I was going to stay out of this, as I don't deal with SARA Title III (although a good friend of mine coordinates all the Tier I/Tier II/TRI/pollution prevention reporting in the state), but I'm afraid the previous comment upset me a bit. If you don't think silica sand is hazardous, please read NIOSH's Silicosis in Sandblasting: A Case Study Adapted for Use in U.S. High Schools at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2002-105/2002-105.html (also available in Spanish and as a pdf file). You may want to pay special attention to the box on the Hawk's Nest incident. There is a reason OSHA, MSHA and NIOSH have had a special emphasis program for silica for years. If there ever was a substance that fit Paracelsus's quote regarding the dose making the poison, silica is it. Oil drillers probably don't have the same exposure as sandblasters, rock drillers and tuckpointers. People on the beach aren't engulfed in a cloud of sand all day like some workers are. Does a pile of sand constitute a public health or safety threat? I rather doubt it, especially taking into account how much is spread on our streets and roadways during this time of year. In response to a previous question, Minnesota eliminated the state emergency response commission a few years ago. There are still regional ones in place, but I believe they vary quite a bit in their amount of activity. As for my buddy, he's currently swamped with providing tech support for filers using a new electronic reporting system for Tier II. - Diane Amell. MNOSHA >>>2/13/2007 4:08 PM >>> 2/13/07 Stefan, I used to prepare Tier 2 reports as a consultant when it was first required (I think it was around 1986 or just before?) and until about three-four years ago when I became sensitized to chemicals and couldn't visit certain locations that needed to be visited before I would accept the responsibility to complete the reports. Most of my customers were from Louisiana, but I did reports in about six states. Louisiana now has electronic filing (not sure if this is common now in other states), so after I set companies up, it was easy for them to redo year after year. Your question about what to report? I did extensive research on this years ago. According to the EPA regulations, you are required to report any product for which an MSDS is required under OSHA standards. NOW WHAT A LOADED ANSWER THAT IS!! I have called the EPA and they tell me no different from what I just wrote above. They said it is not up to the EPA to determine what products to report (except for EHS materials) and that you must file according to whether you maintain MSDSs on your site as required by OSHA. I think the EPA was smart enough to realize that this took any responsibility on "what to report" off their back. I've called OSHA several times about what chemicals require an MSDS. They tell me that if a product can cause any harm, including "affecting the eyes and skin", there must be an MSDS. I mentioned that baby shampoo claims to be safe for the eyes. If I was making large quantities of baby shampoo for commercial use, would I need an MSDS? The answer was, "Yes, because even though the baby shampoo may not harm your eyes, if there is a chance that a user could have his/hers eyes affected by the shampoo, then that person has a right to have pertinent safety information and you must have an MSDS. Go figure! ALSO, I used to file reports for oil drilling operators in Texas and Louisiana. I was specifically told by both states (LA & TX) that sand contains silica, and silica can cause silicosis and other breathing problems. They said that sand must be reported. It's been a joke through the years that when we go to the beach at Destin, Florida, I have an MSDS on sand so as to "protect everyone on the beach". Just kidding, but people laugh about reporting sand as a "hazardous product" and then spending a week at the beach. The Best One Yet: Louisiana used to publish a list of chemicals that were reported to the state and Louisiana assigned a special five digit number to each chemical submitted on Tier 2s, that must be listed on the report along with chemicals CAS number, if there is one. I believe this turned out to be a nightmare as so many companies listed brand names for blends of chemicals and due to other "problems" the list became unmanageable. If you listed a chemical without a state code number, the state would assign one to you for that chemical and it was to be listed the next year. The State stopped publishing such a list several years ago, NOW, the good part is that one year someone listed "water" on their Tier 2 and the state listed "water" on their list with its CAS number and LA. code number. LA did remove water from the list, but I still have the state supplied book with the list containing "water". Again, I used to joke that it is possible to drink too much water and possibly collapse your kidneys (or whatever) and that is why there was an MSDS available. By the way, a radio station recently had a contest concerning who could drink the most water within a certain time period. A female died from an "overdose" of water. The DJs who came up with the contest idea were fired. I brought the water issue up at a Jefferson Parish, LA council meeting when they were discussing collecting a parish fee for filing Tier 2s. And since Louisiana's threshold reporting quantity is 500#, not 10,000# under the federal rules, you can imagine how many companies should be filing. For example, I went to a local Louisiana Ace Hardware store and the manager was discussing the fact that they were filing Tier 2s. When I told him that consumer packaged products sold for household use, etc., were exempt from reporting, he informed me that they keep two 55-gallon drums of mineral spirits in the back to fill customer supplied cans. Louisiana law - over 500#, has a MSDS, is not consumer package - must be reported. I have not kept up with the Tier 2 rules, either state or federal, but do know I went through the years when these agencies were trying to sort out problems. I'm not sure how or if things have changed. Also, each state looked at these reports with different scrutiny and each state usually gave me "their" interpretation of the law - and they were seldom the same interpretations. I could go on and answer your other questions, but as you can tell, once I get started I don't easily quit. This e-mail is long enough as it is. Mike Hall Regulations Management Covington, LA
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post