Navigate permits, plans, audits, and training with ease, ensuring your operations meet all regulatory requirements efficiently.
Forge a path to environmental leadership with tailored sustainability practices and EMS integration.
Elevate your team's expertise with targeted training in SPCC, NPDES, and industry-specific environmental regulations.
Mitigate risk and secure due diligence with our Phase I Environmental Site Assessments. Safeguard your real estate and land investments from environmental liabilities.
Ensuring environmental compliance while advancing towards sustainability goals.
Blending modern industry growth with established environmental compliance.
Expertly steering through dense environmental regulations for those on the water.
Expertly serving the concrete sector with deep industry-specific environmental insights.
Avoid costly pitfalls with comprehensive environmental due diligence for informed investments.
Navigate environmental standards effortlessly, ensuring smooth supply chain operations.
Written By: Doug Ruhlin | Jan 27, 2017
Time to Read 9 Minutes
Let's cut right to the chase. There's a lot of confusion when it comes to EPCRA Reporting. Whether it's Tier II Community Right-to-Know Reporting or TRI Reporting, a lot of people (including regulators) can get the facts switched around.
Why? Because the regulations around these two very different reporting requirements are confusing, conflicting, have odd language, and are pretty damn difficult to figure out if you're reading the regulations. In short, it's complicated and most information out there is bass
Fortunately, as environmental consultants who assist a lot of facilities with their annual reporting requirements, we know there can be a lot of confusion. What needs to be reported, how does it need to be reported, and when is the reporting required are just a few issues most people have when they get down to start reporting.
Finding clear answers can be like trying to find bigfoot; there seem to be a lot of clues out there, but solid, clear information is hard to find. So, let's help you figure out what's going on so you're in the clear when it comes to properly conducting Tier II Community Right-to-Know Reporting.
That might not make total sense but just bear with me for a second.
If you're not sure what we mean by EPCRA Reporting, including Tier II CRTK (Community Right-to-Know) Reporting and Toxic Release Inventory (aka TRI Reporting) then check out is Tier II CRTK Reporting the same as TRI Reporting.
Although there are thresholds which must be exceeded in order for reporting to be required, our experience is that most industries and industrial facilities are required to do Tier II Reporting at the very least. Also, a similarly high percentage of facilities really should be conducting TRI Reporting well, but that's another story for another day.
First, do it wrong, incomplete or not at all, and you risk enforcement from State and Federal USEPA agencies, who can levy some very, very large penalties, even if you're genuinely confused about what you're supposed to do.
Second, not all of this is for the use of the government or public scrutiny. For instance, the Tier II Reporting of the presence of hazardous materials at your facility is used by emergency responders, such as local fire departments. Should there be a fire at your facility, and the fire department is called out to respond, they have the ability to punch up information on what you've reported as being present at your facility before they arrive so that they're ready to respond appropriately when they pull through your front gate. I think we can all agree that's good stuff!
And finally, this information is important, since it gives the public the opportunity to know what's being stored or handled at your facility, and to make decisions such as if they want to live nearby, are there any particular risks I should know about and prepare for, etc. Given some of the recent incidents we've read and heard about at industrial facilities such as fires, explosions, gas releases, etc., you can imagine that this is pretty useful and important information, and we'd all support the availability of this information to anyone with a vested interest.
I need to recount a recent incident that happened to me, and what it means to you and your company.
I was speaking before an industry group recently, going through our standard discussion of EPCRA Reporting (the way we do it), and a few in the crowd let me know that they disagreed with what I was presenting, saying they had been instructed by a USEPA speaker years ago in a different way of doing the reporting.
Needless to say, this threw me for a bit, and while I was tempted to disagree with what they were saying, something rang familiar about it.
I went back and reviewed the regulations, and what the regulations had to say about how we conduct Tier II Reporting (as well as many others) versus what these folks had been told by a USEPA spokesperson and the way that they had been reporting for years.
Okay, I know that might sound clear as mud, but bear with me.
So just exactly what are we reporting on? Specific chemicals, mixtures of chemicals, specific materials such as products or materials?
Turns out, the CRTK regulations provide the flexibility to report different ways, EITHER as pure chemicals or as mixtures.
To report mixtures, you can either break out the individual hazardous chemical or chemicals (there might be several in a mixture).
Or! You can report on the mixture as a whole.
Whichever way you do it, it must be consistent
So if you're providing SDS reporting on mixtures or substances with SDS, then you also have to do your annual inventory reporting for those mixtures or substances with SDS. If you provided your initial SDS for pure chemicals, then you have to do your annual inventory reporting for those pure chemicals.
This stuff is confusing, so let's get into a hypothetical.
Let's presume you have mixtures at your facility, mixture A, B, and C, all of which contain some amount of formaldehyde, an EHS chemical with a reporting threshold of 500 lbs. You can:
What if it's not an EHS? You still do the same thing!
You have a choice of either determining the total quantity of all individual chemicals in all mixtures, or you can report the mixtures individually (those which contain any of those 65,000 hazardous chemicals).
Let's use an example of calcium nitrate as a hazardous chemical. We could total the amount of calcium nitrate in mixture A, mixture B, or mixture C, and compare to the reporting threshold of 10,000 lbs, or we could report mixture A, mixture B, and mixture C individually, provided they exceed the 10,000 lb reporting threshold. If you went this way, you have to provide the name, product name, or trade name of the mixture, and since no EHS, you don't need to list the
We take the mixture route nearly all the time with our clients, instead of the pure chemical route because...
Doing it the mixture way is like saying, "okay, this mixture is hazardous - all of it". In a way, it kind of makes sense, doesn't it? The mixture has an SDS, not the individual chemicals in that mixture. So if mixture A came with an SDS, and it's over 10,000 lbs, it get's reported. A firefighter comes to the site during a fire, he's looking for a tank or container holding mixture A, not one holding the pure chemical in it. To me, that's the more sensible way of doing things.
Sounds easier, right? But, are there times when it might make more sense to do the pure chemical reporting?
One way is not right or wrong, it just depends on your particular circumstances. But finally, here's another reason why I favor the mixture method of reporting.
Recall that fire truck racing to your site, and punching up your list of hazardous substances on the way, which they are preparing to deal with. They arrive at your site and expect to find storage tanks of pure chemicals if that's how you reported them. Sure, there might be a little in mixture A, some in mixture B, and some in mixture C, but they only know there are >500 lbs of it on the site and expect to see a tank or container of it, when in fact, there is no tank or container of the pure chemical.
That doesn't seem to make much sense, does it?
So I get it, it's still a bit confusing. Just remember this. You have two ways of reporting, as a pure chemical or as a mixture. Whatever you do, you have to be consistent, and it needs to make sense for your facility and operation. Your choice.
I hope that makes this a bit clearer, but if not, reach out to us and we'll do what we can to answer your questions. After all, CRTK reporting is important!
We explain the differences between Tier II Reporting & TRI Reporting. Tier II Community Right to Know Reporting is just about done, which means (at least for us here in the office) we're starting to...
We cover details on Community Right-to-Know Reporting & TRI Reporting in South Carolina. When it comes to EPCRA Reporting, usually meaning TRI Reporting & Tier II Community Right-to-Know Reporting,...
Information on Tier II Community Right to Know Reporting & TRI Reporting in North Carolina. Both Tier II Community Right-to-Know Reporting and TRI Reporting can be confusing. From what we've heard...
Tel: 888-RMA-0230 | Email: info@rmagreen
Copyright © Resource Management Associates