Home Site Map Contact Us Support
Indoor Air Children's Health Air Pollution Energy Waste and Toxics Transportation
Inside CAC
Events
Press Room
5k Run
Member
Activists
Jobs
email


PHILADELPHIA
135 South 19th Street
Suite 300
Philadelphia PA 19103
Tel: 215-567-4004
Fax: 215-567-5791

HARRISBURG
105 North Front Street
Suite 106
Harrisburg PA 17101
Tel: 717-230-8806
Fax: 717-230-8808

WILMINGTON, DE
100 West 10th Street
Suite 704
Wilmington DE 19801
Tel: 302-691-0112
Fax: 302-691-0124



Factsheets



Comments and Testimonies

Toxic Release Inventory Phase II Stakeholder Comments by Clean Air Council
December 22, 2003

These comments are submitted on behalf of Clean Air Council, a nonprofit environmental organization representing over 8,000 members. The Council operates out of offices in Harrisburg, PA, Philadelphia, PA and Wilmington, DE. Established in 1967, the Council is dedicated to protecting the right of everyone to breathe clean air.

Clean Air Council recognizes the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) as one of the nation's most important community right-to-know resources. To continue being a useful right-to-know tool, TRI must contain the most complete, most accurate and most up-to-date data possible.

Communities deserve the right-to-know about toxic pollution being produced in their backyards, regardless of the polluting facility's revenues or number of employees. Thus, Clean Air Council opposes loosening reporting thresholds for small businesses, however they are defined ("Option #1). Indeed there seems to be an underlying suggestion by the EPA that small businesses are assumed to release small or insignificant amounts of TRI chemicals. In fact in many neighborhoods a release from a "small business" may have a very big impact on the hosting community. Indeed part of the problem from the communities' point of view is that many "small businesses" are already exempt from TRI reporting despite having a significant impact on the surrounding neighborhood.

For the same reason, the Council opposes loosening reporting thresholds based on category of facility (Option #2). No matter what the size or type of business, all companies should be required to inform the public about toxics they produce. When it comes to public health and community right-to-know, this is not an unreasonable burden.

Furthermore, reporting toxic releases acts as a strong incentive for businesses big and small to reduce their use and storage of toxic chemicals.

The Council also generally opposes loosening reporting thresholds for specific classes of chemicals (also Option #2). Many chemicals included in the Toxic Release Inventory are not proven safe at any level. If a toxic chemical is potentially dangerous, the public deserves the right to know if it is being produced in their area, no matter what the level of its production. There are also benefits to requiring companies to report small releases of toxics that are generally considered "safe" at certain minimal levels. First, such reporting enables regulators and environmental advocates to easier identify facilities that are polluting at higher-than-normal rates. Second, it allows community members in areas with very low releases to feel fully informed about their risks.

The Council opposes the use of "range estimates" on any reporting forms (Option #3 and #5). The burden of reporting is not significantly reduced using range estimates unless the ranges are so broad that facility representatives filling out the reports no longer need to know or estimate an exact number of toxic releases they are emitting. If they know an exact number, there is no reason the public should not also be able to access that exact number. If the facility has not measured or calculated an exact figure, then doubt is introduced as to the reliability of the entire Toxic Release Inventory.

For similar reasons, the Council also opposes the development of a new form that would allow facilities to certify to "no significant change" in TRI reporting as measured against a designated baseline year (Option #4). Again, to be as useful-as-possible, TRI data must be as accurate as possible. Clearly, the phrase "no significant change" is different from "no change." The word "significant" allows for reporting that would render TRI data less accurate, and as such, less reliable and less useful.

Current TRI reporting requirements are not overly burdensome. Timely, accurate and complete data is necessary for TRI to remain a worthwhile right-to-know resource. No changes to TRI should be made without some clear end-benefit to TRI data users.

Home | Site Map | Programs | Contact Us | Donate | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use
All rights reserved. ©2006 Clean Air Council.

Site by Meltzer Design