Congress intended for TRI data to be used “to inform persons about releases of toxic chemicals to the environment; to assist governmental agencies, researchers, and the public in the conduct of research and data gathering; to aid in the development of appropriate regulations, guidance, and standards; and for other similar purposes.” EPA is interested in public input as to whether and how the addition of facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the purpose of generating steam for distribution in commerce would further the purposes of the TRI program.
Join the Discussion
EPA is considering the addition of certain steam generating facilities classified in NAICS 221330 (Steam and Air-Conditioning Supply) to the list of facilities subject to EPCRA § 313. Current coverage of NAICS 221330 is limited to facilities that generate a combination of electric, gas, and other services (e.g., facilities that cogenerate steam and electricity). EPA is considering expanding coverage of this sector to also include facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the purpose of generating steam for distribution in commerce, regardless of cogeneration.
Are there specific TRI-listed toxic chemicals for which you believe that the addition of this sector would provide information of value to communities?
In the past, EPA has occasionally opted to extend TRI coverage only to a portion of a sector. For example, TRI coverage of Electric Utilities (NAICS 2211) is limited to facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the purpose of generating power for distribution in commerce. Are there reasons why certain facilities in this sector should not be covered under TRI?
In the past, EPA has occasionally opted to extend TRI coverage only to a portion of a sector. For example, TRI coverage of Electric Utilities (NAICS 2211) is limited to facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the purpose of generating power for distribution in commerce. Are there reasons why certain facilities in this sector should not be covered under TRI?
Are there any actions you believe EPA should take in conjunction with the potential addition of this sector (e.g., changes to any existing regulatory provisions)?
Is there any other information that you believe EPA should consider in evaluating this sector as a candidate for addition to the TRI list?

