Right-to-know legislation
Right-to-know legislation encompasses laws aimed at ensuring that the public is informed about environmental hazards and toxic substances that may pose risks to their health and safety. Originating in the United States during the 1970s and 1980s, this legislation was a response to growing concerns about air and water pollution, as well as the dangers associated with hazardous waste. Key components of right-to-know laws include the requirement for facilities to report on the presence and handling of hazardous materials, thereby enabling communities and workers to take necessary precautions.
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), which includes the Superfund program, and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) are significant pieces of legislation that bolster these rights. EPCRA specifically mandates the reporting of hazardous substances, requiring facilities to notify local emergency planners and the public about potential chemical hazards. These laws also impose penalties for non-compliance, reinforcing the importance of transparency regarding environmental risks. Overall, right-to-know legislation plays a crucial role in empowering citizens and promoting community safety by providing access to vital information about environmental hazards.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Right-to-know legislation
DEFINITION: Laws requiring dissemination to the public of information about hazards posed by pollution and toxic substances
Right-to-know laws provide members of the public with information they may need to avoid exposure to possible environmental hazards and also serve to protect employees in particular industries.
During the 1970s and 1980s, the US government enacted legislation to address such environmental problems as air pollution, water pollution, and health threats from toxic substances. Much of this legislation includes provisions for informing the public about hazards posed by and toxic substances.
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund, was signed into law in December 1980. Its primary purpose was to address the problem of inactive sites. The mandates of CERCLA were controversial, largely because they required the companies responsible for hazardous wastes to perform extensive and costly cleanups no matter how long ago the wastes were discarded or how well the companies had exercised responsibility in their original handling of the wastes.
Sections 102 and 103 of CERCLA provide for reporting procedures. Section 102 outlines reportable quantities set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Any hazardous substances that have not been assigned a reportable quantity under the Clean Water Act must be reported if they are found in quantities of 1 pound or more. Section 103 stipulates that the National Response Center must be notified as soon as a person in charge of a vessel or facility learns of any of a that is equal to or greater than the reportable quantity for that substance. Failure to report a release carries a maximum criminal penalty of three years in prison for a first offense and a five-year sentence for repeat offenses; a maximum civil penalty equal to $25,000 per day may be assessed.
The original Superfund act expired in September 1985. On October 17, 1986, the US Congress reauthorized $9 billion and made major revisions in CERCLA with the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA). Title III of SARA is the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA). EPCRA has four major components, three of which address reporting requirements. Section 302 requires any facility that produces, uses, or stores any substances on the EPA’s List of Extremely Hazardous Substances in quantities that equal or exceed the specified limits to notify the State Emergency Response Commission (SERC). Section 304 provides for emergency release notification to the emergency coordinators for the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) of areas likely to be affected and to the SERC of any state likely to be affected.
Sections 311 and 312 form the major right-to-know components of EPCRA and are closely intertwined with the Hazard Communication Standard of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Using the basic framework of the OSHA standard, these sections require that the public and employees in facilities that produce or use hazardous chemicals be given information regarding the chemicals’ presence. Certain items are exempt, such as food, food additives, drugs, cosmetics, gasoline used in a family car, products used for household purposes, and substances used for medical and research purposes.
Further provisions are made in clauses designated Tier I and Tier II. As of March 1, 1988, and annually thereafter, industries are required to submit chemical inventory forms for the substances that are regulated by OSHA. Tier I information must be submitted to the LEPC, the SERC, and the fire department with jurisdiction over a given facility. Tier II information is more detailed: It must include the location of each hazardous chemical and a description of how the chemical is stored, unless a facility is excused on the basis of a trade-secret plea. Any facility submitting Tier I or Tier II statements must, on request, allow on-site inspections by the local fire department. While the regulations are silent as to availability of Tier I information, any person may obtain Tier II information by submitting a written request. Any citizen may also request an MSDS on any hazardous chemical, even if the facility does not use it in reportable amounts.
The purpose of section 313 is to ensure that communities are provided with information about chemical releases from local facilities. Owners and operators of certain manufacturing facilities must submit annual reports to the EPA and designated state officials on environmental releases of listed toxic chemicals. This requirement applies to routine and permitted releases as well as accidental releases. Furthermore, certain suppliers must notify their customers if products they distribute contain chemicals that are subject to section 313 mandates. Failure to submit MSDSs or lists of MSDS chemicals are punishable by civil penalties of up to $10,000 per day for each violation. Noncompliance with the annual inventory requirements may result in a penalty of up to $25,000 for each violation.
In addition to EPCRA’s right-to-know title, some other legislation includes reporting provisions. Examples are the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, which mandates that employees be apprised of hazards to which they are exposed and that they receive information regarding symptoms of contamination and appropriate emergency treatment, and the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976, which includes notice provisions for products for domestic use.
Bibliography
Andrews, Richard N. L. Managing the Environment, Managing Ourselves: A History of American Environmental Policy. 2d ed. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2006.
Ashford, Nicholas A., and Charles C. Caldart. “The Right to Know: Mandatory Disclosure of Information Regarding Chemical Risks.” In Environmental Law, Policy, and Economics: Reclaiming the Environmental Agenda. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2008.
Cox, Robert. “Public Participation in Environmental Decisions.” In Environmental Communication and the Public Sphere. 2d ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 2010.
Moore, Gary S. “Environmental Laws and Compliance.” In Living with the Earth: Concepts in Environmental Health Science. 2d ed. Boca Raton, Fla.: CRC Press, 2002.
"Summary of the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act." US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 3 Nov. 2023, www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-emergency-planning-community-right-know-act. Accessed 23 July 2024.