UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
JUN 10 1998
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY
RESPONSE
Dear SERC and LEPC members:
I am writing to tell you about proposed changes to the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act (known as EPCRA or SARA Title ED) regulations, and to
ask for your comments on the proposal. Briefly, EPA is proposing the following three major
changes:
• Higher reporting thresholds for gasoline and diesel fuel at retail gasoline stations;
• Relief from reporting for rock salt, sand, and gravel; and
• Relief from routine reporting for substances with low hazards and low risks.
In addition to these specific proposed changes to EPCRA Section 311-312 reporting
requirements, EPA is asking for your"comments on other EPCRA issues th^at may directly affect
you:
Electronic submission of 311 -312 information;
• Reporting only changes in information, rather than submitting a new 312 inventory form
each year; and
• Allowing Underground Storage Tank reports under RCRA to fulfill EPCRA Section 312
requirements.
On June 8, 1998 EPA published the proposed changes in the Federal Register. A copy of
the FR notice and a brief factsheet.are enclosed for your convenience. I suspect that many of you
will have strong opinions about the proposed changes t6 the EPCRA rule and will want to
provide EPA with your comments. Rest assured that, before making any final decisions about
•these proposed rule changes, we will carefully consider all comments that we receive (directions
for sending comments are at the end of the enclosed factsheet and at the beginning of the FR
notice). Please note that there is a deadline of September 8,1998 for commenting.
On a different note, you have probably heard about the Risk Management Program (RMP)
requirements of the Clean Air Act Section 112(r). We are receiving more and more telephone
calls from LEPC members with questions about the role of LEPCs in the RMP program. I am
happy to tell you that we are currently preparing guidance for LEPCs on the RMP program. We
expect the guidance to be completed by August and you'll be sent a copy as soon as it is finalized.
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Recycled Paper (40% Postconsumer)
-------
Let me thank you for your fine work. LEPCs have, and will continue to, play a major role
in addressing chemical hazards in the community and in working with local industry to prevent
accidents. I am always happy to hear your ideas about how we can continue working together
on chemical accident preparedness and prevention.
Sine
is, JJyrector
ial Emergency Preparedness j
id Prevention Office
Enclosures
P.S. You may have heard that Vice President Gore recently directed Federal agencies to use
language that is less complicated and more easily understood. I hope you find that the enclosed
proposed rule change meets with the Vice President's directive.
-------
vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response
(5104)
EPA 550-F-98-005
May 1998
Regulatory Reinvention
Proposed EPCRA Sections 302-312 Revisions
The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act requires facilities to provide State
and local officials with information on their hazardous chemical inventories to support local
emergency planning. EPA has proposed some regulatory changes under EPCRA aimed at
relieving facilities from routine reporting of information that is not useful to the community.
The proposal simplifies and streamlines compliance, particularly for the chemical inventory
submissions required under EPCRA sections 311 and 312, without compromising the public's
right-to-know. EPCRA section 313 requirements would not be affected.
What's New?
EPA is exploring innovative ways to
improve the efficiency of the reporting
requirements under EPCRA sections
311-312 and has proposed several
major changes:
• Higher reporting thresholds for
gasoline and dieselfuel at retail
gasoline stations. Retail gas
stations that store gasoline and
diesel fuel entirely underground .
and are in compliance with
underground storage tank (UST)
regulations would be subject to
the following thresholds under
section 311-312: 75,000 gallons
for all grades of gasoline
combined and 100,000 gallons
for diesel-fuel. EPA estimates
that the vast majority of retail gas
stations will have less than these
quantities.
The public and local emergency
planners and responders generally are
aware of the presence and the hazards
associated with gasoline and diesel
fuel. Underground storage minimizes
the risk of catastrophic releases.
Finally, performance and operation
standards already are in place under
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) UST regulations.
• Relief from routine reporting for
rock salt, sand, and gravel.
Facilities that store or handle rock
salt, sand, and gravel no longer
would report these substances
under sections 311-312,
regardless of how much was
onsite.
These substances do not present a
physical or health hazard to the public,
emergency responders, or the
environment.
• Relief from routine reporting for
substances with low hazards and
low risks. A substance that does
not pose a significant physical or
health hazard to the public,
emergency response personnel, or
the environment, would no longer
be reportable under sections
311-312, regardless of how much
was onsite.
Chemical Emergency Preparedness and Prevention Office
> Printed on recycled paper
-------
Local communities are best situated to judge the
level of risk presented in site-specific situations.
The elimination of unnecessary reporting will
help focus emergency preparedness and planning
on more significant hazards. However, it is
important to note that the proposed rule would not
affect the public's right-to-know regardless of
threshold levels.
Important Note
Under EPCRA, each State has the authority to adopt
more stringent requirements, including setting lower
threshold levels for individual substances than those
established by EPA. As a result, facilities should
check with the State agency responsible for EPCRA
section 312 Tier I/Tier II reporting to determine
applicable requirements.
EPA also wants comment on several issues that
would give State and local governments more
flexibility to implement the existing requirements
of EPCRA sections 311-312:
• Partnership programs for streamlined
submission of and joint access to section 311
and 312 information;
• Electronic submittal of information;
• Reporting of ONLY changes in information,
rather than submitting a new inventory each
year;
Allowing RCRA UST reports to fulfill
EPCRA Section 312 requirements.
Li keeping with the idea of regulatory reinvention,
EPA also has changed the format of the
regulations to make them easier to understand and
use.
.Other Changes
EPA is proposing to clarify reporting of mixtures
and change the interpretation of the existing
hazardous chemical exemption for solids under
section 311.
How Can I Find Out More?
The full text of the regulatory changes, the
preamble describing all of EPA's proposals, and
the flexibility options have been published in the
Federal Register. They are available in electronic
format on EPA's Chemical Emergency
Preparedness and Prevention Office homepage at
http://www.epa.gov/ceppo/.
For information on how these changes may affect
you, call EPA's Hotline at:
(800) 424-9346/(703) 412-9810
TDD: (800)553-7672
Mon-Fri, 9am to 6pm, E.T.
How Can I Let EPA Know What I
Think?
EPA wants to hear directly from you. All
comments received will be considered as we
prepare the final EPCRA rule to be issued later
this year.
You can submit your comments on the CEPPO
homepage (see above), or mail your comments to
EPA (refer to Docket Number 300RR-1DF) at the
following address:
Docket Coordinator, Headquarters
U.S. EPA
CERCLA Docket Office
Mail Code 5201G
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Chemical Emergency Preparedness and Prevention Office
> Printed on recycled paper
-------
Monday
June 8, 1998
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Parts 355 and 370
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Programs; Amendments to
Hazardous Chemical Reporting
Thresholds, Streamlining Requirements;
Proposed Rule
31267
-------
31268
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 355 and 370
[FR-6103-7]
R!N 2050-AE17
Emergency Planning and Community
RIght-to-Know Programs;
Amendments to Hazardous Chemical
Reporting Thresholds, Streamlining
Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing
modifications to 40 CFR parts 355 and
370, which are the regulations
implementing sections 302, 303, 304,
311 and 312 of the Emergency Planning
and Community Right-To-Know Act
(EPCRA). These rules cover
requirements for emergency planning
and release notification, and hazardous
chemical community right-to-know
reporting under EPCRA. The proposed
changes are intended to reduce
reporting burdens, while preserving the
important public health and safety
benefits of the hazardous chemical
reporting requirements. EPA is
proposing to raise the reporting
thresholds for gasoline and diesel fuel
in underground tanks at retail gas
stations, and to set new reporting
thresholds for some additional
hazardous chemicals, under sections
311 and 312. EPA is also proposing to
make clarifying changes to the mixture
requirements under sections 311 and
312. In addition, EPA is publishing draft
guidance as part of the preamble of this
document to provide States and local
governments with more discretion in
implementing the federal
requirements—this guidance would not
be binding and does not involve any
regulatory changes, as discussed further
in this preamble. EPA believes the
elimination of unnecessary reporting
will help focus emergency prevention
and planning on more significant
hazards. EPA is also proposing to
rewrite 40 CFR parts 355 and 370 to
make them easier to understand and to
use. (However, the rewrite is not
intended to make any substantive
revision to the existing rules;
substantive changes are limited to the
revisions specifically proposed in this
document.) Improving the clarity of
regulatory requirements will make the
rules .easier to understand and improve
compliance.
DATES: Comments must be submitted in
writing and must be received at the
address specified below on or before
Septembers, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Please reference Docket
Number 300RR-IF1. By Mail: Mail
original and three copies of comments
(no facsimiles or tapes) to Docket
Coordinator, Headquarters; U.S. EPA;
CERCLA Docket Office; (Mail Code
5201G); 401 M Street, SW; Washington,
DC 20460; 703/603-9232.
By Federal Express: Send original and
three copies of comments (no facsimiles
or tapes) to Docket Coordinator,
Headquarters; U.S. EPA; CERCLA
Docket Office; 1235 Jefferson Davis
Highway; Crystal Gateway #1, First
Floor; Arlington, VA 22202.
By E-Mail: Comments in ASCII format
only may be mailed directly to
SUPERFUND.DOCKET®
EPAMA1L.EPA.GOV. E-mailed
comments must be followed-up by an
original and three copies sent by mail or
Federal Express. Don't submit
confidential business information
through e-mail.
The docket, which is the
administrative record for parts 355 and
370, is available for inspection between
the hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding Federal
holidays. You can make an appointment
to review the docket by calling 703/603-
9232. You may copy a maximum of 266
pages from any regulatory docket at no
cost. If the number of pages copied
exceeds 266, however, you will be
charged an administrative fee of $25 and
a charge of $0.15 per page for each page
after 266. The docket will mail copies of
materials to you if you are outside of the
Washington, DC metropolitan area.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meg
Victor or John Ferris, Chemical
Emergency Preparedness arid
Prevention Office, MC 5104, U.S. EPA,
401 M Street SW, Washington, DC
20460, 202/260-1379 or 202/260-4043.
Also contact the RCRA/UST, Superfund,
and EPCRA Hotline (the Hotline) at 800/
424-9346 (in the Washington, DC
metropolitan area, contact 703/412-
9810). The Telecommunications Device
for the Deaf (TDD) Hotline number is
800/535-7672 (in the Washington, DC
metropolitan area, 703/412-3323). You
may wish to visit the Chemical
Emergency Preparedness and
Prevention Office (CEPPO) Internet site,
at www.epa.gov/ceppo.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of today's preamble
are listed in the following outline:
I. Who is Affected by This Rule?
II. What is the Statutory Authority for This
Rule?
III. What is the Background of This
Rulemaking?
IV. What Regulatory Changes is EPA
Proposing in This Rule?
A. Principal Regulatory Changes
1. Higher Threshold Levels for Gasoline
and Diesel Fuel at Retail Gas Stations
When Stored in Tanks Entirely
Underground and in Compliance With
Underground Storage Tank Regulations
2. Relief From Routine Reporting for
Substances With Minimal Hazards and
Minimal Risks Under EPCRA Sections
311 and312
3. Relief From Routine Reporting for Sand,
Gravel and Rock Salt Under EPCRA
Sections 311 and 312
B. Other Regulatory Changes
1. Reporting of Mixtures Under EPCRA
Sections 311 and 312
2. Tier I and Tier II Inventory Forms and
Instructions
3. Penalties for Noncompliance
4. Facility Identifier as a Tier I and Tier II
Information Requirement
5. Additional Changes to the Parts 355 and
370 Regulations
6. Definitions
V. What Draft Guidance is EPA Publishing in
This Preamble?
A. Increased Flexibility for States and
Local Governments With Respect to
Reporting Under EPCRA Sections 311
and 312
1. UST Forms to Fulfill the Requirements
for Tier I Information Under EPCRA
Section 312
2. Partnership Programs for Joint Access to
Information and Streamlined Submission
of EPCRA Sections 311 and 312
Reporting
3. Electronic Submittal for EPCRA Sections
311 and 312 Reporting
4. Incorporation of Previous Submissions
Into EPCRA Section 312 Reporting
B. Electronic Access to Facilities'
Databases of MSDSs
C. Interpretation of the Hazardous
Chemical Exemption for Solids Under
EPCRA Section 311 (e) (2)
D. EPCRA Section 312 Reporting to Fulfill
Reporting Requirements Under Section
311
E. Emergency Planning Notification
F. Emergency Release Notification
VI. What Else is Different About This Rule?
A. Plain English Format
B. Conversion Table
VII. Where are SERCs and LEPCs Listed?
VIII. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order No. 12866
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Environmental Justice
F. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
G. Executive Order No. 13045
I. Who Is Affected by This Rule?
Three general categories of entities are
affected by this rule. These three
categories are industry, Federal
government, and State and local
governments. Numerous entities within
each general category are regulated by
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998 /Proposed Rules
31269
this rule. Regulated categories and
entities include:
Category
Federal Government
State and Local Governments
Regulated entities
Retail gasoline service stations, Chemical storage and processing.
Executive Order 12856 requires all Federal agencies to comply with EPCRA.
State Emergency Response Commissions (SERCs) and Local Emergency Planning Commit-
tees (LEPCs) receive the information, provided under EPCRA sections 302, 304, 31 1 and
312. LEPCs receive information provided under EPCRA section 303. Fire departments re-
ceive the information provided under EPCRA sections 311 and 312. State/local government
facilities handling chemicals may be subject to this regulation.
This table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide
for readers regulated by this action. To
determine whether or not your facility
is regulated by this action, you should
carefully examine the sections in
today's proposed rule explaining who
must comply with the rule. If you have
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
one of the persons listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
II. What Is the Statutory Authority for
This Rule?
This proposed rule is issued under
the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-To-Know Act of 1986
(EPCRA), which was enacted by Title III
of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986, (Pub. L.
99-499). EPCRA established a program
to encourage state and local planning
and preparedness for releases of
extremely hazardous substances, and to
provide the public, local governments,
fire departments and other emergency
officials with information concerning
chemical releases and the potential
chemical risks in their communities.
in. What Is the Background of This
Rulemaking?
In 1986, EPCRA created requirements
regarding planning and preparedness for
chemical emergencies, and public
access to information concerning
potential chemical hazards. EPA
established implementing regulations at
40 CFR parts 355 and 370. Today EPA
is proposing modifications to several of
the regulations that implement the
emergency planning, emergency release
notification, and the hazardous
chemical community right-to-know
portions of the EPCRA program (this
rulemaking does not effect the
implementation of EPCRA section 313,
40 CFR part 372, in any way). The
proposed revisions are intended to
reduce costs to individuals, businesses
and other levels of government, while
continuing to achieve EPCRA's
environmental goals. These changes are
proposed as part of EPA's ongoing
efforts to streamline regulatory
requirements. In addition, EPA is
proposing draft guidance that does not
involve regulatory revisions but
explores flexible options to meet the
existing regulations. EPA also is
proposing to rewrite the emergency
planning and hazardous chemical
community right-to-know portions of
the EPCRA regulations in plain English,
in order to reduce regulatory burdens
and improve compliance. Only the
regulatory revisions specifically
discussed in part IV below involve
substantive changes to the existing rule.
The rewrite of the existing regulations
in plain English is intended merely to
restate the existing regulations in a
format that makes them easier to
understand.
In 1990, section 112(r) of the amended
Clean Air Act (CAA) established
requirements regarding the prevention
and detection of accidental releases of
hazardous chemicals. The Risk
Management Program (RMP) established
under those requirements, codified at 40
CFR part 68, is an extension of the
planning and preparedness programs
established under EPCRA. A specific
facility may be subject to the RMP
requirements under CAA section 112(r)
as well as the planning and
preparedness programs under EPCRA.
EPA has considered the relationship
between these programs while
developing today's proposed rule.
IV. What Regulatory Changes Is EPA
Proposing in This Rule?
EPA seeks public comment on the
specific regulatory revisions addressed
below. However, EPA is not
reconsidering and is not seeking public
input on any other aspects of the
existing regulations that are not subject
to substantive revision.
A. Principal Regulatory Changes
In today's proposed rulemaking, EPA
is exploring innovative ways to improve
the efficiency of the reporting
requirements under sections 311 and
312 of EPCRA, and provide regulatory
relief, while continuing to protect
public health and the environment. This
action is proposed as part of EPA's
ongoing efforts at regulatory
reinvention. EPA based the following
proposed changes to the regulatory
requirements on'input from various
stakeholders including States and local
emergency planning committees
(LEPCs), and on the experience gained
through implementing the EPCRA
program at the Federal, State and local
levels over the past ten years.
The proposed regulatory changes are
discussed below:
1. Higher Threshold Levels for Gasoline
and Diesel Fuel at Retail Gas Stations
When Stored in Tanks Entirely
Underground and in Compliance With
Underground Storage Tank Regulations
The reporting requirements under
sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA are
intended to enhance communities' and
emergency response officials' awareness
of chemical hazards, and to facilitate the
development of State and local
emergency response plans, thereby
aiding communities and emergency
response officials in preparing for and
responding to emergencies safely and
effectively. EPA would like to achieve a
. sound balance between the amount of
information generated for the public
under sections 311 and 312, and the
value of that information. In an effort to
streamline reporting requirements, EPA
assessed the usefulness and benefit of
the information reported under sections
311 and 312 for various industries. EPA
considered the input from stakeholders
in making this evaluation.
As described in more detail below,
EPA is proposing to establish higher
reporting thresholds for gasoline and
diesel fuel stored underground at retail
gas stations. Both sections 311 (b) and
312(b) of EPCRA give EPA general
authority to establish threshold
quantities for hazardous chemicals
below which reporting is not required.
Both statutory provisions also state that,
in EPA's discretion, the thresholds may
be based on classes of chemicals or
categories of facilities. Thus, under the
-------
31270
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
statute, EPA's authority to establish
thresholds includes but is not limited to
thresholds that are based on classes of
chemicals or categories of facilities.
Congress broadly empowered EPA to
establish thresholds so that EPA could
"provide for the development of a
manageable program." H.R. Rep. No.
962. 99th Cong., 2d Sess. 1986 (Conf.
Rpt.) reprinted in Senate Comm. on
Environment and Public Works, 101st
Cong,, 2d Sess., A Legislative History of
the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-
499), vol. 6 at 5104 (hereinafter
"Conference Report"). The legislative
history also calls for EPA, in
establishing thresholds under section
312(b), to "consider the degree to which
the hazardous chemical, if released at
the facility, would endanger the health
of individuals in the community,
including emergency response
personnel." Conference Report at 5104-
5105.
EPA believes that gasoline and diesel
fuel, when stored entirely underground
at retail gas stations, and in compliance
with the Underground Storage Tank
(UST) regulations under 40 CFR part
280, present a unique situation for
which separate reporting thresholds
under EPCRA sections 311 and 312 are
warranted. Factors contributing to the
uniqueness of this situation, and which
EPA considered in establishing the
higher reporting thresholds, include the
following.
(1) Community Right-to-Know
The public and local emergency
officials are generally familiar with the
location of retail gas stations, are aware
that these facilities have gasoline and
diesel fuel, and can typically discern the
general storage location of the gasoline
and diesel fuel at the facility. In fact,
retail gas stations prominently advertise
the presence of gasoline and diesel fuel
at their facilities, encourage the public
to come on site, and often permit the
public to dispense the gasoline and
diesel fuel themselves. For example, the
public can readily determine the
location of a retail gasoline station by
looking in the telephone books. Because
the primary business of retail gasoline
stations includes the sale of gasoline
and diesel fuel, the public can be certain
that a facility stores these substances
without the need for reporting under
sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA. Thus,
the community's right-to-know about
the presence of gasoline and diesel fuel
at retail gas stations is largely satisfied
without routine reporting.
(2) Public Knowledge of Hazards
The public and local emergency
officials generally are aware of the
hazards associated with gasoline and
diesel fuel, so the community's right-to-
know about the hazards of those
substances is also addressed
independent of routine reporting.
(3) Storage Entirely Underground
Retail gas stations typically store
gasoline and diesel fuel in tanks that are
entirely underground, which generally
mitigates the risk of catastrophic release.
(4) Subject to UST Regulations
Underground storage tanks are
regulated under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),
so a comprehensive regulatory program
is in place that establishes standards for
the safe performance and operation of
USTs. Additionally, retail gas stations
provide notification of their gasoline
and diesel fuel under the UST program.
EPA believes that each of these four
factors alone wouldn't necessarily
warrant separate reporting thresholds,
but that in combination these factors
present a unique situation for gasoline
and diesel fuel in this industry category.
Considering these factors together, EPA
believes that excluding retail gas
stations from the requirement to report
material safety data sheets (MSDSs) and
annual Tier I information for gasoline
and diesel fuel (when held in typical
amounts in tanks that are entirely
underground, and in compliance with
the UST regulations) will promote a
more manageable EPCRA program while
still protecting the public health and
safety of individuals in the community
and emergency response officials. EPA
acknowledges that gasoline and diesel
fuel are flammable and toxic, and that
they have the potential to pose a hazard
to the community including emergency
responders. However, for the reasons
stated above, EPA believes that these
substances need not be routinely
reported under EPCRA when stored in
tanks entirely underground in typical
amounts and in compliance with the
UST regulations, at retail gas stations.
Consequently, in today's rule EPA is
proposing to raise the reporting
threshold with respect to sections 311
and 312 of EPCRA, for gasoline and
diesel fuel when stored entirely
underground and in compliance with
the UST regulations, at retail gas
stations in typical amounts. EPA's
intent is to establish new thresholds
corresponding to amounts just higher
than the typical total amounts of
gasoline and diesel fuel held at retail gas
stations, so that facilities with typical
capacities would be relieved from
reporting. EPA's intent is to set the
thresholds at the upper bound of the
amounts typically stored at retail gas
stations, so that facilities with greater
than typical capacities would not be
relieved from routine reporting. EPA
believes that the public and emergency
officials would generally be aware of the
quantity stored at typical gas stations,
but might not be aware of the amount
stored at facilities with above normal
inventories.
The reporting thresholds that EPA is
proposing are 75,000 gallons for all
grades of gasoline combined, and
100,000 gallons for diesel fuel, when
held in tanks that are entirely
underground and in compliance with
the UST regulations, at retail gas
stations. EPA based these proposed
thresholds on information provided by
the Service Station Dealers of America,
the Society of Independent Gas
Marketers of America, and the
Petroleum Equipment Institute. A
discussion of the basis for these
proposed thresholds is found in a
technical memo that you can review at
the CERCLA Docket Office, in docket
number 300RR-IF1 (for the address of
the docket office, see the ADDRESSES
section in this preamble). For the
minority of retail gas stations where
gasoline or diesel fuel are not stored
entirely underground, the existing
reporting threshold of 10,000 pounds
would still apply. When gasoline and
diesel fuel are not stored entirely
underground, the risk of catastrophic
release is not mitigated as it,generally is
when these substances are stored
entirely underground. Also, when not
stored in underground storage tanks,
these substances aren't regulated under
the RCRA UST program.
The reporting thresholds that EPA is
proposing today are intended to provide
relief from reporting gasoline and diesel
fuel stored at the great majority of retail
gas stations, including truck stops.
Retail gas stations with unusually large
inventories of gasoline or diesel fuel
would still be required to report. EPA is
not intending to relieve gasoline and
diesel fuel from reporting when stored
at facilities other than retail gas stations,
or when stored above ground at retail
gas stations, or when stored in amounts
in excess of an amount typically found
at retail gas stations.
Under this proposal, retail gas stations
using underground tank systems that do
not comply with EPA's UST regulations
under 40 CFR part 280 (53 FR 37082)
would be subject to the current
threshold of 10,000 pounds for gasoline
and diesel fuel. Part 280 includes
requirements for UST system design,
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31271
construction, installation, operation,
release detection, release reporting,
corrective action and financial
responsibility. As of December 23, 1998,
part 280 will also require all UST
systems to meet certain requirements for
corrosion protection and spill and
overfill prevention. Gasoline and diesel
fuel stored in underground tank systems
that are not in compliance with the UST
regulations would not be eligible for the
higher threshold proposed today,
because the Agency believes that they
continue to pose a significant risk of
release, contamination of soil and
ground water, seepage of vapors into
underground areas, and even fire and
explosions. The Agency believes that
the large majority of retail facilities will
be subject to the higher thresholds in
today's proposed rule, because they
meet the current UST system
requirements and will meet those in
effect as of December 23, 1998.
The proposed thresholds are
presented in gallons, instead of pounds
like the existing reporting thresholds
under current 40 CFR part 370. The
existing reporting thresholds apply to
solids, liquids and gases, therefore the
reporting threshold is in pounds in
order to provide a consistent measure
for all three phases. However, because
gasoline and diesel fuel are liquids, EPA
believes that facilities measure their
stock of gasoline and diesel fuel in
gallons, not in pounds. In addition, the
densities of gasoline and diesel fuel vary
with temperature, grade, and time of
year, so volume is a more reasonable
measure for establishing threshold
quantities for these substances. EPA
requests public comment on setting the
proposed thresholds in gallons instead
of pounds, and whether this would
create confusion because the other
thresholds under part 370 are in
poun'ds.
EPA also seeks public comment oh its
rationale for proposing to raise the
reporting thresholds for gasoline and
diesel fuel stored entirely underground,
and in compliance with the UST
regulations, at retail gas stations.
Additionally, EPA requests comments
on the suitability of the proposed
thresholds. As noted, EPA's intent is to
establish thresholds corresponding to
amounts just higher than the typical
total amounts of gasoline and diesel fuel
held at retail gas stations. EPA seeks
comment on whether this approach is
appropriate for this rule, and whether
the proposed amounts accurately reflect
this approach.
While this proposed regulatory
change is intended to generally provide
relief from reporting MSDSs under
EPCRA section 311 and annual Tier I
inventory information under EPCRA
section 312, public access to MSDSs and
Tier II inventory information regarding
gasoline and diesel fuel of any quantity
would be preserved in specific
circumstances because the threshold for
reporting in response to a request for
information (by State or local officials)
would remain zero; Section 370.21 (d) of
the existing rule requires that MSDSs be
provided upon request of the LEPC, and
section 370.25 (c) requires that Tier II
information be provided upon request of
the SERC, LEPC, or fire department with
jurisdiction over a facility. Section
370.20(b)(3) in the existing rule
provides that the minimum reporting
threshold for reporting in response to a
request is zero. In other words, a facility
with gasoline or diesel fuel of any
quantity would continue to be required
to provide this information upon
request. However, under EPCRA section
312(e)(3)(C), and section 370.61(a) of
today's proposed regulations, if a person
submits a request to a SERC or LEPC for
Tier II information regarding a
hazardous chemical that a facility
doesn't store in excess of 10,000
pounds, and the SERC or LEPC does not
have the Tier II information in its
possession, then the person making the
request must indicate the general need
for the information; the SERC or LEPC,
as the case may be, has discretion in
deciding whether to request that
information from the facility. In today's
proposed rule the zero reporting
threshold for reporting in response to
requests for an MSDS or Tier II
information is retained, and is found in
proposed section 370.10 (b). In addition,
States and local governments always
may choose to establish lower
thresholds under State or local law.
The terms "gasoline" and "diesel
fuel" have been used without definition
in today's proposed rulemaking,
because EPA believes that the meanings
of these terms are understood by the
general public. It is EPA's intention to
raise the reporting thresholds under
sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA for
gasoline and diesel fuel, but not for any
other hydrocarbon mixtures (e.g.,
aviation fuel). Comments are requested
concerning whether EPA should define
gasoline and diesel fuel, in order to
clarify that other types of hydrocarbon
mixtures aren't subject to the higher
thresholds. EPA also seeks suggestions
for'technical definitions of gasoline and
diesel fuel.
The proposed regulatory text
reflecting the establishment of higher
thresholds for gasoline and diesel fuel
when stored entirely underground at
retail gas stations is located in section
370.10(a)(2) of today's rulemaking.
Within that proposed section, the term
"retail gas station" has been defined as
a retail gasoline facility principally
engaged in selling gasoline to the
public, and convenience stores engaged
in selling gasoline to the public, for
purposes of 40 CFR part 370 regulations
implementing EPCRA sections 311 and
312.
EPA proposes to raise the reporting
threshold for gasoline and diesel fuel at
retail gas stations when held in tanks
that are entirely underground. EPA has
chosen to use the phrase "entirely
underground" instead of "underground
storage tank" (UST) to establish
applicability of the proposed thresholds
because, under RCRA, UST has a
specific meaning that includes tanks
with a significant portion of their
volume above ground. USTs include
tanks, the volume of which (including
the volume of underground pipes
connected thereto) is 10 percent or more
beneath the surface of the ground. In
today's proposal, EPA intends the
proposed reporting thresholds to apply
only to storage in tanks that are entirely
underground, which generally mitigates
the risk of catastrophic release.
EPA has had discussions with various
stakeholders regarding the
establishment of a higher reporting
threshold for gasoline at retail gas
stations. During those discussions, some
State and local entities expressed a
desire to continue to receive
information on gasoline at retail gas
stations, and a concern that they would
not be able to get the information if it
were not required under Federal
regulations. EPA would like to know if
these concerns are widespread among
State and local governments. In
addition, EPA seeks comments from
SERCs, LEPCs and fire departments on
whether the information on gasoline
and diesel fuel at retail gas stations
'received under sections 311 and 312 is
useful to them, and if so, how it is used.
Some State entities have also expressed
concern that raising the reporting
threshold for gasoline and diesel fuel at
retail gas stations may trigger other
industries to request higher thresholds.
As discussed above, EPA believes that
gasoline and diesel fuel, when stored
entirely underground and in compliance
with the UST regulations, at retail gas
stations, present a unique situation for
which a higher reporting threshold is
warranted.
EPA understands that some States
generate funds for support of their
EPCRA programs through fees collected
from facilities that comply with section
312. Such States may oppose raising the
thresholds for gasoline and diesel fuel,
as proposed in today's rulemaking,
-------
31272
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
because of the potential for loss of
revenue. EPCRA does not provide for
annual Federal funds for State
implementation of the EPCRA program.
However, some Federal funds are
available through EPA grants, or
through other Federal agencies, to
support emergency planning and
community right-to-know programs
(e.g.. Hazardous Materials Emergency
Preparedness Grants administered
through the Department of
Transportation). In addition, States that
want to retain a fee system that includes
retail-gasoline stations could choose to
establish lower thresholds for gasoline
and diesel fuel under State law. EPA
currently believes that routine reporting
of gasoline and diesel fuel at retail gas
stations, when stored entirely
underground and in compliance with
the UST regulations, is not necessary
nationwide. The Agency further
believes that the generation of fees is not
sufficient justification for requiring such
reporting, and will not consider State
fee generation in Its decision on
whether or not to raise the reporting
threshold for gasoline and diesel fuel at
retail gas stations.
EPA is soliciting comments on these
proposed regulatory changes, and on
EPA's rationale for the changes. The
idea of relieving retail gas stations from
routinely reporting gasoline and diesel
fuel under EPCRA sections 311 and 312
came from the suggestions of
stakeholders, including the U.S. Small
Business Administration (SBA). EPA
would like to know whether there is
general support among stakeholders and
the public regarding this issue. EPA has
Included a June 18, 1995 letter from the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy at SBA,
related letters, and a contractor report
prepared for the Office of Advocacy that
discusses various regulatory alternatives
for providing paperwork relief to retail
gas stations, in the CERCLA Docket
Office (Docket No. 300RR-IF-1).
EPA also seeks comment on whether
or not it would be useful to provide a
specific industry classification code (or
codes) to help describe the universe of
facilities to which the proposed higher
threshold for gasoline and diesel fuel
would apply. In addition, EPA seeks
comments regarding whether it would
be more helpful to provide a Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC) code, or a
North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) code, or both types of
codes. NAICS is a new economic
classification system that replaces the
1987 SIC system. On April 9, 1997, the
Office of Management and Budget
published a document in the Federal
Register (62 FR 17288) regarding the
replacement'of the 1987 SIC by the 1997
NAICS.
EPA believes that it can best serve the
public by requiring a manageable
quantity of reporting data, which can be
supplemented by requests for additional
information and the imposition of lower
State or local thresholds when
appropriate. EPA's objective is to find a
sound balance between the amount of
information collected, and the public
benefit served by the information. In
developing this proposal, EPA
considered whether any chemicals or
facilities, in addition to gasoline and
diesel fuel at retail gas stations, should
be relieved of routine reporting under
sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA. EPA
applied the same four factors discussed
earlier in this section to other chemicals
and facilities. For example, EPA applied
the four factors to propane retailers and
determined that these entities do not
meet the factors necessary to warrant
higher thresholds:
• Propane—EPA considered whether
the reporting threshold for propane at
propane retailers should be raised in a
similar manner as for gasoline and
diesel fuel at retail gas stations. From
the perspective of community right-to-
know (factor 1), the Agency believes the
public and emergency officials are less
familiar with the locations of propane
retailers, and with propane itself and
the associated hazards (factor 2), than
the public and emergency officials are
with gasoline and diesel fuel. EPA
believes that propane is not generally
stored entirely underground (factor 3),
and also is not regulated by the UST
program under RCRA (factor 4). Based
on the application of the four factors to
propane retailers, EPA believes that
raising the reporting threshold under
sections 311 and 312 for propane at
propane retailers would not be
protective of public health and the
environment, and would not be
consistent with the fundamental
purposes of EPCRA.
EPA found that several other types of
facilities presented situations similar to
retail gasoline stations. At this time,
however, the Agency does not believe
the following facilities meet the
community right-to-know criteria (factor
1) for inclusion into this higher
reporting threshold because the public
and emergency officials are generally
less familiar with the location of these
facilities, and may not know whether
and where any particular facility stores
gasoline and diesel fuel. Based on this
belief, EPA is not proposing to raise the
reporting threshold for the following
entities. However, the Agency is
requesting comment on whether
communities nationwide are in fact
aware of the location of these facilities
and whether they store gasoline and
diesel fuel, and whether or not it would
be appropriate to raise the threshold for
the following types of facilities.
• Motor pools, van and bus lines,
rental car facilities and other vehicle
fleets—EPA considered whether the
proposed higher reporting thresholds for
gasoline and diesel fuel should apply to
other facilities that store gasoline or
diesel fuel, such as motor pools, van
and bus lines, rental car facilities and
other vehicle fleets. These types of
facilities don't retail gasoline or diesel
fuel, and not all of them have gasoline
and diesel fuel. The public and local
emergency officials may not be aware of
the presence of gasoline or diesel fuel at
these types of facilities and may not
readily recognize these facilities as
potentially containing hazardous
chemicals (factor 1). As with retail
gasoline stations, however, the public
and emergency officials are generally
aware of the hazards of gasoline and
diesel (factor 2). Also, these types of
facilities generally store the chemicals
entirely underground (factor 3) and the
underground tanks are subject to UST
(factor 4). Nonetheless, these facilities
do not distribute gasoline and diesel
fuel in a retail manner, the public may
not have access to these facilities, and
the public is less likely to know the
location of these chemicals at these
facilities. Because EPA does not
currently believe that these facilities
meet factor 1, EPA is not proposing to
raise the reporting thresholds for
gasoline and diesel fuel at motor pools,
van and bus lines, rental car facilities
and other vehicle fleets at this time.
• Marinas—EPA also applied the
factors to determine whether the
proposed higher reporting thresholds for
gasoline and diesel fuel should apply to
marinas. Unlike retail gasoline stations,
not all marinas have gasoline. Therefore,
as with the other types of facilities
discussed above, the public and local
emergency officials may not be aware of
the presence of gasoline or diesel fuel at
these types of facilities or as readily
recognize them as potentially containing
hazardous chemicals (factor 1).
However, like gas stations, marinas that
store gasoline generally retail it to boat
owners at pumps accessible to the
public. As with retail gasoline stations,
the public and emergency officials are
generally aware of the hazards of
gasoline and diesel fuel (factor 2). Also,
like retail gasoline stations, marinas can
store the gasoline and diesel fuel
underground (factor 3) and would be
subject to UST regulations (factor 4).
The Agency however, is not proposing
to raise the reporting threshold for
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31273
gasoline and diesel fuel when stored at
marinas, at this time. Because the public
and emergency officials may not be
aware of whether or not a marina stores
gasoline, the Agency believes continued
reporting is warranted.
EPA will consider all comments
received regarding alternate reporting
thresholds for marinas, motor pools, van
and bus lines, and rental car facilities.
EPA believes that public comment
could reveal that the public and
emergency officials nationwide are
aware of the presence and location of
gasoline and diesel at some or all of
these types of facilities, as at retail gas
stations. If the public comments are
conclusive that such types of facilities
meet the community right-to-know
criteria (factor 1), EPA may decide to
add these facilities to the final rule or
issue a supplementary notice with
additional information and opportunity
for public comment before making a
final decision.
Should EPA find, based on public
comment, that the public and
emergency officials are aware of the
presence of gasoline and diesel fuel at
these other facilities discussed here, and
decide to raise reporting thresholds for
such facilities, the Agency would list
the specific types of facilities in the
regulation, with appropriate threshold
levels. If EPA were to raise the reporting
thresholds for such facilities, the
threshold levels would be based upon
the quantities of gasoline and diesel fuel
that are routinely stored at these
facilities, so that facilities with typical
capacities would be relieved from
reporting. EPA believes that the public
and emergency officials would not be
aware of the amount stored at facilities
with above normal inventories, even if
they were aware of the presence of
gasoline and diesel fuel at such
facilities. EPA seeks data that would
assist it to determine the quantities
routinely stored at such facilities, and
also on whether quantities routinely
stored would be the appropriate
standards for use in establishing
alternate thresholds. Were EPA to set an
alternative threshold for such facilities
for reporting of MSDSs under EPCRA
section 311 and annual Tier I
information under EPCRA section 312,
EPA would still preserve public access
to MSDSs and Tier II information in
specific circumstances by retaining a
reporting threshold of zero for response
to a request for information by state or
local officials, just as it is currently
proposing to do for retail gas stations.
2. Relief From Routine Reporting
Requirements for Substances With
Minimal Hazards and Minimal Risks
Under EPCRA Sections 311 and 312
A substance is subject to reporting
under EPCRA sections 311 and 312 if
OSHA's hazard communication
standard, codified at 29 CFR 1910.1200,,
requires the owner or operator of a
facility to prepare or have available an
MSDS for that substance. See EPCRA
sections 311(a)(l) and 312(a)(l). OSHA's
hazard communication standard is
designed to promote worker safety and
health; the requirements of that
standard are applicable to any
hazardous chemical that is known to be
present in the workplace in such a
manner that employees may be exposed
under normal conditions of use or in a
foreseeable emergency. The definition of
hazardous chemical under OSHA's
hazard communication standard is very
broad, and includes any chemical which
is a physical hazard or a health hazard
(29CFR1910.1200(c)).
EPA believes that certain substances
that may present a physical or health
risk to employees in the workplace, and
are therefore considered to be hazardous
chemicals and subject to OSHA's hazard
communication standard, may have
minimal inherent hazards and may not,
depending upon the circumstances,
present a significant risk to the health of
individuals in the community, to
emergency responders on-site, or to the
environment. Such substances, although
important under OSHA, are not
generally of regulatory significance
under EPCRA sections 311 and 312. The
reporting requirements under sections
311 and 312 are intended to enhance
communities' and emergency response
officials' awareness of chemical hazards,
to facilitate the development of State
and local emergency response plans,
and to aid communities and emergency
response officials in preparing for and
responding to emergencies safely and
effectively. Although hazardous
chemical reporting under EPCRA
sections 311 and 312 is not intended to
duplicate the role that OSHA's hazard
communication standard has of
protecting worker safety, it is intended
to extend the worker safety protection
provided under OSHA to emergency
response officials. As described below,
EPA proposes to provide reporting relief
for substances that are not of regulatory
significance under EPCRA, using the
Agency's authority to establish reporting
thresholds. Under this proposal, relief
from routine reporting means that
facilities would not need to report
MSDS and inventory information,
except for reporting in response to
requests for information (the
requirements for reporting in response
to requests are discussed further below).
EPA intends to accomplish relief from
routine reporting by establishing infinite
threshold levels for these substances.
The current threshold levels for
reporting under EPCRA sections 311
and 312 are 500 pounds (or the
threshold planning quantity (TPQ),
whichever is lower) for extremely
hazardous substances (EHSs), and
10,000 pounds for other hazardous
chemicals. In the preamble to the
proposed rule to set these threshold
levels, EPA stated that the Agency
"would have liked to establish risk-
based reporting thresholds that take into
consideration the hazards posed by the
chemicals, the potential for a significant
release, and the potential exposure of
surrounding populations" (54 FR 12994,
March 29, 1989). However, because of
the tens of thousands of hazardous
chemicals covered under sections 311
and 312, "a chemical-specific approach
simply was not feasible." In today's
proposed rule, EPA is reconsidering this
approach for chemicals that are OSHA
hazardous chemicals because of the way
they are used in the workplace (and
their potential for worker exposure) but
have minimal inherent hazards and
present minimal physical or health risks
to individuals in the community and
emergency response personnel on-site,
and present minimal risks to the
environment. EPA is seeking public
comment on potential approaches to
raise the reporting threshold or
otherwise reduce the reporting burden
for these chemicals that have minimal
inherent hazards and pose minimal
risks under the EPCRA sections 311 and
312 program.
EPCRA empowers EPA to establish
reporting thresholds under sections 311
and 312 of EPCRA. Both sections 311 (b)
and 312(b) of EPCRA give EPA broad
authority to establish threshold
quantities for hazardous chemicals
below which reporting is not required.
Both statutory provisions also state that,
in EPA's discretion, the thresholds may
be based on classes of chemicals or
categories of facilities. Thus, under the
statute EPA's authority to establish
thresholds includes, but is not limited
to, thresholds that are based on classes
of chemicals or categories of facilities.
As noted previously, Congress broadly
empowered EPA to establish thresholds
so that EPA could "provide for the
development of a manageable program."
Conference Report at 5104. The
legislative history also calls for EPA, in
establishing thresholds under section
312(b) to "consider the degree to which
the hazardous chemical, if released at
-------
31274
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
the facility, would endanger the health
of individuals in the community,
including emergency response
personnel." Conference Report at 5104-
5105.
EPA is proposing to establish an
infinite threshold level for the class of
chemicals with minimal inherent
hazards, and presenting minimal risks,
under the EPCRA sections 311 and 312
program (an infinite threshold level
means a threshold level so great that, no
matter what amount is present at a
facility, the amount present is less than
the threshold level). At the same time,
the Agency believes that the local
community is best situated to make
judgments about the level of risk
presented in site-specific circumstances.
Thus, EPA is proposing to establish
specific criteria governing the class of
substances that may qualify for an
infinite threshold. With this approach,
EPA is endeavoring to promote
decision-making about information
routinely reported under EPCRA
sections 311 and 312, based on
community specific concerns. EPA
seeks public comment on this proposal,
and also requests other suggestions for
ways to bridge community-based
judgments about the level of risk
presented by substances in specific
circumstances, with EPA's authority to
establish thresholds.
EPA proposes the establishment of an
infinite threshold level for the class of
chemicals with minimal inherent
hazards and presenting minimal risks
under the EPCRA sections 311 and 312
program. The criteria for determining
whether a substance may, under certain
circumstances, be included within this
class of chemicals would govern
whether individual substances are
assigned an infinite threshold level and
therefore not subject to routine reporting
under EPCRA sections 311 and 312.
EPA proposes to relieve this class of
substances from routine reporting under
EPCRA sections 311 and 312 in only
those cases where the specific
conditions warrant such relief.
The proposed threshold is as follows.
A hazardous chemical would be deemed
to have a minimal hazard and present a
minimal risk under the EPCRA sections
311 and 312 program, and the owner or
operator would be relieved from the
routine reporting requirements under
these provisions, if the. chemical meets
each of the following criteria:
(1) The chemical has a minimal
inherent hazard and presents a minimal
physical or health risk, to individuals in
the community beyond the site or sites
on which the facility is located, and to
emergency responders on-site, under
normal conditions of production, use, or
storage, or in a foreseeable emergency.
(2) The chemical has a minimal
inherent hazard and presents a minimal
risk, to the environment beyond the site
or sites on which the facility containing
the chemical is located.
(3) The SERC, the LEPC and the fire
department with jurisdiction over the
facility have been notified of the
facility's assessment regarding a
chemical that has a minimal inherent
hazard and presents a minimal risk.
(The proposed requirements for
notification are discussed further
below.)
In today's proposed regulation,
paragraph 370.10 (a) (2) (v) provides that,
for any chemical meeting the specific
criteria for minimal inherent hazards
and minimal risks under proposed
section 370.11, the threshold level is
infinite. Proposed section 370.11
provides the criteria that must be met
for a hazardous chemical to qualify for
the proposed infinite threshold level,
including the proposed requirements for
notification to the SERC, the LEPC and
the fire department.
It is important to note that, under
today's proposed rule, the following
substances do not qualify for the infinite
threshold level: substances that are
listed as Extremely Hazardous
Substances (EHSs) under EPCRA section
302 (40 CFR part 355); regulated
substances under the Clean Air Act
(CAA) Risk Management Program (BMP)
(40 CFR part 68); hazardous substances
under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA) (40 CFR part 302); toxic
chemicals under the toxic chemical
release reporting requirements of
EPCRA section 313 (40 CFR part 372).
See proposed paragraph 370.11 (a).
Substances that are covered under these
other programs are regulated because of
the significant hazards they present; so
such substances could not meet the
proposed criteria for minimal hazards.
EPA seeks public comment on these or
any other lists of regulated substances
that should be categorically excluded
from the proposed class of chemicals
with minimal inherent hazards and
presenting minimal risks, under the
EPCRA sections 311 and 312 program.
The application of the proposed
infinite threshold depends on the
conditions of a particular substance at a
particular facility. The level of risk
associated with a substance depends on
a variety of chemical and facility-
specific factors, including the identity of
the substance involved and the nature of
the facility. A substance may meet the
proposed criteria for an infinite
threshold at a particular facility, due to
the relevant circumstances at that
facility, but may not meet the criteria at
a different facility.
The infinite threshold level proposed
today could only apply to substances
that have a minimal inherent hazard.
EPA doesn't intend the proposed
threshold to apply to any substance that,
because of its inherent hazards, could
present a significant risk to emergency
responders at a facility (or to the
surrounding community or
environment) in the event of a release.
Examples of substances which might be
covered by the proposed infinite
threshold may include substances that
are OSHA hazardous chemicals solely
because of an irritation hazard only to
employees regularly exposed in the
workplace, but for which there is no
other acute health hazard.
Implementation of the proposed
infinite threshold would be optional—
any facility owner or operator would
have a choice whether to make an
assessment regarding a hazardous
chemical present at their facility. Upon
making an assessment that a hazardous
chemical met the criteria for the infinite
threshold level, a facility owner or
operator would notify the SERC, the
LEPC and the local fire department of
such assessment, the name of the
chemical, and any conditions relevant
to the assessment. Any facility owner or
operator may choose not to make use of
the proposed threshold for any
hazardous chemicals at their facility, in
which case they would continue to
routinely report all covered hazardous
chemicals present at their facility above
threshold levels.
EPA is considering several options
regarding the notification requirements
associated with this relief from routine
reporting requirements. In weighing
each option, EPA will need to consider
the requirements associated with each
notification option, any burden to
government entities and industry
associated with each option, and the
government entities' ability to ensure
that they continue to receive
information that they believe is
necessary. While the proposed
regulatory text includes only one of
these options, based on this document
and opportunity for public comment,
EPA may, in the final rulemaking
action, choose to promulgate any
combination of the proposed options
discussed below. EPA seeks comments
on all of the notification options
discussed below.
In today's document, EPA proposes
that any facility owner or operator that
makes an assessment that a specific
substance meets the infinite threshold
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday .June 8, 19 98/Proposed Rules
31275
criteria notify the SERC, the LEPC, and
the local fire department with
jurisdiction over the facility (see
proposed section 370.11(b)(l)). The
SERC, the LEPC or the local fire
department may request additional
information on the basis of the
assessment or otherwise question the
assessment. The required notification
must include the name of the chemical
for which an assessment has been made
and any conditions relevant to that
assessment. EPA recommends, but does
not require, this notification be in
writing. If a facility owner or operator
makes an assessment, but fails to follow
the required notification procedures, the
substance in question would not qualify
for the proposed infinite threshold—
such a substance would continue to be
subject to routine reporting. The
notification need only be made once
(not annually), provided that there are
no changes in the conditions of that
substance at the facility that might affect
whether the substance continues to
meet the proposed criteria.
Requirements for re-notification due to
a change in conditions are discussed
further below.
In the paragraph above, EPA has
stated that the notification of a facility's
assessment regarding a hazardous
chemical would not have to be in
writing. Another option would be to
require that such notification be in
writing. EPA could also require, as part
of the notification, that the facility
provide a brief description of why a
chemical meets the criteria for minimal
hazard/minimal risk chemicals. EPA
requests comment on the contents of the
notification, as well as on whether or
not EPA should require the notification
be in writing.
The proposed notification
requirement imposes a minimal burden
to qualify for relief from routine
reporting. This option does not require
EPA, the SERC, the LEPC or the fire
department to review the facility's
assessment. However, EPA, the SERC,
the LEPC or the fire department may
evaluate the assessment and may
contact the facility to discuss the
assessment at any time. In addition,
EPA and these three other governmental
entities may bring enforcement and/or
civil actions if a facility uses the infinite
threshold for a hazardous chemical that
does not meet the proposed criteria.
Another option would include
requiring a notice of acceptance from
the SERC, the LEPC and local fire
department before a facility could apply
the proposed infinite threshold level. In
this case, the infinite threshold would
apply only for reporting to an entity that
has accepted the assessment. Therefore,
if a facility owner or operator does not
receive notice of acceptance from the
SERC, the LEPC or the fire department,
the facility's assessment has effectively
been rejected, and the infinite threshold
level does not apply to the hazardous
chemical in question (for purposes of
reporting to any entity that has not
accepted the determination). If a SERC,
LEPC, or fire department did not notify
a facility that its assessment regarding a
specific substance had been accepted,
but the facility owner or operator failed
to report the substance as required
under sections 311 and 312 and the
implementing regulations (that is, they
failed to comply with the routine
reporting requirements and did their
reporting as if that substance was
subject to an infinite threshold level),
such a facility could be subject to an
enforcement action.
SERCs, LEPCs and local fire .
departments each evaluate, and set
priorities for, emergency planning and
hazardous chemical community right-
to-know under EPCRA sections 311 and
312, and may have their own
information needs. Thus, one'entity may
agree with the facility owner or operator
that the threshold properly applies, and
another entity may disagree. Because
each SERC, LEPC or local fire
department would have discretion
concerning the acceptance or rejection
of facilities' assessments regarding
specific OSHA hazardous chemicals, a
particular quantity of a specific
substance might be reportable at one
facility, and not reportable at another
facility.
In addition, the SERC, the LEPC or the
local fire department might choose to
accept the facility's assessment, but only
under specific conditions. Thus, the
facility owner or operator, the SERC, the
LEPC, or the local fire department might
each establish conditions under which a
specific substance is covered by the
proposed infinite threshold. Some
examples of conditions on the use of the
proposed infinite threshold could
include: type of storage vessel, or
whether stored aboveground or
underground.
Another option would be to allow the
SERC, the LEPC, and the local fire
department to reject the facility's
assessment. In this case, the SERC, the
LEPC, or the fire department would
notify the facility only if its assessment
had not been accepted. The substance in
question would not be covered by the
proposed infinite threshold for purposes
of reporting to that specific entity that
rejected the assessment.
An additional option would require
the facility to maintain the records that
served as the basis for the assessment.
Under this option, the facility would not
have to notify the SERC, the LEPC and
the local fire department of its
assessment. The facility, however,
would need to be able to produce the
assessment records upon request.
The Agency is seeking comments on
all of these notification options. In the
final rulemaking action, the Agency may
promulgate any option or combination
of options proposed above.
A hazardous chemical would no
longer qualify for the proposed infinite
threshold level if a change occurred that
could affect whether the chemical
continued to meet the specific criteria
under proposed section 370.11. Such a
substance would instead be subject to
the usual hazardous chemical reporting
threshold (generally 10,000 pounds),
and would be routinely reported in
accordance with EPCRA sections 311
and 312 and the implementing
regulations. If the facility owner or
operator made an assessment that,
under the changed conditions, the
substance met the specific criteria for
minimal hazards and minimal risks, it
would be necessary to repeat the
proposed notification procedures (see
proposed section 370.11 (b) (3)). Until the
notification requirements were met, the
chemical would need be routinely
reported, 'based on the applicable
threshold level (generally 10,000
pounds).
While fiPA intends, in this proposal,
to provide relief from reporting material
safety data sheets (MSDSs) under
EPCRA section 311 and annual Tier I
inventory information under EPCRA
section 312, public access to MSDSs and
Tier II inventory information regarding
substances fitting the proposed criteria
would be preserved in specific
circumstances because the threshold for
reporting in response to a request for
information (by a State or local official)
would remain zero. In other words, EPA
is not proposing any changes to the
existing requirements under EPCRA
regarding public access to hazardous
chemical information. These
requirements are discussed in detail in
part IV. A. 1. of this document. In
addition. State and local governments
always may choose to establish lower
thresholds under State or local law, if
appropriate.
EPA requests comments concerning
the proposed infinite threshold
described here. EPA also requests
comments regarding whether the
specific criteria proposed will achieve
the goal of establishing a class of
substances that can be relieved from
routine reporting burdens without
significant risk to the community
including emergency response
-------
31276
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
personnel, and seeks suggestions
regarding additional or different criteria
to achieve that goal.
EPA seeks comments on a number of
issues regarding the implementation
and administration of the proposed
threshold described here. The one-time
notification described above (with re-
notification if warranted by changes in
conditions) is, in EPA's view, a less
burdensome requirement than the
annual submission of information—EPA
requests public comment on whether
such a notification would, in fact, be
less burdensome than annual reporting.
EPA would also like to know if SERCs,
LEPCs and local fire departments would
be concerned that the burden placed on
them .to review and respond to such
notifications would be significant. EPA
also seeks comment on imposing
conditions on the use of the proposed
infinite threshold level. Additionally,
EPA is interested in public comment on
whether there are any concerns over the
inconsistencies that may develop in
reporting, since a specific substance
might be reportable at one facility, and
not be reportable at another facility,
under this proposal.
In today's rulemaking. EPA is
proposing the above approach to
provide relief for facilities from
routinely reporting substances that have
minimal hazards, and present minimal
risks to the community and to
emergency response personnel, and
present minimal risks to the
environment. EPA is also exploring an
alternative approach to achieve that
goal, and is seeking feedback on that
alternative approach. Under the
alternative approach, any substance
which was determined to have minimal
hazards and present minimal risks,
using the proposed criteria described
above, would be put into a newly
created subset of OSHA hazardous
chemicals that would be called Type 2
hazardous chemicals under EPCRA.
Type 2 hazardous chemicals would be
subject to the same reporting thresholds
(generally 10,000 pounds), and
reporting deadlines, as all hazardous
chemicals that are reportable under
EPCRA sections 311 and 312, but the
information requirements under section
312 would be reduced. Under section
312 and the implementing regulations,
the maximum amount and average daily
amount of hazardous chemicals are to
be reported in ranges. For Type 2
hazardous chemicals, the reporting
ranges would be much broader than the
usual ranges. The ranges would be so
broad that, each year, the range reported
for a Type 2 hazardous chemical would
not likely change. In addition, a facility
owner or operator would be able to
incorporate by reference information
previously reported on a Type 2
hazardous chemical, in the manner
described in part V. A.4 of this
document. In other words, if the
information regarding a Type 2
hazardous chemical did not change
from year to year, it would not be
necessary to report any new information
for that specific hazardous chemical. It
would, however, be necessary to report
that the information submitted the prior
year for that hazardous chemical was
incorporated by reference into the
current report. A detailed discussion on
the concept of incorporation by
reference, including issues and
concerns, is found in part V.A.4 of this
preamble. In order to report a Type 2
hazardous chemical, a facility owner or
operator would need to provide notice
to the SERC, the LEPC and the local fire
department of their assessment that a
hazardous chemical was of Type 2. The
notice requirement might be satisfied by
providing a brief explanation, when
submitting inventory information under
section 312, of the minimal inherent
hazards associated with a specific
substance, and of the conditions under
which that substance presents minimal
risks. EPA will review the public
comments received regarding this
alternative approach, and may consider
publishing a supplemental proposal if
this approach is feasible.
In today's document, EPA seeks to
relieve facilities from routine reporting
of substances that are not generally
relevant for the hazardous chemical
community right-to-know and
emergency planning purposes of EPCRA
sections 311 and 312, but that are
considered hazardous chemicals under
OSHA because of the way they are used
in the workplace. While EPA's goal is to
relieve facilities from routine reporting
of information that is not useful to the
community, EPA does not intend to
compromise communities' right-to-
know. EPA intends, in this proposal, to
achieve this goal in a manner that is
reasonable and also consistent with the
requirements under the EPCRA statute.
EPA seeks public comments on the
feasibility of the various alternatives
discussed here, and also seeks
suggestions on any other ways that this
goal may be achieved.
3. Relief From Routine Reporting for
Sand, Gravel and Rock Salt Under
EPCRA Sections 311 and 312
As discussed above, a substance is
subject to EPCRA sections 311 and 312
if OSHA's hazard communication
standard, codified at 29 CFR 1910.1200,
requires the owner or operator of a
facility to prepare or have available an
MSDS for that substance. OSHA's
hazard communication standard is
designed to protect worker safety, and
the requirements of that section are
applicable to any hazardous chemical
that is known to be present in the
workplace in such a manner that
employees may be exposed under
normal conditions of use or in a
foreseeable emergency. The definition of
hazardous chemical under OSHA is
very broad. EPA believes that certain
substances that may present a physical
or health hazard to employees in the
workplace (and are therefore considered
to be hazardous chemicals and subject
to OSHA's hazard communication
standard) have minimal inherent
hazards, and present minimal
environmental risks and minimal
physical or health risks to the
community or to emergency responders
on-site; therefore these substances are
not generally of regulatory significance
under EPCRA sections 311 and 312.
Also, as discussed in the previous part
of the document, sections 311 (b) and
312(b) of EPCRA allow EPA to establish
threshold quantities for hazardous
chemicals below which no facility
needs to report (except in response to a
request for information).
EPA believes that sand, gravel and
rock salt, which may be considered
hazardous chemicals under OSHA's
hazard communication standard, have
minimal inherent hazards and generally
would not have the potential to present
significant risks to the community or to
emergency responders on-site,
regardless of site-specific circumstances,
and are therefore not of regulatory
significance under EPCRA sections 311
and 312. Specifically, EPA believes that
sand, gravel and rock salt meet the
following two criteria:
(1) Sand, gravel and rock salt have a
minimal inherent hazard and present a
minimal physical or health risk, to
individuals in the community beyond
the site or sites on which the facility is
located, and to emergency responders
on-site, under normal conditions of
production, use, or storage, or in a
foreseeable emergency.
(2) Sand, gravel and rock salt have a
minimal inherent hazard and present
minimal risks, to the environment
beyond the site or sites on which the
facility containing the chemical is
located.
The threshold for reporting hazardous
chemicals under EPCRA sections 311
and 312 is currently 10,000 pounds for
the majority of substances. In today's
rulemaking, EPA is proposing to
establish an infinite threshold level for
sand, gravel and rock salt. An infinite
threshold level means that, regardless of
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31277
the amount of sand, gravel or rock salt
present at a facility at any one time, the
amount would not trigger routine
reporting under sections 311 and 312.
Section 370.10(a)(2)(iv) in today's
proposed rule contains the proposed
infinite threshold level for sand, gravel
and rock salt.
Setting this infinite threshold level
would not create an exemption from
reporting, however, because reporting
would still be required in response to a
request. While EPA intends, in this
proposal, to provide relief from
reporting material safety data sheets
(MSDSs) under EPCRA section 311 and
annual Tier I inventory information
under EPCRA section 312, public access
to MSDSs and Tier II inventory
information regarding sand, gravel and
rock salt would be preserved in specific
circumstances because the threshold for
reporting in response to a request for
information (by a State or local official)
would remain zero. In other words, EPA
is not proposing any changes to the
existing requirements under EPCRA
regarding public access to hazardous
chemical information. The existing
requirements are discussed in detail in
part IV. A.I. of this preamble, above. In
addition, States and local governments
always may choose to establish lower
thresholds under State or local law, if
appropriate.
A substance such as gravel or sand
may be subject to OSHA's hazard
communication standard because, for
example, of the hazard posed by
respirable dust. EPA understands that
such dust may present a health hazard
to employees who are regularly exposed
to it in the workplace. However, EPA
believes such dust would not pose an
acute hazard to emergency responders
or to the surrounding community, so it
is not of regulatory significance under
EPCRA sections 311 and 312. EPA
would like to achieve a sound balance
between the amount of information
generated under sections 311 and 312,
and the value of that information. EPA
believes that, although sand, gravel and
rock salt may fit OSHA's broad criteria
for hazardous chemicals, they are not
generally relevant for the hazardous
chemical community right-to-know and
emergency planning purposes of
EPCRA.
EPA is interested in public comments
addressing its belief that sand, gravel
• and rock salt warrant infinite threshold
levels to exclude these substances from
routine reporting under EPCRA sections
311 and 312. EPA seeks public input on
any emergency situations in which any
of these three substances threatened the
health or safety of emergency response
officials or the surrounding community.
Additionally, EPA requests public input
regarding any other specific hazardous
chemicals that may also generally not
warrant routine reporting under sections
31 land 312.
While EPA is proposing to generally
relieve sand, gravel and rock salt from
being routinely reported under EPCRA
sections 311 and 312, EPA is also
proposing in today's document to
relieve other hazardous chemicals from
routine reporting in specific cases where
the conditions warrant such relief (see
part IV. A. 2 of this document, which is
headed "Relief From Routine Reporting
Requirements for Substances With
Minimal Hazards and Minimal Risks
Under EPCRA sections 311 and 312").
EPA seeks public comment on whether
sand, gravel and rock salt should, in
fact, be absolutely excluded from
routine reporting as discussed here, or
whether these three substances should
be treated on a case-by-case basis, in the
manner described in part IV.A.2 of this
document.
B. Other Regulatory Changes
1. Reporting of Mixtures Under EPCRA
Sections 311 and 312
In today's document, EPA is rewriting
in plain English format the current
regulation for applying threshold
quantities to mixtures and reporting
mixtures under EPCRA sections 311 and
312, and reorganizing the regulation to
improve understanding of the
requirements (a detailed discussion on
plain English format is provided in part
VI.A. of this document). In the preamble
discussion below, EPA also generally
explains the mixture requirements.
Although the proposed regulation has
been rewritten and reorganized, the only
substantive changes proposed today to
the existing mixture regulations are the
four specific regulatory revisions
explained below. EPA seeks public
comment on those particular proposed
regulatory revisions. EPA is not re-
opening for public comment any other
provisions of the mixtures regulation
contained in today's document, as the
regulation is a restatement of the
existing regulation in plain English
format. However, EPA will consider
public comment on the limited issue of
whether EPA, in restating and
reorganizing the existing regulatory
requirements, has inadvertently
changed the meaning.
A facility is subject to sections 311
and 312 of EPCRA if the facility must
prepare or have available an MSDS for
a hazardous chemical under the
Occupational Safety and Health Act
(OSHA) and regulations issued under
that Act. The OSHA regulations allow
that MSDSs may provide hazard
information on a mixture that contains
hazardous chemicals, or provide hazard
information on the individual
hazardous chemical components of that
mixture. For this reason, facilities
subject to EPCRA sections 311 and 312
might have MSDSs for mixtures, or for
individual hazardous chemical
components of mixtures. Therefore, the
reporting requirements under sections
311 and 312 permit the choice of
reporting a mixture as the mixture itself
or by its hazardous chemical
components.
EPCRA sections 311 (a) (3) and
312(a)(3) contain the statutory
provisions for reporting on mixtures
containing hazardous chemicals. These
provisions state that for a mixture of
hazardous chemicals, a facility may
meet the reporting requirements of
section 311 of EPCRA by submitting an
MSDS (or a list) for the mixture itself,
or for each hazardous chemical
component in the mixture. Similarly, a
facility may meet the reporting
requirements of section 312 by
providing inventory information for the
mixture itself, or for each hazardous
chemical component of the mixture. If
an MSDS (or listing) and inventory form
are submitted for a hazardous chemical
which is a component of a mixture
(instead of for the mixture itself), and if
more than one mixture at a facility
contains the same hazardous chemical,
only one MSDS (or one listing) and one
entry on the inventory form is necessary
for that hazardous chemical.
In the current regulation, section
370.28 contains the requirements for
applying the reporting threshold to
mixtures containing hazardous
chemicals, and for reporting such
mixtures, under EPCRA sections 311
and 312. Section 370.14 in today's
proposed regulation provides the
requirements for mixtures containing
hazardous chemicals. The regulatory
language in proposed section 370.14
generally reiterates the current
regulation. However, four regulatory
revisions are proposed, and are
discussed below.
In today's document, EPA proposes to
present some of the more complex
aspects of the mixture requirements in
table format (see proposed section
370.14(b)). With the four exceptions
identified below, EPA is merely
restating the existing regulatory
requirements in an improved format and
is not re-opening the underlying
regulations for public comment
(although EPA will consider public
comment on the narrow issue of
whether it has accurately rewritten the
existing regulations). A detailed
-------
31278
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
comparison between the current
regulation (existing section 370.28) and
the proposed regulation (proposed
section 370.14) follows:
• Section 370.28(a) in the current
regulation provides that the owner or
operator of a facility may meet the
requirements for MSDS and Tier I
information reporting for mixtures
containing hazardous chemicals by
either (1) reporting with respect to each
component in the mixture that is a
hazardous chemical, or (2) reporting
with respect to the mixture itself. In
today's proposed regulation, section
370.14 (a) and the table in section
370.14 (b) repeat this basic reporting
option, without substantive revision.
• Section 370.28(a) in the existing
regulation also provides that, where
practicable, the reporting of mixtures by
a facility be consistent for inventory
reporting and MSDS reporting. The
requirement for consistent reporting is
provided, without substantive change,
In proposed section 370.14(d) and is
also reflected in the reporting
requirements in the proposed table at
section 370.14(b). (The requirements for
consistent reporting are discussed
below.)
• Section 370.28(b)(l) in the current
regulation provides the requirements for
calculating the quantity of a hazardous
chemical component present in a
mixture, and proposed section 370.14 (c)
repeats those requirements without
substantive change.
• Section 370.28(b)(2) in the existing
regulation provides that, if the reporting
is on the mixture itself, the total
quantity of the mixture shall be
reported. This is the first provision
where EPA is proposing a substantive
regulatory revision for public comment.
Proposed section 370.14 (a) (2) and the
table in proposed section 370.14(b) in
today's regulation provide the
requirements for reporting mixtures.
Those proposed sections do not include
reference to reporting "the total quantity
of the mixture," but instead cross-
reference the EPCRA sections 311 and
312 Information requirements for
reporting elsewhere within the
proposed regulation. The table in
proposed section 370.14 (b) directs the
reader to proposed sections 370.30 and
370.40, which provide the information
requirements. EPA therefore believes it
is not necessary to retain the current
regulatory language in section
370.28(b)(2) and requests public
comment on the proposed deletion of
this provision.
• Section 370.28(c)(l) in the existing
regulation provides EPA's requirements
for applying threshold quantities to
hazardous chemicals that are EHSs,
when they are components in mixtures.
That section provides that all quantities
of an EHS present at a facility be added
together to determine if the reporting
threshold has been equaled or
exceeded— including the quantity
present as a component in all mixtures
and all other quantities of the EHS at the
facility. In today's proposed regulation,
the requirement to add together all
quantities of an EHS present at the
facility when applying the reporting
threshold is provided in the table in
proposed section 370.14(b) without
substantive revision. However, one
limited substantive change is proposed
to that requirement—language has been
added to clarify that, when determining
the total quantity of an EHS present at
a facility, the quantity present in a
mixture must be included even if that
particular mixture is also being applied
as a whole toward the threshold level
for that mixture. This is the second
substantive regulatory revision that EPA
is proposing to the mixture regulations.
EPA requests public comment on the
substance of this clarification.
• Section 370.28(c)(2) in the existing
regulation provides that, when reporting
an EHS that is a component of a
mixture, the owner or operator of a
facility has the basic option to report
either with respect to each component
in the mixture that is a hazardous
chemical, or with respect to the mixture
itself. As noted, this option is provided
(for all hazardous chemicals including
EHSs) without substantive revision in
proposed section 370.14(a) and the table
in proposed section 370.14(b).
• Note that section 370.2 l(b) in the
existing regulation (which provides that
facility owners or operators have the
option to submit a list of hazardous
chemicals instead of submitting
MSDSs), also contains a provision on
reporting of mixtures. Proposed section
370.30(a)(2), which contains the same
provision that owners or operators have
the option to submit a list instead of
MSDSs, does not contain any provisions
on reporting of mixtures because in
today's proposed rule the requirements
for reporting mixtures are consolidated
in proposed section 370.14.
• In today's regulation, the table in
proposed section 370.14(b) specifies
EPA's requirements for applying the
threshold quantity to a hazardous
chemical component in a mixture, when
the hazardous chemical is not an EHS.
Proposed section 370.14 (b) provides
that the owner or operator of a facility
may choose to either (1) determine the
total quantity of a (non-EHS) hazardous
chemical component present throughout
the facility, by adding together the
quantity present as a component in all
mixtures and all other quantities of that
hazardous chemical (including the
quantity present in a mixture even if
that particular mixture is also being
applied as a whole toward the threshold
level for that mixture), or (2) determine
the total quantity of the mixture itself
present throughout the facility. EPA
proposes today to adopt regulatory
revisions to clarify these requirements
for applying threshold quantities for
mixtures containing non-EHS hazardous
chemicals, and requests comments on
the substance of this proposed
regulatory revision. This is the third
substantive regulatory revision that EPA
is proposing to the mixture
requirements today. This proposal is
discussed further below.
• EPA is also proposing to add
regulatory language to specify
requirements for determining if a
threshold amount of a non-EHS
hazardous chemical is present, when
that chemical is present both by itself
and as a component in mixture(s).
Proposed section 370.14(e) provides
that, if a non-EHS hazardous chemical
is present at a facility both by itself and
as a component in mixture (s), the
facility must determine the total amount
present to apply the threshold level. To
calculate this quantity, you must add
together all quantities of the hazardous
chemical present at the facility,
including the quantity present in all
mixtures. EPA proposes today to adopt
this regulatory revision, and requests
comments on the substance of the
revision. This is the fourth substantive
regulatory revision that EPA is
proposing to the mixture regulations
today. This proposal is discussed
further below.
As discussed above, EPA is proposing
regulatory revisions to clarify the
requirements for applying threshold
quantities to mixtures containing
hazardous chemical components that
are not EHSs, by adding regulatory
language in proposed section 370.14(b)
that provides the choice of either (1)
determining the total quantity of a
hazardous chemical component present,
or (2) determining the total quantity of
the mixture itself. Whenever you must
apply a threshold to the total quantity
of a non-EHS hazardous chemical
present at any one time, this proposed
revision clarifies that you can calculate
either the total quantity of the
hazardous chemical component, or the
total quantity of the mixture
(considering the mixture itself as the
"hazardous chemical"). Both of these
options to determine the quantity of a
hazardous chemical will result in a
reasonably accurate reflection of the
total quantity of a non-EHS hazardous
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31279
chemical present at a facility at any one
time—which is the amount to which the
threshold levels should be compared.
The two options for applying threshold
quantities to mixtures containing non-
EHS hazardous chemical components
are explained below:
Option (1) In this case, the total quantity
of a non-EHS hazardous chemical component
is determined. To establish whether the .
reporting threshold for that hazardous
chemical component has been exceeded,
calculate the total quantity of that hazardous
chemical present throughout the facility at
any one time, including as a component in
all mixtures (even in a mixture that will be
separately applied toward the threshold level
for that mixture), and all other quantities
present. See Conference Report at 5105.
Section 370.14 (c) in today's proposed
regulation provides instructions for
determining the quantity of a non-EHS
hazardous chemical component present in a
mixture. Compare the total quantity of that
hazardous chemical to the hazardous
chemical reporting threshold (the reporting
threshold for all non-EHS hazardous
chemicals is currently 10,000 pounds—today
EPA is proposing to change the thresholds for
certain circumstances, as discussed
elsewhere in this preamble).
Option (2) In this case, the total quantity
of the mixture itself is determined. To
establish whether the reporting threshold for
that mixture has been exceeded, calculate the
total quantity of that particular mixture
present throughout the facility at any one
time. Compare the total quantity of that
mixture to the hazardous chemical reporting
threshold.
As discussed above, EPA is also
proposing regulatory revisions to clearly
establish that, if a particular non-EHS
hazardous chemical is present both by
itself and as a component in mixture (s)
at your facility, you must determine the
total quantity of the hazardous chemical
to see if it meets or exceeds the
threshold. To determine the total
quantity of a hazardous chemical
present, you must add together all
quantities of the hazardous chemical,
including the quantity present in all
mixtures (even in a particular mixture
that is being applied separately toward
the threshold level for that mixture). For
example, in the case of a manufacturer
that produces or obtains benzene and
formulates 200 mixtures with the
benzene, the threshold level would
apply to the total quantity of benzene at
the facility, where some benzene is still
in bulk storage and some has been
formulated into mixtures. EPA
understands that there has been
confusion in the past about EPA's
requirements for applying threshold
quantities when a non-EHS hazardous
chemical is present both by itself and as
a component in mixture(s). This
regulatory revision clearly establishes a
method of calculating the quantity that
will result in an accurate reflection of
the total quantity present at any one
time—which is the amount to which the
threshold levels should be compared.
Applying the threshold to a non-EHS
hazardous chemical component by itself
without considering its presence in
mixtures will not completely reflect the
amount of the hazardous chemical
present. Because you must already
apply the threshold to the hazardous
chemical itself (when the hazardous
chemical is present both by itself and in
mixtures), you can only do so accurately
by adding together all quantities of that
hazardous chemical present.
EPA has required that, where
practicable, reporting for mixtures be
done consistently for both sections 311
and 312 of EPCRA (this requirement is
in section 370.28(a)(2) in the existing
regulation). In today's proposed
regulation, section 370.14(d) similarly
states, without substantive revisions,
that for each specific mixture, reporting
must be done consistently for both
sections 311 and 312, "* * * unless
impracticable." In other words, if a
facility reports a specific mixture as a
whole under section 311, the facility is
also required to report that mixture as
a whole under section 312, unless the
facility can show that it is impracticable
to do so. Similarly, if a facility reports
a specific mixture by its hazardous
chemical components under section
311, the facility is also required to
report that mixture by its hazardous
chemical components under section
312, unless the facility can show that it
is impracticable to do so.
EPA's intention is to be reasonable in
establishing reporting requirements.
Consistent with the existing regulation,
the phrase "unless impracticable" has
been included to account for specific
cases where the owner or operator of a
regulated facility can demonstrate that it
wouldn't be practicable to report
consistently under sections 311 and
312. EPA believes that in all but a few
unique cases, consistent reporting for
sections 311 and 312 is practicable. It is
important for the MSDS information to
correspond with the inventory
information to ensure consistency in the
qualitative and quantitative information
received about the hazards of covered
chemicals. The MSDS information and
inventory information are intended to
be used together to determine the
chemical hazards present at a facility—
the MSDS provides information on the
hazards associated with the types of
chemicals that are reported with the
inventory information. See Conference
Report at 5105.
As discussed above, EPCRA sections
311 (a)(3) and 312(a)(3) provide that,
when reporting mixtures containing
hazardous chemicals, facility owners or
operators have a choice to report in
reference to the mixture itself, or in
reference to each hazardous chemical
component of the mixture. EPA, of
course, recognizes this basic choice for
reporting mixtures. However, EPA
recommends that whichever way a
facility owner or operator chooses to
report for one mixture, the same choice
should be made for every mixture at the
facility. In other words, if a facility
reports a specific mixture as a whole
under sections 311 and 312, then EPA
suggests that each mixture at the facility
be reported as a whole under sections
311 and 312. Similarly, if a facility
reports a specific mixture by its
hazardous chemical components, then
EPA suggests that each mixture at the
facility be reported by its hazardous
chemical components. EPA encourages
consistent reporting throughout a
facility because of various programmatic
reasons. Consistent reporting
throughout a facility facilitates the
calculations necessary for reporting,
improves the clarity of the reported
information consistent with the
emergency planning and response
purposes of EPCRA, and reduces
duplicative reporting. However, EPA
understands that it may not always be
reasonable to report consistently
throughout a facility and recognizes that
the owner or operator of the facility has
discretion to determine whether to
report based on the mixture or the
hazardous chemical components of the
mixture.
While the plain English format
proposed today is intended to improve
the public's understanding of EPA's
regulations, it is not intended to change
the substantive requirements in EPA's
existing regulations. As discussed in
detail above, EPA has proposed four
specific substantive regulatory revisions
regarding mixtures including (1) the
removal of reference to reporting "the
total quantity of the mixture" from the
section containing the mixture
requirements (see existing section
370.28(b)(2) and proposed section
370.14); (2) the additional language in
proposed section 370.14(b) to make the
clarification that, when determining the
total quantity of an EHS present at a
facility, the quantity present in a
mixture must be included even if that
particular mixture is also being applied
as a whole toward the threshold level
for that mixture; (3) the additional
language in proposed section 370.14(b)
to clarify how to apply threshold levels
-------
31280
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
for mixtures containing hazardous
chemical components that are notEHSs;
and (4) the additional language in
proposed section 370.14(e) to clearly
establish how to determine the total
quantity of a hazardous chemical
present, when the chemical is present
both by itself and as a component in
mixture(s).
EPA requests public comment on the
specific substantive proposed regulatory
revisions in today's document. EPA also
seeks public comment on the plain
English format in which the proposed
regulation is written, but only on the
limited issue of whether any
unintended substantive changes have
been made to the mixture requirements
as a result of re-writing and reorganizing
the regulation. Except for the four
specific substantive regulatory revisions
listed above, EPA is not intending any
other substantive changes to the mixture
requirements under sections 311 and
312 today. The mixture requirements
have been in effect for several years, and
EPA is not re-opening for public
comment any other substantive aspects
of those requirements in this document.
EPA is seeking public comments on
ways to improve the plain English
format to make the mixture
requirements clearer and less confusing
without changing the substantive
requirements. EPA similarly requests
public comment on the adequacy and
usefulness of the table in proposed
section 370.14 (b), as well as suggestions
for Improving the table's clarity.
2. Tier I and Tier II Inventory Forms and
Instructions
In today's rulemaking, EPA is
proposing to remove the Tier I and Tier
II inventory forms from the body of the
regulation. Section 312(g) of EPCRA
requires the EPA to publish a "uniform
format for inventory forms." However,
the forms are not required by the statute
to be published in regulations.
Removing the forms from the regulation
would shorten and simplify the
regulations, and allow EPA to change
the forms more easily to reflect new
information and experience. (Note that
any change to the forms would still
require Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act, including
public notice and comment when
required.) EPA would continue to
publish the uniform Tier I and Tier II
forms, which would be readily available
on the CEPPO Internet site
(www.epa.gov/ceppo), or by contacting
the National Center for Environmental
Publications and Information (NCEPI) at
800/490-9198. The Tier II form is
currently available on the CEPPO
Internet site.
EPA is proposing today to remove
both the forms and corresponding
instructions from the regulation. The
Tier I form and instructions are in
section 370.40 in the existing regulation,
and the Tier II form and instructions are
currently in section 370.41. Neither the
forms themselves, nor the instructions,
are included in today's proposed rule.
However, EPA will continue to make
the forms and instructions available to
the public, as indicated above.
At the same time, EPA's proposed
rule would continue to contain a
narrative description of the Tier I and
Tier II informational requirements.
Specifically, sections 370.41 and 370.42
in the proposed rule-set forth the
required Tier I and Tier II information,
respectively.
Today EPA is proposing two changes
to the Tier I and Tier II information
requirements. The first proposed change
is to require facilities to report a Facility
Identification Number with their Tier I
(or Tier II) information. The Facility
Identification Number is part~of a
standardized facility identification
scheme the Agency is currently
undertaking, and is discussed further in
part IV.B.4. of this document. The
second proposed change to the
information requirements is to require
facilities to report the NAICS code for
their facility instead of the SIC code, as
currently required. Replacement of the
SIC codes by the NAICS codes is
discussed below. The Tier I and Tier II
information requirements in today's
proposed rule are the same as the
existing information requirements, with
the exception of these two proposed
changes. EPA is not seeking public
comment on any other aspect of the
existing information requirements.
The facility identification portions of
the existing Tier I and Tier II forms
require reporting of the primary SIC
code for the facility. However, the SIC
system is currently being replaced by
the NAICS system, which is a new
economic classification system that has
been developed to provide common
industry definitions for Canada, Mexico,
and the United States. OMB published
a document in the Federal Register
regarding the replacement of the 1987
SIC by the 1997 NAICS, on April 9,
1997. In today's proposed rule, the
sections that list the Tier I and Tier II
information requirements (proposed
sections 370.41 and 370.42,
respectively) require the NAICS code
instead of the SIC code.
EPA seeks comment on requiring
facilities to report the NAICS code
instead of the SIC code. In particular,
EPA seeks comment on whether it is
premature or otherwise inappropriate to
adopt NAICS codes at this time, and
whether EPA should therefore retain
usage of the SIC codes for the time
being. EPA also invites~comment on
whether it would be sensible to allow
reporting of either the SIC code or the
NAICS code (and an indication of which
code was being reported), or to require
reporting of both codes, during a period
of transition from use of the SIC to the
NAICS. EPA understands that different
agencies may begin using the NAICS
codes for regulatory purposes at
different times. If EPA transitions to
using the NAICS codes in today's
proposed rule, this change may not be
consistent with the timing of some other
agencies' use of the new codes. EPA
seeks comment on the appropriate time
to transition to the NAICS codes for
purposes of the reporting requirements
under today's proposed rule. EPA also
seeks public input on making a
corresponding change to use NAICS
codes instead of SIC codes on the Tier
I and Tier II forms themselves.
In addition to setting forth the
uniform inventory forms and
instructions, existing sections 370.40
and 370.41 reiterate many of the
reporting requirements that are codified
in other sections in the regulation. EPA
doesn't believe it is necessary for these
requirements to be stated twice within
the same regulation, and the proposed
Tier I and Tier II information sections
(sections 370.41 and 370.42) don't
reiterate requirements codified
elsewhere in the regulation. EPA
requests public comments on this
proposed change.
The Tier I and Tier II instructions,
which are in existing sections 370.40
and 370.41, contain some general
explanatory information about the
reporting requirements and some
examples and suggestions to ease
compliance. This instructional
information is not included in the body
of the proposed regulation, but would
still be included with the forms and
instructions that are readily available to
the public. While EPA is proposing to
remove this instructional information
from the proposed regulation, the Tier I
and Tier II information requirements in
today's proposed rule are the same as
the existing Tier I and Tier II
information requirements (except for the
two specific proposed changes
described above). EPA requests public
comments regarding removal of this
instructional information.
Hazardous chemicals are classified
into five hazard categories for purposes
of reporting under EPCRA sections 311
and 312. These five categories are a
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31281
consolidation of the 23 hazard
categories defined under OSHA, at 29
CFR 1910.1200. Sections 370.40 and
370.41 in the existing rule, which
contain the Tier I and Tier II inventory
forms and instructions, each contain a
chart that compares EPA's hazard
categories under EPCRA with OSHA's
hazard categories. Although today's
proposed rule does not include the Tier
I and Tier II forms and instructions, the
five EPCRA hazard categories are
defined in proposed section 355.62 and
the corresponding OSHA hazard
categories are identified for each EPCRA
hazard category.
Section 370.41 in the existing
regulation, which contains the Tier II
form and instructions, also sets forth the
requirements pertaining to trade secret
information and confidential location
information for specific chemicals.
These requirements aren't found
elsewhere in the existing regulation.
Section 370.64 in today's proposed rule
contains the trade secret requirements
and the requirements for confidential
location information.
The instructions for the Tier H form
(currently found in section 370.41)
indicate the requirement to report the
"chemical name or common name" for
each chemical being reported. Section
370.42 in today's proposed rule, which
contains the Tier II information
requirements, indicates the requirement
to report the "chemical name or
common name of the chemical as
provided on the material safety data
sheet." EPA isn't proposing any change
to this requirement, but rather
reiterating the full requirement,
consistent with the statutory language in
EPCRA section 312(d)(2)(A).
The Tier I and Tier II forms that EPA
publishes aren't the only formats that
are acceptable for inventory reporting
under the EPCRA program. The existing
regulations (40 CFR 370.40 and 370.41)
provide that the facility owner or
operator may submit a State or local
form that contains the identical content
of the published uniform federal format
(the Tier I or Tier II information). Such
State or local forms are adequate for
section 312 reporting of Tier I and Tier
II information, provided the entities to
whom the forms must be submitted
receive the information by the reporting
deadline. The proposed regulations
specify the requirements for Tier I and
II information (see proposed sections
370.41 and 370.42) and similarly
provide that State or local formats for
reporting may be used so long as they
contain the required information. See
proposed section 370.40(b). Many States
have developed their own format for
reporting, which often contains
additional requirements beyond what is
required by the Tier I or Tier II forms.
Electronic inventory forms are available
from various sources, including the
CEPPO homepage and some States.
EPA believes that it is appropriate for
the Tier I and Tier II forms to be
published and readily available, but not
to be published in the regulations. EPA
is interested in comments concerning
the removal of these forms from the
body of the regulation, and suggestions
about how the forms can be made
readily available. EPA is especially
interested in comments on whether the
public actually uses the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) as a source of the Tier
I or Tier II forms, in which case it might
be helpful to retain the forms and
instructions in the regulations.
3. Penalties for Noncompliance
Sections 355.50 and 370.5 in the
existing rules describe potential
penalties for noncompliance with
EPCRA's emergency release notification
requirements and hazardous chemical
reporting requirements, respectively.
The Tier I and Tier II form instructions
also describe potential penalties for
noncompliance with the hazardous
chemical reporting requirements. In
today's rulemaking, EPA is proposing to
remove these provisions from the body
of the regulations because it is not
necessary to repeat them in the
regulations. The potential penalties for
all EPCRA violations are established in
the statute itself, which is self-
implementing. The absence of the
penalty discussions in the rule won't
change any requirements with respect to
enforcement. EPA seeks comment on
whether this is a useful change to
streamline the regulations.
4. Facility Identifier as a Tier I and Tier
II Information Requirement
EPA is currently undertaking an
agency-wide initiative to streamline and
consolidate the Agency's collection and
maintenance of environmental data.
EPA, in cooperation with States, is
seeking to establish information
management procedures for the
identification of facilities that are
subject to Federal environmental
reporting and permitting requirements.
This initiative is intended to improve
EPA's management and use of such
information, as well as to provide
improved public access to such
information, by creating links between
major data sources. This initiative is
known as the Facility Identification
Initiative. Through this initiative, EPA
intends to establish a standardized
facility identification scheme, including
a unique Facility Identification Number,
for facilities that submit environmental
data to EPA under various regulatory
programs. EPA would then be able to
establish links among records of
environmental data relative to a specific
facility, and also establish means for the
public to access the Agency's data via
computer telecommunications and other
means. The aim is to enable facility-
related environmental information in
multiple databases to be easily linked.
EPA, in cooperation with the States, is
currently developing a non-regulatory
process for assigning the Facility
Identification Numbers. For the latest
information regarding the Facility
Identifiers Initiative, please see the
memorandum "Announcing the Facility
Identification Interim Data Standard" in
the CERCLA Docket Office, in docket
number 300RR-IF1 (for the address of
the docket office, see the ADDRESSES
section of this preamble).
In today's document, EPA is seeking
public comment on whether or not to
require facilities to report their Facility
Identification Number when reporting
under EPCRA section 312, if such
number has been assigned under
another State or Federal environmental
program. This document does not
contain proposed regulatory language
establishing the Facility Identifier
Number as part of the Tier I and Tier II
information requirements. However,
EPA wants to ensure that the public
understands that based on this
document and opportunity for public
comment, EPA may, in the final
rulemaking action on this proposal,
revise the regulatory requirements for
Tier I and Tier II information by adding
regulatory language that requires
submission of the Facility Identification
Number. See existing sections 370.40
and 370.41, and proposed sections
370.41 and 370.42, for Tier I and Tier
II information requirements generally.
The Tier I and Tier II information
regulations would also be revised to
provide that only those facilities that are
subject to other State and Federal
environmental programs, and have been
assigned a Facility Identification
Number by their State or EPA, would
need to submit such Number with their
Tier I and Tier II information. The
public is hereby informed that EPA may
also take final action to include the
Facility Identification Number as part of
the Tier I and Tier II information
requirements, separate from the final
action on other aspects of this proposal.
This could occur, for example, if EPA
determines that the status of the Facility
Identifiers Initiative warrants either
more expeditious or later regulatory
action. Finally, EPA could also
-------
31282
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
conclude, based on the public input
from this document or other
considerations, that it will not add
Facility Identification Number to the
Tier I and Tier II information
requirements. All three of these
outcomes may occur without providing
opportunity for public comment beyond
that provided in this document.
Information reported under EPCRA
section 312 is submitted to SERCs,
LEPCs and local fire departments; it is
not reported directly to EPA. However,
the Facility Identifiers Initiative is a
cooperative data management effort
between EPA and the States. States
participating in the initiative would
include the Facility Identification
Numbers in their records, which may
eventually be linked to EPA data.
Although EPA does not maintain
EPCRA section 312 data, EPA may be
able to provide data users with links to
State'data systems. Having the Facility
Identification Number present in the
data that the SERCs, LEPCs and local
fire departments receive from a facility
under EPCRA section 312 may allow
Federal, State and local governments as
well as the public to coordinate that
data with other State and Federal data
maintained about the same facility.
Persons viewing the Tier I or Tier II
information for a facility would then
know whether the facility is subject to
other environmental laws in addition to
EPCRA, and would have a link to find
additional information about that
facility.
EPA seeks comment on whether it
would be useful to require that facilities
provide their Facility Identification
Number, if assigned, when reporting
Tier I or Tier II information under
EPCRA section 312. EPA would like to
know if SERCs, LEPCs. local fire
departments and the public would
benefit by the Identification Numbers
being reported under section 312.
5. Additional Changes to the Parts 355
and 370 Regulations
In today's rule EPA is proposing some
changes to the regulations at 40 CFR
parts 355 and 370 that are intended to
make the rules clearer and easier to use.
While rewriting these regulations, EPA
took the opportunity to "clean-up" the
rules—by clarifying requirements,
codifying policy, and in some cases
restating statutory language. The
proposed regulatory revisions are as
follows:
• SERC and LEPC instead of
commission and committee. In today's
proposed rule, SERC and LEPC are used
to abbreviate State emergency response
commission and local emergency
response committee, respectively.
Commission and committee (rather than
SERC and LEPC) have been used as
abbreviations in the existing rule, but
EPA believes that the public is generally
more familiar with the terms SERC and
LEPC. The definitions for key words
used in parts 355 and 370, which are
found in section 355.62 in today's
proposed rule, reflect the use of the
terms SERC and LEPC instead of
commission and committee.
• Quantity of an extremely hazardous
substance in a mixture. Instructions for
calculating the quantity of an extremely
hazardous substance (EHS) present in a
mixture, for purposes of emergency
planning, are in section 355.30(e)(l) of
the existing regulation. The terms
"mixture" and "solution" are both used
in these instructions. In the proposed
regulation the term "solution" has been
removed because "mixture" includes
"solution," so it is redundant to use
both terms. The term "mass" in the
existing instructions is replaced by
"weight" in the proposed instructions.
For the purposes of this regulation the
two terms are synonymous, and
"weight" is a more familiar term to the
general public. Further, in order to
improve the understanding of these
instructions, an example is provided in
the proposed instructions, which are in
section 355.13 of today's proposed rule.
• Extremely hazardous substances in
solid form. Instructions for determining
which threshold planning quantity
(TPQ) to use for extremely hazardous
substances (EHSs) in solid form are in
section 355.30(e) (2) (i) of the existing
regulation. In that section solids are
described as "existing in" or "being
handled in" various forms. In the
proposed rule, the phrases "exists in"
and "is handled in" have been replaced
by "is in." This is simpler and easier to
understand, but doesn't affect the
requirements in any way. These
instructions are in section 355.15 of
today's proposed rule.
• Facility emergency coordinator.
—Section 355.30(c) in the existing
regulation requires the owner or
operator of a facility to notify the
LEPC (or the Governor if there is no
LEPC) of the facility emergency
coordinator. In today's proposed rule,
section 355.20 requires this
notification be made to the SERC if
there is no LEPC, or to the Governor
if there is no SERC. EPA believes that
most States have functioning SERCs
now, and this notification should be
given to the SERC rather than the
Governor, if there is no LEPC.
—The existing rule requires that this
notification be made on or before
September 17, 1987, or 30 days after
establishment of an LEPC, whichever
is earlier. The notification deadlines
in the existing rule correspond to the
statutory deadlines found in EPCRA
section 303(d)(l). Neither the statute
nor the current regulation establish a
deadline for providing this notice in
the case of a facility that later
becomes subject to the emergency
planning requirements (that is, an
EHS first becomes present at the
facility in excess of its TPQ, or the
EHS list is revised and an EHS on the
revised list is present at the facility in
excess of its TPQ). EPCRA section
302 (c) does, however, require that,
within 60 days after becoming subject
to the emergency planning
requirements, a facility provide notice
that it is subject to such requirements.
EPA believes that notice of the facility
emergency coordinator is an integral
part of the emergency planning
notification requirements, and should
therefore be provided at the same time
as the emergency planning notice.
Accordingly, section 355.20 in today's
proposed rule requires that notice of
the facility emergency coordinator be
provided by September 17, 1987, or
within 30 days of establishment of the
LEPC (in accordance with the
statutory deadlines at EPCRA section
303(d)(l)), or within 60 days after a
facility becomes subject to EPCRA's
emergency planning requirements
(consistent with EPCRA section
302(c)). In today's proposed rule, the
deadlines for a facility to provide
notice of its facility emergency
coordinator are consistent with the
deadlines for a facility to provide
notice that it is subject to the
emergency planning requirements
(see proposed section 355.20). (The
deadlines for notification that a
facility is subject to the emergency
planning requirements are discussed
further below.) Proposed section
355.20 presents a summary, in table
format, of the information that is
required under EPCRA's emergency
planning requirements; including
types of information to be reported,
required recipients of information,
and deadlines for reporting. The
proposed table is intended to present
the requirements in a clear, easy to
understand format.
• Emergency planning notification.
—Section 355.30(b) in the existing
regulation requires notification to the
SERC that a facility is subject to the
emergency planning requirements
under EPCRA. In today's proposed
rule, section 355.20 requires this
notification be provided to both the
SERC and the LEPC. This is consistent
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31283
with section 302 (c) of EPCRA, which
provides for owners or operators to
notify the SERC and LEPC when their
facility becomes subject to the
emergency planning requirements.
—Section 355.30(b) in the existing
regulation requires that notification be
provided on or before May 17, 1987
or within 60 days after a facility first
becomes subject to the requirements.
The notification deadlines in the
existing regulation correspond to the
statutory deadlines at EPCRA section
302(c). Section 355.20 in today's
proposed rule requires that emergency
planning notification be provided by
May 17, 1987 or within 60 days after
a facility first becomes subject to the
requirements (in accordance with the
statutory deadlines at EPCRA section
302 (c)) or within 30 days after
establishment of an LEPC. EPA is
proposing to add "within 30 days
after establishment of an LEPC" in
section 355.20 of today's proposed
rule to provide for consistency with
the statutory requirement at EPCRA
section 303(d)(l) to provide notice of
the facility emergency coordinator
within 30 days of establishment of an
LEPC. EPA believes that notification
that a facility is subject to EPCRA's
emergency planning requirements,
and notification of a facility's
emergency coordinator, which are the
two basic components of emergency
planning notification, should be
provided according to consistent
reporting deadlines. EPA does not
believe that it is reasonable to require
a facility to provide notice of the
facility emergency coordinator in
advance of the deadline for providing
notice that they are, in fact, subject to
EPCRA's emergency planning
requirements. (The deadlines for
providing notification of the facility
emergency coordinator are discussed
in detail above.) EPA seeks, in today's
document, to provide for consistency
between these two basic components
of EPCRA's emergency planning
requirements.
• Changes relevant to emergency
planning. Section 355.30(d) in the
current regulation requires that facility
owners or operators inform the LEPC of
any changes occurring at the facility
which may be relevant to emergency
planning. The table in proposed section
355.20 in today's rule contains this
same .requirement, and also indicates
that the information be provided
promptly—EPA is proposing to add
"promptly" to be consistent with
EPCRA section 303(d) (2).
• Format for notifications. In today's
proposed rule, EPA has added sections
that discuss the format to be used for
emergency planning and emergency
release notification (sections 355.21 and
355.41, respectively). EPA is not
intending to change the existing
requirements for format of notifications,
or to impose new requirements.
Sections 355.21 and 355.41 are intended
simply to clarify the existing
requirements. Although the current
regulation does not state the required
format for emergency planning
notification, it long has been EPA policy
to recommend that the emergency
planning notification be made in
writing. In the preamble to the final rule
establishing the emergency planning
requirements (52 FR 13379, April 22,
1987), EPA stated that, "Any facility
where an extremely hazardous
substance is present in an amount in
excess of the threshold planning
quantity is required to notify the State
commission * * * Such notification
should be in writing * * *" (emphasis
added). Proposed section 355.21 in
today's rule is intended to reflect EPA's
policy of recommending (but not
requiring) written emergency planning
notification.
• 24-hour time period for release. The
emergency release notification
requirements in the existing regulation,
found in section 355.40, don't indicate
over what time period a release of a
reportable quantity must occur to trigger
emergency release notification
requirements. Under EPCRA section
304(a), releases are reportable if they
occur in a manner that requires, or
would require, notification under
CERCLA section 103(a). Thus, EPA's
interpretation has been that the 24-hour
policy applicable under CERCLA also
applies under EPCRA. This
interpretation, which long has been EPA
policy, is being codified in today's
proposed rule. Accordingly, section
355.33 in this proposed rule indicates
that the "release of a reportable quantity
* * * within any 24-hour period"
triggers emergency release notification
requirements.
• Releases during transportation. The
emergency release notification
requirements that apply to release of a
substance during transportation (or
storage incident to transportation) are in
section 355.40(b)(4)(ii) in the existing
regulation. The term "transportation-
related release" is used in that section,
and is also defined there. Section
304(b)(l) of EPCRA, which provides the
statutory requirements for releases
during transportation or storage incident
to transportation, doesn't use the term
"transportation-related release." In
today's proposed rule, the requirements
for releases during transportation or
storage incident to transportation are in
section 355.42(b). In that section the
term "transportation-related release,"
and its definition, have been removed
because EPA believes that the use of
that term adds to the confusion about
these requirements. In addition, the
language of that section has been
modified to generally track the statutory
language in EPCRA 304(b)(l). EPA
requests comments as to whether
additional guidance should be provided
concerning notification of releases
during transportation (or storage
incident to transportation). EPA also
requests suggestions as to what type of
additional guidance would be helpful.
• Releases that are continuous. A
release that is continuous and stable in
quantity and rate, under the definitions
in 40 CFR 302.8(b), qualifies for reduced
reporting requirements under EPCRA.
The requirements for reporting
continuous releases are in section
355.40(a)(2)(iii) in the current
regulation, and in section 355.32 in
today's proposed regulation. Continuous
releases are subject to four specific
reporting requirements. These
requirements have been reorganized in
today's proposed rule, to clarify that
each of the four notifications must be
made to the community emergency
coordinator for the LEPC for any area
likely to be affected by the release and
to the SERC of any State likely to be
affected by the release (in addition to
the notifications required under 40 CFR
302.8). The Agency stated that these
four notifications are to be made to the
SERC and the LEPC (in addition to the
NRC) in the final rule establishing the
requirements for reporting continuous
releases of hazardous substances
published on July 24, 1990 (55 FR
30179).
• State or local format for reporting
inventory information.
—One of the purposes of today's
proposal is to insure that SERCs and
LEPCs have flexibility with respect to
the manner in which information is
reported under EPCRA sections 311
and 312. Sections 370.40 and 370.41
in EPA's existing rule allow for
flexibility by providing that a State or
local form may be used for reporting
inventory information, as long as the
State or local form contains identical
content to the uniform federal forms
(Tier I of Tier II forms). To further
clarify this flexibility, EPA proposes
today to revise those provisions such
that the use of a State or local format
is allowed (see proposed section
370.40). These proposed revisions
would clearly encompass submittal of
inventory information in any number
-------
31284
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
or potential manners, including
electronic submittal, so long as all
information required under the statute
and its implementing regulations
were provided.
—Section 370.43 in today's proposed
rule provides weight range codes, and
codes for storage types and
conditions, that are used when
reporting Tier I and Tier II
information (the same codes are in
sections 370.40 and 370.41 in the
current regulation). These codes must
be used when reporting inventory
information using the federal Tier I
and Tier II forms. However, when
State or local formats are used for
reporting Tier I and Tier II
information (as discussed above), EPA
allows the use of State or local codes
for weight ranges and storage types
and conditions. State or local codes
may be used for reporting weight
ranges, provided that the weight
ranges are no broader than those in
proposed section 370.43. State or
local codes may be used for reporting
storage types and conditions,
provided that the codes specify the
same or more detailed information as
that specified in proposed section
370.43. Paragraph (d) in proposed
section 370.43 has been added to
clarify this flexibility regarding the
use of EPA's codes. For example, a
State or local government might
choose to specify ranges in gallons
instead of in pounds—such ranges
may be used when reporting amounts,
provided that weight ranges
corresponding to the given ranges in
gallons are not broader than the
ranges in proposed section 370.43
(and provided that a format other than
the federal Tier I or Tier II forms are
used).
• SERC or LEPC response to a request
for Tier II information within 45 days.
Section 370.61 in today's proposed rule
states that "A SERC or LEPC must
respond to a request for Tier II
information * * * within 45 days of
receiving such a request." This
requirement isn't found in the existing
regulation. However, this requirement is
specified under EPCRA section
312(e)(3)(D), and EPA is proposing to
codify the statutory requirement at this
time for clarity. Codifying this
requirement will not create any new
substantive requirement, since it was
already provided by the statute.
EPA requests public comment on all
aspects of the proposed regulatory
revisions described above.
6. Definitions
In today's proposed rulemaking, the
definitions for parts 355 and 370 (that
currently are found in sections 355.20
and 370.2, respectively) have been
combined into one section and placed at
the end of part 355. See proposed
section 355.62. This was done because
parts 355 and 370 are closely related
and are published together, and the
defined words used in both parts are
generally the same.
Placing the consolidated definitions
section at the end of part 355 relieves
the reader of having to read through all
of the definitions before-seeing how
they are used in the text. A short
statement at the beginning of each part
in today's proposed rule tells the reader
where to find the definitions. Words
that are defined in the consolidated
definitions section are printed with the
initial letter capitalized the first time
they are used in each part, to highlight
them. EPA is seeking comments
concerning whether or not these
changes improve the readability of the
rule.
Some minor revisions to the contents
of the definitions are proposed in
today's rulemaking. EPA intends these
changes to make the definitions clearer
and easier to use. Some of these changes
were necessary to consolidate the two
existing definitions sections into one
section. EPA requests public comment
on the proposed changes to the
definitions, which are as follows:
• Act. The term "act" is defined in
the existing definition section for part
355 as "the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act of 1986." This
definition has been removed from the
proposed definitions section, which
applies to both parts 355 and 370. The
Emergency Planning and Community-
To-Know Act (EPCRA), the
Occupational Safety and Health Act
(OSHA), the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act (CERCLA), and the
Clean Air Act (CAA) are each referenced
in today's proposed rule. The term "act"
is not used in today's rule without the
name of the "act" it is referencing, so it
is unnecessary to give it a specific
meaning.
• SERC and LEPC. As discussed
above, the terms "commission" and
"committee" have been replaced with
"SERC" and "LEPC," respectively,
throughout today's proposed rule.
Accordingly, the terms "commission"
and "committee" have been replaced
with "SERC" and "LEPC" in the
proposed definitions section, which is
section 355.62 in today's rule. No
changes are proposed to the definitions
themselves in today's rule, the terms
"commission" and "committee" have
simply been replaced by "SERC" and
"LEPC."
« EPCRA and OSHA. Definitions of
"EPCRA" and "OSHA" have been
added in the consolidated definitions
section proposed in today's rulemaking.
These acronyms frequently are used
throughout the rule. Placing them in the
definitions section should make it easier
for the reader to find their meanings.
• Facility. The term "facility" is
defined in both parts 355 and 370 in the
existing rule. The two definitions are
identical, except that in part 370 the
definition of "facility" includes "all
natural structures in which chemicals
are purposefully placed or removed
through human means such that it
functions as a containment structure for
human use." EPA intends for the
definition of "facility" under part 355 to
be identical to the definition under part
370 (see 55 FR 30634, July 26, 1990; and
54 FR 12999, March 29, 1989). This is
being clarified in today's proposed
rulemaking by including "all natural
structures in which chemicals are
purposefully placed or removed through
human means such that it functions as
a containment structure for human use"
in the definition of "facility" under the
consolidated definitions section (see
proposed section 355.62).
• Hazardous substances. The term
"CERCLA hazardous substance" is
defined in the existing definitions for
part 355, but not in the definitions for
part 370. This term is defined in the
proposed combined definitions section.
The terms have been reorganized such
that "CERCLA hazardous substance"
and "extremely hazardous substance"
appear together under the (heading
"hazardous substances." EPA believes
that putting the definitions of the two
terms together under a common heading
will help clarify the difference between
these closely related terms. In addition,
these terms now appear immediately
after the definition of "hazardous
chemical," which is the third category
of substances regulated by today's
rulemaking. Placing together the
definitions of each of the categories of
substances that this rule regulates
should help the reader to compare and
understand their meanings.
• Hazardous chemical. No change is
proposed to the meaning of the term
"hazardous chemical." However, two
organizational changes are proposed
that-should improve the clarity of the
definition. The first is that the list of
exceptions to the term has been
reformatted. The second involves the
definition of the phrase "present in the
same form and concentration as a
product packaged for distribution and
use by the general public," which is
used within the definition of
"hazardous chemical" (in the list of
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/ Proposed Rules
31285
exceptions to the term). This phrase is
defined in the existing definitions
section for part 370, in a separate
paragraph from the definition of
"hazardous chemical." In the
consolidated definitions section in
today's rulemaking (proposed section
355.62), the definition of this phrase has
been relocated to appear within the
definition of "hazardous chemical." The
list of exceptions to the definition of
"hazardous chemical" is reiterated in
section 370.13 in today's proposed rule,
and the definition of "present in the
same form and concentration as a
product packaged for distribution and
use by the general public" is placed
within that list.
• Inventory form. The Tier I and Tier
II "inventory forms" have been removed
from the regulation, as discussed above.
The definition of "inventory form" has
been modified to reflect that, under the
proposed rule, the Tier I and Tier II
forms no longer are set forth in part 370.
• Mixture. In the existing rule, the
term "mixture" is defined in part 355
but not in part 370, although the term
is used in both parts. In today's
proposed rulemaking, "mixture" is
defined in the consolidated definitions
section. For the purposes of part 355,
the proposed meaning of "mixture" is
the same as the existing meaning, except
that the existing definition includes the
term "compounds" and the proposed
definition does not. EPA believes that
this term shouldn't be included—in a
"compound" the various constituents
don't retain their individual identities,
so a "compound" shouldn't be treated
as a mixture for the purposes of part
355. For the purposes of part 370, the
proposed definition of "mixture" is
"mixture" as defined under 29 CFR
1910.1200(c). Applicability for the part
370 requirements is based on OSHA's
hazard communication standard (29
CFR 1910.1200), and today EPA is
proposing this regulatory revision to
clarify the Agency's policy that the
definition of "mixture" at 29 CFR
1910.1200(c) applies to 40 CFR part 370.
• Reportable quantity. In section
355.20 in the current regulation,
"reportable quantity" means, "for any
CERCLA hazardous substance, the
reportable quantity established in Table
302.4 of 40 CFR part 302, for such
substance, for any other substance, the
reportable quantity is one pound." In
section 355.62 in today's proposed rule,
however, "reportable quantity" is
defined as, "for any CERCLA hazardous
substance, the reportable quantity
established in Table 302.4 of 40 CFR
part 302, for such substance. For any
extremely hazardous substance,
reportable quantity means the reportable
quantity established in appendices A
and B of this part, for such substance.
Unless and until superseded by
regulations establishing a reportable
quantity for newly listed EHSs or
CERCLA hazardous substances, a weight
of 1 pound shall be the reportable
quantity." EPA seeks to make clear that
the phrase "any other substance" in the
current definition refers only to EHSs
(that are not also CERCLA hazardous
substances). "Reportable quantities"
currently have been established by EPA
for all EHSs, so the proposed definition
directs the reader to appendices A and
B of part 355, where the "reportable
quantities" are published. The language,
"Unless and until superseded by
regulations establishing a reportable
quantity for newly listed EHSs or
CERCLA hazardous substances, a weight
of 1 pound shall be the reportable
quantity" has been added to clarify that
the statutory default reportable quantity
is one pound for EHSs and CERCLA
hazardous substances (see EPCRA
section 304 (a) and CERCLA section
102(b), respectively).
• Threshold planning quantity. The
definition of "threshold planning
quantity (TPQ)" has been changed to
make it clear where in the existing
regulations the TPQs are found, in order
to avoid any confusion that may arise
due to the consolidation of the
definitions for parts 355 and 370.
• Tribe. The term "Tribe" was placed
together with the definition of "Indian
Tribe," because these terms have the
same meaning in the regulation and the
term "Tribe" isn't defined in the
existing rule.
V. What Draft guidance Is EPA
Publishing in This Preamble?
The discussion below addresses a
number of issues for which EPA is
considering providing guidance, to
facilitate understanding and flexibility
in complying with the existing
regulatory requirements. Although the
draft guidance explored below does not
involve any revision to the existing
regulatory requirements, EPA seeks
public comment in developing this
guidance.
A. Increased Flexibility for States and
Local Governments With Respect to
Reporting Under EPCRA Sections 311
and 312
In order to streamline compliance
with the existing regulatory
requirements, EPA is developing
guidance discussing certain reporting
options that SERCs, LEPCs and fire
departments may wish to consider in
implementing EPCRA sections 311 and
312. This effort is part of the President's
program for reinventing government and
reforming regulatory policy. Several
different options under sections 311 and
312 are discussed below. EPA does not
believe any of these options would
entail regulatory changes. EPA's
intention is to generate discussion of
different options at this time. While
EPA's objective is to identify
opportunities for flexibility in
implementing EPCRA sections 311 and
312, SERCs, LEPCs, fire departments,
and facility owners and operators would
not have to follow any of the draft
options. Further, SERCs and LEPCs
could implement the options discussed
in section A(l), (2), (3) and (4)
regardless of whether EPA issues final
guidance, provided the implementation
of the option meets the statutory and
regulatory requirements.
Numerous stakeholders have asked
EPA to provide greater flexibility with
respect to reporting under section 312 of
EPCRA, in order to facilitate their use of
the reporting information. EPA agrees
that enhanced flexibility would allow
SERCs and LEPCs greater discretion in
implementing the EPCRA program;
however, an increase in flexibility may
compromise the existing national
consistency within the EPCRA program.
Also, if the EPCRA programs become
less consistent nationally, Federal
guidance may become obsolete. This
could increase the burden on State and
local entities to provide guidance to
their regulated community. EPA is'also
concerned that increased State and local
flexibility may compromise Federal,
State and local compliance efforts. EPA
is presenting several options that would
clarify State and local flexibility with
respect to reporting under sections 311
and 312, and is seeking public comment
on those options. EPA is especially
interested in comments from SERCs,
LEPCs and local fire departments, and
will consider all public comments in
developing this guidance under the
EPCRA program.
Section 311 of EPCRA requires
facilities to submit MSDSs (or a list of
hazardous chemicals subject to the
requirements) to the SERC, the LEPC,
and the fire department with
jurisdiction over the facility. Likewise,
section 312 requires facilities to submit
an emergency and hazardous chemical
inventory form (containing at a
minimum the Tier I information) by
March 1 of every year to the same three
entities. Sections 370.40 and 370.41 in
the existing rule allow facilities to use
State and local forms instead of the
federal forms, provided the State or
local form contains the information
required by the statute and its
implementing regulations. In today's
-------
31286
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
proposed rule, section 370.40 similarly
provides that a State or local format may
be used if the State or local format
contains at least the Tier I information.
Throughout the implementation of
EPCRA, States have suggested
alternatives to the federal reporting
format. EPA has considered these
suggestions, and is presenting suggested
alternatives below for public comment.
Every SERC, LEPC and fire department
would have the choice of adopting any,
or none, of the alternatives explored
below—EPA would not require the
adoption of any of these options. EPA
would like to provide flexibility in
implementing EPCRA sections 311 and
312, provided that the statutory and
regulatory standards regarding
information reported (at a minimum the
Tier I information), recipients of
information (the SERC. the LEPC, and
local fire department), and timing of
submission (March 1 annually under
section 312, and within 3 months after
becoming subject under section 311),
are met. EPA believes it is important for
the SERC, the LEPC, and the local fire
department to have the information
provided under sections 311 and 312
and the implementing regulations, at the
required time. Each entity has a unique
use and need for this information. EPA
seeks comments on the following
alternatives for reporting under sections
311 and 312 of EPCRA.
1. UST Forms to Fulfill the
Requirements for Tier I Information
Under EPCRA Section 312
EPA is aware that many facilities that
are subject to the underground storage
tank (UST) regulations under section
9002 of RCRA are also subject to the
reporting requirements under EPCRA
sections 311 and 312. Some, but not all,
of the reporting information that is
currently required under section 312 of
EPCRA and under the Federal UST
program, is duplicative. In keeping with
EPA's efforts to provide flexibility with
respect to meeting the reporting
requirements. EPA is considering
developing guidance which would
clarify that States, if they so choose,
have the option to allow the UST form
required under RCRA to be used to
comply with the reporting requirements
under section 312 of EPCRA, provided
that all of the statutory and regulatory
reporting requirements under section
312 are met. The statutory and
regulatory reporting requirements are
discussed in detail below.
EPCRA section 312 requires
submission of an inventory form
containing, at a minimum. Tier I
information, and also requires that the
EPA publish a uniform format for
inventory forms. However, neither the
statute nor the implementing
regulations require that the uniform
federal format be used for submission of
information under section 312. Sections
370.40 and 370.41 in the existing rule
provide that a State or local form that
includes content identical to that of the
Tier I or Tier II forms, respectively, may
be used instead of the Tier I or Tier II
forms. It long has been EPA policy that
alternative State and local formats are
acceptable for reporting under section
312. Today, EPA is proposing to remove
the forms themselves from the
regulation, as discussed above, in part
IV.B.2. of this document.
Some States have suggested to EPA
that the UST form and submittal
procedures under their State UST
programs are similar to the EPCRA
section 312 reporting requirements, and
have asked for guidance on whether
their State UST form could fulfill the
requirements under EPCRA section 312.
By clarifying the conditions under
which a single form (or forms) would
fulfill the reporting requirements under
a UST program and under EPCRA
section 312 and its implementing
regulations, EPA intends to provide
States with flexibility in implementing
the EPCRA program and also seeks to
reduce the reporting burden on
regulated facilities, while preserving the
goals of the two programs. The issue of
using UST forms to substitute for the
Tier I information was also addressed in
a December 27, 1988 Federal Register
Request for Comments (53 FR 52273).
In order for the UST form to address
section 312 of EPCRA, all of the
statutory and regulatory reporting
requirements under section 312 must be
met. The statute and regulations contain
requirements for the information
reported, the recipients of the
information, and the timing of the
submission. A comparison of those
requirements with the Federal UST
program follows:
• Information Reported: Tier I
information is the minimum
information required under EPCRA
section 312 and the implementing
regulations. In addition, Tier II
information must be reported upon
request. Note that some States or LEPCs
require more than the minimum data
that EPA requires. In order for the UST
form to meet the routine reporting
requirements under EPCRA section 312,
it must contain at least the information
required for the Tier I information.
• Recipients of Information: EPCRA
section 312 requires that the reporting
information be submitted to the SERC,
the LEPC, and the fire department with
jurisdiction over the facility. The UST
program under RCRA requires that the
UST forms be submitted to a State
agency. However, that State agency is
not necessarily the SERC. If the UST
forms are to meet section 312 of EPCRA,
then the SERC, the LEPC, and the fire
department must all receive the
information.
• Timing of Reporting: Under EPCRA
section 312 and the implementing
regulations, the owner or operator of a
regulated facility must submit the
required Tier I reporting information by
March 1 of the first year after the facility
first becomes subject to reporting, and
by March 1 of each year afterwards (see
EPCRA section 312(a)(2), and 40 CFR
370.20(b)(2) and 370.25(a)). In addition,
the owner or operator of a regulated
facility must submit Tier II information
within 30 days of the receipt of such a
request from the SERC, the LEPC, or the
fire department having jurisdiction over
the facility (see EPCRA section 312(e)(l)
and 40 CFR 370.25(c)). In contrast, the
UST program requires a one-time
notification, not an annual notification.
If the UST forms are to meet section 312
of EPCRA, then they must contain Tier
I information and must be submitted
annually by March 1, as required under
EPCRA. Additionally, the owner or
operator would continue to be subject to
the requirement to submit Tier II
information upon request.
The reporting requirements under the
Federal UST program differ from
reporting requirements under EPCRA
section 312 in terms of content,
recipients, and timing of submission. In
order for the UST form to fulfill the
reporting requirements under EPCRA
section 312, all of the requirements for
content, recipients and timing described
above must be met. If a facility submits
its UST form in such a manner that~each
of these requirements is met, EPA
would consider that facility to be in
compliance with section 312 of EPCRA.
If an UST form is submitted to fulfill
EPCRA section 312 requirements, under
the conditions examined here, it might
be advisable to indicate on that form
that it is being submitted for EPCRA
section 312, so that the receiving entity
will know why the UST form was
submitted. In addition, it is conceivable
that a facility may submit UST forms, as
well as other inventory forms, together
in one section 312 submission. In such
a case, it may be advisable to indicate
on both sets of forms the total number
of pages in the submission, and that
some of the information is reported on
UST forms and some on other inventory
forms, to avoid any confusion for the
receiving entity.
EPA requests comments on the draft
guidance provided above, and on any
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31287
other issues or concerns regarding the
use of UST forms to fulfill reporting
requirements under EPCRA section 312.
2. Partnership Programs for Joint Access
to Information and Streamlined
Submission of EPCRA Sections 311 and
312 Reporting
Sections 311(a)(l) and 312(a)(l) of
EPCRA require the owner or operator of
covered facilities to submit an MSDS (or
list of hazardous chemicals) and Tier I
inventory information. There are two
key requirements associated with the
reporting of this information. First, the
information must be submitted to the
following three entities: the SERC, the
appropriate LEPC, and the fire
department with jurisdiction over the
facility. Second, there are specific
compliance deadlines governing
submission of the information to the
three entities. The basic requirement to
submit the EPCRA sections 311 and 312
information to the SERC, the LEPC and
fire department by specific deadlines is
implemented in 40 CFR sections 370.21
and 370.25 of the existing regulations,
and is proposed in today's document at
sections 370.32, 370.33, 370.40, 370.44
and 370.45 without substantive
revision.
EPA is interested in exploring how
the statutory and regulatory
requirements to submit the MSDS and
Tier I information to all three entities,
by the required deadlines, could be
streamlined to reduce the reporting
burden on regulated facilities.
Specifically, EPA is exploring the
conditions under which the SERC,
LEPCs and fire departments could
establish partnerships for joint receipt of
EPCRA information. Under such
partnerships, a submission timely
reported under EPCRA sections 311 or
312 to a central database that the SERC,
the LEPC and fire department have
unrestricted access to, could jointly be
received by all three entities. In other
words, timely submission to the joint
database could constitute timely
submission to all three entities in
accordance with the statute and
regulations. In the discussion below,
EPA examines a number of issues
involved in developing this guidance.
EPA seeks public input on all of these
issues, to help design guidance to
facilitate streamlined submission of
EPCRA information.
A critical consideration in designing
any guidance on streamlined submittal
is to ensure that emergency response
officials, State and local officials, and
other members of the community
continue to have timely access to
information reported under EPCRA
sections 311 and 312. As discussed, to
be in compliance with EPCRA, covered
facilities need to submit the required
information by specific statutory and
regulatory deadlines. For example, the
reporting for EPCRA section 312 Tier I
information is due each year by March
1st, to cover hazardous chemicals
present at the facility the preceding
calendar year. See EPCRA section
312(a)(2). Thus, any partnership
program for joint access to information
would need to ensure that the SERC, the
LEPC and the fire department receive
Tier I information by March 1st. As
noted, under the partnership program
concept, this could be accomplished by
timely submittal to a central database
that all three entities have unrestricted
access to and thereby jointly receive.
The critical point is that the goal of the
streamlined submittal policy is to
reduce the reporting burden on
regulated facilities without diminishing
timely and full access to reported
information.
A potential example of streamlined
submission is a joint electronic
database. If, for example, covered
facilities submitted the information
required under EPCRA sections 311 and
312 to a joint electronic database to
which the SERC, the LEPC and the fire
department each have unrestricted
access, then timely submittal to the
single electronic database could
constitute timely submittal to all three
entities. The obvious advantage of the
electronic database example is that the
regulated community could provide the
required information to all three entities
through a single streamlined
submission. This could reduce the
reporting burden on the regulated
community. EPA is interested in other
examples of systems through which a
single submittal of EPCRA information
could similarly be jointly received by
the SERC, the LEPC and the fire
department.
In part V.A.3 of this document
(immediately below), EPA explores the
development of guidance on optional
electronic submittal of information
required under EPCRA sections 311 and
312 and the implementing regulations.
If EPA establishes guidance for
streamlined submittal that relies on the
use of a central electronic database for
joint receipt of EPCRA information, as
suggested above, EPA would build on
the guidance for electronic submittal of
EPCRA information discussed in part
V.A.3 of this document.
EPA notes that information
partnerships could be structured to
reduce the overall information
management burden on SERCs, LEPCs
and fire departments. By joining
together to collectively access the
EPCRA information reported under
sections 311 and 312, SERCs, LEPCs and
fire departments could conserve
resources through economies of scale.
For instance, in the electronic submittal
example, a single electronic database
would be more efficient than three
separate databases. Thus, the initial
effort to establish partnership programs
for joint access to information could be
offset by the resources saved from more
efficient program administration.
Regardless, EPA does not wish to
create burden for the State and local
entities implementing EPCRA. Thus, an
important principle of the streamlined
submittal guidance under development
is that participation by SERCs, LEPCs
and fire departments would be entirely
voluntary. SERCs, LEPCs and fire
departments would decide on their own
accord whether establishing partnership
programs for joint access to information
is a sensible option for them.
To promote flexibility in the
establishment of partnership programs,
EPA also wishes to explore how a
variety of different partnerships could
be created based on the interests and
capabilities of the SERC, the LEPCs and
the fire departments in any given State.
Partnerships could range from statewide
to more limited partnerships as SERCs,
LEPCs and fire departments see fit. For
example, a SERC could form
partnerships with all of the LEPCs and
fire departments in the State managing
EPCRA information. If the SERC, the
LEPCs and fire departments had
unrestricted access to a statewide
electronic database, then for any facility
in the State, timely submission to the
central electronic database could
constitute timely submission to each
entity under EPCRA.
Such a statewide EPCRA database
could have several benefits in addition
to reducing the reporting burden for the
regulated community. For example,
compilation of the information in a
single database, such as a statewide web
site accessible from the Internet, could
provide greatly expanded public access
to EPCRA information, advancing the
fundamental purpose of EPCRA—
community right-to-know. Further, if
the public has ready access to the
information, there may be fewer
requests from the public for
information, which could result in a
decrease in the overall administrative
burden to process such requests. EPA
also recognizes that there may be
technical information management
issues to explore further. EPA seeks
comment about how broad partnerships,
such as statewide electronic databases,
could best be implemented.
-------
31288
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
In addition, EPA seeks input on the
establishment of more limited
partnership programs for joint access to
information. As an alternative to a
statewide database, limited partnerships
might include two of the three entities
to which EPCRA information must be
submitted. Such partnerships would
still reduce the reporting burden for the
regulated community. For example, the
fire departments in a State that wishes
to establish a partnership may not
presently have adequate tools to access
a central electronic database. A SERC
and LEPC may nevertheless choose to
establish a limited partnership so that
timely submission to their joint database
would constitute timely submission to
both the SERC and the LEPC. In this
example, EPCRA would still require a
covered facility to make a separate
submittal to the appropriate fire
department, but the reporting burden on
the regulated community would still be
reduced. In a similar manner, limited
partnerships could be formed between
the LEPCs and fire departments or the
SERC and fire departments. Under any
such scenario, EPCRA would require a
separate submission to the entity not
included in the partnership.
EPA seeks public input on how
partnerships, whether broad or limited,
should be established by the partners.
For example, EPA is contemplating
whether it should encourage SERCs,
LEPCs and fire departments to spell out
partnerships through a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) or other written
document. There are several reasons to
establish a partnership through a
written document. First, a written
document describing the partnership
will help delineate clearly relative roles
and responsibilities of the participating
partners, ensure that all partners
participate willingly, and provide
continuity when there are changes in
personnel. Further, a written document
will Help ensure that the regulated
community is aware of the
governmental partnership and, by
making the partnership better known,
will help maximize the benefits of
reducing the EPCRA reporting burden.
Additionally, formal delineation of
partnerships will help ensure that the
community knows and understands
how the information is handled,
promoting community involvement in
the program. EPA seeks public comment
on whether the partnerships should be
formally delineated through MOUs or
other written documents. EPA also
seeks public input on whether, once
formed, it makes sense to notify the
regulated community and the public so
that they are aware of, and can put to
use, the streamlined submittal option.
EPA would like to maintain reporting
flexibility under this draft guidance.
State and local partnerships for
streamlined submission of information
under EPCRA sections 311 and 312
should be structured to allow facilities
the option of submitting the information
separately to all three entities (SERC,
LEPC and local fire department), instead
of submitting it to the joint database (or
other appropriate system for joint access
to information). Some regulated
facilities may not have adequate
electronic tools to submit information to
an electronic database or may have
other concerns with the streamlined
submittal approach. The objective is to
reduce the reporting burden on the
regulated community. Therefore, if a
facility owner or operator decided that,
on balance, it is more sensible to submit
separately instead of jointly to all three
entities, EPA would not want that
reporting option to be eliminated.
Further, the SERC, the LEPC and the
local fire department would still have
the option to receive Tier II information
separately from the facility by
requesting it (see section 370.10(b) in
today's proposed regulation).
To summarize, the proposed core
elements of the draft streamlined
submittal guidance are as follows:
• Voluntary Participation. SERCs,
LEPCs and fire departments would
voluntarily decide whether they wish to
form partnership programs for joint
access to EPCRA sections 311 and 312
information, based upon their own
programmatic priorities.
• Flexible Participation. Partnership
programs for joint access to information
could include a range of potential
partnerships; from SERC and LEPC, or
LEPC and fire departments for a
particular emergency planning district,
to statewide partnerships that include
the SERC, and all LEPCs and fire
departments.
• Information Management Systems
that Streamline Reporting and Maintain
Community Access. Whatever the scope
of the partnership, it should involve a
system that allows for a single
streamlined submission of EPCRA
MSDS and Tier I information, that must
be jointly and timely received by all
members of the partnership, and that
provides all partners unrestricted access
to the EPCRA information (although a
separate submission would need be
made to an entity not included in the
partnership). An example is submission
of EPCRA information, by the
compliance deadlines, to a joint,
centralized electronic database that all
partners can access without restriction.
(Under EPCRA, the owner or operator of
a covered facility would have to make
a separate submission to any SERC,
LEPC or fire department not included in
the partnership.)
• Written Formation and Public
Notice of Partnership Programs for Joint
Access to Information. EPA believes
there are clear advantages for the
formation of partnership programs
through a written instrument that
describes relative roles and
responsibilities under the partnership.
The formation of a partnership should
be announced to the public to promote
awareness by regulated facilities and the
affected community.
Because EPA's draft guidance
addresses reporting under EPCRA, EPA
is designing it to conform to the Federal
requirements only. The draft guidance
does not address any additional State or
local reporting requirements. However,
if desired, State and local officials could
incorporate or expand partnerships to
address additional State or local
requirements. For example, where State
law requires the routine submittal of
Tier II information (instead of Tier I
information) to all three entities, the
partnership program could be designed
to encompass Tier II information. In this
particular example, the annual
submittal of Tier II information could
satisfy the EPCRA requirement for
annual submittal of Tier I information,
in addition to addressing State and local
requirements, so long as the Tier II
information is timely received by the
SERC, the LEPC and fire department.
EPA seeks public input on a number
of issues related to this draft guidance,
including the following:
• Whether SERCs, LEPCs and fire
departments would be interested in
forming partnership programs for joint
access to information; whether these
entities currently have the tools to form
such partnerships; what implementation
obstacles are anticipated; and how EPA
could reduce any administrative burden
associated with developing and
implementing such partnerships. EPA
would also like to know whether any
State is interested in piloting a
partnership program, to promote
streamlined submission of EPCRA
information.
• Whether the proposed core
elements of the guidance are sensible.
Also, whether EPA has overlooked any
specific concerns, and any suggestions
on ways the draft guidance should be
revised.
• How the draft streamlined submittal
guidance described here should be
implemented in conjunction with the
guidance for electronic submittal of
EPCRA sections 311 and 312
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, ,1998/Proposed Rules
31289
information (see part V.A.3 in this
document), and what potential obstacles
are presented by the use of electronic
means to streamline submittal of
information.
• EPA understands that some SERCs,
LEPCs and fire departments are
currently using electronic means to
obtain and store reporting data that is
required under EPCRA sections 311 and
312 and the implementing regulations.
EPA is interested in comments
concerning the various software
programs used, and any pitfalls
encountered. EPA is interested in how
State and local experience might inform
EPA's guidance.
• What other information systems, in
addition to electronic databases, could
be established through which a
submission to a central database could
be timely and jointly received by the
SERC, the LEPC and fire department.
• Whether the partnership programs
for joint access to information should be
formed through an MOU or other
written document. Also, how EPA could
minimize the burden on SERCs, LEPCs
and fire departments of developing
MOUs. If MOUs or other written
documents are not used to establish
partnerships, how should partnerships
be created?
• As discussed above, EPA suggests
that partnerships may vary in scope-
that is, a partnership could be between
a SERC and LEPC for a single emergency
planning district, or might encompass a
statewide database. EPA seeks comment
on whether the Agency should in any
way restrict participation in
partnerships.
• What technical database
management issues are raised by the
draft guidance, and how could such
issues be addressed?
In addition, EPA seeks public input
on any other suggestions and concerns
regarding the draft guidance.
3. Electronic Submittal for EPCRA
Sections 311 and 312 Reporting
EPA is considering the development
of guidance on electronic submittal to
satisfy sections 311 and 312 reporting.
As noted, EPA's existing regulations
give State and locals broad discretion to
determine the reporting format for
section 312 information. Likewise,
under EPA's draft guidance on
electronic submittal, States would
continue to be able to develop their own
format for electronically submitted
section 312 reporting data, as long as the
information includes the information
required by the statute and its
implementing regulations. Tier I
information is the minimum
information required under EPCRA
section 312 and the regulations. Tier II
information, which is more detailed, is
required under some State laws and
must be provided upon request under
EPCRA. EPA's regulations require
section 312 reporting information to be
certified by the facility owner or
operator, or an official designated
representative, as to its accuracy and
completeness. This requirement applies
to section 312 reporting information
regardless of the format in which it is
submitted, and would apply to
electronic submittal. Section 311 and
the implementing regulations require
submission of an MSDS or a list of
hazardous chemicals. If an electronic
MSDS is developed such that it fits the
requirements for MSDS development
found at 29 CFR 1910.1200(g), that
MSDS could be submitted
electronically. EPA's existing
regulations don't specify a format for
submission of a list of hazardous
chemicals under EPCRA section 311.
Such a list could be submitted
electronically.
If States and locals allow section 312
reporting information to be submitted
via the Internet, it will be necessary for
the facility owner or operator or its
officially designated representative to
certify the information submitted. A
number of Federal agencies, including
EPA, have been striving to develop
methods for certification of
electronically submitted data. This is a
difficult issue, and EPA has not yet
resolved it. One option EPA is
considering is for the facility owner or
operator to mail a signed certification
statement to the SERC, or to all three
entities, for data that has been submitted
electronically. It would be necessary to
establish a precise correspondence
between the data submitted
electronically, and the certification
statement submitted by mail. EPA seeks
comments on ideas for establishing such
a correspondence.
One way to solve the problem of
certification of electronically submitted
section 312 data is for the data be
submitted on a diskette, along with a
signed certification statement. The data
would be submitted in an electronic
format, but would not be transmitted via
the Internet. This may reduce some of
the current data management burden on
regulated facilities, and on SERCs,
LEPCs and fire departments that receive
EPCRA section 312 information. EPA
believes that some States may currently
accept section 312 data on diskette
(with signed certification on paper), and
seeks comments on the feasibility and
effectiveness of this reporting option.
Under EPCRA the requirements for
Tier II information include providing
the locations of specific chemicals
present at a facility. At the same time,
EPCRA provides that a facility may
request that the SERC or LEPC not
disclose confidential location
information to the public, for a specific
chemical. Under the current regulations
a facility may choose to report
confidential location information, with
respect to a specific chemical, on a Tier
II Confidential Location Information
Sheet, which must be attached to the
other Tier II information being reported.
In this way, the SERC, the LEPC and the
fire department receive the location
information but can readily recognize
and separate it in responding to a public
request for Tier II information. If EPA
develops guidance on electronic
submittal for sections 311 and 312
reporting it will be necessary to address
issues relating to submission of
confidential location information. EPA
seeks comments regarding submission
of confidential location information
electronically.
The requirements for section 312 Tier
II information include providing the
names of specific chemicals present at
a facility; however, the facility may
withhold this information from
reporting if it claims the information as
a trade secret. In addition, the facility
may withhold chemical identities from
the MSDS or list of chemicals required
under section 311, if claimed as trade
secret. Although trade secret
information may be withheld from the
SERC, the LEPC and the fire
department, it must be submitted to
EPA, along with a substantiation. Forms
for trade secrecy claims are available on
the CEPPO Internet site (www.epa.gov/
ceppo), and EPA's final rule on trade
secrecy (53 FR 28772, July 29, 1988)
contains detailed information on how to
submit trade secrecy claims. While EPA
is exploring, in today's document,
development of guidance for electronic
submittal of sections 311 and 312
information to SERCs, LEPCs and fire
departments, EPA is not considering
receiving trade secrecy information
electronically. EPA currendy believes
that the small number of trade secrecy
claims that EPA receives for sections
311 and 312 information would not
justify the development of a system for
electronic submittal of such claims.
EPA is seeking public comments on
the development of electronic submittal
guidance for sections 311 and 312
reporting, including ideas for
certification of electronically submitted
data. EPA is interested in public
comment regarding any other issues or
concerns that may not have been
discussed here, but that need to be
considered in developing electronic
-------
31290
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
submittal guidance. EPA is particularly
interested in responses from States,
LEPCs and fire departments regarding
their capabilities for receiving and
processing electronically submitted
sections 311 and 312 information.
4. Incorporation of Previous
Submissions Into EPCRA Section 312
Reporting
Section 312(a) (1) and (2) of EPCRA
mandate that the owner or operator of
any facility that is required to prepare
or have available an MSDS for a
hazardous chemical under OSHA
prepare and submit an inventory form
containing Tier I information annually.
Under EPCRA and the existing
regulations, facility owners or operators
are obliged to report all of the inventory
information required under section 312
each year. The Tier I information is the
minimum routinely required by the
statute and regulations. Some States
have imposed stricter reporting
requirements under State and local law.
in some cases, a facility may find that
some or all of the information from
previous year's Tier I submission has
not changed. EPA is considering
developing guidance to help reduce the
burden of re-creating information that
has not changed from the previous year.
In order for the statutory and regulatory
information requirements to be satisfied,
any option must ensure that the SERC,
LEPC and local fire department have
complete, up-to-date, section 312
inventory information by the reporting
deadline each year. One option would
be for the facility to simply reference
and attach a copy of the unchanged
information from the previous year's
submittal to the current year's Tier I
submission. This would mean that the
facility would have to retain a copy of
its previous submission.
A second option would be for the
facility to reference previous submittals
retained by the SERC, LEPC, and local
fire department. However, if facilities
are to submit only their changes each
year, then SERCs, LEPCs, and fire
departments receiving such reports need
to have retained inventory information
from prior year(s), in order to have
complete, up-to-date information. In
addition, facilities would need to
accompany such a submission with a
statement that the section 312 Tier I (or
Tier II) information reported the prior
year is "incorporated by reference" in
the new submission.
All of the section 312 information is
necessary for emergency planning and
community right-to-know purposes.
Thus, allowing facilities to report under
this second option would only be
feasible in cases where the SERC, LEPC
and local fire department have
maintained the reporting information
from prior year(s) such that they
continue to have access to all of the
information required under section 312.
This second reporting option would be
limited to those facilities where the
SERC, LEPC and fire department
establish a policy to retain the necessary
section 312 information from year to
year, and seeks comments concerning
this issue. Further, EPA believes that
SERCs, LEPCs and fire departments that
choose to implement incorporation of
prior submissions by reference should
communicate to potentially regulated
facilities, that this second reporting
option is available.
Under the second reporting option,
EPA would consider submission of a
statement of the changes in inventory
information (or a statement that there
are no changes to report), accompanied
by a statement that the information
submitted in the previous year's Tier I
(or Tier II) report is "incorporated by
reference" in the new report, to
constitute submission of a Tier I
"inventory form" as required by statute.
A facility that made such a submission
would be in compliance with the
requirement to report Tier I inventory
information under section 312 of
EPCRA, provided that upon receipt of
such a submission, the net result is that
the SERC, LEPC and fire department
had all of the Tier I inventory
information required under EPCRA
section 312 and the implementing
regulations. (However, this may not
meet State or local laws with more
stringent reporting requirements.)
The information required under
section 312 and the implementing
regulations consists of a variety of data
elements beyond the quantities of
hazardous chemicals on site, such as the
number of days that a chemical was on
site, the general location of a chemical
within the facility, and an emergency
contact person for the facility. It would
be necessary to consider each of the data
elements required under the statute and
implementing regulations, before
reporting the changes in information (or
that there were no changes), in order to
use this reporting method.
If either option were implemented,
public access to the Tier II reporting
information required under section 312
and the implementing regulations
would be preserved, because the
public's right to request Tier II
information would not be affected and
facility owners or operators would still
be required to submit Tier II information
upon request of the SERC, LEPC or local
fire department. In addition, States and
local governments can always choose to
establish stricter reporting requirements
under State or local law.
Either reporting option would reduce
the reporting burden for many regulated
facilities, since much of the required
information wouldn't typically change
from year to year. The burden imposed
on SERCs, LEPCs and fire departments
may increase under the second option,
however, because it would be necessary
for these entities to retain reporting
information from previous year(s) and to
manage or read together more than a
single report to comprehend a facility's
reported information. If SERCs, LEPCs
or fire departments indicate to regulated
facilities that it is only necessary to
report changes in section 312
information,.and then these entities fail
to establish a policy for keeping
previous year's submissions, necessary
inventory information may become less
readily available to local emergency
officials and the public.
EPA's regulations require the Tier I
(or Tier II) information submitted under
section 312 of EPCRA to be certified by
the facility owner or operator, or an
official designated representative, as to
its accuracy and completeness. The
certification must be accompanied by an
original signature. By certifying the
accuracy and completeness of a
submission that attaches or incorporates
previous reports, the certifying
individual would be assuming full
responsibility for the accuracy and
completeness of the entire current
submission, including any information
attached or incorporated by reference
from a previous report. The certifying
individual couldn't disclaim
responsibility for inaccurate information
that was attached or incorporated from
previous reports. EPA seeks comments
regarding certification of a section 312
Tier I (or Tier II) submission that
attaches or incorporates by reference
prior section 312 reports.
EPCRA section 312 and the
implementing regulations require
submission of an inventory form
containing, at a minimum, Tier I
information. Although EPA publishes
uniform federal formats for reporting
(the Tier I and Tier II forms), State or
local forms containing the same
information as the uniform federal
forms are acceptable for reporting
inventory information. This flexibility is
provided in sections 370.40 and 370.41
in the existing rule. Section 370.40 in
today's proposed rule likewise provides
that State or local formats containing at
least the Tier I information are
acceptable. The reporting requirements
concern the specific information to be
reported, not the form itself. EPA
believes that a report stating any
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998 /Proposed Rules
31291
changes in information, and attaching or
incorporating by reference information
previously submitted, could constitute
an "inventory form." EPA also believes
that, provided that such a report
contains, attaches, or incorporates at
least the Tier I information, the statutory
and regulatory requirements regarding
the contents of an inventory form would
be met. In EPA's judgement, the SERC,
LEPC and fire department could
implement either reporting option
without a change to the federal EPCRA
regulations.
In considering these reporting
options, EPA's intent is to balance the
amount of information generated under
section 312 and the value of that
information, with the costs of providing
and managing the information. EPA is
soliciting comments as to whether these
reporting options are feasible,
particularly the second option. In
addition, EPA seeks public comment on
whether the Agency should develop
regulations to support or control either
of these reporting options. EPA
particularly seeks input from SERCs,
LEPCs and fire departments about
administrative and implementation
issues or concerns, associated with the
second option.
B. Electronic Access to Facilities'
Databases ofMSDSs
EPA believes that some facilities
maintain an electronic database of
MSDSs. EPA is exploring the possibility
of allowing a facility to meet the
requirement under EPCRA section 311
for submitting MSDSs by giving the
SERC, LEPC, and local fire department
electronic access to the facility's
database ofMSDSs, instead of actually
submitting the MSDSs to each of the
three entities. EPA is not advancing this
reporting option at this time, but is
seeking comment on the feasibility of
such an option. This reporting option
raises several concerns. It would be
necessary to ensure that the SERC, LEPC
or local fire department had the
capabilities to access such a database at
any time, to ensure the required
information was clearly delineated and
readily accessible, and to ensure that
access was uninterrupted, even in the
event of an emergency situation. While
this option would reduce the burden on
regulated facilities, it could increase the
burden on the SERC, LEPC, or local fire
department. EPA seeks comments on
how this option would increase or
decrease the burden on SERCs, LEPCs,
and fire departments. EPA also seeks
comment on whether facilities allowing
access to an electronic database of
MSDSs could constitute submission of
an MSDS, as required under EPCRA
section 311 (a)(1).
C. Interpretation of the Hazardous
Chemical Exemption for Solids Under
EPCRA Section 311(e)(2)
EPA is considering interpreting the
exemption for hazardous chemicals
found at EPCRA section 311 (e) (2) so that
only the amount of fume or dust given
off a piece of metal (or other
manufactured solid) that is being
modified be subject to EPCRA sections
311 and 312 and applied toward
threshold determination.
Under EPCRA section 311(e)(2), "Any
substance present as a solid in any
manufactured item to the extent
exposure to the substance does not
occur under normal conditions of use''
is exempt from the definition of
hazardous chemical and therefore need
not be reported under sections 311 and
312. EPA's interpretation of this
exemption has been that portions of
metal stock that are modified such that
exposure to a hazardous chemical can
occur should be counted to determine
the quantity present for threshold
purposes. For example, if there are
10,000 pounds of steel undergoing a
welding process at a facility at any one
time, then 10,000 pounds would need
be counted toward the quantity for
threshold determination.
EPA believes that the current
interpretation of this exemption
occasionally requires reporting of
information that is unnecessary for
emergency planning and community
right-to-know purposes. Refining this
interpretation would relieve facilities
from reporting that unnecessary
information. Under this approach, the
facility owner or operator would need to
quantify the amount of fume or dust
given off during a modification process,
in order to apply that amount toward
threshold determination.
EPA's intention is to interpret this
exemption in a reasonable manner, one
that provides a balance between the
amount of information required to be
reported, and the usefulness of the
information for the protection of public
health and the environment. EPA
requests comments concerning whether
it should revise its guidance on the
meaning of this exemption and, if so,
whether the alternative interpretation
described above is sensible.
EPA would also like to clarify that,
under any of the interpretations of this
exemption being considered, stamping a
piece of sheet metal doesn't negate the
exemption for that piece of metal; the
piece of metal would still qualify for the
exemption. EPA believes that the
stamping of sheet metal does not
present exposure to a hazardous
chemical.
EPA also seeks to clarify that bricks
generally need not be reported under
sections 311 and 312, provided that they
are being neither manufactured nor
modified, because they fall under the
exemption at EPCRA section 311 (e) (2).
However, if a brick undergoes a
modification process (for example
cutting) such that exposure to a
hazardous chemical can occur, then
under the current interpretation, the
brick would no longer be exempt; and
under the alternative interpretation
under consideration, that portion of the
brick released as fume or dust would no
longer be exempt, but the remainder of
the brick would be exempt.
D. EPCRA Section 312 Reporting to
Fulfill Reporting Requirements Under
Section 311
EPA is considering guidance that
addresses how facilities may use section
312 reporting to fulfill the reporting
requirements under section 311,
provided that the reporting conforms to
the required time frame and that Tier II
information is reported. The
information and timing requirements
are discussed below.
Section 312 reporting can only be
used to fulfill section 311 reporting if
the section 312 report contains all of the
information required under section 311.
Section 311 permits the choice of
submitting either an MSDS for each
hazardous chemical being reported, or a
list of such chemicals grouped by
hazard categories. Under section 312, a
regulated facility may choose to submit
Tier I information or Tier II information;
some States may require Tier II
information. Tier II information
includes all of the data required under
section 311. Tier II information requires
the reporting of hazardous chemicals,
with an indication of which hazard
categories apply to each chemical being
reported. In short, Tier II information
constitutes a list of hazardous chemicals
identified by hazard category, consistent
with section 311.
In addition, section 312 and its
implementing regulations require
reporting Tier I information by March 1
of each year for which hazardous
chemicals were present at a facility
during the preceding year, and Tier II
information within 30 days of a request
from the SERC, the LEPC or the fire
department. Section 311 and its
implementing regulations require
reporting within 3 months after
becoming subject to the reporting
requirements, or within 3 months after
discovery of significant new information
concerning a hazardous chemical that
-------
31292
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
has already been reported, or within 30
days of a request from the SERC, LEPC
or the fire department. For any given
year, a section 312 submission may be
made between January 1 and March 1 of
the following year. Section 312
reporting could be used to meet section
311 reporting for only those facilities
that become subject to reporting under
section 311, or discover significant new
information concerning a hazardous
chemical, between October 1 and
December 31 of any given calendar year.
Both sections 311 and 312 require
submission of reporting information to
the SERC, the LEPC and the fire
department with jurisdiction over the
facility, so allowing section 312
reporting to meet section 311 reporting
requirements does not create any
difficulties concerning recipients of the
information.
EPA seeks comments from regulated
facilities, SERCs, LEPCs, and local fire
departments regarding the usefulness of
guidance on this reporting option, and
any difficulties that may have been
encountered in the past that might be
relevant.
E. Emergency Planning Notification
Section 355.20 in today's proposed
rule provides requirements for
emergency planning notification. That
section is based on section 355.30 of the
existing regulations, and indicates that
notice of any changes relevant to
emergency planning, and any
information requested by the LEPC that
is necessary for developing or
implementing the local emergency plan,
must be submitted promptly to the
SERC and the LEPC. EPA is taking this
opportunity to consider guidance on the
meaning of "promptly." EPA does not
intend to define the term "promptly,"
however, EPA believes that 10 to 20
working days is generally a reasonable
amount of time to provide such notice.
EPA requests public comment on this
potential guidance.
F. Emergency Release Notification
Section 355.40 in today's proposed
rule provides requirements for
emergency release notification. That
section is based on section 355.40 of the
existing regulations, and indicates that a
written follow-up emergency notice is to
be provided as soon as practicable after
a release. EPA is taking this opportunity
to consider guidance on the meaning of
"as soon as practicable." EPA does not
intend to define the phrase "as soon as
practicable'—the amount of time
required to provide a written follow-up
notice will depend on the specific
circumstances of an incident. However,
EPA believes that it should be
practicable to provide such notice in no
more than 30 days (although, depending
on the circumstances, more or less time
may be appropriate for the written
follow-up notification). EPA requests
public comment on this potential
guidance.
VI. What Else Is Different About This
Rule?
A. Plain English Format
EPA is proposing today to rewrite and
reorganize all of parts 355 and 370,
which cover requirements for
emergency planning and release
notification and hazardous chemical
community right-to-know reporting, to
make them clearer and easier to use.
These changes are proposed as part of
the Agency's ongoing efforts at
regulatory reinvention. Although the
format has changed as a result of
rewriting the regulatory text in "plain
English," the only substantive
regulatory changes that EPA is
proposing are those discussed above,
under the heading What Regulatory
Changes is EPA Proposing in This Rule?
EPA is not intending to revise, reopen
or reconsider the merits of any other
aspects of the existing regulatory
requirements at 40 CFR parts 355 and
370. In today's document EPA is also
exploring the development of guidance
on the implementation of existing
statutory and regulatory requirements,
as discussed under the heading What
Draft Guidance is EPA Publishing in
This Preamble? Any previous policy
statements, interpretations, or guidance
issued by EPA concerning the existing
requirements under parts 355 and 370
would not be changed by today's
document, except for the specific
guidance EPA has described in this
document.
EPA is seeking comments concerning
whether the plain English format that is
proposed in today's rulemaking is, in
fact, clearer and easier to use than the
existing regulatory text. EPA requests
suggestions for improving the
readability of the rule. EPA also is
requesting comments on whether any
unintended substantive changes have
been made as a result of rewriting the
regulatory text in plain English.
Comments are requested concerning all
issues and options regarding the specific
substantive regulatory changes that are
discussed in this preamble. However,
the regulations at 40 CFR parts 355 and
370 have been in effect for many years
and EPA is not soliciting comments on
any other aspects regarding the merits of
those regulations in today's rulemaking.
One of the proposed changes to parts
355 and 370 is to use tables to
reorganize and clarify some of the
requirements. In particular, sections
355.20, 355.60 and 370.14 of today's
proposed rule each contain tables. EPA
is interested in public comment on the
usefulness of the proposed tables. Note
that ellipses are used in the proposed
tables to help the reader walk through
the tables, and do not reflect the
omission of any text. Ellipses used in
the body of a table indicate that the
rows contain sentences to be read across
the table from left to right. Ellipses used
in the heading of a table indicate the
continuation of a concept in the rows
below.
It is important to understand that all
of the requirements found in today's
proposed regulations, including those
set forth in table format, constitute
binding, enforceable legal requirements.
The plain English format used in today's
proposed regulations may appear
different from other rules, but it
establishes binding, enforceable legal
requirements like those in the existing
regulations at 40 CFR parts 355 and 370.
Note, however, that EPA has added
some non-binding guidance in today's
proposed regulations in the form of
notes. Such notes are indicated in the
regulations by the word "note" and a
smaller typeface (see, for example, the
note at the end of proposed paragraph
355.40(b)). These notes are intended to
improve understanding of the regulatory
requirements, but are not binding under
EPCRA. Proposed sections 355.1 and
370.1 explain that the notes are
considered non-binding guidance.
B. Conversion Table
In an effort to make the requirements
clearer and easier to use, the existing
parts 355 and 370 have been
reorganized. The conversion table below
will help you to determine where the
various sections of the existing
regulations are located in today's
proposed rule:
Existing section
355 10
355.20
355 1
355.61
Proposed section(s)
Comment
Definitions for parts 355 and 370 were consolidated.
-------
Federal Register /Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31293
Existing section
355.30 ....
355.40
355.50
370.1
370.2
370.5
370.20
370.21
370.25
370.28
370.30
370.31
370.40
370.41
Proposed section(s)
355.10, 355.11, 355.12, 355.13, 35514 35515
355.16,355.20.
355.30, 355.31, 355.32, 355.33, 355.40, 355.42
355.43, 355.60.
355.2
355.3
355.21
355.41
370.1
355.61,370.13
370.10, 370.12, 370.20 37030 37033 37040
370.45.
370 10 370 30 370 31 370 32 370 33 370 62
370.10, 370.40, 370.44, 370.45, 370.62, 370.65.
370.14.
370.10, 370.60, 370.61, 370.62, 370.63.
370.63, 370.64
370.40, 370.41, 370.43
370.40, 370.42, 370.43, 370.64
370.2
370.3
370.11
Comment
Penalty provisions were removed from the regulation*
penalties continue to apply under statutory authority.
New section
New section.
New section
New section.
Definitions for parts 355 and 370 were consolidated; ex-
ceptions to the definition of hazardous chemical were
also placed in section 370.13.
Penalty provisions were removed from the regulation*
penalties continue to apply under statutory authority.
Tier I form and instructions were removed
Tier II form and instructions were removed.
New section
New section.
New section.
VII. Where Are SERCs and LEPCs
Listed?
You may access a database of SERCs
and LEPCs by visiting the CEPPO
Internet site, at www.epa.gov/ceppo.
The database provides the most up-to-
date information that EPA has regarding
contacts, phone numbers and addresses
for SERCs and LEPCs. This information
is subject to change, however. You may
also contact the Hotline for information
regarding SERCs, and your SERC should
be able to direct you to your LEPC.
Hotline phone numbers are listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section. EPA is providing this
information here in an effort to ease
compliance with the regulations at 40
CFR parts 355 and 370.
VIII. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order No. 12866
Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993) the Agency
must determine whether the regulatory
action is "significant" and therefore
subject to Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) review and the
requirements of the Executive Order.
The Order defines "significant
regulatory action" as one that is likely
to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive
Order 12866, OMB has notified EPA
that it considers this a "significant
regulatory action" within the meaning
of the Executive Order. This proposed
rule is considered significant because it
advances novel policy issues. Thus,
EPA has submitted this action to OMB
for review. The draft of this proposed
rulemaking document submitted to
OMB for review, related documents, and
changes made in response to OMB
suggestions or recommendations will be
documented in the public record and
made available for public inspection at
EPA's CERCLA Docket Office (Docket
No. 300RR-IF-1).
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the" Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 etseq., as amended by
the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, or
SBREFA) whenever an agency is
required to publish a notice of
rulemaking for any proposed or final
rule, it must prepare and make available
for public comment a regulatory
flexibility analysis that describes the
effect of the rule on small entities (i.e.,
small businesses, small organizations,
and small governmental jurisdictions).
This analysis is unnecessary, however,
if the agency's administrator certifies
that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
EPA has examined this rule's
potential effects on small entities as
required by the Regulatory Flexibility
Act and has determined that this action
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule would reduce
regulatory burdens for small entities.
The overall economic effect of this
regulation has been estimated to equate
to 588,054 hours of burden reduction
(with no added burden) at a total cost
saving of approximately $ 16 million per
year to all regulated entities. Therefore,
this regulation will result in a cost
savings. Accordingly, the Agency
certifies that the rule, will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule, therefore, does not require a
regulatory flexibility analysis.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection analysis
for this proposed rule has been
submitted for approval to OMB under
the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
3501 etseq. An Information Collection
-------
31294
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
Request (ICR) document has been
prepared by EPA (ICR No. 1352.05) and
a copy may be obtained from Sandy
Farmer by mail at OPPE Regulatory
Information Division; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(2137); 401 M St.. SW; Washington, DC
20460. by email at
farmer.sandy@epamail.epa.gov. or by
calling (202) 260-2740. A copy may also
be downloaded off the Internet at http:/
/www.epa.gov/icr.
EPA currently has an approved ICR
(ICR No. 1395.03) of 965,982 hours for
the existing EPCRA sections 302, 303
and 304 (40 CFR part 355) reporting
requirements, based on 106,400 annual
responses, averaging 20.75 hours per
response for newly regulated facilities,
11.5 hours for existing facilities, and
approximately 5 hours for emergency
release notification requirements with
no annual record keeping burden hours.
Also, EPA currently has an approved
ICR (ICR No. 1352.04) of 2,963,209
hours for the existing EPCRA sections
311 and 312 reporting requirements (40
CFR part 370), based on 868,527 annual
responses, averaging 3.1 hours per
response with no annual record keeping
burden hours. Burden means the total
time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate,
maintain, retain, or disclose or provide
information to or for a Federal agency.
This includes the time needed to review
instructions; develop, acquire, install,
and utilize technology and systems for
the purposes of collecting, validating,
and verifying information, processing
and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with
any previously applicable instructions
and requirements; train personnel to be
able to respond to a collection of
information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of
information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
As part of the President's program for
reinventing government and reforming
regulatory policy, EPA is proposing to
relax the reporting burden imposed by
the EPCRA regulations at 40 CFR parts
355 and 370. EPA anticipates that
today's proposed rulemaking will
reduce the burden for part 370 from
2,963.209 hours to 2,375.155 hours, for
a reduction of 588,054 hours under ICR
No. 1352.04. This translates into an
estimated cost savings of over $16
million.
An Agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control
numbers for EPA's regulations are listed
in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter
15.
Comments are requested on the
Agency's need for this information, the
accuracy of the provided burden
reduction estimates, and any suggested
methods for further minimizing
respondent burden, including through
the use of automated collection
techniques. Send comments on the ICR
to the Director, OPPE Regulatory
Information Division; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(2137); 401 M St., SW; Washington, DC
20460; and to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th St.,
NW, Washington, DC 20503, marked
"Attention: Desk Officer for EPA."
Include the ICR number in any
correspondence. Since OMB is required
to make a decision concerning the ICR
between 30 and 60 days after June 8,
1998, a comment to OMB is best assured
of having its full effect if OMB receives
it by July 8, 1998. The final rule will
respond to any OMB or public
comments on the information collection
requirements contained in this proposal.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. L.
104-4, establishes requirements for
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local,
and tribal governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
EPA generally must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules
with "Federal mandates" that may
result in expenditures to State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or to the private sector, of $100 million
or more in any one year. Before
promulgating an EPA rule for which a
written statement is needed, section 205
of the UMRA generally requires EPA to
identify and consider a reasonable
number of regulatory alternatives and
adopt the least costly, most cost-
effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule.
The provisions of section 205 do not
apply when they are inconsistent with
applicable law. Moreover, section 205
allows EPA to adopt an alternative other
than the least-costly, most cost-effective
or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final
rule an explanation why that alternative
was not adopted. Before EPA establishes
any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal
governments, it must have developed
under section 203 of the UMRA a small
government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially
affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments
to have meaningful and timely input in
the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
EPA has determined that this rule
does not contain a Federal mandate that
may result in expenditures of $100
million or more for State, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
the private sector in any one year. This
rule is intended to provide burden
relief, and doesn't impose additional
costs to State, local, or tribal
governments, or to the private sector.
Thus, today's rule is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of
the UMRA.
EPA also has determined that this rule
contains no regulatory requirements that
might significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The intent of this
rule is to provide burden relief to
regulated entities, including small
governments.
E. Environmental Justice
Executive Order 12898 requires that
each Federal agency make achieving
environmental justice part of its mission
by identifying and addressing, as
appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of its programs,
policies, and activities on minorities
and low-income populations. By
proposing to rewrite the regulations at
40 CFR parts 355 and 370 in plain
English, EPA intends to make the rule
clearer and more easy to use, which may
decrease the costs of compliance and
also promote more meaningful public
participation under EPCRA. This will
benefit all of the public, including
minorities and low-income populations.
F. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Pub. L. No. 104-
113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note),
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, business
practices, etc.) That are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. The NTTAA requires
EPA to provide Congress, through OMB,
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31295
explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable
voluntary consensus standards.
EPA is not proposing any new test
methods or other technical standards as
part of today's rule, which proposes
revisions to the regulations
implementing the emergency planning
and release notification and hazardous
chemical community right-to-know
requirements under EPCRA. Thus, the
Agency does not need to consider the
use of voluntary consensus standards in
developing this proposed rule. EPA
invites public comment on this analysis.
G. Executive Order 13045
The Executive Order 13045, entitled
"Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks" (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),
applies to any rule that EPA determines
(1) "economically significant" as
defined under Executive Order 12866,
and (2) the environmental health or
safety risk addressed by the rule has a
disproportionate effect on children. If
the regulatory action meets both criteria,
the Agency must evaluate the
environmental health or safety effects of
the planned rule on children; and
explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective
and reasonably feasible alternatives
considered by the Agency. This
proposed rule is not subject to E.O.
13045 because a) this is not an
economically significant regulatory
action as defined by E.O. 12866 and b)
the environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action do not have a
disproportionate effect on children.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 355 and
370
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Chemical accident
prevention, Chemical emergency
preparedness, Chemicals, Community
emergency response plan, Community
right-to-know, Contingency planning,
Disaster assistance, Emergency planning
and community right-to-know act,
Hazardous substances,
Intergovernmental relations, Natural
resources, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Threshold planning
quantity, Water pollution control, Water
supply.
Dated: May 21, 1998.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble the Environmental Protection
Agency proposes to revise 40 CFR parts
355 and 370 as follows:
PART 355—EMERGENCY PLANNING
AND NOTIFICATION
Subpart A—General Information
Sec.
355.1 What is the purpose of this part?
355.2 Who do "you," "I," and "your" refer
to in this part?
355.3 Which section contains the
definitions of the key words used in this
part?
Subpart B—Emergency Planning
Who Must Comply
355.10 Must my facility comply with the
emergency planning requirements of this
subpart?
355.11 To what substances do the
emergency planning requirements of this
subpart apply?
355.12 What quantities of extremely
hazardous substances trigger emergency
planning requirements?
355.13 How do I calculate the quantity of
extremely hazardous substances present
in mixtures?
355.14 Do I have to aggregate extremely
hazardous substances to determine
quantities present?
355.15 Which threshold planning quantity
do I use for extremely hazardous
substances present at my facility in solid
form?
355.16 How do I determine the quantity of
extremely hazardous substances present
for certain forms of solids?
How To Comply
355.20 If this subpart applies to my facility,
what information must I provide, who
must I submit it to, and when is it due?
355.21 What format should the information
be in?
Subpart C—Emergency Release
Notification
Who Must Comply
355.30 What facilities must comply with
the emergency release notification
requirements of this subpart?
355.31 What types of releases are exempt
from the emergency release notification
requirements of this subpart?
355.32 Which emergency release
notification requirements apply to
continuous releases?
355.33 Release of what quantities of EHSs
and CERCLA hazardous substances
trigger the emergency release notification
requirements of this subpart?
How To Comply
355.40 What information must I provide?
355.41 What format should the information
be in?
355.42 To whom must I submit the
information?
355.43 When must I submit the
information?
Subpart D—Additional Provisions
355.60 What is the relationship between the
emergency release notification
requirements of this part and the release
notification requirements of CERCLA?
355.61 How are key words in this part
defined?
Appendix A to Part 355—The List of
Extremely Hazardous Substances and Their
Threshold Planning Quantities (Alphabetical
Order)
Appendix B to Part 355—The List of
Extremely Hazardous Substances and Their
Threshold Planning Quantities (CAS
Number Order)
Authority: Sections 302, 303, 304, 325,
327, 328, and 329 of the Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986
(EPCRA) (42U.S.C. 11002, 11003, 11004,
11045, 11047, 11048, and 11049).
Subpart A—General Information
§ 355.1 What is the purpose of this part?
(a) This part (40 CFR part 355)
establishes requirements for a facility to
provide information necessary for
developing and implementing State and
local chemical emergency response
plans, and requirements for emergency
notification of chemical releases. This
part also lists Extremely Hazardous
Substances (EHSs) and Threshold
Planning Quantities (TPQs) in
appendices A and B, which are used in
determining if you are subject to these
requirements.
(b) This part is written in a special
format to make it easier to understand
the regulatory requirements. Like other
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
regulations, this part establishes
enforceable legal requirements.
Information considered non-binding
guidance under EPCRA is indicated in
this regulation by the word "note" and
a smaller typeface. Such notes are
provided for information purposes only
and are not considered legally binding
under this part.
§ 355.2 Who do "you," "I," and "your"
refer to in this part?
Throughout this part, "you," "I,"and
"your" refer to the owner or operator of
a facility.
§355.3 Which section contains the
definitions of the key words used in this
part?
The definitions of key words used in
this part are in § 355.62. It is important
to read the definitions for key words
because the definition explains the
word's specific meaning in the
regulations in this part. When a defined
word first appears in this part, it is
printed with the initial letter
capitalized.
-------
31296
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
Subpart B—Emergency Planning
Who Must Comply
§ 355.10 Must my facility comply with the
emergency planning requirements of this
subpart?
You must comply with the emergency
planning requirements in this subpart if
your facility meets either of the
following two conditions:
(a) Any extremely hazardous
substance (EHS) is present at your
facility in an amount equal to or greater
than its threshold planning quantity
CTPQ).or
(b) Your facility has been designated
for emergency planning purposes, after
public notice and opportunity for
comment, by one of the following three
entities:
(1) The State Emergency Response
Commission (SERC). SERC means the
emergency response commission for the
State in which the facility is located
except where the facility is located in
Indian Country, in which case, SERC
means the emergency response
commission for the Indian Tribe under
whose jurisdiction the facility is
located.
(2) The Governor of the State in which
your facility is located.
(3) The Chief Executive Officer of the
Tribe for the Indian Tribe under whose
jurisdiction your facility is located.
§ 355.11 To what substances do the
emergency planning requirements of this
subpart apply?
The emergency planning
requirements of this subpart apply to
any extremely hazardous substance
(EHS). EHSs are listed in appendices A
and B of this part. If a facility is
designated for emergency planning
purposes, as provided in § 355.10(b) of
this subpart, substances that are not
EHSs may become subject to the
emergency planning requirements of
this subpart.
§ 355.12 What quantities of extremely
hazardous substances trigger emergency
planning requirements?
Any EHS present at your facility in an
amount equal to or greater than its
threshold planning quantity triggers the
emergency planning requirements of
this subpart. The threshold planning
quantities are listed in appendices A
and B of this part, in the column labeled
"threshold planning quantity."
§ 355.13 How do I calculate the quantity of
extremely hazardous substances present in
mixtures?
If an EHS is present in a Mixture in
a particular container, then determine
the actual quantity of EHS in that
container as follows: multiply the
concentration of EHS (in weight
percent) by the weight (in pounds) of
mixture in the container. If the
concentration of an EHS is less than or
equal to one percent, you do not have
to count that EHS present in the
mixture. The following example
illustrates the provisions of this
paragraph:
Example
If you have 150 pounds of a mixture that
contains 20 percent of a certain EHS, the
quantify of that EHS present in the mixture
can be calculated as follows:
EHS (in pounds)
= (weight percent of EHS) x (weight of
mixture)
- (20 percent) x (150 pound mixture)
= (0.20) x (150)
EHS (in pounds)
= 30 pounds
§355.14 Do I have to aggregate extremely
hazardous substances to determine
quantities present?
You must aggregate (i.e., add together)
EHSs at your facility to determine if a
TPQ is present. This means that, for a
particular extremely hazardous
substance, you must consider the total
amount present at any one time at your
facility, by adding together the quantity
present in all mixtures and all other
quantities of the EHS, regardless of
location, number of containers, or
method of storage. You do not have to
count extremely hazardous substances
present in a mixture if the concentration
is less than or equal to one percent.
§ 355.15 Which threshold planning
quantity do I use for extremely hazardous
substances present at my facility in solid
form?
Extremely hazardous substances that
are in solid form are subject to one of
two different TPQs (for example, TPQs
may be listed as 500/10,000 pounds),
both of which are listed in appendices
A and B of this part. The following
explains how to determine which of the
two listed TPQs you must use for an
extremely hazardous substance present
at your facility in solid form:
(a) Use the lower TPQ, from
appendices A and B of this part, if the
solid is in one of the following four
categories:
(1) The solid is in powdered form and
has a particle size less than 100
microns.
(2) The solid is in solution.
(3) The solid is in molten form.
(4) The solid meets the criteria for a
National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA) rating of 2, 3 or 4 for reactivity.
Note to paragraph (a): Use the instructions
in § 355.16 to calculate the quantity present
for the categories of solids listed in
paragraphs (a)(l), (2) and (3) of this section.
(b) Use the higher TPQ, from
appendices A and B of this part, if the
solid does not meet one of the criteria
in paragraph (a) of this section. The
higher TPQ is 10,000 pounds in every
case.
§355.16 How do I determine the quantity
of extremely hazardous substance present
for certain forms of solids?
For the following three forms of
solids, which are listed in § 355.15(a),
use these instructions to determine the
quantity of extremely hazardous
substance present:
(a) Solid in powdered form with a
particle size less than 100 microns.
Multiply the weight percent of solid
with a particle size less than 100
microns in a particular container by the
total weight of solid in the container.
(b) Solid in solution. Multiply the
weight percent of solid in the solution
in a particular container by the total
weight of solution in the container.
(c) Solid in molten form. Multiply the
weight of solid in molten form by 0.3.
How to Comply
§ 355.20 If this subpart applies to my
facility, what information must I provide,
who must I submit it to, and when is it due?
The following table tells you what
information you must provide to
comply with the emergency planning
requirements of this subpart. The table
also tells you to whom you must
provide the information, and when the
information is due:
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31297
What types of
emergency
planning notifi-
cation are re-
quired?
What information must I pro-
vide?
To whom must I provide the
information?
When must I provide the information?
Emergency
planning noti-
fication.
Facility emer-
gency coordi-
nator.
Changes rel-
evant to
emergency
planning.
Requested in-
formation.
You must provide notice that
your facility is subject to the
emergency planning re-
quirements of this subpart.
You must designate a facility
representative who will par-
ticipate in the local emer-
gency planning process as
a facility emergency re-
sponse coordinator. You
must provide notice of this
facility representative.
You must provide notice of
any changes occurring at
your facility that may be rel-
evant to emergency plan-
ning.
You must provide any infor-
mation necessary for devel-
oping or implementing the
local emergency plan if the
LEPC requests it.
To the SERC and the LEPC
(LEPC means the local
emergency planning com-
mittee appointed by the
SERC).
To the LEPC (or the SERC if
there is no LEPC, or the
Governor if there is no
SERC).
To the LEPC
To the LEPC
By May 17, 1987, or within 60 days after your facility first be-
comes subject to the requirements of this subpart; if no
LEPC exists for your facility at the time you are required to
provide emergency planning notification, then report to the
LEPC within 30 days after establishment of a LEPC for the
emergency planning district in which your facility is lo-
cated.
By September 17, 1987, or within 60 days after your facility
first becomes subject to the requirements of this subpart; if
no LEPC exists for your facility at the time you are re-
quired to provide facility emergency coordinator notifica-
tion, then provide an additional report to the LEPC within
30 days after establishment of a LEPC for the emergency
planning district in which your facility is located.
Promptly.
Promptly.
§355.21 What format should the
information be in?
EPA does not require any specific
format. Note: EPA recommends that you
submit the information described in
§ 355.20 in writing, in order to insure
appropriate documentation. The SERC
or LEPC may request a specific format
for this information.
Subpart C—Emergency Release
Notification
Who Must Comply
§ 355.30 What facilities must comply with
the emergency release notification
requirements of this subpart?
You must comply with the emergency
release notification requirements in this
subpart if both of the following two
conditions are met:
(a) A Hazardous Chemical is
produced, used, or stored at your
facility.
(b) There is a release of a Reportable
Quantity (RQ) of any extremely
hazardous substance, or of a hazardous
substance as defined by the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA Hazardous Substance) at
your facility, except that certain releases
are exempted from these requirements.
Exempted releases are listed in § 355.31.
Note to paragraph (b): In addition to the
emergency release notification requirements
of this subpart, releases of CERCLA
hazardous substances are subject to
notification requirements under CERCLA.
This is explained further in subpart D of this
part.
§ 355.31 What types of releases are
exempt from the emergency release
notification requirements of this subpart?
You do not have to provide
emergency release notification under
this subpart for any of the following five
types of releases of EHSs or CERCLA
hazardous substances that occur at your
facility:
(a) Any release that results in
exposure to persons solely within the
boundaries of your facility.
(b) Any release that is a federally
permitted release as defined in section
101(10) of CERCLA.
(c) Any release of a pesticide product
that is exempt from CERCLA section
103(a) reporting under section 103(e) of
CERCLA.
(d) Any release that doesn't meet the
definition of release under section
101 (22) of CERCLA and is therefore
exempt from CERCLA section 103(a)
reporting.
(e) Any radionuclide release that
occurs:
(1) Naturally in soil from land
holdings such as parks, golf courses, or
other large tracts of land.
(2) Naturally from land disturbance
activities, including farming,
construction, and land disturbance
incidental to extraction during mining
activities, except that which occurs at
uranium, phosphate, tin, zircon,
hafnium, vanadium, monazite, and rare
earth mines. Land disturbance
incidental to extraction includes: land
clearing; overburden removal and
stockpiling; excavating, handling,
transporting, and storing ores and other
raw materials; and replacing materials
in mined-out areas as long as such
materials have not been beneficiated or
processed and do not contain elevated
radionuclide concentrations (greater
than 7.6 picocuries per gram or pCi/g of
Uranium-238, 6.8 pCi/g of Thorium-232,
or 8.4 pCi/g of Radium-226).
(3) From the dumping and
transportation of coal and coal ash
(including fly ash, bottom ash, and
boiler slags), including the dumping and
land spreading operations that occur
during coal ash uses.
(4) From piles of coal and coal ash,
including fly ash, bottom ash, and boiler
slags.
§ 355.32 Which emergency release
notification requirements apply to
continuous releases?
If there is a release of an EHS or
CERCLA hazardous substance that is
continuous and stable in quantity and
rate at your facility, as defined in 40
CFR 302.8(b), the release qualifies for
reduced reporting requirements under
this subpart. Under the reduced
reporting requirements, you do not need
to provide the notifications required
under § 355.40. However, in addition to
the notifications required under 40 CFR
302.8, you must make all of the
following notifications to the
-------
31298
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
community emergency coordinator for
the LEPC for any area likely to be
affected by the release and to the SERC
of any State likely to be affected by the
release:
(a) Initial notifications as specified in
40 CER 302.8 (d) and (e).
(b) Notification of a "statistically
significant increase," defined in 40 CFR
302.8(b) as any increase above the upper
bound of the reported normal range.
(c) Notification of a "new release" as
specified in 40 CFR 302.8(g)(l).
(d) Notification of a change in the
normal range of the release as specified
under 40 CFR 302.8(g)(2).
§ 355.33 Release of what quantities of
EHSs and CERCLA hazardous substances
trigger the emergency release notification
requirements of this subpart?
The release of a reportable quantity
(RQ) of an EHS or CERCLA hazardous
substance, within any 24-hour period,
triggers the emergency release
notification requirements. Reportable
quantities for extremely hazardous
substances are listed in appendices A
and B of this part, in the column labeled
"reportable quantity." Reportable
quantities for CERCLA hazardous
substances are listed in Table 302.4 of
40 CFR part 302, in the column labeled
"final RQ."
How to Comply
§ 355.40 What information must I provide?
You must make two separate
notifications to comply with the
emergency release notification
requirements of this subpart: an
immediate notification, and as soon as
practicable thereafter a written follow-
up emergency notification (or
notifications, as more information
becomes available). You must include
the following information in your
notifications:
(a) Immediate notification. Your
immediate notice must include all of the
following, to the extent known at the
time of notice and so long as no delay
in notice or emergency response results:
(1) The chemical name or identity of
any substance involved in the release.
(2) An indication of whether the
substance is an extremely hazardous
substance.
(3) An estimate of the quantity of any
such substance that was released into
the environment.
(4) The time and duration of the
release.
(5) The medium or media into which
the release occurred.
(6) Any known or anticipated acute or
chronic health risks associated with the
emergency and, where appropriate,
advice regarding medical attention
necessary for exposed individuals.
(7) Proper precautions to take as a
result of the release, including
evacuation (unless such information is
readily available to the community
emergency coordinator pursuant to the
emergency plan).
(8) The name and telephone number
of the individual (or individuals) to be
contacted for further information
(b) Written follow-up emergency
notification. Except for releases during
transportation, or storage incident to
transportation, you must provide a
written follow-up emergency notice (or
notices, as more information becomes
available), as soon as practicable after
the release. In the written follow-up
emergency notice you must set forth and
update the information required in the
immediate notification and include
additional information with respect to
all of the following:
(1) Actions taken to respond to and
contain the release.
(2) Any known or anticipated acute or
chronic health risks associated with the
release.
(3) Where appropriate, advice
regarding medical attention necessary
for exposed individuals.
Note to paragraph (b): You are not
required to submit a written follow-up
notification for a release during
transportation, or storage incident to
transportation. See §355.42(b) for
requirements for reporting such releases.
§ 355.41 What format should the
information be in?
The immediate notification, described
in §355.40(a), should be oral. The
written follow-up emergency
notification, described in §355.40(b),
must be in writing. The EPA does not
specify a particular format for the
written follow-up emergency
notification.
Note: The LEPC may request a specific
format for this information.
§ 355.42 To whom must I submit the
information?
(a) You must provide the required
emergency release notification
information (both the immediate and
written follow-up notification) to both
of the following:
(1) The community emergency
coordinator for the LEPC of any area
likely to be affected by the release (if
there is no LEPC, notify relevant local
emergency response personnel).
(2) The SERC of any State likely to be
affected by the release.
(b) With respect to a release during
transportation, or storage incident to
transportation, you may meet the
requirements of this subpart by
notifying the 911 operator (or in the
absence of a 911 emergency telephone
number, the operator) of the immediate
notification information listed in
§ 355.40(a). You are not required under
this subpart to submit a written follow-
up notification, as described in
§ 355.40(b), for such a release.
§ 355.43 When must I submit the
information?
You must provide the required
emergency release notification
information as follows:
(a) Provide the notice described under
§355.40(a), immediately.
(b) Provide the written follow-up
emergency notice (or notices, as more
information becomes available)
described under § 355.40(b), as soon as
practicable after the release.
Subpart D—Additional Provisions
§ 355.60 What is the relationship between
the emergency release notification
requirements of this part and the release
notification requirements of CERCLA?
The emergency release notification
requirements of this part are in addition
to the release notification requirements
of CERCLA. If you have a release of a
CERCLA hazardous substance, you must
comply with the emergency release
notification requirements of this part
and the release reporting requirements
of CERCLA section 103, codified at 40
CFR part 302. Refer to the following
table to determine which emergency
release notification requirements apply
to your release:
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998 / Proposed JRuJes
31299
If a reportable quantity of a substance is re-
leased within a 24-hour period at your facility
And if the release is reportable under EPCRA
section 304 then you must
And if the release is reportable under
CERCLA section 103 then you must
And the substance is on BOTH the list of
EPCRA Extremely Hazardous Substances
(appendices A and B of this part) AND the
list of CERCLA Hazardous Substances
(Table 302.4 of 40 CFR 302.4).
And the substance is on the list of CERCLA
Hazardous Substances (Table 302.4 of 40
CFR 302.4) and NOT on the list of EPCRA
extremely hazardous substances (appen-
dices A and B of this part).
And the substance is on the list of EPCRA Ex-
tremely Hazardous Substances (appendices
A and B of this part) and NOT on the list of
CERCLA Hazardous Substances (Table
302.4 of 40 CFR 302.4).
Notify the local emergency planning committee
(the LEPC) and the State emergency re-
sponse commission (the SERC), in accord-
ance with §§355.40 through 355.43 of this
part (see exception for a release during
transportation or storage incident to trans-
portation, as provided in §355.42(b)).
Notify the LEPC and the SERC, in accordance
with §§355.40 through 355.43 of this part
(see exception for a release during transpor-
tation or storage incident to transportation,
as provided in §355.42(b)),.
Notify the LEPC and the SERC, in accordance
with §§355.40 through 355.43 of this part
(see exception for a release during transpor-
tation or storage incident to transportation,
as provided in §355.42(b)).
Comply with the release reporting require-
ments of CERCLA section 103 and its im-
plementing regulations (40 CFR part 302).
Call the National Response Center at 800/
424-8802.
Comply with the release reporting require-
ments of CERCLA section 103 and its im-
plementing regulations (40 CFR part 302).
Call the National Response Center at 8007
424-8802.
Note: This table only applies to reportable releases, not to exempt releases.
§355.61 How are key words in this part
defined?
This section contains the definitions
of key words for 40 CFR parts 355 and
370. Therefore some of the key words
defined in this section do not appear in
this part, but appear in 40 CFR part 370
(40 CFR. 370.3 indicates that definitions
for part 370 are in this section). Many
of the defined key words appear in both
40 CFR parts 355 and 370.
CERCLA means the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act of 1980, as amended.
Chief Executive Officer of the Tribe
means the person who is recognized by
the Bureau of Indian Affairs as the chief
elected administrative officer of the
Tribe.
Environment includes water, air, and
land and the interrelationship that
exists among and between water, air,
and land and all living things.
EPCRA means the federal Emergency
Planning and Community Right-To-
Know Act.
Facility means all buildings,
equipment, structures, and other
stationary items that are located on a
single site or on contiguous ,or adjacent
sites and that are owned or operated by
the same person (or by any person that
controls, is controlled by, or under
common control with, such person).
Facility includes manmade structures as
well as all natural structures in which
chemicals are purposefully placed or
removed through human means such
that it functions as a containment
structure for human use. For purposes
of emergency release notification, the
term includes motor vehicles, rolling
stock, and aircraft.
Hazard category means any of the
following:
(1) Immediate (acute) health hazard,
including highly toxic, toxic, irritant,
sensitizer, corrosive, (as defined under
29 CFR 1910.1200) and other hazardous
chemicals that cause an adverse effect to
a target organ and which effect usually
occurs rapidly as a result of short-term
exposure and is of short duration;
(2) Delayed (chronic) health hazard,
including carcinogens (as defined under
29 CFR 1910.1200) and other hazardous
chemicals that cause an adverse effect to
a target organ and which effect generally
occurs as a result of long-term exposure
and is of long duration;
(3) Fire hazard, including flammable,
combustible liquid, pyrophoric, and
oxidizer (as defined under 29 CFR
1910.1200);
(4) Sudden release of pressure,
including explosive and compressed gas
(as defined under 29 CFR 1910.1200);
and
(5) Reactive, including unstable
reactive, organic peroxide, and water
reactive (as defined under 29 CFR
1910.1200).
Hazardous chemical means any
hazardous chemical as defined under 29
CFR 1910.1200(c), except that such term
does not include the following
substances:
(1) Any food, food additive, color
additive, drug, or cosmetic regulated by
the Food and Drug Administration.
(2) Any substance present as a solid
in any manufactured item to the extent
exposure to the substance does not
occur under normal conditions of use.
(3) Any substance to the extent it is
used:
(i) For personal, family, or household
purposes, or is present in the same form
and concentration as a product
packaged for distribution and use by the
general public. Present in the same form
and concentration as a product
packaged for distribution and use by the
general public means a substance
packaged in a similar manner and
present in the same concentration as the
substance when packaged for use by the
general public, whether or not it is
intended for distribution to the general
public or used for the same purpose as
when it is packaged for use by the
general public;
(ii) In a research laboratory or hospital
or other medical facility under the
direct supervision of a technically
qualified individual; or
(iii) In routine agricultural operations
or is a fertilizer held for sale by a retailer
to the ultimate customer.
Hazardous substances:
(1) CERCLA hazardous substance
means a substance defined in section
101(14) of CERCLA. A list of such
substances appears in Table 302.4 of 40
CFR part 302.
(2) Extremely hazardous substance
(EHS) means a substance listed in
appendices A and B of this part.
Indian Country means Indian country
as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. That
section defines Indian country as:
(1) All land within the limits of any
Indian reservation under the
jurisdiction of the United States
government, notwithstanding the
issuance of any patent, and, including
rights-of-way running through the
reservation;
(2) All dependent Indian communities
within the borders of the United States
whether within the original or
subsequently acquired territory thereof,
and whether within or without the
limits of a State; and
(3) All Indian allotments, the Indian
titles to which have not been
extinguished, including rights-of-way
running through the same.
Indian Tribe or Tribe means those
Tribes federally recognized by the
Secretary of the Interior.
-------
31300
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
Inventory form means the uniform
Tier I and Tier II emergency and
hazardous chemical inventory forms
published by the EPA. These forms can
be used for reporting inventory
information, as described in 40 CFR
370.40 through 370.45.
LEPC or Local emergency planning
committee means the local emergency
planning committee appointed by the
State emergency response commission.
Material Safety Data Sheet or MSDS
means the sheet required to be
developed under 29 CFR 1910.1200(g).
Mixture means, for the purposes or 40
CFR part 355, a heterogenous
association of substances where the
various individual substances retain
their identities and can usually be
separated by mechanical means. This
definition includes, for the purposes of
40 CFR part 355, solutions but does not
include alloys or amalgams. For the
purposes of part 370, mixture means
mixture as defined under the
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration's Hazard
Communication Standard in 29 CFR
1910.1200(c).
OSHA means the Occupational Safety
and Health Act of 1970.
Person means any individual, trust,
firm, joint stock company, corporation
(including a government corporation),
partnership, association, State,
municipality, commission, political
subdivision of a State, or interstate
body.
Release means any spilling, leaking,
pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying,
discharging; injecting, escaping,
leaching, dumping, or disposing into the
environment (including the
abandonment or discarding of barrels,
containers, and other closed receptacles)
of any hazardous chemical, extremely
hazardous substance, or CERCLA
hazardous substance.
Reportable quantity means, for any
CERCLA hazardous substance, the
reportable quantity established in Table
302.4 of 40 CFR part 302, for such
substance. For any extremely hazardous
substance, reportable quantity means
th6 reportable quantity established in
appendices A and B of this part, for
such substance. Unless and until
superseded by regulations establishing a
reportable quantity for newly listed
EHSs or CERCLA hazardous substances,
a weight of 1 pound shall be the
reportable quantity.
SERC or State Emergency Response
Commission means the emergency
response commission for the State in
which the facility is located except
where the facility is located in Indian
Country, in which case, SERC means the
emergency response commission for the
Tribe under whose jurisdiction the
facility is located. In the absence of an
emergency response commission for a
State or an Indian Tribe, the Governor
or the chief executive officer of the tribe,
respectively, shall be the SERC. Where
there is a cooperative agreement
between a State and a Tribe, the SERC
shall be the entity identified in the
agreement.
State means any State of the United
States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam,
American Samoa, the United States
Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana
Islands, any other territory or possession
over which the United States has
jurisdiction and Indian Country.
Threshold planning quantity (TPQ)
means, for a substance listed in
appendices A and B of this part, the
quantity listed in the column "threshold
planning quantity" for that substance.
APPENDIX A TO PART 355—THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING
QUANTITIES
[Alphabetical Order]
CAS No.
Chemical name
Notes
Reportable
quantity *
(pounds)
Threshold plan-
ning quantity
(pounds)
75-86-5 Acetone Cyanohydrin
1752-30-3 Acetone Thiosemicarbazide
107-02-8 Acroleln
79-06-1 Acrylamide
107-13-1 Acrylonitrile > I
814-68-6 Acrylyl Chloride h
111-69-3 Adiponitrile I
116-06-3 Aldicarb c
309-00-2 Aldrin
107-18-6 Allyl Alcohol
107-11-9 Allylamine
20859-73-8 Aluminum Phosphide
54-62-6 Aminopterin
78-53-5 Amiton
3734-97-2 Amiton Oxalate
7664-41-7 Ammonia I
300-62-9 Amphetamine
62-53-3 Aniline I
88-05-1 Aniline, 2,4,6-Trimethyl-
7783-70-2 Antimony Pentafluoride
1397-94-0 Antimycin A c
86-88-4 ANTU
1303-28-2 Arsenic Pentoxide
1327-53-3 Arsenous Oxide h
7784-34-1 Arsenous Trichloride ,
7784-42-1 Arsine
2642-71-9 Azinphos-Ethyl .'
86-50-0 Azinphos-Methyl
98-87-3 Benzal Chloride
98-16-8 Benzenamine, 3-(Trifluoromethyl)-
100-14-1 Benzene, 1-(Chloromethyl)-4-Nitro-
98-05-5 Benzenearsonic Acid
3615-21-2 Benzimidazole, 4,5-Dichloro-2-(Trifluoromethyl)- g
10
1,000
1
5,000
100
100
1,000
1
1
100
500
100
500
500
100
100
1,000
5,000
500
500
1,000
100
1
1
1
100
100
1
5,000
500
500
10
500
1,000
1,000/10,000
500
1,000/10,000
10,000
100
1,000
100/10,000
500/10,000
1,000
500
500
500/10,000
500
100/10,000
500
1,000
1,000
500
500
1,000/10,000
500/10,000
100/10,000
100/10,000
500
100
100/10,000
10/10,000
500
500
500/10,000
10/10,000
500/10,000
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31301
APPENDIX A TO PART 355—THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING
QUANTITIES—Continued
[Alphabetical Order]
CAS No.
Chemical name
Notes
Reportable
quantity *
(pounds)
Threshold plan-
ning quantity
(pounds)
98-07-7 Benzotrichloride , , ,...,
100-44-7 Benzyl Chloride , , :.
140-29-4 Benzyl Cyanide h
15271-41-7 Bicyclo[2.2.1]Heptane-2-Carbonitrile, 5-Chloro-6-
((((Methylamino)Carbonyl)Oxy)lmino)-, (1 s-(1 -alpha,2-beta,4-alpha,5-alpha,6E))-.
534-07-6 Bis(Chloromethyl) Ketone ,
4044-65-9 Bitoscanate , ,-.
10294-34-5 Boron Trichloride
7637-07-2 Boron Trifluoride , '.
353-^2-4 Boron Trifluoride Compound With Methyl Ether (1:1) , ...
28772-56-7 Bromadiolone
7726-95-6 Bromine I
1306-19-0 Cadmium Oxide
2223-93-0 Cadmium Stearate , c
7778-44-1 Calcium Arsenate
8001-35-2 Camphechlor , '..
56-25-7 Cantharidin ,
51-83-2 Carbachol Chloride
26419-73-8 Carbamic Acid, Methyl-, O-(((2,4-Dimethyl-1, 3-Dithiolan-2-yI)Methylene)Amino)- d
1563-66-2 Carbofuran
75-15-0 Carbon Disulfide I
786-19-6 Carbophenothion
57-74-9 Chlordane .,
470-90-6 Chlorfenvinfos
7782-50-5 Chlorine ,..,.:
24934-91-6 Chlormephos '. ,
999-81-5 Chlormequat Chloride ,.„ h
79-11-8 Chloroacetic Acid
107-07-3 Chloroethanol ,
627-11-2 Chloroethyl Chloroformate , , ,
67-66-3 Chloroform ,.: I
542-88-1 Chloromeihyl Ether h
107-30-2 Chloromethyl Methyl Ether c
3691-35-8 Chlorophacinone
1982-47-4 Chloroxuron ,...
21923-23-9 Chlorthiophos h
10025-73-7 Chromic Chloride ..; '. '.
62207-76-5 Cobalt, ((2,2'-(1,2-Ethanediylbis (Nitrilomethylidyne)) Bis(6-Fluorpphenolato))(2-)-
10210-68-1 Cob'alt'carbonyl h
64-86-8 Colchicine h
56-72-4 Coumaphos
5836-29-3 Coumatetralyl , „
95-48-7 Cresol, o- , ...
535-89-7 Crimidine
4170-30-3 Crotonaldehyde
123-73-9 Crotonaldehyde, (E)- ,...,..,..,„ ...
506-68-3 Cyanogen Bromide ,
506-78-5 Cyanogen Iodide '. ,
2636-26-2 Cyanophos ,..., ,..,.' ,.
675-14-9 Cyanuric Fluoride
66-81-9 Cycloheximide ....,
108-91-8 Cyclohexylamine , ,....
17702-41-9 Decaborane(14) ...................
8065-48-3 Demeton ,
919-86-8 Demeton-S-Methyl
10311-84-9 Dialifor :
19287-45-7 Diborane ,
111-44-4 Dichloroethyl ether
149-74-6 Dichloromethylphenylsilane
62-73-7 Dichlorvos , :
141-66-2 Dicrotophos .„
1464-53-5 Diepoxybutane , ....
814-49-3 Diethyl Chlorophosphate , h
71-63-6 Digitoxin c
2238-07-5 Diglycidyl Ether
20830-75-5 Digoxin , , h
115-26-4 Dimefox
10
100
500
500
10
500
500
500
1,000
100
500
100
1,000
1
1
100
500
1
10
100
500
1
500
10
500
100
100,
500
1,000
10
10
10
100
500
500
1
100
10
10
10
500
100
100
100
10Q
1,000
1,000
1,000
100
100
10,000
500
500
500
100
100
10
1,000
10
100
10
500
100
1,000
10
500
100
500
500
500/10,000
10/10,000
500/10,000
500
500
1,000
100/10,000
500
100/10,000
1,000/10,000
500/10,000
500/10,000
100/10,000
500/10,000
100/10,000
10/10,000
10,000
500
1,000
500
100
500
100/10,000
100/10,000
500
1,000
10,000
100
100
100/10,000
500/10,000
500
1/10,000
100/10,000
10/10,000
10/10,000
100/10,000
500/10,000
1,000/10,000
100/10,000
1,000
1,000
500/10,000
1,000/10,000
1,000
100
100/10,000
10,000
500/10,000
500
500
100/10,000
100
10,000
1,000
1,000
100
500
500
100/10,000
1,000
10/10,000
500
-------
31302
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
APPENDIX A TO PART 355—THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING
QUANTITIES—Continued
[Alphabetical Order]
CAS No.
Chemical name
Notes
Reportable
quantity *
(pounds)
Threshold plan-
ning quantity
(pounds)
60-51-5 Dlmethoate
2524-03-0 Dimethyl Phosphorochloridothioate
77-78-1 Dimethyl sulfate
75-78-5 Dlmethyldichlorosilane h
57-14-7 Dlmethylhydrazine
99-98-9 Dlmethyl-p-Phenylenediamine
644-64-4 Dlmetilan d
534-52-1 Dlnltrocresol
88-85-7 Dinoseb
1420-07-1 Dinoterb
78-34-2 Dioxathlon
82-66-6 Diphacinone
152-16-9 Dlphosphoramide, Octamethyl-
298-04-4 Disulfoton
514-73-8 Dlthlazanine Iodide
541-53-7 Dithiobiuret
316-42-7 Emetine, Dihydrochloride h
115-29-7 Endosulfan
2778-04-3 Endothion
72-20-8 Endrin
106-89-8 Epichlorohydrin I
2104-64-5 EPN
50-14-6 Ergocalciferol c
379-79-3 Ergotamine Tartrate
1622-32-8 Ethanesulfonyl Chloride, 2-Chloro-
10140-87-1 Ethanol, 1,2-Dichloro-, Acetate
563-12-2 Ethion
13194-48-4 Ethoprophos
538-07-8 Ethylbis(2-Chloroethyl)Amine h
371-62-0 Ethylene Fluorohydrin c, h
75-21-8 Ethylene Oxide I
107-15-3 Ethylenediamine
15'l-56-4 Ethyleneimine ,
542-90-5 Ethylthiocyanate
22224-92-6 Fenamiphos
115-90-2 Fensulfothion h
4301-50-2 Fluenetil
7782-41-4 Fluorine k
640-19-7 Fluoroacetamide
144-49-0 Fluoroacetic Acid
359-06-8 Fluoroacetyl Chloride c
51-21-8 Fluorouracil
944-22-9 Fonofos
50-00-0 Formaldehyde I
107-16-4 Formaldehyde Cyanohydrin h
23422-53-9 Formetanate Hydrochloride d, h
2540-82-1 Formothion
17702-57-7 Fomnparanate d
21548-32-3 Fosthietan
3878-19-1 Fuberidazole
110-00-9 Furan .-.
13450-90-3 Gallium Trichloride
77-47-4 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene h
4835-11-4 Hexamethylenediamine, N,N'-Dibutyl-
302-01-2 Hydrazine
, 74-90-8 Hydrocyanic Acid
7647-01-0 Hydrogen Chloride (gas only) I
7664-39-3 Hydrogen Fluoride
7722-84-1 Hydrogen Peroxide (Cone > 52%) I
7783-07-5 Hydrogen Selenide
7783-06-4 Hydrogen Sulfide I
123-31-9 Hydroquinone I
13463-40-6 Iron, Pentacarbonyl-
297-78-9 Isobenzan
78-82-0 Isobutyronitrile h
102-36-3 Isocyanic Acid, 3,4-Dichlorophenyl Ester
465-73-6 Isodrin
55-91-4 Isofluorphate ,. c
10
500
100
500
10
10
1
10
1,000
500
500
10
100
1
500
100
1
1
500
1
100
100
1,000
500
500
1,000
10
1,000
500
10
10
5,000
1
10,000
10
500
100
10
100
10
10
500
500
100
1,000
1
100
1
500
100
100
500
10
500
1
10
5,000
100
1,000
10
100
100
100
100
1,000
500
1
100
500/10,000
500
500
500
1,000
10/10,000
500/10,000
10/10,000
100/10,000
500/10,000
500
10/10,000
100
500
500/10,000
100/10,000
1/10,000
10/10,000
500/10,000
500/10,000
1,000
100/10,000
1,000/10,000
500/10,000
500
1,000
1,000
1,000
500
10
1,000
10,000
500
10,000
10/10,000
500
100/10,000
500
100/10,000
10/10,000
10
500/10,000
500
500
1,000
500/10,000
100
100/10,000
500
100/10,000
500
500/10,000
100
500
1,000
100
500
100
1,000
10
500
500/10,000
100
100/10,000
1,000
500/10,000
100/10,000
100
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31303
APPENDIX A TO PART 355—THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING
QUANTITIES—Continued
[Alphabetical Order]
CAS No.
Chemical name
Notes
Reportable
quantity *
(pounds)
Threshold plan-
ning quantity
(pounds)
4098-71-9 Isophorone Diisocyanate
108-23-6 Isopropyl Chloroformate '.., ,
119-38-0 Isopropylmethylpyrazolyl Dimethylcarbamate d
78-97-7 Lactonitrile :
21609-90-5 Leptophos
541-25-3 Lewisite C, h
58-89-9 Lindane .
7580-67-8 Lithium Hydride b
109-77-3 Malononitrile
12108-13-3 Manganese, Tricarbonyl Methylcyclopentadienyl h
51-75-2 Mechlorethamine c
950-10-7 Mephosfolan
1600-27-7 Mercuric Acetate
7487-94-7 Mercuric Chloride
21908-53-2 Mercuric Oxide
10476-95-6 Methacrolein Diacetate
760-93-0 Methacrylic Anhydride :
126-98-7 Methacrylonitrile h
920-46-7 Methacryloyl Chloride
30674-80-7 Methacryloyloxyethyl Isocyanate h
10265-92-6 Methamidophos ,
558-25-8 Methanesulfonyl Fluoride ,
950-37-8 Methidathion
2032-65-7 Methiocarb
16752-77-5 Methomyl h
151-38-2 Methoxyethylmercuric Acetate
80-63-7 Methyl 2-Chloroacrylate
74-83-9 Methyl Bromide
79-22-1 Methyl Chloroformate h
60-34-4 Methyl Hydrazine
624-83-9 Methyl Isocyanate
556-61-6 Methyl Isothiocyanate b
74-93-1 Methyl Mercaptan I
3735-23-7 Methyl Phenkapton
676-97-1 Methyl Phosphonic Dichloride b
556-64-9 Methyl Thiocyanate
78-94-4 Methyl Vinyl Ketone
502-39-6 Methylmercuric Dicyanamide
75-79-6 Methyltrichlorosilane h
1129-41-5 Metolcarb d
7786-34-7 Mevinphos
315-18-4 Mexacarbate
50-07-7 Mitomycin C
6923-22-4 Monocrotophos ,
2763-96-4 Muscimol
505-60-2 Mustard Gas h
13463-39-3 Nickel Carbonyl
54-11-5 Nicotine c
65-30-5 Nicotine Sulfate
7697-37-2 Nitric Acid
10102-43-9 Nitric Oxide c
98-95-3 Nitrobenzene
1122-60-7 Nitrocyclohexane
10102-44-0 Nitrogen Dioxide
62-75-9 Nitrosodimethylamine h
991-42-4 Norbormide ,.
0 Organorhodium Complex (PMN-82-147)
630-60-4 Ouabain c
23135-22-0 Oxamyl d
78-71-7 Oxetane, 3,3-Bis(Chloromethyl)-
2497-07-6 Oxydisulfoton h
10028-15-6 Ozone
1910-42-5 Paraquat Dichloride
2074-50-2 Paraquat Methosulfate
56-38-2 Parathion c
298-00-0 Parathion-Methyl c
12002-03-8 Paris Green
19624-22-7 Pentaborane
100
1,000
1
1,000
500
10
1
100
1,000
100
10
500
500
500
500
1,000
500
1,000
100
100
100
1,000
500
10
100
500
500
1,000
1,000
10
10
500
100
500
100
10,000
10
500
500
1
10
1,000
10
10
1,000
500
10
.100,
100
1,000
10
1,000
500
10
10
100
10
100
1
500
500
100
10
10
10
100
1
500
100
1,000
500
1,000
500/10,000
10
1,000/10,000
100
500/10,000
100
10
500
500/10,000
500/10,000
500/10,000
1,000
500
500
100
100
100/10,000
1,000
500/10,000
500/10,000
500/10,000
500/10,000
500
1,000
500
500
500
500
500
500
100
10,000
10
500/10,000
500
100/10,000
500
500/10,000
500/10,000
10/10,000
500/10,000
500
1
100
100/10,000
1,000
100
10,000
500
100
1,000
100/10,000
10/10,000
100/10,000
100/10,000
500
500
100
10/10,000
10/10,000
100
100/10,000
500/10,000
500
-------
31304
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
APPENDIX A TO PART 355—THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING
QUANTITIES—Continued
[Alphabetical Order]
CAS No.
Chemical name
Notes
Reportable
quantity *
(pounds)
Threshold plan-
ning quantity
(pounds)
2570-26-5 Pentadecylamine
79-21-0 Peracetic Acid
594-42-3 Perchloromethylmercaptan
108-95-2 Phenol
4418-66-0 Phenol, 2,2'-Thiobis(4-Chloro-6-Methyl)-
64-00-6 Phenol, 3-(1-Methylethyl)-, Methylcarbamate d
58-36-6 Phenoxarsine, 10,10'-Oxydi-
696-28-6 Phenyl Dichloroarsine h
59-88-1 Phenylhydrazine Hydrochloride
62-38-4 Phenylmercury Acetate
2097-19-0 Phenylsilatrane h
103-85-5 Phenylthiourea
298-02-2 Phorate
4104-14-7 Phosacetim
947-02-4 Phosfolan
75-44-5 Phosgene I
732-11-6 Phosmet
13171-21-6 Phosphamidon
7803-51-2 Phosphlne
2703-13-1 Phosphonothioic Acid, Methyl-, O-Ethyl O-(4-(Methylthio) Phenyl) Ester
50782-69-9 Phosphonothioic Acid, Methyl-, S-(2-(Bis(1 Methylethyl)Amino)Ethyl) O-Ethyl Ester ..
2665-30-7 Phosphonothioic Acid, Methyl-, O-(4-Nitrophenyl) O-Phenyl Ester
3254-63-5 Phosphoric Acid, Dimethyl 4-(Methylthio)Phenyl Ester
2587-90-8 Phosphorothioic Acid, O,O-Dimethyl-S-(2-Methylthio) Ethyl Ester c, g
7723-14-0 Phosphorus b, h
10025-87-3 Phosphorus Oxychloride •
10026-13-8 Phosphorus Pentachloride b
7719-12-2 Phosphorus Trichloride
57-47-6 Physostigmine d
57-64-7 Physostigmine, Salicylate (1:1) d
124-87-8 Picrotoxin .'.
110-89-4 Piperidine
23505-41-1 PIrimifos-Ethyl
10124-50-2 Potassium Arsenite
151-50-8 Potassium Cyanide b
506-61-6 Potassium Silver Cyanide b
2631-37-0 Promecarb d, h
106-96-7 Propargyl Bromide
57-57-8 Propiolactone, Beta-
107-12-0 Propionitrile
542-76-7 Propionitrile, 3-Chloro-
70-69-9 Propiophenone, 4-Amino- 9
109-61-5 Propyl Chloroformate
75-56-9 Propylene Oxide I
75-55-8 Propyleneimine
2275-18-5 Prothoate
129-00-0 Pyrene •
140-76-1 Pyridine, 2-MethyI-5-Vinyl-
504-24-5 Pyridine, 4-Amino- h
1124-33-0 Pyridine, 4-Nitro-,l-Oxide
53558-25-1 Pyriminit
14167-18-1 Salcomine
107-44-8 Sarin h
7783-00-8 Selenious Acid
7791-23-3 Selenium Oxychloride
563-41-7 Semlcarbazide Hydrochloride
3037-72-7 Silane, (4-Aminobutyl)Diethoxymethyl-
7631-89-2 Sodium Arsenate
7784-46-5 Sodium Arsenite
26628-22-8 Sodium Azide (Na(N3)) b
124-65-2 Sodium Cacodylate
143-33-9 Sodium Cyanide (Na(CN)) b
62-74-8 Sodium Fluoroacetate
13410-01-0 Sodium Selenate
10102-18-8 Sodium Selenite h
10102-20-2 Sodium Teilurite
900-95-8 Stannane, Acetoxytriphenyl- g
57-24-9 Strychnine c
100
500
100
1,000
100
1
500
1
1,000
100
100
100
10
100
100
10
10
100
100
500
100
500
500
500
1
1,000
500
1,000
1
1
500
1,000
1,000
1
10
1
1
10
10
10
1,000
100
500
100
1
100
5,000
500
1,000
500
100
500
10
10
500
1,000
1,000
1
1
1,000
100
10
10
100
100
500
500
10
100/10,000
500
500
500/10,000
100/10,000
500/10,000
500/10,000
500
1,000/10,000
500/10,000
100/10,000
100/10,000
10
100/10,000
100/10,000
10
10/10,000
100
500
500
100
500
500
500
100
500
500
1,000
100/10,000
100/10,000
500/10,000
1,000
1,000
500/10,000
100
500
500/10,000
10
500
500
1,000
100/10,000
500
10,000
10,000
100/10,000
1,000/10,000
500
500/10,000
500/10,000
100/10,000
500/10,000
10
1,000/10,000
500
1,000/10,000
1,000
1,000/10,000
500/10,000
500
100/10,000
100
10/10,000
100/10,000
100/10,000
500/10,000
500/10,000
100/10,000
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31305
APPENDIX A TO PART 355—THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING
QUANTITIES—Continued
[Alphabetical Order]
CAS No.
60-41-3
3689-24-5
3569-57-1
7446-09-5
7783-60-0
7446-11-9
7664-93-9
77-81-6
7783-80-4
107-49-3
13071-79-9
78-00-2
597-64-8
75-74-1
509-14-8
10031-59-1
6533-73-9
7791-12-0
2757-18-8
7446-18-6
2231-57-4
39196-18-4
297-97-2
108-98-5
79-19-6
5344-82-1
614-78-8
7550-45-0
584-84-9
91-08-7
110-57-6
1031-47-6
24017-47-8
76-02-8
115-21-9
327-98-0
98-13-5
1558-25-4
27137-85-5
998-30-1
75-77-4
824-11-3
1066-45-1
639-58-7
555-77-1
2001-95-8
1314-62-1
108-05-4
81-81-2
129-06-6
28347-13-9
58270-08-9
1314-84-7
Chemical name
Strychnine Suifate
Sulfotep
Sulfoxide, 3-Chloropropyl Octyi
Sulfur Dioxide
Sulfur Tetrafluoride
Sulfur Trioxide
Sulfuric Acid
Tabun
Tellurium Hexafluoride
TEPP ,
Terbufos
Tetraethyllead
Tetraethyltin
Tetramethyllead
Tetranitromethane
Thallium Suifate
Thallous Carbonate
Thallous Chloride
Thallous Malonate
Thallous Suifate
Thiocarbazide
Thiofanox
Thionazin
Thiophenol
Thiosemicarbazide
Thiourea, (2-Chlorophenyl)-
Thiourea, (2-Methylphenyl)-
Titanium Tetrachloride
Toluene 2,4-Diisocyanate
Toluene 2,6-Diisocyanate
Trans-1 ,4-Dichlorobutene
Triamiphos
Triazofos
Trichloroacetyl Chloride
Trichloroethylsilane
Trichloronate
Trichlorophenylsilane
Trichloro(Chloromethyl)Silane
Trichloro(Dichlorophenyl) Silane
Triethoxysilane
Trimethylchlorosilane
Trimethylolpropane Phosphite
Trimethyltin Chloride
Triphenyltin Chloride
Tris(2-Chloroethyl)Amine
Valinomycin
Vanadium Pentoxide
Vinyl Acetate Monomer
Warfarin ,
Warfarin Sodium
Xylylene Dichloride
Zinc, Dichloro(4,4-Dimethyl-5((((Methylamino)Carbonyl) Oxy)lmino)Pentanenitrile)-,
(T-4)-.
Zinc Phosphide
Notes
1
b
c h
k
h
c
c
c 1
h
c h
c h
c h
h
k
h
h
h
c
1
h
b
Reportable
quantity *
(pounds)
10
100
500
500
100
100
1 000
10
100
10
100
10
100
100
10
100
100
100
100
100
1 000
100
100
100
100
100
500
1 000
100
100
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
100
500
500
1 000
100
500
500
100
1 000
1 000
5 000
100
100
100
100
100
Threshold plan-
ning quantity
(pounds)
100/10 000
500
500
500
100
100
1 000
10
100
100
100
100
100
100
500
100/10 000
1 00/1 0 000
1 00/1 0 000
1 00/1 0 000
1 00/1 0 000
1 000/1 0 000
1 00/1 0 000
500
500
100/10 000
1 00/1 0 000
500/1 0 000
100
500
100
500
500/10000
500
500
500
500
500
100
500
500
1 000
1 00/1 0 000
500/1 0 000
500/1 0 000
100
1 000/1 0 000
1 00/1 0 000
1 000
500/1 0 000
1 00/1 0 000
1 00/1 0 000
100/10,000
500
* Only the statutory or final RQ is shown. For more information, see 40 CFR table 302.4.
NOTES:
a This chemical does not meet acute toxicity criteria. Its TPQ is set at 10,000 pounds.
b This material is a reactive solid. The TPQ does not default to 10,000 pounds for non-powder, non-molten, nonsolution form.
c The calculated TPQ changed after technical review as described in the technical support document.
d Indicates that the RQ is subject to change when the assessment of potential carcinogenicity and/or other toxicity is completed.
e Statutory reportable quantity for purposes of notification under SARA sect 304(a)(2).
f [Reserved]
g New chemicals added that were not part of the original list of 402 substances.
h Revised TPQ based on new or re-evaluated toxicity data.
j TPQ is revised to its calculated value and does not change due to technical review as in proposed rule.
k The TPQ was revised after proposal due to calculation error.
I Chemicals on the original list that do not meet toxicity criteria but because of their high production volume and recognized toxicity are consid-
ered chemicals of concern ("Other chemicals").
-------
31306
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B TO PART 355.-
-THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING
QUANTITIES
[CAS Number Order]
CAS No.
Chemical name
Notes
Reportable
quantity*
(pounds)
Threshold plan-
ning quantity
(pounds)
0 Organorhodium Complex (PMN-82-147)
50-00-0 Formaldehyde
50-07-7 Mitomycin C
50-14-6 Ergocalciferol c
51-21-8 Fluorouracil
51-75-2 Mechlorethaminec
51-83-2 Carbachol Chloride
54-11-5 Nicotine
54-62-6 Aminopterin •
55-91-4 Isofluorphate c
56-25-7 Cantharidin
56-38-2 Parathion c
56-72-4 Coumaphos
57-14-7 Dimethylhydrazine
57-24-9 Strychnine
57-47-6 Physostigmine d
57—57-8 Propiolactone, Beta-
57-64-7 Physostigmine, Salicylate (1:1) d
57-74-9 Chlordane
58-36-6 Phenoxarsine, 10,10'-Oxydi-
58-89-9 Lindane
59-88-1 Phenylhydrazine Hydrochloride
60-34-4 Methyl Hydrazine
60-41-3 Strychnine sulfate
60-51-5 Dimethoate
62-38-4 Phenylmercury Acetate
62-53-3 AnilineI
62-73-7 Dichlorvos
62-74-8 Sodium Fluoroacetate
62-75-9 Nitrosodimethylamine
64-00-6 Phenol, 3-(1-Methylethyl)-, Methylcarbamate d
64-86-8 Colchicine h
65-30-5 Nicotine sulfate
66-81-9 Cycloheximide
67-66-3 Chloroform '
70-69-9 Propiophenone, 4-Amino- ••••• 9
71-63-6 Digitoxin
72-20-8 Endrin
74-83-9 Methyl Bromide I
74-90-8 Hydrocyanic Acid
74-93-1 Methyl Mercaptan I
75-15-0 Carbon Disulfide I
75-21-8 Ethylene Oxide '
75-44-5 Phosgene
75-55-8 Propyteneimine
75-56-9 Propylene Oxide
75-74-1 Tetramethyllead
75-77-4 Trimethylchlorosilane
75-78-5 Dimethyldichlorosilane h
75-79-6 Methyltrichlorosilane n
75-86-5 Acetone Cyanohydrin ~
76-02-8 Trichloroacetyl Chloride
77-47-4 Hexachiorocyclopentadiene n
77-78-1 Dimethyl Sulfate
77-81-6 Tabun c, h
78-00-2 Tetraethyllead
78-34-2 DIoxathion
78-53-5 Amiton
78-71-7 Oxetane, 3,3-Bis(Chloromethyl)-
78-82-0 Isobutyronitrile h
78-94-4 Methyl Vinyl Ketone
78-97-7 Lactonitrile
79-06-1 Acrylamide
79-11-8 Chloroacetic Acid
79-19-6 Thiosemicarbazide
79-21-0 Peracetic Acid
79-22-1 Methyl Chloroformate h
80-63-7 Methyl 2-Chloroacrylate
10
100
10
1,000
500
10
500
100
500
100
100
10
10
10
10
1
10
1
1
500
1
1,000
10
10
10
100
5,000
10
10
10
1
10
100
100
10
100
100
1
1,000
10
100
100
10
10
1
100
100
1,000
500
500
10
500
10
100
10
10
500
500
500
1,000
10
1,000
5,000
100
100
500
1,000
500
10/10,000
500
500/10,000
1,000/10,000
500/10,000
10
500/10,000
100
500/10,000
100
100/10,000
100
100/10,000
1,000
100/10,000
100/10,000
500
100/10,000
1,000
500/10,000
1,000/10,000
1,000/10,000
500
100/10,000
500/10,000
500/10,000
1,000
1,000
10/10,000
1,000
500/10,000
10/10,000
100/10,000
100/10,000
10,000
100/10,000
100/10,000
500/10,000
1,000
100
500
10,000
1,000
10
10,000
10,000
100
1,000
500
500
1,000
500
100
500
10
100
500
500
500
1,000
10
1,000
1,000/10,000
100/10,000
100/10,000
500
500
500
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31307
APPENDIX B TO PART 355.—THE LIST OF LXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING
QUANTITIES—Continued
[CAS Number Order]
CAS No.
Chemical name
Notes
Reportable
quantity*
(pounds)
Threshold plan-
ning quantity
(pounds)
81-81-2
82-66-6
86-50-0
86-88-4
88-05-1
88-85-7
91-08-7
95-48-7
98-05-5
98-07-7
98-13-5
98-16-8
98-87-3
98-95-3
99-98-9
100-14-1
100-44-7
102-36-3
103-85-5
106-89-8
106-96-7
107-02-8
107-07-3
107-11-9
107-12-0
107-13-1
107-15-3
107-16^
107-18-6
107-30-2
107-44-8
107-49-3
108-05-4
108-23-6
108-91-8
108-95-2
108-98-5
109-61-5
109-77-3
110-00-9
110-57-6
110-89-4
111-44-4
111-69-3
115-21-9
115-26-4
115-29-7
115-90-2
116-06-3
119-38-0
123-31-9
123-73-9
124-65-2
124-87-8
126-98-7
129-00-0
129-06-6
140-29-4
140-76-1
141-66-2
143-33-9
144-49-0
149-74-6
151-38-2
151-50-8
151-56-4
152-16-9
297-78-9
Warfarin
Diphacinone
Azinphos-Methyl :
ANTU
Aniline, 2,4,6-Trimethyi-
Dinoseb
Toluene 2,6-Diisocyanate
Cresol, o-
Benzenearsonic Acid
Benzotrichloride
Trichlorophenylsilane h
Benzenamine, 3-(Trifluoromethyl)-
Benzal Chloride
Nitrobenzene I
Dimethyl-p-Phenylenediamine
Benzene, 1-(Chloromethyl)-4-Nitro-
Benzyl Chloride
isocyanic Acid, 3,4-Dichlorophenyl Ester
Phenylthiourea
Epichlorohydrin
Propargyl Bromide
Acrolein
Chloroethanol
Allylamine
Propionitrile
Acryionitrile I
Ethylenediamine
Formaldehyde Cyanohydrin h
Allyl Alcohol
Chloromethy! Methyl Ether c
Sarin h
TEPP
Vinyl Acetate Monomer I
Isopropyl Chloroformate
Cyclohexylamine |
Phenol
Thiophenol .'
Propyl Chloroformate
Malononitrile
Furan
Trans-1,4-DichIorobutene
Piperidine
Dichloroethyl Ether
Adiponitrile I
Trichloroethylsilane h
Dimefox
Endosulfan
Fensulfothion h
Aldicarb c
Isopropylmethylpyrazolyl Dimethylcarbamate d
Hydroquinone I
Crotonaldehyde, (E)-
Sodium Cacodylate
Picrotoxin
Methacrylonitrile , h
Pyrene c
Warfarin Sodium h
Benzyl Cyanide h
Pyridine, 2-Methyl-5-Vinyl-
Dicrotophos
Sodium Cyanide (Na(CN)) b
Fluoroacetic Acid
Dichloromethylphenylsilane
Methoxyethylmercuric Acetate
Potassium Cyanide b
Ethyleneimine
Diphosphoramide, Octamethyl-
Isobenzan
100
10
1
100
500
1,000
100
100
10
10
500
500
5,000
1,000
10
500
100
500
100
100
10
1
500
500
10
100
5,000
1,000
100
10
10
10
5,000
1,000
10,000
1,000
100
500
1,000
100
500
1,000
10
1,000
500
500
1
500
1
1
100
100
100
500
1,000
5,000
100
500
500
100
10
10
1,000
500
10
1
100
100
500/10,000
10/10,000
10/10,000
500/10,000
500
100/10,000
100
1,000/10,000
10/10,000
100
500
500
500
10,000
10/10,000
500/10,000
500
500/10,000
100/10,000
1,000
10
500
500
500
500
10,000
10,000
1,000
1,000
100
10
100
1,000
1,000
10,000
500/10,000
500
500
500/10,000
500
500
1,000
10,000
1,000
500
500
10/10,000
500
100/10,000
500
500/10,000
1,000
100/10,000
500/10,000
500
1,000/10,000
100/10,000
500
500
100
100
10/10,000
1,000
500/10,000
100
500
100
100/10,000
-------
31308
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B TO PART 355.—THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING
QUANTITIES—Continued
[CAS Number Order]
CAS No.
Chemical name
Notes
Reportable
quantity *
(pounds)
Threshold plan-
ning quantity
(pounds)
297-97-2
298-00-0
298-02-2
298-04-4
300-62-9
302-01-2
309-00-2
315-18-4
316-42-7
327-98-0
353-42-4
359-06-8
371-62-0
379-79-3
465-73-6
470-90-6
502-39-6
504-24-5
505-60-2
506-61-6
506-68-3
506-78-5
509-14-8
514-73-8
534-07-6
534-52-1
535-89-7
538-07-8
541-25-3
541-53-7
542-76-7
542-88-1
542-90-5
555-77-1
556-61-6
556-64-9
558-25-8
563-12-2
563-41-7
584-84-9
594-42-3
597-64-8
614-78-8
624-83-9
627-11-2
630-60-4
639-58-7
640-19-7
644-64-4
675-14-9
676-97-1
696-28-6
732-11-6
760-93-0
786-19-6
814-49-3
814-68-6
824-11-3
900-95-8
919-86-8
920-46-7
944-22-9
947-02-4
950-10-7
950-37-8
991-42-4
998-30-1
999-81-5
Thionazin
Parathlon-Methyl c
Phorate
Dlsulfoton
Amphetamine
Hydrazine
Aldrln
Mexacarbate
Emetine, Dihydrochloride h
Trlchloronate k
Boron Trifluoride Compound With Methyl Ether (1:1)
Fluoroacetyl Chloride c
Ethylene Fluorohydrin c, h
Ergotamlne Tartrate
Isodrin
Chlorfenvlnfos
Methylmercuric Dicyanamide
Pyridine, 4-Amino- h
Mustard Gas h
Potassium Silver Cyanide b
Cyanogen Bromide
Cyanogen Iodide
Tetranitromethane
Dithiazanine Iodide
Bis(Chloromethyl) Ketone
Dinitrocresol
CrimkJine
Ethylbis(2-Chloroethyl)Amine h
Lewisite c,
Dithiobiuret
Propionitrile, 3-Chloro-
Chlorornethyl Ether h
Ethylthlocyanate
Tris(2-Chloroethyl)Amine h
Methyl Isothiocyanate b
Methyl Thiocyanate
Methanesulfonyl Fluoride
Ethion
Semicarbazide Hydrochioride
Toluene 2,4-Diisooyanate
Perchloromethylmercaptan
Tetraethyltin c
Thlourea, (2-Methylphenyl)-
Methyl Isocyanate
Chloroethyl Chloroformate
Ouabain
Triphenyltin Chloride
Fluoroacetamide
Dlmetilan
Cyanuric Fluoride
Methyl Phosphonio Dichloride b
Phenyl Dichloroarsine h
Phosmet
Methacryllc Anhydride
Carbophenothion
Dlethyl Chlorophosphate h
Acrylyl Chloride h
Trimethylolpropane Phosphite h
Stannane, Acetoxytriphenyl- g
Demeton-S-Methyl
Methacryloyl Chloride
Fonotos
Phosfolan
Mephosfolan
Methidathion
Norbormide
Triethoxysilane
Chlormequat Chloride h
100
100
10
1
1,000
1
1
1,000
1
500
1,000
10
10
500
1
500
500
1,000
500
1
1,000
1,000
10
500
10
10
100
500
10
100
1,000
10
10,000
100
500
10,000
1,000
10
1,000
100
100
100
500
10
1,000
100
500
100
1
100
100
1
10
500
500
500
100
100
500
500
100
500
100
500
500
100
500
100
500
100/10,000
10
500
1,000
1,000
500/10,000
500/10,000
1/10,000
500
1,000
10
10
500/10,000
100/10,000
500
500/10,000
500/10,000
500
500
500/10,000
1,000/10,000
500
500/10,000
10/10,000
10/10,000
100/10,000
500
10
100/10,000
1,000
100
10,000
100
.500
10,000
1,000
1,000
1,000/10,000
500
500
100
500/10,000
500
1,000
100/10,000
500/10,000
100/10,000
500/10,000
100
100
500
10/10,000
500
500
500
100
100/10,000
500/10,000
500
100
500
100/10,000
500
500/10,000
100/10,000
500
100/10,000
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
313O9
APPENDIX B TO PART 355.—THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING
QUANTITIES—Continued
[CAS Number Order]
CAS No.
Chemical name
Notes
Reportable
quantity *
(pounds)
Threshold plan-
ning quantity
(pounds)
1031-47-6
1066-45-1
1122-60-7
1124-33-0
1129-41-5
1303-28-2
1306-19-0
1314-62-1
1314-84-7
1327-53-3
1397-94-0
1420-07-1
1464-53-5
1558-25-4
1563-66-2
1600-27-7
1622-32-8
1752-30-3
1910-42-5
1982-47-4
2001-95-8
2032-65-7
2074-50-2
2097-19-0
2104-64-5
2223-93-0
2231-57-4
2238-07-5
2275-18-5
2497-07-6
2524-03-0
2540-82-1
2570-26-5
2587-90-8
2631-37-0
2636-26-2
2642-71-9
2665-30-7
2703-13-1
2757-18-8
2763-96-4
2778-04-3
3037-72-7
3254-63-5
3569-57-1
3615-21-2
3689-24-5
3691-35-8
3734-97-2
3735-23-7
3878-19-1
4044-65-9
4098-71-9
4104-14-7
4170-30-3
4301-50-2
4418-66-0
4835-11-4
5344-82-1
5836-29-3
6533-73-9
6923-22-4
7446-09-5
7446-11-9
7446-18-6
7487-94-7
7550-45-0
7580-67-8
Triamiphos
Trimethyltin Chloride ZZZZZ
Nitrocyclohexane
Pyridine, 4-Nitro-,1 -Oxide '".
Metolcarb :
Arsenic Pentoxide
Cadmium Oxide
Vanadium Pentoxide
Zinc Phosphide b
Arsenous Oxide h
Antimycin A c
Dinoterb
Diepoxybutane
Trichloro(Chloromethyl)Si(ane , '..
Carbofuran
Mercuric Acetate
Ethanesulfonyl Chloride, 2-Chloro- ,
Acetone Thiosemicarbazide
Paraquat Dichloride
Chloroxuron
Valinomycin c
Methiocarb
Paraquat Methosulfate
Phenylsilatrane h
EPN ZZ"ZZ""
Cadmium Stearate c
Thiocarbazide
Diglycidyl Ether
Prothoate
Oxydisulfoton h
Dimethyl Phosphorochloridothiqate
Formothion
Pentadecylamine
Phosphorothioic Acid, O,O-Dimethyl-S-(2-Methylthio) Ethyl Ester ".'.'.".'.'"."... c, g
Promecarb d, h
Cyanophos
Azinphos-Ethyl
Phosphonothioic Acid, Methyl-, O-(4-Nitrophenyl) O-Phenyl Ester Z"ZZZ
Phosphonothioic Acid, Methyl-, O-Ethyl O-(4-(Methylthio)Phenyl) Ester
Thallous Malonate ; c, h
Muscimol
Endothion
Silane, (4-Aminobutyl)Diethoxymethyl- '.'"."."".'.
Phosphoric Acid, Dimethyl 4-(Methylthio)Phenyl Ester
Sulfoxide, 3-Chloropropyl Octyl
Benzimidazole, 4,5-Dichloro-2-(Trifluoromethyl)- g
Sulfotep
Chlorophacinone .'.
Amiton Oxalate ""'"""".'.
Methyl Phenkapton
Fuberidazole
Bitoscanate
Isophorone Diisocyanate
Phosacetim
Crotonaldehyde ZZZZ!""
Fluenetil
Phenol, 2,2'-Thiobis(4-Chloro-6-Methyl)- Z"Z!!!!!!Z!ZZ!!
Hexamethylenediamine, N,N'-Dibutyl-
Thiourea, (2-Chlorophenyl)-
Coumatetralyl
Thallous Carbonate c, h
Monocrotophos '"'
Sulfur Dioxide I
Sulfur Trioxide ZZZZZ.ZZZZ b
Thallous Sulfate
Mercuric Chloride '
Titanium Tetrachloride
Lithium Hydride Z!"!Z!!!!ZZ!!!!!!!!.. b
500
500
500
500
1
1
100
1,000
100
1
1,000
500
10
100
10
500
500
1,000
10
500
1,000
10
10
100
100
1,000
1,000
1,000
100
500
500
100
100
500
1
1,000
100
500
500
100
1,000
500
1,000
500
500
500
100
100
100
500
100
500
100
100
100
100
100
500
100
500
100
10
500
100
100
500
1,000
100
500/10,000
500/10,000
500
500/10,000
100/10,000
100/10,000
100/10,000
100/10,000
500
100/10,000
1,000/10,000
500/10,000
500
100
10/10,000
500/10,000
500
1,000/10,000
10/10,000
500/10,000
1,000/10,000
500/10,000
10/10,000
100/10,000
100/10,000
1,000/10,000
1,000/10,000
1,000
100/10,000
500
500
100
100/10,000
500
500/10,000
1,000
100/10,000
500
500
100/10,000
500/10,000
500/10,000
1,000
500
500
500/10,000
500
100/10,000
100/10,000
500
100/10,000
500/10,000
100
100/10,000
1,000
100/10,000
100/10,000
500
100/10,000
500/10,000
100/10,000
10/10,000
500
100
100/10,000
500/10,000
100
100
-------
31310
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B TO PART 355.—THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING
QUANTITIES—Continued
[CAS Number Order]
CAS No.
7631-89-2
7637-07-2
7647-01-0
7664-39-3
7664-41-7
7664-93-9
7697-37-2
7719-12-2
7722-84-1
7723-14-0
7726-95-6
7778-44-1
7782-41-4
7782-50-5
7783-00-8
7783-06-4
7783-07-5
7783-60-0
7783-70-2
7783-80-4
7784-34-1
7784-42-1
7784-46-5
7786-34-7
7791-12-0
7791-23-3
7803-51-2
8001-35-2
8065-48-3
10025-73-7
10025-87-3
10026-13-8
10028-15-6
10031-59-1
10102-18-8
10102-20-2
10102-43-9
10102-44-0
10124-50-2
10140-87-1
10210-68-1
10265-92-6
10294-34-5
1031.1-84-9
10476-95-6
12002-03-8
12108-13-3
13071-79-9
13171-21-6
13194-48-4
13410-01-0
13450-90-3
13463-39-3
13463-40-6
14167-18-1
15271-41-7
16752-77-5
17702-41-9
17702-57-7
19287-45-7
19624-22-7
20830-75-5
20859-73-8
21548-32-3
21609-90-5
21908-53-2
21923-23-9
Chemical name
Boron Trifluoride
Sulfuric Acid
Nitric Acid
Phosphorus Trichloride
Chlorine
Thallous Chloride
Nitric Oxide
Nitrogen Dioxide
Pthannl 1 ?-Dirhloro- Acetate
Dialifor
Methacrolein Dlacetate
Manoanese Tricarbonyl Methylcyclopentadienyl
Iron Pentacarbonyl-
Bicyclo[2.2.1 ]Heptane-2-Carbonitrile, 5-Ch!oro-6-
((((Methylamino)Carbonyl)Oxy)lmino)-, (1 s-(1 -a!pha,2-beta,4-a!pha,5-alpha,6E))-.
Decaborane(1 4)
Pentaborane
Digoxin
Aluminum Phosphide
Fosthietan
Leptophos
Mercuric Oxide
Chiorthiophos
Notes
I
I
I
b,h
k
I
k
c, h
b
h
h
c
h
h
h
h
h
Reportable
quantity *
(pounds)
1
500
5,000
100
100
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
500
1
10
10
10
100
10
100
500
100
1
10
100
500
100
1
500
1
500
100
100
100
500
10
10
1
10
100
500
100
1,000
1
100
100
1,000
100
500
10
100
500
500
100
500
100
500
10
100
500
500
500
500
Threshold plan-
ning quantity
(pounds)
1,000/10,000
500
500
100
500
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
100
500
500/10,000
500
100
1,000/10,000
500
10
100
500
100
500
100
500/10,000
500
100/10,000
500
500
500/10,000
500
1/10,000
500
500
100
100/10,000
100/10,000
500/10,000
100
100
500/10,000
1,000
10/10,000
100/10,000
500
100/10,000
1,000
500/10,000
100
100
100
1,000
100/10,000
500/10,000
1
100
500/10,000
500/10,000
500/10,000
500/10,000
100/10,000
100
500
10/10,000
500
500
500/10,000
500/10,000
500
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31311
APPENDIX B TO PART 355.—THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING
QUANTITIES—Continued
[CAS Number Order]
CAS No.
22224-92-6
23135-22-0
23422-53-9
23505-41-1
24017-47-8
24934-91-6
26419-73-8
26628-22-8
27137-85-5
28347-13-9
28772-56-7
30674-80-7
39196-18-4
50782-69-9
53558-25-1
58270-08-9
62207-76-5
Chemical name
Fenamiphos
Oxamyl
Formetanate Hydrochloride
Pi rimif os-Ethyl
Triazofos
Chlormephos
Carbamjc Acid, Methyl-, O-(((2,4-Dimethyl-1 , 3-Dithiolan-2-yl)Methylene)Amino)-
Sodium Azide (Na(N3))
Tricr)loro(Dichlorophenyl)Silane
Xylylene Bichloride
Bromadiolone
Methacryloyloxyethyl Isocyanateh . ,
Thiofanox
Phosphonothioic Acid, Methyl-, S-(2-(Bis(1-Methylethyl)Amino)Ethyl) O-Ethyl Ester ...
Pyriminil . ... ..
Zinc, Dichloro(4,4-Dimeihyl-5((((Methylamino) Carbonyl)Oxy)lmino)Pentanenitrile)-,
(T-4)-.
Cobalt, ((2,2'-(1 ,2-Ethanediylbis (Nitrilomethylidyne)) Bis(6-Fluorophenolato)) (2-)-
N.N'.O.OO-.
Notes
d
d h
d
b
h
Reportable
quantity*
(pounds)
10
•\
1
1 000
500
500
1
1 000
500
100
100
100
1fin
100
100
100
100
Threshold plan-
ning quantity
(pounds)
10/10 000
100/10 000
500/10 000
1 onn
-------
31312
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
reporting requirements established
under this part consist of Material
Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) reporting, and
inventory reporting.
(b) This part is written In a special
format to make it easier to understand
the regulatory requirements. Like other
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
regulations, this part establishes
enforceable legal requirements.
Information considered non-binding
guidance under EPCRA is indicated in
this regulation by the word "note" and
a smaller typeface. Such notes are
provided for Information purposes only
and are not considered legally binding
under this part.
§ 370.2 Who do "you," "I," and "your"
refer to In this part?
Throughout this part, "you," "I," and
"your" refer to the owner or operator of
a Facility.
§ 370.3 Which section contains the
definitions of the key words used In this
part?
The definitions of key words used in
this part are In 40 CFR 355.62. It is
Important to read the definitions for key
words because the definition explains
the word's specific meaning in the
regulations in this part. When a defined
word first appears in this part, it is
printed with the Initial letter
capitalized.
Subpart B—Who Must Comply
§ 370.10 Who must comply with the
hazardous chemical reporting requirements
of this part?
(a) You must comply with the
reporting requirements of this part if the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1970 (OSHA) and regulations issued
under that Act require your facility to
prepare or have available a material
safety data sheet (MSDS) for a
hazardous chemical and if either of the
following conditions is met:
(1) A hazardous chemical that is an
Extremely Hazardous Substance (EHS)
is present at your facility at any one
time in an amount equal to or greater
than the threshold level for that EHS—
500 pounds (or 227 kg, approximately
55 gallons) or the Threshold Planning
Quantity (TPQ). whichever is lower.
Extremely hazardous substances and
their TPQs are listed in appendices A
and B of 40 CFR part 355.
(2) A hazardous chemical that is not
an extremely hazardous substance is
present at your facility at any one time
in an amount equal to or greater than
the threshold level for that hazardous
chemical. Threshold levels for such
hazardous chemicals are as follows:
(i) For any hazardous chemical that
does not meet the criteria in paragraph
(a) (2) (11), (Hi), (iv) or (v) of this section,
the threshold level is 10,000 pounds (or
4,540 kg).
(ii) For gasoline at a retail gas station,
when stored in a tank entirely
underground and in compliance with
die Underground Storage Tank
regulations at 40 CFR part 280, the
threshold level is 75,000 gallons (for all
grades of gasoline combined). For
purposes of this part, retail gas station
means a retail gasoline facility
principally engaged in selling gasoline
to the public and convenience stores
engaged in selling gasoline to the
public.
(Hi) For diesel fuel at a retail gas
station, when stored in a tank entirely
underground and in compliance with
the Underground Storage Tank
regulations at 40 CFR part 280, the
threshold level is 100,000 gallons.
(iv) For sand, gravel, and rock salt the
threshold level is infinite. For purposes
of this part, an infinite threshold level
means that you do not have to comply
with the reporting requirements of this
part, except for § 370.10(b).
(v) For any chemical that is
considered minimal hazard and
minimal risk under § 370.11, the
threshold level is infinite. For purposes
of this part, an infinite threshold level
means that you do not have to comply
with the reporting requirements of this
part, except for § 370.10(b).
(b) You also must comply with the
reporting requirements of this part if
OSHA and regulations issued under that
Act require your facility to prepare or
have available an MSDS for a hazardous
chemical and if the LEPC requests that
you submit an MSDS (and you have not
already submitted an MSDS to the LEPC
for that hazardous chemical), or if the
LEPC, the SERC, or the fire department
with jurisdiction over your facility
requests that you submit Tier II
information. For reporting in response
to any such requests under this
paragraph (§370.10(b)), the threshold
level is zero. Tier II information is
discussed in § 370.42. LEPC means the
local emergency planning committee
appointed by the State emergency
response commission. SERC means the
emergency response commission for the
State in which the facility is located
except where the facility is located in
Indian Country, in which case, SERC
means the emergency response
commission for the Tribe under whose
jurisdiction the facility is located.
§ 370.11 What specific criteria must be met
for a hazardous chemical to qualify for relief
from routine reporting requirements?
(a) A hazardous chemical present at
your facility that is not an EHS, a
CERCLA hazardous substance, a toxic
chemical listed in 40 CFR part 372 or a
regulated substance listed under the
Clean Air Act (CAA) Risk Management
Program (RMP) in 40 CFR part 68
qualifies for the infinite threshold level
under § 370.10(a)(2)(v), which provides
for relief from routine reporting
requirements, if the hazardous chemical
meets each of the following specific
criteria:
(1) The chemical has a minimal
inherent hazard and presents a minimal
physical or health risk, to individuals in
the community beyond the site or sites
on which the facility is located, and to
emergency responders on-site, under
normal conditions of production, use, or
storage, or in a foreseeable emergency.
(2) The chemical has a minimal
inherent hazard and presents a minimal
risk, to the environment beyond the site
or sites on which the facility containing
the chemical is located.
(3) You have followed the notification
requirements under paragraph (b) of this
section.
(b) For a hazardous chemical present
at your facility to qualify for the infinite
threshold level under §370.10(a)(2)(v),
which provides for relief from routine
reporting requirements, you must meet
each of the following notification
requirements:
(1) You must notify the appropriate
SERC, LEPC and fire department of your
assessment that the chemical meets the
specific criteria in paragraph (a) of this
section, and must notify them of the
name of the chemical and conditions
relevant to the assessment.
(2) You must follow the notification
procedure described in this section one
time, unless a change occurs that may
affect whether the chemical continues to
meet the criteria in paragraph (a) of this
section. If such a change occurs, you
must repeat the notification
requirements of this paragraph. Until
these notification requirements are met,
you must report using the applicable
threshold level under §§370.10(a)(2)(i)
through (iv).
§370.12 What hazardous chemicals must I
report under this part?
You must report any hazardous
chemical for which you are required to
prepare or have available an MSDS
under OSHA and regulations issued
under that Act that is present at your
facility above the applicable threshold
specified in §370.10. (Specific
exemptions from reporting are in
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31313
§370.13.) The EPA has not Issued a list
of hazardous chemicals subject to
reporting under this part; a substance is
a hazardous chemical, and required to
have an MSDS, if it meets the definition
of hazardous chemical under the OSHA
regulations found at 29 CFR
1910.1200(c).
§ 370.13 What substances are exempt
from these reporting requirements?
You do not have to report substances
for which you are not required to have
an MSDS under the OSHA regulations,
or that are excluded from the definition
of hazardous chemical under EPCRA
section 311(e). Each of the following
substances are excluded under EPCRA
section 31 l(e):
(a) Any food, food additive, color
additive, drug, or cosmetic regulated by
the Food and Drug Administration.
(b) Any substance present as a solid
in any manufactured item to the extent
exposure to the substance does not
occur under normal conditions of use.
(c) Any substance to the extent it is
used:
(1) For personal, family, or household
purposes, or is present in the same form
and concentration as a product
packaged for distribution and use by the
general public. Present in the same form
and concentration as a product
packaged for distribution and use by the
general public means a substance
packaged in a similar manner and
present in the same concentration as the
substance when packaged for use by the
general public, whether or not it is
intended for distribution to the general
public or used for the same purpose as
when it is packaged for use by the
general public;
(2) In a research laboratory or hospital
or other medical facility under the
direct supervision of a technically
qualified individual;
-------
31314
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
(b) You must also submit an MSDS for
any hazardous chemical present at your
facility for which you have not
submitted an MSDS, to the LEPC within
30 days of receipt of a request by the
LEPC (as provided in §370.10(b)).
§ 370.31 Do I have to update the
Information?
You must update the information in
all of the following ways:
(a) Submit a revised MSDS after
discovery of significant new information
concerning a hazardous chemical for
which an MSDS was submitted.
(b) Submit an MSDS, or a list as
described in § 370.30(a), for any
hazardous chemical for which you
become subject to these reporting
requirements.
(c) Submit an MSDS for any
hazardous chemical present at your
facility for which you have not
submitted an MSDS, and for which the
LEPC requests you to submit an MSDS,
as provided in §370.30(b).
§ 370.32 To whom must I submit the
Information?
You must submit the required
reporting information to the following
entities:
(a) Submit an MSDS or list, as
provided in §370.30(a), to the LEPC, the
SERC, and the fire department with
jurisdiction over your facility.
(b) Submit an MSDS requested by the
LEPC, as provided in § 370.30(b), to the
LEPC.
§ 370.33 When must I submit the
Information?
You must submit the required
reporting information at the following
times:
(a) Submit an MSDS, or a list as
provided in § 370.30(a), for a hazardous
chemical subject to the reporting
requirements of this part by October 17,
1987, or within 3 months after you first
become subject to the reporting
requirements of this part (as provided in
§§370.30 and 370.31(b)).
(b) Submit a revised MSDS, as
provided in §370.31 (a), within 3
months after discovering significant
new information about a hazardous
chemical for which an MSDS was
submitted.
(c) Submit an MSDS requested by the
LEPC. as provided in §§370.30(b) and
370.3 l(c), within 30 days of receiving
the request.
How to Comply With Inventory
Reporting
§ 370.40 What Information must I provide,
and what format must I use?
(a) If you are required to comply with
the hazardous chemical reporting
requirements of this part, then you must
annually—by March 1—submit
inventory information regarding any
hazardous chemical present at your
facility at any time during the previous
calendar year in an amount equal to or
in excess of its threshold level.
Threshold levels are provided in
§370.10.
(b) Tier I information is the minimum
information that you must report to be
in compliance with the inventory
reporting requirements of this part, and
is described in §370.41. You may
choose to report Tier II information,
which is described in §370.42, for any
hazardous chemical at your facility. You
must submit Tier II information to the
SERC, LEPC, or fire department having
jurisdiction over your facility if they
request it. The EPA publishes Tier I and
Tier II Inventory Forms, which are
uniform formats for reporting the Tier I
and Tier II information. You may use a
State or local format for reporting
inventory information if the State or
local format contains at least the Tier I
information.
Note to paragraph (b): Some States require
Tier II information annually under State law.
(c) You should contact the SERC to
determine State requirements for format
and procedures regarding inventory
reporting. If your State has a policy for
electronic submittal of inventory
information, you should obtain
instructions from the SERC. You may
also contact the SERC to obtain
inventory forms specific to that State.
You may obtain the most current
versions of the EPA Tier I and Tier II
forms, and instructions for completing
the Tier I and Tier II forms, by
contacting the National Center for
Environmental Publications and
Information (NCEPI) at 800/490-9198.
The forms are also available on the
Internet at www.epa.gov/ceppo/
publications/.
§ 370.41 What is Tier I inventory
Information?
Tier I information provides State and
local officials and the public with
information on the general types and
locations of hazardous chemicals
present at your facility during the
previous calendar year. The Tier I
information is the minimum
information that you must provide to be
in compliance with the inventory
reporting requirements of this part. If
you are reporting Tier I information, you
must report aggregate information on
hazardous chemicals by hazard
categories. There are two health hazard
categories and three physical hazard
categories for purposes of reporting
under this part. These five hazard
categories are defined in 40 CFR 355.62.
Tier I information includes all of the
following:
(a) Certification. The owner or
operator or the officially designated
representative of the owner or operator
must certify that all information
included in the submission is true,
accurate, and complete by certifying the
following: "I certify under penalty of
law that I have personally examined and
am familiar with the information
submitted and that based on my inquiry
of those individuals responsible for
obtaining the information, I believe that
the submitted information is true,
accurate, and complete." This
certification shall be accompanied by
your full name, official title, signature,
date signed, and total number of pages
in the submission including all
attachments.
(b) The calendar year for the reporting
period.
(c) The complete name (and company
identifier where appropriate) and
address of your facility. Include the full
street address or state road, the city,
county, State and zip code.
(d) The North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) code for
your facility.
(e) The Dun & Bradstreet number of
your facility.
(f) The owner's or operator's full
name, mailing address,-and phone
number.
(g) Emergency contact. The name,
title, and phone number(s) of at least
one local individual or office that can
act as a referral if emergency responders
need assistance in responding to a
chemical accident at your facility. You
must provide an emergency phone
number where such emergency
information will be available 24 hours a
day, every day.
(h) An indication whether the
information being reported is identical
to that submitted the previous year.
(i) An estimate (in ranges) of the
maximum amount of hazardous
chemicals in each hazard category
present at your facility at any time
during the preceding calendar year. You
must use codes that correspond to
different ranges. The range codes are in
§370.43.
0) An estimate (in ranges) of the
average daily amount of hazardous
chemicals in each hazard category
present at your facility during the
preceding calendar year. You must use
codes that correspond to different
ranges. The range codes are in § 370.43.
(k) The greatest number of days that
any single hazardous chemical within
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31315
each hazard category was present at
your facility.
(1) The general location of hazardous
chemicals in each hazard category,
within your facility. For each hazard
type, list the locations of all applicable
chemicals. As an alternative, you may
choose to submit a site plan, and list the
site coordinates related to the
appropriate locations.
§ 370.42 What is Tier II inventory
information?
Tier II information provides State and
local officials and the public with
specific information on amounts and
locations of hazardous chemicals
present at your facility during the
previous calendar year. If you are
reporting Tier II information, you must
include the following:
(a) Certification. The owner or
operator (or the officially designated
representative of the owner or operator)
must certify that all information
included in the submission is true,
accurate, and complete by certifying the
following: "I certify under penalty of
law that I have personally examined and
am familiar with the information
submitted and that based on my inquiry
of those individuals responsible for
obtaining the information, I believe that
the submitted information is true,
accurate, and complete." This
certification must be accompanied by
your full name, official title, original
signature, date signed, and total number
of pages in the submission including all
Confidential and Non-Confidential
Information Sheets and all attachments.
All other pages must also contain your
signature or signature stamp, the date
you signed the certification, and the
total number of pages in the submission.
(b) The calendar year for the reporting
period.
(c) The complete name (and company
identifier where appropriate) and
address of your facility. Include the full
street address or state road, the city,
county, State and zip code.
(d) The North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) code for
your facility.
(e) The Dun & Bradstreet number of
your facility.
(f) The owner's or operator's full
name, mailing address, and phone
number.
(g) Emergency contact. The name,
title, and phone number(s) of at least
one local individual or office that can
act as a referral if emergency responders
need assistance in responding to a
chemical accident at your facility. You
must provide an emergency phone
number where such emergency
Information will be available 24 hours a
day, every day.
(h) An indication whether the
information being reported is identical
to that submitted the previous year.
(i) For each hazardous chemical that
you are required to report, you must
provide the following information:
(1) The chemical name or the
common name of the chemical as
provided on the material safety data
sheet, and the Chemical Abstract
Service (CAS) registry number. If you
are withholding the name in accordance
with trade secret criteria, you must
provide the generic class or category
that is structurally descriptive of the
chemical, and indicate that the name is
withheld because of trade secrecy.
Trade secret criteria are addressed in
§370.64(a).
(2) An indication if any of these
descriptors apply to the chemical: pure
or mixture; solid, liquid, or gas; and
whether the chemical is or contains an
EHS.
(3) If the chemical is a mixture
containing an EHS, the chemical name
of each EHS in the mixture.
(4) An indication of which hazard
categories apply to the chemical. The
five hazard categories are defined in 40 -
CFR 355.62.
(5) An estimate (in ranges) of the
maximum amount of the hazardous
chemical present at your facility on any
single day during the preceding
calendar year. You must use codes that
correspond to different ranges. The
range codes are in § 370.43.
(6) An estimate (in ranges) of the
average daily amount of the hazardous
chemical present at your facility during
the preceding calendar year. You must
use codes that correspond to different
ranges. The range codes are in § 370.43.
(7) The number of days that the
hazardous chemical was present at your
facility during the preceding calendar
year.
(8) A brief description of the precise
location of the hazardous chemical at
your facility. You may choose to attach
a site plan with site coordinates
indicated, a list of site coordinate
abbreviations, or a description of dikes
and other safeguard measures. Under
EPCRA section 324 you may choose to
withhold the location information
regarding a specific chemical from
disclosure to the public. If you choose
to withhold the location information
from disclosure to the public you must
clearly indicate that the information is
"confidential." You must provide the
"confidential" location information on a
separate sheet from the other Tier II
information (which will be disclosed to
the public), and attach the
"confidential" location information
sheet to the other Tier II information.
Indicate any attachments you are
including.
(9) A brief description of the manner
of storage of the hazardous chemical,
including container type, temperature
and pressure, for each location listed.
You must use codes that correspond to
different storage types and temperature
and pressure conditions. The storage
codes are in § 370.43. If the specific
location for which you are reporting
storage conditions is a "confidential"
location then you must report the
storage conditions on a separate
"confidential" location information
sheet.
§370.43 What codes are used to report
Tier I and Tier II inventory information?
(a) Weight range codes. You must use
the following codes to report the
maximum amount and average daily
amount when reporting Tier I or Tier II
information:
Weight range in pounds
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
From
0
100
1,000
10,000
100,000
1,000,000 ....
10,000,000 ..
50,000,000 ..
100,000,000
500,000,000
1 billion
To
99.
999.
9,999.
99,999.
999,999.
9,999,999.
49,999,999.
gg^gg^gg.
499 ggg ggg
999,999,999.
Higher than
1 billion.
Note to paragraph (a): To convert gas or
liquid volume to weight in pounds, multiply
by an appropriate density factor.
(b) Storage type codes. You must use
the following codes to report storage
types when you are reporting Tier II
information:
Codes
A ,
B
C ,
D
E
F
G
H ,
I .,
J .,
K .
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
Types of storage
Above ground tank.
Below ground tank.
Tank inside building.
Steel drum.
Plastic or non-metallic drum.
Can.
Carboy.
Silo.
Fiber drum.
Bag.
Box.
Cylinder.
Glass bottles or jugs.
Plastic bottles or jugs.
Tote bin.
Tank wagon.
Rail car.
Other.
-------
31316
Federal Register /Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
(c) Storage condition codes. You must
use the following codes to report storage
conditions when you are reporting Tier
II Information:
Codes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Storage conditions
Pressure conditions
Ambient pressure.
Greater than ambient pres-
sure.
Less than ambient pres-
sure.
Temperature conditions
Ambient temperature.
Greater than ambient tem-
perature.
Less than ambient tem-
perature but not cryo-
genic.
Cryogenic conditions
(d) Your SERC or LEPC may provide
other range codes for reporting
maximum amounts and average dally
amounts, or may require reporting of
specific amounts. You may use your
SERC's or LEPC's range codes (or
specific amounts) provided the ranges
are not broader than the ranges in
paragraph (a) of this section. Your SERC
or LEPC may also provide other codes
for storage types or conditions. You may
use those codes provided your SERC's
or LEPC's storage types and conditions
codes specify the same or more detailed
Information as the codes in paragraphs
(b) and (c) of this section.
§ 370.44 To whom must I submit the
Inventory Information?
You must submit the required
Inventory information to each of the
following:
(a) Your State emergency response
commission (SERC).
(b) Your local emergency planning
committee (LEPC).
(c) The fire department with
jurisdiction over your facility.
§ 370.45 When must I submit the Inventory
Information?
You must report the required
inventory information as follows:
(a) Submit the required inventory
Information by March 1, each year
(beginning in 1988 or beginning after
your facility first becomes subject to this
part), and by March 1 of each year
afterwards. Your submission must
contain the required inventory
information on hazardous chemicals
present at your facility during the
preceding calendar year at or above the
threshold levels. Threshold levels are in
§370.10. The minimum required
inventory information under EPCRA
section 312 is Tier I information. Tier I
information requirements are described
in §370.41.
(b) Submit Tier II information within
30 days of the receipt of such a request
from the SERC, LEPC, or the fire
department having jurisdiction over
your facility, as provided in §370.10(b).
Tier II information requirements are
described in §370.42.
Subpart D—Community Access to
Information
§370.60 How does a person obtain MSDS
Information about a specific facility?
Any person may obtain an MSDS for
a specific facility, by writing to the
LEPC and asking for such an MSDS.
(a) If the LEPC has the MSDS, it must
provide it to the person making the
request.
(b) If the LEPC does not have the
MSDS, it must request the MSDS from
the facility's owner or operator.
§370.61 How does a person obtain
Inventory information about a specific
facility?
(a) Any person may request Tier II
information for a specific facility by
writing to the SERC or the LEPC and
asking for such information.
(1) If the SERC or LEPC has the Tier
II Information, the SERC or LEPC must
provide it to the person making the
request.
(2) If the SERC or LEPC does not have
the Tier II information, it must request
it from the facility's owner or operator
in either of the following cases:
(i) The person making the request is
a State or local official acting in his or
her official capacity.
(ii) The request is for hazardous
chemicals stored at the facility—in an
amount greater than 10,000 pounds—at
any time during the previous calendar
year.
(3) If the SERC or LEPC does not have
the Tier II information, it may request it
from the facility's owner or operator in
the following case: neither condition in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section is met,
but the person's request includes a
general statement of need.
(b) A SERC or LEPC must respond to
a request for Tier II information under
this section within 45 days of receiving
such a request.
§ 370.62 What Information may a State or
local official request from a facility?
The LEPC may ask a facility's owner
or operator to submit an MSDS for a
hazardous chemical present at the
facility. The SERC, LEPC, or fire
department having jurisdiction over a
facility may ask a facility's owner or
operator to submit Tier II information.
The owner or operator must submit the
MSDS (unless the owner or operator has
already submitted an MSDS to the LEPC
for that hazardous chemical) or Tier II
information within 30 days of receipt of
such request.
§ 370.63 What responsibilities do the
SERC and the LEPC have to make
requested information available?
If a person makes a request under this
subpart, the SERC or LEPC must make
available the following information
(except for confidential location
information, which is discussed in
§370.64(b)):
(a) All information obtained from an
owner or operator in response to a
request under this subpart.
(b) Any requested Tier II information
or MSDS otherwise in possession of the
SERC or the LEPC.
§ 370.64 What Information can 1 claim as
trade secret or confidential?
(a) Trade secrets. When submitting
MSDS reporting or inventory reporting
information that requires you to provide
the names of specific chemicals present
at your facility, you may be able to
withhold the name of a specific
chemical from reporting, if that
information is claimed as a trade secret.
The requirements for withholding trade
secret information are set forth in
EPCRA section 322 and implemented in
40 CFR part 350. EPA's final regulation
on trade secrecy (53 FR 28772, July 29,
1988) contains detailed information on
how to submit trade secrecy claims. If
you are withholding the name of a
specific chemical as a trade secret, in
accordance with trade secrecy
requirements, you must report the
generic class or category that is
structurally descriptive of the chemical
along with all other required
information; you must also submit the
withheld information to EPA and must
adequately substantiate your claim.
(b) Confidential location information.
If you are reporting Tier II information
then you are required to provide the
precise locations of specific chemicals
present at your facility (Tier II
information is described in §370.42).
You may request uiat the SERC or the
LEPC not disclose to the public the
location of any specific chemical
required to be submitted as Tier II
information. If you make such a request,
the SERC or LEPC must not disclose the
location of the specific chemical for
which you made the request. If you use
a Tier II form to report your inventory
information, you can choose to report
confidential location information with
respect to a specific chemical on a Tier
Two Confidential Location Information
Sheet, which must be attached to the
other Tier II information you are
reporting. Altiiough you may request
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 109/Monday, June 8, 1998/Proposed Rules
31317
that location Information with respect to
a specific chemical be withheld from
the public, you may not withhold this
information from the SERC, the LEPC,
or die local fire department.
§ 370.65 Must I allow the local fire
department to Inspect my facility, and must
I provide It specific location Information
about hazardous chemicals at my facility?
If you are the owner or operator of a
facility that has submitted inventory
information under this part, you must
comply with die following two
requirements upon request by the fire
department with jurisdiction over your
facility:
(a) You must allow die fire
department to conduct on-site
inspection of your facility.
(b) You must provide the fire
department witii information about the
specific locations of hazardous
chemicals at your facility.
[FR Doc. 98-14490 Filed 6-5-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
-------
vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
(5104)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
First Class Mai
Postage and Fees Paid
EPA
G-35
------- |