florida department of community affairs

STATE EMERGENCY RESPONSE COMMISSION

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS

1998 ANNUAL REPORT

1 9 9 8 S TAT E E M E R G E N C Y R E S P O N S E C O M M I S S I O N A N N UA L R E P O RT

1EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2CLEAN AIR ACT

SECTION 112 (R) IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES

5FLORIDA’S HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAM

A REFLECTION OF THE FIRST TEN YEARS

9PROGRESS REPORT:

FLORIDA HAZARDOUS MATERIALS DISTRICT RESPONSE TEAMS

13U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

HAZARDOUS MATERIAL EMERGENCY PLANNING GRANT

17TRI: TOXIC RELEASE INVENTORY

19FLORIDA’S SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS

21THE STATE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER

OUR OTHER OFFICE

FLORIDADEPARTMENT OF

COMMUNITYAFFA IRS

STATE EMERGENCY RESPONSE COMMISSIONF O R H A Z A R D O U S M A T E R I A L S

M E M B E R S

Mr. Steven M. Seibert

Chairman

Florida Department of Community Affairs

Mr. Joseph F. Myers

Alternate Chairman

Florida Department of Community Affairs

Mr. J. Allison DeFoor II*

Office of the Governor

Mr. Greg Lee

Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Mr. George E. Rice, Jr.

Florida Department of Transportation

Chief Randall W. Napoli

State Fire Marshal’s Office

Commissioner Cindy Gennell*

Florida League of Cities

Mr. Manny Pamariega*

Florida Regional Councils Association

Chief Michael D. Murphy

Florida Fire Chiefs’ Association

Ms. Nancy Stephens

Florida Manufacturing & Chemical Council

Mr. Ozzie Morris

Florida Phosphate Council

Mr. Daniel L. McGowan

Associated Industries of Florida

Ms. Suzi Ruhl

Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation

Inspector Ken Morris

Florida Department of Law Enforcement

Vacant

Florida Department of Labor and

Employment Security

Mr. Paul Lewis, Jr.

Florida Power Corporation

Mr. Richard R. Smith

Florida Emergency Preparedness Association

Mr. John Hudson

Local Emergency Planning

Committee Chairperson

Mr. Tom Mason

Florida Association of Counties

Vacant

Agricultural Industry

Mr. David Mica

Petroleum Industry

Mr. David Rogers

Liquefied Petroleum Gas Industry

Vacant

Seminole Tribe of Florida

Mr. Steve Rutz

Florida Department of Agriculture and

Consumer Services

Mr. Richard D. Radford

Sierra Club

Lieutenant Wayne Yoder

Florida Professional Firefighters

Ms. Suzy Davis

Florida Department of Health

(Emergency Medical Services)

* Pending appointment

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION regarding the State Emergency Response

Commission on Hazardous Materials (SERC) and the Hazardous Materials Planning

Program, contact:

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS

Division of Emergency Management

2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard

Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100

Phone: (850) 413-9970 or (800) 635-7179 (in Florida)

Fax: (850) 488-1739

Internet: http://www.dca.state.fl.us/cps/SERC/serc.htm

Printed on recycled paper.

MAY • 1999

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to thank the following

group who enhanced the presentation

of this Annual Report by providing

photographs:

• Apalachee Regional Planning Council

ARP/RMP Accidental Release Prevention/Risk Management Planning

DCA Department of Community Affairs

EHS Extremely Hazardous Substance

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

GIS Geographic Information Systems

LEPC Local Emergency Planning Committee

RMP Risk Management Plan/Program

RPC Regional Planning Council

SEOC State Emergency Operations Center

SERC State Emergency Response Commission

TRI Toxic Release Inventory

ACRONYMS USED IN THIS REPORT

The close of 1998 marked the for-

mal beginning of the expanded

Florida Hazardous Materials

Planning Program. On December 21,

1998, the U.S. Environmental Protec-

tion Agency (EPA), Region 4, granted

the Florida Department of Community

Affairs delegation to implement the Risk

Management Planning (RMP) provi-

sions of Section 112(r) of the Clean Air

Act Amendments of 1990 for selected

sources. This delegation was the cul-

mination of more than three years of de-

tailed analysis by the State Emergency

Response Commission (SERC) regard-

ing the most appropriate means to

implement the federal provisions in

Florida.

Florida is the first state in the nation

to integrate the Risk Management Plan-

ning prevention component into its over-

all emergency management responsi-

bilities. The 1998 Legislature’s passage

of the Florida Accidental Release Pre-

vention and Risk Management Planning

(ARP/RMP) Act and the U.S. Environ-

mental Protection Agency’s program

delegation based on the Act’s authori-

ties and resources, is a tribute to the

Commission’s Emergency Planning

and Community Right-To-Know Act

(EPCRA) implementation philosophy

over the past ten years. Additionally, the

Florida Accidental Release Prevention

and Risk Management Planning Act

recognizes that Congress’ Emergency

Planning and Community Right-To-

Know Act vision of an active and effec-

tive dialogue among industry, respond-

ers and the community can be realized

when State Emergency Response

Commissions and Local Emergency

Planning Committees (LEPCs) are pro-

vided adequate financial and technical

resources.

This 1998 State Emergency Re-

sponse Commission Annual Report

highlights the continued accomplish-

ments of Florida’s Local Emergency

Planning Committees under the Emer-

gency Planning and Community Right-

To-Know Act program and their new op-

portunities to participate in Risk Man-

agement Planning initiatives. The report

reflects on a decade of Emergency

Planning and Community Right-To-

Know Act implementation in Florida, fo-

cusing on trends in Section 313 Toxic

Release Inventory reporting, innovative

Supplemental Environmental Projects

associated with enforcement actions,

and the impact of changes to federal

reporting requirements.

Finally, as a tribute to Florida’s active

emergency season, the 1998 Annual

Report features an article on State

Emergency Response Commission

staff responsibilities during disasters.

Participation in the state’s response and

recovery operations for a broad range of

hazards makes us better prepared to re-

spond to the consequences of an event

involving hazardous materials.

Executive Summary

1998 STATE EMERGENCY RESPONSE COMMISSION ANNUAL REPORTSERC

1 9 9 8 S TAT E E M E R G E N C Y R E S P O N S E C O M M I S S I O N A N N UA L R E P O RT • 1

Clean Air ActSECTION 112(R) IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES

During this year, the Section

112(r) Work Group established

by the State Emergency Re-

sponse Commission accomplished all

of its goals. Under Section 112(r), fa-

cilities which use, store, process or

manufacture any one of 140 listed sub-

stances above a set threshold quantity

per process must develop and imple-

ment a risk management program on-

site and submit a plan summarizing this

program to the U.S. Environmental Pro-

tection Agency’s national Risk Manage-

ment Program Reporting Center by

June 21, 1999. Elements of the program

include a hazard assessment evaluat-

ing the off-site effects and physical ex-

tent of a chemical release, a preven-

tion program incorporating require-

ments for management of change and

other safety features, and an emer-

gency response program.

The Work Group’s goals were the se-

lection of the most appropriate state

agency for efficient implementation of

the program, preparing delegation op-

tions, identifying the number and type

of affected Florida facilities as well as

potential funding sources, and drafting

legislative language requesting budget-

ary and enforcement authority for the

program. After identifying all potential

implementation agencies, the Work

Group recommended in 1997 that the

Florida Department of Community Af-

fairs seek delegation of the Accidental

Release Prevention and Risk Manage-

ment Planning provisions of the Clean

Air Act Amendments of 1990 from EPA.

The Work Group concluded that the

program would add a critical prevention

component to the state’s Hazardous

Material Planning Program while pro-

viding facilities the benefits of state level

implementation which reflects Florida’s

enforcement philosophy. With the assis-

tance of the Work Group, notably the

Florida Manufacturing and Chemical

Council representative (Ms. Nancy

Stephens), the Department of Commu-

nity Affairs pursued legislative change.

Senator Buddy Dyer and Representa-

tive Lori Edwards sponsored the bills,

Senate Bill 812 and House Bill 3717

respectively, and were instrumental in

passage of the Florida Accidental Re-

lease Prevention and Risk Manage-

ment Planning (ARP/RMP) Act on May

24, 1998.

The Act, codified in Chapter 252,

Part IV, Florida Statutes, directs the

Department of Community Affairs to


2 • 1 9 9 8 S TAT E E M E R G E N C Y R E S P O N S E C O M M I S S I O N A N N UA L R E P O RT

seek delegation of the Section 112(r)

program from EPA for all sources ex-

cept those facilities which contained

propane as the sole regulated sub-

stance–essentially, propane retailers.

EPA Region 4 will implement the Sec-

tion 112(r) program for these facilities

(approximately 500 sources). The Act

also provides for funding through a fee

system and a start-up loan, tort liabil-

ity, and budgetary, inspection, and en-

forcement authorities for DCA. Annual

registration fees for each affected facil-

ity (approximately 1,500 facilities) are

due to DCA upon initial submission of

the risk management plan to EPA’s

RMP Reporting Center by June 21,

1999 and on every April 1 thereafter.

The fee schedule is based upon the

highest program level assigned to a pro-

cess on-site. Program levels range from

1 to 3; a reflection of the complexity of

each process and its historical safety

record. The Act allows fee caps for own-

ers of multiple facilities and a cap for

facilities classified in Standard Indus-

trial Classification code groups 01, 02,

and 07 (routine agricultural operations).

DCA formally requested program

delegation from EPA Region 4 on June

12, 1998. Following review of the del-

egation package by both regional and

national staff, EPA promulgated an ap-

proval notice in the Federal Register on

October 20, 1998. The notice was is-

sued as a direct final rule, effective on

December 21, 1998. Meanwhile, DCA

prepared rule language to implement

the fee provisions in the ARP/RMP Act.

Rule Chapter 9G-21, Florida Adminis-

trative Code, titled the Hazardous Ma-

terials Risk Management Planning

Fee Schedule, was proposed in the

Florida Administrative Weekly on July

17, 1998 and became final on Novem-

ber 9, 1998. DCA also has executed

Memoranda of Understanding with the

Department of Environmental Protec-

tion, and the Department of Labor and

Employment Security. Establishing

Memoranda of Understanding officially

recognized the interagency coordina-

tion begun during the Work Group

phase and ensured the program’s suc-

cess by allowing DCA access to regu-

latory, inspection, and technical re-

sources present in those agencies.

DCA continued to participate on the

EPA national workgroup addressing

implementation issues and helped to

critique the database created for elec-

tronic submittal of risk management

plans (RMP*SUBMIT) during the beta-

testing phase (September–October

1998). During 1998, DCA conducted

several training workshops with indus-

try and Local Emergency Planning

Committees on program requirements,

applicability issues, modeling chemical

releases, and reviewing the beta-ver-

sion of RMP*SUBMIT. Staff also cre-

ated a new webpage on the 112(r) pro-

gram, accessible from the DCA/SERC

homepage on the Internet.

The 1999 year will bring even more

challenges as DCA continues program

outreach, technical assistance, and

training in preparation for the June 21

submittal date for risk management

plans. In early February, DCA mailed

out letters and guidance materials to

potentially affected sources, advising

them of the state program requirements.

This enabled DCA to refine the data-

base of affected sources prior to the fee

package mailout in March. DCA will

also develop educational packets for

media and elected officials in each

LEPC district.


FLORIDA’S HAZARDOUS MATERIALSPLANNING PROGRAM

A Reflection on theFirst Ten Years

gency plans for facilities with ex-

tremely hazardous substances and

to the Regional Planning Councils

to provide professional staff support

to the Local Emergency Planning

Committees and serve as the reposi-

tories for reports received from in-

dustry.

In 1988, the Florida Legislature

passed the Florida Hazardous Materi-

als Emergency Response and Commu-

nity Right-to-Know Act and the Florida

Hazardous Materials Program began a

vigorous outreach campaign to alert in-

dustry of the new federal and state re-

porting and fee requirements. Hazard-

ous Materials Planning Program staff

toured the state conducting “How-to-

Comply” seminars and providing Local

Emergency Planning Committees, lo-

cal governments and industry with tech-

nical compliance information. Staff also

provided the media with public service

announcements and press releases

and distributed over 100,000 letters and

brochures directly to potentially affected

industry informing them of the new fed-

eral and state laws. The first year of the

Florida Hazardous Materials Program

was devoted entirely to these outreach

efforts with the State Emergency Re-

sponse Commission leading the way in

setting the tone for a unique working

relationship among the state, Local

Emergency Planning Committees,

counties and industry that continues to

this day. None of these activities would

I n 1988, with the passage of the

Florida Hazardous Materials Emer-

gency Response and Community

Right-to-Know Act (Chapter 252, Part

II, Florida Statutes), the Florida Hazard-

ous Materials Program took off and has

never looked back. Ten years later the

program can boast of many accom-

plishments as well as reflect on numer-

ous learning experiences.

With the enactment of the federal

Emergency Planning and Community

Right-To-Know Act of 1986, all 50 states

were immediately faced with the chal-

lenge of implementing a program that

imposed new, extensive and complex

hazardous materials reporting require-

ments on a large segment of industries

with no federal funding provided. In

Florida, the State Emergency Response

Commission, appointed by Governor

Martinez in 1987, began paving the way

for the future of the Florida Hazardous

Materials Program by recommending the

following measures be taken to ensure

successful Emergency Planning and

Community Right-To-Know Act imple-

mentation:

◆ passage of a state law to implement

the federal requirements and estab-

lish an industry based fee system;

◆ using the existing Regional Planning

Council boundaries for the Local

Emergency Planning Committee dis-

tricts; and

◆ providing state funds from industry

fees to the counties to develop emer-



have been possible without industry

support through fees, technical exper-

tise and participation on Local Emer-

gency Planning Committees.

In 1989, the program was expanded

and emphasis was transferred from

pure outreach and notification to com-

pliance verification and enforcement.

This was managed by a newly created

Compliance Verification/Enforcement

Unit tasked with working directly with

industry to verify compliance, provide

technical assistance and notify facilities

of the steps necessary to achieve com-

pliance. Organizationally, the Verifica-

tion/Enforcement Unit was comple-

mented by the Planning/Training Unit

that was responsible for working directly

with the Local Emergency Planning

Committees and counties regarding

their roles in program implementation.

The Planning/Training Unit was respon-

sible for reviewing the first set of Local

Emergency Planning Committee Haz-

ardous Materials Plans which were ap-

proved by the State Emergency Re-

sponse Commission in 1989. Due to the

extensive outreach and compliance re-

lated efforts, the year saw tremendous

growth in the number of facilities report-

ing, a trend that would continue into the

early 1990s. Under the State Emer-

gency Response Commission’s direc-

tion, the huge success of the first two

years established the foundation for the

Florida Hazardous Materials Program

that has continued to serve as a leader

among programs of its type throughout

the nation.

During the years of 1990 through

1995, the program continued to grow

and face many new challenges. Sev-

eral new initiatives and projects were

undertaken and accomplishments

made by the State Emergency Re-

sponse Commission during this period.

The following is a breakdown by year

of the highlights.

week of March 1 to focus on outreach

efforts to industry.

◆ Department of Community Affairs’

Hazardous Materials Planning Sec-

tion is awarded the prestigious Davis

Productivity Award for outstanding

service.

◆ Legislative review of hazard-based

fee proposal and election to retain

employee-based fees.

◆ Pollution prevention initiative con-

ducted jointly between the Depart-

ment of Community Affairs and the

Department of Environmental Regu-

lation (now the Department of Envi-

ronmental Protection) using Toxic Re-

lease Inventory data to identify facili-

ties suited to pollution prevention

practices.

1993◆ State Emergency Response Com-

mission Efficiency Task Force estab-

lished to promote program efficiency,

cooperation among state agencies

and reduce duplication in reporting

among industry.

◆ State Emergency Response Com-

mission Training Task Force estab-

lished to formulate policies for deliv-

ery of standardized hazardous ma-

terials training for the public and pri-

vate sectors and address other train-

ing needs.

1990◆ Adoption of the EPA Penalty Policy

for enforcement of Emergency Plan-

ning and Community Right-To-Know

Act (EPCRA) Sections 302, 303, 304,

311 and 312.

◆ Demonstration projects with the City

of Tampa, Hillsborough, Dade and

Duval Counties—identified over 200

new EPCRA facilities.

◆ Outreach campaign to suppliers of

compressed gases–identified over

1,000 new Emergency Planning and

EPCRA facilities.

1991◆ Completion of development of the

Hazardous Materials Information

System used to store and manage all

chemical and facility information for

EPCRA reporters.

◆ Establishment of the State Emer-

gency Response Commission Annual

Awards Program.

◆ Awarded U.S. Environmental Protec-

tion Agency grant for development

and distribution of EPCRA outreach

materials.

1992◆ Inaugural year for Emergency Plan-


Act Hazardous Materials Awareness

Week— held each year during the

6 • 1 9 9 8 S TAT E E M E R G E N C Y R E S P O N S E C O M M I S S I O N A N N UA L R E P O RT

◆ Revised State Emergency Response

Commission Executive Order to ex-

pand representatives to include ad-

ditional affected industry groups.

1994◆ Inaugural State Emergency Re-

sponse Commission Annual Report

published.

◆ Development and State Emergency

Response Commission Adoption of

Public Sector Training Guidelines.

1995◆ State Emergency Response Com-

mission Adoption of Private Sector

Training Guidelines.

◆ Completion of the High Risk/High

Priority Initiative conducted jointly

among the Commission, EPA, local

government and industry in the

Tampa Bay area.

◆ National Governors’ Association

State Emergency Response Com-

mission Conference hosted by

Florida.

◆ State Emergency Response Com-

mission passes a resolution in sup-

port of Operation Clean Sweep.

1996 served as a turning point

for the program as the Commission

dealt with two very important and dif-

ferent issues. One concerned past re-

porting requirements under Emergency

Planning and Community Right-To-Know

Act and the other concerned the future

of a new, far-reaching federal hazard-

ous materials program. The new pro-

gram involved the requirement under

state law for the 1996 Florida Legisla-

ture to review and reauthorize the ex-

isting fee system. After much delibera-

tion among members of both chambers

of the legislature, a bill was passed that

reauthorized the fee system at its ex-

isting funding levels. A portion of the

bill included a provision for a fee am-

nesty period which brought approxi-

mately 200 facilities that had not re-

ported previously under the Act into

compliance. The other important step

taken by the Commission in 1996 in-

volved the establishment of the Clean

Air Act Section 112(r) Work Group. The

Work Group, established in July 1996,

was tasked with mapping out the future

for the implementation of the federal

Section 112(r) Accidental Release Pre-

vention and Risk Management Planning

requirements in Florida.

The Section 112(r) Work Group met

regularly through 1997 when a rec-

ommendation was presented to and

passed by the Commission to have the

Department of Community Affairs’ Haz-

ardous Materials Program seek delega-

tion from the U.S. EPA to be the Sec-

tion 112(r) implementing agency.

1998 saw the Work Group’s efforts

fulfilled as the Florida Legislature

passed the Florida Accidental Release

Prevention and Risk Management Plan-

ning (ARP/RMP) Act of 1998. The Act

provides the Department of Community

Affairs with full implementation author-

ity for the Section 112(r) program with

the exception of the propane industry

which opted out of the state program.

The U. S. EPA, Region 4, is implement-

ing the Section 112(r) program for

Florida facilities with propane as their

only regulated substance. Among the

key elements of the Act are an industry

based fee system, inspection and au-

dit provisions and enforcement author-

ity. The state received formal delega-

tion of the program from EPA in Decem-

ber 1998.

1998 also brought with it several new

proposals by the U.S. EPA that could

drastically change the complexion of the

mergency Planning and Community

Right-To-Know Act side of the Florida

Hazardous Materials Planning Pro-

gram. One such proposal, which in

early 1999 was finalized by EPA, is rais-

ing the threshold for gasoline and die-

sel fuel at retail petroleum facilities. It

is estimated, with the passage of this

final rule, the Florida program will lose

approximately 5,000 reporting facilities

and $75,000 annually in fees. Other pro-

posals of interest which could have a

significant future impact on the state’s

program include provisions for elec-

tronic submission of Sections 311/312

information and reporting only changes

in Tier Two chemical inventories rather

than submitting entirely new reports

each year.

The first 10 years of the Florida Haz-

ardous Materials Planning Program

have been very successful on many

levels. During this period the number

of active facilities reporting under Emer-

gency Planning and Community Right-

To-Know Act has grown to more than

17,000. Enhancing responder capabili-

ties and public information and educa-

tion continue to play prominent roles in

the program. In addition, with the pas-

sage of the Florida Accidental Release

Prevention and Risk Management Plan-

ning Act, the section has now taken on

an entirely new program and is faced

with many of the same implementation

challenges it faced with the Emergency

Planning and Community Right-To-Know

Act over 10 years ago. Currently in the

midst of an extensive outreach program,

the program staff is again utilizing many

of the successful methods that were

used in conducting outreach for

EPCRA in 1988. Due to advanced tech-

nologies, staff has also been able to

develop new techniques for outreach

such as the development of a compre-

hensive Internet Web Site for both the

ARP/RMP and EPCRA programs. The

ARP/RMP program is benefitting from

many of the lessons learned from the

EPCRA program. With the SERC’s

guidance, this new federal program is

destined to experience the success that

the Florida EPCRA program has expe-

rienced in its first 10 years.


PROGRESS REPORT:

Florida Hazardous MaterialsDistrict Response Teams

F lorida’s implementation of the

Emergency Planning and Com-

munity Right-to-Know Act has

been recognized as one of the best in

the country. The Florida Department

of Community Affairs’ Division of Emer-

gency Management, the Local Emer-

gency Planning Committees and the

State Emergency Response Commis-

sion are actively involved in ongoing

efforts to help ensure the continued

success of the Emergency Planning

and Community Right-to-Know Act pro-

gram. This includes further enhancing

the program’s contributions to Florida’s

local communities for response and re-

covery activities associated with haz-

ardous materials incidents. This com-

mitment is based on a proactive strat-

egy to identify opportunities to improve

local capabilities and provide a func-

tional framework whereby existing

statewide resources can be effectively

deployed to support local hazardous

materials emergency response teams.

In 1993, the State Emergency Re-

sponse Commission created the Train-

ing Task Force to address hazardous

materials training issues. Since its in-

ception, the task force’s responsibilities

have evolved and expanded to include

the development of statewide adopted

responder training guidelines for all as-

pects of public and private sectors; co-

ordination with various responder

groups to ensure the availability of re-

quired hazardous materials training; es-

tablishment of a uniform classification

system for hazardous materials inci-

dents; and the examination of the need

and feasibility of statewide hazardous

materials district response teams.

Based on the complexity of issues

involved with hazardous materials re-

sponse teams, the task force organized

a separate subcommittee, utilizing per-

sonnel with specific experience, to ana-

lyze Florida’s existing response teams’

capabilities and service areas. This

group recommended that the name of

any proposed state-sponsored hazard-

ous materials “Regional Response

Teams” be worded to avoid potential

confusion with existing federal hazard-

ous materials regional response teams.

The Commission recently approved the

name of these teams as the “Florida

Hazardous Materials District Response

Teams”. These state-sponsored re-

sponse teams would be utilized as sup-

port units for hazardous materials inci-

dents that exceed the resources of lo-

cal response agencies. This article pro-

vides an update of the subcommittee’s



accomplishments, activities and ongo-

ing efforts in analyzing the potential

need for the Florida Hazardous Materi-

als District Response Teams.

One of the first issues the Team Sub-

committee focused on was the devel-

opment of a definition for the Florida

Hazardous Materials District Response

Team. The definition, as recommended

by the Subcommittee and approved by

the State Emergency Response Com-

mission, is:

◆ An organized group of trained re-

sponse personnel, designated by the

organization, operating under an

emergency response plan and ap-

propriate standard operating proce-

dures, who are expected to perform

work to handle and control or other-

wise minimize or eliminate the haz-

ards to people, property, or the en-

vironment from an actual or poten-

tial leak or spill of hazardous sub-

stances requiring possible close ap-

proach to the substance.

◆ A hazardous materials team is not a

fire brigade nor is a typical fire bri-

gade a hazardous materials team.

◆ A hazardous materials team in-

cludes a minimum of seven team

members.

The next stage of work undertaken

by the subcommittee included the de-

termination and development of meth-

ods to identify existing response re-

sources, hazards and vulnerabilities,

and capabilities throughout the state in

relation to hazardous materials pre-

paredness and response. The Sub-

committee initially identified statewide

resources and vulnerabilities through

the use of Geographic Information Sys-

tem (GIS) maps. Maps were generated

that depicted the number of hazardous

materials response teams and their lo-

cation throughout the state as well as

areas that had a potential deficit of haz-

ardous materials response capability.

Maps of each Local Emergency Plan-

ning Committee District were also pro-

duced and reviewed to determine high

risk areas (such as Section 302 facili-

ties, ports, railways and transportation

routes). Evaluation of existing response

teams includes consideration of the

teams’ physical locations to appropri-

ately identify service areas throughout

the state and to maximize the teams’

effectiveness to support local re-

sources.

Subcommittee members also re-

searched and surveyed other states

that had established state-sponsored

hazardous materials (regional) re-

sponse teams. Subcommittee members

held discussions with representatives

from several of these states including

Idaho, Massachusetts, North Carolina,

Virginia and Wisconsin. States’ enabling

legislation and funding levels for oper-

ating, startup costs and cost recovery

mechanism were also reviewed.

The Subcommittee prepared and

mailed out a comprehensive response

capabilities survey to more than180 ex-

isting hazardous materials teams lo-

cated in Florida, most of which were

already participants of the Florida Fire

Chiefs statewide mutual aid plan. Of

these surveys, a total of 58 were com-

pleted and returned to the Subcommit-

tee. Subcommittee members evaluated

and assigned a score to the returned

surveys based on the teams’ current in-

ventory of specialized equipment, train-

ing of members and number of mem-

bers.

To further determine each team’s ca-

pability, an on-site assessment tool was

developed by an independent contrac-

1 0 • 1 9 9 8 S TAT E E M E R G E N C Y R E S P O N S E C O M M I S S I O N A N N UA L R E P O RT

tor and piloted in sample areas of the

state. The capability assessment tool,

as refined by the pilot study, will be used

to survey participants to obtain an ac-

curate, consistent and standardized as-

sessment of existing hazardous mate-

rials response capabilities. Approxi-

mately 20 hazardous materials re-

sponse teams throughout the state will

be selected to take part in this assess-

ment program. This on-site assessment

effort is financed through a grant to the

Department by the Federal Emergency

Management Agency.

To complement the technical analy-

sis, the subcommittee formed a sepa-

rate sub-group to identify and resolve

the potential legal issues involved in the

establishment of state-sponsored haz-

ardous materials response teams. The

Legal Committee is examining existing

state legal authorities and responsibili-

ties for hazardous materials response,

funding sources and cost recovery. The

current mechanism used by hazardous

material response teams to provide as-

sistance outside their established ser-

vice areas is primarily through the use

of mutual aid agreements. The Legal

Committee further discovered that ex-

isting legislation may not permit the

Florida Department of Environmental

Protection to contract with local govern-

ment entities for emergency response

assistance as it does with private haz-

ardous waste contractors for

remediation activities. The Legal Com-

mittee continues to explore state law to

gain a clearer picture of the authorities

and responsibilities that currently exist

and to propose additional statutory au-

thorities where necessary and appro-

priate.

At the present time, the Florida Haz-

ardous Materials District Response

Teams subcommittee continues to

tackle many challenging issues and ini-

tiatives associated with establishing a

state-sponsored hazardous materials

response program. Subcommittee

members have completed and are cur-

rently working on the following tasks:

◆ Define location and number of

teams.

◆ Develop and finalize standards for

personnel to serve on hazardous

materials response teams.

◆ Develop procedures to determine

how the designated response teams

will receive an on-site assessment.

◆ Prepare advanced training recom-

mendations for hazardous materials

response team members.

◆ Identify equipment and staff for haz-

ardous materials response teams.

◆ Determine how to disseminate risk

and accessibility data from the Divi-

sion of Emergency Management to

district teams.

◆ Determine call out and response re-

quest procedures in conjunction with

the Florida Fire Chiefs Mutual Aid

Plan.

Subcommittee members and the Le-

gal Committee will also be working on

the following issues in the upcoming

months:

◆ Identify companion legislation to au-

thorize creation of a state-sponsored

hazardous materials response pro-

gram.

◆ Determine and/or develop budget

program requirements and statutory

authorities.

◆ Determine and develop scope of

work and concept of operations for

the program.

◆ Address civil liability protection and

response cost recovery.

The new millennium already prom-

ises to provide exciting opportunities for

further strengthening Florida’s pre-

paredness and response capabilities.

The Florida Hazardous Materials Dis-

trict Response Teams subcommittee is

commended for its hard-work and ac-

tivities accomplished to date with this

critical and complicated hazardous ma-

terials response program project.

1 9 9 8 S TAT E E M E R G E N C Y R E S P O N S E C O M M I S S I O N A N N UA L R E P O RT • 1 1

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Hazardous MaterialEmergency Planning Grant(FORMERLY KNOWN AS HMTUSA AND HMTA)

In 1993, the Florida Department of

Community Affairs’ Division of Emer-

gency Management first applied for

and was awarded a hazardous materi-

als training and planning grant through

the U.S. Department of Transportation.

These funds were distributed statewide

to the 11 Local Emergency Planning

Committees through a contract with the

Department. Since then, funding has

been provided on an annual basis to

ensure first responder and higher level

training for hazardous materials inci-

dents (see Figure 1). In addition, plan-

ning funds are provided for exercise de-

sign, development and implementation;

commodity flow studies; risk analyses

and assessments; Section 302 facility

analyses and community workshops

and outreach (see Figure 2).

As indicated by Figure 1, although

1994 was the base year, each Local

Emergency Planning Committee district

ensured first responders were trained

at the Awareness Level. In 1996, the

Local Emergency Planning Committees

focused on providing expanded train-

ing, including Operations and Techni-

cian Level training as well as other haz-

ardous materials training for traditional

and non-traditional responders. The dis-

tribution of the Florida developed

Awareness Level training video for haz-

ardous materials correlated with an in-

crease in training (specifically in District

8) for fire responders. The reporting

years of 1997 and 1998 show a less

dramatic increase in total persons

trained than in previous years and this

trend is expected to continue. This is

primarily due to the majority of respond-

ers having received training early in the

program and the number of train-the-

trainer courses given, which allow for

training at the local level without the

necessity of state funds.

As shown in Figure 2, on an annual

basis each Local Emergency Planning

Committee chooses a planning project

to further awareness of hazardous ma-

terials issues in its region. Although oc-

casionally a Local Emergency Planning

Committee will repeat a project, new

projects are encouraged to ensure a

more comprehensive overview of the

hazardous materials issues per district.

The planning projects in the earlier

years of the grant centered on data col-

lection and analysis. In 1997 and 1998

chosen projects have been geared to-

ward the Community Outreach and

Awareness campaign. With the in-

crease of industry in the state, each

Local Emergency Planning Committee

strives to have the most up-to-date in-

formation available on the risks of haz-

ardous materials. Through the U.S.

Department of Transportation Hazard-

ous Materials Emergency Planning

Grant, the Planning Committees will

have the continued opportunity to en-

sure that the most current information

is shared with their community.

Each Local Emergency Planning

Committee has enhanced the capabili-

ties of their first responders, as well as

providing citizens a comprehensive

analysis of the hazardous materials

within their region. Additionally, each

Planning Committee has provided tech-

nical assistance to facilities and local

governments regarding the transporta-

tion, use and storage of hazardous

materials.

The U.S. Department of Transporta-

tion Hazardous Materials Emergency

Planning Grant has been utilized to

ensure that citizens and facilities are

aware of the location and distribution

of hazardous materials statewide. This

grant program ensures that cooperation

between the Local Emergency Planning

Committee, the Division of Emergency

Management and local entities is main-

tained; and that a collaborative effort is

made by all parties to inform the citi-

zens of the state regarding the impacts

hazardous materials.



DISTRICT 1 DISTRICT 71994 1995* 1996 1997 1998 Totals 1994 1995* 1996 1997 1998 Totals

Awareness 266 0 59 226 313 864 Awareness 51 0 109 35 55 250

Operations 0 0 7 53 73 133 Operations 27 0 4 17 19 67

Technician 0 0 49 0 0 49 Technician 0 0 5 0 0 5

Other 0 0 21 0 0 21 Other 0 0 0 37 0 37

Total 266 0 136 279 386 1,067 Total 78 0 118 89 74 359


Awareness 22 0 63 606 428 1,119 Awareness 71 0 3,478 134 218 3,901



Other 0 0 175 0 161 336 Other 0 0 170 9 34 213

Total 41 0 358 628 640 1,667 Total 136 0 3,766 218 274 4,394


Awareness 649 0 125 265 183 1,222 Awareness 40 0 71 430 91 632



Other 0 0 134 39 4 177 Other 0 0 5 0 0 5

Total 671 0 325 316 377 1,689 Total 100 0 98 442 91 731





Other 0 0 46 36 15 97 Other 0 0 4 0 0 4

Total 127 0 105 67 116 415 Total 120 0 67 59 65 311





Other 92 0 9 19 16 136 Other 0 0 69 32 0 101

Total 302 0 66 162 43 573 Total 74 0 100 76 136 386

DISTRICT 6 GRAND TOTAL1994 1995* 1996 1997 1998 Totals 1994 1995* 1996 1997 1998 Totals

Awareness 44 0 310 2 0 356 Awareness 1,517 0 4,401 1,771 1,356 9,045

Operations 44 0 135 290 32 501 Operations 390 0 377 537 465 1,769


Other 0 0 274 16 0 290 Other 92 0 907 188 230 1,417

Total 88 0 1,062 309 43 1,502 Total 2,003 0 6,201 2,645 2,245 13,094

* 1995 FIGURES UNAVAILABLE

Figure 1: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HAZARDOUS MATERIALSEMERGENCY PLANNING GRANT TRAINING BY LEPC DISTRICT


DIST

RICT

1994

1995

*19

9619

9719

9819

99

Dist

rict 1

Com

mod

ity F

low

Stud

yUn

avai

labl

eQ

uality

Con

trol o

f Sub

mitt

edCo

mm

unity

Wor

ksho

psSh

elte

r-In-

Plac

eSh

elte

r-In-

Plac

eTi

er II

Info

rmat

ion

Educ

atio

n En

hanc

emen

t

Dist

rict 2

Need

s As

sess

men

t for

Unav

aila

ble

Com

mod

ity F

low

Stud

ySe

ctio

n 30

2 Fa

cility

Com

mun

ity W

orks

hops

&LE

PC P

lan

Exer

cise

Haza

rdou

s M

ater

ials

Team

sO

utre

ach

Sect

ion

302

Facil

ity O

utre

ach

Dist

rict 3

Enha

nced

Haz

ards

Unav

aila

ble

Facil

ity H

azar

dsLE

PC E

xerc

iseCo

mm

unity

Wor

ksho

ps &

LEPC

Pla

n Ex

ercis

eAn

alys

isAn

alys

is Su

mm

ary

Sect

ion

302

Facil

ity O

utre

ach

Dist

rict 4

Need

s As

sess

men

t of

Unav

aila

ble

Com

mun

ity W

orks

hops

Sect

ion

302

Facil

ityCo

mm

unity

Wor

ksho

ps &

Com

mun

ity W

orks

hops

&Ha

zard

ous

Mat

eria

lsO

utre

ach

Sect

ion

302

Facil

ity O

utre

ach

Sect

ion

302

Facil

ity O

utre

ach

Dist

rict 5

Com

mod

ity F

low

Stud

yUn

avai

labl

eFa

cility

Haz

ards

Ana

lysis

Qua

lity C

ontro

l of

Com

mun

ity W

orks

hops

&Co

mm

unity

Wor

ksho

ps &

Sum

mar

ySu

bmitt

ed T

ier I

I Inf

orm

atio

nSe

ctio

n 30

2 Fa

cility

Out

reac

hSe

ctio

n 30

2 Fa

cility

Out

reac

h

Dist

rict 6

Com

mod

ity F

low

Stud

yUn

avai

labl

eCo

mm

unity

Wor

ksho

psCo

mm

unity

Wor

ksho

psCo

mm

odity

Flo

w St

udy

+Co

mm

odity

Flo

w St

udy

Dist

rict 7

Enha

nced

Haz

ards

Ana

lysis

Unav

aila

ble

Com

mun

ity W

orks

hops

Sect

ion

302

Facil

ity O

utre

ach

Com

mod

ity F

low

Stud

yLE

PC P

lan

Exer

cise

Dist

rict 8

Com

mod

ity F

low

Stud

yUn

avai

labl

eQ

uality

Con

trol o

f Sub

mitt

edCo

mm

unity

Wor

ksho

psCo

mm

unity

Wor

ksho

ps &

Qua

lity C

ontro

l of S

ubm

itted

Tier

II In

form

atio

nSe

ctio

n 30

2 Fa

cility

Out

reac

hTi

er II

Info

rmat

ion

Dist

rict 9

Enha

nced

Haz

ards

Ana

lysis

Unav

aila

ble

Facil

ity H

azar

ds A

nalys

isLE

PC E

xerc

iseFa

cility

Haz

ards

Ana

lysis

Com

mun

ity W

orks

hops

&Su

mm

ary

Sum

mar

ySe

ctio

n 30

2 Fa

cility

Out

reac

h

Dist

rict 1

0Ne

eds

Asse

ssm

ent f

orUn

avai

labl

eCo

mm

unity

Wor

ksho

psCo

mm

odity

Flo

w St

udy

LEPC

Pla

nnin

g Co

mm

ittee

Com

mun

ity W

orks

hops

& H

azar

dous

Mat

eria

ls Te

ams

Plan

Exe

rcise

Sect

ion

302

Facil

ity O

utre

ach

Dist

rict 1

1Ne

eds

Asse

ssm

ent f

orUn

avai

labl

eFa

cility

Haz

ards

Ana

lysis

Qua

lity C

ontro

l of S

ubm

itted

LEPC

Pla

nnin

g Co

mm

ittee

Com

mun

ity W

orks

hops

& H

azar

dous

Mat

eria

ls Te

ams

Sum

mar

yTi

er II

Info

rmat

ion

Plan

Exe

rcise

Sect

ion

302

Facil

ity O

utre

ach

* D

ata

for

1995

is u

nava

ilabl

e+ N

ot b

egun

due

to E

mer

genc

y E

vent

s

Fig

ure

2: U

.S. D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T O

F T

RA

NS

PO

RTA

TIO

N H

AZ

AR

DO

US

MA

TE

RIA

LS

EM

ER

GE

NC

Y P

LA

NN

ING

GR

AN

T P

RO

JE

CT

S B

Y L

EP

C D

IST

RIC

T


TRI:Toxic Release Inventory

The 1998 Toxic Release Inventory

(TRI) reporting year brought sev-

eral important changes to the

Section 313 Program. Most notable of

the changes are the addition of seven

new sectors to the list of industry groups

subject to the TRI reporting require-

ments. These industry groups repre-

sent the first set of non-manufacturing

industries to be added to the Section

313 reporting requirements with the ex-

ception of the federal facilities which

were added by Executive Order in 1993.

Following are the industry sectors in-

cluded in the Final Rule:

◆ Coal mining;

◆ Metal mining;

◆ Electric utilities that combust coal

and/or oil;

◆ Chemicals and allied products-

wholesale;

◆ Commercial hazardous waste treat-

ment;

◆ Petroleum bulk terminals-wholesale;

and

◆ Solvent recovery services.

The U. S. Environmental Protection

Agency believes the addition of these

non-manufacturing industry groups will

significantly increase the public’s knowl-

edge about releases, transfers and

other waste management practices in-

volving toxic chemicals.

The 1998 Florida Legislature en-

acted changes to the state reporting re-

quirements for Section 313 which in-

cluded modifications to the fee system

and a change in the effective date for

the listed substances covered under

Section 313. The fee change, imple-

mented by revisions to Rule Chapter

9G-14, Florida Administrative Code, re-

duced the annual fee for alternate

threshold filings (Form A) from $150 per

chemical report to $75 per chemical

report. This fee reduction reflects the

shorter processing time required for the

less complicated Form A reports. The

annual filing fee for the more complex

Form R remains at $150 per chemical

report.

In conjunction with EPA, staff con-

ducted outreach workshops to inform

the recently included industry sectors

of their potential new Section 313 re-

porting obligations. Staff also began to



focus additional outreach efforts on in-

dustry sectors already covered under

Section 313. These industries which

include paint manufacturing, boat build-

ers and cultured marble users among

others, have historically low TRI com-

pliance rates and the increased techni-

cal assistance should increase Section

313 reporting among these types of fa-

cilities.

To further assist expanded compli-

ance, a 1998 TRI reporting package will

be mailed to approximately 1,000 facili-

ties prior to the July 1, 1999 deadline.

Of this number, only 548 are facilities

that have previously reported under

Section 313. The remaining 452 facili-

ties, identified as potentially subject to

Section 313 based on their Standard

Industrial Classification code, include

facilities in the newly included industry

sectors as well as other facilities that

may have Section 313 reporting obli-

gations.

Looking to the future, a number of

changes are in the works for the 1999

reporting year (reports are due July 1,

2000). The EPA has proposed lower

reporting thresholds for certain persis-

tent bioaccumulative toxic chemicals

that are subject to reporting under Sec-

tion 313. EPA has also proposed lower

reporting thresholds for dioxin and di-

oxin-like compounds that are proposed

for addition to the Section 313 list of

toxic chemicals. In addition, EPA has

proposed adding certain persistent

bioaccumulative toxic chemicals to the

list of chemicals subject to reporting

under Section 313. The proposed ad-

dition of these chemicals is based on

their carcinogenicity or other chronic

human health effects and/or adverse

effects on the environment. The EPA

also proposed the requirement that

separate reports be filed for tetraethyl

lead and tetramethyl lead which are cur-

rently listed under the lead compounds

category. This proposed rule could be-

come final sometime in the Fall of 1999.

With the addition of the new indus-

try groups for 1998 and the proposed

changes for 1999, the TRI program may

experience a reversal of the downward

trend of recent years in the number of

reports submitted. Florida’s increased

outreach efforts to certain industries will

also likely bolster TRI reporting num-

bers.


Florida’s SupplementalEnvironmental Projects

The Florida Department of Com-

munity Affairs began investigat-

ing facilities for violations of Sec-

tion 304 (accidental release notification

requirements) of the Emergency Plan-


Act in 1989. Since that time, the De-

partment has entered into 29 settlement

agreements with facilities cited for al-

leged violations of accidental release

notifications. Over the years, Supple-

mental Environmental Projects have

been used in approximately 50 percent

of these settlements.

Supplemental Environmental Pro-

jects are projects that are used as al-

ternative methods to monetary fines for

resolving enforcement actions under

EPCRA. The U.S. Environmental Pro-

tection Agency, in 1991, issued the Fi-

nal Supplemental Environmental

Projects Policy which set forth guide-

lines for EPA to follow when using

Supplemental Environmental Projects

in settlements of enforcement actions.

The policy, which was revised in 1995,

outlines seven broad categories of

types of projects that are eligible for

Supplemental Environmental Projects:

◆ Public Health

◆ Pollution Prevention

◆ Pollution Reduction

◆ Environmental Restoration and

Protection

◆ Assessments and Audits

◆ Environmental Compliance

Promotion

◆ Emergency Planning and Prepared-

ness

Supplemental Environmental Pro-

jects are perceived as a more positive

approach to settling enforcement ac-

tions and allow the enforcing authority

and the potential violator to reach an

agreement that has a direct benefit to

the environment and the local commu-

nity in which the incident occurred.

In Florida, facilities investigated un-

der Section 304 are given the option to

enter into an agreement that involves a

Supplemental Environmental Project or

pay a flat monetary penalty. Those in-

terested in Supplemental Environmen-

tal Projects are provided with informa-

tion on the different types of projects

considered as eligible projects. They are

also encouraged to contact their local

emergency management offices and

Local Emergency Planning Committees

to identify projects that meet the local

need or enhance local capabilities.

Since 1991, the Florida Hazardous Ma-

terials Program has used Supplemen-

tal Environmental Projects in 14 settle-

ment agreements. Following are some

of the types of projects used over the

years:



◆ Outreach activities regarding

Emergency Planning and Commu-

nity Right-To-Know Act require-

ments

◆ Hazardous materials training for

local responders

◆ Facility Identification/Compliance

Promotion

◆ Printing Emergency Planning and

Community Right-To-Know Act

advertisements and articles in

trade journals and magazines

◆ Donation of equipment to Local

Emergency Planning Committees,

local emergency management

offices and fire departments

◆ Facility safety improvements for pol-

lution and accidental release preven-

tion

One of the more interesting Supple-

mental Environmental Project applica-

tions involved the installation of a warn-

ing system equipped with sirens to no-

tify the outlying community of acciden-

tal releases. The facility sponsoring the

Supplemental Environmental Project

experienced an ammonia release that

impacted approximately 40 individuals

offsite and closed down a major high-

way for a short period. The impact of

the release could have been mitigated

in large part with a more efficient warn-

ing system for the community. The in-

stallation of the alert system which in-

volved extensive outreach and interac-

tion among the facility, other local in-

dustries, local government and the com-

munity was very successful and serves

as an excellent example of the benefits

of using Supplemental Environmental

Projects in enforcement actions.

Supplemental Environmental Proj-

ects exemplify the State Emergency

Response Commission’s philosophy of

working together with industry to pro-

mote a better prepared, safer and edu-

cated community with respect to the

threats posed by hazardous materials.

The Department of Community Affairs

and the SERC recognize the positive

benefits of Supplemental Environmen-

tal Projects and support the continued

use of them in implementing Section

304 of the Emergency Planning and

Community Right-To-Know Act.


THE STATE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER

Our Other Office

F rom 8:00am to 5:00pm, Monday

through Friday, theCompliance

Planning staff is busy assisting

industry and local government with vari-

ous sections of the Emergency Plan-

ning Community Right-to-Know Act and

Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act.

However, when Florida is threatened or

experiencing a natural or man-made di-

saster the majority of the 15 plus people

that make up the Compliance Planning

staff switch gears and move to the State

Emergency Operations Center to serve

as Response Liaisons.

The State Emergency Operations

Center is divided into 17 different emer-

gency support functions known as

ESFs. Each ESF is responsible for sup-

porting local government in response

to and recovery from a natural or man-

made disaster. The role of the Re-

sponse Liaison is to serve as the single

point of contact between the county

Emergency Operations Center and the

state ESFs. What this entails is gather-

ing information from and providing in-

formation to the county and taking

county requests for resources. While,

at the onset, this may seem relatively

simple, there is much varied knowledge

that is required to perform these tasks

successfully. A working knowledge of

anything from sandbags to generators

to comfort stations is mandatory as is a

good understanding of the structure and

organization of local emergency man-

agement. Also, to communicate effec-

tively, it is imperative that a Response

Liaison have thorough knowledge of the

various Division of Emergency Manage-

ment programs to be able to comfort-

ably converse with counties during the

different stages of a disaster.

During 1998, the State Emergency

Operations Center was activated for

over 200 days as Florida experienced

disasters from floods to wild fires. Dur-

ing the summer of 1998 the state was

faced with a devastating drought the

consequences of which were numerous

fires. The role of the Response Liaison

changed considerably during this time.

Due to the specific nature of the re-

source requests from the county it was

necessary to interface more directly

with the Division of Forestry. Re-

sponse Liaisons were situated

within the Division of Forestry work

area to assist Forestry staff and

county personnel to utilize the re-

sources the State Emergency Op-

erations Center has to offer.

Staff also serve as State Emer-

gency Response Team chiefs, Op-

erations chiefs, Rapid Impact As-

sessment Team leaders and

Branch chiefs during times of acti-

vation. State Emergency Response

Team chiefs handle policy issues that

arise during a disaster while Operations

chiefs and Branch chiefs deal with the

coordination of response efforts. Rapid

Impact Assessment Team leaders, on

the other hand, lead a small team that

goes into an impacted area directly af-

ter an event to assist in assessing the

immediate needs of a community.

It is essential that Division of Emer-

gency Management staff work together

as a team in times of disaster and Com-

pliance Planning staff make up an im-

portant part of that team. From fires to

tornadoes, floods to hurricanes and

even mass migration, staff must be pre-

pared at any time to drop what they are

doing, put on their “other hat” and as-

sist the citizens of Florida.



District1 WEST FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL

LEPC Chairperson: Richard Delp / Staff Contact:Terry JosephPost Office Box 486 • Pensacola 32593-0486(850) 595-8910 s/c 695-8910 FAX: (850) 595-8967e-mail address: [email protected]

2 APALACHEE REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCILLEPC Chairperson: Richard Smith / Staff Contact: Neil Fleckenstein314 E. Central Ave., Rm. 119 • Blountstown 32424(850) 674-4571 s/c 771-4417 FAX: (850) 674-4574Tallahassee Office (850) 488-6211 FAX: (850) 488-1616e-mail address: [email protected]

33333 NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCILLEPC Chairperson: John Hudson / Staff Contact: Dwayne Mundy2009 N.W. 67 Place, Suite A • Gainesville 32653(352) 955-2200 s/c 625-2200 FAX: (352) 955-2209e-mail address: [email protected]

4 NORTHEAST FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCILLEPC Chairperson: Michael Chlada / Staff Contact: Wayne Dyess9143 Phillips Highway, Suite 350 • Jacksonville 32256(904) 363-6375 s/c 874-6350 FAX: (904) 363-6356e-mail address: [email protected]

5 WITHLACOOCHEE REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCILLEPC Chairperson: Milton Hill / Staff Contact: Charlotte Neupauer1241 S.W. 10th Street • Ocala 34474-2798(352) 732-1315 s/c 667-1315 FAX: (352) 732-1319e-mail address: [email protected]

6 EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCILLEPC Chairperson: Phillip Graves / Staff Contact: Teri Hunalp1011 Wymore Road, Suite 105 • Winter Park 32789(407) 623-1075 ext. 335 s/c 334-1075 FAX: (407) 623-1084e-mail address: [email protected]

7 CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCILLEPC Chairperson: Ed Higby / Staff Contact: Ricky KeckPost Office Drawer 2089 • Bartow 33831(941) 534-7130 ext. 104 s/c 549-7130 FAX: (941) 534-7138e-mail address: [email protected]

8 TAMPA BAY REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCILLEPC Chairperson: Ernie Hiers / Staff Contact: Bill Lofgren9455 Koger Blvd., Suite 219 • St. Petersburg 33702-2491(813) 577-5151 ext. 248 s/c 586-3217 FAX: (813) 570-5118e-mail address: [email protected]

9 SOUTHWEST FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCILLEPC Chairperson: Bruce Porter/ Staff Contact: John GibbonsPost Office Box 3455 • North Ft. Myers 33918-3455(941) 656-7720 s/c 749-7720 FAX: (941) 656-7724e-mail address: [email protected]

10 TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCILLEPC Chairperson: John Gojkovich / Staff Contact: Bruce Pisani301 East Ocean Blvd., Suite 300 • Stuart 34994(561) 221-4060 s/c 269-4060 FAX: (561) 221-4067e-mail address: [email protected]

11 SOUTH FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCILLEPC Chairperson: George Danz/ Staff Contact: Evangeline Suarez Pearson3440 Hollywood Blvd., Suite 140 • Hollywood 33021(954) 985-4416 s/c 473-4416 FAX: (954) 985-4417e-mail address: [email protected]

Figure 3: Local Emergency Planning Committees

4/1/99


1

23 4

5

6

78

10

9

11

Esca

mbi

a SantaRosa Okaloosa

Walton

Holmes

Washington

Jackson

CalhounBay

Gulf

Liberty

Gadsden

Franklin

Leon

Wakulla

Jeffe

rson

Madison

Taylor

Lafayette

Suwannee

Hamilton

Dixie

ColumbiaBaker

Union

BradfordClay

Putnam

Nassau

Duval

Alachua

Levy

Gilch

rist

St.Johns

Flagler

Marion

Volusia

Citrus

Hernando

Pasco

Lake

Seminole

Sum

ter

Orange

Osceola

Polk

HardeeManatee

SarasotaDeSoto

Highlands

Glades

Brevard

IndianRiver

St.Lucie

Okeechobee

Martin

Palm BeachHendry

Charlotte

Lee

Broward

Pine

llas

Collier

DadeMonroe

Hillsborough

M o n r o e C o u n t y

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998

28

55

70

59

41

32

55

128

1214

0

50

100

150

200

250

District1

112

69 69

175

98

121

192

205

127

106

142

District2

District3

District4

District5

District6

District7

District8

District9

District10

District11

Figure 4: Section 304 Incidents by Year 1988-1998

Figure 5: Total Hazardous Materials Incidents by LEPC District 1998


Figure 6: Florida’s Top Ten Extremely Hazardous Substances (EHSs) and Inventory Levels

Figure 7: Florida’s Top Ten TRI Substances and Release Totals

Phosphoric Acid

Nitrate Compounds

Ammonia Zinc Compounds

Methanol

Styrene

Lead CompoundsFormic Acid

CopperN-Butyl Alcohol

Chemical MaximumInventory (lbs)

Sulfuric Acid (non-aerosol forms) 703,622,357

Ammonia 366,494,741

Adiponitrile 580,050,000

Nitric Acid 32,611,121

Chlorine 29,329,846

Sulfur Dioxide 14,766,695

Cadmium Oxide 12,968,061

Hyrogen Sulfide 10,730,459

Hydrogen Fluoride 5,471,686

Bromomethane 5,131,849

Release

Chemical Estimate (lbs.)

Phosphoric Acid 26,032,610

Nitrate Compounds 20,117,611

Methanol 17,253,157

Ammonia 10,866,480

Zinc Compounds 5,678,761

Styrene 4,579,829

Lead Compounds 4,048,916

Formic Acid 3,806,700

Copper 3,243,753

N-Butyl Alcohol 2,465,840

Ammonia

Sulfuric Acid

Adiponitrile

Nitric AcidChlorine

Cadmium OxideHydrogen Sulfide

Hydrogen FluorideBromomethane

Sulfur Dioxide



Adiponitrile 58,050,000

Ammonia 44,628,389


Hydrogen Sulfide 10,643,803

Sulfuric Acid 7,163,813

Cyclohexylamine 4,012,300

Acrylonitrile 3,600,000

Hydrogen Chloride 2,168,785

Chlorine 1,485,244

Vinyl Acetate Monomer 480,000



Chlorine 772,864

Nitric Acid 246,825

Bromomethane 103,720

Sulfur Trioxide 35,194

Cyclohexylamine 19,139

Aldicarb 15,845

Ethion 14,700

Sulfur Dioxide 12,200

Boron Triflouride 9,440



Ammonia 10,130,991

Chlorine 2,247,390

Vanadium Pentoxide 1,540,661

Nitric Acid 206,000

Cadmium Oxide 166,000


Trimethylchlorosilane 108,304

Hydrogen Sulfide 86,406

Bromomethane 78,777

District 1

District 2

District 3

Figure 8: Top Ten Section 302 Chemicals by LEPC District

Adiponitrile

Ammonia

Nitric Acid

Hyrogen Sulfide

Sulfuric Acid

CyclohexylamineAcrylonitrile

ChlorineVinyl Acetate Monomer

Hydrogen Chloride

Sulfuric AcidNitric Acid

Chlorine

BromomethaneSulfur Trioxide

Sulfur Dioxide

Cyclohexylamine

Boron Triflouride

AldicarbEthion

Hydrogen SulfideBromomethane

Sulfuric Acid

Ammonia

Chlorine

Nitric AcidVanadium Pentoxide

Cadmium OxideSulfur Dioxide

Trimethylchlorosilane



Chlorine 7,279,955


Ammonia 1,804,890


Nitric Acid 680,500

Ethoprop 511,395

Hydrogen Chloride 377,384

Acrylamide 360,000

Hydrogen Peroxide 213,854

Endosulfan 137,195


Chlorine 571,880

Sulfuric Acid 346,244

Nitric Acid 100,174

Ammonia 89,349

Hydrogen Fluoride 66,749

Formaldehyde 43,082

Bromomethane 18,800

Toluene 2,4-Diisocyanate 18,704

Toluene 2,6-Diisocyanate 10,017




Chlorine 4,101,561

Nitrogen Dioxide 2,265,342

Ammonia 1,785,059

Hydrazine 676,859

Nitric Acid 567,432

Formaldehyde 397,943

Aldicarb 266,072

Ethoprop 253,397

Propylene Oxide 250,000

District 4

District 5

District 6

Top Ten Section 302 Chemicals by LEPC District (continued)

Sulfuric Acid Ammonia

Chlorine

Ethoprop

Hydrogen Peroxide

Endosulfan

Nitric AcidSulfur Dioxide

Acrylamide

Hydrogen Chloride

Sulfuric Acid Nitric Acid

Chlorine

Hydrogen Fluoride

Bromomethane

Hydrogen PeroxideToluene 2,6 Diisocyanate

Formaldehyde

Ammonia

Toluene 2,4 Diisocyanate

Sulfuric AcidNitrogen Dioxide

Chlorine

EthopropPropylene Oxide

Aldicarb

HydrazineNitric Acid

Ammonia

Formaldehyde




Cadmium Oxide 12,800,000


Ammonia 12,116,067


Chlorine 984,201

Nitric Acid 708,863


Aldicarb 503,705

Phosphorus 500,000


Ammonia 294,489,683


Hydrogen Fluoride 4,600,302

Chlorine 4,528,844

Bromomethane 3,274,896




Aldicarb 288,539

Ethoprop 250,720



Chlorine 1,061,068


Ammonia 307,086

Aldicarb 117,480


Ethion 29,509

Paraquat Dichloride 15,808

Phorate 14,024

Endosulfan 11,805

District 7

District 8

District 9


Sulfuric Acid

Cadmium OxideAmmonia

Chlorine

Hydrogen FluorideNitric Acid

Vanadium Pentoxide

Aldicarb

Sulfur Dioxide

PhosphorusAldicarb

Sulfuric Acid

Ammonia

Bromomethane

Nitric AcidVanadium Pentoxide

ChlorineHydrogen Fluoride

Sulfur DioxideAldicarb

Ethoprop

Sulfuric Acid

Bromomethane

Chlorine

Sulfur Dioxide

Phorate

EthionParaquat Dichloride

Ammonia

Aldicarb

Endosulfan




Chlorine 2,109,634

Phorate 1,190,150

Ammonia 452,847


Nitric Acid 337,298


Ethoprop 142,340

Zinc Phosphide 130,000

Paraquat Dichloride 109,947


Chlorine 4,187,205


Ammonia 685,680



Phenol 114,808

Formaldehyde 100,885



Nitric Acid 41,110

District 10

District 11


Sulfuric Acid

Phorate

Chlorine

Bromomethane

Paraquat Dichloride

Nitric Acid

Ethoprop

Zinc Phosphide

Sulfur Dioxide

Ammonia

Chlorine

Ammonia

Sulfuric Acid

Hydrogen Peroxide

Bromomethane

Formaldehyde

Hydrogen FluorideSulfur Dioxide

Phenol

Nitric Acid


Figure 9:Florida’s Section 302 Facilities by LEPC District

Number of Section 302 Facilities

101-350 Facilities

51-100 Facilities

26-50 Facilities

25 or less Facilities

1

23

5

78

11

4

6

109

Esca

mbi


Walton

Bay

GulfFranklin

Wakulla

Jeffe

rson

Taylor

Dixie

Nassau

Levy

St.Johns

Flagler

Volusia

Citrus

Hernando

Pasco

Manatee

Sarasota

Brevard

IndianRiver

St.Lucie

Martin

Palm Beach

Charlotte

Lee

Broward

Pine

llas

Collier

Dade

Monroe

Hillsborough


Holmes

Washington

Jackson

Calhoun

Liberty

Gadsden

Leon Madison

Lafayette

Suwannee

Hamilton

ColumbiaBaker

Union

BradfordClay

PutnamAlachua

Gilch

rist

Marion

Lake

Seminole

Sum

ter

Orange

Osceola

Polk

Hardee

DeSotoHighlands

Glades

Okeechobee

Hendry

Duval

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Distric

t 2

Distric

t 3

Distric

t 4

Distric

t 5

Distric

t 6

Distric

t 1

Distric

t 7

Distric

t 8

Distric

t 9

Distric

t 10

Distric

t 11

322

230 224

388

177

737

459

306

415360

617

Total Section 302 Facilities by LEPC District

Total Facilities= 4,235


Figure 10: Florida’s Section 311/312 Facilities by LEPC District

0

500

1000

1500

2000

Distric

t 2

Distric

t 3

Distric

t 4

Distric

t 5

Distric

t 6

Distric

t 1

Distric

t 7

Distric

t 8

Distric

t 9

Distric

t 10

Distric

t 11

1029

533459

1208

573

1845

787688

843

1169

1649

Section 311/312 Facilities by LEPC District

Number of Section 311/312 Facilities

501-1000 Facilities

101-500 Facilities

50-100 Facilities

Less than 50 Facilities

1

23

5

78

109

11

Esca

mbi


Walton

Bay

GulfFranklin

Wakulla

Jeffe

rson

Taylor

Dixie

Nassau

Duval

Levy

St.Johns

Flagler

Volusia

Citrus

Hernando

Pasco

Manatee

Sarasota

Brevard

IndianRiver

St.Lucie

Martin

Palm Beach

Charlotte

Lee

Broward

Pine

llas

Collier

Dade

Monroe

Hillsborough


Holmes

Washington

Jackson

Calhoun

Liberty

Gadsden

Leon Madison

Lafayette

Suwannee

Hamilton

ColumbiaBaker

Union

BradfordClay

PutnamAlachua

Gilch

rist

Marion

Lake

Seminole

Sum

ter

Orange

Osceola

Polk

Hardee

DeSotoHighlands

Glades

Okeechobee

Hendry

4

6

Total Facilities= 10,783


Figure 11: Florida’s Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) Facilities by LEPC District

0

50

100

150

200

Distric

t 2

Distric

t 3

Distric

t 4

Distric

t 5

Distric

t 6

Distric

t 1

Distric

t 7

Distric

t 8

Distric

t 9

Distric

t 10

Distric

t 11

40

1427

101

43

148

77

47 43

146

184

Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) Facilities by LEPC District

Total TRI Facilities

51-100 Facilities

26-50 Facilities

11-25 Facilities

10 or less Facilities

1

23

5

8

9

11

4

6

10

Esca

mbi


Walton

Bay

GulfFranklin

Wakulla

Jeffe

rson

Taylor

Dixie

Nassau

Levy

St.Johns

Flagler

Volusia

Citrus

Hernando

Pasco

Manatee

Sarasota

Brevard

IndianRiver

St.Lucie

Martin

Palm Beach

Charlotte

Lee

Broward

Pine

llas

Collier

Dade

Monroe

Hillsborough


Holmes

Washington

Jackson

Calhoun

Liberty

Gadsden

Leon Madison

Lafayette

Suwannee

Hamilton

ColumbiaBaker

Union

BradfordClay

PutnamAlachua

Gilch

rist

Marion

Lake

Seminole

Sum

ter

Orange

Osceola

Polk

Hardee

DeSotoHighlands

Glades

Okeechobee

Hendry

Duval

7

Total Facilities= 870


State Emergency Response Commission1998 ANNUAL REPORT

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OFCOMMUNITY AFFAIRS

Steven M. Seibert, Secretary2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard

Tallahassee, FL 32399www.dca.state.fl.us

florida department of community affairs

Documents