United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste And
Emergency Response
(OS-120)
EPA 550-F-93«002-«>7
January 1S&3
Series 9, No.3
v>EPA Making It Work
Secrets Of Successful
SERCs
Put It In Writing
Written by-laws can
make the difference
between organization
and chaos.
The 1986 Emergency
Planning and
Community Right-to-
Know Act outlined the
basics of what a SERC is
and what it's supposed to
do: collect and distribute
Title HI data, establish
Local Emergency
Planning Committees
(LEPCs) and supervise
their activities, and
review local emergency
plans.
Beyond these broad
guidelines, though, the
law left many of the
specifics of carrying out
Title III to the individual
states. That gives each
SERC the freedom to
tailor its program to fit
the state's own particular
needs. For example, a
densely populated
industrial state with
many chemical facilities
and a great deal of rail
and highway transport of
hazardous materials may
want to set up a different
program than a rural
state.
However the program is
structured, it's important
to have the duties and
Even though the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (commonly known as Title III) is a
federal law, the real job of making it work takes place
most often at the state and local level. Citizens' groups,
local emergency responders, business people, and
government officials all play a critical part in reducing
the risk from chemicals in the community. Because all
these groups don't always have the chance to talk
directly to one another, E".\ publishes the Mating It
Work bulletins as a forum for people in the Title HI
community to trade ideas and exchange information.
(For more detailed discussions of some of the state
activities mentioned in this publication, see the
"SuccessfulPractices in Title HI Implementation" series
of bulletins listed on page 11.)
In this issue, a number of State Emergency Response
Commissions (SERCs) share their "secrets" about what
makes a Title III program work at the state level:
Having written by-laws that clearly establish
procedures and responsibilities;
Delegating jobs and authority to all SERC
members;
Managing and using Title III information in
creative ways;
Providing assistance to LEPCs;
Finding a variety of sources of funding; and
Being proactive rather than just following the
letter of the law.
As it turns out, there's very little secret about most of
these practicesthe most important factors in creating
an effective state Title III program areenergy, creativity,
dedication, and leadership.
authority of the SERC
clearly spelled out, either
through state legislation,
an executive order from
the governor, or some
other formal means. It
may seem like yet
another burden of
paperwork, but the
alternative can be a
muddle of confusion
over who's responsible
for what.
Before Maine enacted its
own state right-to-know
law in 1989, many issues
came up that were
difficult to settle among
all the groups involved in
emergency response,
says David Brown of the
Maine SERC. The
process of writing a state
law helped to focus the
debate and establish
clear and orderly
procedures.
The first order of
business was to copy and
codify the requirements
of the federal Title in
into the state law, says
Brown. "We found that
this was very important
in order to make
compliance easier and to
make things easier to
understand," so that
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
' !!['- i '. ' :; !1 i MI -I' : t»'' 1(1 vi ' it: ;"i' ii; fr>iir:»t1* p" I ^au.'lllt*.:: -w ' - r III" i ' 1i a ; , ,\, in» r , , <« if;
lull
people wouldn't have to
run to the federal
documents whenever a
question came up.
"Then we added the
specifics that would be
unique for Maine," says
Brown. For example, the
state law mandated that
facilitiesdevelop
gmejrgency plans and
i^conductannual ' \ BI|I|II^
exercises, ami'that an
environmental group be
included on the SERC
and on each, qf Maine's
16 LEPCs. It set term
limits for ncjn-permanent
SERC members, with
expiration dates
staggered so that new
members ar^ folded in
gradually.
;K ; ;r,;[<<%.V |.!':V
An important part of
writing by-laws for a
SERCJs toj^blish
who's in charge. "It's
absolutely necessary" to
have a designated lead
agency, says Brown. "If
that position of
leadership is abdicated,
then the splinter groups
will go off in ten
different directions."
:>: :. VKi,*..
In Maine, as in many
states, the SERC is
headed by the state
emergency management
j. agency", But the] " "" '
i LreSpojisitulities pf other
',. " , agencies'
environmental
protection, police, etc.
alsq were spelled out
clearly either in the
statute or in an executive
order from the Governor
that "fleshed put the little
details," according to
Brown.
Rules governing each
agency's participation in
the SERC should specify
positions, not
individuals, so that when
key people leave, their
replacements will know
what their roles and
duties are. In Maine, the
commissioner of th§
department of public
safety is required by
executive order to name
a state police person to
sit on the SERC. But if
that person can't make a
meeting, the
commissioner is
responsible for making
sure that someone else
does attend. That way,
.thejSERC is nejer
;' without a quorum!
After Maine passed its
state right-to-know law,
the SERC then produced
a "plain English" primer
that put the new law into
ordinary language so that
LEPCs, facilities,
firefighters, and other
groups would be even
more clear about what
was required of them.
, ,1 \ '", i
As a result, says Brown,
"We've, moved from
feeling our way around
in the dark to a situation
Delegate!
The lead agency
shouldn't do everything.
Thafs what the SERC is
for.
Along with money, the
resource that every state
Title III program needs
most desperately is
manpower. Effective
SERCs have learned to
spread the workload
around to as many
people as possible so that
the lead agencythe
agency responsible for
administering the state's
Title HI program
doesn't become
overburdened.
, where most of the
LEPCs have conducted
at least one exercise,
most facilities have
submitted an emergency
plan for review, and 95
percent of our facilities
that; have hazardous
materials are now
registered with us."
"Delegation is the first
logical step," says
Delaware SERC
representative Gordon
Henderson. "You sure
as heck don't want to set
up a' bureaucracy, even if
you did have the
money."
It starts with using the
resources that are already
on hand, beginning with
the other state agencies
represented on the
SERC. When Title III
passed in 1986, there
was no additional money
provided to perform its
functions, says
Henderson, so Delaware
divided the new
responsibilities among
agencies that already
were doing similar jobs.
The state EPA, for
example, had been
handling chemical
release notifications from
facilities, so it took on
Title Hi's additional
requirements. The
public health department
expanded its collection
of worker-right-to-know
information to include
reports required under
sections 311 and
Once the jobs are
delegated, it's important
for the lead agency to
coordinate all the efforts
into a single coherent
program. Agencies
working on chemical
emergency planning, for
example, should be
aware of who is
collecting TRI (Toxic
Release Inventory) data
collected under section
313, which may be of
value to them. Similarly,
state agencies that handle
risk assessment, clean
air, transportation, and
other programs related to
Title HI should be
encouraged to join the
SERC and add whatever
help and resources they
can. This is particularly
important since the 1990
passage of two new laws
that could affect SERC
activities significantly
the Clean Ah Act
Amendments (CAAA)
and the Hazardous
Materials Transportation
Uniform Safety Act
(HMTUSA).
1 Lit t> i Hill1. ' u '
-------
Participation in the
SERC isn't limited to
government agencies,
however. Each state
should aim to create a
balanced and active
commission that
represents all sectors of
the community, then
make sure that each of
the members takes an
active role. "We are
demanding of our SERC
members," says Ohio
SERC chairman Grant
Wilkinson. "If they miss
two meetings in a row
and don't have a good
reason for it, we remove
them from the
commission." Wilkinson
also encourages lots of
interaction in SERC
meetings, not only
among commission
members but with the
audience as well: "I
don't generally let
someone sit there
without saying
something." As a result,
he says, Ohio's SERC
meetings have been well-
attended and productive.
"This has to be a
dynamic process if it's
going to work," says Joe
Quinn of the Nevada
SERC. "New members
should be brought in
regularly new blood,
if you will." In Nevada,
transportation of
hazardous chemicals has
become more of an issue
recently, so
representatives from
railroads and the
trucking industry are
being introduced into the
SERC.
One key "player" on any
SERC has to be local
industry, says Quinn.
"The public sector
cannot set itself up in
automatic opposition to
What the Law Says about SERCs
According to section 301 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Act (EPCRA) also known as Title ill each State Emergency Response
Commission (SERC) is required to:
"...designate emergency planning districts in order to facilitate preparation
and implementation of emergency plans."
"...appoint local emergency planning committees [LEPCs]members...and
supervise and coordinate the activities of such committees..."
"...review the [LEPC] plan and make recommendations to the committee...
necessary to ensure coordination of such plans with...plans of other [LEPCs]..."
"...notify the Administrator of facilities subject to...[section 302]...by notifying
the Administrator of:
1) each notification received from a facility under subsection (c) and,
2) each facility designated by the Governor or State emergency
response commission..."
"...establish procedures for receiving and processing requests from the public
for information...;" and
"Upon receipt of a request for tier II information... (from a state or local
official)...request the facility owner or operator for the tier II information and
make available such information to the official."
the private sectorit's
got to be a partnership."
The Nevada SERC has
been very successful in
getting real participation
from its industrial
members: a chemist
from a local mine might
give a training course, or
a facility might donate
use of its vehicles to haul
equipment. The
companies are generally
happy to help, says
Quinn. "The PR doesn't
hurt them at all, and it's
of mutual benefit. They
live here, too. Their kids
go to the same schools."
Including state political
figures as active
members of the SERC
also is "critical," says
Quinn. "Without that
conduit to the legislative
body of the state, the
SERC is not going to be
anywhere near as
effective as it should be.
If it works correctly, [the
SERC] can be a
tremendous force in
getting needed
legislation passed."
As the numbers of
people involved in Title
III issues grow, the
SERC membership could
become unwieldy. To
avoid this, it may be
helpful to create
committees and working
groups for ongoing jobs
that require more
attention.
-------
[IP I
The Maine SERC has
three standing
committees for dealing
with paining, budget,
and community right-to-
know issues. There are
25 members on the
training committee
alone, including fire
fighters, police, medical
emergency responders,
and industry
representatives. Because
all these groups have
their different
perspectives on
emergency response, the
committee hashes out
whatever disagreements
might arise over policies
and plans before making
a recommendation to the
overall SERC for
approval or disapproval.
Short-term projects can
be delegated to
subcommittees. In
Connecticut, the SERC
formed an LEPC
Advisory Task Force to
develop a guidance
manual giving LEPCs a
basic overview of Title
III requirements, along
with sample emergency
plans and public notices.
VVith half its members
drawn from industry and
half from LEPCs, the
task force was able to
tackle a job that the
SERC would have been
unable to take on itself.
I/..' '!"
Advisory committees are
another way to get much-
needed help while at the
same time brqadening
the base of support for
Title HI programs within
the state. R. C. Dawson
serves on a hazmat
response advisory
committee in Virginia,
one of several such
groups that provide
advice to the SERC in a
specific area where it can
use more expertise.
Some advisory
committees meet
monthly, others less
often, depending on the
tasks at hand. The
hazmat advisory
committee involves
police, firefighters,
rescue officials, and
others "from a variety of
disciplines," says
Dawson. "Once you
break down the barriers
and start networking, you
open up a whole avenue
of help."
In Ohio, a task force set
up by the state legislature
to conduct a one-time
outside review of the
SERC's activities has
been helpful as a kind of
reality check, says SERC
Chairman Grant
Wilkinson. With its
membersiiip drawn from
the regulated
community, LEPCs, and
environmental groups
no state employees
allowed the task fprce
can assess how
effectively the SERC is
fulfilling its charter and
recommend how its
operations might be
improved. Then, after the
group makes its report, it
simply disbands instead
of leaving behind
another permanent layer
of bureaucracy.
When looking for
resources to draw into
the SERC, it's useful to
think regionally. Many
chemical safety issues
extend across state lines
and even international
borders. Neighboring
SERCs, the federal
Regional Response
Team, and EPA's
regional office all can be
of help. It may be a
simple matter of two
counties on opposite
sides of a state line
conducting joint safety
exercises. Or it may
involve cooperation on a
larger scale. In
Delaware, a recent
LEPC regional
conference drew 275
people from 13 states
who were able to share
ideas about solving
common problems.
As with most Title III
work, regional
cooperation depends on
people in different
organizations in different
states talking to each
other and exchanging
information about their
programs.
"The job title I have of
Title III 'coordinator' is
pretty descriptive," says
Delaware's Gordon
Henderson. "What I do
all day long is
coordinate. I'll be on the
phone to FEMA, to
EPA's regional office or
headquarters, to my
counterpart in another
state, or to one of our
LEPCs, You pick up the
telephone and you talk to
a lot of people."
As SERCs delegate work
to more and more
"helpers," the issue of
legal immunity may
eventually arise.
Volunteers who
participate on LEPCs
and SERCs may become
concerned that they are
legally liable if an
accident occurs in a
facility for which they've
helped to create an
emergency response
plan.
In order to allay these
fears, states such as
Arizona have passed
laws that specifically
grant immunity to SERC
and LEPC members.
Most states have some
form of liability
protection for individuals
involved in emergency
planning, or have
existing laws that cover
volunteers in general. In
any case, the SERC may
want to address this issue
as it seeks to recruit
people willing to carry
out the work of Title HI.
ti in
-------
MAKING
IT
WORK
Information that
Informs
Collecting a mountain of
data isri t your goal
understanding and using
it is.
A large part of Title HI
work is collecting
information about
facilities, about the
chemicals they handle,
and about the risks these
chemicals pose to the
community. Managing
that flood of information,
and using it in creative
ways, is one of the great
challenges facing any
SERC.
The first concern should
be who's going to collect
the data. Tier II forms,
Form R reports, Material
Safety Data Sheets, and
other Title III data can
all go to the same state
agency or to several
different ones. But if the
information is scattered,
it should eventually be
put into a format
compatible with different
uses, or integrated into a
single database that
contains all Tide III
information in a form
that everyone can use.
Pennsylvania made the
decision that one-stop
shopping was the best
way to go, says SERC
representative Jim
Tinney. One agency
collects all Title III
information, assembles it
into a statewide
computer database, then
sends the updated data
twice a year to LEPCs,
who can plug the latest
information into dBase,
CAMEO (Computer-
Aided Management of
Emergency .Operations),
or other computer
programs of their choice.
That way, says Tinney,
instead of having the
data exist in different
forms all over the state,
"We all have up-to-date
files."
One way for SERCs to
get the most out of Title
III data is to make
LEPCs familiar with the
latest computer database
programs. "Information
is power," says Karl
Bims of the Kansas
SERC, "and one way to
empower the LEPCs is to
support a system that
gets them usable
information."
The Kansas SERC
makes CAMEO software
which includes
databases on chemicals,
facilities, and
transportation, along
with street maps to assist
planning and response
personnel widely
available to counties.
The SERC provides the
CAMEO software to any
LEPC that wants it,
along with maps and
local Title III data.
Once it's up and running,
the CAMEO database
includes "names of the
companies, contacts,
what chemicals are
present, where they're
found, everything," says
Birns. "CAMEO is a
real live link to
informatioa It's the
kind of thing that takes
the program out of the
theoretical and makes it
practical."
Aside from helping
LEPCs with their
emergency planning,
these kinds of powerful
computer programs
allow the LEPC to
establish "linkages" with
other agencies outside
the chemical safety
community, says Birns.
CAMEO can be useful to
officials responsible for
zoning and highway
planning, or to health
departments who can use
it to track private wells
and septic systems.
Bims suggests that
counties make CAMEO
data available to road
departments, water
departments, and many
other users so that the
LEPC becomes a
respected source of
information.
This empowerment, he
says, is probably Lie
single most important
thing a SERC can do for
LEPCs. "If the LEPC is
in a position to be a
source of good
information to
everybody, then they
become a formidable
force in their community,
and they will accrue
suppdrL People will
come to them "
The ultimate goal of
community "right-to-
know" laws is to get the
information out to the
general public, and here
too, the SERC can tak<>
an active role. The first
thing the Pennsylvania
SERC did in this regard
was to establish a
citizens' reading room
where the public could
come in and review
submitted Title III forms
on paper. When
computer automation
became more widespread
and affordable, the
reading room substituted
a laser-disc "Citizen's
Access Workstation" for
the paper files. With
only a little bit of
instruction, users from
the general public can
create their own queries
and get copies of Title III
reports.
People visit the reading
room and make written
requests, says Tinney, or
"they call us on the
phone, and we provide
customized responses."
In order to let the public
know that the service is
available, the SERC
sends out press releases
and does an annual
mailing to every
employer in the state.
Other Title III outreach
activities in Pennsylvania
include seminars for
-------
trade groups and
citizens' associations,
exhibits at environmental
conferences, and an
electronic bulletin board
carrying general
information about Title
III that's accessible to
anyone with a computer
modem.
Currently, says Tinney,
the Pennsylvania SERC
is working with a fire
company and a private
vendor to develop a way
for remote users to dial
directly into the state's
Title HI data system.
Using touch-tone voice
prompts, he says, "You
could, in effect, order up
your own fax of a site
plan or a Tier II or TRI
form." The system is
being designed initially
for emergency
responders, but
ultimately, he says, it
could be made available
to the public.
This movement to
convert Title III data to
more "user-friendly"
formats also is underway
in Hawaii, where the
SERC is using grant
money from EPA to
install computer displays
in public places such as
libraries. The system
would use hands-on,
interactive video displays
to present basic
information about j
chemicals in the
community.
In Minnesota, the SERC
found that it was
routinely asked for
information about Title
III by citizens' groups
around the state. But,
says SERC
representative Bob
Dahm, "What can you do
with a bunch of handouts
and a six-foot table?"
So, using grant money
from EPA, the
Minnesota SERC
developed a portable
display booth
complete with photo
panels explaining how
facilities use chemicals
and what Title III is all
about that could be
used as a traveling
exhibit Along with the
booth, the SERC
produced a video and
printed booklets that
could be handed out to
the public.
The first stop on the
"tour," says Dahm, was
the Minnesota State Fair.
After that, the booth
traveled to meetings of
fire chiefs,
environmental
conferences, citizens'
groups "anywhere we
found a large enough
audience." The SERC
also has made the booth
available to any county
that wants to display it in
shopping malls or other
public forums.
Minnesota's other
outreach efforts include
developing a speaker's
kit for people giving
talks to citizens groups
and producing public
service announcements
that have aired on local
radio stations.
Interestingly, the SERC
found that television
commercials were not
the best way to spread
the word. "We were
tcld by stations, 'We'll
air [a public service
announcement], but it
will be somewhere
between the 53rd
episode of / Love Lucy
and the Home Shopping
Channel,'" says Dahm.
"For the cost of
producing something
like that, we decided it
wouldn't be money well
spent."
LEPCs: How You
Can Help
The local level is -where
most of the work is
and should be done.
If SERCs often find
themselves strapped for
resources, the situation
can be even worse at the
local level. Because
LEPCs often receive very
little direct financial
support, says Delaware's
Gordon Henderson, "You
start having LEPCs run
on sort of a bake-sale
basis, scrounging for
filing cabinets or xerox
machines." The result,
he says, is that "A lot of
them were feeling
alienated, saying, 'We're
the ones who have the
liability if the plant fails,
but nobody's talking to
us."1
There are a number of
ways a SERC can help.
One way is to help
LEPCs get organized by
giving them guidance on
writing their own by-
laws. What's true for
states also is true at the
local level: Without
written rules, the
implementation of Tide
III can dissolve into
chaos.
-------
The Arizona SERC
discovered a simple way
to be of assistance in this
area. After one county in
the state, Cochise,
produced a good,
workable set of by-laws
covering everything
from where the LEPC
office was located to
who was responsible for
public information the
SERC merely sent the
Cochise by-laws around
to each of the other 15
Arizona LEPCs as a
model to copy or adapt
to their own needs.
"Why reinvent the
wheel?" says Carl Funk
of the Arizona SERC.
Since then, half of the
state's LEPCs have
adopted their own by-
laws.
SERCs can help LEPCs
in other ways, by
running public
information campaigns
to draw volunteers, or by
providing general
guidance and relevant
documents on state and
federal Tide III
requirements.
By law each SERC also
is required to conduct
regular reviews of LEPC
emergency plans. Here
the SERC's oversight
can be of immeasurable
help in making sure that
local communities are
building an effective
Title III program.
Virginia is a good
example of a state that
"takes care" of its
LEPCs by offering
expert guidance on
emergency planning. A
branch within the state's
emergency management
agency takes
responsibility for helping
LEPCs to develop their
emergency plans. The
branch reviews the
plans, sends them back
with recommendations,
and conducts training
courses to help LEPCs
solve their problems if
the plans don't meet
certain criteria. These
courses are often group
sessions where several
LEPCs that have similar
problems can compare
notes. After the group
session, a state
representative follows up
to address the individual
issues in each
jurisdiction.
The other important
supervisory role that
SERCs have is to
provide guidance in
creating training
programs. Here again,
Virginia offers an
extensive program.
Each year, the SERC
puts on two to three
contingency planning
courses, along with two
emergency exercise
design courses, at least
two conferences for
public officials (which
may include LEPC
members), and 60 to 70
courses for hazardous
materials responders.
The courses are free to
all attendees and are
offered at different
locations around the state
because, says SERC
representative Norman
McTague, "It's a heck of
a lot easier to get people
to drive 100 miles than
200 or 300 miles."
As part of its LEPC
outreach program,
Virginia (through a grant
from EPA) also has aired
a full-day satellite TV
program on Title III
emergency planning,
complete with call-in
from the LEPCs. The
emergency management
agency also keeps four
people "in the field" to
help support the 114
LEPCs in the state. Asa
result, says McTague,
"We keep in fairly close
contact all the time."
When the SERC can't go
to the LEPCs, the LEPCs
can come to the SERC.
One simple way is to
hold statewide meetings
so that people from
different jurisdictions
can share ideas. Often,
says Sue Vaughn of the
Connecticut SERC,
"There's no other
mechanism for LEPC
members to get together
and exchange ideas."
Michigan has had great
success with its annual
LEPC conference, says
SERC representative
Diane Ogrea With 97
LEPCs in the state, the
conference draws an
attendance of some 250
One LEPC has a problem. Another has the solution. The
trouble is, they're on opposite sides of the state and
neither one is aware of what the other is doing.
That'swhere the "peer exchange" grant program sponsored
by EPA and the International City Management
Association (ICMA) comes in. LEPCs can apply to the
program to serve either as "advisors" or "recipients" of
assistance. Atthe ICMA offices in Washington, D.C., the
applications are entered into a database that matches
LEPCs who have specific needs with those who offer that
same expertise. The two parties get together for a
workshop, compare notes and both go home a little wiser.
The grants cover up to $600 of travel costs and other basic
expenses for workshop attendees.
ICMA expects to award approximately 30 of these peer
exchange grants in 1992. To receive an application, write
to Sarith Guerra, International City Management
Association, 777 North Capitol Street ME, Suite 500,
Washington DC 20002, or call (202) 962-3649.
-------
MAKING
WORK
people each year, who
hear presentations and
trade informatioa "We
don't just invite LEPC
members," says Ogren.
"We also invite members
of hazardous materials
response teams, so the
planners and the
responders get a chance
to interact." Carl Funk of
Arizona agrees that the
rejuvenation that takes
place at these statewide
meetings justifies paying
travel expenses for
LEPC members to be
there. It's a good way,
he says, of "maintaining
constant contact."
SERCs also can
encourage neighboring
LEPCs to share
emergency equipment
and other resources
through mutual aid
agreements. The
Minnesota SERC
currently is putting
together a database of
emergency response
personnel, equipment,
and supplies that could
be made available to all
local governments within
the state. The
information would go
into a database tended by
a 24 -hour duty officer.
That way, says Bob
Dahm, "When someone
calls and says they need
[emergency equipment]
in a hurry, you call the
duty officer and he pulls
up the list of sources."
Cooperative agreements
across political
boundaries also extend to
Minnesota's dealings
with Indian reservations,
which are sovereign
nations. The state has a
Memorandum of
Understanding with the
Minnesota Chippewa
Tribe whereby the tribe
works in cooperation
with the SERC, sharing
planning, training, and
response resources as
well as facility
information.
Mutual aid agreements
are just a matter of
common sense, says Joe
Quinn of the state of
Nevada, which has set
up "Project Oasis" to
integrate information
about regional resources
and response capabilities
into a single
comprehensive computer
database. "There's no
way some rural districts
can support a hazmat
team of their own," says
Quinn, "whe^as if the
resources are focused, a
regional team is a much
more logical approach to
the problem and a lot
more economically
feasible."
Paying the bills
Money is always a
problem, but for most
SERCs there's more than
one source of revenue.
No Title III program can
run without funding, of
course, and the perpetual
battle to raise money
preoccupies many a
SERC chairperson.
Most states appropriate
some amount of public
funds in their annual
budget for Title III
programs.
Another option is to do
what many states already
have done: establish fees
for industry who file
reports under Tide III.
Maine, for example,
established a fee system
based on the amount of
hazardous chemicals
stored at each facility
(with a ceiling of $5,000
per facility per year).
Not only does that raise
revenue, it also
discourages facilities
from storing large
amounts. According to
the 1991 edition of the
National Governors
Association's
publication, Emergency
Planning and
Community Right-to-
Know: A Status of State
Actions, 18 states have
Title III fee systems in
place, while two others
have fee programs that
provide funds to support
Title HI activities. Ten
other states plan to
introduce fee bills during
their 1992 legislative
sessions.
Be warned, however if
you don't already have a
fee system, getting the
legislation through the
statehouse may be a long
process. In Delaware it
took three years to agree
on a bill that wasn't
considered too
burdensome on industry.
"That wasn't easy
legislation to draft," says
Gordon Henderson. "I
remember spending an
hour and a half one day
on the committee just
trying to say 'gas station'
in legal language."
The key to success, he
says, is to get industry
actively involved in the
process of creating a fee
system from the start,
instead of springing it on
the facilities without
their participation.
"You have to work with
the community that
you're regulating,"
Henderson says.
"Industry wanted
something that would
work. Better to have a
good, workable system
that [they] helped to
develop than to let a
bunch of bureaucrats do
it."
Before establishing its
fee system, the Delaware
SERC set up a
subcommittee with
8
-------
members from industry,
fire fighters, and state
representatives (who
head two of the state's
LEPCs). The
subcommittee worked
out several compromises,
including exemptions for
non-profit associations.
But even if there are
compromises, the result
can be thousands of
additional dollars coming
to the SERC every year,
and a way to decrease its
reliance on general
appropriations.
In some states, money
from fees or
appropriations are passed
through directly to
LEPCs. In others, the
SERC itself administers
the funds, which can be a
good way of keeping
abreast of local activities.
To qualify for grants,
Wisconsin LEPCs have
to be able to show that
they did a certain amount
of work, says William
Clare of the Wisconsin
SERC. "They don't
automatically get the
grant whether they do
something or not." The
SERC uses a formula
based on population and
the number of planning
and reporting facilities to
determine grants that
cover each LEPC's
planning and
administrative costs.
Grants also can provide
matching funds for
computer equipment and
emergency response
equipment. Along with
their grant application,
however, the LEPC is
required to fill out a
work plan detailing its
planned activities in
developing emergency
response plans,
conducting emergency
exercises, and meeting
other requirements of
Title HI. If any of these
milestones are not met, a
percentage of the total
grant is deducted for
each task the LEPC has
not completed. That
way, says Clare, funding
is tied to performance,
and the state gets the best
possible result from its
appropriated money.
Civil action settlements
and fines for non-
compliance can be
another source of
revenue. Although
"We've discovered that
encouragement works a
lot better," says David
Brown of the Maine
SERC, "We'll still do it
[enforcement]. We're not
going to ignore
violators."
Even when it isn't
mandatory, facilities in
the state can be an
important source of
financial help. "One of
the things we found [in
Delaware] is that all you
have to do is ask
industry," says
Henderson. "We haven't
been turned down yet."
He advises that SERCs
ask not for money so
much as specific services
perhaps free training
courses or secretarial
help. These kinds of
industry donations "have
magnified our Title HI
budget a hundred-fold,"
says Henderson. For one
regional LEPC
conference, a company
donated the conference
center, the food, and the
audiovisual equipment,
as well as printing the
conference program.
The cost to the facility
was over $35,000,
which, says Henderson,
is "twice my whole
year's training budget"
Along with state
appropriations,
application fees, and
industry donations,
SERCs also receive
funds from the federal
government. EPA has
provided a limited
number of grants for
everything from
community outreach to
training programs, and
the Federal Emergency
Management Agency
(FEMA) has provided
grants for training.
Beginning in fiscal year
1993, a portion of fees
collected under the
Hazardous Materials
Transportation Uniform
Safety Act (HMTUSA)
of 1990 will be applied
to state and local Title IE
programs: a total of $5
million for annual
planning grants to states
(with 75 percent of that
amount passed through
to LEPCs) and $7.8
million in annual
emergency response
training grants to states
and Indian tribes (with
75 percent going to train
public employees,
primarily firefighters).
LEPCs should contact
the state agency
designated by tiie
Governor as the primary
lead for the HMTUSA
program to learn more
about the state's planning
grant application.
SERC representatives mentioned in
Arizona
Connecticut
Delaware
Hawaii
Kansas
Maine
Michigan
Minnesota
Nevada
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Virginia
Wisconsin
Carl Funk
Sue Vaughn
Gordon Henderson
Mark Ingoglia
Karl Birns
David Brown
Diane Ogren
Bob Dahm
Joe Quinn
Grant Wilkinson
Jim Tinney
Norm McTague
R.C. Dawson
William Clare
this bulletin:
(602) 231-6399
(203) 566-4856
(302)834-4531
(808) 543-8249
(913)296-1690
(207) 289-4080
(517) 334-5107
(612) 643-3002
(702) 687-4240
(614) 644-2782
(717) 783-2071
(804) 674-2459
(804) 270-2931
(608) 266-1509
-------
Get Active!
The best SERCs go
beyond the letter of the
law.
Being a successful SERC
means looking for
innovative programs in
unexpected places and
encouraging
participation from every
sector of society. It also
means keeping the spirit
of Title HI in mind,
rather than just fulfilling
the letter of the law.
"You can't wait for
legislation," says Joe
Quinn of the Nevada
SERC. "You've got to be
very proactive."
Many SERCs already
have most of the
ingredients they need to
be successful the next
step is organization,
followed by learning
what others in their
region and around the
country are doing to
further the goal of
safety.
EPA Regional Title III Offices
"When I took this job,"
says Gordon Henderson
of the Delaware SERC,
"I thought. This is never
going to work.
Government people and
industry are not
supposed to be able to
cooperate.'"
Nonetheless, he says he's
learned that SERCs
really can accomplish
good things: 'Title in is
an idealistic dream that
shouldn't be working,
but is."
EPA - Region 1
New England Regional Lab
60 Westview Street
Lexington, MA 02173
617-860-4301
(CT, MA, ME, NH, RI,
VT)
EPA - Region 2
2890 Woodbridge Avenue
Edison, NJ 08837-3679
908-321-6620
(NJ. NY, PR, VI)
EPA - Region 3
Oil & Title HI Section
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
215-597-5998
(DE, DC, MD, PA, VA,
WV)
EPA - Region 4
345 Courtland Street, ME
Atlanta, GA 30365
404-347-1033
(AL,FL,GA,KY,MS,
NC.SC.TN) .
EPA - Region 5
77 West Jackson HSC-9J
Chicago, IL 60604-3590
312-353-1964
(IL,IN,MI,MN,OH,WI)
EPA - Region 6
Allied Bank Tower
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
214-655-2270
(AR,LA,NM,OK,TX)
EPA - Region 7
ARTX/TOPE/TSCS
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
913-551-7308
(IA, KS, MO, NE)
EPA - Region 8
One Denver Place
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2466
303-293-1723
(CO, MT, ND, SD, UT,
WY)
EPA - Region 9
75 Hawthorne Street (H-l-2)
San Francisco, C A 94105
415-744-2100
(AS, AZ, CA, HI, NP, NV,
GU)
EPA - Region 10
1200 6th Avenue (HW-114)
Seattle, W A 98101
206-553-4349
(AK, ID, OR, WA)
10
-------
WANT MORE INFORMATION?
To provide additional insight into the various programs and
activities discussed in this publication, EPA has published
many documents that might be helpful in implementing Title
III at the state level. Below is a partial listing of documents
available through the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Knpw Information Service:
EPCRA Information Service
US EPA (OS-120)
401 M St. S.W.
Washington D.C. 20460
Telephone: 1-800-535-0202
Chemicals in Your Community: A Guide to the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (OS WER-90-
002), September 1988.
Computer Systems for Chemical Emergency Planning
(Technical Assistance Bulletin 5) (OSWER-89-005),
September 1989.
Criteria for Review of Hazardous Materials Emergency
Plans (NRT-1A), May 1988.
Digest of Federal Training in Hazardous Materials (FEMA
134), July 1987)
Guide to Exercises in Chemical Emergency Preparedness
Programs (OSWER-88-006), May 1988.
Hazardous Materials Emergency Planning Guide (NRT-1),
March 1987.
It's Not Over in October: A Guide for Local Emergency
PlanningCommittees;ImplementingtheEmergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (OSWER-90-
004), September 1988.
Managing Chemicals Safely (EPA-510-K-92-001), March
1992.
Risk Communication About Chemicals In Your Community:
A Manual for Local Officials (EPA 230/09-89-066), EPA/
FEMA/DOT/ATSDR.
Successful Practices in Title III Implementation, Volumes 1-
9. A series of bulletins highlighting state and local Tide HI
programs that are particularly innovative or effective. Each
bulletin profiles the activities of several different SERCs and
LEPCs, along with "lessons learned" and contacts for tnore
information.
Successful Practices #1 (OSWER-89-006.1), January 1989.
State of Kansas
Washtenaw County, Michigan
Butler County, Kansas
Jefferson County, Kentucky
Successful Practices #2 (OSWER-89-006.2), August 1989
Calhoun County, Alabama
Pampa, Texas
Cuyahoga County, Ohio
Racine County, Wisconsin
State of Idaho
Successful Practices #3 (OSWER-89-006.3),December 1989.
Woodbury County, Iowa
State of Virginia
Fairfax County, Virginia
Pierce County, Washington
Successful Practices #4 (OSWER-90-006.1), March 1990.
New York, New York
El Paso County, Colorado
Alexandria, Virginia
State of Maine
Successful Practices #5 (OSWER-90-006.2), June 1990.
Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma
State of Connecticut
Cumberland County, Maine
Wyandotte County, Kansas
Successful Practices #6(OSWER-90-006.3),September 1990.
State of Ohio
Hamilton County, Ohio
Wallingford, Connecticut
Ouachita Parish, Louisiana
11
-------
SuccessfulPractices#7(OSWER-91-006.1),February 1991.
Cameron County, Texas
Bucks County, Pennsylvania
Harford County, Maryland
Dallas County, Texas
Successful Practices #8 (OSWER-91-006.2), October 1991.
Cherry Hill, New Jersey
Manitowac County, Wisconsin
Green County, Missouri
State of Hawaii
Arapahoe County, Colorado
Successful Practices #9 (OSWER-92-006.1), September 1992.
Natrona County, Wyoming
Erie County, New York
State of Arizona
Mohave County, Arizona
Title III List of Lists (Consolidated List of Chemicals Subject
to Reporting Under the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know) EPA 560/4-92-011, January 1992.
Tort Liability in Emergency Planning (OSWER-89-007),
January 1989.
When All Else Fails! Enforcement of the Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Act (OSWER-89-010),
September 1989.
v-xEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency (OS-120)
Washington, DC 20460
FIRST CLASS MAIL
Postage and Fees Paid
EPA
G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
S300
12
------- |