Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 10:42:44 -0600
Reply-To: Diane Amell <Diane.Amell**At_Symbol_Here**STATE.MN.US>
Sender: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: Diane Amell <Diane.Amell**At_Symbol_Here**STATE.MN.US>
Subject: Re: Tier 2 Reporting
Comments: To: MHall96162**At_Symbol_Here**
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 (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
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 >>>



I used to prepare Tier 2 reports as a consultant when it was first
(I think it was around 1986 or just before?) and until about three-four
ago when I became sensitized to chemicals and couldn't visit certain
that needed to be visited before I would accept the responsibility to
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
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
ago. According to the EPA regulations, you are required to report any
for which an MSDS is required under OSHA standards. NOW WHAT A LOADED

I have called the EPA and they tell me no different from what I just
above. They said it is not up to the EPA to determine what products to
(except for EHS materials) and that you must file according to whether
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.
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
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
his/hers eyes affected by the shampoo, then that person has a right to
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
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
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
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
chemicals CAS number, if there is one. I believe this turned out to be
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
several years ago, NOW, the good part is that one year someone listed
on their Tier 2 and the state listed "water" on their list with its CAS
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
"overdose" of water. The DJs who came up with the contest idea were

I brought the water issue up at a Jefferson Parish, LA council meeting
they were discussing collecting a parish fee for filing Tier 2s. And
Louisiana's threshold reporting quantity is 500#, not 10,000# under the
rules, you can imagine how many companies should be filing.

For example, I went to a local Louisiana Ace Hardware store and the
was discussing the fact that they were filing Tier 2s. When I told him
consumer packaged products sold for household use, etc., were exempt
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
know I went through the years when these agencies were trying to sort
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
interpretation of the law - and they were seldom the same

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

The content of this page reflects the personal opinion(s) of the author(s) only, not the American Chemical Society, ILPI, Safety Emporium, or any other party. Use of any information on this page is at the reader's own risk. Unauthorized reproduction of these materials is prohibited. Send questions/comments about the archive to
The maintenance and hosting of the DCHAS-L archive is provided through the generous support of Safety Emporium.