May 24, 2012

Medical Facilities Turn to Alternative Waste Disposal Options

On October 6, 2009, the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") published a Final Rule entitled "Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators" ("Rule"). 74 Fed. Reg. 51369. The Rule applies to any device used to burn hospital waste and/or medical/infectious waste. Hospital waste is defined as discards generated at a hospital, and medical/infectious waste consists of any waste generated in the diagnosis, treatment, or immunization of human beings or animals, in research pertaining thereto, or in the production or testing of biologicals. The Rule was promulgated under Sections 111 and 129 of the Clean Air Act and amends several sections of Title 40, Part 60, Subpart Ce of the Code of Federal Regulations.

EPA promulgated the Rule to serve two functions: (1) as a the statutorily-required five-year review of the standards for Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators ("HMIWI"), last promulgated by EPA on September 15, 1997; and (2) as a further response to the March 2, 1999 remand by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in Sierra Club v. EPA, 167 F.3d 658, which had sought further explanation of EPA's reasoning in determining the minimum regulatory "floors" in the 1997 standards. EPA first published a proposed response to the Court of Appeals' remand on February 6, 2007. After public comments and several rulings by that Court, EPA re-assessed its response and, on December 1, 2008, published another proposed version. EPA subsequently took public comments on the proposal and after consideration of same published its final rule last month.

The main function of the Rule is to control the release of air pollutants by HMIWI. The air pollutants regulated by the Rule include particulate matter; heavy metals including lead, cadmium, and mercury; toxic organics including chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins/dibenzofurans; carbon monoxide; nitrogen oxide; and acid gases including hydrogen chloride and sulfur dioxide. The Rule establishes new, and more stringent, "maximum achievable control technology" ("MACT") standards for reducing emissions of these air pollutants for both new and existing HMIWI in different categories.

Categories for
HMIWI

 

New
 

Exiting
 

Large
 

>500lb/hr of waste
 

>500lb/hr of waste
 

Medium
 

>200 to≤500lb/hr of waste
 

>200 to≤500lb/hr of waste
 

Small
 

≤200 lb/hr of waste
 

≤200 lb/hr of waste
 

Small Rural
 

N/A
 

Small HMIWI >50 miles from boundary of nearest SMSA, burning <2,000 lb/wk of waste
 

The revised emission limits for existing HMIWI are based on the average of the best performing 12 percent of sources for each pollutant subcategory. EPA surmises that most sources should be able to meet the revised limits using control technology already available in the industry (i.e., wet scrubbers, dry scrubbers, or some combination of these controls). 74 Fed. Reg. at 51396. EPA further expects that, due to the stringent nature of the revisions to the emission guidelines for new HMIWI, new HMIWI are unlikely to be built and sources instead will utilize alternative waste disposal options. 74 Fed. Reg. at 51398.

All HMIWI that complied with the New Source Performance Standards ("NSPS") promulgated in the 1997 rule are "existing" sources under the Rule. These sources are required to meet the emissions limits under the revised Emissions Guidelines ("EG") or the 1997 NSPS, whichever is more stringent, by the applicable compliance date for the revised EG (December 7, 2009). "New" units under the Rule are defined as those units for which construction commenced after the December 1, 2008 proposal, or for which modification is commenced on or after April 6, 2010. Those new units would be subject to the more stringent MACT limits under the Rule and must comply with those standards by April 6, 2010 or upon startup, whichever is later.

The Rule makes other changes to the HMIWI regulations including allowing existing sources to use previous emissions test results to demonstrate compliance with the revised limits; annual inspections of air pollution control devices; a one-time visible emissions test of ash handling operations; carbon monoxide continuous emissions monitoring systems and bag leak detection systems for new sources; several approved monitoring alternatives; changes regarding requirements for nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide; performance testing requirements for small rural HMIWI; monitoring requirements for HMIWI that install selective non-catalytic reduction technology to reduce nitrogen oxides emissions; waste segregation; removal of exemptions regarding startup, shutdown, and malfunction; and procedures for test data submittal.

Although EPA states that its purpose is not to discourage use of HMIWI, recognizing the costs involved in incineration control technology, EPA promulgated these revised MACT standards with an understanding that they will cause most medical facilities to use alternative waste disposal options, including in particular, use of an autoclave followed by landfilling of sterilized waste. 74 Fed. Reg. at 51396. The overall purpose, of course, is to encourage segregation of wastes and minimize the quantities of wastes that are incinerated. For those sources that plan to continue to operate HMIWI and/or modify existing HMIWI, it will be important to assess the compliance status of those facilities with reference to the new federal MACT standards and guidelines, as well as the corresponding regulations found in State Implementation Plans approved under the federal Clean Air Act, and any independent state-law based regulatory programs that may apply to same.

© 2009 Dinsmore & Shohl LLP. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Partner

Kip Power's practice encompasses civil and administrative litigation related to the energy industry, with a particular emphasis on natural resources extraction and related operations. His practice also includes compliance counseling and representation of manufacturers and other industrial clients in matters arising under federal environmental statutes and their state counterparts, as well as contractual issues, zoning and land use laws. Kip has served as a mediator and arbitrator in a variety of matters and has made numerous presentations before professional organizations, trade...

304-357-0902
Associate

Eric M. Hayhurst is a member of the Litigation Department. His practice focuses on general litigation and includes product liability, insurance defense, medical malpractice, as well as the defense of toxic tort and mass tort litigation.

Education

J.D., West Virginia University College of Law (Moot Court Board, CALI Awards in Energy and Administrative Law, 2009)
B.A., Political Science, West Virginia University (Helvetia Honorary, 2005)

Bar Admissions

West Virginia

304-357-0916

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.