EPCRA Frequent Questions - Applicability All Sections
APPLICABILITY TO ALL SECTIONS OF EPCRA (Title III) — 302, 304, 311 and 312
- Sections 302, 311 and 312: Threshold Planning Quantity (TPQ) Determination for Substances in Molten Form
- Sections 304, 311 and 312: Chemicals Used at Hospital
- Sections 304, 311 and 312: Substances Used at a Medical Facility
- Sections 301-303 and 305: Emergency Planning & Interstate Transportation
- Sections 303, 304, 311 and 312: Facility Located Within the Planning Districs of Two LEPCs
- Sections 302 and 304: Ammonia and Ammonium Hydroxide Reporting
- Sections 301-303, 304, 311 and 312: Indian Lands
- Sections 302, 304, 311 and 312: Farmers
- Sections 302, 304, 311 and 312: Landfills
- Sections 302, 304, 311 and 312: Reporting Ranges
- Sections 302, 304, 311 and 312: Boosters and Transportation Exemption
- State and Local Laws
SECTIONS 302, 311 and 312: Threshold Planning Quantity (TPQ) Determination for Substances in Molten Form
Q. Facilities are subject to emergency planning and notification requirements under EPCRA (also known as SARA Title III) when an extremely hazardous substance (EHS) is present at a facility in an amount equal to or in excess of its TPQ. For some EHSs that are solids, two TPQs are given (e.g., 500/10,000 pounds). The lower quantity applies only if the solid exists in powder form or is handled in solution or molten form (40 CFR 355.16). Otherwise, the 10,000-pound TPQ applies. The amount of substance in molten form must be multiplied by 0.3 to determine whether the lower TPQ is met (40 CFR 355.16). What is the significance of multiplying by the fraction 0.3 and how was this fraction chosen?
A. Emergency planning for EHSs under EPCRA Section 302 is based on estimates of the quantity of an EHS released to the air. One of the factors that affect the quantity that actually becomes airborne is the physical state of the substance. At molten temperatures, significant amounts of vapor are not likely to be generated. The Agency examined the fraction of volatilization expected from the solids on the EHS list and found that the amount of chemical that actually volatilizes ranges from 0.008 to 0.3 pounds per minute per pound spilled. Since information was not available for all the solids on the EHS list, the Agency chose to incorporate the more conservative fraction of 0.3 for TPQ determination. As a result, a facility that handles an EHS in molten form must multiply the amount of molten material by 0.3 to determine the weight applied toward the TPQ.
Q. A hospital stores oxygen in a large outside bulk storage tank and delivers the material, as needed, throughout the hospital using a piping system (the oxygen is used only in the treatment of patients). The bulk storage tank is routinely maintained by hospital maintenance people but the oxygen itself is administered to patients by nurses, doctors, nurses aides, and other persons trained in the medical field. Furthermore, the hospital is required by OSHA to have available an MSDS for the oxygen. Is the oxygen a "hazardous chemical" pursuant to EPCRA Sections 304 and 311/312?
A. No. Section 311(e)(4) of EPCRA and 40 CFR 370.66 and 355.61 of the regulations exclude from the definition of "hazardous chemical" any substance to the extent it is used in a research laboratory or a hospital or other medical facility under the direct supervision of a technically qualified individual. EPA believes that this exemption is intended to include substances which are used or will be used at these facilities under the direct supervision of technically qualified individuals for medical or research purposes (October 15, 1987, 52 FR 38347). The exemption would include the storage of the substances at these facilities prior to the use of the substance. [Note: the term "technically qualified" is interpreted (for purposes of EPCRA Sections 304 and 311/312) to refer to individuals who are adequately trained in the research or medical fields, as appropriate (for example, doctors, nurses, research professionals).] In the above example, the oxygen at the hospital is not considered a hazardous chemical because it is used for medical purposes and its administration is carried out by medical professionals (i.e., doctors, nurses, etc.). The amount stored at the hospital is also exempt from being a hazardous chemical since it will be used for medical purposes (even though the actual storage is supervised by non-medical persons). [Note: if medical or research facility stores a material, some of which will be used for medical or research purposes and some of which will not be used for medical or research purposes, only the amount stored for medical or research purposes is exempt from the definition of a hazardous chemical.] Therefore, this exemption would not apply to building cleaning supplies used at research or medical facilities even though they may be used under the supervision of qualified individuals, because they are not used for medical purposes. It is important to note that the exemption applies to the substances rather than the facility. Under Sections 311 and 312, only those substances which are used for medical or research purposes in medical or research facilities are exempt. Medical or research facilities may have other hazardous chemicals which are subject to reporting. These medical and research facilities may also be subject to reporting under Section 304 if there are any release of these other hazardous chemicals above their reportable quantities.
Q. A medical facility uses liquid nitrogen for the nuclear magnetic resonance spectrometer. The spectrometer is used for medical diagnostic purposes. In addition, the facility is required by OSHA to have an MSDS available for the liquid nitrogen. Is the liquid nitrogen at the facility considered a hazardous chemical for purposes of Sections 304 and 311/312?
A. No. Section 311(e)(4) of and 40 CFR 370.66 and 355.61 of the regulations exclude from the definition of "hazardous chemical", any substance to the extent it is used in a research laboratory or a hospital or other medical facility under the direct supervision of a technically qualified individual. For purposes of Sections 304 and 311/312, EPA considers this exemption to apply to chemicals that are used in machines or instruments that are directly used for medical or research purposes (e.g., medical diagnostic equipment, incubators, and oxygen at a hospital or in an ambulance). This exemption does not apply to chemicals used in machines or instruments that serve an ancillary function to the medical or research machines or instruments (e.g., fuel to run a hospital operating room emergency power generator). The exemption would also not apply to chemicals used in machines or instruments that do not have a direct medical or research purpose (e.g., fuel to run an ambulance or other facility vehicles or an autoclave used to sterilize instruments). This exemption would also not apply to building cleaning supplies used in research or medical facilities even though they may be used under the supervision of qualified individuals. It is important to note that the exemption applies to the substances rather than the facility. Under Sections 311 and 312, only those substances which are used for medical or research purposes are exempt. Medical or research facilities may have other hazardous chemicals which are subject to reporting. These medical and research facilities may also be subject to reporting under Section 304 if there is a release of any of these other hazardous chemicals at or above the reportable quantities.
Q. To what extent is a State required to plan if there are only a few (or no) facilities having extremely hazardous substances present in excess of threshold planning quantities, but there is significant interstate transportation of these and other hazardous substances?
A. While Section 327 of Title III generally exempts the transportation of hazardous materials from coverage under most Title III reporting requirements, the law does require comprehensive emergency plans that address all hazardous materials and the potential for both fixed facility and transportation incidents (Section 303). The list of extremely hazardous substances should provide a focus and a starting point for planning. Therefore, the transportation routes and facilities with significant inventories of extremely hazardous substances should be considered in any plan. Finally, Section 301 includes transportation officials among those representatives who must participate in local planning committees.
Q. The reporting requirements of EPCRA sections 303(d), 311, and 312 require covered facilities to provide information on the presence of extremely hazardous substances (EHSs) and hazardous chemicals to the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) for the purpose of preparing an emergency plan. In general, facilities are located within the boundaries of a single LEPC's emergency planning district, allowing all notification to be made to the same planning entity. A certain facility subject to EPCRA emergency planning requirements is located such that its perimeter extends across the planning jurisdiction boundaries of two LEPCs. In this case, which LEPC is responsible for including the facility in its emergency response plan? To which LEPC should the facility fulfill its reporting obligations under Sections 303(d), 304, 311, and 312?
A. LEPCs who share jurisdiction over a facility should decide on how they will share responsibility for including the facility in their emergency planning activities and how they will accept information required under Sections 303(d), 304, 311, and 312. With respect to Section 303(d), if the facility is located within two districts, it must provide the required notification to both LEPCs. Since Section 304 requires facilities to notify the LEPC responsible for any area likely to be affected by a release of a reportable chemical (40 CFR section 355.42), both LEPCs should receive release notification to ensure sufficient emergency response. Sections 311 and 312 require information to be submitted to the appropriate LEPC (Sections 311(a)(1)(a), and 312(a)(1)(a)). LEPCs may reach an agreement as to which is the appropriate LEPC, and thus determine which would receive information submitted under Sections 311 and 312. In the absence of such an agreement, the facility would need to report to both LEPCs.
Q. Ammonia (CAS #7664-41-7) is listed on the Extremely Hazardous Substance (EHS) list found at 40 CFR Part 355 Appendix A and B, with a threshold planning quantity (TPQ) of 500 pounds. A facility stores ammonium hydroxide (CAS #1336-21-6), which does not appear on the EHS list, on site in excess of 500 pounds. Since ammonium hydroxide is essentially a mixture of ammonia and water, should the facility include the quantity of ammonia in ammonium hydroxide toward TPQ and reportable quantity (RQ) calculations for purposes of Sections 302 and 304 reporting?
A. The quantities of ammonia in ammonium hydroxide should be considered separately when determining reporting requirements under Sections 302 and 304. This is consistent with the listing under CERCLA (40 CFR section 302.4), where ammonia and ammonium hydroxide are specifically and separately listed as hazardous substances. Thus, ammonia (CAS #7664-41-7) and ammonium hydroxide (CAS #1336-21-6) are considered different chemicals. The notification requirement in Section 302 applies to facilities with quantities of EHSs present on-site equal to or in excess of a TPQ. Ammonia is considered an EHS, therefore, a facility with a TPQ or more of ammonia is required to provide Section 302 notification. Since ammonium hydroxide is considered distinct from ammonia, and is not specifically listed as an EHS, it is not subject to emergency planning requirements. A facility storing a large quantity of ammonium hydroxide, however, may have free ammonia in the headspace of a storage tank. A facility must report the ammonia in the headspace of a storage tank under Section 302 if this amount of free ammonia equals or exceeds the TPQ at any time. Section 304 applies to chemicals listed as either CERCLA hazardous substances (40 CFR 302.4) or EHSs. Both ammonia and ammonium hydroxide are specifically listed as CERCLA hazardous substances and both chemicals, therefore, are subject to Section 304 reporting requirements. Ammonia has a RQ of 100 pounds and ammonium hydroxide has an RQ of 1000 pounds. If either chemical is released to the environment above its designated RQ within a 24-hour period, the facility is subject to Section 304 notification requirements (40 CFR 355.40).
Q. In 1986, Congress passed the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), also known as Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), to help local communities, including Indian reservations, protect public health and the environment from chemical hazards by informing citizens about the chemicals present in their communities. On July 26, 1990, EPA published a final rule designating Indian Tribes and their chief executive officers as the implementing authority for EPCRA on all Indian lands (55 FR 30632). What is EPA's policy regarding the implementation of the different provisions of EPCRA on Indian lands?
A. EPA's policy is to work with Tribes on a "government to government" basis in implementing the requirements of EPCRA. EPCRA contains four major provisions: planning for chemical emergencies, emergency notification of chemical accidents and releases, reporting of hazardous chemical inventories, and toxic chemical release reporting. The emergency planning provisions of Sections 301-303 are designed to help Indian Tribes prepare for, and respond to chemical emergencies occurring on Indian lands that involve extremely hazardous substances (EHSs), found at 40 CFR Part 355, Appendix A and B. The chief executive officers of federally recognized Tribes must appoint Tribal Emergency Response Commissions (TERCs), responsible for carrying out the provisions of EPCRA in the same manner as State Emergency Response Commissions (SERCs). Alternatively, Tribal leaders can join a Tribal Coalition which functions as the TERC, or establish a Memorandum of Understanding with a State to participate under the SERC. TERCs establish emergency planning districts and can appoint Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs) or act as TERCs/LEPCs, performing the functions of both. LEPCs use information collected under EPCRA to develop local emergency response plans to respond quickly to chemical accidents. The chief executive officer should ensure that TERCs maintain a broad-based representation, including Tribal public agencies and departments dealing with environmental, energy, public health and safety issues, as well as other tribal community groups with interest in EPCRA. The Tribal LEPC should also be representative of the community, and should include elected Tribal officials, fire chiefs, Indian Health Services officials, Bureau of Indian Affairs officials, Tribal elders and leaders, representatives of industries on or near the reservation, and members of the general community. The emergency release notification provisions of Section 304 require facilities to immediately notify TERCs and LEPCs of releases in excess of reportable quantities of EHSs and CERCLA hazardous substances, found at 40 CFR 302.4. Facilities must also provide written follow-up reports on the actions taken to respond to releases and possible health effects of the released substances. The emergency release notification provisions cover releases from commercial, municipal, and other facilities on Tribal lands, including those owned by the Tribe, and those from accidents on transportation routes within the reservation. Substances covered by this section include not only EHSs, but also hazardous substances subject to the emergency release notification requirements of CERCLA Section 103. CERCLA requires notification of releases to the National Response Center. In cases where releases from facilities located on Indian lands may affect areas outside Indian jurisdiction, the legislation under Section 304(b)(1) requires that notice be provided to all SERCs and LEPCs likely to be affected by the releases. Response to such releases will be handled by cooperation between the affected jurisdictions. EPA encourages Indian Tribes, SERCs, and LEPCs to participate in joint planning efforts to prepare for such potential emergencies. The hazardous chemical right-to-know provisions of Sections 311 and 312, require facilities that prepare material safety data sheets (MSDSs) for hazardous chemicals under OSHA, and have hazardous chemicals or EHSs present above applicable threshold levels, to submit these MSDSs, or lists of such chemicals to TERCs, LEPCs, and local fire departments. Facilities are also required to submit hazardous chemical inventory forms which detail the amounts, conditions of storage, and locations of hazardous chemicals and EHSs to TERCs, LEPCs, and local fire departments. It is the responsibility of TERCs and LEPCs to make this information available to the public. The information collected under EPCRA enables TERCs and LEPCs to paint a picture of the hazardous substances and chemicals found on Indian lands. It also allows the Tribal communities to work with industries to reduce the use and releases of toxic chemicals into the environment and prevent chemical accidents.
Q. Are farmers subject to EPCRA? If so, why? What exactly do farmers have to do?
A. There are four major reporting requirements under EPCRA: emergency planning notification (Section 302), emergency release notification (Section 304), community right-to-know (Section 311 material safety data sheets and Section 312 emergency and hazardous chemical inventory forms) and toxic chemical release forms (Section 313 "emissions inventory"). Each reporting provision has different requirements for chemicals and facilities covered. Due to this complexity in the statute itself, each Section must be read carefully to understand the chemicals covered and the facilities to which the Section applies. Farmers may be subject to several of the reporting requirements of EPCRA.
Emergency Planning Notification (Section 302)
Farm owners and operators are most likely to be subject to the emergency planning requirements of Section 302. Farms were not exempted from this provision, since the law was designed to generally identify all facilities that have any of the listed extremely hazardous substances (EHS) present in excess of its threshold planning quantity (TPQ). The TPQ is based on the amount of any of these substances which could, upon release, present human health hazards which warrant emergency planning. The TPQ emergency planning trigger is based on these public health concerns rather than the type of facility where the chemicals might be located. The type of facility and degree of hazard presented at any particular site, however, are relevant factors for consideration by the local emergency planning committees. For many farms, chemicals in these quantities may not present a significant hazard to their communities due to their rural location or short holding times, other farms may well present a potentially significant hazard if the chemicals are located in a suburban, populated area or near a school, hospital, or nursing home. Even in a rural area, large volume storage could be a concern. Although these substances may only be stored or used periodically, there is always the possibility of accidents which could present a hazard to the community. Finally, in the event of a fire or other emergency on the farm, local responders should know what chemicals they might encounter in order to take appropriate precautionary measures. The hazards posed by an individual farm or ranch must be evaluated on a site-specific basis. Communities must know which facilities may present a potential for chemical releases so they can determine the nature of the risk to the public and to emergency responders in the event of a release. EPCRA established State and local planning organizations and notification requirements to meet these needs. Local emergency planning committees can best address these concerns by working with farm representatives. To meet the emergency planning requirements of EPCRA, farm owners and operators must determine if they have any of the listed EHSs in excess of the threshold planning quantity (TPQ) present on their farms at any one time in concentrations greater than one percent by weight. This requirement applies even if the chemicals are present for only a short period of time before use. There is no exemption to this requirement for farms or for substances used in routine agricultural operations. If any of the EHSs is present in excess of its TPQ, simply notify (preferably in writing) the State emergency response commission (SERC) and the local emergency planning committee. The notification need not include the names and quantities of identified substances, but EPA encourages the inclusion of such information because it will be useful to the SERC and the local committees in organizing and setting priorities for emergency planning activities. This notification was required by May 17, 1987 or 60 days after the TPQ is exceeded for at least one extremely hazardous substance, whichever is later. If such notification has not been made, farm owners and operators should do so immediately. This is a one-time notification. Once made, owners or operators are not required to notify the SERC further of other extremely hazardous substances that may become present on the farm; however, they may be required to inform the local emergency planning committee of such changes. EPA may revise the list of extremely hazardous substances. A facility which has any substances added to the list but which was not previously required to notify must notify its SERC and local emergency planning committee within 60 days. Farmers required to notify under Section 302 must designate representatives to work with the local emergency planning committee to address any need for emergency planning involving their farms. Local emergency planning committees were to be established by the SERC by August 17, 1987. There is no requirement for farm owners or operators to develop a farm emergency plan. A comprehensive emergency response plan is to be developed by the local emergency planning committee for the local emergency planning district it covers. This plan should address, to the extent possible, all potential chemical release hazards in the district including, where appropriate, chemicals on farms.
Emergency Release Notification (Section 304)
Farmers may also be subject to emergency release notification requirements (Section 304) if they release any of the listed extremely hazardous substances or CERCLA hazardous substances in excess of its reportable quantity (RQ). Reportable quantities are the amounts of these substances which, if released, must be reported. (RQs for Superfund hazardous substances are specified in EPA regulations found in 40 CFR 302.4. The CFR is available in public libraries and EPA Regional Offices). Section 304 requires reporting of such releases to SERC and Local Emergency Planning Committees. Reporting of releases of CERCLA hazardous substances to the National Response Center (1-800-424-8802) has been required since 1980. Section 304 also requires a written follow-up emergency notice to the SERC and Local Emergency Planning Committee. Exempted from reporting are pesticides registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) when used generally in accordance with its intended purpose. Also, normal application of fertilizer would not need to be reported. However, an accidental release of such substances (or other release not generally in accord with its intended purpose) in excess of the RQ must be reported. EPCRA emergency release notification (Section 304) has two limitations which are not present in CERCLA release reporting. First, EPCRA (Section 304) release reporting applies only to facilities which produce, use, or store a "hazardous chemical." Because the definition of "hazardous chemical" in EPCRA specifically excludes substances used in routine agricultural operations and household or consumer products, some farms or ranches will not be subject to Section 304. Secondly, releases reportable under Section 304 will include only those releases which have potential for off-site exposure and which equal or exceed the applicable reportable quantity for that substance. Thus, spills of pesticides which would require release reporting to the National Response Center under Superfund would not be subject to local and state reporting under Section 304 unless there were a potential for off-site exposure.
Community Right-to-Know (Sections 311 and 312)
Community right-to-know reporting (Sections 311 and 312) is limited to those facilities required to prepare or have available MSDSs under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's Hazard Communication Standard (HCS). Sections 311 and 312 became applicable beyond the manufacturing sector beginning September 24, 1988, as a result of the expansion of OSHA Hazard Communication Standard, but chemicals used in routine agricultural operations and household products are not subject to these reporting requirements. Chemicals used for such purposes are excluded from the EPCRA definition of "hazardous chemical" to which the reporting requirement applies.
EPCRA also includes various provisions for civil, administrative and criminal penalties and citizen suits for failure to comply with the requirements of the law. For assistance in meeting these requirements, farmers may call on their State and county offices of the USDA Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service, which have the list of EHS chemicals, their TPQs and RQs, and a list of SERCs. They may also call at the Superfund, TRI, EPCRA RMP and Oil Information Center (the "Call Center"): 1-800-424-9346 (in the Washington, D.C. area: 703-412-9810).
Q. Are landfills covered under SARA Title III (EPCRA) since they are covered by RCRA?
A. Yes, landfills are subject to certain Title III requirements. Subtitle A of Title III is intended to identify facilities which present a potential hazard for a chemical emergency and to provide a process for local emergency planning committees to engage with such facilities in determining the significance of the release hazard and developing response plans to facilitate timely and appropriate response in the event of a chemical spill. Because landfills meet the definition of "facility" and may in some instances present such a hazard, EPA interprets them to be subject to reporting and notification requirements under Section 302 in Subtitle A. While EPA agrees that conditions at some facilities (including landfills) may not pose significant chemical hazards even though extremely hazardous substances are present in excess of the threshold planning quantity, in other such facilities conditions will exist which do present a significant hazard. Such assessment must be made on a site-specific basis. EPA believes that leaving such decisions to the local planning committees is consistent with the purpose of Subtitle A. Communities must know which facilities may present potential for chemical emergencies so they can determine the nature of the risk to the public and to emergency responders. It is recognized that Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations already address many of the goals of Subtitle A of Title III. However, it is important that the facility contingency plan and local coordination required by RCRA be coordinated with any new State and local planning structure or community planning process established under Title III. Full compliance with RCRA requirements should minimize additional planning activities with local communities under Title III. Therefore, these requirements are not duplicative. It should be noted that landfills may not be covered under the other sections of Title III. The placing of a container holding an extremely hazardous substance into a landfill which has a federal permit for this chemical is exempt from the Section 304 emergency release notification. Also, under Subtitle B, Sections 311/312, most substances at landfills would be exempt due to the exemption for any hazardous waste such as defined by the Solid Waste Disposal Act under the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard (only hazardous chemicals for which a MSDS must be prepared or available under the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard must report under Sections 311/312).
Q. A facility has a mixture which contains extremely hazardous substances. The Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for the mixture only indicates a range of concentration for its components. For the purposes, of reporting under EPCRA Sections 302, 304, and 311/312 of EPCRA, should the facility owner/operator report be based on the lower, upper, or mid-point concentration of each component?
A. If the MSDS for the mixture indicates only a range of concentration for its components, then for purposes of reporting under Sections 302, 304, and 311/312 of EPCRA, the facility owner/operator should use the upper bound concentration when determining the weight of each component in the mixture. Such reporting is consistent with the purpose of EPCRA, which is to maximize local communities' opportunities to know about local chemicals and to plan for emergencies.
Q. An oil company owns many wells on an oil field. Each well is on its own plot of land. These plots are not adjacent or contiguous and, therefore, each well is its own facility. When operating these wells, it is sometimes necessary to inject air or gas into the well to get the flow of oil started. The machines that inject the gas are called boosters. The booster is a portable piece of equipment that can be attached via a hose to more than one well at a time. Once the wells are flowing, the booster can be moved to another location on the oil field to boost other wells. The booster contains some extremely hazardous substances (EHSs) that are released during normal operations. The amounts of some EHSs exceed their threshold planning quantity. Since these boosters are mobile and never part of a well (not part of an existing facility), can they be exempted under the transportation exemption?
A. The transportation exemption applies to EHSs that are traveling in commerce, such as in a truck, or are in transit, such as in a pipeline. Therefore, when the boosters are being moved and are not attached to any facility, they are in transit and exempt under the transportation exemption (except for Section 304). However, when the booster is stationary and/or attached to the wells, it is not in transit or traveling in commerce and must be reported. Even though it is a temporary site, the presence of those EHSs above the threshold planning quantities (TPQs) is of concern to the local planning emergency committee (LEPC). Therefore, the EHSs in the booster should be reported under Section 302 in the same manner as a chemical that is only on-site for part of the year, which includes the time at one location. Similarly, any EHS present in the hose that is attached to the well from the booster is considered process equipment and subject to reporting as part of the booster. A generic report may be prepared (i.e., one Tier I/II for similar wells). Therefore, one set of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) and one Tier I/II may be prepared for similar boosters with the same EHSs in similar amounts and submitted to each State emergency response commission (SERC), LEPC and fire department under whose jurisdiction the oil field falls.
Q. Can existing State and local laws that provide substantially similar emergency planning supersede the specific provisions of the Federal law?
A. Title III (Section 321) generally provides that nothing in Title III shall preempt or affect any State or local law. However, material safety data sheets, if required under a State or local law passed after August 1, 1985, must be identical in content and form to that required under Section 311. Accordingly, while Title III does not supersede State or local laws, EPA has no authority to waive the requirements imposed under Title III. These requirements, including the threshold planning quantities, are intended to be minimum standards. EPA is working with States that have developed reporting forms and planning structures to determine the most efficient approaches to avoid duplication of effort with existing State or local structures, forms, and requirements.