TRI Toolkit Q&A

Yes, if the listed toxic chemicals contained in the solvents are manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in a laboratory at a covered facility under the supervision of a technically qualified individual, then they are exempt from threshold determinations and release and other waste management reporting (40 CFR Section 372.38(d)).

Equipment and component testing is equivalent to laboratory activities and thus is eligible for the laboratory activity exemption as long as listed toxic chemicals are manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in a laboratory at a covered facility under the supervision of a technically qualified individual.

While all of the noted operations are considered ‘product testing’ and as such are potential candidates for the laboratory exemption, only those listed toxic chemicals that are manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in a laboratory at a covered facility under the supervision of a technically qualified individual (40 CFR Section 372.38(d) are exempt. Therefore, if these conditions are met, the testing of production engines intended for sale in specialized engine test cells and testing engines for research and development purposes in specialized engine test cells would be eligible for the exemption. However, the testing and research in open water bodies would not qualify because these activities are not being performed in a laboratory.

No. The listed chemicals associated with trial-burns required for permitting purposes at TSD facilities are not conducted in laboratories. For activities to be exempt from threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations under the laboratory activity exemption, the toxic chemicals must be manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in a laboratory at a covered facility under the supervision of a technically qualified individual (40 CFR Section 372.38(d)).

No. The laboratory activity exemption, 40 CFR Section 372.38(d), is primarily for laboratories that perform auxiliary functions for the manufacturing or processing activities at the facility. The photography laboratory does not perform an auxiliary function, but performs activities which are essential to the manufacturing of the newspaper, i.e., they make a product (photographs) that is used in the manufacture of another product (newspaper), and therefore these activities are not exempt from reporting under EPCRA section 313.

No. Amounts of listed toxic chemicals that are manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in conjunction with the preparation of trial samples are not excluded from threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations under the laboratory activities exemption.

No. Federal facilities are required to include in their threshold determinations any quantity of an EPCRA section 313 chemical that is manufactured, processed, or otherwise used. The “laboratory activities” exemption (40 CFR 372.38(d)) only applies to the EPCRA section 313 chemicals used within the laboratory, not to the on-site manufacture, process, or otherwise use (and associated releases) of the EPCRA section 313 chemical prior to the time the sample was sent to the laboratory.

The 2,000 pounds are exempt from the threshold determination for manufacturing under the laboratory activities exemption (40 CFR Section 372.38(d)) because the listed toxic chemical was manufactured in a laboratory under the supervision of a technically qualified individual. The facility will count only 24,000 pounds of the manufactured chemical toward its applicable manufacturing threshold.

In either case the listed toxic chemicals used in the shops would not be exempt from threshold determinations and release and other waste management estimates. The fact that the shops support exempt laboratory activities does not exclude the listed toxic chemicals used in the shops from threshold determinations and release and other waste management estimates. The laboratory activities exemption in Section 372.38(d) applies to toxic chemicals that are manufactured, processed, or otherwise used for certain purposes (such as research or quality control) in a laboratory under the supervision of a technically qualified individual. This exemption does not exempt the facilities themselves, it only exempts those listed toxic chemicals that are manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in a laboratory during certain laboratory activities, from threshold determinations and release and other waste management estimates required under EPCRA section 313. Specifically, Section 372.38(d)(3) states that the exemption does not apply to ‘activities conducted outside the laboratory.’

The benzene would be considered otherwise used for the Section 313 threshold determination since the benzene is being used in a non-incorporative activity in order to train individuals to use equipment. The laboratory activity exemption is intended to cover activities in a laboratory (e.g., product testing) under the supervision of a technically qualified individual. Training is not considered product testing nor research and development and thus would not be exempt under the laboratory activities exemption.

No. Training is not an activity that falls under the laboratory activities exemption (see 40 CFR Section 372.38(d)).

All copper compounds and any other toxic chemicals created or otherwise used during the production of the copper panels are considered towards the manufacturing or otherwise use thresholds. At this point in the panel production, the toxic chemicals manufactured or otherwise used in the entire panel production process are not eligible for the laboratory activities exemption. Those toxic chemicals in the panels distributed in commerce should also be considered towards the processing threshold. The toxic chemicals in the panels tested for research and development purposes become eligible for the laboratory activities exemption while the panels are being tested on-site under the supervision of a technically qualified individual in a laboratory setting.

Covered facilities manufacturing, processing or otherwise using a toxic chemical in a laboratory setting under the supervision of a technically qualified individual, need not consider those quantities of the toxic chemical when determining EPCRA section 313 chemical activity thresholds and calculating releases and other waste management amounts. The facility is eligible for the laboratory activity exemption for the amount of listed toxic chemical otherwise used, processed, and manufactured in the laboratory and amounts of the listed toxic chemical released or otherwise managed as waste from the laboratory. The covered facility is not required to count the amount of listed toxic chemical laboratory waste sent off-site for recycling toward the processing threshold. Any other non-exempt quantities of the toxic chemical manufactured, processed or otherwise used on-site, however, should be considered towards the appropriate threshold to see if the facility triggers reporting for that toxic chemical.

Yes. This de minimis exemption applies solely to chemicals that are not chemicals of special concern in mixtures. EPA’s long-standing interpretation has been that mixture does not include waste. Also, generally, de minimis does not apply to listed toxic chemicals that a facility manufactures. The de minimis exemption cannot be applied to listed toxic chemicals manufactured as a byproduct.

No, under EPCRA section 313, an impurity refers to a chemical that is coincidentally manufactured as a result of the manufacture, process, or otherwise use of another chemical, but is not separated from that chemical and remains primarily with the product or mixture. Because the listed toxic chemical is manufactured during the treatment of water and not during the processing of the primary product or mixture, it is not considered an impurity. In this case, the facility should consider amounts of chemicals manufactured toward the manufacturing threshold, to the extent that the facility has information on the amount of a toxic chemical that is manufactured. In addition, to the extent that the water and the toxic chemicals that are applied to the coal are intended to be incorporated into the coal product, the chemical manufactured in the water treatment process may also be processed.

The de minimis exemption applies to process streams when a starting material for the process is a mixture containing less than 1 percent (or 0.1 percent) of a listed chemical that is not a chemical of special concern. If the process stream is exempt under de minimis, fugitive releases from the stream are not reported on the Form R.

The de minimis exemption does not apply in this instance. The de minimis exemption does not apply to chemical byproducts manufactured under Section 313. Additionally, any EPCRA section 313 toxic chemicals manufactured during the facility’s production process, even if the toxic chemicals are created from toxic chemicals in the same EPCRA section 313 category, must be considered towards the facility’s manufacturing threshold. Therefore, the facility must consider all the EPCRA section 313 listed metal sulfates and chlorides created as a result of its production process for threshold determinations and release and other waste management reporting.

Yes. To determine the de minimis for xylene (mixed isomers), the one percent would be applied to the aggregated isomer’s weight percent in the mixture. For example, a mixture contains 30 pounds each of the three isomers, and 9,910 pounds of Chemical Z. The total xylene would be 90 pounds. That 90 pounds would constitute less than one percent of the total weight of 10,000 pounds, and would therefore, be exempt.

The amount of the listed toxic chemical in the mixture that is at or above the de minimis level, and therefore counts towards the threshold, can be assumed to be proportional to the ratio of the amount at or above de minimis concentration to the amount of the total concentration range. The concentration of the chemical in the mixture that is not exempt is the average of the de minimis level and the maximum concentrations. For example, assume that a facility manufactures 10 million pounds of a mixture containing 0.25–1.20 percent of a toxic chemical that is subject to a 1 percent de minimis level. The quantity of the mixture subject to reporting is: (10,000,000 lb × (1.20 - 0.99))/(1.20 - 0.25) = 2,210,526 lb non-exempt mixture This 2,210,526 pounds of non-exempt mixture is multiplied by the average concentration above the de minimis, which is 1.1 percent, or (1.20 + 0.99)/2 = 0.011 2,210,526 lb × 0.011 = 24,316 lb In this example, the amount of chemical that counts toward a threshold is 24,316 pounds.

A listed toxic chemical with a concentration range that has an upper bound equal to the de minimis level is not exempt from reporting under EPCRA section 313. The exception applies only if the chemical concentration is below the de minimis level. The amount of the listed toxic chemical in the mixture that is at or above the de minimis level, and therefore counts towards the threshold, is proportional to the ratio of the amount at or above the de minimis concentration to the amount of the total concentration range. The concentration of the chemical in the mixture that is not exempt is the average of the de minimis level and the maximum concentration, which in this case is the same. The fraction of the listed toxic chemical that is not exempt is the fraction that is at the de minimis level, i.e., 1 percent. The fraction that is exempt is that below the de minimis level, which is 0.5 percent – 0.9 percent (one significant figure). For example, assume that a facility manufactures 10 million pounds of a mixture containing 0.5-1.0 percent of a toxic chemical that is subject to a 1 percent de minimis exemption. The quantity of the mixture subject to reporting is: (10,000,000 lb × (1.0 - 0.9))/(1.0 - 0.5) = 2,000,000 lb non-exempt mixture

All of the xylene isomers are individually listed under EPCRA section 313. In addition, there is a listing for xylene (mixed isomers) that covers any combination of xylene isomers. When the threshold and de minimis concentration for each isomer in the mixture are exceeded independently, the facility may report under the individual isomer listings or under the mixed isomers listing. When the threshold and/or de minimis for each isomer in the mixture are not exceeded independently, but are exceeded collectively, the facility should report under the CAS number for xylene (mixed isomers). Therefore, if a covered facility otherwise uses a mixture containing 8,000 pounds of ortho-xylene, 4,000 pounds of meta-xylene, and 2,000 pounds of para-xylene, the facility would report as xylene (mixed isomers) because it exceeded the 10,000-pound otherwise use threshold for xylenes (mixed isomers).

The de minimis levels are dictated by determinations made by the National Toxicology Program (NTP), Report on Carcinogens, the International Agency for Research and Cancer (IARC) Monographs, or 29 CFR Part 1910, Subpart Z, Toxic and Hazardous Substances, Occupational Safety and Health Administrations. Toxic chemicals listed as carcinogens or potential carcinogens under NTP (classified as a known or reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens), IARC (classified as 1, 2A or 2B), or 29 CFR Part 1910, Subpart Z, have a 0.1 percent de minimis concentration level. EPA generally refers to these chemicals as the ‘OSHA carcinogens.’ All other toxic chemicals have a 1 percent de minimis concentration level. EPA periodically reviews the latest editions of the IARC and the NTP reports, as well as 29 CFR Part 1910, Subpart Z, to see if a listed chemical’s status has changed and updates the EPCRA section 313 lists accordingly.The list of toxic chemicals in the publication Toxic Chemical Release Inventory Reporting Forms and Instructions for the current reporting year contains the de minimis values for each of the toxic chemicals and chemical categories. The list is also available from the EPCRA hotline and on the EPA’s TRI website at: https://www.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventory-tri-program/tri-listed-chemicals. Although not required to do so, EPA prepares this list as a courtesy to the reporting public.

In the final rule (53 FR 4500, Feb. 16, 1988) that implements the reporting requirements of EPCRA section 313, EPA adopts a de minimis exemption which permits facilities to disregard de minimis levels of listed chemicals that are not chemicals of special concern for threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations. The regulations adopt a 0.1 percent de minimis level for chemicals that are carcinogens, as defined in 29 CFR Section 1910.1200(d)(4), as follows: “(4) Chemical manufacturers, importers and employers evaluating chemicals shall treat the following sources as establishing that a chemical is a carcinogen or potential carcinogen for hazard communication purposes: (I) National Toxicology Program (NTP), Report on Carcinogens (latest edition); (ii)International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs (latest editions); or (iii)29 CFR Part 1910, Subpart Z, Toxic and Hazardous Substances, Occupational Safety and Health Administration.” Therefore, once a chemical’s status under NTP, IARC, or 29 CFR Part 1910, Subpart Z, indicates that the chemical is a carcinogen or potential carcinogen, the reporting facility may disregard levels of the chemical below the 0.1 percent de minimis concentration, provided that the other criteria for the de minimis exemption are met. For convenience purposes, EPA refers to these chemicals as the “OSHA carcinogens.” If in reporting year “A,” IARC or NTP classifies a chemical as a probable or known carcinogen (thus lowering the EPCRA section 313 de minimis concentration from 1.0 to 0.1 percent), the lower de minimis concentration for the purposes of reporting would be applicable starting with reporting year “A+1.” For example, vinyl acetate was classified as a group 2B chemical by IARC in 1995, so the lower de minimis level of 0.1 percent applied starting with the 1996 reporting year (i.e., it was effective as of January 1, 1996, for reports due July 1, 1997). Suppliers would need to notify their customers of such changes with the first shipment in the year in which the change is applicable to reporting. If, as in the vinyl acetate example, the classification changes in 1995, then the supplier would notify customers with the first shipment on or after January 1, 1996.

On November 7, 2013, EPA published a final rule adding ortho-nitrotoluene to the list of EPCRA §313 chemicals (78 FR 66848). After reviewing the 12th RoC, EPA concluded that ortho-nitrotoluene meets the EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(B) statutory listing criteria because it is “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.” This final rule is effective November 29, 2013, and will apply for the 2014 reporting year (reports due July 1, 2015).Additional information regarding the final rule, including the Federal Register notice, is available at the following URL: https://www.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventory-tri-program/addition-ortho-nitrotoluene-0.

Since the chemical is manufactured at the facility as part of a waste treatment process, the de minimis exemption does not apply and the toxic chemical must be considered for both threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations.

On November 26, 2010, EPA expanded the TRI toxic chemical list by adding 16 chemicals classified as “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen” by the National Toxicology Programs (NTP) Report on Carcinogens (75 FR 72727). After reviewing the NTPs report, EPA believes that these 16 chemicals meet the EPCRA §313(d)(2)(B) statutory listing criteria because they can reasonably be anticipated to cause cancer in humans. Twelve of the chemicals were listed individually, while the remaining four were added to the polycyclic aromatic compounds (PACs) category. The PACs category is a category of special concern because PACs are persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic (PBT) chemicals, and as such, they are likely to remain in the environment for a very long time, are not readily destroyed, and may build up or accumulate in the body.This rulemaking to expand the TRI toxic chemical list is a part of EPAs ongoing efforts to provide communities with more complete information on chemicals. The revised toxic chemical list is effective starting with reports due July 1, 2012, for Reporting Year 2011.

No. The facility cannot take the de minimis exemption for this activity because the facility manufactured aqueous ammonia. The de minimis exemption does not apply to the manufacture of a chemical that is not a chemical of special concern, unless the toxic chemical is manufactured as an impurity and remains in the product distributed in commerce. Since the facility used the aqueous ammonia on-site and the ammonia is not an impurity that remains in a product distributed in commerce, the de minimis exemption does not apply.

No. For the purposes of calculating the ‘manufacturing’ threshold, the de minimis exemption cannot be applied to listed toxic chemicals in waste or listed toxic chemicals ‘manufactured’ in waste.

No. The mixture received by and initially processed by the facility contains chlorine above the de minimis concentration level. Because the mixture contained chlorine in a concentration above the 1 percent de minimis level, the de minimis exemption does not apply. The facility must consider the total weight percent of the chlorine in the mixture toward a threshold determination. Any amounts of the listed toxic chemical that are ultimately released or otherwise managed as waste as a result of this processing activity should be reported regardless of the concentration of the chlorine in the waste stream.

No. If a facility has multiple uses of a single EPCRA section 313 chemical, and one of those uses meets the criteria for an exemption, then the quantity of the EPCRA section 313 chemical that meets the criteria for the exemption is exempt from threshold determinations and release and other waste management reporting requirements. In the above example, the facility must file a Form R for toluene and must report all releases and other waste management of toluene that result from all non-exempt uses of the chemical.

The metal mine is otherwise using the listed toxic chemicals contained in the sewage sludge as a soil building material. However, because the listed toxic chemicals contained in the sludge are being applied to land, the facility is managing the sewage sludge as a waste. Therefore, in this example, amounts of listed toxic chemicals being otherwise used are not eligible for the de minimis exemption. Amounts of listed toxic chemicals are reported as a release to land. The otherwise use of listed toxic chemicals, such as nitrate compounds for farming, is to be reported as a release to land in Section 5.5 of the Form R.

The use of ash as a component of a mixture (concrete) that is otherwise used on-site to construct cement blocks constitutes an otherwise use of a material containing listed toxic chemicals and such amounts must be counted toward the facility’s otherwise use of those chemicals. In this case, the ash is not considered a waste because it is not managed as a waste. Thus, the listed chemicals that are not chemicals of special concern contained in the ash are eligible for the de minimis exemption if they do not exceed the de minimis concentrations.

No. For threshold determinations, the weight percent of the whole compound in the mixture is used. In general, the de minimis value for compounds is one percent, unless the particular compound is itself an OSHA carcinogen and then the de minimis level is 0.1 percent. The de minimis exemption does not apply to the chemicals of special concern listed at 40 CFR section 372.28.

No. The manufacture of a Section 313 chemical during a waste treatment process is not covered by the de minimis exemption.

No. The de minimis exemption can be applied to the listed chemical that is not a chemical of special concern in the raw material that is processed. Because the de minimis exemption can be taken, the quantities processed do not have to be applied to the processing threshold for that toxic chemical at the facility and quantities of the listed toxic chemical that are released or otherwise managed as waste as a result of this specific processing activity are exempt from release and other waste management calculations. The exemption applies even if the listed toxic chemical is concentrated above the de minimis level in the waste stream resulting from that processing activity.

The toxic chemical in the coal being combusted should be considered towards the facility’s otherwise use threshold and this activity is eligible for the de minimis exemption. The toxic chemicals that are manufactured as a result of the combustion process are byproducts and therefore not eligible for the de minimis exemption. The chemicals in the ash that is sold for direct reuse off-site are considered processed. After combustion, when the facility is preparing the toxic chemicals in ash for distribution in commerce, the chemicals that are not chemicals of special concern are eligible for the de minimis exemption.

The de minimis exemption cannot be applied to quantities of the listed toxic chemical in used or spent containers that are sent off-site for disposal because these quantities are being managed as a waste and the de minimis exemption does not apply to wastes. The de minimis exemption can be applied to a listed chemical that is not a chemical of special concern in a mixture or trade name product that is processed, otherwise used, manufactured as an impurity (that remains with the product), or imported, provided that the listed toxic chemical is present in the mixture or trade name product below the de minimis concentration level.

Yes, the de minimis exemption applies to the listed chemical that is not a chemical of special concern present in the shale (40 CFR Section 372.38(a)).

An article would be exempt from threshold determinations if the article meets the criteria for exemption. The article must be a manufactured item: (1) which is formed to a specific shape or design during manufacture; (2) which has end use functions dependent in whole or in part upon its shape or design; and (3) which does not release a toxic chemical under normal conditions of processing or otherwise use of the item at the facility or establishments. If an item retains its initial thickness or diameter in whole or in part, as a result of normal processing or otherwise use, then it meets the first part of the definition. Disposal of materials that are recognizable as the processed article is not considered a release or management of a waste containing a listed toxic chemical from an article, and thus, does not negate the article status.

The fact that an item is metal is irrelevant because metals do not have special status under the article exemption. If the metal article meets all the criteria for the article exemption during normal processing and otherwise use, then it would be exempt from threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations.

If a ‘non-article’ metal item is processed but all wastes are recycled, the item is still subject to threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations. The toxic chemicals therein must be applied to the appropriate thresholds.

The Agency has adopted a ‘round to the nearest pound policy.’ If the amount of a listed toxic chemical in releases from processing or otherwise using all like items is equal to or less than a half pound, this amount can be rounded to zero. Thus, the exemption would be maintained. The half-pound limit does not apply to each individual article, but applies to the sum of all amounts released during processing or otherwise use of all like items over the entire reporting year. If the listed toxic chemical that is released exceeds a half pound and is completely recycled/reused, on-site or off-site, then the item may still maintain its status as an article.

There is no need to round the 0.4 pound release quantity to zero. If the processing or otherwise use of all like items results in a total release of 0.5 pound or less of the chemical, the items retain their article status. This means that for purposes of filling out a Form R release report, the facility has the option to: 1) not count the quantities of toxic chemical contained in the like articles towards threshold determinations; and 2) not count the 0.5 pound or less total release quantity (in this example the 0.4 pound quantity) of the toxic chemical that occurred from the processing or otherwise use of all like articles towards the quantities released or otherwise managed as waste. This applies to toxic chemical of special concern (e.g. lead) and all other chemicals included on the TRI list of toxic chemicals.

The article exemption applies to the normal processing or otherwise use of an article. It does not apply to the manufacture of an article. For example, the manufacture of articles such as tableware is not exempt. Toxic chemicals processed into articles produced at a facility must be factored into threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations.

The article exemption does not apply. The lead billet does not qualify as an article because it does not have an end use function other than to be of a size and shape convenient to further processing, and the end product is significantly different in shape and dimension from the starting material. Since the facility processes more than 100 pounds of lead, the facility must report for this toxic chemical.

If 0.5 pounds or less of the toxic chemical is released from all like articles in the reporting year and the overall thickness or diameter of the sheet metal is not changed when processed into the desk, the sheet metal would retain its article status. The desk itself would not meet the criteria for the article exemption because the exemption does not apply to the manufacture of articles. Also, because air emissions are generated from the welding and soldering rods when they are used, the owner/operator must assess the entire amount of the toxic chemical in the rods for processing threshold purposes.

No. Melting and reforming the lead shields to form storage containers would constitute manufacturing of an article, which negates the article exemption for the lead shield. Because the lead is incorporated into the radioactive waste storage containers, the lead is otherwise used, unless the facility sends the containers off-site (including to another DOE facility), in which case the lead is processed.

Each tube may be considered an article. However, for amounts of listed toxic chemicals to be exempt from threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations under the article exemption, releases of all listed toxic chemicals for all ‘like’ articles must not exceed 0.5 pounds (see the Toxic Chemical Release Inventory Reporting Forms and Instructions). In this example, releases from all the replaced copper tubes must not exceed 0.5 pounds for the reporting year for the amounts not to be considered. If the tubes are ineligible for the exemption, then amounts of listed toxic chemicals contained in the tubes replaced (put in service) during the reporting year must be counted towards thresholds.

The 0.5 pounds/year release cut-off value applies to aggregate releases from the same type of item being processed or otherwise used in any manner at the facility. This value applies to the total aggregate releases of the EPCRA section 313 chemical from both steps of the process. Therefore, to reach the 0.5 pounds/year value, a facility should add any releases from grinding to those from cutting.

Items made from two different types of materials are not considered like items. In other words, the eligibility of items made from one type of material for the exemption does not affect the eligibility of items made from another type of material for the articles exemption. For example, stainless steel tubes and aluminum tubes are not considered like items. Therefore, if stainless steel tubes meet all of the criteria for the exemption, they would continue to qualify for the exemption even if the aluminum tubes do not qualify.Similarly, items that have been formed to a distinct shape or design during their manufacture are not considered to be like items with respect to items that have been formed to a different shape or design. For example, steel sheets, plates, coils, and tubes would not be considered like items.

One of the three qualifying criteria for the article exemption (40 CFR Section 372.3), states that an article ‘does not release a toxic chemical under normal conditions of processing or otherwise use of that item at the facility or establishment.’ When the welding rod is used, a listed toxic chemical is released. Therefore, the welding rod cannot be considered an article.

The article status of the metal items is not negated by the toxic chemical releases from the welding rods. The joined metal parts may be considered articles, and only the welding rods must be considered when making threshold determinations and releases and waste management calculations. However, if more than 0.5 pound of a toxic chemical is released from all like items, the item(s) would not qualify for the articles exemption.

The circuit boards would not qualify for the articles exemption if a release of a toxic chemical occurs as a result of the processing or otherwise use of the circuit boards (§372.38(b)). EPA allows releases from all like items of 0.5 pounds or less of a TRI toxic chemical to be rounded to 0 (zero), allowing the items to retain their article status. Therefore, if the facility released more than 0.5 pounds of a toxic chemical from all like boards at the facility during the reflowing of the lead over the course of the calendar year, then the toxic chemicals in the boards would not be eligible for the articles exemption. Similarly, if more than 0.5 pounds of a toxic chemical is released from all like components being attached to the boards, then those components would not be eligible for the articles exemption. If the boards and the components meet the definition of an article in §372.3, then the facility would only have to consider toxic chemicals in the solder towards threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations.

If, upon shaving and melting the die block, the diameter or thickness are not retained in whole or in part or toxic chemicals are released in an amount which exceeds 0.5 pounds for all like items in a reporting year, then the block would no longer qualify for the article exemption and the facility would have to perform threshold determinations and report releases and other waste management of the listed toxic chemical. When threshold determinations are made, the facility must consider the weight of the toxic chemical contained in the entire block for threshold determinations. However, only quantities in like articles that do not meet the article definition and were placed into use within the reporting year would be considered towards thresholds. Those items in use from previous years would not be considered in the threshold determinations for the current reporting year.

No. Since the item did not retain its original thickness in whole or in part, the anode is not considered an article.

Elemental zinc is listed with a qualifier, fume or dust, and is only reportable in the form of fume or dust. Thus, the zinc in the sheet metal would not count toward the threshold determinations since it is not in the fume or dust form. The zinc that is generated (in the form of fume or dust) as a result of the sheet metal processing is reportable and would be counted toward the 25,000-pound threshold determination for manufacturing, regardless of the sheet metal’s article status.

Because all of the copper released from the plate is collected and reused, no reportable release has occurred and the article exemption is maintained. If the copper is disposed of, on the other hand, the plates lose the article status.

The article exemption does not apply because: (1) the end use of the glass is not dependent on the specific shape or design of the glass entering the process-the glass is melted and reshaped, and/or (2) emissions result from heating of the glass during processing.

No, the lead buttons from crushed light bulbs would not be considered articles and the lead would not be exempt from threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations. The lead in these buttons would not be counted toward any threshold. The facility would only be required to report the release of lead buttons if a threshold for lead was exceeded by a covered activity or other waste management elsewhere at the facility.

All of the listed toxic chemical in the entire piece of cut sheet metal must be counted toward the shavings or the processing threshold, not just the weight of the listed toxic chemical in the section of the item on which work is done. The weight of the listed toxic chemical in the entire piece of sheet metal is used; the exemption cannot apply to a portion of the article.

If the manufactured item and all like items release more than 0.5 pounds of any toxic chemical, then those items lose their article status for all toxic chemicals contained in the items. Therefore, because the facility released more than 0.5 pounds of nickel, the manufactured item loses the article status for all TRI toxic chemicals, including chromium. The item would only qualify for the article exemption if the processing or otherwise use of all like items resulted in a total release of 0.5 pounds or less of nickel and 0.5 pounds or less of chromium.

First, the wire would remain an article if during the manufacture of the glass bulbs no toxic chemicals are released, and if the wire meets the other two criteria of the article exemption (i.e., it is formed to a specific shape or design during manufacture and it has end use functions dependent in whole or in part upon its shape or design). If the wire is not an article, then for an element such as copper, both copper metal and copper compounds are subject to EPCRA section 313 reporting. Determine the form of the copper in the wire first. If it is pure copper wire, the entire weight of the entire wire must be used. If it is an alloy, the weight percent of the toxic chemical times the entire wire weight must be used. If there are multiple copper compounds, the entire weight of each copper compound must be used for the processing threshold determination.

Cutting the wire into segments and winding it around a motor part do not negate the exemption since the diameter and thickness of the wire is not changed. The copper wire remains an article as long as no toxic chemicals (or less than 0.5 lb for all like items over the entire reporting year) are released during use. Since your engineer determined no copper is released, the article exemption does apply and the copper wire does not have to be considered for threshold determinations and releases and other waste management calculations.

The transfer of the copper sulfate to the POTW constitutes a release from the article. The release from the copper wire in the form of a copper compound would negate the article exemption for the copper wire. If the facility exceeds an activity threshold for the copper wire, a report must be filed for copper. In addition, if the 25,000-pound manufacturing threshold is exceeded for the copper sulfate, a report must also be filed for copper compounds. If a threshold for copper and copper compounds is individually met, the facility may file one report for both.

Yes. If the only thing separated from the metal sheets during cutting are shavings, and if all the shavings are sent off-site for reuse, and the thickness of the metal sheet is not completely altered during processing, then the metal sheets are still considered articles and are exempt. If cutting results in shavings or other waste materials from the sheets, and if these shavings are completely captured and sent either on-site or off-site to be either recycled or reused, then the item (in this case, metal sheets) can retain the article exemption, given that the other criteria for exemption are met.

Fluorocarbon in foam pieces that are cut counts toward the processing threshold. If the threshold is met, the facility must report all releases and other waste management of fluorocarbon as a result of cutting polyurethane foam and any diffusion of fluorocarbon in polyurethane foam to the environment under normal storage conditions. Note that the polyurethane foam may meet the article exemption if 0.5 pounds or less of fluorocarbon, from all like items, is released during processing and the foam maintains a specific shape or design.

Assuming the scrap metal pieces are recognizable as the original piece, the article exemption does apply to these metals if the forming process caused 0.5 pounds or less of releases of a listed toxic chemical from all like items or the items retain the thickness of sheet metal in whole or in part. Once an operation is performed on a metal that causes a release which is not recycled and which exceeds 0.5 pounds for the reporting year (for example, from operations such as heating, grinding, or welding), the article exemption no longer applies and releases must be reported when listed chemicals in a sheet metal are processed in quantities greater than the processing threshold.

Releases greater than 0.5 lb/yr of the chemicals contained in mixtures, including alloys, during fabrication operations disqualifies the item processed from the article exemption. Releases include the chemical component of fumes, dust, grindings, and turnings generated from metal fabrication activities. However, wastes generated in a form recognizable as the processed article (e.g., pieces of a plate or cylinder) are exempt from release and other waste management calculations.

Bar stock is an article if its basic dimensional characteristics are maintained in whole or in part in the finished product and if processing the bar stock does not result in releases. If the end product is totally different in diameter or thickness from the bar stock, the bar stock would not be an article.

No. If you are completely changing the shape or form of an item during processing, the article exemption no longer applies. An article has end use functions dependent in whole or in part upon its shape or design during end use. The end use function is dependent upon the copper being in the shape of the wire, so the copper bar cannot be considered an article. Also, in the above example the thickness or diameter of the entire item has been altered.

In order for an item to qualify for the articles exemption, it must be a manufactured item that is formed to a specific shape or design during manufacture, has end use functions dependent in whole or in part upon its shape or design, and does not release a toxic chemical under normal conditions of processing or otherwise use of the item (40 CFR Section 372.38(b)). Under TRI, particles, including granules, are not eligible for the articles exemption because they are not formed to a specific shape or design during manufacture (53 FR 4507; February 16, 1988). Therefore, the facility would need to count the toxic chemicals in the copper granules toward the processing threshold.

No. The manufacture of articles is not exempt. Thus, the lead chromate that is sent to the landfill is considered a release of lead chromate since the substandard bottles that are disposed of are waste from the manufacturing process.

If all of the lead is recycled or reused then the lead dust does not have to be counted as a release. Therefore, the cut bricks retain their article status. If while cutting the bricks, there are releases which are not recycled and that exceed 0.5 pounds for a year, then the cut bricks would not be considered articles. In this case, count only the lead in bricks actually processed toward the threshold determination. Any amounts of toxic chemicals sent off-site for recycling would be reported appropriately on the Form R.

The lead contained in the bricks is considered otherwise used since it is not incorporated into the final product. The facility would count the amount of lead in the bricks that are added to the reaction vessel only for the year in which the bricks are installed. In answer to the second question, if the 100-pound threshold is exceeded, then all releases and other waste management of lead would be reported from both the newly added bricks and those installed in previous years. Neither the lead contained in the refractory bricks in the inventory (i.e., not yet installed), nor the lead in place, contained in bricks (i.e., installed in a previous year) are to be included in threshold determinations for the reporting year in question. If no bricks are installed during the reporting year, and lead is not used elsewhere at the facility, then a report would not be required.

Disposal of the glass does not necessarily constitute a release which automatically negates the article exemption. For the tubing to meet the definition of an article when discarded, the diameter of the tubing must remain intact and unchanged. As a result, shards of glass no longer qualify as articles. If more than 0.5 pounds of lead is released and not recycled, then the article exemption would not apply to this glass tubing.

If the processing or otherwise use of all like manufactured items results in the release of 0.5 pounds or less of a toxic chemical, EPA will allow this quantity to be rounded to zero and the steel plates may be exempt as articles. If the listed toxic chemical that is released exceeds 0.5 pounds over a calendar year and is completely recycled or reused, on-site or off-site, then these steel plates may also be exempt as articles. Any amount that is not recycled or reused will count toward the 0.5 pound per year cut-off value.

If releases of the toxic chemical from the steel plate processing are recycled or reused or if the total amount released is 0.5 pound or less for the reporting year, then the releases are exempt from reporting under the article exemption.If the article exemption does not apply, the covered facility must include releases from the welding operation if thresholds are exceeded. EPA has developed tables to be used in estimating releases of metal in fumes for various types of welding and one for cutting mild steel. These tables can be found in Clarification and Guidance for the Metal Fabrication Industry (1998 version).

An already manufactured item (e.g., maintenance-free batteries) containing a listed toxic chemical may be considered an article if the facility uses the item as intended and the listed toxic chemical is not emitted during its processing or otherwise use. If the facility services the item by replacing the listed toxic chemical, the amount of the listed toxic chemical added during the reporting year must be counted toward the threshold determination. For facilities which manufacture batteries, lead that is incorporated into a lead acid battery is processed to manufacture the battery, and; therefore, must be counted toward threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations. The article exemption does not apply to the manufacture of an item. However, the use of the battery elsewhere in the facility may not have to be counted. Disposal of the battery after its use does not constitute a release.

If the car battery is completely sealed while present at the facility, it would be considered an article, and thus would be exempt from EPCRA section 313 reporting. If lead is released from the batteries under normal processing at the facility, as might occur during maintenance of the battery, the release would negate the article exemption. If the exemption is negated, the amount of lead and any other toxic chemical in these non-article batteries would be applied toward the processing threshold to determine if the facility must report.

The use of products containing toxic chemicals for the purpose of maintaining motor vehicles operated by the facility is exempt from threshold determinations and release and other waste management reporting under EPCRA §313. This would include batteries, as long as the battery is used to maintain the vehicle operated by the facility. In order to be considered a motor vehicle, the equipment cannot be stationary. Motor vehicles include forklifts, as well as cars, trucks, some cranes, locomotive engines, and aircraft. This exemption only applies to the otherwise use of the batteries, not to manufacturing or processing.Alternatively, if the battery is completely sealed while present at the facility, it would be considered an article, thus making it exempt from EPCRA §313. This exemption can be considered in both otherwise use and processing situations but cannot be used to exempt a chemical from the manufacturing threshold. If lead is released from the batteries under normal processing conditions at the facility, as might occur during maintenance of the battery, the release would negate the article exemption.If the battery in the forklift is not exempt, either by way of the motor vehicle or article exemption, then the reportable toxic chemicals present in the battery must be considered in the facility’s threshold calculations.

No. Although the catalyst is manufactured to a specific shape or design, and has end use functions dependent upon its shape during end use, EPA believes that releases occur during transfer operations. Therefore, the article exemption does not apply. Such catalysts usually contain dust size material that is not the same size and shape of the pellets. The likely releases would be dust emissions and potential spills that occur during charging and removing the catalyst from the reactor. Such operations are part of the normal conditions of processing and otherwise use that must be considered under the article definition. The intent of EPCRA is to capture all releases, whether they are intentional or not. The spent catalyst sent off-site for recycling does not itself constitute a release that invalidates the article exemption, as long as all of the toxic chemical is recycled. The facility should also consider whether any on-site regeneration of the catalyst results in the toxic chemical being released in waste streams.

The Pollution Prevention Act requirements do not affect the article status of the metal item. If all of the releases from the article are sent off-site for recycling, the item would still be exempt as an article. If this is the only occurrence of nickel in the facility, the facility would not have to report for nickel.

Although the pieces are sent off-site in step 3, they are returned to the process as essentially the same material. Thus, the activity is to be treated as a continuous process activity. If there is scrap material which is recognizable as the original form of the article, and if releases from steps 1, 2, and 4 (collectively), which are not recycled, do not exceed 0.5 pounds for the entire reporting year, then the metal sheets could be exempt as articles.

PCB transformers are considered to be articles, as long as PCBs are not released from the transformers during normal use or if the facility does not service the transformer by replacing the fluid with other PCB-containing fluid.

If the quantity of the formaldehyde released during processing of all like items exceeds 0.5 pounds per year, the facility cannot take the article exemption for the pipe and all formaldehyde incorporated into the pipe should be counted toward the processing threshold. The facility should report if the processing threshold is exceeded. If the quantity of formaldehyde released during processing of the pipes is 0.5 pounds or less per year, the facility would not have to report because it is part of an article.

EPA recommends that facilities use one or more of the following for performing release and other waste management calculations of EPCRA Section 313 chemicals: monitoring data, mass balance, emissions factors, and engineering calculations. If all wastes generated from stamping operations (including fume, dust, sludge and scrap pieces) are recycled or reused and the facility’s total releases will be equal to or less than 0.5 lb limit for each toxic chemical per year, the article exemption may apply. If releases (including disposal) of a toxic chemical are more than 0.5 lb, the article exemption is negated for all chemicals and all quantities of such chemicals in the metal sheets should be included in threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations.

The plastic wrap containing DEHP is not exempt as an article because quantities of DEHP are released during the cutting process. If a facility releases 0.5 pounds or less of DEHP during the reporting year from all like items, this amount can be rounded to zero and therefore would be exempt. If the facility can reasonably document that none of its customers are likely to release more than 0.5 pounds, no supplier notification is required.

No. The otherwise use of waste rock, ash, or other material in surface mining to replace excavated land is a reclamation activity. The otherwise use of these materials for reclamation is not considered part of extraction, and amounts of listed toxic chemicals contained in these materials must be considered toward threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations.

Provided that materials remain within the same disposal unit, the facility is not conducting a threshold activity, nor is the facility releasing materials that would have to be considered for reporting. If the facility regrades the material outside of the disposal unit, for use as road building material for example, then the facility is otherwise using the previously disposed material and would have to consider amounts of listed toxic chemicals contained in these materials for threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations.

No. In the final rule (62 FR 23834), EPA specifically exempted coal mining extraction activities. EPA defines coal extraction (for purposes of determining which activities are eligible for the extraction exemption), to mean the physical removal or exposure of ore, coal, minerals, waste rock, or overburden prior to beneficiation, and to encompass all extraction-related activities prior to beneficiation. EPA defines beneficiation as the preparation of ores to regulate size (including crushing and grinding) of the product, to remove unwanted constituents, or to improve the quality, purity, or grade of a desired product. Based on these definitions, certain beneficiation activities, such as crushing or grinding, may occur before coal enters a processing plant, and these activities are not exempt under the extraction exemption.

In terms of identifying which activities are considered part of the coal extraction exemption, EPA has made the following determinations: listed toxic chemicals involved in the transportation of coal, and reclamation of the extraction site are not considered ‘extraction-related’ activities. While these activities may involve listed toxic chemicals, existing exemptions should greatly reduce and simplify the type and amount of reporting required by covered facilities that conduct these activities. Crushing and grinding are beneficiation steps as provided in 40 CFR Section 261.4(b)(7), which was referenced in the final rule. The following items specifically address the activities raised in the above question:a) Crushing for transportation is not considered part of extraction and amounts of listed toxic chemicals involved in these activities must be considered toward threshold determinations and release or other waste management calculations.b) Land disposal of materials including waste rock, ore, and oily water from underground coal extraction activities are considered part of extraction activities and would therefore not be subject to threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations.c) Coal product screening activities involve grading of coal after it has been crushed, both of which are considered beneficiation steps, and; therefore, would not be considered part of extraction.d) Ash or other materials used for structural support during extraction activities would be considered part of extraction and would be eligible for the extraction exemption. Otherwise use of ash, overburden, waste rock or fertilizer for reclamation are not considered part of extraction, and amounts of listed toxic chemicals contained in these materials must be considered toward threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations.

No. Listed toxic chemicals that are constituents of overburden, as defined in the May 1, 1997, final rule (62 FR 23834), which are processed or otherwise used are not subject to threshold determinations or reporting for releases and other waste management activities (40 CFR Section 372.38(h)). However, listed toxic chemicals used in removing overburden during metal mining activities are not eligible for the overburden exemption.

For covered metal mining facilities, unconsolidated material that overlies a deposit of useful materials or ores is eligible for the ‘overburden exemption’ and does not have to be considered toward threshold determinations, or release and other waste management calculations. This exemption does not apply to consolidated material or unconsolidated/consolidated materials that do not overlie a deposit of useful material and which may be displaced or otherwise managed during extraction. Similar to waste rock that is separated from the useful more mineralized material at the point of extraction, amounts of these materials are not considered toward any threshold activities. However, these materials are not exempt from release and other waste management reporting and must be included if thresholds are exceeded elsewhere at the facility for the same listed toxic chemicals.

The de minimis exemption would apply to the chemicals that are not chemicals of special concern until they are concentrated above the applicable de minimis level. For purposes of threshold determinations and release and other waste management calculations, the facility would account for a listed toxic chemical from the first point in the process in which the concentration of the toxic chemical meets or exceeds the applicable de minimis level for that toxic chemical, in the process mixture.

Facilities that receive chemicals into the plant at concentrations below de minimis have to report releases and other waste management activities from that point in the process when the chemical’s concentration exceeds de minimis level. This facility would not have to report air emissions from their crude oil tanks for the chemicals present in oil below de minimis. For those above de minimis, they must report releases and other waste management activities. The de minimis exemption does not apply to the chemicals of special concern listed at 40 CFR section 372.28.

No. EPA has provided a list of standard chemical names and Chemical Abstract Service Registry numbers (CAS numbers) for all chemicals that must be reported. The regulations require the use of these standard names. Many Form Rs submitted previously could not be processed because unlisted CAS numbers or names were used.

Threshold determinations are made in the same manner for both delimited and nondelimited categories. If a covered facility manufactures, processes, or otherwise uses more than one member of a listed chemical category, the total volume of all the members of the category must be counted towards the applicable activity threshold (40 CFR Section 372.27(d)). If an activity threshold is exceeded, the owner or operator of the facility is required to report under EPCRA section 313. The report must cover all non-exempt activities at the facility involving members of the category. For reporting on delimited categories, only the members that are specifically listed as part of the category are subject to EPCRA section 313 reporting. When reporting other nondelimited chemical categories, any unique chemical substance that contains the named category compound as part of that chemical’s structure, or any compound meeting the specified molecular formula, is subject to threshold determinations. In 1999, (64 FR 58666, October 29, 1999), EPA classified the PACs category as a PBT chemical category and lowered the reporting threshold to 100 pounds. In addition, EPA added two members to this category: benzo(j,k)fluorine (fluoranthene) and 3-methylcholanthrene. EPA has developed guidance to facilitate accurate reporting for PACs entitled Guidance for Reporting Toxic Chemicals: Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds Category, accessible from GuideME at: https://guideme.epa.gov/ords/guideme_ext/f?p=guideme:gd-list.

Starting in 2000, EPA established more stringent reporting thresholds for chemicals designated as chemicals of special concern originally on, or added to, the TRI chemical list. PBT chemicals are of particular concern not only because they are toxic, but also because they remain in the environment for long periods of time, are not readily destroyed, and build up or accumulate in body tissue. The PBT chemicals include dioxin and dioxin-like compounds, lead and lead compounds, mercury and mercury compounds, polycyclic aromatic compounds (PACs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD), and certain pesticides, among other chemicals. For more detailed information about PBT chemicals under the TRI program, visit https://www.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventory-tri-program/persistent-bioaccumulative-toxic-pbt-chemicals-rules-under-tri.

Pursuant to EPCRA section 313(d), only EPA has the statutory authority to add or delete chemicals from the TRI toxic chemicals list. However, EPCRA section 313(e)(2) allows states and tribes to petition EPA to add or delete chemicals. If EPA receives a petition from a state or tribe that requests the addition of a particular chemical, EPA would have 180 days to respond with either the initiation of a rulemaking to add the chemical to the list or an explanation of why the petition does not meet the requirements to add a chemical to the list. If EPA does not respond within 180 days of receipt of a state or tribe’s petition to add a chemical, the chemical would be added to the list pursuant to EPCRA section 313(e)(2). Within 180 days of receipt of a state or tribe’s petition to delete a chemical, EPA would either initiate a rulemaking to delete the chemical or explain why EPA denied the petition; however, unlike the analogous process for petitions to add a chemical, the chemical would not be deleted within 180 days if EPA failed to respond to the petition.In addition, pursuant to EPCRA section 313(e)(1), any person may petition EPA to add or delete a chemical from the list of TRI toxic chemicals. If EPA receives a petition by a private citizen to add a chemical and EPA fails to respond within 180 days, the chemical would not necessarily be added. This result distinguishes citizen petitions to add a chemical from petitions to add a chemical by a state or tribe.

Report releases of the listed toxic chemical. The facility is not responsible for reporting a toxic chemical resulting from a conversion in the environment (e.g., outside of a facility air stack).