I.. . . . .Introduction

II.. . . .The Emergency Planning & Community Right-to-Know Act

A.. . . . .Nuts & Bolts of the Act

1.. . . . .Emergency Planning

2.. . . . .Emergency Release Notification

3.. . . . .Hazardous Chemical Reporting

4.. . . . .Toxic Chemical Release Reporting

B.. . . . .Lists of Chemicals

III.. . . The Mid-Ohio Valley EPCRA Project

A.. . . . .Emergency Planning

1.. . . . .Ohio

(a). . . . .Washington County

(b). . . . .Other Counties

2.. . . . .West Virginia

(a). . . . .Wood County

(b). . . . .Other Counties

B.. . . . .Emergency Release Notifications

C.. . . . .Hazardous Chemical Reports

D.. . . . .Toxic Chemical Release Reports

E.. . . . .What can you do?

IV.. . . Conclusion

Source: Much of the material contained in this section is based upon the videorecording entitled Chemical Valley. See Chemical Valley, Appalshop, Inc., Whitesburg, KY (1991). In order to improve readibility, citation to Chemical Valley will be omitted. Thus, unless otherwise indicated, one may presume that all of the material contained in this section is derived from this videorecording.

. . . . . . . . During the early morning hours of December 3, 1984, a Union Carbide plant in a village just South of Bhopal, India released approximately forty tons of Methyl Isocyanate (MIC) into the air. Used in the manufacture of pesticides, MIC is a lethal chemical. The gas quickly and silently diffused over the ground and, in the end, killed, by some estimates, upwards to 5,000 people and injured 50,000 more. The only other place in the world that Union Carbide manufactures MIC is at its Institute plant in the Kanawha Valley of West Virginia.

. . . . . . . . A week after the Bhopal accident, on December 11, 1984, Hank Karawan, then plant manager of the Union Carbide's Institute facility, held a press conference at which he expressed his confidence in the safety of the Institute plant's operations:

All of us here at the Institute plant have been deeply saddened by the tragic event in India and we extend our sympathy to all the people in the city of Bhopal. I am pleased to have the opportunity to make a point here this morning. Employees of the Institute plant have been manufacturing MIC in an effective and safe manner for seventeen years. We are extremely proud of that safety record. We are confident in the ability of our trained, dedicated, skilled, and experienced people. We are confident in the equipment that we operate, the safety precautions that we utilize, the monitoring systems that we have, and our plant emergency preparedness.

. . . . . . . . Despite Mr. Karawan's vote of confidence for the safety of the MIC operations at his plant, Union Carbide elected to shut down production of the deadly chemical until it could make $500 million worth of safety improvements. On May 4, 1985, Union Carbide resumed production of MIC. On August 11, 1985, on the heels of the completion of the safety improvement program just a few months before, 500 gallons of highly toxic aldchiloxin (phonetic) and MIC leaked from the Institute plant. Although no one was killed, 134 people living around the plant were treated at local hospitals.

. . . . . . . . Immediately following the release, the following exchange occurred between Mr. Karawan and a local reporter:

Q: Mr. Karawan, after Bhopal occurred, didn't you in fact assure the people of this community that this type of thing could not happen here?

A: Bhopal? Bhopal hasn't happened. . . .

Q: You suggested that this sort of thing could not occur here at the Institute plant?

A: I don't think I said that unequivocally.

This dialogue pointed up the flaw in the reasoning of Mr. Karawan's earlier "vote of confidence" just as he was confident in the operations of his own plant, so too, most likely, was the manager of the plant in Bhopal.

. . . . . . . . Both the Bhopal and the Institute incidents underscored the reality of modern-day chemical production -- no matter what safety precautions are taken, no matter how well trained a plant's employees may be, and no matter how prepared a plant may be to handle an emergency situation, accidents will occur and people will die. Indeed, around the time of the Bhopal accident, 6,928 chemical accidents occurred in the United States within a five year period. In response to this growing threat, the United States Congress passed the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) in 1986.

Source: The United States Environmental Protection Agency has published a document explaining EPCRA entitled Chemicals in Your Community: A Guide to the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1988 516-002/80246). This document is an excellent guide to understanding the Act. This section will provide a summary of the document. In order to improve readibility, citation to the EPA's document will be omitted. Thus, unless otherwise indicated, one may presume that all of the material contained in this section is derived from the EPA's guide to EPCRA.

. . . . . . . . In November of 1986, the United States Congress passed the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act ("EPCRA" or "the Act") to help America's communities "deal safely and effectively with the many hazardous substances that are used throughout our society." The purpose of the Act is two-fold: (1) to encourage and support emergency planning for responding to chemical accidents; and (2) to provide local governments and the public with information about possible chemical hazards in their communities. To facilitate cooperation between industry, interested citizens, environmental and other public-interest organizations, and government at all levels, the Act establishes an ongoing "forum" at the local level called the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC). LEPCs are governed by the State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) in each state.

A.. . . . .Nuts & Bolts of the Act

. . . . . . . . Under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, SERCs and LEPCs are charged with four primary responsibilities:

In the ensuing discussion, each of these tasks will be examined.

1.. . . . .Emergency Planning

. . . . . . . . You have the right to know what preparations have been made in your community to respond to an industrial emergency. The governor of each state is required to appoint a State Emergency Response Commission (SERC). In turn, this commission must divide the state into local emergency planning districts and must appoint a Local Emergency Planning Commission (LEPC) for each district. Membership on the LEPC should include the following individuals:

. . . . . . . . In preparing a local emergency response plan, each LEPC must analyze the hazards present in the community. To this end, the Environmental Protection Agency has developed a list of 366 "extremely hazardous substances" that have immediate health effects and hazardous properties. This list includes a "threshold planning quantity" for each substance. Thus, if a facility possesses the threshold amount or more of a particular chemical, the owner or operator of that facility must notify both the SERC and the LEPC so that the community can be prepared in the event of an accident. If facility owners or operators fail to adhere to the Act's reporting requirements, they will be subject to civil penalties of up to $25,000 per day for each day a violation continues.

. . . . . . . . Pursuant to the Act, the required elements of a local emergency plan are as follows:

. . . . . . . . Once the plan is completed, the LEPC must notify the public that a plan exists and must schedule public meetings so that comments may be heard. In addition, the LEPC is required to test the plan by periodically conducting emergency drills.

2.. . . . .Emergency Release Notification

. . . . . . . . You have the right to know when a chemical accident occurs that results in the release of a hazardous substance. Under the Act, if more than a predetermined amount of a particular chemical is released into the environment, the facility is required to report the incident to both the SERC and the LEPC. Immediate notification must include the following:

. . . . . . . . In addition to immediate notification, facilities are required to provide a follow-up report, in writing, "updat[ing] the original notification, provid[ing] additional information on response actions taken, known or anticipated health risks, and, if appropriate, advice regarding any medical care needed by exposure victims." Failure to notify the proper authorities may result in civil penalties of up to $25,000 per day for each day of non-compliance and criminal penalties of up to $25,000 in fines and prison sentences of up to two years.

3.. . . . .Hazardous Chemical Reporting

. . . . . . . . You have the right to know the amounts, location, and potential effects of hazardous chemicals being used or stored at facilities in your community. Under the Act, facilities must report this information to the SERC, the LEPC, and the fire department with proper jurisdiction. This information, then, must be made available to the public.

. . . . . . . . There are two ways facilities must report the hazardous chemicals they use and store. First, facilities are required to submit material safety data sheets (MSDSs). These sheets contain information on a chemical's physical properties and health effects. A facility may satisfy this requirement either by submitting actual copies of the MSDSs or by providing a list of MSDS chemicals that are present at the site in excess of a certain amount. Second, facilities are required to submit annual inventories of the hazardous chemicals they possess. As explained in the EPA document discussed earlier, the Act, provides a "two-tier" approach for satisfying the annual inventory reporting requirement:

Under Tier I, a facility must report the amounts and general location of chemicals in certain hazard categories. For example, a Tier I report might say that a facility stores 10,000 pounds of substances that cause chronic health effects. A Tier II Report contains basically the same information, but it must name the specific chemical. A Tier II report might say that the facility has 500 pounds of benzene, and it would indicate the physical and health hazards associated with benzene.

. . . . . . . . Facilities who fail to follow the reporting requirements are subject to civil penalties of up to $10,000 per day for each violation involving a MSDS, and $25,000 for each violation involving an annual inventory report.

4.. . . . .Toxic Chemical Release Reporting

. . . . . . . . You have the right to know what toxic chemicals are being released into the air, water, and soil of your community. There are approximately 320 different toxic chemicals for which releases, either accidental or routine, must be reported. Many of these chemicals pose long-term (chronic) health and environmental effects including cancer, disorders of the nervous system, and reproductive disorders. These reports must include the following information:

. . . . . . . . Unlike the reporting requirements discussed above, these toxic release reports must be submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA is then required to compile the information into a national computerized data base known as the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI). The EPA's guide to EPCRA explains how the public can usually obtain TRI information:

[TRI] data must be accessible to the public through computer telecommunications and other means. You will be able to obtain the release information on microfiche from a public library in your county; your state office where the forms are filed; federal depository libraries; LEPCs, which also are a focal point for the data dissemination at the local level and will be able to access and review TRI for your community; and from EPA's regional offices. . . . If you own a home computer and a telephone modem, you will also be able to call up the TRI data base "on-line" on your computer to see what releases have occurred in your community[.]

. . . . . . . . If a facility fails to file an annual toxic chemical release report, it may be subject to a civil penalty of up to $25,000 per day for each chemical they should have reported.

B.. . . . .Lists of Chemicals

. . . . . . . . The EPA's guide provides a useful description of the four groups of chemicals subject to reporting under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act:

. . . . . . . . The Mid-Ohio Valley is defined primarily by the Ohio River and the cities of Marietta, Ohio and Parkersburg, West Virginia. Although the two cities are only thirteen miles apart, no fewer than six major industrial facilities inhabit their riverbanks: Amoco, Chevron, Dupont, G.E. Plastics, and Shell Chemicals.

. . . . . . . . In recent years, the chemical industry on both sides of the river has earned dubious distinctions. For instance, in March of 1994 a chemical explosion at Shell Chemical in Belpre, Ohio rocked the Mid-Ohio Valley. In what was perhaps the worst chemical accident in the area in years, three plant employees were killed and hundreds of residents in both Ohio and West Virginia were evacuated.

. . . . . . . . More recently, the Environmental Defense Fund, using the EPA's data, ranked Wood County, West Virginia as the worst county in the State for hazardous air pollution with cancer-causing toxic concentrations nearly 600 times the guidelines. See Ken Ward, Report: Air Fails Health Test, The Charleston Gazette, April 20, 1999. Indeed, among the pollutants cited as causing the greatest cancer concerns in the entire State of West Virginia was the chemical 1,3 Butadiene. According to the report, the largest emitters of 1,3 Butadiene in the State of West Virginia was Union Carbide in Kanawha County and G.E. Plastics in Wood County.

. . . . . . . . The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act has afforded the citizens of the Mid-Ohio Valley the opportunity to engage in a closer, more equal relationship with industrial, governmental, and public health officials. This project is designed to relate to the citizenry what they have a right know: (1) the emergency preparedness of Washington and Wood counties; (2) reports of emergency releases at local chemical companies; (3) an inventory of hazardous chemicals at local industrial facilities; and (4) toxic releases into the air, water, and land.

A.. . . . .Emergency Planning

1.. . . . .Ohio

. . . . . . . . The Ohio State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) was created pursuant to Ohio Revised Code (ORC) Chapter 3750 and is under the control of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Ohio's implementing regulations can be found at Chapter 3750 of the Ohio Administrative Code (OAC). The Ohio SERC's address is as follows:

(a). . . . .Washington County

. . . . . . . . The Washington County Local Emergency Planning Committee is located in Marietta, Ohio at the following address:

. . . . . . . . The Washington County LEPC has developed a Hazardous Materials Annex to the County's Emergency Operations Plan (EOP). This addition is referred to as Annex O -- Washington County Hazardous Materials Emergency Response & Preparedness Plan. A copy of the plan is available at the public libraries in Marietta and in Belpre or may be purchased directly from the LEPC for a nominal fee of $15.00. Although Annex O was not available on electronic media, the following two sections have been included to provide a general overview of the emergency response plan:

Washington County Hazards Analysis

Washington County Assumptions & Planning Factors

(b). . . . .Other Counties

. . . . . . . . There are a total of eighty-eight LEPCs located in the State of Ohio. Most of them are county LEPCs but a few are joint county organizations. To obtain the address and phone number for a particular LEPC, please click here.

2.. . . . .West Virginia

. . . . . . . . The West Virginia Emergency Response Commission was created pursuant to W.Va. Code ' 15-5A-1 et seq.(1995) and is part of the Office of Emergency Services. Implementing regulations can be found at 55 CSR 1. The West Virginia SERC can be reached at the following address:

(a). . . . .Wood County

. . . . . . . . The Wood County Local Emergency Planning Committee is located in Parkersburg, West Virginia at the following address:

. . . . . . . . The Wood County LEPC has developed a Hazardous Materials Annex to the County's Emergency Operations Plan (EOP). This addition is referred to as Annex N. A copy of the EOP in its entirety is available on-line.

(b). . . . .Other Counties

. . . . . . . . There are a total of fifty LEPCs located in the State of West Virginia. Most of them are county LEPCs but a few are joint county organizations. To obtain the address and phone number for a particular LEPC, please click here.

B.. . . . .Emergency Release Notifications

. . . . . . . . Both the Washington County LEPC and the Wood County LEPC keep records of reportable incidents that have occurred at a facility in the last five years. Although Amoco, Dupont, and Huntsman had no incident reports on file, both Chevron and Shell Chemical each had one report while G.E. Plastics had no fewer than eleven:

Note: The original incident reports on which the information contained in this site is based will be made available at the Wood County Public Library, the Washington County Public Library, and the West Virginia University College of Law Library.

C.. . . . .Hazardous Chemical Reports

. . . . . . . . For the purpose of this project, only Tier II Hazardous Chemical Inventory information was collected from the six industrial facilities. The reason for this decision is two-fold. First, because each facility must maintain an MSDS on just about everything they use, an attempt to collect this information in a manageable manner would be overly cumbersome and not very beneficial to the end-user. Second, the Tier II information contains the type of data in which an individual concerned with the health hazards of chemicals would be interested.

Note: The original Tier II data sheets on which the information contained in this site is based will be made available at the Wood County Public Library, the Washington County Public Library, and the West Virginia University College of Law Library.

D.. . . . .Toxic Chemical Release Reports

. . . . . . . . As discussed in Part II, toxic release inventories (TRIs) are compiled by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The databases are now available on the internet and can be searched using a variety of fields. Both the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency and the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection provides TRI information at their websites:

Ohio

http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dapc/tri/tri.html

West Virginia

http://www.dep.state.wv.us/tri/

E.. . . . .What can you do?

. . . . . . . . One of the first things you can do is to gather some information for yourself. To this end, this FOIA Request Form has been prepared to assist you in making a request under either the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), EPCRA., or both. In addition, the EPA's guide to EPCRA provides even more ideas on how you can get involved in your community:

The law requires industry and others to make available to you information on potential chemical hazards and inventories, and on releases of toxic chemicals into the environment. There are several ways you can become involved in obtaining and using this information to enhance the quality of life in your community:

. . . . . . . . Under the Emergency Planning & Community Right-to-Know Act, your are no longer "on the outside looking in" when it comes to making decisions about health hazards in your community. Rather, the Act provides you with a tremendous opportunity to get directly involved in the decision-making process that affects your safety and health. In the end, the question is no longer "What can you do?" but, rather, "What can you do?"

. . . . . . . . The industrial facilities in the Mid-Ohio Valley work with each other and with the community to be responsible and good neighbors. They provide good-paying jobs for the community and take an active part in supporting the community's needs. Admittedly, in our society, we, as consumers, demand the very products that the chemical companies produce. Naturally, then, with modern-day conveniences there must come certain acceptable risks. Yet, the risks posed by the chemicals cannot be completely ignored. Our neighbors, though good and responsible as they may be, are not perfect. The lesson of Bhopal is that chemical accidents do occur and people do die. The lesson of Institute is that, yes, it can happen here.

. . . . . . . . Through a community-based decision-making framework, the United States Congress has given the people most effected by the presence of hazardous chemicals a voice in developing a safer, healthier environment. Congress has given us the right-to-know and the means to get involved. The Mid-Ohio Valley EPCRA Project is simply a way of disseminating publicly available information on chemical hazards present in the Mid-Ohio Valley. The project is based upon the principle that an informed and prepared citizenry will be able to better manage potential hazards, will work to improve the safety and health of other individuals in the community, and will endeavor to improve the environmental quality of the community. The people of the Mid-Ohio Valley are the "stakeholders;" thus, the burden of ensuring a safer and healthier environment rest squarely with them and no one else.