RDX is certainly not new as an explosive. Radioactive RDX I'm not sure about
however I know a few EOD types whom I'll poll.

Is this a liquid or a solid?



Louis N. Molino, Sr. CET
FF/NREMT/FSI/EMSI

Training Program Manager
Fire & Safety Specialists, Inc.

Typed by my fingers on my iPhone.

Please excuse any typos.

(979) 412-0890 (Cell)
(979) 690-7559 (Office)
(979) 690-7562 (Office Fax)

LNMolino@...
Lou@...

On Feb 13, 2012, at 19:37, vcament@... wrote:

>
>
> If RDX is explosive, you hqve created a new explosive and will need to go
through the DOT approval process,   G ood luck.
>
> Vic Ament
>
> vcament@...
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "James A Marriott" <jamarrio@...>
> To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 3:34:00 PM
> Subject: [hazmat101] assistance with proper classification
>
>
>
> I'm working on a shipment that has me baffled.
>
> I have a lab that has created a solution of radioactive RDX in water
(1mg/100ml). Besides the radioactive nature, would this be considered hazardous?
If so, how would I classify this?
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
> -Jim
>
> Jim Marriott
> Chemical Safety Professional
> Division of Research Safety
> University of Illinois
> 217-244-4366
> http://www.drs.illinois.edu
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I agree RDX is not new, but he said they added a Class 7 component. That is
new. Do I suggest a possible home land security concern?

Vic Ament
vcament@...

Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless

-----Original message-----
From: "Louis N. Molino, Sr." <lnmolino@...>
To: "hazmat101@yahoogroups.com" <hazmat101@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, Feb 14, 2012 02:57:35 GMT+00:00
Subject: Re: [hazmat101] assistance with proper classification

RDX is certainly not new as an explosive. Radioactive RDX I'm not sure about
however I know a few EOD types whom I'll poll.

Is this a liquid or a solid?



Louis N. Molino, Sr. CET
FF/NREMT/FSI/EMSI

Training Program Manager
Fire & Safety Specialists, Inc.

Typed by my fingers on my iPhone.

Please excuse any typos.

(979) 412-0890 (Cell)
(979) 690-7559 (Office)
(979) 690-7562 (Office Fax)

LNMolino@...
Lou@...

On Feb 13, 2012, at 19:37, vcament@... wrote:

>
>
> If RDX is explosive, you hqve created a new explosive and will need to go
through the DOT approval process,   G ood luck.
>
> Vic Ament
>
> vcament@...
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "James A Marriott" <jamarrio@...>
> To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 3:34:00 PM
> Subject: [hazmat101] assistance with proper classification
>
>
>
> I'm working on a shipment that has me baffled.
>
> I have a lab that has created a solution of radioactive RDX in water
(1mg/100ml). Besides the radioactive nature, would this be considered
hazardous? If so, how would I classify this?
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
> -Jim
>
> Jim Marriott
> Chemical Safety Professional
> Division of Research Safety
> University of Illinois
> 217-244-4366
> http://www.drs.illinois.edu
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Louis,

It’s a liquid.  They purchased the solid, then dissolved it in water.

-Jim

Jim Marriott
Chemical Safety Professional
Division of Research Safety
University of Illinois
217-244-4366
http://www.drs.illinois.edu



From: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hazmat101@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Louis N. Molino, Sr.
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 8:58 PM
To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [hazmat101] assistance with proper classification



RDX is certainly not new as an explosive. Radioactive RDX I'm not sure about
however I know a few EOD types whom I'll poll.

Is this a liquid or a solid?

Louis N. Molino, Sr. CET
FF/NREMT/FSI/EMSI

Training Program Manager
Fire & Safety Specialists, Inc.

Typed by my fingers on my iPhone.

Please excuse any typos.

(979) 412-0890 (Cell)
(979) 690-7559 (Office)
(979) 690-7562 (Office Fax)

LNMolino@...<mailto:LNMolino%40aol.com>
Lou@...<mailto:Lou%40fireworld.com>

On Feb 13, 2012, at 19:37, vcament@...<mailto:vcament%40comcast.net>
wrote:

>
>
> If RDX is explosive, you hqve created a new explosive and will need to go
through the DOT approval process, G ood luck.
>
> Vic Ament
>
> vcament@...<mailto:vcament%40comcast.net>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "James A Marriott"
<jamarrio@...<mailto:jamarrio%40illinois.edu>>
> To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com<mailto:hazmat101%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 3:34:00 PM
> Subject: [hazmat101] assistance with proper classification
>
>
>
> I'm working on a shipment that has me baffled.
>
> I have a lab that has created a solution of radioactive RDX in water
(1mg/100ml). Besides the radioactive nature, would this be considered hazardous?
If so, how would I classify this?
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
> -Jim
>
> Jim Marriott
> Chemical Safety Professional
> Division of Research Safety
> University of Illinois
> 217-244-4366
> http://www.drs.illinois.edu
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I've had to run new explosive approvals in the past. "New" doesn't mean a new
chemical to DOT. You need to file for approval for each new formulation you
intend to ship. It's also called "new" if YOU've never produced and shipped it
before, even if a gazillion other people have.

Take a look through 173.56, and the rest of that subpart. There are some
exceptions that may apply.

Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From: Louis N. Molino, Sr. <lnmolino@...>;
To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com <hazmat101@yahoogroups.com>;
Subject: Re: [hazmat101] assistance with proper classification
Sent: Tue, Feb 14, 2012 2:57:35 AM

 

RDX is certainly not new as an explosive. Radioactive RDX I'm not sure about
however I know a few EOD types whom I'll poll.

Is this a liquid or a solid?

Louis N. Molino, Sr. CET
FF/NREMT/FSI/EMSI

Training Program Manager
Fire & Safety Specialists, Inc.

Typed by my fingers on my iPhone.

Please excuse any typos.

(979) 412-0890 (Cell)
(979) 690-7559 (Office)
(979) 690-7562 (Office Fax)

LNMolino@...
Lou@...

On Feb 13, 2012, at 19:37, vcament@... wrote:

>
>
> If RDX is explosive, you hqve created a new explosive and will need to go
through the DOT approval process, G ood luck.
>
> Vic Ament
>
> vcament@...
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "James A Marriott" <jamarrio@...>
> To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 3:34:00 PM
> Subject: [hazmat101] assistance with proper classification
>
>
>
> I'm working on a shipment that has me baffled.
>
> I have a lab that has created a solution of radioactive RDX in water
(1mg/100ml). Besides the radioactive nature, would this be considered hazardous?
If so, how would I classify this?
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
> -Jim
>
> Jim Marriott
> Chemical Safety Professional
> Division of Research Safety
> University of Illinois
> 217-244-4366
> http://www.drs.illinois.edu
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Interesting. I thought RDX was unsinkable? For what purpose?

Louis N. Molino, Sr. CET
FF/NREMT/FSI/EMSI

Training Program Manager
Fire & Safety Specialists, Inc.

Typed by my fingers on my iPhone.

Please excuse any typos.

(979) 412-0890 (Cell)
(979) 690-7559 (Office)
(979) 690-7562 (Office Fax)

LNMolino@...
Lou@...

On Feb 14, 2012, at 5:52, "Marriott, James A" <jamarrio@...> wrote:

> Louis,
>
> It’s a liquid. They purchased the solid, then dissolved it in water.
>
> -Jim
>
> Jim Marriott
> Chemical Safety Professional
> Division of Research Safety
> University of Illinois
> 217-244-4366
> http://www.drs.illinois.edu
>
>
>
> From: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hazmat101@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Louis N. Molino, Sr.
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 8:58 PM
> To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [hazmat101] assistance with proper classification
>
>
>
> RDX is certainly not new as an explosive. Radioactive RDX I'm not sure about
however I know a few EOD types whom I'll poll.
>
> Is this a liquid or a solid?
>
> Louis N. Molino, Sr. CET
> FF/NREMT/FSI/EMSI
>
> Training Program Manager
> Fire & Safety Specialists, Inc.
>
> Typed by my fingers on my iPhone.
>
> Please excuse any typos.
>
> (979) 412-0890 (Cell)
> (979) 690-7559 (Office)
> (979) 690-7562 (Office Fax)
>
> LNMolino@...<mailto:LNMolino%40aol.com>
> Lou@...<mailto:Lou%40fireworld.com>
>
> On Feb 13, 2012, at 19:37, vcament@...<mailto:vcament%40comcast.net>
wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > If RDX is explosive, you hqve created a new explosive and will need to go
through the DOT approval process, G ood luck.
> >
> > Vic Ament
> >
> > vcament@...<mailto:vcament%40comcast.net>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >
> > From: "James A Marriott"
<jamarrio@...<mailto:jamarrio%40illinois.edu>>
> > To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com<mailto:hazmat101%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 3:34:00 PM
> > Subject: [hazmat101] assistance with proper classification
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm working on a shipment that has me baffled.
> >
> > I have a lab that has created a solution of radioactive RDX in water
(1mg/100ml). Besides the radioactive nature, would this be considered hazardous?
If so, how would I classify this?
> >
> > Any help would be appreciated.
> > -Jim
> >
> > Jim Marriott
> > Chemical Safety Professional
> > Division of Research Safety
> > University of Illinois
> > 217-244-4366
> > http://www.drs.illinois.edu
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Limited solubility (40-60mg/L).  This is from a civil engineering lab. 
They’re measuring uptake of RDX in plants I believe.
-Jim

From: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hazmat101@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Louis N. Molino, Sr.
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 8:03 AM
To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [hazmat101] assistance with proper classification



Interesting. I thought RDX was unsinkable? For what purpose?

Louis N. Molino, Sr. CET
FF/NREMT/FSI/EMSI

Training Program Manager
Fire & Safety Specialists, Inc.

Typed by my fingers on my iPhone.

Please excuse any typos.

(979) 412-0890 (Cell)
(979) 690-7559 (Office)
(979) 690-7562 (Office Fax)

LNMolino@...<mailto:LNMolino%40aol.com>
Lou@...<mailto:Lou%40fireworld.com>

On Feb 14, 2012, at 5:52, "Marriott, James A"
<jamarrio@...<mailto:jamarrio%40illinois.edu>> wrote:

> Louis,
>
> It’s a liquid. They purchased the solid, then dissolved it in water.
>
> -Jim
>
> Jim Marriott
> Chemical Safety Professional
> Division of Research Safety
> University of Illinois
> 217-244-4366
> http://www.drs.illinois.edu
>
>
>
> From: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com<mailto:hazmat101%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:hazmat101@yahoogroups.com<mailto:hazmat101%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf
Of Louis N. Molino, Sr.
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 8:58 PM
> To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com<mailto:hazmat101%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [hazmat101] assistance with proper classification
>
>
>
> RDX is certainly not new as an explosive. Radioactive RDX I'm not sure about
however I know a few EOD types whom I'll poll.
>
> Is this a liquid or a solid?
>
> Louis N. Molino, Sr. CET
> FF/NREMT/FSI/EMSI
>
> Training Program Manager
> Fire & Safety Specialists, Inc.
>
> Typed by my fingers on my iPhone.
>
> Please excuse any typos.
>
> (979) 412-0890 (Cell)
> (979) 690-7559 (Office)
> (979) 690-7562 (Office Fax)
>
> LNMolino@...<mailto:LNMolino%40aol.com><mailto:LNMolino%40aol.com>
> Lou@...<mailto:Lou%40fireworld.com><mailto:Lou%40fireworld.com>
>
> On Feb 13, 2012, at 19:37,
vcament@...<mailto:vcament%40comcast.net><mailto:vcament%40comcast.net>
wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > If RDX is explosive, you hqve created a new explosive and will need to go
through the DOT approval process, G ood luck.
> >
> > Vic Ament
> >
> >
vcament@...<mailto:vcament%40comcast.net><mailto:vcament%40comcast.net>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >
> > From: "James A Marriott"
<jamarrio@...<mailto:jamarrio%40illinois.edu><mailto:jamarrio%40illinoi\
s.edu>>
> > To:
hazmat101@yahoogroups.com<mailto:hazmat101%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:hazmat101%4\
0yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 3:34:00 PM
> > Subject: [hazmat101] assistance with proper classification
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm working on a shipment that has me baffled.
> >
> > I have a lab that has created a solution of radioactive RDX in water
(1mg/100ml). Besides the radioactive nature, would this be considered hazardous?
If so, how would I classify this?
> >
> > Any help would be appreciated.
> > -Jim
> >
> > Jim Marriott
> > Chemical Safety Professional
> > Division of Research Safety
> > University of Illinois
> > 217-244-4366
> > http://www.drs.illinois.edu
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>> They’re measuring uptake<<  An “aha!” moment (no, not the one-hit
wonder from the ‘80’s).

Which explains the radioactive material.

Which isotope are they using (if you know or are allowed to say)?

Depending on the half-life and/or the activity of the nuclide(s), it may be
eligible for “limited quantity” radioactive material, in which case the
hazard of the RDX solution is the primary hazard, or if the half-life is short
enough to get it below the activity concentration(s) in 173.436, it’s not even
“radioactive” as far as DOT regulations go.

If the radioactive is not low enough for limited quantity, then the radioactive
material class takes precedence.

You might check with the regulators at PHMSA, if you can find a way to test the
RDX solution separately and classify it first, then maybe the nuclide part can
be added. Or, if you can find a non-radioactive version of the same chemical
(say, sodium iodide), the lab could test their non-radioactive version for its
chemical hazard properties. I would suspect finding a lab to test an actual
radioactive sample would be a challenge.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Capt. Bruce Bugg #7013
Georgia Department of Public Safety
Motor Carrier Compliance Division
Region 3 Commander
320 Chester Avenue
Atlanta, GA  30316
office:               404.463.3880
voicemail:          404.463.3899
fax:                   770.357.8867
e-mail: obbugg[at]gsp.net (replace “[at]” with @)

From: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hazmat101@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Marriott, James A
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 11:45
To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [hazmat101] assistance with proper classification



Limited solubility (40-60mg/L). This is from a civil engineering lab. They’re
measuring uptake of RDX in plants I believe.
-Jim



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Loader found dead in container; Suffocation suspected


By VM Sathish

Published Sunday, February 12, 2012



A 55-year-old Indian porter found dead inside a massive onion container is
likely to have died of suffocation because of the onion odour, the chief of
Dubai's criminal investigation was reported on Monday as saying.

Brigadier Khalil Al Mansoori said the body of worker at Al Awir vegetable
market had been handed to the coroner to determine the precise cause of
death.

"It was noticed that the dead man had blue signs on the face and lips, which
indicate his dead was caused by suffocation because of low oxygen levels,"
he said, quoted by the Sharjah-based Arabic language daily 'Al Khaleej'.

"According to forensic experts, onion inhales oxygen and exhales carbon
dioxide, which leads to asphyxia and eventually death."

Mansoori urged shipping firms not to allow their workers to sleep in loaded
containers, adding that he had instructed Rashidiya police to mount an
awareness drive for porters to alert them about the risks of sleeping inside
containers and other places which lack ventilation. "We are now awaiting a
final forensic report about the exact cause of death of that Indian
loader.details will be released later," he said.

The worker from Tamil Nadu state was found dead inside an onion container on
Sunday morning. He had worked till night loading onions in a 40-feet
container and decided to sleep inside the container because of the cold
weather.


EARLIER STORY:

An Indian worker from Tamil Nadu at the Al Awir Fruits and Vegetables Market
was found dead inside an onion container on Sunday morning. The worker, in
his 50s, worked till night loading onions in a 40-feet container. Because of
the cold weather, he chose to sleep inside the container, partially filled
with onions.

According to Dubai Police, the dead man was found on Sunday morning and the
cause of death is being investigated. Preliminary reports suggest that he
died of carbon dioxide inhalation from the container. His body has been
moved to the police morgue. "Because of the cold weather, many workers who
usually sleep on the pavements and under the trees have shifted to
containers, which are warmer. It is not known whether the  man died of
suffocation after someone closed the container without knowing that someone
was sleeping inside," said a trader at the vegetable market. "He could have
died of carbon dioxide produced by the onions in the locked container,"
sources said.

The worker, who lives in the Hor Al Anz area, chose to sleep in the
container rather than travel back to his accommodation and return to work
early next morning. "There are no fixed timings for workers in the fruit and
vegetable market. After the market was shifted from Deira to Al Awir. Many
workers continued to stay in their old accommodation. They have to work at
odd hours, sleep wherever they find temporary shelter and resume work. It is
common to see workers sleeping under the trees, on pavements and containers.
During the cold season, many workers find it convenient to sleep in
containers," said an Asian worker. According to sources in the vegetable
market, containers with Advanced Fresh Air Management systems allow low
levels of oxygen as onions can tolerate up to 10 per cent carbon dioxide
which helps reducing sprouting, root growth and decay of the vegetable. By
increasing the carbon dioxide level and minimising the ventilation openings,
such containers can minimise water loss from onions and build up carbon
dioxide levels, which can help to preserve onions.

http://www.emirates247.com/news/emirates/loader-found-dead-in-container-suff
ocation-suspected-2012-02-12-1.442629





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Worker dead after fall into vat of corrosive liquid


by Jeff Thompson, KGW.com Staff

KTVB.COM

Posted on February 19, 2012 at 1:47 PM

PORTLAND - A worker on a barge docked in the Swan Island Basin was killed
after falling into a vat of chemicals, fire officials reported Sunday.

Crews were called just after 10 a.m. to the report that an employee had
fallen into a tank full of a wood byproduct called likening, according to
Lt. Rick Tyler with Portland Fire and Rescue. Dispatchers said the compound
was corrosive and combustible.

Two workers on the barge had walked past the tank when one of them suddenly
noticed the other was missing. He then saw that an emergency line tied to
the other worker was leading down into the tank.

Once on scene firefighters said the rescue effort had become a body recovery
mission, and that the worker did not survive.

A hazardous materials team said the worker would have become unconscious
within seconds of falling into the tank, as the oxygen level reading was
less than one percent near the top of the tank.

Just before 11:30 a.m. crews found the body by using a camera. Two
firefighters equipped with Hazard suits and oxygen tanks were lowered into
the tank to recover the body.

http://www.ktvb.com/news/regional/Worker-dead-after-fall-into-vat-of-corrosi
ve-liquid-139643383.html





What is "Likening"? Anyone able to name it with a decent chemical name?



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Worker's body found inside 12-foot-deep chemical tank on Swan Island


Published: Sunday, February 19, 2012, 12:03 PM     Updated: Sunday, February
19, 2012, 12:16 PM


By  <http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/sallyho/index.html> Sally Ho, The
Oregonian The Oregonian


Share





Rescue crews are working to recover the body of a male worker who fell into
a 12 foot-deep chemical tank Sunday morning at an industrial site on Swan
Island.

The man's co-worker called police to report he had disappeared from sight at
about 10 a.m. in the 6000 block of Basin Avenue. The two were working around
a 40 feet-by-50 feet barge filled with a chemical liquid called lignin
amine. The chemical is not flammable and is often used to spray fruit trees,
Portland Fire & Rescue Lt. Rich Tyler said.

The tank's 28-inch hatch opening was opened when crews got to the scene. A
camera confirmed the man's body was inside the tank, which was emptied into
a separate container to recover the man's body. Nearby waters and site
grounds were also searched.

"This tank is a double hazard," Tyler said at the scene, citing the confined
space with 1 percent oxygen, hazardous atmosphere amd hazardous materials.
It's unclear if the man, who has not been identified, was wearing a life
jacket, but Tyler confirmed safety standards would required one. The other
worker was not injured.


A hazardous materials team was on the scene and the U.S. Coast Guard was
also alerted.



http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2012/02/workers_body_found_insi
de_12-f.html





This sounds more realistic than "likening"



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The ASME EED Health, Safety and Environment Newsletter for 20 Feb. 2012 is
available at

<http://files.asme.org/Divisions/EED/16811.pdf> (PDF)


---
Enform Safety alert
Prevention of welder's flash

<http://enform.informz.ca/enform/data/images/media/ia_feb2012_welders_flash_prev\
ention.pdf> (PDF)

---
The Hotel Fire that Changed an Industry
Lessons Learned
* From the Files of Chief Ronnie Coleman

Built in 1913 by renowned architect William Lee Stoddard, the Winecoff Hotel was
one of Atlanta's tallest and most luxurious hotels. Standing fifteen stories
tall with an open-air terrace overlooking Peachtree Street, the hotel was
strategically located in the heart of Atlanta's retail district.

According to their stationery, the hotel was advertised as being absolutely
fireproof, even though it was designed without fire alarms, fire escapes or a
sprinkler system.
On the night of December 7, 1946, the hotel was filled to capacity with over 280
guests including shoppers, travelers, World War II soldiers eager to rebuild
their lives, and 40 of Georgia's most promising high school students who had
come to attend a mock legislation.

Around three o'clock in the morning, the elevator operator noticed the smell of
smoke around the fifth floor. Panicked, she descended to the lobby then stumbled
out of the elevator screaming, "Fire! Fire!"

Unbeknownst to her, the fire had already completely engulfed floors three, four
and five. For employees of the hotel and the guests who were awake, realization
and reaction would come quickly. But for the guests who were asleep, survival
would come at a much higher price.

Read more at:
http://www.winecoffhotelfire.com/index.html

----
WorkSafe (BC) News - February 16, 2012

http://www2.worksafebc.com/enews/120216/120216.htm

---
USFA Coffee Break Training

Emergency Medical Services
EMS Mass-Casualty Support Vehicles
Learning Objective: The student shall define Mass-Casualty Support Vehicle
resources in accordance with National Incident Management System (NIMS)
standards.

<http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/coffee-break/ems/ems_2012_4.pdf> (PDF)

-
Hazardous Materials:  Aboveground Tank Locations for Motor Vehicle Fuel
Dispensing
Learning Objective: The student shall be able to identify the seperation
requirements for aboveground storage tanks for motor vehicle fuels.

<http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/coffee-break/cb_fp_2012_7.pdf> (PDF)


---

USEPA press release
February 13, 2012

EPA budget supports President Obama's vision of an America that is built to last

WASHINGTON � Today the Obama Administration proposed a FY 2013 budget of $8.344
billion for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This budget reflects
a government-wide effort to reduce spending and find cost-savings, and is $105
million below the EPA's enacted level for FY 2012. The FY 2013 budget is the
result of EPA's ongoing efforts to carefully consider potential cost savings and
reductions while continuing its commitment to core environmental and health
protections -- safeguarding Americans from pollution in the air they breathe,
the water they drink and the land where they build their communities.

"This budget is focused on fulfilling EPA's core mission to protect health and
the environment for millions of American families. It demonstrates fiscal
responsibility, while still supporting clean air, healthy waters and innovative
safeguards that are essential to an America built to last," said EPA
Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. "It has taken hard work and difficult choices to
reach this balanced approach, and while we had to make sacrifices, we have
maintained our commitment to the core priorities of this agency and ensured the
protections the American people expect and deserve."

Key FY 2013 budget highlights include:

Supporting State Governments. The budget proposes $1.2 billion in categorical
grants for states that are on the front lines implementing environmental
statutes such as the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. The increases from
FY 2012 levels include nearly $66 million for State and Tribal Air Quality
Management grants, nearly $27 million for Pollution Control (Clean Water Act
Section 106) grants, and about $29 million for the Tribal General Assistance
Program.

Protecting America's Waters. The proposal provides $2 billion for Clean Water
and Drinking Water State Revolving funds (SRFs). This will allow the SRFs to
finance over $6 billion in wastewater and drinking water infrastructure projects
annually. EPA will work to target assistance to small and underserved
communities with limited ability to repay loans, while maintaining state program
integrity.

Cleaning Up Contaminated Sites in Communities. The proposal includes $755
million in funding for the Superfund Cleanup program which maintains funding to
support cleanup at hazardous waste sites that address emergencies (Superfund
Emergency Response and Removal) at the nation's highest priority sites
(Superfund Remedial).

Acute cannabis consumption and motor vehicle collision risk

February 9, 2012 - 15:33 Drivers who consume cannabis within three hours of
driving are nearly twice as likely to cause a vehicle collision as those who are
not under the influence of drugs or alcohol claims a paper published today on
bmj.com.

Read more at:
<http://www.bmj.com/press-releases/2012/02/09/acute-cannabis-consumption-and-mot\
or-vehicle-collision-risk>

If you wondered why they test public tranportion workers for drugs and
alcohol,...

Please plan to join us for the UCDPER Statewide Conference on Risk & Crisis
Communication – Communicating Before, During, and After Disasters and
Emergencies on Thursday evening, March 1, 2012, at The Conference Center at
Mercer, 1200 Old Trenton Road, West Windsor, NJ, from 5:00 p.m. until 9:00 p.m.

The agenda and additional details can be found on the attached brochure and also
on the website:
http://ccoe.umdnj.edu/catalog/medical/11MR15.htm

Registration is required to attend.  Please e-mail your completed registration
form to galltsa@..., call 973 -972-7141 to register for Course Code
11MR15, or fax your form to 973-972-7128.

Thank you.

Brian M. Carney, EMT-P
Emergency Management Planner/Educator
Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital
New Brunswick, New Jersey

732 418-8129 Office
732 672-8694 Mobile
732 418-8911 Fax
732 937-8687 24 Hour Emergency




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

USEPA Press Release, Feb 21, 2012

Pennsylvania Company Settles Toxic Chemical Reporting Violations at Nazareth,
Pa. Facility

PHILADELPHIA (February 21, 2012) -- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
today announced that Essroc Cement Corporation has agreed to pay a $82,000
penalty to settle alleged violations of toxic chemical reporting requirements at
its manufacturing facility located at 401 West Prospect St., Nazareth, Pa. 
According to EPA, Essroc failed to submit three years of required reports on a
regulated toxic chemical (lead) which was processed at this facility.

EPA cited the company for violating the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA). This law requires companies that manufacture, use or
process more than a threshold amount of listed toxic chemicals to file an annual
toxic chemical release form with EPA and the state. These reports are used to
compile the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) -- a publicly available EPA database,
searchable by zip code, that contains information on toxic chemical releases and
waste management activities.

The multi-establishment Nazareth, Pa., plant processes lead as part of the
manufacturing process for bulk and packaged cement. Lead and lead compounds are
regulated under EPCRA due to the public health effects of ingestion or
inhalation of lead, particularly among children, including damage to the nervous
system. According to EPA, a June 2011 inspection revealed that Essroc did not
submit annual reports for lead for three years (2006 through 2008) when the
Nazareth facility processed lead in amounts in excess of 130,000 pounds annually
-- significantly exceeding EPCRA's 100 pound reporting threshold. (This
settlement involves alleged reporting violations, not unlawful releases of toxic
chemicals.)

The settlement penalty reflects the company's cooperation with EPA in resolving
the alleged violations, and its compliance efforts. As part of the settlement,
the company did not admit liability for the alleged violations, but has
certified compliance with applicable EPCRA requirements.

In a separate matter, the United States recently announced a $1.7 million
settlement of alleged Clean Air Act violations at six Essroc facilities
nationwide, including the Nazareth plant.

For folks in or familiar with California.

What are the requirements of Chemical Inventory reporting (referred to as Tier 2
reporting) for locations in California?

What is the deadline?

What triggers applicability?

How does it relate to EPA's EPCRA Tier 2 reporting? Program

Thanks in advance.
..PC

My two reports due at the end of this month are Tier II, and EPA Pesticide
producing report.

But I don't work in CA, do they have some sort of PROP 65 report they have to
do?

--- In hazmat101@yahoogroups.com, "pcjr101" <pcjr101@...> wrote:
>
> For folks in or familiar with California.
>
> What are the requirements of Chemical Inventory reporting (referred to as Tier
2 reporting) for locations in California?
>
> What is the deadline?
>
> What triggers applicability?
>
> How does it relate to EPA's EPCRA Tier 2 reporting? Program
>
> Thanks in advance.
> ..PC
>

Not sure about the entire state, but LA County has its own set of
rules/regulations: http://fire.lacounty.gov/HealthHazMat/HHMDForms.asp

Brenda Hinds Pool, MSPH, CIH
Georgia State University
Department of Safety and Risk Management
Atlanta, GA 30302-3961
bpool@...<mailto:bpool@...>



From: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hazmat101@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
pcjr101
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 1:43 PM
To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [hazmat101] Chemical Inventory reporting in California



For folks in or familiar with California.

What are the requirements of Chemical Inventory reporting (referred to as Tier 2
reporting) for locations in California?

What is the deadline?

What triggers applicability?

How does it relate to EPA's EPCRA Tier 2 reporting? Program

Thanks in advance.
..PC



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The report is due 12/31 every year. An increase of 100% or a new chemical
addition over 55 gallons, 50 pounds or a 200 cuft gas cylinder are the lower
limits.


Ray Campbell


________________________________
  From: pcjr101 <pcjr101@...>
To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 10:42 AM
Subject: [hazmat101] Chemical Inventory reporting in California



 

For folks in or familiar with California.

What are the requirements of Chemical Inventory reporting (referred to as Tier 2
reporting) for locations in California?

What is the deadline?

What triggers applicability?

How does it relate to EPA's EPCRA Tier 2 reporting? Program

Thanks in advance.
..PC




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

California requires Tier II (no Tier I). But their bigger program is the "hazmat
business plan." It applies to any EPCRA hazardous chemical in excess of 55
gallons for liquids, 500 lbs for solids, or 200 cu ft for compressed gases. The
program is administered (like most CA rules) through the CUPAs, so there is some
local variability.

I'm not up on all of the details. You can get a good overview at:
http://www.calema.ca.gov/HazardousMaterials/Pages/Business-Plan-EPCRA%20312.aspx



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hazmat team searches vehicle near Winnipeg airport after reports of apparent
suicide pact

Traffic was re-routed as police investigated Monday night.
Updated: Tue Feb. 28 2012 14:31:35

An apparent suicide pact sparked during an online chat lead to a lockdown at
Winnipeg's airport.
The case stemmed from an investigation at the Vancouver airport Monday
night.
Officers there had a woman in custody who said she was planning to fly to
Winnipeg to see a man she had met online. The two had plans to harm
themselves, said police.
In Winnipeg, the terminal at Winnipeg James Armstrong Richardson
International Airport was also put into lockdown, with no one allowed in or
out.
Vehicle traffic was gridlocked at the airport for about an hour as police
and hazmat personnel investigated around 11 p.m. Monday.
The liquid chemicals were found in sealed containers and deemed safe, said
police. They said it does not appear the couple had plans to hurt anyone
else.
No airplane traffic was disrupted. Police said both individuals were
provided with support and no charges are pending.

<http://winnipeg.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20120228/wpg_airport_chemicals_\
120228/20120228/?hub=WinnipegHome>

This is a question about the HMIS classification process. Please
recognize that issues beyond the HMIS procedure are not going to be
helpful to me in this instance. I've not used HMIS in the past and need
some guidance as to its classification process in the particular
circumstance described below.



Say you have a solid suspension in a liquid medium, and the solid
consists of carbon black well encapsulated by a polymer.  Does the HMIS
classification procedure permit you to recognize that the carbon black
is not available to react as free carbon black for issues of
carcinogenicity; or does the procedure require that you list a
carcinogenic hazard because of the presence of carbon black, even fully
encapsulated carbon black ?



I am researching this myself, but would appreciate guidance from those
who have used HMIS more extensively than I have.



Thanks.





Peter Zavon, CIH
Sr. Industrial Hygienist
EH&S - Workplace Safety
Xerox Corporation
800 Phillips Road (205-99F)
Webster, NY  14580


p 585.422.3677   ( 8*222.3677)
peter.zavon@... <mailto:peter.zavon@...>









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

HMIS is subjective, it isn't like it has a flashpoint and a boiling point and
you KNOW how bad it is.

There are guidelines on OSHA website and others to gauge a 1-4 rating but in my
experience if it was possible to ever release the carbon black through fire or
massive contact, you must list it.

Sent using the free mail.com iPhone App

Killer wheat pills claimed 11 lives this year
Muhammad Qasim
Saturday, February 25, 2012

Rawalpindi
To date in 2012, a total of 24 persons have been brought to the three
teaching hospitals in town after ingestion of poisonous wheat pills, of
which 11 could not survive.
The poisonous wheat pills, which are openly available in almost all markets
of the country, are commonly used to safeguard wheat grains from rodents and
harmful insects. The wheat pill poisoning is considered as one of the most
fatal, but still they are even available in a number of general stores in
town and the concerned authorities have not taken any step to check
over-the-counter sale of the killer pills.
According to data collected by 'The News', the allied hospitals in town
received 13 persons after ingestion of wheat pills in 2007 and none of them
survived. In 2008, 18 patients were brought to the allied hospitals, of
which 17 died, while in 2009, 17 patients were brought, of which 14 died and
three survived. In 2010, 21 patients were brought to the allied hospitals
after ingestion of wheat pills, of which 20 died while one survived. In
2011, the killer pills claimed over 30 lives.  The data available is of
patients who were taken to the allied hospitals in town after ingestion of
killer pills.
"This year, however, the health professionals managed to save lives of 13
persons at District Headquarters Hospital who were brought to the hospital
after ingestion of wheat pills," said Chairman Young Doctors Association
Punjab Dr Muhammad Haroon while talking to 'The News' on Friday. He added
that a total of 24 cases have been reported at the allied hospitals in the
last two months of which 11 persons died after ingestion of wheat pills.
Last year, the YDA had demanded the government to put a check on open sale
of wheat pills; however, nothing has yet been done on the subject. Dr Haroon
terming saving of 13 lives a great success said that it has become possible
only after attention of media to the issue as a section of press has
published guidelines for treatment of patients after intake of wheat pills.
Wheat pills contain aluminium phosphide that on contact with water releases
PH3 (Phosphine gas), which destroys the mitochondria of heart, liver and
pancreas.
In most of the cases, the persons who take wheat pills suffer a fatal
cardiac arrest. In case of stomach wash, a person who has taken wheat pills
cannot survive. According to experts, if anyone takes wheat pills, he or she
should be given two litres of cooking oil or coconut oil that might be life
saving as it prevents release of phosphine. The aim of giving oil is to
prevent disintegration of the pills so that it passes out in the stool
without releasing phosphine gas.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=94474&Cat=6&dt=2/25/2012



This is an enormous increase of phosphine suicides! Often the victims are
bankrupt farmers, crushed by financial vultures.

I wonder if the effective medical treatment, mentioned here, is known
worldwide? This was new to me - but very logical at the same time
"In case of stomach wash, a person who has taken wheat pills cannot survive.
According to experts, if anyone takes wheat pills, he or she should be given
two litres of cooking oil or coconut oil that might be life saving as it
prevents release of phosphine. The aim of giving oil is to prevent
disintegration of the pills so that it passes out in the stool without
releasing phosphine gas." Just in case, I will spread the word amongst my
medical hazmat colleagues.

Hi Peter.

I don't do HMIS ratings. I am not a doctor I just play one on the web.

I think the procedure allows you to use professional judgment. In my opinion, if
a constituent is encapsulated and under normal use it is not available, then
chronic (long term) exposure is unlikely. To be super conservative, you can
assume it is possible.

The HMIS rating is used to select PPE. What PPE would be recommended for
something that would be encapsulated? A rating of star usually means contact the
EHS professional for the appropriate PPE.

Here's an excerpt from the HMIS rating instructions.

-----
Chronic Health Hazard Classification

Step 4. Carcinogens ----- ingredients >0.1% to 100%: Review information for
those ingredients that are present in the material at greater than or equal to
one-tenth of a percent and up to one
hundred percent pure of the total product. Determine whether they are
carcinogenic (listed as cancer-causing by the IARC, NTP, or OSHA). If present,
these ingredients will trigger an (*) with the HMIS� ``health'' rating. When no
chronic hazard is included, a single slash should be placed across the box to
indicate that no chronic hazards are present.

Step 5. Additional Chronic Hazards ----- Ingredients 1% to 100%: For each
ingredient/ component present in the product at greater than or equal to one
percent of the total, review information to
determine whether there are additional associated chronic health hazards. If
present, these ingredients will trigger an (*) with the HMIS� ``health'' rating.
(See Table 1.1a.)

Explanatory Note: Carcinogenicity is considered for all ingredients present from
0.1% to 100% of the total material. Other chronic and acute health hazards and
flammability and reactivity hazards are only considered for ingredients present
from 1% to 100% of the total material. These hazards are not considered for
those ingredients below one percent of the total, unless the small amount
present could present a significant hazard to health under normal circumstances
of use.
----

--- In hazmat101@yahoogroups.com, "Zavon, Peter L" <peter.zavon@...> wrote:
>
> This is a question about the HMIS classification process. Please
> recognize that issues beyond the HMIS procedure are not going to be
> helpful to me in this instance. I've not used HMIS in the past and need
> some guidance as to its classification process in the particular
> circumstance described below.
>
>
>
> Say you have a solid suspension in a liquid medium, and the solid
> consists of carbon black well encapsulated by a polymer.  Does the HMIS
> classification procedure permit you to recognize that the carbon black
> is not available to react as free carbon black for issues of
> carcinogenicity; or does the procedure require that you list a
> carcinogenic hazard because of the presence of carbon black, even fully
> encapsulated carbon black ?
>
>
>
> I am researching this myself, but would appreciate guidance from those
> who have used HMIS more extensively than I have.
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
>
> Peter Zavon, CIH
> Sr. Industrial Hygienist
> EH&S - Workplace Safety
> Xerox Corporation
> 800 Phillips Road (205-99F)
> Webster, NY  14580
>
>
> p 585.422.3677   ( 8*222.3677)
> peter.zavon@... <mailto:peter.zavon@...>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Chemical that caused evacuation in Carlisle turns out to be rat poison
Published: Thursday, March 01, 2012, 3:57 PM
Updated: Thursday, March 01, 2012, 5:14 PM
By MONICA VON DOBENECK, The Patriot-News The Patriot-News

A chemical found during a police search which brought out the haz-mat team
and forced the evacuation of a block of homes this morning turned out to be
a pesticide possibly used to poison rats, according to a Cumberland County
spokesperson.
Megan Silverstrim, spokeswoman for the county's Department of Public Safety,
said she could confirm there was no meth lab in the house as earlier rumors
had speculated.

DAN GLEITER, The Patriot-News Several homes in the vicinity of the 200 block
of Mulberry Avenue in Carlisle were evacuated this morning after police
found an unknown chemical while initiating a search warrant, according to
Cumberland County Department of Public Safety spokeswoman Megan Silverstrim.
Silverstrim said police called in a hazardous material team. She could not
confirm that the building contained a meth lab, as some have reported.
03/01/2012 DAN GLEITER, The Patriot-News
Police kicked in the door of the home on the 200 block of Mulberry Avenue
about 9:30 a.m. this morning in order to serve a search warrant. Silverstrim
said she could not yet say why police were serving the warrant or what they
expected to find. They took one man into custody at the time. No charges
have yet been filed.
Police then encountered the chemical in the attic, and it caused some
irritation to the officers, she said. That's when they decided to call in
the haz-mat team as a precaution and evacuate about a dozen neighboring
homes in the alley.
The officers who had encountered the chemicals were monitored by health
personnel, but none were treated or taken to a hospital, she said.
Neighbors were allowed back in their homes about 12:30 p.m.
Several said they think the police overreacted.
"They're making a big deal about nothing," said Alicia Alexander, who was
angry that she couldn't go into her home to get her work clothes and car to
go to work. She was afraid she would be fired for being late.
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/03/chemical_that_caused_evac
uatio.html


Which rat poison can be smelled? Aluminium phosphide / phosphine?

TechDirect March 1, 2012
http://www.clu-in.org/techdirect/td032012.htm

---
March 2012 CCPS Process Safety Beacon (Double Block and Bleed)

<http://www.aiche.org/uploadedFiles/CCPS/Publications/Beacon/201203BeaconEnglish\
.pdf> (PDF)

----
USEPA News release
EPA Approves New Jersey's List of Polluted Water Bodies
Sewage Pollution Continues to be a Major Problem in New Jersey

(New York, N.Y. � February 28, 2012) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
has approved the 2010 list of waters in New Jersey that are considered either
impaired or threatened by pollutants. An impaired water body is one that does
not meet federal water quality standards even after pollution controls have been
put in place. A threatened water body is one that is expected to be impaired
within two years. The list helps establish priorities for addressing threats
from water pollution.



The Clean Water Act requires states to assess the quality of their waters and to
report their findings to the EPA every two years. The list is compiled by the
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and is a valuable tool for
reaching the Clean Water Act goal of "fishable and swimmable" waters for all of
New Jersey.


The most common pollutants causing impairment in New Jersey water bodies include
PCBs (8.33%), dissolved oxygen (8.19%), phosphorus (7.86%), pH (7.62%), and
arsenic (6.89%). New Jersey's 2010 list identifies 2,112 instances in which a
pollutant is causing an impairment of a water body that keeps it from supporting
its "designated use" for drinking water, swimming and recreation, fishing or
other activities specified by the state.

A complete list of impaired waters in New Jersey is available at:
http://www.epa.gov/region02/water/waterbodies

--
Fire Safety for Older Adults
Focus on Fire Safety
The facts speak for themselves: the relative risk of Americans over the age of
65 dying in a fire is 2.6 times greater than that of the general population. The
risk worsens as age increases. People age 85 and older die in fires at a rate
4.4 times higher than the rest of the population.

The leading cause of fire deaths in older adults is smoking and the leading
cause of fire injuries in older adults is cooking.

There are a number of precautionary steps older Americans can take to
dramatically reduce their chances of becoming a fire casualty, including:


�Don't leave smoking materials unattended and never smoke in bed.
�Never leave cooking unattended. Use a timer to remind you that you are cooking.
�Keep anything that can burn at least three feet away from heat sources, like
portable space heaters, wood burning stoves, and fireplaces.
�Place a smoke alarm on every level of your home, including the basement, and
both inside and outside bedrooms.
�Know at least two exits from every room. Make sure all doors and windows that
lead outside open easily.

http://www.usfa.fema.gov/campaigns/50plus/index.shtm

---
USFA Coffee Break Training

Automatic Sprinklers: Copper Sprinkler Pipe Joints
Learning Objective: The student shall be able to explain how copper sprinkler
pipe is joined.

<http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/coffee-break/cb_fp_2012_9.pdf> (PDF)

Perhaps I missed it.  I didn't ever see your response to the request for
information on how your facility is exempted from reporting under SARA Title
III/EPCRA.  Could you send that to me?

--- In hazmat101@yahoogroups.com, "Bruce Van Scoy" <brucev@...> wrote:
>
> Michael,
> Officially we are exempt from reporting to the LEPC, with having the records
> open to everyone, local gov't officials, activists, etc.  (Any record
> (document) submitted to a gov't agency is open for release based upon the
> Freedom of Information Act to anyone and needless to say, that would be
> extremely detrimental to everyone's safety/security.)  However, whenever
> something is coming to our facility (regardless of how short the duration) I
> coordinate with the local fire department, Emergency Management Director,
> etc..  My responsibilities are not just for the safety/health of our
> employees, but for anyone responding to our facility, the goal is to have
> EVERYONE going home in the same condition that they arrived!  I must say
> that I couldn't be prouder of our local responders, Haz Mat Team, Bomb
> Squad, etc.!  Ohio recently passed S.B. 5 which changes the way civil
> servants are paid from seniority to performance and I could not be prouder,
> we have some impressive personnel and they need to be rewarded (paid) above
> the seniority level limit!
> The coordination and preparation, has and will continue to occur to the
> benefit of both the employees/responders.  You are all my responsibility and
> if you are not receiving that level of commitment from my peers in Chicago,
> than I suggest raising your concerns within the chain of authority for those
> companies not in compliance.  Personally, I would find it embarrassing.
> BruceV
>
>
> From: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hazmat101@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of Michael Kuryla
> Sent: Friday, July 01, 2011 10:35 AM
> To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [hazmat101] Re: Chemtrec and Chemtrec-like services
>
>
> I look at the group messages everyday and sometimes scratch my head with
> some of the questions, but mainly I gain a lot of good information from
> everyone who contributes. Some of you in the private sector can and should
> reach out to you local fire departments who (especially in the Chicago Metro
> area) have a lot of experience and expertise when it comes to many of the
> questions that are raised from time to time. Many of the private concerns
> don't like to involve our teams for many reasons. Our team has been called
> too many times hours into the incident when the stuff hits the fan and we
> have to play catch up. When something happens or if a question arises, pick
> up the phone and talk to your local fire chief or hazmat coordinator, you
> may be surprised how much information we can provide. Contrary to some
> belief, we don't like to create huge incident scenes - our trained
> firefighters have families and really are all about prevention and not
> having to risk themselves unless absolutely necessary. We also care about
> your employees, the community near your site and the environment. CHEMTREC
> has been our friend and has provided outstanding assistance many times
> over. Thanks for all the information over the years and remember - talk to
> your local emergency response teams.
>
> Michael N. Kuryla III
>
> Fire Chief - MABAS Div. 20 Vice-President
>
> President - Cook County Fire Chief's Association
>
> Hillside Fire Department
>
> 523 N . Wolf Rd.
>
> Hillside, IL 60162
>
> mkuryla@... <mailto:mkuryla%40hillside-il.org>
>
> 708-202-3402 Office
>
> 708-203-3819 Cell
>
> 708-544-6405 Fax
>
> Everyone Goes Home
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

See the exemptions under Sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA, specifically "Any
substance to the extent it is used in a research laboratory or hospital or
other medical facility under the direct supervision of a technically
qualified individual."  Where did you imply an exemption or inference to
SARA Title III?

I never meant to imply ANY exemption under SARA III (Superfund), if anyone
on the list interpreted differently (from the e-mail below), I apologize.

Sincerely,

BruceV





From: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hazmat101@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of tuhabuts
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 2:50 PM
To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [hazmat101] Re: Chemtrec and Chemtrec-like services





Perhaps I missed it. I didn't ever see your response to the request for
information on how your facility is exempted from reporting under SARA Title
III/EPCRA. Could you send that to me?

--- In hazmat101@yahoogroups.com <mailto:hazmat101%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Bruce Van Scoy" <brucev@...> wrote:
>
> Michael,
> Officially we are exempt from reporting to the LEPC, with having the
records
> open to everyone, local gov't officials, activists, etc. (Any record
> (document) submitted to a gov't agency is open for release based upon the
> Freedom of Information Act to anyone and needless to say, that would be
> extremely detrimental to everyone's safety/security.) However, whenever
> something is coming to our facility (regardless of how short the duration)
I
> coordinate with the local fire department, Emergency Management Director,
> etc.. My responsibilities are not just for the safety/health of our
> employees, but for anyone responding to our facility, the goal is to have
> EVERYONE going home in the same condition that they arrived! I must say
> that I couldn't be prouder of our local responders, Haz Mat Team, Bomb
> Squad, etc.! Ohio recently passed S.B. 5 which changes the way civil
> servants are paid from seniority to performance and I could not be
prouder,
> we have some impressive personnel and they need to be rewarded (paid)
above
> the seniority level limit!
> The coordination and preparation, has and will continue to occur to the
> benefit of both the employees/responders. You are all my responsibility
and
> if you are not receiving that level of commitment from my peers in
Chicago,
> than I suggest raising your concerns within the chain of authority for
those
> companies not in compliance. Personally, I would find it embarrassing.
> BruceV
>
>
> From: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com <mailto:hazmat101%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:hazmat101@yahoogroups.com <mailto:hazmat101%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
> Of Michael Kuryla
> Sent: Friday, July 01, 2011 10:35 AM
> To: hazmat101@yahoogroups.com <mailto:hazmat101%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [hazmat101] Re: Chemtrec and Chemtrec-like services
>
>
> I look at the group messages everyday and sometimes scratch my head with
> some of the questions, but mainly I gain a lot of good information from
> everyone who contributes. Some of you in the private sector can and should
> reach out to you local fire departments who (especially in the Chicago
Metro
> area) have a lot of experience and expertise when it comes to many of the
> questions that are raised from time to time. Many of the private concerns
> don't like to involve our teams for many reasons. Our team has been called
> too many times hours into the incident when the stuff hits the fan and we
> have to play catch up. When something happens or if a question arises,
pick
> up the phone and talk to your local fire chief or hazmat coordinator, you
> may be surprised how much information we can provide. Contrary to some
> belief, we don't like to create huge incident scenes - our trained
> firefighters have families and really are all about prevention and not
> having to risk themselves unless absolutely necessary. We also care about
> your employees, the community near your site and the environment. CHEMTREC
> has been our friend and has provided outstanding assistance many times
> over. Thanks for all the information over the years and remember - talk to
> your local emergency response teams.
>
> Michael N. Kuryla III
>
> Fire Chief - MABAS Div. 20 Vice-President
>
> President - Cook County Fire Chief's Association
>
> Hillside Fire Department
>
> 523 N . Wolf Rd.
>
> Hillside, IL 60162
>
> mkuryla@... <mailto:mkuryla%40hillside-il.org>
>
> 708-202-3402 Office
>
> 708-203-3819 Cell
>
> 708-544-6405 Fax
>
> Everyone Goes Home
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Here's an EPA FAQ about the exempions for EPCRA

<http://www.epa.gov/osweroe1/content/epcra/epcra-qa_exempt_311.htm#exempt311_312\
>

In NJ (per NJ CRTKN regs), you get a confirmation of the exemption from NJDEP
and need to file the annual report but you don't report the chemicals.

If you have other chemicals (not related to the exemption) at the same site, you
need to report them if they exceed the thresholds.
...PC

--- In hazmat101@yahoogroups.com, "Bruce Van Scoy" <brucev@...> wrote:
>
> See the exemptions under Sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA, specifically "Any
> substance to the extent it is used in a research laboratory or hospital or
> other medical facility under the direct supervision of a technically
> qualified individual."  Where did you imply an exemption or inference to
> SARA Title III?
>
> I never meant to imply ANY exemption under SARA III (Superfund), if anyone
> on the list interpreted differently (from the e-mail below), I apologize.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> BruceV
>

> From:tuhabuts
> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 2:50 PM

> Perhaps I missed it. I didn't ever see your response to the request for
> information on how your facility is exempted from reporting under SARA Title
> III/EPCRA. Could you send that to me?

[snipe]