in the characterization and disposal of approximately 250 drums of various types of materials that were found locked in a warehouse. The drums were in various states of decay and some had started to leak.
AVIA identified and characterized drummed materials against known products used previously at the facility. Drummed waste oil and antifreeze from vehicle maintenance operations was sent to an oil recycler for disposal. Spent filter media was characterized and sent to a local landfill as non-hazardous waste. Drums of reusable products were repackaged and relabeled, as needed, for future use at the facility. Spent drums were scrapped for recycling. Limited materials were disposed of as hazardous waste.
The identification and characterization activities conducted allowed the new owner to dispose of or reuse the stored materials, without having to dispose of all of the drums as hazardous waste, and without incurring hazardous waste disposal costs for each stored drum of material.
EPCRA REPORTING AND COMPLIANCE
Background Issues
State and federal community right-to-know laws require that business report the storage or use of listed chemicals that could potentially affect the public. There are substantial penalties for failure to file appropriate reports.
AVIA Project Descriptions
As a result of complaints by a disgruntled former employee, a Wisconsin bathroom fixture manufacturer was facing an audit by the EPA for failure to comply with community right-to-know reporting requirements. AVIA personnel quickly audited the manufacturer's product and chemical inventory records to determine potential compliance or non-compliance. During AVIA's review, it was determined that the manufacturer had failed to file necessary Tier II and Form R reports for the previous 5 years. Working with facility staff and management, AVIA completed and filed the necessary reports prior to the EPA audit. As a result of these efforts, the facility was judged to be in substantially in compliance at the time of the EPA audit and received no fines.
INDUSTRIAL PROCESS SAFETY AND RISK MANAGEMENT PLANNING
Background Issues
Industrial process safety and risk management planning protects company profits by minimizing potential hazards to which employees and the general public may be exposed. Through a thorough understanding of and training in the industrial process, as well as compliance with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) 29 CFR 1900 series regulations, employee safety is greatly increased, and lost time accidents and workman's comp claims and costs can be minimized. Additional reductions in liability can be achieved through evaluations designed to evaluate and minimize risk of exposure or injury to the public or environment outside of the plant boundaries.
Many facilities are subject to both OSHA Process Safety Management (PSM) and EPA Risk Management Plan (RMP) requirements. Additionally, many facilities not currently regulated under OSHA PSM are regulated under EPA RMP rules.
AVIA Project Descriptions
AVIA was contracted to perform a Process Safety Management (PSM) plan for a Texas pipeline up-loading facility. AVIA worked with facility personnel to develop current P&IDs, review applicable equipment design codes and standards, review and update applicable operating procedures and requirements, and complete necessary documentation and auditing tasks. AVIA identified several areas where facility employees had installed out-of-specification equipment that could have resulted in substantial liability to the owner of the facility had an equipment failure occurred.
AVIA was contracted to develop a Risk Management Plan (RMP) for an Arkansas petroleum refinery. AVIA worked with facility personnel to identify regulated processes, storage capacities for regulated chemicals, and potential release mechanisms that could result in potential exposure or harm to the public. AVIA modeled worst-case and alternative-case release scenarios to aid in the evaluation of potential release event scenarios. The facility's existing PSM documentation was used, where applicable, to obtain information to facilitate cost-effective RMP development.
AVIA was contracted to develop a RMPs for Texas, Georgia, and Florida ammonia fertilizer manufacturing facilities. AVIA worked with facility personnel and corporate management to identify the regulated processes, storage capacities for regulated chemicals, and potential release mechanisms at each facility that could result in potential exposure or harm to the public. AVIA modeled worst-case and alternative-case release scenarios for each facility to aid in the evaluation of potential release event scenarios. Existing PSM documentation was used, where applicable, to obtain information to facilitate cost-effective RMP development. Emergency action plans were developed to facilitate alerting appropriate local emergency responders in the event that releases might occur at any of the facilities.
MUNICIPAL PROCESS SAFETY AND RISK MANAGEMENT PLANNING
Background Issues
While not always subject to OSHA requirements, municipalities face the same concerns as industry in regard to potential injury to employees and risk to the public and environment outside of facility boundaries. Documentation of equipment specifications, operation and maintenance procedures, and training of appropriate training of plant personnel all result in reduced liability and lower operating costs for the municipality.
AVIA Project Descriptions
AVIA was contracted to develop and RMP for a Texas municipal wastewater treatment plant that utilized both pressure and vacuum delivery systems for chlorine and sulfur dioxide gases. AVIA worked with facility personnel to identify storage capabilities and practices for regulated chemicals, to identify release mechanisms that could result in potential exposure or harm to the public. AVIA modeled worst-case and alternative-case release scenarios for each facility to aid in the evaluation of potential release event scenarios. AVIA worked with municipal personnel to develop appropriate procedures for operations and maintenance of the facility.
AVIA was contracted to develop and RMP for a Texas municipal water treatment plant that utilized both pressure and vacuum delivery systems for chlorine and ammonia gases. AVIA worked with facility personnel to identify storage capabilities and practices for regulated chemicals, to identify release mechanisms that could result in potential exposure or harm to the public. AVIA modeled worst-case and alternative-case release scenarios for each facility to aid in the evaluation of potential release event scenarios. AVIA worked with municipal personnel to develop appropriate procedures for operations and maintenance of the facility.
FACILITY SITING AND PERMITTING EVALUATIONS
Background Issues
Understanding the regulatory requirements for a proposed facility can yield significant savings by identifying up-front the constraints under which the facility must be designed and operated. Failure to evaluate these requirements can result in significant penalties, construction delays, and increased operational scrutiny by regulatory agencies. Further, understanding and implementing preferred engineering designs can significantly reduce waste disposal efforts and costs.
AVIA Project Descriptions
AVIA was contracted to evaluate permitting requirements for a proposed Illinois sulfur pastille fertilizer manufacturing facility. The evaluation included reviews of permit requirements for air, process containment, storm water, and wastewater.
State air operating permit requirements were evaluated, along with AP-42, to establish permit thresholds and standard emission rates. Based on production volumes estimated documented by the facility, AVIA determined the facility would require an air quality construction permit, but established that the proposed did not require a costly air operating permit.
State process containment requirements were evaluated to ascertain the impact to plant design, equipment specifications, and engineering considerations. AVIA worked closely with the design engineers and plant management to incorporate required containment measures into the facility design. The containment measures were documented in an application to the state regulatory agency.
Storm water runoff from the fertilizer facility was a great concern to the two state regulatory agencies that had jurisdiction over the project. Evaluation of state storm water regulations revealed the facility would be subject to regular storm water sampling and analysis. Potential contamination of storm water run-off, although minimized by the implementation of containment measures described previously, was further reduced through the development of good housekeeping practices. An engineered storm water drain was also developed to simplify storm water sampling by establishing a single facility out-fall.
Plant wastewater discharges were evaluated and found to be regulated under two different agencies and regulatory programs. Contact wastewater was determined to be recyclable agri-chemical waste that could be discharge under land-spreading guidelines. Non-contact wastewater was regulated under a state-implemented discharge elimination system permit. However, by engineering the separation of the waste streams, the non-contact water was eligible for discharge under a general permit. This allowed the facility to eliminate sampling, monitoring, and reporting costs for the discharge of the non-contact water.
AVIA was contracted to evaluate permitting requirements for a proposed New Mexico sulfuric acid rail transfer station. State operating permit requirements were evaluated, along with AP-42, to establish permit thresholds and standard emission rates. Based on production volumes estimated documented by the facility, AVIA determined the facility would require an air quality construction permit, but established that the proposed facility did not require a costly air operating permit.