United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response
(5104)
EPA 550-B-98-OT4
November 1998
www.epa.gov/ceppo/
&EPA
Chemical Emergency Preparedness and Prevention Office
Printed on recycled paper
-------
-------
This document provides guidance to help owners and operators of stationary sources to
determine if their processes are subject to regulation under section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act
and 40 CFR part 68 and to comply with regulations. This document does not substitute for
EPA's regulations, nor is it a regulation itself. Thus, it cannot impose legally binding
requirements on EPA, states, or the regulated community, and may not ajpply to a particular .
situation based upon circumstances. This guidance does not represent final agency action, and
EPA may change it in the future, as appropriate.
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
" , ' ,'•-••
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 1 GENERAL APPLICABILITY
1.1 Introduction -".. v , 1-1
1.2 General Provisions - 1-3
1..3 Regulated Substances and Thresholds 1-4
1.4 What is a Process ' 1-5
1.5 Threshold Quantity in a Process 1-1
1.6 Stationary Source ' 1-17
1.7 When You Must Comply '••"• . • 1-18
CHAPTER 2 APPLICABILITY OF PROGRAM LEVELS •
2.1 ' What Are Program Levels . 2-1
2.2. Program 1 , . ' , . 2-2
2.3' Quick Rules for Determining Program 1 Eligibility , 2-8
2.4 Program 3 " ,' 2-9
2.5 ' Program 2 . , •'.> . , " 2-10
2.6 Dealing with Program Levels 2-11
2.7 Summary of Program Requirements . 2-13
CHAPTER 3 FIVE-YEAR ACCIDENT HISTORY -
3.1 What Accidents Must Be Reported 3-1
3.2 What Data Must Be Provided \ 3-1
3.3 Other Accident Reporting Requirements 3-9
CHAPTER 4 OFFSITE CONSEQUENCE ANALYSIS
4.1 Worst-Case Release Scenario Analysis 4-3
4.2 ' Alternative Release Scenario 4-13
4.3' Defining Offsite Receptors . ' 4-19
4.4 Documentation . 4-23
Appendix 4A Brief Summary of the Various States in~ Which Ammonia Exists in a Typical
Refrigeration Facility , 4-25
Appendix 4B Equations for Log-Log Graphs arid Calculations 4-30
Appendix 4C Information about Accidental Releases of Ammonia 4-34
CHAPTER 5 MANAGEMENT SYSTEM .
5.1 . General Information ''.,.'-,. • 5'1
5.2 How to Meet the Management System Requirements 5-1
CHAPTER 6 PREVENTION PROGRAM (PROGRAM 3) ;
-------
6.1 Prevention Program 3 and OSHA PSM 6-1
6.2 Process Safety Information (§ 68.65) . ,6-3
6.3 Process Hazard Analysis (§ 68.67) 6-5
6.4 Operating Procedures (§ 68.69) 6-8
6.5 Training (§ 68.71) 6-10
6.6 Mechanical Integrity (§ 68.73) 6-10
6.7 Management of Change (§68.75) 6-13
6.8 Pre-Startup Review (§ 68.77) 6-13
6.9 Compliance Audits (§ 68.79) ' 6-14
6.10 Incident Investigation (§ 68.81) 6-14
6.11 Employee Participation (§ 68.83) . 6-16
6.12 Hot Work Permits (§68.85) 6-16
6.13 Contractors (§68.87) . 6-1
Appendix 6-A PHA Techniques . , 6-19
CHAPTER 7 EMERGENCY RESPONSE
7.1 Non-Responding Sources ' 7-1
7.2 Elements of an Emergency Response Program 7-2
7.3 Developing an Emergency Response Program 7-5
7.4 Integration of Existing Program 7-8
7.5 Have I Met Part 68 Requirements 7-11
7.6 Coordination with Local Emergency Planning Committees 7-1
CHAPTERS RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN
8.1 -Elements of the RMP " 8-1
8.2 RMP Submission . 8-2
8.3 Resubmission and Updates 8-3
CHAPTER 9 IMPLEMENTATION
9.1 Implementing Agency 9-1
9.2 Reviews/Audits/Inspections 9-2
9.3 Relationship with Tide V Permit Programs .9.4
9.4 Penalties for Non-Compliance 9-4
CHAPTER 10 COMMUNICATION WITH THE PUBLIC -
10.1 Basic Rules of Risk Communication 10-1
10.2 Sample Questions for Communicating with the Public 10-4
10.3 Communication Activities and Techniques 10-13
10.4 For More Information 10-19
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A PART 68
APPENDIX B SELECTED NAICS CODES
APPENDIX C EPA REGIONAL CONTACTS
-------
APPENDIX D OSHA CONTACTS
APPENDIX E TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
APPENDIX F OSHA GUIDANCE ON PSM
APPENDIX G HAZARD ALERT
-------
-------
LIST OF BOXES AND EXHIBITS
IN RMP GUIDANCE
LIST OF EXHIBITS
CHAPTER 1
Exhibit 1-1 .
Exhibit 1-2
Exhibit 1-3
Evaluate Facility to Identify Covered Processes
Process
Stationary Source • ,
CHAPTER2
Exhibit 2-1 . Program Level Criteria
Exhibit 2-2 Comparison of Program Requirements
CHAPTER 3
Exhibit 3-1
CHAPTER 4
Exhibit 4-1
Exhibit 4-2
Exhibit 4-3
. Exhibit 4-4
Exhibit 4-5
Exhibit 4-6
Exhibit 4-28
Figure 4-1
Figure 4-2
Figure 4-3
Atmospheric Stability Classes
Steps for an Off site Consequence Analysis
Required Parameters for Modeling
Ten-Minute Building Release Attenuation Factors for Prolonged Releases
Distances to Toxic Endpoint for Anhydrous Ammonia Liquefied Under Pressure
Distances to Toxic Endpoint for Anhydrous Ammonia . ' .' .
Release Rates and Distances to Toxic Endpoints for Leaks of Anhydrous Ammonia
(Alternative Scenario)
Ten-Minute Building Release Attenuation Factors for Prolonged Releases of Chlorine and
Sulfur Dioxide
Guidance on Effectiveness of Building Mitigation for Worst-Case Scenarios. .' . .
Worst-Case Scenario — Predicted Distances to Toxic Endpoint for Anhydrous Ammonia
Alternative Case Scenario — Predicted Distances to Toxic Endpoint for Anhydrous '"
Ammonia • • , ••
Guidance on Effectiveness of Building Mitigation for Alternative Scenarios
Simplified Presentation of Worst Case and Alternative Scenario on a Local Map
Figure 4-4
Figure 4-5
Two Stage Ammonia System
Single Stage Ammonia System ,
Figure 4-A. 1 Vapor Pressure of Ammonia as a Function of Temperature
CHAPTERS
Exhibit 5-1
CHAPTER 6
Exhibit 6-1
Exhibit 6-2
Exhibit 6-3
Exhibit 6-4
Exhibit 6-5
Exhibit 6-6
Exhibit 6-7 .
.Exhibit6-8 ..
Exhibit 6-9
Exhibit 6-10
Exhibit 6-11 ,
Exhibit 6-12
Sample Management Documentation
Comparable EPA and OSHA Terms.
Summary of Program 3 Prevention Program
Process Safety Information Requirements
Process Hazard Analysis Requirements
Operating Procedures Requirements
Mechanical Integrity Chart
Management of Change Requirements
Pre-startup Review Requirements
Incident Investigation Requirements
Employee Participation Requirements
Hot Work Permits Requirements
Contractors Chart
-------
Exhibit 6a-l Applicability of PHA Techniques
Exhibit 6a-2 Time and Staffing for PHA Techniques
CHAPTER?
Exhibit 7-1 Federal Guidance on Emergency Planning and Response
Exhibit 7-2 Federal Emergency Planning Regulations
Exhibit 7-3 Integrated Contingency Plan Outline
CHAPTERS
Exhibit 8-1 RMP Updates
CHAPTER 10
Exhibit 10-1 Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication
LIST OF BOXES
INTRODUCTION
Guidance for Industry-specific Risk Management Programs
State Programs
If You Are New to Regulations
What Is a Local Emergency Planning Committee?
CHAPTER 1
State Programs
Qs and As: Stationary Source
Qs and As: Process
Aggregation of Substances
Q and A: Changing Inventories
Qs and As: Compliance Dates
CHAPTER2
Q and A: Process and Program Level
Qs and As: Public Receptors
Q and A: Determining Distances
Q and A: Environmental Receptors
Qs and As: Accident History
QsandAs:OSHA
CHAPTERS
Qs and As: Property Damage
Qs and As: Accident History
CHAPTER 4
RMP*Comp
Qs and As: Worst-case and Mitigation
How to Obtain Census Data and LandView
How to Obtain USGS Maps
CHAPTER6
Qs and As: Implementation and Program Level
Qs and As: Process Safety Information
Qs and As: Offsite Consequences
CHAJTER7
What Is a Response
-------
What Is a Local Emergency Planning Committee?
How Does the Emergency Response Program Apply?
CHAPTERS .
QandA: Revising a PHA '.""'.
CHAPTER9
Qs and As: Delegation ,
Qs and As: Audits
CHAPTER 10
What Does Your Worst-case Distance Mean?
What Does It Mean That We Could Be Exposed If We Live/Work/Shop/Go to School X Miles Away?
• If There Is An Accident, Will Everyone Within That Distance Be Hurt? What About Property Damage?
How Sure Are You of Your Distances? .
What-Are You Doing to Prevent Releases?
What Are You Doing to Prepare for Releases? . . . •
Why Are Your Distances Different from the Distances in the EPA Lookup Tables? .
How Likely Are the Worst-case and Alternative Release Scenarios?
Is the Worst-case Release You Reported Really the Worst Accident You Can Have?
What about the Accident at the [Name of Similar Facility] That Happened Last Month?
What Actions Have You Taken to Involve the Community in Your Accident Prevention arid Emergency
Planning Efforts? •
Can We See the Documentation You Keep on Site?
-------
-------
INTRODUCTION
WHY SHOULD I READ THIS GUIDANCE?
If you handle, manufacture, use, or store any of the toxic and flammable substances
listed in 40 CFR 68.130 (see Appendix A of this document) above the specified
threshold quantities in a process, you are required to develop and implement a risk
management program rule issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). This rale, "Chemical Accident Prevention Provisions" (part 68 of Title 40 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)), applies to a wide variety of facilities that
handle, manufacture, store, or use toxic substances, including ammonia. This
document provides guidance on how to determine if you are subject to part 68 and
how to comply with part 68. If you are subject to part 68, you must be in compliance
no later than June 21,1999, or the date on which yb'u first have more than 10,000
pounds of ammonia in a process, whichever is later.
This guidance is intended for food processors, food distributors, and refrigerated
.warehouses who use ammonia as a refrigerant, as well as any other facility that has an
ammonia refrigeration system. Information not applicable to ammonia refrigeration
systems has been omitted. If you have other processes that use regulated substances -
(see Appendix A of this document) other than ammonia, there will be information that
is applicable to those other operations that is not presented in this document. For
those operations, you should consult the General Guidance of Risk Management
Programs.
The goal of part 68 — the risk management program — is to prevent accidental
releases of substances that can cause serious harm to the public and the environment
from short-term exposures and to mitigate the severity of releases that do occur. The
1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act (CAA) require EPA to issue a rule specifying
the type of actions to be taken by facilities (referred to in the statute as stationary
sources) to prevent accidental releases of such hazardous chemicals into the
atmosphere and reduce their potential impact on the public and the environment. Part
68 is that rale.
In general, part 68 requires that: , '....'.
Covered facilities must develop and implement a risk management program
and maintain documentation of the program at the site. The risk management
program will include an analysis of the potential offsite consequences of an
" .accidental release, a five-year accident history, a release prevention program,
and an emergency response program.
Covered facilities also must develop and submit a risk management plan
(RMP), which includes registration information, to EPA no later than June 21,
1999, or the date on which the facility first has more than a threshold quantity
in a process, whichever is later. The RMP provides a summary of the risk
.management program. The RMP will be available to federal, state, and local
government agencies and the public.
November 19,1998
-------
Introduction
-11-
Covered facilities also must continue to implement the risk management
program and update their RMPs periodically or when processes change, as
required by the rule.
The phrase "risk management program" refers to all of the requirements of part 68,
which must be implemented on an on-going basis. The phrase "risk management plan
(RMP)" refers to the document summarizing the risk management program that you
must submit to EPA.
HOW DO I USE THIS DOCUMENT?
This is a technical guidance document designed for owners and operators of sources
covered by part 68. It .will help you to:
Determine if you are covered by the rule;
Determine what level of requirements is applicable to your covered
process(es);
Understand which specific risk management program activities must be
conducted;
Select a strategy for implementing a risk management program, based on your
current state of compliance with other government rules and industry
standards and the potential offsite impact of releases from your process(es);
and
Understand the reporting, documentation, and risk communication
components of the rule.
This document provides guidance and reference materials to help you comply with
EPA's risk management program regulations. You should view and retain this
guidance as a reference document for use when you are unsure about what a
requirement means. This document'does not provide guidance on any other rule or
part of the CAA.
STATE PROGRAMS
This guidance applies to 40 CFR part 68. You should check with your state government to determine
if the state has its own accidental release prevention rules or has obtained delegation from EPA to
implement and enforce part 68 in your state. State rules may be more stringent than EPA's rules. They
may cover more substances'or cover the same substances at lower thresholds. They may also impose
additional requirements. For example, California's state program requires a seismic study. See
Chapter 9 for information on state implementation of part 68. Unless your state has been granted
delegation, you must comply with part 68 as described in this document even if your state has different
rules under state law.
November 19,1998
-------
-m-
Introduction
WHAT DO I DO FIRST?
1 Before developing a risk management program, you should do five things:
(1) Determine which, if any, of your processes are covered by this program
Only sources with more than a threshold ^quantity of a regulated substance (for
anhydrous ammonia, more than 10,000 pounds) in a "process" need to
comply with part 68. "Process" is defined by, the rule in § 68.3 and does not
necessarily correspond with an engineering conceptof process. The
•• ' . requirements apply only to covered processes. See Chapter 1 for more
information on how to define your processes and determine if they are subject
: . . to. theruje.'
(2) Determine the appropriate program level for each covered process
Depending on the specific characteristics of an ammonia covered process and
the results of the offsite consequence analysis for that process, it may be
'' , • ' -. . , subject to one of two different sets of requirements (called program levels).
See Chapter 2 for more information.
(3) Determine EPA's requirements for the facility and each covered process
Certain requirements apply to the facility as. a whole, while others are
process-specific. See Chapter 2 for more information.
(4) Assess your operations to identify current risk management activities
Because you probably conduct some risk management activities already (e.g.,
employee training, equipment maintenance, and emergency planning), you
. should review your current operations to determine the extent to which they
meet the provisions of this rule. EPA does not expect you to redo these
activities if they already meet the rule's requirements. See Chapters 5 to 7
individually for guidance on how to tell if your existing practices can meet
those required by EPA. .
(5) Review the regulations and this guidance to develop a strategy for
conducting the additional actions you need to take for each covered
process. Discuss the requirements with management and staff.
r i
The risk management program takes an integrated approach to assessing and
managing risks and will involve most of the operations of covered processes.
Early involvement of both management.and staff will help develop an
effective program. ' ' . >
November 19,1998
-------
Introduction
-IV-
REQUIREMENTS ARE PERFORMANCE BASED
Finally, keep in mind that many of these requirements are performance-based; that is,
EPA is not specifying how often you must inspect storage tanks, only that you do so in
a manner that minimizes the risk of a release. This allows you to tailor your program
to fit the particular conditions at your facility. The degree of complexity required in a
risk management program will depend on the complexity of the facility. While a
facility with a large, complex ammonia system may benefit from a computerized
maintenance tracking system, a small facility with a simpler process may be able to
track maintenance activities using a logbook.
There is no one "right" way to develop and implement a risk management program.
Even for the same rule elements, your program will be different from everyone else"s
program (even those in the same industry) because it will be designed for your specific
situation and hazards — it will reflect whether your facility is near the public and
sensitive environmental areas, the specific equipment you have installed, the
managerial decisions that you have made previously, and other relevant factors.
WHERE DO I GO FOR MORE INFORMATION?
EPA's risk management program requirements may be found in Part 68 of Volume 40
of the Code of Federal Regulations. The relevant sections were published in the
Federal Register on January 31, 1994 (59 FR 4478) and June 20, 1996 (61 FR
31667). A consolidated copy of these regulations is available in Appendix A. In
addition, EPA has finalized a rule adopting the provisions covered by the Stay of
Applicability included in the June 20, 1996, final rule, 40 CFR 68.2 (January 6, 1998,
63FR640).
EPA is working with industry and local, state, and federal government agencies to
assist sources in complying with these requirements. For more information, refer to
Appendix E (Technical Assistance). Appendices C and D also provide points of
contact for EPA and OSHA at the state and federal levels for your questions. Your
local emergency planning committee (LEPC) also can be a valuable resource and can
help you discuss issues with the public.
Finally, if you have access to the Internet, EPA has made copies of the rules, fact
sheets, and other related materials'available at the home page of EPA's Chemical
Emergency Preparedness and Prevention Office (http://www.epa.gov/ceppo/). Please
check the site regularly as additional materials are posted.
November 19.1998
-------
-V-
Introduction
IF YOU ARE NEW TO REGULATIONS
We have tried to make this document as clear and readable as possible, but if you have rarely dealt
with regulations before^, some of the language may seem initially odd and confusing. All regulations
have their own vocabulary. A few words and phrases have very specific meanings within the
regulation. Some of these are unusual, which is to say they are not usedln everyday language. Others
are defined by the rule in ways that vary to 'some degree from their everyday meaning. The following
are the major regulatory terms used in this document and a brief introduction to their meaning within
the context of part 68. They are defined in § 68.3 of the rule.
"Stationary source" basically means-facility. The CAA and, thus Part 68 use the term "stationary
source" and we explain it in Chapter 1. Generally, we use "facility" in its place in this document.
"Process" is given a broad meaning in this rule and document. Most people.think of a process as the
mixing or reacting of chemicals. Its meaning under this rule is much broader. It basically means any
equipment, including storage vessels, and activities, such as loading, that involve a regulated substance
and could lead to an accidental release. Chapter 1 'discusses the definition of process under this rule i
detail. .,'...' ,
"Regulated substance" means one of the 140 chemicals listed in part 68.
"Threshold quantity" means the quantity, in pounds; of a regulated substance which, if exceeded,
triggers coverage by this rule. Each regulated substance has its own threshold quantity. If you have
more than a threshold quantity of a regulated substance in a process, you must comply with the rule.
Chapter 1 explains how to determine whether you have a threshold quantity.
" Vessel" means any container, from a single drum or pipe to a large storage tank or sphere.
"Public receptor" generally means any place where people live, work, or gather, with the exception of
roads. Buildings, such as houses, shops, office buildings, industrial facilities, the areas surrounding
buildings where people are likely to be present, such as yards and parking lots, and recreational areas,
such as parks, sports arenas, rivers, lakes, beaches, are considered public receptors. Chapter 2
discusses public receptors.
"Environmental receptor" means a limited number of natural areasJhat are officially designated by the
state or federal government. Chapter 2 discusses this definition.
November 19, 1998
-------
Introduction
-VI-
WHAT IS A LOCAL EMERGENCY PLANNING COMMITTEE?
Local emergency planning committees (LEPCs) were formed under the Federal Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) in 1986. The committees are designed to serve as a
community forum for issues relating to preparedness for emergencies involving hazardous substances.
They consist of representatives from local government, local industry, transportation groups, health and
medical organizations, community groups, and the media. LEPCs:
Collect information from facilities on hazardous substances that pose a risk to the community;
Develop a contingency plan for the community based on this information; and
Make information on hazardous substances available to the general public.
Contact the mayor's office or the county emergency management office for more information on your
LEPC.
November 19, 1998
-------
CHAPTER 1: GENERAL APPLICABILITY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this chapter is to help you determine if you are subject to Part 68, the
risk management program rule. Part 68 covers you if you'are:' . ,
The owner or operator of a stationary source (facility) :
That has more than a threshold quantity • •
Of a regulated substance
In a process. ' .
The goal of this chapter is to make it easy for you to identify processes that are . '
covered by this rule so you can focus on them.
This chapter walks you through the key decision points (rather than the definition
items above), starting with those provisions that may tell you. that you are not subject
. to the rule. We first outline the general-applicability provisions and the few
exemptions and exclusions, then discuss which chemicals are "regulated substances."
If you do not have a "regulated substance" at your site, you are not covered by this
rule. The exemptions may exclude you from the rule or simply exclude certain
activities from consideration. (Throughout this document, when we say "rule" we
mean the regulations in part 68.) ,
We then describe what is considered a "process," which is"critical because you are,
subject to the rule if you have more than a threshold quantity in a process. The
chapter next describes how .to determine' whether you have more than a threshold
quantity.
Finally, we discuss how you define your overall stationary source and when you must
comply. .These questions are-important once you have decided that you are covered.
For most ammonia refrigeration facilities covered by this rule, the stationary source is
basically all covered processes at your site. If your facility is part of a site with other
divisions of your company or other companies, the discussion of stationary source will
help you understand what you are responsible for in your compliance and reporting.
Exhibit 1-1 presents the decision, process for determining applicability.
November 19, 1998
-------
EXHIBIT 1-1
EVALUATE FACILITY TO IDENTIFY COVERED PROCESSES
Is your facility
a stationary
source?
Do you have
any regulated
substances?
STOP!
You are not covered
by the rule.
Define.your
processes
Do you nave any
regulated substances
above a threshold quantity
in a process?
You are subject
to the rule.
Assign Program levels to
covered processes
(see Exhibit 2-1)
-------
1-3
Chapter 1
General Applicability
STATE PROGRAMS
This guidance applies to only 40 CFR part 68. You should check with your state government to
determine if the state has.its own accidental release prevention rules or has obtained delegation from
EPA to implement and enforce part 68 in your state. State rules may be more stringent than'EPA's
rules. Unless your state has been granted delegation, you must comply with part 68 as described in
this document even if your state has different rules under state law. See Chapter 9 for a discussion of
state implementation of part 68.
1.2 GENERAL PROVISIONS
The CAA applies this rule to any person who owns or operates a stationary source.
"Person" is defined to include '-'-.'
"An individual, corporation, partnership, association, State, municipality, political'
subdivision of a state,.and any agency, department, or instrumentality of the United
States and any officer, agency, or employee thereof."
The rule, therefore, applies to all levels of government as well as private businesses.
CAA section 112(r)(2)(c) defines "stationary sources" as:
__"Any buildings, structures, equipment, installations, or substance emitting stationary
activities '. : ' . .
' Which .belong to the same industrial group.
Which are located on one or more contiguous propertiesp
Which are under the control of the same-person (or persons under common
control), and •
From which an accidental release may occur."
' EPA has added some language in the rule to clarify issues related to transportation
(see below).
FARMS (§68.125)
The rule has only one exemption: for ammonia when held by a fanner for use as an
agricultural nutrient on a farm. This exemption applies to ammonia only when used
as a fertilizer by a farmer. It does not apply to agricultural suppliers or the fertilizer
manufacturer, or the use of ammonia as a refrigerant. It does not apply to farm
cooperatives or to groups of farmers who buy, use, and sell ammonia.
November 19. 1998
-------
Chapter 1
General Applicability
1-4
Qs & As
STATIONARY SOURCE
Q. What does "same industrial group" mean?
A. Operations at a site that belong to the same three-digit North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) code (which has replaced the old two-digit SIC codes) belong to the "same industrial
group. In addition, where one or more operations at the site serve primarily as support facilities for the
main operation at the site, the supporting operations are part of the "same industrial group" as the main
operation. For example, if you process poultry (NAICS 311) and operate a waste treatment facility
(NAICS 562) that handles primarily wastes from your poultry operations, the waste treatment is
considered a support operation.
Q. What does "contiguous property" mean?
A. Property that is adjoining. Public rights-of-way (e.g., railroads, highways) do not prevent property
from being considered contiguous. Property connected only by rights-of-way are not considered
contiguous (e.g., two plants with a connecting pipeline).
Q. What does "control of the same person" mean?
A. Control of the same person refers to corporate control, not site management. If two divisions of a
corporation operate at the same site, even if each operation is managed separately, they will count as
one source provided the other criteria are met because they are under control of the same company.
TRANSPORTATION ACTIVITIES
The rule applies only to stationary sources. Pipelines covered by DOT or under a state
natural gas or hazardous liquid program for which the state has in effect a certification
to DOT under 49 U.S .C. 6010.5 -are not covered. Piping at your source, however, is
covered.
Transportation containers used for storage not incident to transportation and
transportation containers connected to equipment at a stationary source are considered
part of the stationary source. Transportation containers that have been unhooked from
the motive power that delivered them to the site (e.g., truck or locomotive) and left on
your site for short-term or long-term storage are part of your stationary source. For
example, if you have railcars on a private siding that you use as storage tanks until you
are ready to hook them to your process, these railcars should be considered to be part
of your source. If a tank truck is being unloaded ahd the motive power is still
attached, the truck and its contents are considered to be in transportation and not
covered by the rule. You should count only the substances in the piping or hosing as
well as the quantity unloaded. Some issues related to transportation are still under
discussion with DOT.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 1
1-5 General Applicability
RELATIONSHIP TO OSHA PROCESS SAFETY MANAGEMENT STANDARD EXEMPTIONS
The OSHA Process Safety Management (PSM) standard (29 CFR 1910.119) exempts
• retail facilities and unoccupied, remotely located facilities (other OSHA exemptions
are not relevant to ammonia refrigeration systems). Your processes are not exempt
from the Risk Management Program simply because they qualify for one of the OSHA
exemptions.
1.3 REGULATED SUBSTANCES AND THRESHOLDS (§ 68.130)
The list of substances regulated under § 68.130 is in Appendix A. The threshold
quantity for anhydrous ammonia is 10,000 pounds. If you do not have ammonia or
any of other regulated substances (either as pure substances or in mixtures above 1
percent concentration) or do not have them above their listed threshold quantities, you
do not need to read any further.
1.4 WHAT IS A PROCESS
The concept of "process" is key to whether you are subject to this rule. Process is
defined in 40 CFR 68.3 as:
\
"Any activity involving a regulated substance, including any use, storage,
manufacturing, handling, or on-site movement of such substances, or combination of
these activities. For the purposes of this definition, any group of vessels that are
interconnected, or separate vessels that are located such that a regulated substance
could be involved in a potential release, shall be considered a single process."
"Vessel" in § 68.3 means any reactor, tank, drum, barrel, cylinder, vat, kettle, boiler,
pipe, hose, or other container. •
EPA's definition of process is identical to the definition of process under the OSHA
PSM standard. Understanding the definition of process is important in determining
whether you have a threshold quantity of a regulated substance and what level of
, • " requirements you must meet if the process is covered.
What does this mean to you?
If you store a regulated substance in a single vessel in quantities above the
- threshold quantity, you are covered.
If ypu have interconnected vessels that altogether hold more than a threshold
quantity, you are covered. The connections .need not be permanent. If two or
more vessels are connected occasionally, they are considered a single process
for the purposes of determining whether a threshpld quantity is present.
If you have multiple unconnected vessels, containing the same substance, you
will have to determine whether,they need to be considered together as co-
located.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 1
General Applicability 1-6
A process can be as simple as a single storage vessel or a group of drums or cylinders
in one location or as complicated as a system of interconnected reactor vessels,
distillation columns, receivers, pumps, piping, and storage vessels.
SINGLE VESSELS
If you have only a single vessel containing regulated substances, you need not worry
about the other possibilities for defining a process and can skip to section 1.5. For the
purposes of defining a threshold quantity, you need only consider the quantity in this
vessel.
INTERCONNECTED VESSELS
In general, if you have two or more vessels containing a regulated substance that are
connected through piping or hoses for the transfer of the regulated substance, you
must consider the total quantity of a regulated substance in all the connected vessels
and piping when determining if you have a threshold quantity in a process. If the
vessels are connected for transfer of the substance using hoses that are sometimes
disconnected, you still have to consider the contents of the vessels as one process,
because if one vessel were to rupture while the hose was attached or the hose were to
break during the transfer, both tanks could be affected. Therefore, you must count
the quantities in both tanks and in any connecting piping or hoses. You cannot
consider the presence of automatic shutoff valves or other devices' that can limit flow,
because these are assumed to fail for the purpose of determining the total quantity in a
. • process. .
Once you have determined that a process is covered (the quantity of a regulated
substance exceeds its threshold), you must also consider equipment, piping, hoses, or
other interconnections that do not carry or contain the regulated substance, but that are
important for accidental release prevention. Equipment or connections which contain
utility services, process cooling water, steam, electricity, or other non-regulated
substances may be considered part of a process if such equipment could cause a
regulated substance release or interfere with mitigating the consequences of an
accidental release. Your prevention program for this process (e.g., PSM program) will
need to cover such equipment. If, based on your analysis, it is determined that
interconnected equipment or connections not containing the regulated substance
cannot cause a regulated substance release or interfere with mitigation of the
consequences of such a release, then such equipment or connections could safely be
considered outside the limits or boundaries of the covered process.
In some cases, determining the boundaries of a process for purposes of the RMP rule
may be complicated. In the preamble to the June 20, 1996 rule (61 FR 31668), EPA
clearly stated its intent to be consistent with OSHA's interpretation of "process" as
that term is used in OSHA's PSM rule. Therefore, if your facility is subject to the
PSM rule, the limits of your process(es) for purposes of OSHA PSM will be the limits
of your process(es) for purposes of RMP (except in cases involving atmospheric
storage tanks containing flammable regulated substances, which are exempt from
PSM but not RMP). If your facility is not covered by OSHA PSM and is complicated
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 1
1-7 General Applicability
from an engineering perspective, you should consider contacting your implementing
agency for advice on determining.process boundaries.
CO-LOCATION • -
The third possibility you must consider is whether you have separate vessels that
contain the same regulated substance that are located such that they could be involved
in a single release. If so, you must add together the total quantity in all such vessels
to determine if you have more than a threshold quantity. This possibility will be .
particularly important if you have two separate ammonia refrigeration systems that are
in a single building. For these cases, you should ask yourself:
Couid a release from one of the systems lead to a release from the other?- For
example, would the ammonia released from one system be confined to that
system and burn, and/or would the fire spread to the other system?
Could an event external to the containers; such as a fire or explosion or
collapse or collision (e.g., a vehicle collides with several stored containers),
have the potential to release the regulated substance from multiple containers?
You must determine whether there is a credible scenario that could lead to a release of
a threshold quantity. -
For flammables, you should consider the distance between vessels. If a fire could
spread from one vessel to others or an explosion could rupture multiple vessels, you
must count all of them.. For ammonia, a release from a single vessel will not normally
lead to a release from others unless the vessel fails catastrophically and explodes,
sending metal fragments into other vessels. Co-located vessels containing ammonia,
however, may well be involved in a release caused by a fire or explosion that occurs
from another source. The definition of process is predicated on the assumption that
explosion will take place.
If the vessels are separated by fire walls or barricades that will contain the blast waves
from explosions of the substances, you ,will not need to count the separated vessels,
but you would count any that are in the same room.
You may not dismiss the possibility of a fire spreading based on an assumption that
your fire brigade will be able to prevent any spread. You should ask yourself how far
the fire would spread if the worst happens — the fire brigade is slow to arrive, the
water supply fails, or the local., fire department decides it is safer to let the fire burn
itself out. If you have separate vessels containing a regulated substance that could be
affected by the same accident, you should count them as a single process.
PROCESSES WITH MULTIPLE CHEMICALS
t • , . •
When you are determining whether you have a covered process, you should not limit
your consideration to vessels that have the same regulated substance. A covered
process includes any vessels that altogether hold more than a threshold quantity of
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 1
General Applicability 1-8
regulated substances and that are interconnected or co-located. Therefore, if you have
four storage or reactor vessels holding four different regulated substances above their
individual thresholds and they are located close enough to be involved in a single
event, they are considered a single process. One implication of this approach is that if
you have two ammonia refrigeration systems, each containing slightly less than a
threshold quantity of ammonia and located a considerable distance apart, and you have
other storage or process vessels in between with other regulated substances above their
thresholds, the two ammonia systems may be considered to be part of a larger process
involving the other intervening vessels and other regulated substances, based on
co-location.
Exhibit 1-2 provides illustrations of what may be defined as a process.
1.5 THRESHOLD QUANTITY IN A PROCESS -
The threshold quantity for anhydrous ammonia is 10,000 pounds. You should
determine whether the maximum quantity of ammonia in a process is greater than
10,000 pounds. If it is, you must comply with this rule for that process. Even if you
are not covered by this rule, you may still be subject to reporting requirements under
the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA) which covers
ammonia when you have more than 500 pounds on site.
QUANTITY IN A VESSEL
To determine if you-have the threshold quantity of ammonia in a vessel involved in a
single process, you need to consider the maximum quantity in that vessel at any one
time. You do not need to consider the vessel's maximum capacity if you never fill it to
that level. Base your decision on the actual maximum quantity that you may have in
the vessel. Your maximum quantity may be more than your normal operating
maximum quantity; for example, if you may use a vessel for emergency storage, the
maximum quantity should be based on the quantity that might be stored.
"At any one time" means you need to consider the largest quantity that you ever have
in the vessel. If you fill a tank with 50,000 pounds and immediately begin using the
substance and depleting the contents, your maximum is 50,000 pounds.
If you fill the vessel four times a year, your maximum is still 50,000 pounds.
Throughput is not considered because the rule is concerned about the maximum
quantity you could release in a single event.
November 19,1998
-------
EXHIBIT 1-2: PROCESS
Schematic Representation
Description
Interpretation
1 vessel
, 1 regulated substance above TQ
i process
r
2 or more connected vessels
same regulated substance
above TQ ,
1 process
.2 or more connected vessels
different regulated substances
each above TQ '
1 process
pipeline feeding multiple vessels
total above TQ
1 process
2 or more vessels co-located
same substance .
total'above TQ ,
1 process
(±3
2 or more-vessels co-located
different substances
each .above TQ
1 process
2 vessels, located so they won't be
involved in a single release
same or different substances
each above TQ
2 processes
2 locations with regulated substances
each above TQ
1 or 2 processes
depending on distance
F—-
Flammable
1 series of'interconnected vessels
same or cf/fferenf substances* above TQs
plus a co-located storage vessel
containing flammables
1 process
-------
Chapter 1
General Applicability 1-10
QUANTITY IN A PIPELINE
The maximum quantity in a pipeline will generally be the capacity of the pipeline
(volume). In most cases, pipeline quantity will be calculated and added to the
interconnected vessels. .
\ '
INTERCONNECTED/CO-LOCATED VESSELS
If your process consists of two or more interconnected vessels, you must determine the
maximum quantity for each vessel and the connecting pipes or hoses. The maximum
for each individual vessel and pipe is added together to determine the maximum for
the process.
If you have determined that you must consider co-located vessels as one process, you
must determine the maximum quantity for each vessel and sum up the quantities of all
such vessels.
EXCLUSIONS (§ 68.115)
The rule has a number of exclusions that allow you to ignore certain items that contain
a regulated substance when you determine whether a threshold quantity is present.
Note that these same exclusions apply to EPCRA section 313; you may be familiar
with them if you comply with that provision.
ARTICLES (§ 68.115(b)(4))
• You do not need to include in your threshold calculations any manufactured item
defined at § 68.3 (as defined under 29 CFR 1910.1200(b)) that:
Is formed to a specific shape or design during manufacture,
Has end use functions dependent in whole or in part upon the shape or design
during end use, and •
Does not release or otherwise result in exposure to a regulated substance
under normal conditions of processing and use.
This exclusion will generally not apply to ammonia refrigeration systems.
USES (§ 68.115(b)(5))
You also do not need to include regulated substances in your calculation when in use
for the following purposes:
Use as a structural component of the stationary source;
Use of products for routine janitorial maintenance;
November 19,1998
-------
•••-•.. Chapter 1
1-11 " General Applicability
Use by employees of foods, drugs, cosmetics, or other personal items
. , containing the regulated substances; and
Use of regulated substances present in process water or non-contact cooling
water as drawn from the environment or municipal sources, or use of
regulated substances present in air used either as compressed airof as part of
combustion. . , .
ACTIVITIES IN LABORATORIES •
If a regulated substance is manufactured, processed, or used in a laboratory at a
stationary source under the supervision of a technically qualified individual (as
'•;.'; defined by §720.3 (ee) of 40 CFR), the quantity of the substance need not be
considered in determining whether a threshold quantity is present. This exclusion
; • • does not, extend to:
Specialty chemical production;
Manufacture, processing, or use of substances in pilot plant scale operations;
, and s
Activities conducted outside the laboratory.
This exclusion will generally not apply to ammonia refrigeration systems.
' • '
1.6 STATIONARY SOURCE
The rule applies to "stationary sources" and'each stationary source with one or more
covered processes must file an RMP that includes all covered processes.
SIMPLE SOURCES ,
For most facilities covered by this rule, determining what constitutes a "stationary
source" is simple. If you own or lease a property, your processes are contained within
the property boundary, and no other companies operate on the property, then your
' stationary source is defined by the property boundary and covers any process within
the boundaries that has more than a threshold quantity of a regulated substance. You
must comply with the rule and file a single RMP for all covered processes.
MULTIPLE OPERATIONS OWNED BY A SINGLE COMPANY
If the property is owned or leased by your company, but several separate, operating
divisions of the company have processes at the site, the divisions'processes may be
considered a single stationary source because they are, controlled by a single company.
Two factors will determine if the processes are to be considered a single source: Are
the processes located on one or more contiguous properties? Are all of the operations
in the same industrial group? ,
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 1
General Applicability 1-12
If your company does have multiple operations that are on the same property and are
in the same industrial group, each operating division may develop its prevention
program separately for its covered processes, but you must file a single RMP for all
covered processes at the site. You should note that this is different from the
requirements for filing under CAA Title V, and EPCRA section 313 (the annual toxic
release inventory), where each division could file separately if your company chose to
do so.
OTHER SOURCES
There are situations where two or more separate companies occupy the same site. The
simplest of these cases is if multiple companies lease land at a site (e.g., an industrial
park). Each company that has covered processes must file an RMP that includes
information on its own covered processes at the site. You" are responsible for filing an
RMP for any'operations that you own or operate.
Another possibility is that one company owns the land and operates there while
leasing part of the site to a second company. If both companies have covered
processes, each is considered a separate stationary source and must file separate RMPs
even if they have contractual relationships, such as supplying product to each other or
sharing emergency response functions.
If you and another company jointly own a site, but have separate operations at the site,
you each must file separate RMPs for your covered processes. Ownership of the land
is not relevant; a stationary source consists of covered processes located on the same
• property and controlled by a single owner.
JOINT VENTURES
You and another company may jointly own covered processes. In this case, the legal
entity you have established to operate these processes should file the RMP. If you
consider this entity a subsidiary, you should be listed as the parent company in the
RMP.
MULTIPLE LOCATIONS
If you have multiple operations in the same area, but they are not on physically
connected land, you must consider them separate stationary sources and file separate
RMPs for each, even if the sites are connected by pipelines that move chemicals
among the sites. Remember, the rule applies to covered processes at a single location.
Exhibit 1-3 provides examples of stationary source decisions.
1.7 WHEN YOU MUST COMPLY
Prior to June 21, 1999, if you determine that you have a covered process, you must
comply with the requirements of part 68 no later than June 21,1999. This means that
if you have the process now or start it on June 1, 1999, you must be in compliance
November 19,1998
-------
EXHIBIT 1-3: STATIONARY SOURCE
Schematic Representation
Description
Interpretation
ABC Chemicals
General Chemicals Division
ABC Chemicals '
Plastics Division
same .owner „
same industrial group
ABC Chemicals
Agricultural -Chemicals Division
1 stationary source
1 RMP
ABC Chemicals
ABC Chemicals
two owners
XYZ Gases
2 stationary sources
2 RMPs
1 ABC
1 XYZ
ABC Chemicals
ABC Refinery
two owners
three industrial groups
XYZ Gases
3 stationary sources
1 ABC Chemicals
1 ABC Refinery
1 XYZ Gases
ABC Chemicals
two owners
t m t iml 1 m .n nl Imlml llml FTut in I Imi I -m t
ABC-MNO Joint-Venture
2 stationary sources
2 RMPs
same owner
same industrial group
contiguous property
1 stationary source
1 RMP
Building owned by Brown Properties
Farm Chemicals Inc.
Brown Property offices
two owners
Pet Supply Storage
(no regulated substances)
2 stationary sources
2 RMPs
1 ABC Chemicals
1 Farm Chemicals
-------
Chapter 1
General Applicability 1-14
with the rule on June 21, 1999. By that time you must have developed and
implemented all of the elements of the rule that apply to each of your covered
processes, and you must submit an RMP to EPA in a form and manner that EPA will
specify prior to that time.
If the first time you have a covered process is after June 21, 1999, or you bring a new
process on line after that date, you must comply with part 68 no later than the date on
which you first have more than a threshold quantity of ammonia in a process.
November 19.1998
-------
Chapter 1
1-15 General Applicability
. Qs&As /•'• ' ' .
.COMPLIANCE DATES
Q. What happens if I bring a new covered process on line (e.g., install a second storage tank) after
June 21,1999?
A. For a new covered process added after the initial compliance date, you must be in compliance on
the date you first have a regulated substance above the threshold quantity. There is no grace'period.
You must develop and implement all the applicable rule elements and update your RMP before you
start operating the new process.
Q. What if I change a process by adding to the system?
A. Because increasing the size of the system is a major change to your process, you will have six
months to come into compliance and update your RMP to reflect changes in your prevention program
elements and report any other changes. ' , • •
Q. What if the quantity in the process fluctuates? I may not have a threshold quantity on June 21,
1999, but Twill before then and after then.
A. You do not need to comply with the rule and file an RMP until you have more than threshold
quantity in a process; however, once you have more than threshold quantity in a process after June 21,
1999, you must be in compliance immediately. In this situation, with fluctuating quantities, it may be
prudent to file by June 21,1999, so you will be in compliance when your quantity exceeds the
threshold. :
November 19. 1998
-------
Chapter 1
General Applicability 1-16
November 19,1998
-------
1-17
Chapter 1
General Applicability
, Novemberl9, 1998
-------
-------
CHAPTER 2: APPLICABILITY OF PROGRAM LEVELS
2.1 WHAT ARE PROGRAM LEVELS?
Once you have decided that you have one or more processes subject to this rule (see
Chapter 1), you need to identify what actions you must take to comply. The rule
defines three Program levels based on processes' relative potential for public impacts
and the level of effort needed to prevent accidents. For each Program level, the rule
' defines requirements that reflect the level of risk and effort associated with the
processes at that level. The Program levels are as follow.s: •.
Program 1: Processes with no public receptors within the distance to an
endpoint from a worst-case release and with no accidents with specific offsite
consequences within the past five years are eligible for Program 1, which
imposes limited hazard assessment requirements and minimal prevention and
emergency response requirements.
Program 2: Processes not eligible for Program 1 or subject to Program 3 are
, placed in Program 2, which imposes streamlined prevention program
- requirements, as well as'additional hazard assessment, management, and
emergency response requirements.
Program 3: Processes not eligible for Program 1 and either subject to
OSHA's PSM standard under federal or state OSHA programs or classified in
one of nine specified Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes are placed
in Program 3, which imposes OSHA's PSM standard as the prevention
program as well as additional.hazard assessment, management, and
emergency response requirements.
If you can qualify a process for Program 1, it is in your best interests to do so, even if
the process is already subject to OSHA PSM. For Program 1 processes, the
implementing agency will enforce only the minimal Program 1 requirements. If you
assign a process to Program 2 or 3 when it might qualify for Program 1, the
implementing agency will enforce all the requirements of the higher program levels.
If, however, you are already in compliance with the prevention elements of Program 2
or Program 3, you may want to use the RMP to inform the community of your
prevention efforts.
KEY POINTS TO REMEMBER
In determining program level(s) for your process(es), keep in mind the-following:
(1) Each process is assigned to a program level, which indicates the risk
management measures necessary to comply with this regulation for that
' process, not the facility as a whole: The eligibility of one process for a
program level does not influence the eligibility of Other covered processes for
other program levels.
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 2
Applicability of Program Levels 2-2
(2) Any process that meets the criteria for Program 1 can be assigned to
Program 1, even if it is subject to OSHA PSM or is in one of the SIC codes
listed for Program 3. ,
' • |T ' l
(3) Program 2 is the default program level. There are no "standard criteria"
for Program 2. Any process that does not meet the criteria for either Programs
1 or 3 is subject to the requirements for Program 2.
(4) Only one Program level can apply to a process. If a process consists of •
multiple production or operating units or storage vessels, the highest Program
level that applies to any segment of the process applies to all parts.
Q&A
PROCESS AND PROGRAM LEVEL
Q. My process includes a series of interconnected units, as well as several storage vessels that are co-
located. Several sections of the process could qualify for Program 1. Can I divide my process into
sections for the purpose of assigning Program levels?
A. No, you cannot subdivide a process for this purpose. The highest Program level that applies to any
section of the process is the Program level for the whole process. If the entire process is not eligible
for Program 1, then the entire process must be assigned to Program 2 or Program 3.
2.2 PROGRAM 1
WHAT ARE THE ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS?
Your process is eligible for Program 1 if:
(1) There are no public receptors within a distance to an endpoint from a
worst-case release;
(2) The process has had no release of a regulated substance in the past five years
where exposure to the substance, its reaction products, overpressures
generated by explosion involving the substance, or radiant heat from a fire
involving the substance resulted in one or more offsite deaths, injuries, or
response or restoration activities for exposure'of an environmental receptor;
and •
(3) You have coordinated your emergency response activities with the local
responders. (This requirement applies to any covered process, regardless of
program level.)
November 19,1998
-------
'Chapter 2
2-3 Applicability of Program Levels
WHAT Is A PUBLIC RECEPTOR?
The rule (§ 68.3) defines public as "any person except an employee or contractor of,
the stationary source." Consequently, employees of other facilities that may share
your site are considered members of the public even if they share the same physical
location. Being "the public," however, is not the same as being a public receptor.
Public receptors include "offsite residences, institutions (e.g., schools and hospitals),
industrial, commercial, and office buildings, parks, or recreational areas inhabited or
occupied by the public at any time without restriction by the stationary source where
members of the public could be exposed to toxic concentrations, radiant heat, or
overpressure, as a result of an accidental release." Offsite, means areas beyond your
property boundary and "areas within the property boundary to which the public has
routine and unrestricted access during or outside business hours." — _..
,'' - ' ..'•''•
The first step in identifying public receptors is determining what is "offsite." For most
facilities, that determination will be straightforward. If you restrict access to all of your
property all of the time, "offsite" is anything beyond your property boundaries. Ways
of restricting access include fully fencing the property, placing security guards at a
reception area or using ID badges.to permit entry. . .
.If you do not restrict access to a section of your property and the public has routine
and unrestricted access to it during or. after business hours, that section would be
"offsite." For example, if your operations are fenced but the public has unrestricted
access to your parking lot during or after business hours, the parking lot is "offsite." In
the case of facilities such as hospitals, schools, and hotels that shelter members of the
public as part of their function or business, the parts of the-facility that are used to
shelter the public would be "offsite."
Not all areas offsite are potential public receptors. The point of identifying public
receptors is to locate those places where there are likely to be, at least some of the
time, members of the public whose health could be harmed by short-term exposure to
an accidental release at your site. The basic test for identifying a public receptor is
thus whether an area is a place where it is reasonable to expect that members of the
public will routinely gather at least some of the time.
The definition of "public receptor" itself specifies the types of areas where members
of the public may routinely gather at least some of the time: residences, institutions
such as hospitals and schools, buildings in general, parks and recreational areas. •'
There should be little difficulty in identifying residences, institutions and businesses
as such, and virtually any residence, institution and business will qualify as a public
receptor, even when the property is used only seasonally (as in a vacation home).
Notably, a residence includes its yard, if aay, and an institution or business includes
its grounds to the extent that employees or other members of the-public are likely to
routinely gather there at least some of the time for business brother purposes (see
discussion of recreational areas below). .The only circumstances that would justify not
considering such a property a public receptor would be where your facility owns or
controls the property and restricts access to it, or no member of the public inhabits
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 2
Applicability of Program Levels 2-4
or occupies it at any time. Where a hospital, school, hotel or other entity that provides
public shelter is itself subject to the part 68 rule (e.g., because of on-site propane
storage tanks), it will be its own public receptor except for those areas where members
of the public are not allowed to go at any time.
Buildings other than residences, institutions or businesses are also highly likely to
qualify as public receptors since the function of most buildings is at least in part to
shelter people. Accordingly, toll booth plazas, transit stations, and airport terminals
would qualify as public receptors. For a building not to qualify as a public receptor,
one of the circumstances mentioned above would have to apply.
Every designated park or recreational area, or at least some portion thereof, is apt to
be a public gathering place by virtue of facilities made available to the public (e.g.,
visitors' center, playground, golf course, camping or picnic area, marina or ball field)
or attributes that members of the public routinely seek to use (e.g., beach). It does not
matter whether use of such facilities is seasonal; routine use for at least part of the year
would qualify the area as a public receptor.
At the same time, some portion of a designated park or recreational area may not be a
public receptor. For instance, a large state or national park may include relatively
inaccessible tracts of land that do not contain public facilities or receive routine use.
Occasional hiking, camping or hunting in such areas would not qualify the areas as
public receptors.
An area need not be designated a recreational area to be one in fact. If an area is
routinely used for recreational purposes, even if only seasonally, it is a recreational
area for purposes of the part 68 rule. For example, a marina may not bill itself as a
"recreational area," but if a marina houses recreational boats, it qualifies as a public
receptor. Further, if your facility or a neighboring property owner allows the public to.
make routine recreational use of some portion of land (e.g., a ball field or fishing
pond), that portion of land would qualify as a public receptor.
Roads and parking lots are not included as such in the definition of "public receptor."
Neither are places where people typically gather; instead they are used to travel from
one place to another or to park a vehicle while attending an activity elsewhere. •
However, if a parking lot is predictably and routinely used as a place of business
(e.g., a farmer's market) or for a recreational purpose (e.g., a county fair), it would
qualify as a public receptor.
In general, farm land would not be considered a public receptor. However, if farm
land, or a'portion thereof, is predictably and routinely occupied by farm workers or
other members of public, even if only on a seasonal basis, that portion of the land
would be a public receptor?
If you are in doubt about whether to consider certain areas around your facility as
public receptors, you should consult with the relevant local officials and land owners
and your implementing agency for guidance.
November 19,1998
-------
2-5
' Chapter 2
Applicability of Program Levels
WHAT is A DISTANCE TO AN ENDPOINT FROM A WORST-CASE RELEASE?
In broad terms, the distance to an endpoint is the distance a toxic vapor cloud, fire, or
. explosion from an accidental release will travel before dissipating to the point that
serious injuries from short-term exposures will no longer occur. The rule establishes
. "endpoints" for each regulated substance and defines the circumstances of a
Qs&As
PUBLIC RECEPTORS
Q. My processes are fenced, but my offices and parking lot for customers are not restricted. What is
considered offsite? What is considered a public receptor?
A. The unrestricted areas would be considered offsite. However, they would not be public receptors
because you are responsible for the safety of those who work in or visit your offices and because
parking lots are not generally public receptors.
Q. What is considered a recreational area? ,
A. Recreational areas would include land that is designed, constructed, designated, or used for
recreational activities. Examples are national, state, county, or city parks, other outdoor recreational
areas such as golf courses or swimming pools and bodies of waters (oceans, lakes, rivers, and streams)
when used by the public for fishing; swimming, or boating. Public and private areas that are .
predictably used for hunting, fishing, bird watching, bike riding, hiking, or camping or other
recreational use also would be considered recreational areas. EPA encourages you to consult with land
owners, local officials, and the community to reach an agreement on an area's-status; your local
emergency planning committee (LEPC) can help you with these'consultations. EPA recognizes that
some judgment is involved in determining whether an area should be considered a recreational area.
Q. Does public receptor cover only buildings on a property or the entire property? If the owner of the
land next to my site restricts access to the land, is it still a public receptor?
A. Public ^receptors are not limited to buildings. For example, if there are houses near your property,
both the houses and their yards are considered public receptors because it is likely that residents will be
present in one or the other at least some of the time, and, in fact, people are likely to be in more danger
if they are outside when a release occurred. The ability of others to restrict access to an area does not
change its status as a public receptor. You need to consider whether that land is generally unoccupied.
If the land is undeveloped or rarely has anyone on it, it is not a public receptor. If you are not sure of
the land's use of occupancy, you should talk with the landowner and the community about its status.
Because it is,the landowner and members of the local community who are likely to be affected by your •
decision, you should involve them in the decision is you have doubts. • „ " •
worst-case release scenario (e.g., scenario, weather, release rate and duration) (see
Chapter 4 or the RMP Offsite Consequence Analysis, Guidance for more information).
You will have to define a worst-case release (usually the loss of the total contents of
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 2
Applicability of Program Levels 2-6
your largest vessel) for each Program 1 process and either use EPA's guidance or
conduct modeling on your own to determine the distance to the endpoint for that
worst-case release. Beyond that endpoint, the effects on people are not considered to
be severe enough to merit the need for additional action under this rule.
To define the area of potential impact from the worst-case release, draw a circle on a
map, using the process as the center and the distance to the endpoint as the radius. If
there are public receptors within that area, your process is not eligible for Program 1.
QandA
Determining Distances
Q. Our distance to the endpoint for the worst-case release is 0.3 miles. The nearest public receptor is
0.32 miles away. What tools are available to document that the public receptor is beyond the distance
to the endpoint so we can qualify for Program 1?
A. The results of any air dispersion model (from EPA's guidance documents or other models) are not
precise predictions. They represent an estimate, but the actual distances to the endpoint could be
closer to or farther from the point of release. If your distance to the endpoint and distance to a public
receptor are so close that you cannot document, using a USGS map, that the two points are different, it
would be advisable to comply with the higher Program level. (The most detailed maps available from
the US Geological Survey (scale of 1:24,000) are not accurate enough to map these distances and
document that these two points (which are about 100 feet apart) differ. Civilian GPS systems
generally have a margin of error of 100 meters (about 0.05 miles).)
ACCIDENT HISTORY
To be eligible for Program 1, no release of the regulated substance from the process
can have resulted in one or more offsite deaths, injuries, or response or restoration
activities at an environmental receptor during the five years prior to submission of
your RMP. A release of the regulated substance from another process has no bearing
on whether the first process is eligible for Program 1.
WHAT is AN INJURY?
An injury is defined as "any effect on a human that results either from direct exposure
to toxic concentrations; radiant heat; or overpressures from accidental releases or from
the direct consequences of a vapor cloud explosion (such as flying glass, debris, and
other projectiles) from an accidental release." The effect must "require medical
treatment or hospitalization." This definition is taken from the OSHA regulations for
keeping employee injury and illness logs and should be familiar to most employers.
Medical treatment is further defined as "treatment, other than first aid, administered
by a physician or registered professional personnel under standing orders from a
physician." The definition of medical treatment will likely capture most instances of
hospitalization. However, if someone goes to the hospital following direct exposure.
November 19,1998
-------
2-7
Chapter 2
Applicability of Program Levels
to a
is
a release and is kept overnight for observation (even if no specific injury or illness
found), that would qualify as hospitalizatibn and so would be considered.an injury.
WHAT is AN ENVIRONMENTAL RECEPTOR?
The environmental receptors you heed to consider are limited to natural areas such as
national or state parks, forests, .or monuments; officially designated wildlife
sanctuaries, preserves, refuges, or areas; and Federal wilderness areas. All of these
areas can be identified on local U.S. Geological Survey maps.
WHAT ARE RESTORATION AND RESPONSE ACTIVITIES?
The type of restoration and response activity conducted to address the impact of an •
accidental release will depend on the type of release (volatilized spill, vapor cloud,
fire, or explosion), but may include such activities as:
s
Collection and disposal of dead animals and contaminated plant life;
Collection, treatment, and disposal of soil;
Shutoff of drinking water;
Replacement of damaged vegetation; or
Isolation Of a natural area due to contamination associated with an accidental
release. . ,
Q&A
ENVIRONMENTAL RECEPTORS
Q. Do environmental receptors include areas that are not Federal Class I areas under the CAA?
A. Yes. The list of environmental receptors in Part 68 includes areas in addition to those that qualify
as Federal Class I areas under CAA section 162. Under Part 68, national parks, monuments,
wilderness areas, and forests are environmental receptors regardless of size. State parks, monuments,
and forests are also environmental receptors. .
DOCUMENTING PROGRAM 1 ELIGIBILITY.
For every Program 1 process at your facility, you must keep records documenting-the
- eligibility of the process for Program 1. For each Program 1 process, your records
should include the following:
A description of the worst-case release scenario, which must specify the
vessel or pipeline and substance selected as worst case, assumptions and
parameters used, and the rationale for selection. Assumptions may include
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 2
Applicability of Program Levels 2-8
use of any administrative controls and any passive mitigation that were
assumed to limit the quantity that could be released; .
Documentation of the estimated quantity of the worst-case release, release
rate, and duration of release;
The methodology used to determine distance to endpoints;
Data used to determine that no public receptor would be affected; and
Information on your coordination with public responders.
2.3 QUICK RULES FOR DETERMINING PROGRAM 1 ELIGIBILITY
' •i" ''''"•,'
You generally will not be able to predict with certainty that the worst-case scenario for-
a particular process will meet the criteria for Program 1. Processes containing
refrigerated ammonia, however, may be more likely than others to be eligible for
Program 1. The information presented below may be useful in identifying processes
that may be eligible for Program 1.
Toxic GASES
If you have a process containing more than a threshold quantity of ammonia that is not
liquefied by refrigeration alone (i.e., you hold it as a gas or liquefied under pressure),
the distance to the endpoint estimated for a worst-case release of the toxic gas will
generally be several miles. As a result, the distance to endpoint is unlikely to be less
than the distance to public receptors, unless the process is very remote. In some cases,
however, ammonia in processes in enclosed areas may be eligible for Program 1.
REFRIGERATED AMMONIA
If you have a process containing anhydrous ammonia liquefied by refrigeration alone,
and your worst-case release would take place into a diked area, the chances are good
that the process will be eligible for Program 1, unless there are public receptors very
close to the process. Even if you have many times the threshold quantity of ammonia,
the process may still be eligible for Program 1.
November 19,1998
-------
2-9
Chapter 2
Applicability of Program Levels
QS&AS
ACCIDENT HISTORY
Q. What is the relationship between the accident history criteria for Program 1 and the five-year
accident history? If my process is eligible for Program 1, do I still need to do a five-year accident
history?
A. The five-year accident history is an information collection requirement that is designed to
provide data on all serious accidents from a covered process involving a regulated substance held
above the threshold.quantity.
In contrast, the Program 1 accident history criteria focus on whether the process in question has the
potential to experience a release of the regulated substance that results in harm to the public based
on past events. Onsite effects, shelterings-in-place, and evacuations that have occurred must be
reported in the five-year accident history, but they are not considered in determining Program 1
eligibility. Therefore, it is possible for process to be eligible for Program 1 and still have
experienced a release that must be reported in the accident history for the source.
Q. A process" with more than a threshold quantity of a regulated substance had an accident witn
offsite consequences three'years ago. After the accident, we altered the process to reduce the
quantity stored on site. Now the worst-case release scenario indicates that there are no public
receptors within the distance to an endpoint Can this process qualify for Program 1 ?
A. No, the process cannot qualify for Program 1 until five years have passed since any accident
with consequences that disqualify a process for Program 1.
Q. A process involving a regulated substance had an accidental release with offsitp consequences
two years ago. The process has been shut down. Do I have to report anyway?
A. No. The release does not have to be included in your accident history. Your risk management
plan only needs to address operating processes that have more than a threshold quantity of a
regulated substance:
2.4 PROGRAMS
Most ammonia refrigeration processes that are not eligible for Program 1 will be .
subject to Program'3 requirements because they are subject to ;the OSHAPSM
Standard. If your ammonia refrigeration process is subject to Program 2 requirements,
consult the General Guidance for Risk Management Programs.
WHAT ARE THE ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR PROGRAM 3?
Your process is subject to Program 3 if : .
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 2
Applicability of Program Levels
2-10
Your process does not meet the eligibility requirements for Program 1, and
Your process is subject to OSHA PSM (federal or state).
WHAT is THE OSHA PSM STANDARD?
The OSHA Process Safety Management standard (codified at 29 CFR 1910.119) is a
set of procedures in thirteen management areas designed to protect worker health and
safety in case of accidental releases. Similar to EPA's rule, OSHA PSM applies to a
range of facilities that have more than a threshold quantity of a listed substance in a
process. All processes subject to this rule and the OSHA PSM standard (federal or
state) and not eligible for Program 1 are assigned to Program 3 because the Program 3
prevention program is virtually identical to the elements of the PSM standard. If you
are already complying with OSHA PSM for a process, you probably will need to take
few, if any, additional steps and develop little, if any, additional documentation to
meet the requirefnents of the Program 3 prevention elements (see Chapter 6 for a
discussion of differences between Program 3 prevention and OSHA PSM). EPA
placed all covered OSHA PSM processes in Program 3 to eliminate the possibility of
imposing overlapping, inconsistent requirements on the same process.
2.5 PROGRAM 2
Program 2 is considered a default program level because any covered process that is
not eligible for Program 1 or assigned to Program 3 is, by default, subject to Program
2 requirements. Ammonia refrigeration processes will usually not be eligible for this
program level because they are covered by OSHA PSM. If your ammonia process is
not eligible for Program 1, it will generally be subject to Program 3.
Exhibit 2-1 provides a summary of the criteria for determining Program level.
EXHIBIT 2-1
PROGRAM LEVEL CRITERIA
Program 1
No accidents in the previous five
years that resulted in any offsite;
Death
Injury
Response or restoration
activities at an
environmental receptor
AND
No public receptors in worst-case
circle.
AND
Program 2 .
The process is not eligible for
Program 1 or subject to Program 3.
.'••
Program 3
Process is not eligible for Program
1.
AND , ; [
Process is subject to OSHA PSM.
;?v. OR
November 19,1998
-------
2-11
. Chapter 2
Applicability of Program Levels
EXHIBIT 2-1
PROGRAM LEVEL CRITERIA
Program 1
Program 2
Program 3
Emergency response coordinated
with local responders. ,
Process is classified in SIC code
2611-Pulp Mills
2812 - Clor-Alkali Manufacturers
2819 - Industrial Inorganics
2821 - Plastics and Resins
2865 - Cyclic Crudes and
Intermediates
2869 - Industrial Organics
2873 - Nitrogen Fertilizer
Manufacturers
2879 - Agricultural Chemicals
2911 - Petroleum Refineries
Note: EPA has proposed to revise part 68 to reflect the shift to the new North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) codes. Check the hotline or the CEPPO web page for up-to-date
information on the changes. -
2.6 DEALING WITH PROGRAM LEVELS
,• WHAT IF I HAVE MULTIPLE PROGRAM LEVELS?
If you have more than one covered process, you may be dealing with multiple program
levels in your risk management program.
• If your facility has processes subject to different program levels, you will need to
comply with different program requirements for different processes. Nevertheless,
you must submit a single RMP for all covered processes.
If you prefer, you may choose to adopt the most stringent applicable program level
requirements for all covered processes. For example, if you have three covered
processes, one eligible for Program 1 and two subject to Program 3, you may find it
. administratively easier to follow the Program 3 requirements for all three covered
processes. Remember, though, that this is only an option; we expect that most sources
will comply with the set of program level requirements for which each process is
eligible..
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 2
Applicability oF Program Levels
2-12
Q&A
OSHA
Q. If my state administers an OSHA-approved PSM program, does that mean that my processes that
are subject to OSHA PSM under the state rules are in Program 3?
A. Yes, as long as the process does not qualify for Program 1. Any process subject OSHA PSM,
under federal or state rules, is considered to be in Program 3 unless it qualifies for Program 1.
CAN THE PROGRAM LEVEL FOR A PROCESS CHANGE?
A change in a covered process or in the surrounding community can result in a change
in the Program level of the process. If this occurs, you must submit an updated RMP
within six months of the change that altered the program level for the covered process.
If the process no longer qualifies as a covered process (e.g., as a result of a change in
the quantity of the regulated substance in the process), then you will need to
"deregister" the process (see Chapter 8 for more information). Typical examples of
switching program levels include:
MOVING UP
From Program 1 to Program 3. You have a covered process subject to Program 1
requirements. A new residential development results in public receptors being located
within the distance to the endpoint for a worst-case release for that process. The
process is, thus, no longer eligible for Program 1. You must submit a revised RMP
within six months of the program level change, indicating and documenting that your
process is now in compliance with the new program level requirements.
From Not Covered to Program 1 or 3. You have a process that was not originally
covered by part 68, but, due to an expansion in production, the process holds more
than 10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia. You must determine which Program
level applies and come into compliance with the rule by June 21, 1999, or by the time
you exceed the threshold quantity, whichever is later.
SWITCHING DOWN
From Program 3 to Program 1. At the time you submit your RMP, you have a
covered process subject to Program 3 requirements because it experienced an
accidental release of a regulated substance "with offsite impacts four years ago.
Subsequent process changes have made such an event unlikely (as demonstrated by
the worst-case release analysis). One year after you submit your RMP, the accident
will no longer be included in the five-year accident report for the process, so the
process is eligible for Program 1. If you elect to qualify the process for Program 1,
you must submit a revised RMP within six months of the program level change,
November 19.1998
-------
Chapter 2
2-13 Applicability of Program Levels
indicating and documenting mat the process is now in compliance with the new
program level requirements.,
From Program 3 to Not Covered. You have a covered process that has been subject
to Program 3 requirements, but due to a reduction in production, the amount of
ammonia it holds no longer exceeds the threshold. Therefore, the process is no longer
, a covered process. You must submit a revised RMP within six months indicating that
your process is no longer subject to any program level requirements.
2.7 SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
Regardless of the program levels of your processes, you must complete a five-year
accident history for each process (see Chapter 3) and submit an RMP that covers all
processes (see Chapter 8). Depending on the Program level of each of your processes,
you must comply with the additional requirements described below.
PROGRAM
For each Program 1 process, you must conduct and document a worst-case release
analysis. You must coordinate your emergency response activities with local
responders and sign the Program 1 certification as part of your RMP submission.
PROGRAMS 2 AND 3
For all Program 3 processes, you must conduct and document at least one worst-case
release analysis to cover ammonia. You may need to conduct additional worst-case
release analyses if worst-case releases from different parts of your facility would affect
different public receptors. You must also conduct one alternative release scenario
analysis for ammonia. See Chapter 4 or the RMP Offsite Consequence Analysis
Guidance for specific requirements. You must coordinate your emergency response
activities with local responders and, if you use your own employees to respond to
releases, you must develop and implement an emergency, response program. See
Chapter,? for more details. (Because ammonia is listed as a toxic substance, you do
not need to consider its flammability in doing offsite consequence analyses. If your
facility could confine ammonia and create an ignitable cloud, explosion hazards
should be addressed in your process hazard analysis.)
For each Program 3 process, you must implement all of the elements of the Program 3
prevention program: process safety information, process hazard analysis, standard
operating procedures, training, mechanical integrity, compliance audits, incident
investigations, management of change, pre-startup reviews, contractors, employee
participation, and hot work permits. See Chapter 6 for more details.
Exhibit 2-2 provides a summary, of the requirements for each Program level.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 2
Applicability of Program Levels
2-14
EXHIBIT 2-2
COMPARISON OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
Program 1
Worst-case release analysis
5-year accident history
Program 3
Worst-case release analysis
Alternative release analysis
5-year accident history
Document management system
Prevention Program
Certify no additional prevention steps needed
,
Process Safety Information
Process Hazard Analysis.
Operating Procedures
Training
Mechanical Integrity
Incident Investigation
Compliance Audit
Management of Change
Pre-Startup Review
Contractors
Employee Participation
Hot Work Permits
Emergency Response Program
Coordinate with local responders
Develop plan and program and coordinate with
local responders.
Submit One Risk Management Plan for All Covered Processes
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 2
2-15 Applicability of Program Levels
November 19,1998
-------
-------
CHAPTER 3: FIVE-YEAR ACCIDENT HISTORY
The five-year accident history involves an examination of the effects of any accidental
' releases of one or more of the regulated substances from a covered process in the'five
years prior to the submission of a Risk Management Plan (RMP). A five-year
accident history must be completed for each covered process, including the processes
in Program 1, and all accidental releases meeting specified criteria must be reported in
the RMP for the process. .-'-..
Note that a Program 1 process may have had an accidental release that must be
. included in the five-year accident history, even though the release does not disqualify
the process from Program 1. The accident history criteria that make a process
. . ineligible for Program 1 (certain offsite, impacts) do not include other types of effects
that require inclusion of a release in the five-year accident history (on-site impacts and
' - more inclusive offsite impacts). For example, an accidental release may have.led to
worker injuries, but no other effects. This release would not bar the process from
••..-. Program 1 (because the injuries were not offsite), but would need to be reported in the
five-year accident history. Similarly, a release'may have resulted in damage to foliage
offsite (environmental damage), triggering reporting, but because the foliage was not
part of an environmental receptor (e.g., national park or forest) it would not make the
process ineligible for Program 1.
3.1 WHAT ACCIDENTS MUST BE REPORTED?
, . The five-year accident history covers only certain releases:
The release must be from a covered process and involve a regulated substance
held above its threshold quantity in the process.
The release must have" caused at least one of the following:
On-site deaths, injuries, or significant property damage <§68.42(a));
or ' , ' - •'
. Known offsite deaths, injuries, property damage, environmental
- . . , damage, evacuations, or sheltering in place (§68.42(a)).
If you have had a release of a regulated substance from a process where the regulated
substance is held below its threshold quantity, you do not. need to report that release
even if the release caused one of the listed impacts or if the process is covered for
some other substance. You may choose to report the release in the five-year accident
history, but you are not required to do so. '
3.2 WHAT DATA MUST BE PROVIDED?
The following information should be included in your accident history for every
reported release. The descriptions below correspond to the RMP*Submit system
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 3
Five-Year Accident History 3-2
being developed and to data element instructions for the system:
Date. Indicate the date on which the accidental release began.
Time. Indicate the time the release began.
Release duration. Indicate the approximate length of time of the release in minutes.
Chemical(s). Indicate the regulated substance(s) released. Use the name of the .
substance as listed in § 68.1,30 rather than a synonym (e.g., propane rather than LPG).
If the release was of a flammable mixture, list the primary regulated substances in the
mixture if feasible; if the contents of the mixture are uncertain, list it as a flammable
mixture. If non-regulated substances were also released and contributed to the
impacts, you may want to list them as well, but you are not required to do so.
Quantity released. Estimate the amount of each substance released in pounds. The
amount should be estimated to two significant digits, or as close to that as possible.
For example, if you estimate that the release was between 850 and 900 pounds,
provide a best guess. We realize that you may not know precise quantities. For
flammable mixtures, you may report the quantity of the mixture, rather than that of the
individual regulated substances.
Release event. Indicate which of the following release events best describes your
accident Check all that apply:
Gas Release. A gas release is a release of the substance as a gas (rather than
vaporized from a liquid). If you hold a gas liquefied under refrigeration,
report the release as a liquid spill.
Liquid Spill/Evaporation. A liquid spill/evaporation is a release of the
substance in a liquid state with subsequent vaporization.
Fire. A fire is combustion producing light, flames, and heat.
Explosion. An explosion is a rapid chemical reaction with the production of
noise, heat, and violent expansion of gases.
Release source. Indicate all that apply.
Storage Vessel. 'A storage vessel is a container for storing or holding gas or
liquid. Storage vessels include transportation containers being used for
on-site storage.
Piping. Piping refers to a system of tubular structures or pipes used to carry a
fluid or gas.
November 19, 1998
-------
.Chapters
3-3 ' Five-Year Accident History
. Process Vessel. A process vessel is a container in which substances under
certain conditions (e.g., temperature, pressure) participate in a process (e.g.,
' substances are manufactured, blended to form a mixture, reacted to convert
them into some other final product or form, or heated to purify).
Transfer Hose. A transfer hose is a tubular structure used to connect, often
temporarily, two or more vessels. .
Valve. A valve is a device used to regulate the flow in piping systems or
machinery. Relief valves and rupture disks open to release pressure in
vessels. ' ' •
Pump. A pump is a device that raises, transfers, or compresses fluids or that
attenuates gases by suction or pressure or both.
Joint. The surface at which two or more mechanical components are united.
Other. Specify other source of the release.
Weather conditions at time of event (if known). This information is important to
those concerned with assessing and modeling the effects of accidents. Reliable
information from those involved in.the incident or from an on-site weather station is
ideal. However, this rule does not require your facility to have a weather station; If
you do not have an onsite weather station, use information from your local weather
station, airport, or other source of meteorological data. -Historical wind speed and
temperature data (but not stability data) can be obtained from the National Climatic
Data Center.(NCDC) at (828) 271-4800; NCDC staff can also provide information on
the nearest weather station. To the extent possible, complete the following:
Wind Speed and Direction. Wind speed is an estimate of how fast the wind is
traveling. Indicate the speed in miles per hour. Wind direction is the
. , direction from which the wind comes. For example, a wind that blows from
east to west would be described as having an eastern wind direction. You may
describe wind direction as a-standard compass reading such as "Northeast" or
"South-southwest."
You may also describe wind direction in degrees—with North as zero degrees
and East as 90 degrees.'Thus, northeast would represent 45 degrees and
south^southwest would represent 202.5 degrees. Abbreviations for the wind
direction such as NE (for northeast) and SSW (for south-southwest) are also
acceptable. - ,
Temperature. The ambient temperature at the scene of the accident in degrees
Fahrenheit. If you did not keep a record, you can use the high (for daytime
releases) or low (for nighttime releases) for the day of the release. Local
papers publish these data.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 3
Five-Year Accident History 3-4
Stability Class. Depending on the amount of incoming solar radiation as well
as other factors, the atmosphere may be more or less turbulent at any given
time. Meteorologists have defined six atmospheric stability classes, each
representing a different degree of turbulence in the atmosphere. When
moderate to strong incoming solar radiation heats air near the ground, causing
it to rise and generating large eddies,' the atmosphere is considered unstable,
or relatively turbulent. Unstable conditions are associated with stability
classes A and B. When solar radiation is relatively weak, air near the surface
has less of a tendency to rise and less turbulence develops. In this case, the
atmosphere is considered stable or less turbulent with weak winds. The
stability class is E or F. Stability classes D.and C represent conditions of
neutral stability or moderate turbulence respectively. Neutral- conditions are
associated with relatively strong wind speeds and moderate solar radiation.
The neutral category D should be used,reg'ardless of wind speed, for overcast
conditions day or night, and for any conditions during the hour preceding or
following the night (one hour before sunset to one hour after dawn). Exhibit
3-1 presents the stability classes associated with wind speeds, time of day, and
cloud cover.
Precipitation Present. Precipitation may take the form of hail, mist, rain,
sleet, or snow. Indicate "yes" or "no" based on whether there was any •
precipitation at the time of the accident.
Unknown. If you have no record for some or all of the weather data, indicate
"unknown" for any missing item. We realize that you may not have weather
data for accidents that occurred in the past. You should, however, collect
these data for any future accidents.
On-site impacts. Complete the following about on-site effects.
Deaths. Indicate the number of on-site deaths that are attributed to the
accident or mitigation activities. On-site deaths means the number of
employees, contract employees, offsite responders, or others (e.g., visitors)
who were killed by direct exposure to toxic concentrations, radiant heat, or
overpressures from accidental-releases or from indirect consequences of a
vapor cloud explosion from an accidental release (e.g., flying glass, debris,
other projectiles). You should list employee/contractor, offsite responder, and
other on-site deaths separately.
Injuries. An injury is any effect that results either from direct exposure to
toxic concentrations, radiant heat, or overpressures from accidental releases or
from indirect consequences of a vapor cloud explosion (e.g., flying glass,
debris, other projectiles) from an accidental release and that requires medical
treatment or hospitalization. You should list injuries to employees and
contractors, offsite responders, and others separately.
November 19,1998
-------
3-5
Chapters
Five-Year Accident History
EXHIBIT 3-1
ATMOSPHERIC STABILITY CLASSES
SURFACE WIND SPEED
AT 10 MEtfefcS ABOFE \
/ .(GROUND r, * ,T--
Meters per
second
<2
2-3 .
3-5
5-6
, >6
Miles per
hour
: <4.5
. 4.5-7
7-11
11-13
>13
vr/*- ^ DA^ . ' *" v "*•
,' ** < ^ £•*,. * **
ft . • • — x SCT ^
1 •« t ^w k,<- ~v " "^
^ **-^ s * J «i i ^
jf - f"*^.*y ^ t^- " ^ ' / V ^>
Incoming Solar Radiation
Strong*
A
A-B
B
C
C
Moderate
A-B
B
., B-C
C-D
D
Slight**
B
C
C
D
D
'^"~?£ lj[*Panrt^ ~^
' ~ i. '' ' t. v "\- r
*v, '*) s * n/ V '^'
Thinly
Overcast
or 4/8 ,
low clou
-E '
D
D
D
3/8
Cloud
F
E
D
D
t Night refers to one hour Before sunset to one hour after dawn.
* Sun high in the sky with no clouds.
** Sun low in the sky with no clouds.
Medical treatment means treatment, other than first aid, administered by a
physician or registered professional personnel under standing orders from a
physician.
Your OSHA occupational injury and illness log (200 Log) will help complete
these items for employees.
Property Damage. Estimate the value of the equipment or business structures
(for your business alone) that were damaged by the accident or mitigation
activities. Record the value in American dollars. Insurance claims may
provide this information. Do not include any losses that you may have
incurred as a result of business interruption. .
f
Known offsite impacts, These are impacts that you know or could reasonably be
expected to know of (e.g., from media reports or from reports to your facility) that
occurred as a result of the accidental release. You are not required to conduct an
additional investigation to determine offsite impacts., .
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapters
Five-Year Accident History 3-6
Q&A
PROPERTY DAMAGE
Q. What level of offsite property damage triggers reporting?
A. Any level of known offsite property damage triggers inclusion of the accident in the five-year
accident history. You are not required to conduct a survey to determine if such damage occurred, but if
you know, or could reasonably be expected to know (e.g., because of reporting in the newspapers), that
damage occurred, you must include the accident.
Deaths. Indicate the number of offsite deaths that are attributable to the
accident or mitigation activities. Offsite deaths means the number of people
offsite who were killed by direct exposure to toxic concentrations, radiant
heat, or overpressures from accidental releases or from indirect consequences
of a vapor cloud explosion from an accidental release (e.g., flying glass,
debris, other projectiles).
Injuries. Indicate the number of injuries among people offsite. Injury means
any effect that results either from direct exposure to toxic concentrations,
radiant heat, or overpressures from accidental releases or from indirect"
consequences of a vapor cloud explosion from an accidental release (e.g.,
flying glass, debris, other projectiles) and that requires medical treatment or
hospitalization.
Evacuated. Estimate the number of people offsite who were evacuated to
reduce exposure that might have resulted from the accident. A total count of
the number of people evacuated is preferable to the number of houses
evacuated. People who were ordered to move simply to improve access to the
site for emergency vehicles are not considered to have been evacuated.
Sheltered. Estimate the number of people offsite who were sheltered-in-place
during the accident. Sheltering-in-place occurs when community members
are ordered to remain inside their residence or place of work until the
emergency is over to reduce exposure to the effects of the accidental release.
Usually these orders are communicated by an/emergency broadcast or similar
method of mass notification by response agencies.
Environmental Damage. Indicate whether any environmental damage
occurred and specify the type. The damage to be reported is not limited to
environmental receptors listed in the rule. Any damage to the environment
(e.g., dead or injured animals, defoliation, water contamination) should be
identified. You are not, however, required to conduct surveys to determine
whether such impact occurred. Types of environmental damage include:
November 19,1998
-------
, Chapters
3-7 Five-Year Accident History
Fish or animal kills.
Lawn, shrub, or crop damage minor defoliation.
Lawn, shrub, or crop damage major defoliation.
Water contamination.
Other (specify).
Initiating event. Indicate the initiating event that was the immediate cause of the
accident, if known. If you conducted an investigation of the release, you should have
identified the initiating event.
Equipment Failure. A device or piece of equipment failed or did not function
as designed. For example, the vessel wall corroded or cracked.
Human Error. An operator performed a task improperly, either by failing to
take the necessary steps or by taking the wrong steps.
Weather Conditions. Weather conditions, such as lightning, hail, ice storms,
tornados, hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, or high winds, caused the accident.
Unknown. <
Contributing factors. These are factors that contributed to the accident, but were not
• the initiating event. If you conducted an investigation of the release, you may have
identified factors that led to the initiating event or contributed to the severity of the
release. Indicate all that apply. ' ' . -
Equipment Failure. A device or piece of equipment failed to function as
designed, thereby allowing a substance leading to or worsening the accidental
release.
Human error. An operator performed an operation improperly or made a
mistake lead to or worsened the accident.
Improper Procedures. The procedure did not reflect the proper method of
operation, the procedure omitted steps that affected the accident, or the
procedure was written in a manner that allowed for misinterpretation of the
instructions. .
Overpressurization. The process was operated at pressures exceeding the
design working pressure. ,
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 3
Five-Year Accident History 3-8
Upset Condition. Incorrect process conditions (e.g., increased temperature or
pressure) contributed to the release.
By-pass Condition. A failure occurred in a pipe, channel, or valve that diverts
fluid flow from the main pathway when design process or storage conditions
are exceeded (e.g., overpressure). By-pass conditions may be designed to
release the substance to restore acceptable process or storage conditions and
prevent more severe consequences (e.g., explosion).
Maintenance Activity/Inactivity. A failure occurred because of maintenance
activity or inactivity. For example, the storage racks remained unpainted for
so long that corrosion caused the metal to fail.
Process Design. A failure resulted from an inherent flaw' in the design of the
process (e.g., pressure needed to make product exceeds the design pressure of
the vessel).
./ —
Unsuitable Equipment. The equipment used was incorrect for the process.
For example, the forklift was too large for the corridors.
Unusual Weather Conditions. Weather conditions, such as lightning, hail, ice
storms, tornados, hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, or high winds contributed to
the accident.
Management Error. A failure occurred because management did not exercise
its managerial control to prevent the accident from occurring. This is usually
used to describe faulty procedures, inadequate training, inadequate oversight,
or failure to follow existing administrative procedures.
Whether offsite responders were notified. If known, indicate whether response
agencies (e.g., police, fire, medical services) were contacted.
Changes introduced as a result of the accident. Indicate any measures that you
have taken at the facility to prevent recurrence of the accident. Indicate all that apply.
Improved/ Upgraded Equipment. A device or piece of equipment that did not
function as designed was repaired or replaced.
Revised Maintenance., Maintenance procedures were clarified or changed to
ensure appropriate and timely maintenance including inspection and testing
(e.g., increasing the frequency of inspection or adding a testing method).
Revised Training. Training programs were clarified or changed to ensure that
employees and contract employees are aware of and are practicing correct
safety and administrative procedures.
November 19,1998
-------
Chapters
3-9 . Five-Year Accident History
Revised Operating Procedures. Operating procedures were clarified or
changed to ensure that employees and contract employees are trained on
appropriate operating procedures.
New Process Controls. New process designs and controls were installed to
correct problems and prevent recurrence of an accidental release.
New Mitigation Systems. New mitigation systems were initiated to limit the
severity of accidental releases.
Revised Emergency Response Plan. The emergency response plan was
'••-.' ' . revised.
Changed Process. Process was altered to reduce the risk (e.g.,"process
chemistry was changed). . •
Reduced Inventory. Inventory was reduced at the facility to reduce the
potential release quantities and the magnitude of the hazard.
Other.
• None. No changes initiated at facility as a result of the accident (e.g., because
none were necessary or technically feasible). There may be some accidents
that could not have been prevented because they were caused by events that
are too rare to merit additional steps. For example, if a tornado hit your
facility and you are located in an area where tornados are very rare; it may not
be reasonable to design a "tornado proof process even if it is technically
feasible.
3.3 OTHER ACCIDENT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
You should already have much of the data required for the five-year accident history
because of the reporting requirements under the Comprehensive Emergency
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), EPCRA, and OSHA (e.g.,
log of occupational injuries and illnesses). This information should minimize the
effort necessary to complete the accident history.
At the same time, some of the information originally reported to response agencies
may have been inaccurate because it was reported during the release when a full
assessment was not possible. It is imperative that you include the most accurate,
up-to-date information possible in the five-year accident history. This information
may not always match the original estimates from the initial reporting of the accident's
effects.
. CERCLA Section 103(a) requires you to immediately notify the National Response
Center if your facility releases a hazardous substance to the environment in greater
than a reportable quantity (see 40 CFR part 302). Toxic substances regulated under
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 3
Five-Year Accident History 3-10
part 68 are also CERCLA hazardous substances, but most of the flammable
substances regulated under part 68 are not subject to CERCLA reporting. Notice .
required under CERCLA includes the following information:
;' .
The chemical name or identity of any substance involved in the release
An indication of whether the substance is on the list referred to in Section
302(a)
An estimate of the quantity of substance that was released into the
environment
The time and duration, of the release
The medium or media into which the release occurred.
Releases reported to the National Response Center are collected into a database, the
Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS). ERNS data are available on
EPA's web site: http://www.epa.gov.
EPCRA Section 304 requires facilities to report to the community emergency
coordinator of the appropriate local emergency planning committee (LEPC) and state
emergency response commission (SERC) releases of extremely hazardous substances
to the environment in excess of reportable quantities (as set forth in 40 CFR part 302).
All toxic substances regulated under part 68 are subject to EPCRA reporting;
flammables regulated under part 68 are generally not subject to EPCRA reporting.
The report required by EPCRA is to include:.
Chemical name or identity of all substances involved in the accident
An estimate of the quantity 'of substances released to the environment
The time and duration of the release.
The owner or operator is also required to release a Follow-up Emergency Notice as
soon as possible after a release which requires notification. This notice should update
the previously released information and include additional information regarding
actions taken to respond to the release, any known or anticipated acute or chronic
health risks associated with the release, and where appropriate, advice regarding
medical attention necessary for exposed individuals.
OSHA's log of occupational injuries and illnesses. OSHA No. 200, is used for
recording and classifying recordable occupational injuries and illnesses, and for noting
the extent and outcome of each case. T^ he log shows when the occupational injury or
illness occurred, to whom, what the injured or ill person's regular job was at the time
of the injury or illness exposure, the department in which the person was employed,
the kind of injury or illness, how much time was lost, and whether the case
November 19,1998
-------
Chapters
3-11 Five-Year Accident History
resulted in a fatality, etc. The following are the sections of the illness/ injury log that
are useful in completing the accident history.
Descriptive section of the log:
Column B: date of work accident which resulted in injury
' ' . f ' ,
Column C: name of injured person
Column F: description of nature of injury or illness
Injury portion of the log:
Column 1: date of death is entered if an occupational injury results in a
, fatality ' .
Column 6: an injury occurred, but did not result in lost workdays ;
Illness portion ofxthe log:
Column 7: for occupational illnesses, an entry is placed in one'of the columns
7a-7g, depending upon which column is-applicable.
PART 68 INCIDENT INVESTIGATION
An incident investigation-is a requirement of the rule (§68.60 and 68.81). These
requirements are virtually identical to the requirements under OSHA PSM. For
accidents involving processes categorized in Program 2 or Program 3, you must
investigate each incident which resulted in, or could reasonably have resulted in, a
catastrophic release of a regulated substance. A report, which includes the following
information, should be prepared at the conclusion of the investigation:
Date of incident ....-•.
Date investigation began
Description of the incident
Factors that contributed to the incident
- ' ' . . ' f ,
Any recommendations resulting from the investigation. •• •
Because the incident investigation report must be retained for five years, you will have
a record for completing the five-year accident history for updates of the RMP.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 3
Five-Year Accident History
3-12
Qs & As
ACCIDENT HISTORY
Q. When does the five-year period to be reported in the accident history begin?
A. The five-year accident history must include all accidental releases from covered processes meeting
the specified criteria that occurred in five years preceding the date the RMP for the processes was
submitted. For example, if an RMP is submitted on June 1, 1999, the five-year accident history must
cover the period between June 1,1994 and June 1, 1999, , . ,
Q. If a facility has recently changed ownership, is the new facility owner required to include accidents
which occurred prior to the transfer of ownership in the accident history portion of the RMP submitted
for the facility?
A. Yes, accidents involving covered processes that occurred prior to the transfer of ownership should
be included in the five-year accident history. You may want to explain that the ownership has changed
in your Executive Summary. ,
Q. If I have a large on-site incident, but no offsite impact, would I have to report it in the'five-year
accident history?
A. It would depend on whether you have onsite deaths, injuries, or significant property damage. You
could have a large accident without any of these consequences (e.g., a large spill that was contained);
this type of release would not have to be included in the five-year accident history.
Q. I had a release where several people were treated at the hospital and released; they attributed their
symptoms to exposure. We do not believe that their symptoms were in fact the result of exposure to
the released substance. Do we have to report these as offsite impacts?
A. Yes, you should report them in your five-year accident history. You may want to use the executive
summary to state that you do not believe that the impacts can be legitimately attributed to the release
and explain why.
November 19,1998
-------
CHAPTER 4: OFFSITE CONSEQUENCE ANALYSIS
You are required to conduct an offsite consequence analysis to provide information to
the government and the public about the potential consequences of an accidental
chemical release. The offsite consequence analysis (OCA) consists of two elements:
A worst-case release scenario and " "
Alternative release scenarios. ,
To simplify the analysis and ensure a common basis for comparisons, EPA has
defined the worst-case scenario as the release of the largest quantity of a regulated
substance from a single vessel or process'line failure that results in the greatest
distance to an endpoint. In broad terms, the distance to the endpoint is the distance an
ammonia vapor cloud will travel before dissipating to the point that serious injuries
from short-term exposures will no longer occur. '
This chapter gives guidance on how to perform the offsite consequence analysis for
anhydrous ammonia in ammonia refrigeration facilities. Exhibit 4-1 shows the basic
steps used to conduct the OCA.
RMP*Comp™
To assist those using this guidance, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
and EPA have developed a software, program, RMP*Comp™, that performs the calculations
described in this document. This software can be downloaded from the NOAA Internet website at
http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/chemaids/rmp/rmp.html. .
You are not required to use this guidance. You may use publicly available or
proprietary air dispersion models to do your offsite consequence analysis, subject to
certain conditions. If you choose to use other models, you should review the rule and
Chapter 4 of the General Guidance for Risk Management Programs, which outline
. required conditions for use of other models.
Complex models that can account for many site-specific factors may give less
conservative estimates of offsite consequences than the simple methods in this
guidance. This is particularly true for alternative scenarips, for which EPA has not
specified many assumptions. However, complex models may be expensive and
require considerable expertise to use; this guidance is designed to be simple and
straightforward. You will need to consider these tradeoffs in deciding how to carry
out your required consequence analyses.
November 19, 1998
-------
EXHIBIT 4-1
STEPS FOR OFFSITE CONSEQUENCE ANALYSIS
Gather Basic Data
(quantities and process conditions)
Select Scenario
Toxics
Worst-case and Alternative Release
Flammables
Alternative Release
Estimate Rate of
Release
Flammables
Worst-case Release
Define Distance to Endpoint of Concern
-------
• . Chapter 4
4-3 Offsite Consequence Analysis
This chapter presents discussions and tables for the Worst-case scenario (section 4.1),
followed by discussions and tables for alternative scenarios (section 4.2). The
remaining sections provide guidance on defining offsite impacts (section 4.3), and
documentation (section 4.4). ' •
The guidance presented in this chapter is intended for users — that is, it does not
contain explanations of how the guidance was derived. For those readers who are
interested in following this up, there is a document entitled Backup Information for
the Hazard Assessments in the RMP Offsite Consequence Analysis Guidance, the
Guidance for Wasteyvater Treatment Facilities and the Guidance for Ammonia
. Refrigeration—-Anhydrous Ammonia, Aqueous Ammonia, Chlorine and Sulfur
Dioxide. This Backup Document is available from EPA.
4.1 WORST-CASE RELEASE SCENARIO ANALYSIS (§ 68.25)
Exhibit 4-2 presents the parameters that must be used in analyzing the worst-case and
alternative release scenarios. .
MANDATORY INPUT
The following input is required by the Risk Management Program rule:
• •_ . ' The worst-case release quantity Q (Ib) shall be the greater of the following:
, For substances in a vessel, the greatest amount held in a vessel, taking
into account administrative controls that limit the maximum quantity;
• : 'or - - • :
For substances in pipes, the greatest amount in a pipe,_ taking into
• account administrative controls mat limit the maximum quantity.
For ammonia refrigeration systems, a storage vessel or high-pressure receiver is likely
to contain the largest quantity. (See -Appendix 4A to this Chapter for a description of
ammonia systems.)
, Because ammonia is a vapor at ambient temperature and is handled as a liquid
under pressure in .most parts of a refrigeration system, the quantity Q is
completely released from the vessel over a period of 10 minutes. This applies
whether the release takes place outside or in a building.
• . ' Weather conditions. The rule specifically allows anyone who conducts their
OCA based on this guidance to use specific default weather conditions for
wind speed, stability class, average temperature, and humidity.
.November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 4
Offsitc Consequence Analysis
4-4
EXHIBIT 4-2
REQUIRED PARAMETERS FOR MODELING AMMONIA (40 CFR 68.22)
WORST CASE
ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO
Endpoints (§68.22(a))
Toxic endpoints are listed in part 68 Appendix A.
Toxic endpoints are listed in part 68 Appendix A.
Wind speed/stability (§68.22(b))
This guidance assumes 1.5 meters per second and F
stability. For other models, use wind speed. of 1.5
meters per second and F stability class unless you can
demonstrate that local meteorological data applicable to
the site show a higher minimum wind speed or less
stable atmosphere at all times during the previous three
years. If you can so demonstrate, these minimums may
be used for site-specific modeling.
This guidance assumes wind speed of 3 meters per second and
stability. For other models, you must use typical meteorological
conditions for your site.
Ambient temperature/humidity (§68.22(c))
This guidance assumes 25 C (77 F) and 50 percent
humidity. For other models for toxic substances, you
must use the highest daily maximum temperature and
average humidity for the site during the past three years.
This guidance assumes 25 C and 50 percent humidity. For other
models, you may use average temperature/humidity data gathered
at the site or at a local meteorological station.
Height of release '(§68.22(d))
For toxic substances, you must assume a ground level
release.
This guidance assumes a ground-level release. For other models,
release height may be determined by the release scenario.
Surface roughness (§68.22(e))
Use urban (obstructed terrain) or rural (flat terrain)
topography, as appropriate.
Use urban (obstructed terrain) or rural (flat terrain) topography, a
appropriate.
Dense or neutrally buoyant gases (§68.22(f>)
Tables or models used for dispersion of regulated toxic
substances must appropriately account for gas density.
Tables or models used for dispersion must appropriately account
for gas density.
Temperature of released substance (§68.22(g))
You must consider liquids (other than gases liquefied by
refrigeration) to be released at the highest daily
maximum temperature, from data for the previous three
years, or at process temperature, whichever is higher.
Assume gases liquefied by refrigeration at atmospheric
pressure to be released at their boiling points.
Substances may be considered to be released at a process or
ambient temperature that is appropriate for the scenario.
(
November 19,1998
-------
.'. y ••••-,' ' ' Chapter 4
4-5 Offsite Consequence Analysis
If you do your own modeling, you can obtain weather data from local weather
stations. You can also obtain temperature and wind speed data from the
National Climatic Data Center at (828) 271-4800. .
For the worst-case scenario, the release must be assumed to take place at
ground level.
The toxic endp'oint for ammonia is 200 ppm (0.14 mg/L). This airborne
concentration is the maximum airborne concentration below which it is
, believed that nearly all individuals can be exposed for up to one hour without
experiencing or developing irreversible or .other serious health effects or
symptoms that could impair an individual's ability to take protective action.
QUANTITY RELEASED AND RELEASE RATE IN THE WORST-CASE RELEASE SCENARIO
QUANTITY RELEASED
Take the largest quantity Q (Ib) of ammonia that is liquefied under pressure in any
vessel in the ammonia refrigeration system.. For many systems, this vessel will be the
high pressure receiver with typical pressures in the range 100 to 200 psig. Other
candidate vessels include:
An outside vessel in which ammonia is stored as a liquid at ambient
temperature (some, but not all, facilities have such a vessel);
\ - : _ - ,
An intermediate receiver with typical pressures in the range 20 to 60 psig
(typical of two-stage ammonia refrigeration systems); or
A low-pressure receiver with pressures in the range 10-60 psig (typical of
single-stage refrigeration systems). ^
In the case of a vessel, the quantity does not include any liquid ammonia in pipework •
connected to the vessel and in any other vessel that can discharge directly into
•, pipework connected to the vessel. However, the maximum amount of ammonia that
could be in the vessel at any one time, not just during normal operation, should be
considered. For example, if the vessel is used to store some or all of the ammonia
while the rest of the system is being serviced, then Q should include the additional
quantity of ammonia that is in the vessel at such a time. If there are administrative
controls-that limit the amount of ammonia that is allowed in the vessel at any one
time, this limit can also be taken into account when estimating Q. Similarly, if the
, largest quantity is in a pipeline, you do not need to consider the quantity of ammonia
in connected vessels. .
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis . 4-6
RELEASE RATE
Unmitigated Releases. For the worst-case scenario for a substance that is a gas under
ambient conditions, the largest vessel is assumed to fail in a catastrophic manner, and
the release occurs over a period of 10 minutes. The worst-case release rate is:
QR = (3/10 ; • (1)
where: QR = .Release rate (Ibs/min)
<2 = Quantity released (Ibs)
The rapid release of ammonia initially liquefied under pressure leads to an airborne
mixture of vapor and droplets. If the vessel is outdoors, all of the vapor and droplets
remain airborne, and the release rate (QR) is the total inventory uniformly distributed
over 10 minutes, as required by the rule.
Mitigated Releases. The rule allows you to consider passive mitigation in estimating
the worst-case release rate. Figure 4-1 displays the procedure to be followed to
determine the release rate for the worst-case scenario. If the release takes place in a
building, the building can be considered to provide passive mitigation, unless:
The building may fail as a result of the release. This is unlikely except in the
case of a large vessel in a very small room. As a rough rule of thumb, if the
room volume (V) divided by the quantity of ammonia (Q) in the vessel is less
than 0.1 ft3/lb, you should look at the possibility that the release of ammonia
will cause failures such as windows blowing out or doors blowing open.
• The release takes place facing an opening in the building (door or window).
In this case, you should assume that the door or window will be open, and the
ammonia will be released through these openings.
If the building may fail as a result of the release, estimate the release rate as for an
unmitigated release (Equation 1, QR = Q/10 Ib/min). Similarly, if the release would
take place facing doors or windows, the release rate is again the entire inventory
uniformly distributed over 10 minutes (Equation 1).
November 19,1998
-------
Figure 4-1. Guidance on Effectiveness of Building Mitigation for Worst-Case
Scenarios
Identify / ^s.
Quantity (Q) //Indoors \^ Outside
in largest NS. ul /
vessel N^utside^X
Indoors
./Adj¢V yes
-------
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis 4-8
If the above conditions do not apply, you can assume that rain-out of liquid droplets is
facilitated by impingement on surfaces (in a compressor room, for example), and only
a portion of the released material will become airborne. The remainder collects in
relatively slowly evaporating pools and makes only a small contribution to the rate of
release from the building. To estimate the mitigated release rate, assume the
following:
The amount of material airborne in the building is four-tenths of the total
inventory, or 0.4 Q.
The airborne material includes 0.2 Q vapor and 0.2 Q liquid droplets.
Exhibit 4-3 provides factors for estimating the mitigated release rate from a building.
To estimate the release rate using these factors, do the following:
Estimate as follows:
Determine room volume, V, in ft3
Calculate from room volume divided by the quantity of ammonia
initially released as vapor, or
(ftVlb) = V/(0.2Q)
Determine the active ventilation rate, Nw in room volumes exchanged per
hour (hr~'), for the building.
From Exhibit 4-3, find the 10-minute building attenuation factor, FR10,
corresponding to your estimated and the ventilation rate, N^
Estimate the release rate in Ibs/min from the building attenuation factor and
the airborne quantity (0.4 Q) as follows, assuming the release takes place over
10 minutes:
QRB = (FR,0xOAQ)/10 ; (2)
Example 1 A high-pressure receiver containing 5,000 Ib of ammonia is in a room of
dimensions 20 feet x 50 feet x 30 feet = 30,000 ft3. Hence, = 30,0007(5,000 x 0.2)
' = 30 ftVlb. The nearest value of on Exhibit 4-3 is =25. The ventilation rate for
the building is 5 hr"1. For = 25 and Nv = 5, FR10 = 0.35, and the release rate to the
atmosphere is QRB = (0.35)(0.4)(5,000)/10 = 70 Ib/min, using Equation 2 above.
November 19,1998
-------
4-9
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis
EXHIBIT 4-3
TENrMINUTE BUILDING RELEASE ATTENUATION FACTORS FOR PROLONGED
RELEASES
. ®
(ft3/lb)
150.0
>
100.0
50.0
25.0
Nv
(hr-1)
- o
1
5
10
20
30
40
0
1 -
5
10
20
30
40
0
1
5 •
10
20
30
40
0
1
5
10
20
30
40
FR10
(dim)
0.07
0.08
0.32
0.51
0.71
. 0.80
0.85
0.11
0.11
0.32
0.51
0.71
0.80
0.85
0.20
0.20
0.32
0.51
0.71
0.80
0.85
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.51
0.71
0.80
0.85
-
r
®
(ft'/ib)
10.0
5.0
1.0
0.5
Nv
(hr"1)
0
1
5
10
20
30
40
0
1
5
10
20
30
40
0
1
5-
10
20
30 •
40
0
1
' 5
10 .
20 ,
30
40
FR10
(dim)
0.61
0.61
0.61
0.61
0.71
0.80
0.85
0.79
0.79
,0.79
0.79
0.79
0.80
0.85
0.96
0.96
0.96
0.96
0.96
- 0.96
0.96
0.98
0.98
0.98
0.98
0.98
0.98
0.98
Example 2 The 5,000 Ib vessel in Example 1 is outside. The release rate is,
therefore, QR = 5,000/10 = 500 Ib/min. It can be seen that the building provides
extensive attenuation. However, to take advantage of this potential attenuation, you
must be certain that the worst-case scenario cannot occur outside or adjacent to a door
or window that may be open.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis 4-10
OTHER POTENTIAL WORST-CASE SCENARIOS
The rule requires that you look for other potential scenarios that could affect offsite
populations further away from the site or in different areas than does the release from
the largest vessel. Thus, even if an outside storage vessel is smaller than your high-
pressure receiver, you should consider the release of its contents over a 10-minute
period as a possible worst-case scenario. Similarly, if a pipe containing ammonia
liquefied under pressure is outside for part of its length, you should consider the
release of the contents of that pipe as a possible worst-case scenario.
DISTANCE TO THE Toxic ENDPOINT
Take the estimated worst-case rate of release QR (unmitigated) or QRB(in a building)
and go to Exhibit 4-4. Find the entry in the "Rate of Release" column that is closest to
your estimated release rate. Read off the corresponding distance from the urban or the
rural column. This is the "distance to the endpoint" that must be submitted (in miles)
in the RMP information.
To decide whether the site is rural or urban, the rule gives the following guidance in
§ 68.22(e): "Urban means that there are many obstacles in the immediate area;
obstacles include buildings or trees. Rural means that there are no buildings in the
immediate area and the terrain is generally flat and unobstructed."
Figure 4-2 represents Exhibit 4-4 in graphical form. Both apply to releases of
duration 10 minutes.
Example 3 Take the 500 Ib/min release rate from Example 2. From Exhibit 4-4, the
predicted distance to the toxic endpoint is ~ 1.3 miles at a rural site and ~ 0.9 miles at
an urban site. For the 70 Ib/min release of Example 1, these distances become 0.5
miles and 0.3 miles, respectively.
November 19,1998
-------
4-11
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis
EXHIBIT 4-4
DISTANCES TO TOXIC ENDPOINT
FOR ANHYDROUS AMMONIA LIQUEFIED UNDER PRESSURE
F Stability, Wind Speed 1.5 Meters per Second
Release Rate
(Ibs/minj
1
: 2 , ,
5
10
15 -
20
30
40
50-
60-
70
80
90
100
150
200.
250
300
400
500
600
700
750
800
900
Distance to Endpoint (miles)
Rural
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.4
• 0.4
0.5
'0.5
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.2
1-3
1.4
1.5
1.6
,1.6
1.7
Urban
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
' 0.2
0.3 __
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.5.
0.6
0.6
0.7-
0.8 '
0.9
0.9
1.0
1.0
, 1-1
1.2
Release Rate
(Ibs/min)
1,000
1,500
2,000
. 2,500
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
7,500
8,000
9,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
75,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
750,000
Distance to Endpoint (miles)
Rural
' 1.8
2.2
2.6
2.9
3.1
3.6 '
4.0
4.4
4.7
4.9
5.1 ,
5.4 '
5.6
-6.9
8.0
8.9
9.7 i
11
12
15
18
22
*
* •
• *
Urban
1.2
1.5
1.7
1.9 •
2.0
2.3
'2.6
2:8
3.1
, 3.2
3.3
3.4- -,
3.6
4.4
5.0
5.6
6.1
7.0
7.8
9.5
10 •
13
15
17
*
: More than 25 miles (report distance as 25 miles)
November 19,1998
-------
Figure 4-2 Worst-Case Scenario - Predicted Distances to Toxic Endpoint
Anhydrous Ammonia @ Atmospheric Stability Class F with Windspeed 1.5 m/s
100.00
50-
20-
W
0)
.§ 10.00
•s
1
T3
UJ
U
'x
8
I
5
1.00-
0.50 - -
0.20-,
0.10
10
20
50
00
200 2000
100 1000
Rate of Release (Ibs/min)
* rura!
• urban
«*»«- Model Limit
5000
2000. 50000
-------
,. , • . Chapter4
4-13 • Offsite Consequence Analysis
4.2 ALTERNATIVE RELEASE SCENARIO
The owner or operator must identify and analyze at least one "alternative" release
scenario.
CHOICE OF THE ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO ^
Your alternative scenario for a covered process must be one that is more likely to
occur than the worst-case scenario and that reaches an endpoint offsite, unless no such
scenario exists, rtate that this requirement means thatthe release rate for the
s alternative scenario for ammonia must be fairly large, or it generally will not reach the
ammonia endpoint offsite. You do not need, to demonstrate greater likelihood of
occurrence or carry out any analysis of probability of occurrence; you only need to use
_ < reasonable judgement and knowledge of the process. If, using a combination of
reasonable assumptions, modeling of a release of a regulated substance from a process
shows that the relevant endpoint is not reached offsite, you can use the modeling
results to demonstrate that a scenario does not exist for the process that will give an
endpoint offsite. You must report an alternative scenario, however.
-. ' • Release scenarios you should consider include, but are not limited to, the following,
where applicable:
Transfer hose releases due to splits or sudden uncoupling;
• Process piping releases from failures at flanges, joints,' welds, valves and
• valve seals, and drains or bleeds;
Process vessel or pump releases due to cracks, seal failure, drain bleed, or
plug failure; • . -
~ Vessel overfilling and spill, or overpressurization and venting through relief
valves or rupture disks; and .
, Shipping container mishandling and breakage or puncturing leading to a spill.
For alternative release scenarios, you niay consider active mitigation systems, such as
interlocks, shutdown systems, pressure relieving devices, flares, emergency isolation
systems, and fire water and deluge systems, as well as passive mitigation systems.
Mitigation systems considered must be capable of withstanding the event that triggers
the release while remaining functional.
You must consider your five-year accident history and failure scenarios identified in
your hazard review or process hazards analysis in selecting alternative release
scenarios for regulated toxic or flammable substances (e.g., you might choose an
actual event from your accident history as the basis of your scenario). You also may
consider any other reasonable scenarios.
' The alternative scenarios you choose to analyze should be scenarios that you consider
possible at your site. Although EPA requires no explanation of your choice of
scenario, you should choose a scenario that you think you can explain to emergency
responders and the public as a reasonable alternative to the worst-case scenario. For
example, you could pick a scenario based on an actual event, or you could choose a
scenario that you worry about, because circumstances at your site might make it a
•possibility. If you believe that there is no reasonable scenario that could lead to
. November 19, 1998 .' •
-------
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis 4-14
offsite consequences, you may use a scenario that has no offsite impacts for your
alternative analysis. You should be prepared to explain your choice of such a scenario
to the public, should questions arise. •
Appendix G of this guidance is a hazard alert for ammonia releases at ammonia
refrigeration facilities. This alert includes a discussion of accidents that have occurred
in the past at such facilities. The information on past accidents may be helpful to you
in developing a reasonable alternative scenario for your facility.
ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS FOR AMMONIA AT REFRIGERATION FACILITIES
For the alternative scenario analysis, you should use typical meteorological conditions
for your site.. This guidance uses an "average" weather condition of wind speed 3 m/s
and D stability class with an ambient temperature of 25
-------
4-15
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis
EXHIBIT 4-5
DISTANCES TO TOXIC ENDPOINT FOR ANHYDROUS AMMONIA
D Stability, Wind Speed 3 Meters per Second
Release Rate
(Ibs/min)
<10
" 10
15
20
30
40
' 50
60
- • . 70
80 .
90
100
150
200
250
300
. 400
500
600
700
750
800
Distance to Endpoint (miles)
Rural
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0,2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.5
' 0.5
0.5
Urban
,0.1
0.1
. .0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
o.i
d.i
0.2
0.2
... 0.2
0.2 '
0.2
0.2
Release Rate
(Ibs/min)
900
1,000
" 1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
4,000
' 5,000
7,500
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000 •
30,000
40,000
50,000
, 75,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
Distance to Endpoint (miles)
Rural
0.6
0.6'
0,7
0.8
0,9
1.0
1.2
1.3 '
1.6
1.8
2.2
2.5 ,
. 2.8
. 3.1
. 3.5
3.9
4.8
.5.4
6.6
7.6
8.4
9.2
Urban
.0.2
0.2
. 0.3
. 0!3
0.3
0.4
^ 0.4
0.5
0.5 .
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.4'
1.6
1.9
2.1
2.3
' 2.5
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis
4-16
Figure 4-3 Alternative Case Scenario - Predicted Distances To Toxic Endpoint
For Anhydrous Ammonia @ Atmospheric Stability Class D with Windspeed 1.5 m/s
10.0000
W
JD
E
•%
Q
o
a
•o
UJ
u
1
o
i
ca
1.0000-
0.1000
0.0100
•RURAL
•URBAN
10
100
1000
10000
. 100000
Rate Of Release. (R, Ibsfrnin)
November 19, 1998
-------
4-17
C'hapter'4
Offsite Consequence Analysis
Exhibit 4-6 provides release rates and distances for pressures of 100 to 180 psig and
hole diameters of 1/4 inch to 12 inches. (The distances are based on Exhibit 4-5).
You may use this exhibit to estimate the distance to the endpoint if this type of -
scenario is reasonable for your site.
EXHIBIT 4-6
RELEASE RATES AND DISTANCES TO TOXIC ENDPOINT FOR LEAKS OF ANHYDROUS
AMMONIA (ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO)
Hole
Diameter
(inches)
0.25
0.5
1 .
2
3
4
5
6
7
8.
. 9
10
; 11
12
Tank Pressure 100 psig
Release
Rate
(Ib/min)
100
400
1,600
6,400
14,300
25;500
39,900
57,400
78,100
102,000
129,000,
159,000
193,000
230,000
Distance (miles)
Rural
0.2
0.4
0.7
1.6
2.2
2.8
3.5
3.9
4.8
5.4
6.6
6.6
7.6
8.4
Urban
o.i
0.2
0.3
. 0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.2
1-4
1.6
1.9
1.9
2.1
2.3
Tank Pressure 130 psig
Release
Rate
(Ib/min)
110
450
1,800
7,300
16,400
29,100
45,400
65,400
89,100
116,000
147,000
182,000
220,000
262,000
Distance (miles)
Rural
0.2
0.4
0.8
1.6
2.2
3.1
3.9
4.8
5.4
5.4
6.'6
7.6
7.6
, 8.4
Urban
0.1
. -0.2
0.3
0.5
0.7"
1.0
' 1.2
1.4
1.6
.1.6
1.9
2.1
2.1
2.3
Tank Pressure 180 psig
Release
Rate
(Ib/min)
130
540
2,100
8,600
19,300
34,200
53,500
77,000
105,000
137,000
173,000
214,000
259,000
308,000
Distance (miles)
Rural
0.2
. 0.4
0.8
1.6
2.5
3.1
3.9
4.8
5.4
6.6
6.6
7.6
8.4
9.2
Urban
0.1
0.2
6.3
0.5
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.9
1-9
2.1
2.3
2.5
ALTERNATIVE RELEASE SCENARIOS INSIDE A BUILDING
The alternative release scenario inside a building is handled in much the same way as
is the worst-case scenario. See Figure 4-4 for a flow chart describing the procedure.
To use the factors provided in Exhibit 4-3 for estimating the release rate in a building,
you must assume the release takes place over a ten-minute period. The total quantity
released will be your estimated release rate multiplied by 10. If a ten-minute release is
. not a reasonable alternative scenario for your site, you will need to do additional
calculations or use a different method for releases in buildings.
November 19, 1998
-------
Figure 4-4. Guidance on Effectiveness of Building Mitigation for Alternative Scenarios
Adjacent
to door or
indow
1NO
Calculate
0= V/(0.2Q)
Airborne,
Mass
M =0.40
Calculate FR10
Exhibit 4-3
Release Rate
0.1FR10Ma
Ib/min
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 4
4-19 Offsite Consequence Analysis
Example 4 Suppose the release from a Vi-inch hole in a tank with pressure 180 psig,
cited in Exhibit 4-6, resulting,in a release rate of 550 Ib/min of flashing liquid
ammonia, takes place inside a building with a ventilation rate Nv= 5 hr'1. The release
is assumed to take place over ten minutes, and the total quantity released is 550 x 10 =
5,500 Ib, of which 0.4 x 5,500 = 2,200 Ib becomes airborne. Of the airborne quantity,
1,100 Ib is vapor and 1,100 Ib is liquid that remains entrained in the vapor. The
remaining 3,300 Ib of liquid forms an evaporating pool on the flopr. The building
volume is 50 feet x 20 feet .x 20 feet = 20,000 ft3, so that = 20,000/1,100 = 18 ftVlb.
From Exhibit 4-3; FR10 = 0.35 for = 25 ft3/lb (the number closest to 18) and Nv = 5.
Assuming a ten-minute release, the,rate of release from the building is 77 Ib/min [QRB
= (0.35)(0.4)(5,500)/10 from Equation 2 in section 4.1 ]. Using Exhibit 4-5, the
predicted distance to the toxic endpoint is -0*2 mile, for a rural site and 0.1 mile for an
urban site, compared to 0.4 mile (rural) and 0.2 mile (urban) for the same release
outdoors.
As noted above, the attenuation factors in Exhibit 4-3 apply to ten-minute releases. If
you want to use the same method to perform a calculation for a different duration of
release in a building, consult the Backup Information document cited at the beginning
of this chapter for additional information on how to carry out such calculations.
4.3 DEFINING OFFSITE RECEPTORS ,
The rule requires that you estimate in the RMP residential populations within the
circle defined by the endpoint for your worst-case and alternative release scenarios
(i.e., the center of the circle is the point of release and the radius is the distance to the
endpoint). In addition, you must report in the RMP whether certain types of public
receptors and environmental receptors are within the circles.
Figure 4-5 is one suggested example of how the consequences of worst-case and
alternative scenarios might be presented. It is a simplified map that shows the radius •
to which the vapor cloud might extend, given the worst-case release in worst-case
weather conditions (the owner or operator should use a real map of the area
, surrounding the site). ~
RESIDENTIAL POPULATIONS
To estimate residential populations, you may use the most recent Census data or any
other source of data that you believe is more accurate. You are not required to update
Census data or conduct any surveys to develop your estimates. Census data are
available in public libraries and in the LandView system, which is available on
CD-ROM (see box below). The rule requires that you estimate populations to
• two-significant digits. For example, if there are 1,260 people within the circle, you
may report 1,300 people. If the number of'people is between 10 and 100, estimate to
the nearest 10. If the number of people is less than 10, provide the actual number.
November 19, 1998
-------
Figure 4-5 Simplified Presentation of Worst-Case
and Alternative Scenario on a Local Map
Radius for
Alternative
Scenario
Radius for
Worst-case Scenario
-------
Chapter 4
.4-21 Offsite Consequence Analysis
Census data are presented by Census tract. If your circle covers only a portion of the
tract, you should develop an estimate for that portion. The easiest way to do this is to
determine the population density per square mile (total population of the Census tract
divided by the number of square miles in the tract) and apply that density figure to the
number of square miles within your circle. Because there is likely to be considerable
variation in actual densities within a Census tract, this number will be approximate.
The rule, however, does not require you to correct the number.
OTHER PUBLIC RECEPTORS
Other public, receptors must be noted in the RMP (see the discussion of public
receptors in Chapter 2). If there are any schools, residences, hospitals, prisons, public
recreational areas or arenas, or commercial or industrial areas within the circle, you
must report that. You are not required to develop a list of all public receptors; you
must simply check off that one or more such areas is within the circle. Most receptors
can be identified from local street maps.
ENVIRONMENTAL RECEPTORS ,
Environmental receptors are defined as natural areas such as national or state parks,
forests, or monuments; officially designated wildlife sanctuaries, preserves, refuges, or
areas; and Federal wilderness areas. Only environmental receptors that can be
identified on local U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) maps (see box below) need to be
considered. You are not required to locate each of these specifically. You are'only
required to check off in the RMP which specific types of areas are within the circle. If
any part of one of these receptors is within your circle, you must note that in the RMP.
Important: The rule does not require you to assess the likelihood, type, or severity of
potential impacts on either public or environmental receptors. Identifying them as
within the circle simply indicates that they could be adversely affected by the release.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis
4-22
How TO OBTAIN CENSUS DATA AND LANDVIEW®
Census data can be found in publications of the Bureau of the Census, available in public libraries,
including County and City Data Book.
LandView ®III is a desktop mapping system that includes database extracts from EPA, the Bureau of
the Census, the U.S. Geological Survey, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Department of
Transportation, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. These'databases are presented in a
geographic context on maps that show jurisdictional boundaries, detailed networks of roads, rivers,
and railroads, census block group and tract polygons, schools, hospitals, churches, cemeteries, airports,
dams, and other landmark features.
CD-ROM for IBM-compatible PCS .
CD-TGR95-LV3-KIT $99 per disc (by region) or $549 for 11 disc set
U.S. Department of Commerce
Bureau of the Census
P.O. Box 277943
Atlanta, GA 30384-7943
Phone: 301 -457-4100 (Customer Services — orders)
Fax: (888) 249-7295 (toll-free)
Fax: (301) 457-3842 (local)
Phone: (301)457-1128 (Geography Staff-content)
http://www.census.gov/ftp/pub/geo/www/tiger/
Further information on LandView and other sources of Census data is available at the Bureau of the
Census web site at www.census.gov.
November 19. 1998
-------
4-23
Chapter 4
Qffsite Consequence Analysis
How TO OBTAIN USGS MAPS
The production 'of digital cartographic data and graphic maps comprises the largest component of the
USGS National Mapping Program. The USGS's most familiar product is the 1:24,000-scale
Topographic Quadrangle Map. This is the primary scale of data produced, and depicts greater detail
for a smaller area than intermediate-scale (1:50,000 and 1:100,000) and small-scale (1:250,000,
1:2,000,OQO or smaller) products, which show selectively less detail for larger areas.
U.S. Geological Survey - :
508 National Center .
12201 Sunrise Valley Drive
Reston,VA 20192 . .' .
www.mapping.usgs.gov/
To order USGS maps by fax, select, print, and complete one of the online forms and fax to ^
303-202-4693. A list of commercial dealers also is available at , '
www.mapping.usgs.gov/esic/usimage/dealers.html/. For more information or ordering assistance, call
1:800-HELP-MAP, or write: ^ •_•'..
* . ' , •
USGS Information Services •
Box25286
Denver, CO 80225 .
* ' ' '.''''•".'
For additional information, contact any USGS Earth Science Information Center or call
1-800-USA-MAPS. .
4.4 DOCUMENTATION
You must maintain on site the following records on the offsite consequence analyses:
For the worst-case scenario, a description of the vessel or pipeline selected as
worst-case, assumptions and parameters used, and the rationale for selection;
assumptions include use of any administrative controls and any passive
mitigation that were assumed to limit the quantity that could be released. If
the current guidance has been used,. Section 4.1 can.be referenced as the basis
for the choice of the worst-case scenario. .
For alternative release scenarios, a description of the scenarios identified,
assumptions and parameters used, and the rationale-for the selection of
specific scenarios; assumptions include use of any administrative controls and
any mitigation that were assumed to limit the quantity that could be released.
Documentation includes the effect of the controls and mitigation on the .
release quantity and rate. Section 4.2 can be referenced here if the "canned"
scenario isoised. .
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis 4-24
Documentation of estimated quantity released, release rate, and duration of
release. . •
Methodology used to determine distance to endpoints (it will be sufficient to
reference this guidance).
Data used to identify potentially affected population and environmental
receptors. •
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 4
4-25 Offsite Consequence Analysis
APPENDIX 4A
BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE VARIOUS STATES IN WHICH AMMONIA EXISTS
IN A TYPICAL REFRIGERATION FACILITY
A typical block diagram of a two-stage ammonia refrigeration facility is shown on the next page; a similar
diagram of a single-stage facility is shown on the following page.
Ammonia Liquefied Under Pressure
In many parts of a typical refrigeration system, there is ammonia liquefied uoder pressure. If the pressure
and temperature are sufficiently high, and if there is a sudden release of liquid ammonia, it will all become
and remain airborne as a mixture of ammonia vapor and very fine liquid droplets that do not fall to the
ground, provided that no obstacles are encountered in the immediate vicinity of the release. Experimental
results clearly show that this is a real physical phenomenon (Goldwire et al., 1985; Kaiser, 1989). 'The
droplets evaporate quickly as air is entrained. The evaporation process cools the air so that a cold mixture
of air and ammonia vapor is formed.v The mixture is denser than air, and a heavy vapor dispersion model is
required to adequately predict airborne concentrations downwind of the point of release.
In many refrigeration facilities, the ammonia travels from the discharge of the compressors through the
evaporative condensers to the high-pressure receiver. The next page shows a range of typical pressures in
the high-pressure receiver from 100-200 psig (approximately 8-15 atmospheres). The figure shows
ammonia vapor pressure as a function of temperature. Pressures of 8-15 atmospheres correspond to
ammonia .temperatures of approximately 10-40 °C, or superheats (number of degrees above the
atmospheric boiling point) of about 40-70 °C. These conditions are definitely such as to ensure that all of
any liquid ammonia release will become and remain airborne. • - ^
Some (but by no means all) refrigeration facilities have an ammonia storage vessel in addition to the high-
pressure receiver. This vessel will, in all likelihood, be outside, and its pressure will fluctuate with the
external temperature. However, at an ambient temperature of (say) 25 "C, the superheat would be about 60
°C so that the characteristics of any release from such a vessel are expected to be similar'to those of a
release from the high-pressure receiver. A release from such a vessel should be considered as a candidate
for the worst case. ~
Some refrigeration facilities may not have a high-pressure receiver. In such facilities, ammonia at
pressures as high as 180 psig is confined to pipework, and there may be a low-pressure receiver with a
.typical pressure in the range 10-60 psig (~ 2-5 atmospheres), also containing ammonia liquefied under
pressure. From Figure 4-A.l, the corresponding temperatures are -20-0 °C, or superheats of 10-30 °C. It
is only slightly conservative to assume that all of the ammonia released from such a vessel becomes
airborne. Two-stage systems have an intermediate receiver, which has a range of operating pressures
similar to those for low-pressure receivers in a single-stage system.
November 19, 1998
-------
Two-Stage Ammonia Refrigerating System
HIGH STAGE
COMPRESSOR
PRESSURE
REGULATOR
CHECK VALVE
GLOBE VALVE
-g- HAND VALVE
SOLENOIDE VALVE
RELIEF VALVE
CONTROL
LEVEL
iLEGENDl .
-------
Single-Stage Ammonia Refrigeration System
with High-Side Float Regulator and Pump Circulation
Cooling
Coils
Cooling
Water
D
O
ri
j-^§ —
Z
X
COMPRESOR
PUMP
PRESSURE
REGULATOR
CHECK VALVE
GLOBE VALVE
-g- HAND VALVE
2£-n SOLENOIDS VAI
t$ RELIEF VALVE
§ CONTROL
•' LEVEL
,
[LEGENDl
iuja«j;j«i-mim-u'-j.»uu»iLiM^
-------
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis 4-28
Ammonia at Subatmospheric Pressures
In some facilities (e.g., food processing plants), even colder ammonia may be needed (when, for example,
very rapid freezing of food is necessary). The first figure shows a low-pressure receiver with
Subatmospheric pressures as low as 15 inches of water, which corresponds to a temperature well below the
atmospheric boiling point. If released, the ammonia will spill onto the ground and, over an average period
of 10 minutes or more, will evaporate at a much lower rate than a release from a worst-case rupture in such
a vessel as the high-pressure receiver. In addition, these low temperature vessels are generally inside
buildings, and it is likely that this would further reduce the effective rate of release to the atmosphere
external to the refrigeration plant.
Ammonia Gas
Finally, in ammonia refrigeration systems there is ammonia gas (vapor) in the system under a range of
temperatures and pressures. If there is a rupture in the vapor space of the high-pressure receiver (say),
there will be a buoyant ammonia jet (i.e., the ammonia vapor is less dense than air). However, for a given
hole size and a given pressure, the rate of release of ammonia gas is very much less than that of liquid
ammonia,-so that it is unlikely that a vapor release would be the worst-case.
November 19.1998
-------
Figure 4-A-1 Vapor Pressure of Ammonia as a Function of Temperature
-40-
-20
-10 0 10
Temperature (SC)
20
30
40
-------
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis . 4-30
APPENDIX 4B
EQUATIONS FOR LOG-LOG GRAPHS AND CALCULATIONS
LOG-LOG EQUATIONS
The guidance on Figure 4-2 is essentially in the form of a straight line on a log-log plot:
D = 0.0607(QR)°'4923 (B-D
for a rural site and
D = 0.0443(QR)°'4782 (B-2)
for an urban site, where:
D = Distance to the endpoint (miles)
QR = Release rate (Ib/min)
If you wish, you can use Equation i or 2 instead of Exhibit 4-4 or Figure 4-2.
The curves on Figure 4-3 are approximately straight lines on a log-log plot:
D = 0.0222(QR)°-4780 . (B-3)
at a rural site, and
D = 0.0130(QR)a4164 , (B-4)
, ' • ' ' / , ' ••
at an urban site.
If you wish, you can use Equation 3 or 4 instead.,of Exhibit 4-5 or Figure 4-3.
ALTERNATIVE RELEASE SCENARIOS
There are many possible alternative scenarios. Some of those identified from a review of past incidents in
refrigeration facilities (see Appendix 4C) include:
Plant upsets leading to the lifting of relief valves
Pipeline failures
A blocked-in, liquid-full pipeline rupturing as it heats up
Failures during ammonia delivery, such as a hose leak
The rule states that other scenarios, listed in Section 4.2, should be considered
In addition, active and passive mitigation systems may be considered, provided that they can be shown to
withstand the cause of the release. '
November 19,1998
-------
1 ' Chapter 4
4-31 ' Offsite Consequence Analysis
It is apparent that there is a great variety of alternative scenarios. However, EPA requires that only one
such scenario be identified and modeled. Many scenarios are effectively equivalent to a small hole of
diameter 1A inch to Vi inch (e.g., a gasket rupture or a pump seal leak). Remember, however, that the
alternative scenario must result in offsite consequences, unless you can show that no such scenario exists.
The rate of release QR for a liquid release through a hole may be calculated using Bernoulli's formula:
QR = c LA(2P/ L+2gh)a5 . (B-5)
where:
c ' = a constant (typical value 0.8) , .
. „ L = the density of the liquid in the vessel (639 kg/m3 for ammonia)
A = the area of the hole (m2)
Pg = the gauge pressure in the vessel (Pa)
g = the acceleration due to gravity (9.82 m/s2)
h = the static head (m)
The static head is likely to be negligible when the tank pressure is high, as is likely for liquefied ammonia;
therefore, the.2gh term in Equation B-5 can be ignored.
The following equation drops the 2gh term and includes conversion factors:
QR= 132.2x6.4516 x 10^x0.8x639xa)#Ax(2x(P/639)x6895)1/2 (B-6)
where: QR = Release rate (pounds per minute)
HA = Hole area (square inches)
1 32.2 . = Conversion factor for kilograms per second to pounds per minute
6.4516 x 10"* = Con version factor for square inches 'to square meters (HA)
0.8 = Discharge coefficient (0.8)
, 639 . , = • Liquid density of ammonia (kg/m3)
Pg = Gauge pressure in tank (psi)
6,895 = Conversion factor for psi to Pascals
Combining the conversion factors and incorporating the density of ammonia, leads to the equation
presented in the text as Equation 2 for the release rate through a hole of ammonia liquefied under pressure:
1/2
QR = 203x#Ax(Pg))
Note that this is the formula for the release of a pure liquid and would apply to a breach in the wall of a
vessel or to the rupture of a very short pipe. For long pipes, there is a pressure drop between the vessel and
the hole that leads to flashing in the pipe and a reduced rate of release
The scenario needs to be modeled in typical weather conditions. For many sites, Atmospheric Stability
Category D with a moderate wind speed (e.g., 3 m/s) is close to average. The distance to the toxic
endpoint can then be estimated from Figure 4-3 or from Exhibit 4-5, which is a tabulation of Figure 4-3.
These results could simply be quoted in the Risk Management Plan.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis 4-32
You also may identify your own alternative scenario(s). Consult your trade association (e.g., the
International Institute of Ammonia Refrigeration) for guidance on other scenarios. Your Process Hazards
Analysis is another potential source of pertinent information. However, remember that the regulation
requires that releases large enough to have the potential to exceed the toxic endpoint offsite be considered.
GENERAL GUIDANCE ON MODELING
« ' (''."'.
If you decide to perform your own modeling, you must carefully consider two major items:
(a) Correct characterization of the source term'
(b) Choice of a suitable dispersion model
The quadrennial conferences on vapor cloud dispersion modeling that are organized by the Center for
Chemical Process Safety (CCPS) are a good source of information on the latest developments in source
term and dispersion'modeling (CCPS, 1987, 1991, 1995). There are also CCPS Guidebooks, such as
"Guidelines for Use of Vapor Cloud Dispersion Models - Second Edition".
EPA has also published guidance. There is one document that looks carefully at the definition of source
terms (USEPA, 1993). EPA has also performed an evaluation of dense gas dispersion models (USEPA,
1991). Another review of available models has been given by Hanna et al. (1991).
REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX 4B
Brighton, P.W.M. (1989). "Pressures Produced by Instantaneous Releases of Chlorine Inside Buildings,"
United Kingdom'Healthand Safety Executive Report SRD/HSE/R467, Her Majesty's Stationery Office,
London.
Center for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS, 1987). "Proceedings of the International Symposium on
Vapor Cloud Modeling," Boston, MA; American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, NY.
Center for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS, 1991). "International Conference and Workshop on
Modeling and Mitigating the Consequences of Accidental Releases of Hazardous Materials" New
Orleans, LA; American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, NY.
Center for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS, 1995). "International Conference and Workshop on
Modeling and Mitigating the Consequences of Accidental releases of Hazardous Materials," New
Orleans, LA; American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, NY.
Goldwire, Jr., H.C., T.G. McRae, G.W. Johnson, D.L. Hippie, R.P. Koopman, J.W. McLure, L.K. Morris
and R.T. Cederwall (1985). "Desert Tortoise Series Data Report - 1983 Pressurized Ammonia Spills,"
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories Report UCID-20562, Livermore, CA.
Hanna, S.R., D.G. Strimatis and Joseph C. Chang (1991). "Uncertainties in Hazardous Model Gas
Predictions," in CCPS (1991), pp. 345-368.
'A "source term" is the source information for the atmospheric dispersion model and is characterized by the
rate of release, the duration of release, temperature, density, momentum, aerosol content, etc.
November 19, 1998
-------
. • Chapter 4
4-33 •• . Offsite Consequence Analysis
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA, 1991). "Evaluation of Dense Gas Simulation
Models," EPA-45Q/R-89-Q18, Research Triangle Park, NC. • • "
' United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA, 1993). "Contingency Analysis for Superfund
Sites and Other Industrial Sources," EPA-454/R-93-001, Research Triangle Park, NC.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis 4-34
APPENDIX 4C
INFORMATION ABOUT ACCIDENTAL RELEASES OF AMMONIA
For a number of years, EPA has been keeping a record of accidental releases in the Accidental Release
Information Program (ARIP). Considerable information is requested of those who have reportable
releases. .
The database has numerous entries recorded since its inception, many of which involve ammonia. A list of
all events involving ammonia refrigeration plants, which resulted in an offsite release was obtained. The
original report of each of these events was examined for root cause, as described by the reporting firm.
Other information on the reports was also considered. In some cases, there were multiple applicable root
causes.
In the examination of the data, a comparison of the event to the elements of the Prevention Program was
made. The elements of the Program, which, had they been properly carried out, would have prevented the
release, were judged to be the root causes.
The data garnered from this examination reveal that several sub-elements of Mechanical Integrity are vital
to preventing releases from ammonia refrigeration plants. In particular, a majority of the accidents have
omissions in inspections or tests as a root cause of the releases.
These data are presented in the spreadsheet that follows.
November 19.1998
-------
4-35
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis
ARIP
No.
• 4153
1770
2579
2825
1281
2850
1078
1080
1338
1901
4140
4209
3320
1394
834
2320
4269
2456.
1770
2202
2825
2227
424
2456
4252
1879
799
2332
2340
1098
1878
1878
2579
2907
3218
453
1098
2227
3263
3539
453
Event '•
Valve disassembled
Flange blew out
Condenser leak
Heat exch, leak
Valve failure
Pipe joint failure
. Valve separation
Gasket leak
Recip shaft seal
PRV opens
Pipe break
Pipe broke
Tube rupture
PRV opens
Tube rupture '
Valve leak
Valve came apart
PRV opens
Sight glass leak
Pipe break
Pump casing worn
Strainer casting
PRV opens
PRV failure
PRV opens
PRV opens
Unit failure
Pipe cap blown off
PRV opens
PRV opens
Pipe break, forklift
Piping damage
Operation
Maintenance
In operation
Maintenance
In operation
In operation
In operation
In operation
In operation
In operation
Maintenance
Sched shutdown
Temp inactive
Temp inactive
Temp shutdown
-
In operation
Sched shutdown
In operation
Maintenance
Weekend shutdown
In operation
Maintenance
In operation
In operation
In operation
In operation
In operation
In operation
In operation
In operation
Normal startup
In operation
In operation
Root Cause
Contractor selection
E/R training
E/R training
E/R training
M.I. fit for purpose
M.I. inspection
M.I. inspection
M.I. inspection
M.I. inspection
M.I. inspection
M.I. inspection
M.I. inspection
M.I. inspection
M.I. inspection
M.I, inspection
M.I. inspection
M.I. inspection
M.I. inspection
M,I. inspection (Inf)
M.I. inspection, (Inf)
M.I. procedures
M.I. procedures
M.I. procedures
M.I. QC
M.I. QC
M.I. QC (Inf)
M.I. test
M.I. test
M.I. test
M.I. test
M.I. test
PHA
PHA
PHA
PHA
PHA
PHA
PHA
PHA (siting)
PHA (siting)
Procedures
Process
Public CS
Ice cream
Food production
Poultry processing
Citrus concentrate
Milk
Ice mfg.
Meat process •
Milk & ice cream
Food processing
Ice
Frozen fish
Ice
Ice cream
Turkey prod.
Frozen juices
Ground beef
Public CS
Ice
Frozen desserts
Poultry processing
Poultry
Sausage mfg.
Food production
Distribution whsc.
Meat processing
Public CS
Citrus juices
Public CS
Cheese
Ice
Meat processing
Poultry processing
Public CS ,
Cheese
Sausage mfg.
Cheese
Poultry
Meat packing.
Beer
Sausage mfg.
Remarks
Error in installing a new accumulator
Equipment upgrade stated
Sched 40 thd pipe used instead of welded sch 80
Procedure produced untenable thermal shock
Cast iron flange -
Corrosion; new unit on order at the time
Ice machine tube failure
No explanation
Fatigue failure on vibration
Corrective actions inspection and maintenance
Gasket leak on compressor; shut off valve failed to close
Main brg. failure - broken crank
In pressure test to less than staled relief pressure; opened at lower pressure
Equipment upgrade stated
None given; Corr. Actions were Inspections; RC inferred
Condenser replaced with new design
Data missing ;
Solenoid valve fails to close
Inspection called out •
Correction actions PM, inspection and test
Procedure produced untenable thermal shock
Equipment not tied into central controller; •restarted improperly after maintenance
Contractor left compressor water off
Sched 40 thd pipe used instead of welded sch 80
Pumps replaced with a "more reliable design"
Strainer casting failure; changed design
Ice buildup; fan destroyed; high-pressure cutout fails
RV neither tested nor replaced '
Solenoid valve fails to close
RV set pressure less than high-pressure trip; would not reseat
Inspection called out
Improved control at PLC called out .
Procedure produced untenable thermal shock
Not stated; vent re-routed to accumulator
Failed to start water pump on startup
Contractor left compressor Water off
RV set pressure less than high-pressure trip; would not reseat
Equipment not tied .into central controller; restarted improperly, after maintenance •
Exposed piping - to be rerouted
Damaged ammonia piping; PHA called out as corrective active
Contractor left compressor water off
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 4
Offsite Consequence Analysis
4-36
ARIP
No,
1106
3218
1106
3090
4170
3538
453
Event
Open line
Valve left open
Not legible
Valve left open
Flex joint break
Operation
Construction
Startup new equip
Startup new equip
Maintenance
Temp inactive
Root Cause
Procedures
Procedures
PSSR
PSSR
PSSR
SWP
Training
Process
Cheese
Cheese
Public CS
Meat products
Not legible
Beer
Vcg, mfg.
Remarks
RV set pressure less than high-pressure trip; would not reseat
Failed to start water pump on startup
New construction; valve left uncapped at startup
No check for proper installation prior to startup
Details illegible
Valve left open during maintenance
Trapped liquid; operator error; design fault
November 19, 1998
-------
CHAPTERS: MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
5.1 GENERAL INFORMATION (§68.15)
If you have at least one Program 3 process (see Chapter 2 for guidance on determining
, . ' the Program levels of your processes), the management system provision in §68.15
requires you to:
Develop a management system to oversee the implementation of the risk
'• , management program elements;
Designate a qualified person or position with the overall responsibility for the
development, implementation, and integration of the risk management
program elements; and
Document the names of people or positions and define the lines of authority
through an organizational chart or other similar document, if you assign
responsibility for implementing individual requirements of the risk
management program to people or positions other than the person or position
with overall responsibility for the risk management program.
ABOUT THE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROVISION ,
. Management commitment to process safety is a critical element of your facility's risk
management program. Management commitment should not end when the last word
of the risk management plan is composed. For process^ safety to be a constant priority,
your facility must remain committed to every element of the risk management
program.'
This rule takes an integrated approach to managing risks. Each rule element (e.g.,
'.'•'.' . operating procedures, training — see Chapter 6) must be implemented on an ongoing,
daily basis and become a part'of the way you operate. Therefore, your commitment
and oversight should be continuous. " • . •' .
By satisfying the requirements of this provision, you are ensuring that:
. The risk management program elements are integrated and implemented on an
ongoing basis; and ' •
. All groups within a source understand the lines of responsibility and -
communication.
5.2 HOW TO MEET THE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
We understand that the sources covered by this rule are diverse and that you are in the
best position to decide how to appropriately implement and incorporate the risk
management program elements at your facility; therefore, we sought to maximize your
flexibility in complying with this program.
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 5
Management System
5-2
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR ME AS A SMALL FACILITY?
As a small facility that must comply with this provision, you most likely have one or
two Program 2 or 3 processes. To begin, you may identify either the qualified person
or position with overall responsibility for implementing the risk management program
elements at your facility. As a small facility, it may make sense and be practical to
identify the name of the qualified person, rather than the position. Recognize that the
only element of your management system that you must report in the RMP is the name
of the qualified person or position with overall responsibility. Further, changes to this
data element in your RMP do not require that you update your RMP.
Identification of a qualified individual or position with overall responsibility
may be.all you need to do if the person or position named directly oversees the
employees operating and maintaining the processes. You must define the lines of.;-= .,
authority with an organizational chart or similar document only if you choose to assign
responsibility for specific elements of the risk management program to persons or
positions other than the person with overall responsibility. For a small facility, with
few employees, it is likely that you will meet the requirements of this provision by
identifying the one person or position with the overall responsibility of implementing
the risk management program elements. If this is the case, you need not develop an
organizational chart. For this reason, this chapter does not provide an example
organizational chart for a small facility. . '
Even if you meet the requirements of this section by naming a single person or
position, it is important to recognize that the person or position assigned the
responsibility of overseeing implementation must have the ability and resources to
ensure that your facility and employees carry out the risk management program,
particularly the prevention elements, on an continuing basis. Key to the effectiveness
of the rule is integrated management of the program elements. ' •
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR ME AS A MEDIUM OR LARGE FACILITY?
" As a medium or large facility you may have more managerial turnover than smaller
sites. For this reason, it may make more sense at your facility to identify a position,
rather than the name of the specific person, with overall responsibility for the risk
management program elements. Remember that the only element of your
management system that you must report in the RMP is the name of the qualified
person or position with overall responsibility. Also note that changes to this data
element in your RMP do not require you to update your RMP.
Lines of Authority
As a relatively large or complex facility, you will likely choose to identify several
people or positions to supervise the implementation of the various elements of the
program; therefore, you must define the lines of authority through an organizational
chart or similar document Further, we expect that most facilities your size already
have an interest in formalizing internal communication and have likely developed and
maintained some type of documentation defining positions and responsibilities. Any
internal documents you currently have should be the starting point for defining the
lines of authority at your facility. You may find that you can simply use or update
November 19,1998
-------
• Chapters
5-3 Management System
current documents to satisfy this part of the management system provision. Exhibit
5-1 provides a sample of another type of documentation you may use in addition to or
as a replacement for an organization chart.
Defining the lines of authority and roles and responsibilities of staff that oversee the
risk management program elements will help to:
Ensure effective communication about process changes between divisions;
Clarify the roles and responsibilities related to process safety issues at your
facility;^ , ,
Avoid problems or conflicts among the various people responsible for
implementing elements of the. risk management program;
Avoid confusion and allow those responsible for implementation to work
together as a team; and " • -
Ensure that the program elements are integrated into an ongoing approach to
identifying hazards and managing risks.
Remember that all of the positions you identify in your documentation will report their
progress to the person with overall responsibility for the program. However, nothing
in the risk management program rule prohibits you from satisfying the management
provision by assigning process safety committees with management responsibility,
provided that an organizational chart or similar document identifies the names or '
positions and lines of authority. - :
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 5
Management System
5-4
EXHIBIT 5-1
SAMPLE MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTATION
Position
Primary Responsibility
Changes
Responsibility re: Changes
Operations Manager
Training Supervisor
Developing OPs
Oversight of operation
On-the-job training
On-the-job competency testing
Process Safety Information
Selecting participants for PHAs,
incident investigations
Develop management of change and
pre-startup procedures
New Equipment
New Process Parameters
New Procedures
Change in Process-Utilization
Inform head of training
Inform head of maintenance
Inform lead for PHAs
Inform hazmat team as needed
Inform contractors
Develop, track, oversee operator
training program
Track competency testing
Set up and track operator refresher
training
Set up training for maintenance
Work with contractors
New Equipment
New Process Parameters -
New Procedures
Change in Process Utilization
New regulatory requirements
Revise training and refresher training
courses
Revise maintenance courses, as
needed
Inform other leads of need for
additional training
Maintenance Supervisor
Develop maintenance schedules
Oversee and document maintenance
Revise schedules as needed
New Equipment
New Process Parameters
New Procedures
Change in Process Utilization
Inform operations manager of
potential problem areas
Inform training supervisor of any
training revisions
Inform contractors
Revise schedules
Hazmat Team Chief
Develop and exercise ER plan
Train responders
Test and maintain ER equipment
Coordinate with public responders
Select participants in accident
investigations
New Equipment
New Process Parameters
New Procedures
Change in Process Utilization
New regulatory requirements
Revise the ER plan as needed
Inform operations manager of
problems created by changes
Work with training supervisor to
revise training of team and others
November 19, 1998
-------
5-5
Chapters
Management System
EXHIBIT 5-1
SAMPLE MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTATION
Position
Primary Responsibility
Changes
Responsibility re: Changes
Health and Safety Officer
Oversee implementation of RMP
Develop accident investigation
procedures
Oversee compliance audits
Develop employee participation
plans
Conduct contractor evaluations
Track regulations
New Equipment
NeW Process Parameters
New Procedures
Change in Process Utilization
New regulatory requirements
Inform all leads of new requirements
and assign responsibilities
Ensure that everyone is informed of
changes and that changes are
incorporated in programs as needed.
November 19,1998
-------
Chapters
Management System 5-6
November 19, 1998
t ••
-------
CHAPTER 6: PREVENTION PROGRAM (PROGRAM 3)
Many of you will need to do little that is new to comply with the Program 3
prevention program, because you already have the OSHA PSM program in place.
Whether you're building on the PSM standard or creating a new program, keep these
things in mind.
EPA and OSHA have different legal authority — EPA for offsite
consequences, OSHA for on-site consequences. If you are already complying
with the PSM standard, your process hazard analysis (PHA) team may have to
assess new hazards that could affect the public or the environment offsite.
Protection measures that are suitable for workers (e.g., venting releases to the
outdoors) may be the very kind of thing that imperils the public.
-.-.'. .,.-»•'. • ,
Integrate the elements of your prevention program. You must,ensure that a
change in any single element of your program leads to a review of other
elements to identify any effect caused by the change.
Most importantly, make accident prevention an institution at your site. Like
the entire risk management program, a prevention program is more than a
collection of written documents. It is a way to make safe operations and
accident prevention the way you do business everyday.
6.1 PROGRAM 3 PREVENTION PROGRAM AND OSHA PSM
The Program 3 prevention program includes the requirements of the OSHA PSM
standard. Whenever we could, EPA used OSHA's language verbatim. However,
there were a few terms that EPA had to change to reflect the differences between its
authority and OSHA's. For example, OSHA regulates to protect workers; EPA's
responsibility is to protect public health and safety and the environment. Therefore,
an "owner or operator" subject to EPA's rule must investigate catastrophic releases
"that present(s) (an) imminent and substantial endangerment to public health and the
environment," but an OSHA "employer" would focus its concerns on the workplace.
To clarify these distinctions, we deleted specific references to workplace impacts and
"safety and health" contained in OSHA's PSM standards. We also used different
schedule dates and references where appropriate. Exhibit 6-1 compares terms in
EPA's rule with their counterparts in the OSHA PSM standard.
EXHIBIT 6-1
COMPARABLE EPA AND OSHA TERMS
Highly hazardous substance
Employer
Facility
Standard
Regulated substance
Owner or operator
Stationary source
Rule or part
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3)
6-2
There are twelve elements in the Program 3 prevention program. Each element
corresponds'with a section of subpart D of part 68. Exhibit 6-2 sets out each of the
twelve elements, the corresponding section numbers, and OSHA references. Two
OSHA elements are not included. Emergency response is dealt with separately in part
68; the OSHA trade secrets requirement (provision of trade secret information to
employees) is beyond EPA's statutory authority.
' .' /
EXHIBIT 6-2
SUMMARY OF PROGRAM 3 PREVENTION PROGRAM
(40 CFR PART 68, SUBPART D)
SE^ON^''!
§68.65
§ 68.67
§ 68.69
§ 68.71
§ 68.73
§ 68.75
§ 68.77
§ 68.79
§ 68.81
§ 68.83
§ 68.85
§ 68.87
TITLE ..': :•.•.••:'''.""
Process Safety Information •
Process Hazard Analysis (PHA)
Operating Procedures
Training
Mechanical Integrity
Management of Change ,
Pre-Startup Review
Compliance Audits
Incident Investigation
Employee Participation
Hot Work Permit
Contractors
OSHA PSM REFERENCE
PSM standard § 1910.119(d).
PSM standard § 1 9 1 0. 1 1 9(e).
PSM standard § 1910.119(f).
PSM standard § 1910.1 19(g).
PSM standard § 1910.1 19(j).
PSM standard § 1910.119(1).
PSM standard § 1910.119(1).
PSM standard § 1 9 1 0. 1 1 9(o).
PSM standard §1910.11 9(m)
PSM standard § 1910.119(c).
PSM standard § 1910.1 19(k).
PSM standard § 1910.1 19(h).
OSHA provided guidance on PSM in non-mandatory appendix C to the standard.
OSHA has reprinted this appendix as PSM Guidelines for Compliance (OSHA 3133).
The OSHA guidance is reproduced, reordered to track part 68, in Appendix F. The
remainder of this chapter briefly outlines the major requirements and provides a
discussion of any differences between EPA and OSHA. In some cases, further
guidance is provided on the,meaning of specific terms. For more detailed guidance,
you should refer to the OSHA guidance in Appendix F. IIAR has also developed
PSM guidance that is specific for ammonia refrigeration systems: Process Safety
Management Guidelines for Ammonia Refrigeration, 2nd Edition.
November 19,1998
-------
6-3
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3)
6.2 PROCESS SAFETY INFORMATION (§ 68.65)
Exhibit 6-3 briefly summarizes the process safety information requirements.
EXHIBIT 6-3
PROCESS SAFETY INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS
For chemicals, you must
complete information on:
Toxicity
Permissible exposure limits
Physical data
Reactivity
Corrosivity
Thermal & chemical stability
Hazardous effects of
inadvertent mixing of
materials that could
foreseeably occur
For process technology, you
must provide:
A block flow diagram or
simplified process flow
diagram
Information on process
chemistry
Maximum intended inventory
of the EPA-regulated chemical
Safe .upper & lower Hmits for
such items as temperature,
pressure, flows, or
composition'
An evaluation of the
consequences of deviation
For equipment in the
process, you must include
information on; .
Materials of construction
Piping & instrument diagrams
(P&IDsK—
Electrical classification
Relief system design & design
basis
Ventilation system design
Design codes & standards
employed
Safety systems
Material and energy balances
for processes built after June
21,1999
WHERE To Go FOR MORE INFORMATION
Diagrams. You may find it useful to consult Appendix B of OSHA's PSM final rule,
computer software programs that do P&IDs, or other diagrams.
Guidance and Reports. Various engineering societies issue technical reports relating
to process design. EPA's Chemical Safety Alert on Hazards of Ammonia Releases at
Ammonia Refrigeration Facilities, contained in Appendix G of this document also
provides suggests on design issues you may want to consider. Other sources you may
find u'seful include: ,
Ammonia Data Book, International Institute of Ammonia Refrigeration
(EAR).
' American National Standard for Equipment, Design, and Installation of
Ammonia Mechanical Refrigerating Systems, ANSI/EAR Standard 2,
ANSI/EAR 2-1992..
American National Standard: Safety Code for Mechanical Refrigeration,
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 15, ANSI/ASHRAE 1994.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3)
6-4
Qs&As
PROCESS SAFETY INFORMATION
Q. What does "materials of construction" apply to and how do I find this information?
A. You must document the materials of construction for all process equipment in a covered process.
For example, you need to know the materials of construction for process vessels, storage vessels,
piping, hoses, valves, and flanges. Equipment specifications should provide this information.
Q. What does "electrical classification" mean?
A. Equipment and wiring for locations where fire and explosion hazards may exist must meet
requirements based on the hazards. Each room, section, or area mu.st.be considered separately.
Equipment should be marked to show Class, Group, and operating temperature or temperature range.
You must determine the appropriate classification for each area and ensure that the equipment used is
suitable for that classification. The equipment covered includes transformers, capacitors, motors,
instruments, relays, wking, switches, fuses, generators, lighting, alarms, remote controls,
communication, and grounding. Electrical classification will be included in equipment specifications.
Q. What does "relief system design basis" mean?
A. Relief systems include, but are not limited to, relief valves, relief headers, relief drums, and rupture
disks. Design basis means documenting how the loads and sizes of the relief system, as well as inlet
and outlet sizes, were determined. This includes a description of overpressure scenarios considered,
the scenario that creates the largest load to be relieved, the assumptions used, and if the device meets a
certain code. Relief devices on pressure vessels must conform to ASME codes. -Industry codes (e.g.,
API RP 520) also provide guidance on scenarios that should be considered and on equations for sizing
of devices. Scenarios you may need to consider include fire, blocked flow, control valve failure,
overheating, power outage, tube rupture, and cooling water failure. For two-phase flow, you should
review AIChE publications from the Design Institute for Emergency Relief Systems (DIERS).
Q. What do I have to do for material and energy balances?
A. For new processes, you must document both material and energy inputs and outputs of a process.
For example, you would document the quantity of a regulated substance added to the process, the
quantity consumed during the process, and the quantity that remains in the output. This requirement
will not generally apply to storage processes.
Guidelines for: HAR Minimum Safety Criteria for a Safe Ammonia
Refrigeration System, IIAR, B-109, 1988.
Guidelines for Ammonia Machinery Room Ventilation, IIAR Bulletin 111,
1990.
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 6
6-5 , Prevention Program (Program 3)
Guidelines for identification of Ammonia Refrigeration Piping and System
Components, EAR, B-l 14, 1991.
Guidelines for Process Safety Documentation, Center for Chemical Process
, " Safety of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers 1995.
Emergency Relief System Design Using DIERS Technology, American
Institute of Chemical Engineers, 1992.
Emergency Relief Systems for Runaway Chemical Reactions and Storage
Vessels: A Summary of Multiphase Flow Methods, American Institute of
Chemical Engineers, 1986... "
--•--!=*•' Guidelines for Pressure Relief and Emergency Handling Systems, Center for
Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers,
1998.
Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, Volumes I, II, and III, Frank P.
Lees, Butterworths: London 1996. . .,
6.3 PROCESS HAZARD ANALYSIS (§ 68.67)
Exhibit 6-4 provides a summary of the requirements for process hazard analyses ,
(PHAs).
EPA/OSHA DIFFERENCES
You can use a PHA conducted under the OSHA PSM standard as your initial process
hazard analysis. AH OSHA PHAs must have been completed by May 1997.
. Therefore, the only "new" PHAs will be for non-OSHA Program 3 processes. If the
, process is subject to OSHA PSM, you can update and revalidate your PHA on
OSHA's schedule.
Offsite impacts. You should consider offsite impacts when you conduct a PHA
under EPA's rule (except for an initial PHA where you are using the PHA conducted
for OSHA PSM). Since you are in the Program 3 prevention program because you
must comply with the PSM standard, you may not have fully considered offsite
consequence because the focus of PSM is worker protection. Practically speaking,
however, there should be few instances where the scenarios considered for OSHA fail
to address offsite impacts. A well-done PHA should identify all failure scenarios that
. could lead to significant exposure, of workers, the public, or the environment. The •
only issue that may require further consideration for part 68 processes is whether any
protection measures that were adequatelbr worker safety are inadequate for public
and environmental safety.
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3)
6-6
EXHIBIT 6-4
PROCESS HAZARD ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
The PHA must cover:
Hazards of the process
Identification of previous,
potentially catastrophic
incidents
Engineering and
administrative controls
applicable to the hazards
Consequence of failure of
controls
Siting
Human factors
Qualitative evaluation of
health and safety impacts of
control failure
Techniques must be one or
more of:
What If
Checklist
What If/Checklist
Hazard and Operability Study
(HAZOP)
Failure Mode and Effects
Analysis (FMEA)
Fault Tree Analysis
Appropriate equivalent
methodology
Other requirements:
Analysis must be done by a
team, one member of which
has experience in the process,
one member .of which is
knowledgeable in the PHA
technique .'
A system must be developed
for addressing the team's
recommendations and-
documenting resolution and
corrective actions taken
The PHA must be updated at
least once every five years
PHAs and documentation of
actions must be kept for th
life of the process
Consider two circumstances — one where OSHA's PSM standard and EPA's risk
management program rule lead to the same result, and another where protecting
workers could mean endangering the public and the environment. For flammables,
any scenario that could affect the public almost certainly would have the potential to
affect workers; measures taken to protect your employees likely will protect the public
and the environment. For ammonia under PSM, however, you may plan to address a
loss of containment by venting toxic vapors to the outside air. In each circumstance, a
PHA should define how the loss of containment could occur. However, for EPA, the
PHA team should reassess venting as an appropriate mitigation measure.
Updating and revalidating your PHA. For EPA, you must complete the initial PHA
for each Program 3 process not later than June 21, 1999, and update it at least once
every five years. You may complete an initial PHA before that date. You may use an
OSHA PHA as your initial PHA, and update and revalidate it every five years on the
OSHA schedule. A PHA completed after August 19, 1996 (the effective date of part
68) should consider offsite impacts.
REJECTING TEAM RECOMMENDATIONS
You may not always agree with ypur PHA team's recommendations and may wish to
reject a recommendation. OSHA's compliance directive CPL 2-2.45A-revised states
that you may decline a team recommendation if you can document one of the
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 6
6-7 Prevention Program (Program 3)
following: (1) the analysis upon which the recommendation is based contains factual
errors; (2) the recommendation is not necessary to protect the health of employees or
contractors; (3) an alternative measure would provide a sjafficient level of protection;
or (4) the recommendation is infeasible. For part 68, you should also consider
whether recommendations are not necessary to protect public health and the
environment. .. . . -
UPDATING YOUR PHA >
You should update or revalidate your PHA whenever there is a new hazard or risk
created by changes to your process. Such changes might include introducing a new
process, process equipment,'or regulated substance; altering process chemistry that
results in any change to safe operating limits; or other alteration that introduces a new
hazard. You might, for example, introduce a-new hazard if you installed a gas
pipeline next to a storage tank containing a regulated substance. Other candidates
could be making changes in process equipment. EPA recommends that .you consider
revalidating your PHA whenever adjoining processes create a hazard. Remember that
you have a general duty to prevent accidents and ensure safety at your source, which
may require you to take steps beyond those specified in the risk management program
rule. . • • ,
WHERE To Go FOR MORE INFORMATION
Appendix 6-A of this chapter provides a summary of each of the techniques, a
description of the types of processes for which they may be appropriate, and estimates
about the time and staff required for each.
Part 68 and OSHA PSM require that whichever technique of techniques you use, you
.must have at least one person on the PHA team who is trained in the use of the
technique. Training on such techniques is available from a number of professional
organizations as well as private companies. You may have staff members who are
capable of providing this training as well. You might find the following documents
useful. ' •
Guidelines for Hazard Evaluation Procedures, 2nd Ed. with Worked.
examples, Center for Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of
Chemical Engineers 1992. '
,*•** -.-••" '
Evaluating Process Safety in the Chemical Industry, Chemical Manufacturers
Association. . - .
Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, Volumes I, II, and III, Frank P.
Lees, Butterworths: London 1996.
Management of Process Hazards (RP 750), American Petroleum Institute.
~- ' - f
Risk-Based Decision Making (Publication 16288), American Petroleum
Institute. . '
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3)
6-8
Qs & As
OFFSITE CONSEQUENCES
Q. What does EPA mean by "consider offsite consequences"? Do we have to do an environmental
impact assessment (EIA)?
A. EPA does not expect you to do an EIA. Potential consequences to the public and the environment
are already analyzed in the offsite consequence analysis. In the PHA, EPA only expects you to identify
any failure scenarios that could lead to public exposures and to examine whether your strategies are
adequate to reduce the risk of such exposures.
Q. If I need to revise a PHA to consider offsite consequences, when do I have to do that?
A. In general, for a PHA completed to meet the requirements of OSHA PSM, you should revise the
PHA to consider offsite consequences when you update that PHA. Any PHA for a covered process
completed or updated for OSHA PSM after August 19, 1996, when part 68 was effective, should
examine offsite consequences. For example, if you completed an initial PHA for OSHA PSM in May
1993, OSHA requires that you update that PHA by May 1998. In that update, you should consider
offsite consequences. If you complete your initial PHA for OSHA in May 1995, you must'update it by
May 2000; PHAs conducted for part 68 must include consideration of offsite consequences at that
time.
6.4 OPERATING PROCEDURES (§ 68.69)
Exhibit 6-5 summarizes what your operating procedures must address. Operating
• procedures must be readily accessible to workers who operate or maintain the process.
You must review operating procedures as often as necessary to assure that they reflect
current practices and any changes to the process or facility. You must certify annually
that the operating procedures are current and accurate.
November 19.1998
-------
6-9
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3)
EXHIBIT 6-5
OPERATING PROCEDURES REQUIREMENTS
Steps for each
' operating phase
Initial startup
Normal operations
Temporary operations
Emergency shutdown
Emergency operations
Normal shutdown
Startup following a
- turnaround or emergency
shutdown
Lockout/tagout
Confined space entry
Opening process
equipment or piping
Entrance into the facility
Operating limits
Consequences of
deviations
Steps to avoid,
correct deviations
Safety & health
considerations
Chemical properties & hazards
Precautions for preventing
chemical exposure
Control measures for exposure
QC for raw materials and
chemical inventory
Special or unique hazards
Safety
systems &
their
functions
•
Address
whatever is
applicable
WHERE To Go FOR MORE INFORMATION
EPA's Chemical Safety Alert on Hazards of Ammonia Releases at Ammonia
Refrigeration Facilities, contained in Appendix G of this document, provides
suggestions on procedures you may want to consider. In addition, the following may
be useful:
Guidelines for Suggested Safety and Operating Procedures When Making
Refrigeration Plant Tie-ins, IIAR Bulletin 107, 1977^
Guidelines for IIAR Safety Criteria for a Safe Ammonia Refrigeration System,
'lIAR Bulletin 109, 1988.
Guidelines for Start-Up, Inspection, and Maintenance of Ammonia
Refrigeration Systems, EAR Bulletin 110, 1993.
Guidelines for Avoiding Component Failure in Industrial Refrigeration
Systems Caused by Abnormal Pressure or Shock, HA.R Bulletin 116, 1992.
Guidelines for Process Safety Fundamentals for General Plant Operations,
' Center for Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical
Engineers 1995.
Guidelines for Safe Process Operations and Maintenance, Center for
Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers
1995. .
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3) 6-10
Guidelines for Writing Effective Operating and Maintenance Procedures,
Center for Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical
Engineers 1996.
6.5 TRAINING (§68.71)
You are required to train new operators on the operating procedures and cover health
and safety hazards, emergency operations, and safe work practices applicable to the
employee's tasks. For workers involved in operating the process before June 21, 1999,
you may certify in writing that they are competent to operate the process safely, in
accordance with the operating procedures. At least every three years you must
provide refresher training (you must consult with employees involved in operating the
• process to determine the appropriate frequency). Finally, you are required to. • -
determine that each operator has received and understood the training and keep a
record for each employee with the date of the training and the method used to verify
that the employee understood the training.
WHERE To Go FOR MORE INFORMATION
ILAR has a series of training yideos,-with workbooks and computerized tests, that
• cover the basics of ammonia refrigeration systems.
Guidelines for Process Safety Fundamentals for General Plant Operations,
Center for Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical
Engineers 1995.
Guidelines for Technical Planning for On-Site Emergencies, Center for
Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers
1995.
Federally Mandated Training and Information (Publication 12000),
American Petroleum Institute.
6.6 MECHANICAL INTEGRITY (§ 68.73)
*J ' ,
You must have a mechanical integrity program for pressure vessels and storage tanks,
piping systems, relief and vent systems and devices, emergency shutdown systems,
controls, and pumps. Exhibit 6-6 briefly summarizes the dther requirements for your
mechanical integrity program.
In ammonia refrigeration plants, experience indicates that the following can be
important:
November 19,1998
-------
6-11
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3)
EXHIBIT 6-6
MECHANICAL INTEGRITY CHART
Written
procedures
C^Establish &
implement
written
. procedures to
• maintain the
integrity of
process
equipment.
'. . ' .
Training -
Train process .
maintenance
employees in an
overview of the
process and its
hazards.
Make sure this
training covers
the procedures
applicable to
safe job
performance.
•
Inspection &
testing
Inspect & test
process equipment.
Use recognized and
generally accepted
good engineering
practices.
Follow a schedule
.mat-matches the
manufacturer's
recommendations or
more frequently if •
prior operating
experience indicates ...
is necessary.
Document each
inspection & test
with: Date,
inspector name,
equipment identifier,
test or inspection
performed, results.
Equipment
deficiencies
Correct
equipment
deficiencies
before further
use of process
equipment or
whenever
necessary to
ensure safety.
Quality
assurance
Establish a QA
program for new
construction &
equipment, newly
installed
equipment,
maintenance
materials, and
spare parts &
equipment.
-
Periodic walk-throughs to find unusual or increasing vibration, leaks, and
other indications of potential failures. The age of the system and the way in
which the system is used will determine the frequency of such inspections;
older plants or units where frequent changes are made may benefit from daily
walk-throughs. .
Inspection of pressure vessels. EAR'S Bulletin 110 provides information on
inspection for stress corrosion cracking.
Periodic replacement or preventive inspection and maintenance of pressure
relief valves. EAR Bulletin 110 recommends replacement every five years.
ASME, ANSI/ASHRAE 15,. and state and local codes may also provide
guidance. :
Periodid inspection and calibration of liquid level, temperature and pressure ,
instruments, switches, and shutdown devices that you determine have'safety
implications. v
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3) 6-12
Periodic inspection of major powered equipment (e.g., compressors, pumps,
large fans, bearings, couplings, shaft seals, mountings) for vibration or
incipient mechanical failure. •
Consideration of spare parts. Replacement parts must be appropriate for
refrigeration service.
WHERE To Go FOR MORE INFORMATION
Guidance and Reports. EPA's Chemical Safety Alert on Hazards of Ammonia
Releases at Ammonia Refrigeration Facilities, contained in Appendix G of this
document, provides suggestions on preventive maintenance procedures you may want
to consider. Other sources of guidance and reports you may find useful include:
Guidelines for Suggested Safety and Operating Procedures When Making
Refrigeration Plant Tie-ins, EAR Bulletin 107, 1977.
Guidelines for Water Contamination in Ammonia Refrigeration Systems,
EAR Bulletin 108, 1986.
Guidelines for IIAR Safety Criteria for a Safe Ammonia Refrigeration System,
EAR Bulletin 109, 1988.
Guidelines for Start-Up, Inspection, and Maintenance of Ammonia
Refrigeration Systems, IIAR Bulletin 110, 1993.
Guidelines for Avoiding Component Failure in Industrial Refrigeration
Systems Caused by Abnormal Pressure or Shock, IIAR Bulletin 116, 1992.
Guidelines for Process Equipment Reliability Data with Data Tables, Center
for. Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers
1989.
Guidelines for Process Safety Documentation, Center for Chemical Process
Safely of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers 1995.
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: Maintenance Inspection, Rating, Repair,
and Alteration (API 510), American Petroleum Institute.
Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction (Std 653), American
Petroleum Institute. ' ' • • ™
November 19, 1998
-------
6-13
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3)
6.7 MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE (§ 68.75)
Exhibits 6-7 briefly summarizes EPA's MOC requirements.
EXHIBIT 6-7
MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE REQUIREMENT
MOC procedures
must address:
Technical basis for
the change
Impact on safety
and health.
Modifications to
operating procedures
Necessary time
period for the change
Authorization
requirements for
proposed change
Employees
affected by the
change must:
Be informed of the
change before
startup
Trained in the
change before
startup
Update process safety
information if:
A change covered by
MOC procedures results
in a change in any PSI
required under EPA's rule
(see §67,65)
Update operating
procedures if:
A change covered
by MQC procedures
results in a- change
in -any -operating
procedure required
under EPA's rule
(see § 67.69)
6.8
WHERE To Go FOR MORE INFORMATION
Management of Change in Chemical Plants: Learning from Case Histories,
Center for Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical
Engineers 1993.
Plant Guidelines for Technical Management of Chemical Process Safety,
Center for Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical
Engineers 1992.
Management of Process Hazards (RP 750), American Petroleum Institute.
PRE-STARTUP REVIEW (§ 68.77)
You must conduct your pre-startup safety review for new stationary sources or
modified stationary sources when the modification is significant enough to require a
change in safety information under the management of change element. You must
conduct your pre-startup review before you introduce a regulated substance to a
process, and you must address the items listed in Exhibit 6-8.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3)
6-14
EXHIBIT 6-8
PRE-STARTUP REVIEW REQUIREMENTS
Design Specifications
Confirm that new or
modified construction
and equipment meet
design specifications.
Adequate Procedures
Ensure that
procedures for safety,
operating, maintenance,
and emergencies are
adequate and in place.
PHA/MOC
Perform a PHA and
resolve or implement any
recommendations for new
process. Meet
management of change
requirements for modified
process.
Training
Confirm that each
employee involved
in the process has
been trained
completely.
6.9 COMPLIANCE AUDITS (§ 68.79)
You must conduct an audit of the process to evaluate compliance with the prevention
program requirements at least once every three years. At least one person involved in
the audit must be knowledgeable in the process. You must develop a report of the
findings and document appropriate responses to each finding and document that
deficiencies have been addressed. The two most recent audit reports must be kept on-
site.
• WHERE To Go FOR MORE INFORMATION
Guidelines for Auditing Process Safety Management Systems, Center for
Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers
1993.
Process Safety Management — Compliance Guidelines and Enforcement
Procedures, CPL2-2.45A, US OSHA.
6.10 INCIDENT INVESTIGATION (§ 68.81)
Exhibit 6-9 briefly summarizes the steps you must take for investigating incidents.
November 19, 1998
-------
6-15
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3)
EXHIBIT 6-9
INCIDENT INVESTIGATION REQUIREMENTS
Initiate an investigation
promptly.
Begin investigating no later than 48 hours following the incident.
Establish a knowledgeable
investigation team.
Establish an investigation team to gather the facts, analyze the
event, and develop the how and why of what went wrong. At
least one team member must have knowledge of the process
involved. Consider adding other workers in the process area
where the incident occurred. Their knowledge will be significant
and should give you the fullest insight into the incident.
Summarize the investigation in a
report.
Among other things, the report must identify the factors .
contributing to the incident. Remember that identifying the root
cause may be more important than identifying the initiating
event. The report must also include any recommendations for
corrective actions. Remember that the purpose of the report is to
help management take corrective action.
Address the team's findings and
recommendations.
Establish a system to address promptly and resolve the incident
report findings and recommendations; document resolutions and
corrective actions.
Review the report with
and contractors.
your staff
You must share the report - its findings and recommendations
with affected workers whose johTtasks are relevant to the
incident.
Retain the report.
Keep incident investigation reports for five years.
You must investigate each incident which resulted in, or could have resulted in, a
"catastrophic release of a regulated substance." A catastrophic release is one that
"presents an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health and the
environment." Although the rule requires you to investigate only those incidents
which resulted in, or could reasonably have resulted in a catastrophic release, EPA
encourages you to investigate all accidental releases. Investigating minor accidents or
near misses can, help you identify problems that could result in major releases if left
unaddressed.
WHERE To Go FOR MORE INFORMATION .
Guidelines for Investigating Chemical Process Incidents, Center for Chemical
Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers 1992.
Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations (NFPA 921), National Fire
Protection Association. ' •
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3)
6-16
6.11 EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION (§ 68.83)
i • '
Exhibit 6-10 briefly summarizes what you must do.
EXHIBIT 6-10
EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS
Write a plan.
Consult with
employees.
Provide access to
information.
Develop a written plan of action regarding how you will implement
employee participation.
Consult your employees and their representatives regarding conducting and
developing PHAs and other elements of process safety management in the
risk management program rule.
Ensure that your employees and their representatives have access to PHAs
and all other information required to be developed under the rule.
6.12 HOT WORK PERMITS (§ 68.85)
Exhibit 6-11 briefly summarizes how to meet the hot work permit requirement.
EXHIBIT 6-11
HOT WORK PERMITS REQUIREMENTS
Issue a hot work permit.
Implement fire prevention and
protection.
Indicate the appropriate dates.
Identify the work.
Maintain the permit on file.
You must issue this permit for hot work conducted on or near a
covered process.
You must ensure that the fire prevention and protection
requirements in 29 CFR 1910.252(a) are implemented before the
hot work begins. The permit must document this.
The permit should indicate the dates authorized for hot work.
The permit must identify the object on which hot work is to be
performed.
You must keep the permit on file until workers have completed the
hot work operations.
WHERETO Go FOR MORE INFORMATION
Standard for Fire Prevention in Use of Cutting and Welding Processes
(NFPA 518), National Fire Protection Association.
Standard for Welding, Cutting and Brazing, 29 CFR 1910 Subpart Q.
November 19.1998
-------
6-17 -
- Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3)
6.13 CONTRACTORS (§ 68.87)
Exhibit 6-12 summarizes both yours and the contractors' responsibilities where
contractors perform maintenance or repair, turnaround, major renovation, or specialty
work on or adjacent to a covered process.
EXHIBIT 6,12
CONTRACTORS CHART
You must...
Check safety performance When selecting a
contractor, you must obtain and^evaluate
information regarding the safety performance of
the contractor.
{/Provide safely and hazards information.
You must inform the contractor of potential
fire, explosion, or toxic release hazards; and of
' your emergency response activities as they
relate to the contractor's work and the process.
Ensure safe practices. You must ensure that
you have safe work practices to control the
entrance, presence, and exit of contract
employees in covered process areas.
Verify that the contractor acts responsibly.
• You must verify that the contractor is fulfilling
its responsibilities.
Your contractor must...
Ensure training for its employees. The
contractor must train its employees to ensure
that they perferis their jobs safely and in
accordance with your source's safety
procedures.
Ensure its employees know process hazards
and applicable emergency actions. The
contractor must assure that contract employees
are aware of hazards and emergency procedures
relating to the employees' work.
Document training. The contractor must
prepare a record documenting and verifying
adequate employee training.
Ensure its employees are following your
safety procedures.
Inform you of hazards. The contractor must
tell you of any unique hazards presented by its
work or of any hazards it finds during
performance.
EPA/OSHA DIFFERENCES
EPA has no authority to require that you maintain an occupational injury and illness
log for contract employees. Be aware, however, that OSHA does have this authority,
and that the PSM standard does set this requirement. (See 29 CFR
1910.119(h)(2)(vi)). ; ,
WHERE To Go FOR MORE INFORMATION
Contractor and Client Relations to Assure Process Safety, Center for
Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers
1996. •
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3) 6-18
API/CMA Managers Guide to Implementing a Contractor Safety Program
(RP 2221), American Petroleum Institute.
Improving Owner and Contractor Safety Performance (RP 2220), American
Petroleum Institute.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 6
6-I9_ Prevention Program (Program 3)
APPENDIX 6-A
PHA TECHNIQUES
This appendix provides descriptions of each of the PHA techniques listed,in the OSHA
PSM standard and § 68.67. These descriptions include information on what each technique is,
which types of processes they may be appropriate for, what their limitations are, and what level
of effort is typically associated with each. This information is based on Guidelines for Hazard
Evaluation Procedures, 2nd Ed., published by AIChE/CCPS. If you are interested in, more
detailed discussion and worked examples, you should refer to the AIChE/CCPS volume.
Neither the information below nor the full AIChE/CCPS volume will provide you with
enough information to conduct a PHA. The rule requires that your PHA team include at least
one person trained in the technique you use. Training in PHA techniques is available from a
. number of organizations. If you must conduct multiple PHAs, you are likely to need to update
your PHAs frequently, or you have a complex process that will take several .weeks to analyze,
you may want to consider training one or more of your employees. If you have a single process
that is unlikely to change more than once every five years, you may find it more cost-effective to
hire a trained PHA leader. . , .
DESCRIPTIONS OF TECHNIQUES
CHECKLISTS
Checklists are primarily used for processes that are covered by standards, codes, and
industry practices — for example, storage tanks designed to ASME standards, ammonia handling
covered by OSHA (29 CFR 1910.111), propane facilities,subject to NFPA-58. Checklists are '
easy to use and can help familiarize new staff with the process equipment. AIChE/CCPS states
that checklists are a highly cost-effective way to identify customarily recognized hazards.
Checklists are dependent on the experience of the people who develop them; if the checklist is
not complete, the analysis may not identify hazardous situations.
Checklists are created by taking the. applicable standards and practices and using them to
generate a list of questions that seek to identify any differences or deficiencies. If a checklist for
a process does not exist, an experienced person must develop one based on standards, practices,
and facility or equipment experience. A completed checklist usually provides "yes," "no," "not
applicable," and "need more information" answers to each item. A checklist analysis involves
touring the process area and comparing equipment to the list.
AIChE/CCPS estimates that for a small or simple system a checklist will take 2 to 4 hours
to prepare, 4 to 8 hours to evaluate the process, and 4 to 8 hours to document the results.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3) 6-20
For larger or more complex processes, a checklist will take 1 to 3 days to prepare, 3 to 5 days to
evaluate, and 2 to 4 days to document.
WHAT-IF
A What-If is a brainstorming approach in which a group of people familiar with the
process ask questions about possible deviations or failures. These questions may be framed as
What-If, as in "What if the pump fails?" or may be expressions of more general concern, as in "I
worry about contamination during unloading." A scribe or recorder takes down all of the
questions on flip charts or a computer. The questions are then divided into specific areas of
investigation, usually related to consequences of interest. Each area is then addressed by one or
more team members.
What-If analyses are intended to identify hazards, hazardous situations, or accident
scenarios. The team of experienced people identifies accident scenarios, consequences, and
existing safeguards, then suggest possible risk reduction alternatives. The method can be used to
examine deviations from design, construction, modification, or operating intent. It requires a
basic understanding of the process and an ability to combine possible deviations from design
intent with outcomes. AIChE describes this as a powerful procedure if the staff are experienced;
"otherwise, the results are likely to be incomplete."
A What-If usually reviews the entire process, from the introduction of the chemicals to
the end. The analysis may focus on particular consequences of concern. AIChE provides the
following example of a What-If question: "What if the raw material is the wrong concentration?"
The team would then try to determine how the process would respond: "If the concentration of
acid were doubled, the reaction could not be controlled and a rapid exotherm would result." The
team might then recommend steps to prevent feeding wrong concentrations or to stop the feed if
the reaction could not be controlled.
A What-If of simple systems can be done by one or two people; a more complex process
requires a larger team and longer meetings. AIChE/CCpS estimates that for a small or simple
system a What-If analysis will take 4 to 8 hours to prepare, 1 to 3 days to evaluate the process,
and 1 to 2 days to document the results. For larger or more complex processes, a What-If will
take 1 to 3 days to prepare, 4 to 7 days to evaluate, and 4 to 7 days to document.
WHAT-IF/CHECKLIST
A What-If/Checklist combines the creative, brainstorming aspects of the What-If with the
systematic approach of the Checklist. The combination of techniques can compensate for the
weaknesses of each. The What-If part of the process can help the team identify hazards and
accident scenarios that are beyond the experience of the team members. The checklist provides a
more detailed systematic approach that can fill in gaps in the brainstorming process. The
technique is generally used to identify the most common hazards that exist in a process. AIChE
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 6
6-21 Prevention Program (Program 3)
states that it is. often the first PHA conducted on a process, with subsequent analyses using more
detailed approaches. ;
The purpose of a What-If/Checklist is to identify hazards and the general types of
accidents that could occur, evaluate qualitatively the effects of the effects, and determine whether
safeguards are adequate. Usually the What-If brainstorming precedes the use of the checklist,
although the order can be reversed.
The technique usually is performed by a team experienced in the design, operation, and
maintenance of the process. The number of people required depends on the complexity of the
process. AIChE/CCPS estimates that for a small or simple system a What-If/Checklist analysis
will take 6 to 12 hours to prepare, 6 to 12 hours to evaluate the process, and 4 to .8 hours to
document the results. 'For larger or more complex processes, a What-If/Checklist will take 1 to 3
days to prepare, 4 to 7 days to evaluate, and 1 to 3 weeks to document.
HAZOP
The Hazard and Operability Analysis (HAZOP) was originally developed to identify both
hazards and Operability problems at chemical process plants, particularly for processes using
technologies with which the plant was not familiar. The technique has been found to be useful
for existing processes as well. A HAZOP requires an interdisciplinary team and an experienced
team leader. , '.'"-.-.','
The purpose of a HAZOP is to review a process or operation systematically to identify
whether process deviations could lead to undesirable consequences. AIChE states that the
technique can be used for continuous or batch processes and can be adapted to evaluate written
procedures. It can be used at any stage in the life of a process.
HAZOPs usually require a series of meetings in which, using process drawings, the team
systematically evaluates the impact of deviations.. The team leader uses a fixed set of guide
words and applies them to process parameters at each point in the process. Guide words include
"No," "More," "Less," "Part of," "As weU as," Reverse," and "Other than." Process parameters
considered include flow, pressure, temperature, level, composition, pH, frequency, and voltage.
As the team applies the guide words to each, process step, they record the deviation, with its
causes, consequences, safeguards, and actions needed, or the need for more information to
evaluate the deviation. ' '
HAZOPs require more resources than simpler techniques. AIChE states that a simple
process or a review with a narrow scope may be done by as few as three or four people, if they
have the technical skills and experience. A large or complex process usually requires a team of.
five to seven people.. AIChE/CCPS estimates that for a small or simple system a HAZOP
analysis will take 8 to 12 hours to prepare, 1 to 3 days to evaluate the process, and 2 to 6 days to
document the results. For larger or more complex processes, a HAZOP will take 2 to 4 days to
prepare, 1 to 3 weeks to evaluate, and 2 to 6 weeks to document.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3) 6-22
FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS (FMEA)
A Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) evaluates the ways in which equipment
fails and the system's response to the failure. The focus of the FMEA is on single equipment
failures and system failures. An FMEA usually generates recommendations for increasing
equipment reliability. FMEA does not examine human errors directly, but will consider the
impact on equipment of human error. AIChE states that FMEA is "not efficient for identifying
an exhaustive list of combinations of equipment failures that lead to accidents."
An FMEA produces a qualitative, systematic list of equipment, failure modes, and
effects. The analysis can easily be updated for design or systems changes. The FMEA usually
produces a table that, for each item of equipment, includes a description, a list of failure modes,
the effects of each failure, safeguards that exist, and actions recommended to address the failure.
For example, for pump operating normal, the failure modes would include fails to stop when
required, stops when required to run, seal leaks or ruptures, and pump case leaks or ruptures.
The effects would detail both the immediate effect and the impact on other equipment.
Generally, when analyzing impacts, analysts assume that existing safeguards do not work, AIChE
states that "more optimistic assumptions may be satisfactory as long as all equipment failure
modes are analyzed on the same basis." .
An FMEA requires an equipment list or P&ED, knowledge of the equipment, knowledge
of the system, and responses to equipment failure. AIChE states that on average, an hour is
sufficient to analyze two to four pieces of equipment. AIChE/CCPS estimates that for a small or
simple system an FMEA will take 2 to 6 hours to prepare, 1 to 3 days to evaluate the process, and
1 to 3 days to document the results. For larger or more complex processes^ an FMEA will take 1
to 3 days to prepare, 1 to 3 weeks to evaluate, and 2 to 4 weeks to document.
FAULT TREE ANALYSIS (FTA)
A Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) is a deductive technique that focuses on a particular
accident or main system failure and provides a method for determining causes of the event. The
fault tree is a graphic that displays the combinations of equipment failures and human errors that
can result in the accident. The FTA starts with the accident and identifies the immediate causes.
Each immediate cause is examined to determine its causes until the basic causes of each are
identified. AIChE states that the strength of FTA is its ability to identify combinations of basic
equipment and human failures that can lead to an accident, allowing the analyst to focus
preventive measures on significant basic causes.
AIChE states that FTA is well suited for analyses of highly redundant systems. For
systems vulnerable to single failures that can lead to accidents, FMEA or HAZOP are better
techniques to use. FTA is often used when another technique has identified an accident that
requires more detailed analysis. The FTA looks at component failures (malfunctions that require
that the component be repaired) and faults (malfunctions that will remedy themselves once the
conditions change). Failures and faults are divided into three groups: primary failures and faults
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 6
6-23 Prevention Program (Program 3)
occur when the equipment is operating in-the environment for which, it was intended;, secondary '
. failures and faults occur when the system is operating outside of intended environment; and
command faults and failures are malfunctions where the equipment performed as designed but
the system that commanded it malfunctioned. • > _
An FTA requires a detailed knowledge of how the plant or system works, detailed process
drawings and procedures, and knowledge of component failure modes and effects.' AIChE states
that FT As need well trained and experienced analysts. Although a single analyst can develop a
fault tree, input and review from others is needed
AIChE/CCPS estimates that for a small or simple system an FTA will take 1 to 3 days to
prepare, 3 to 6 days for model construction, 2 to 4 days to evaluate the process, and 3 to 5 days to
document the results. For larger or more complex processes, an FTA will take 4 to-6 days to
prepare, 2 to 3 weeks for model constructions, 1 to 4 weeks to evaluate, and 3 to 5 weeks to
document.
Other Techniques .
The rule allows you to use other techniques if they are functionally equivalent. The
AIChE Guidelines includes descriptions of a number of other techniques including Preliminary
Hazard Review, Cause-Consequence Analysis, Event-Tree Analysis, and Human Reliability
Analysis. You may also develop a hybrid technique that combines features of several techniques
or apply more than one technique. .
Selecting a Technique
Exhibit 6A-1 is adapted from the AIChE Guidelines and indicates which techniques are
appropriate for particular phases in a process's design and operation.
November 19, .1998
-------
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3)
6-24
EXHIBIT 6A-1
APPLICABILITY OF PHA TECHNIQUES
R&D
Design
Pilot Plant Operation
Detailed Engineering
Construction/Start-Up
Routine Operation
Modification
Incident Investigation
Decommissioning
Checklist
What-
If
S
What-If-
Checklist
HAZOP
S
FMEA
V
FT A
•
^
Factors in Selecting a Technique
Type of process will affect your selection of a technique. AIChE states that most of the
techniques can be used for any process, but some are better suited for certain processes than
others. FMEA efficiently analyzes the hazards associated with computer and electronic systems;
HAZOPs do not work as well with these. Processes or storage units designed to industry or
government standards can be handled with checklists.
Analysis of multiple failure situations is best handled by FTA. Single-failure techniques,
such as HAZOP and FMEA, are not normally used to handle these although they can be extended
to evaluate a few simple accident situations involving more than one event.
AIChE states that when a process has operated relatively free of accidents for a long time,
the potential for high consequence events is low, and there have been few changes to invalidate
the experience base, the less exhaustive techniques, such as a Checklist, can be used. When the
opposite is true, the more rigorous techniques are more appropriate.
A final factor in selecting a technique is time required for various techniques. Exhibit
6A-2 summarizes AIChE's estimates of the time required for various steps. The full team is
usually involved in the evaluation step; for some techniques, only the team leader and scribe are
involved in the preparation and documentation steps.
November 19,1998
-------
6-25
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3)
EXHIBIT 6A-2
TIME AND STAFFING FOR PHA TECHNIQUES
Checklist
What-If
What-If
Checklist
HAZOP
FMEA
FTA
Simple/Small System
# Staff
Preparation
Modeling
Evaluation
Documentation
1-2
2-4 h
. 4-8 h
4-8 h ;
2-3
4-8 h
, ,l-3d
1-2'd
2-3
. 6-12 h
6-12 h
4-8 h
3-4
8-12 h
1-3 d
2-6 d
1-2
2-6 h
1-3 d
1-3 d
2-3
1-3 d
3-6 d
2-4 d
3-5 d
Large/Complex Process . '
# Staff
Preparation
Modeling
f
Evaluation
Documentation A
1-2
1-3 d
3-5 d
2-4 d.
3-5
1-3 d
4-7 d
4-7 d
3-5
1-3 d
'
4-7 d
1-3 w
5-7
2^4 d
1-3 w
2-6 w
2-4
1-3 d
1-3 w
2-4 w
2-5
4-6 d
2-3 w
1-4 W
3-5 W
h = hours . ' d = days (8 hours) w = weeks (40 hours)
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 6
Prevention Program (Program 3) 6-26
November 19.1998
-------
CHAPTER 7: EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROGRAM
If you have at least one Program 3 process at your facility, then part 68 may require
you to implement an emergency response program, consisting of an emergency
response plan, emergency response equipment procedures, employee training, and
procedures to ensure the program is up-to-date. This requirement applies if your
employees will respond to some releases involving regulated substances. (See the box
on the next page for more information on What is Response?)
EPA recognizes that, in some cases (particularly for retailers and other small
operations with few employees), it may not be appropriate for employees to conduct
. response operations for releases of regulated substances. For example, it would be
inappropriate, and probably unsafe, for a refrigerated warehouse with only two
. full-time employees to expect that a major fire cpuld be handled without the help of
the local fire department or other emergency responder. EPA does not intend to force
such facilities to develop emergency response capabilities. At the same time, you are
responsible for ensuring effective emergency response to any releases at your facility.
If your local public responders are not capable of providing such response, you must
take steps to ensure that effective response is available (e.g., by hiring response
contractors).
7.1 NON-RESPONDING FACILITIES (§ 68.90(b))
EPA has adopted a policy for non-responding facilities similar to that adopted by
QSHA in its Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER).
Standard (29 CFR 1910.120), which allows certain facilities to develop an emergency
action plan (29 CFR 1910.38(a)) to ensure employee safety, rather than a full-fledged
emergency response plan. If your employees will not respond to accidental releases of
regulated substances, then you need not comply with the emergency response plan and
program requirements. Instead, you are simply required to coordinate with local
response agencies to ensure that they will be prepared to respond to an emergency at
your facility. (You may want to briefly review the program design issues discussed in
Section 7.2 of this chapter prior to making this decision,) This will help to ensure that '
your community has a strategy, for responding to and mitigating the threat posed by a
release of a regulated substance from your facility. To do so, you must ensure that you
have set up a way to notify emergency responders when there is need for a response.
1 Coordination with local responders also entails the following steps:
#
•^ If you have a covered process with a regulated toxic, work with the local
emergency planning entity to ensure that the facility is included in the .
community emergency response plan prepared-under EPCRA. regarding a
. response to a potential release.
•*• If you have a covered process with a regulated flammable, work with the local
fire department regarding a response to a potential release.
Although you do not need to describe these activities in your risk management plan, to
document your efforts you should keep a record of:
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 7
Emergency Response Program
7-2
The emergency contact (i.e., name or organization and number) that you will
call for a toxic or flammable release, and
What is "Response"?
EPA interprets "response" to be consistent with the definition of response specified underOSHA's
HAZWOPER Standard. OSHA defines emergency response as "a response effort by employees from
outside the immediate release area or by other designated responders ... to an occurrence which results,
or is likely to result, in-an uncontrolled release of a hazardous substance." The key factor here is that
responders are designated for such tasks by their employer. This definition excludes "responses to
incidental releases of hazardous substances where the substance can be absorbed, neutralized, or
otherwise controlled at the time of release by employees in the immediate release area, or by
maintenance personnel" as well as "responses to releases of hazardous substances where there is no
potential safety or health hazard (i.e., fire, explosion, or chemical exposure)." Thus, if you expect your
employees to take action to end a small leak (e.g., shutting a valve) or clean up a spill that does not
pose an immediate safety or health hazard, this action could be considered an incidental response and
you would not need to develop an emergency response program if your employees are limited to such
activities.
However, due to the nature of the regulated substances subject to EPA's rule, only the most minor
incidents would be included in this exception. In general, most activities will qualify as a response due
to the immediacy of the dispersion of a toxic plume or spread of a fire, the volatilization of a spill, and
the threat to people on and off site. As a result, if you will have your employees involved in any
substantial way in responding to releases, you will need to develop an emergency response program.
Your emergency response procedures need only apply to "response" actions; other activities will be
described in your maintenance and operating procedures.
+ The organization that you worked with on response procedures.
The remainder of this chapter is applicable only to those facilities which will conduct
a more extensive level of response operations. As noted above, you may want to
review the next section before making a decision on whether the facility will take
responsibility for conducting any response activities.
7.2 ELEMENTS OF AN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROGRAM (§ 68.95)
If you will respond to releases of regulated substances with your own employees, your
emergency response program must consist of the following elements:
+ An emergency response plan (maintained at the facility) that includes:
1« • ' i ' i : ; , h
> Procedures for informing the public and emergency response agencies
about releases,
> Documentation of proper first aid and emergency medical treatment
necessary to treat human exposures, and
> Procedures and measures for emergency response.
November 19,1998
-------
7-3
Chapter?
Emergency Response Program
What is a Local Emergency Planning Committee?
i
Local emergency planning committees (LEPCs) were formed under the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) of 1986. The committees are designed to serve as a
community forum for issues relating to preparedness for emergencies involving releases of
hazardous substances in their jurisdictions. They consist of representatives from local government
(including law enforcement and firefighting), local industry, transportation groups, health and
, medical organizations, community groups, and the media. LEPCs:
+ Collect information from facilities on hazardous substances that pose a risk to the
community; . '. ' •
+ Develop a contingency plan for the community based on this information; and
+ Make information on hazardous substances available to the general public.
Contact the mayor's office or the county emergency management office for more information on
yourLEPC.
4- Procedures for using, inspecting,.testing, and maintaining your emergency
response equipment; '
4 Training for all employees in relevant procedures; and
+ Procedures to review and update, as appropriate, the emergency response plan
to reflect changes at the facility and ensure that employees are informed of
changes.
Finally, your plan must be coordinated with the community plan developed under the
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Kriow Act (EPCRA, also known as
SARA Title EH). In addition, at the request of local emergency planning'or response
officials, you must provide any information necessary for developing and
implementing the community plan. '
EPA is not requiring facilities to document training and maintenance activities.
However, as noted above, facilities must maintain an on-site emergency response' plan
as well as emergency response equipment maintenance and program evaluation
procedures. ,
Although EPA's required elements are essential to any emergency response program,
they are not comprehensive guidelines for creating an adequate response capability.
Rather than establish another set of federal requirements for an emergency response
program, EPA has limited the provisions of its rule to those the CAA mandates. If
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 7
Emergency Response Program
7-4
you have a regulated substance on site, you are already subject to at least one
emergency response rule: OSHA's HAZWOPER standard (29 CFR 1910.120).
Under HAZWOPER,, any facility that handles "hazardous substances" (a broad term
that includes all of the CAA regulated substances and thus applies to all facilities with
covered processes) must comply with either 29 CFR 1910.38(a) (emergency action
plan) or 1910.119(q). If you will use your employees to respond to a release, you are
subject to the 29 CFR 1910.119(q) requirements. If you determine that the emergency
response programs you have developed to comply with these other rules satisfy the
elements listed at the beginning of this section, you will not have to do anything
additional to comply with these elements. Additional guidance on making this
decision is provided in section 7.5.
In addition, be careful not to confuse writing a set of emergency response procedures
in a plan with developing an emergency response program. An emergency response
plan is only one element of the integrated effort that makes an emergency response
program. Although the plan outlines the actions and equipment necessary to respond
effectively, training, program evaluation, equipment maintenance, and coordination
with local agencies must occur regularly if your plan is to be useful in an emergency:
The goal of the program is to enable you to respond quickly and effectively to any
emergency. The documents listed in Exhibit 7-1 may be helpful in developing
specific elements of your emergency response program.
Exhibit 7-1
Federal Guidance on Emergency Planning and Response
Hazardous Materials Emergency Planning Guide (NRT-1), National Response Team, March 1987.
Although designed to assist communities in planning for hazmat incidents, this guide provides useful
information on developing a response plan, including planning teams, plan review, and ongoing
planning efforts.
Criteria for Review of Hazardous Materials Emergency Plans (NRT-1 A), National Response Team,
May 1988. This guide provides criteria for evaluating response plans.
Integrated Contingency Plan, National Response Team, (61 FR 28642, June 5, 1996). This provides
guidance on how to consolidate multiple plans developed to comply with various federal regulations
into a single, functional emergency response plan.
North American Emergency Response Guidebook (NAERG96), U.S. Department of Transportation,
1996. This guidebook lists over 1,000 hazardous materials and provides information on their general
hazards and recommended isolation distances. •
Response Information Data Sheets (RIDS), US EPA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. Developed for use with the Computer-Aided Management of Emergency Operations
(CAMEO) software, these documents outline the properties, hazards, and basic safety and response
practices for thousands of hazardous chemicals.
November 19.1998
-------
7-5
Chapter 7
Emergency Response Program
Finally, remember that under the General Duty Clause of CAA section 1 12(r)(l) you
are responsible for ensuring that any release from your processes can be handled
effectively. If you plan to rely on local respbnders for some or all of the response, you
must determine that those responders have both the equipment and training needed to
do so. If they do not, you must take steps to meet any needs, either by developing
your own response capabilities, developing mutual aid agreements with other
facilities, hiring response contractors, or providing support to local responders so they
can acquire equipment or training. ,
RELATIONSHIP TO HAZWOPER
If you choose to establish and maintain onsite emergency response capabilities, then
you will be subject to the detailed provisions of the OSHA or EPA HAZWOPER
Standard. HAZWOPER covers .preparing an emergency response plan, employee
training, medical monitoring of employees, recordkeeping, and other issues. Call your
state or federal district OSHA office (see the list in Appendix D) for more information
on complying with the HAZWOPER Standard. State and local governments in states
without a delegated OSHA program are subject to HAZWOPER under EPA's 40 CFR
part 311.
How Does the Emergency Response Program Apply?
The requirements for the emergency response program are intended to apply across all covered
processes at a facility. Although certain elements of the program (e.g., how to use specific items of
response equipment) may differ from one process to another, EPA does not intend or expect you to
develop a separate emergency response program for each covered process. With this in mind, you
should realize that your emergency response program will probably apply to your entire facility,
although technically it need only apply to covered processes. , ~
For example, a facility may have two storage tanks, one containing slightly more than a threshold
quantity of a regulated substance and one with slightly less. The facility is likely to adopt the same
response approach (e.g., procedures, equipment, and training) for releases whether or not the process is
"covered." Similarly, a facility may have two adjacent flammables storage tanks, one containing a
regulated substance above the threshold and the other containing another, unlisted flammable. The
facility is likely to adopt the same approach for releases whether or not the process is "covered."
7.3 DEVELOPING AN EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROGRAM
The deyelppment of an emergency response program should be approached _.
systematically. As described in section 7.2, all facilities complying with these
emergency response program provisions will already be subject to OSHA
HAZWOPER. As a result, you are likely to fall into one of two groups:
+ You have already met several federal requirements for emergency planning
and are interested in developing an integrated program to minimize
duplication (section 7.4). .
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 7
Emergency Response Program 7-6
4 You have a pre-existing emergency response program (perhaps based on an
internal policy decision) and need to determine what additional activities you
will need to conduct (section 7.5).
STEPS FOR GETTING STARTED
The following steps outline a systematic approach that can serve as the framework for
the program development process in each of these cases. Following these initial steps
will allow you to conduct the rest of the process more efficiently.
Form an emergency response program team. The team should consist of
employees with varying degrees of emergency response responsibilities, as well as
personnel with expertise from each functional area of your facility. You should
consider including persons from the following departments or areas:
4- Maintenance;
4 Operations or line personnel;
4 Upper and line management;
4 Legal;
4 Fire and hazmat response;
4 Environmental, health, and safety affairs; .
4 Training;
4 Security;
4 EPGRA section 302 emergency coordinator (if one exists);
4- Public relations; and
4 Personnel.
Of course, the membership of the team will need to be more or less extensive
depending on the scope of the emergency response program. A three-member team
may be appropriate for a small facility with a couple of process operators cross-trained
as fire responders, while a facility with its own hazmat team and environmental affairs
department may need a dozen representatives.
•• • • ' , , ' •..•'' / • > ,
Collect relevant facility documents. Members of the development team should
collect and review all of the following:
+ Site plans;
4 Existing emergency response plans and procedures;
4 Submissions to the LEPC under EPCRA sections 302 and 303;
4 Hazard evaluation and release modeling information;
4- Hazard communication and emergency response training;
4 Emergency drill and exercise programs;
4 After-action reports and response critiques; and
•*• Mutual aid agreements.
Identify existing programs to coordinate efforts. The team should identify any
related programs from the following sources:
November 19,1998
-------
7-7
Chapter?
Emergency Response Program
Corporate- and industry-sponsored safety, training, and planning efforts; and
Federal, state, and local government safety, training, and planning efforts (see
.Exhibit 7-2).
Exhibit 7-2
Federal Emergency Planning Regulations
The following is a list of some of the federal emergency planning regulations:
+ EPA's Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation (SPCC and Facility Response-Plan Requirements) •
40 CFR part 112.7(d) and 112.20-.21;
+ EPA's Risk Management Programs Regulation - 40 CFR part 68;
+ OSHA's Emergency Action Plan Regulation-29 CFR 1910,38(a);
+ OSHA's Process Safety Management Standard - 29 CFR 1910.119;
+ OSHA's HAZWOPER Regulation-29 CFR 1910.120; *
+ OSHA's Fire Brigade Regulation-29 CFR 1910.156;
+ EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Contingency Planning Requirements - 40
. . CFR part 264, Subpart D, 40 CFR part 265, Subpart D, and 40 CFR 279.52.
+ EPA's Emergency .Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act Requirements - 40 CFR part
355. (These planning requirements apply to communities, rather than facilities, but will be
relevant when facilities are coordinating with local planning and response entities).
+ EPA's Storm water Regulations-40 CFR 122.26.
Facilities may also be subject to state and local planning requirements.
Determine the status of each required program element. Using the information
collected, you should assess whether each required program element (see section 7.2)
is:
•*• In place and sufficient to meet the requirements of part 68;
+ In place, but not sufficient to meet the requirements of Part 68; or
+ Not in place. ,
This examination will shape the nature of your efforts to complete the emergency
response program required under the risk management program. For example, if you
are already in compliance with OSHA's HAZWOPER Standard, you have probably
satisfied most, if not all, of the requirements for an emergency response-program.
Section 7.6 explains the intent of each of EPA's requirements to help you determine
whether you are already in compliance.
Take additional actions as necessary.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 7
Emergency Response Program 7-8
TAILORING YOUR PROGRAWI TO YOUR HAZARDS
If your processes and chemicals pose a variety of hazards, it may be necessary to tailor
some elements of your emergency response program'to these specific hazards. Unless
each part of your program element is appropriate to the release scenarios that may
occur, your emergency response program cannot be fully effective. Your program
should include core elements that are appropriate to most of the scenarios,
supplemented with more specific response information for individual scenarios. This
distinction should be reflected in your emergency response plan, which should explain
when to access the general and specific response information. To do this, you will
need to consider the following four steps:
4- Identify and characterize the hazards for each covered process. The process
hazards analysis (see Chapter 6), and offsite consequence analysis (see
Chapter 4) should provide this information.
+ For each program element, compare the activities involved in responding to
each type of accident scenario and decide if they are different enough to
require separate approaches. For example, response equipment and training
will likely be different for releases of toxic versus flammable gases.
+ For those program elements that may be chemical- or process-specific,
identify what and how systems and procedures need to be modified. For
example, if existing mitigation systems are inadequate for responding to
certain types of releases, you will need to consider what additional types of
equipment are needed.
+ Consider possible causes of emergencies in developing your emergency
response program. You should consider both the hazards at your facility and
in the surrounding environment. In making this determination, you should
consider your susceptibility to:
> Fires, spills, and vapor releases;
> Floods, temperature extremes, tornadoes, earthquakes, and
hurricanes;
> Loss of utilities, including power failures; and
> Train derailments, bomb threats, and other man-made disasters.
7.4 INTEGRATION OF EXISTING PROGRAMS
A number of other federal statutes and regulations require emergency response
planning (see Exhibit 7-2). On June 5,1996, the National Response Team (NRT), a
multi-agency group chaired by EPA, published the Integrated Contingency Plan
Guidance in the Federal Register (61 FR 28642). This guidance is intended to be used
by facilities to prepare emergency response plans for responding to releases of oil and
hazardous substances. The guidance provides a mechanism for consolidating multiple
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 7
•7-9 . Emergency Response Program
plans that you prepared to comply with various regulations into a single, functional
emergency response plan or integrated contingency plan (ICP).
The ICP guidance does not change existing regulatory requirements; rather, it
provides a format for organizing and presenting material currently required by
regulations. Individual regulations are often more detailed than the ICP guidance. To
. . ensure full compliance, you will still need to read and comply with all of the federal
regulations that apply. The guidance contains a series of matrices designed to assist
you in consolidating various plans while documenting compliance with these federal
requirements. '.'.'.
The NRT and the agencies responsible for reviewing and approving plans to which
• the ICP option applies have agreed that integrated response plans prepared according
to the guidance will be acceptable and the federally preferred method of response
planning. The NRT anticipates that future development of all federal regulations
addressing emergency response planning will incorporate use of the ICP guidance.
••. As. shown in Exhibit 7-3, the ICP format is organized into three main sections: an
introductory section, a core plan, and a series of supporting annexes. The notice
published in the Federal Register explains the intended structure of the ICP and
provides detailed annotation. EPA's EPCRA/RCRA/Superfund Hotline can supply
you with a copy and answer general questions about the guidance; for further
information and guidance on complying with specific regulations, you should contact
the appropriate federal agencies.
AN APPROACH TO INTEGRATION
Like many other facilities, you may have opted to develop and maintain separate
documents and procedures for each federal emergency planning requirement.
However, meeting the Clean Air Act emergency response requirements provides you
with the opportunity to integrate several existing programs. Integrating the various
emergency response efforts you conduct (both those mandated by management arid by
government) will increase the usefulness of your emergency preparedness activities
and decrease the burden associated with maintaining multiple programs. Integration
will improve your chances to respond effectively to a release by streamlining your
training and eliminating overlaps and conflicts in the roles and responsibilities of your
employees under different programs. However, it is important to note that, although
you are encouraged to integrate your emergency response efforts, it is not a
requirement of the Clean Air Act.
If you have multiple emergency response programs, you should consider integrating
them into a single program with procedures for responding to your most likely release
scenarios. The ICP Guidance discussed above provides comparison matrices for a
number of federal programs that will help you accomplish the following:
•*• Distinguish the individual regulatory provisions with which you must comply,
and .-•'.'. , ;
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 7
Emergency Response Program
7-10
Exhibit 7-3
Integrated Contingency Plan Outline
Section I - Plan Introduction Elements
1. Purpose and Scope of Plan Coverage
2. Table of Contents
3. Current Revision Date
4. General Facility Identification Information
a. Facility name
b. Owner/operator/agent (include physical and mailing address and phone number)
c. , Physical address of the facility (include county/parish/borough, latitude/longitude, and directions) •
d. Mailing address of the facility (correspondence contact)
e. Other identifying information (e.g., ID numbers, SIC Code, oil storage start-up date)
f. Key contacts) for plan development and maintenance
g. Phone number for key contact(s)
h. Facility phone number
I. Facility fax number
Section EC - Core Plan Elements
1. Discovery
2. Initial Response
a. Procedures for internal and external notifications (i.e., contact, organization name, and phone number
of facility emergency response coordinator, facility response team personnel, federal, state, and local
officials)
b. Establishment of a response management system
c. Procedures for preliminary assessment of the situation, including an identification of incident type,
hazards involved, magnitude of the problem, and resources threatened
d. Procedures for establishment of objectives and priorities for response to the specific incident,
including:
(1) Immediate goals/tactical planning (e.g., protection of workers and public as priorities) •
(2) Mitigating actions (e.g., discharge/release control, containment, and recovery, as appropriate)
(3) Identification of resources required for response
e. Procedures for implementation of tactical plan
f. Procedure for mobilization of resources
3. Sustained Actions
4. Termination and Follow-Up Actions
Section HI - Annexes
Annex 1. Facility and Locality Information
a. Facility maps
b. Facility drawings •
c. Facility description/layout, including identification of facility hazards and vulnerable resources and
populations on and off the facility which may be impacted by an incident
November 19,1998
-------
7-11
Chapter?
Emergency Response Program
Exhibit 7-3 (continued)
Annex 2. Notification
a. Internal notifications
b. Community notifications
c. Federal and state agency notifications
Annex 3. Response Management System
a.' General ,
b. Command
c. Operations
d. Planning
e. Logistics , ;
f. Finance/procurement/administration
Annex 4. Incident Documentation
a. Post accident investigation ,
i>. Incident history
Annex 5. Training and Exercises/Drills
Annex 6. Response Critique and Plan Review and Modification Process
Annex 7. Prevention
Annex 8. Regulatory Compliance and Cross-Reference Matrices
+ Identify where an integrated effort can meet the requirements of two or more
regulations. .
The requirements of various emergency response programs may be similar, but the
subtle differences between requirements will likely determine the degree to which
integration is a feasible and beneficial undertaking. To help you identify the relevant
rules and regulations, the ICP Guidancejprovides section-by-section regulatory
citations for each emergency response program element for each of the regulatory
programs listed in Exhibit 7-2.
7.5 HAVE I MET PART 68 REQUIREMENTS?
EPA believes that the creation of multiple response plans to meet slightly different
federal or state standards is counterproductive, diverting resources that could be .used
• to develop better response capabilities. Therefore, as part of the overall effort to
reduce the imposition of potentially duplicative or redundant federal requirements,
EPA has limited its requirements for the emergency response program to the general
provisions mandated by Congress, as described in Section 7.2.
As a result, EPA believes that facilities subject to other federal emergency planning
requirements may have already met the requirements of these regulations. For
example, plans developed to comply with other EPA contingency planning
requirements and the OSHA HAZWOPER rule (29 CFR 1910.120) will likely meet
the requirements for the emergency response plan (and most of the requirements for
the emergency response program). The following discussion presents some general
guidance on what actions you need to take for each of the required elements.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 7
Emergency Response Program 7-12
EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
If you already have a written plan to comply with another planning regulation, you do
not need to write another plan, but only add to it as necessary to cover the elements
listed below.
Keep in mind: At a minimum, your plan must describe: ,
4- Your procedures for informing the public and offsite emergency response
agencies of a release. This must include the groups and individuals that will
be contacted and why, the means by which they will be contacted, the time
frame for notification, and the information that will be provided.
•*• The proper first aid and emergency medical treatment for employees, first
responders, and members of the public who may have been exposed to a
release of a regulated substance. This must include standard safety
precautions for victims (e.g., apply water to exposed skin immediately) as
well as more detailed information for medical professionals. You must also
indicate who is likely to be responsible for providing the appropriate
treatment: an employee, an employee with specialized training, or a medical
professional.
•*• ' Your procedures for emergency response in the event of a release of a
regulated substance. This must include descriptions of the actions to be taken
by employees and other individuals on-site over the entire course of the
release event:
> Activation of alarm systems and interpretation of signals;
> Safe evacuation, assembly, and return;
> Selection of response strategies and incident command structure;
> Use of response equipment and other release mitigation activities;
> Protocol and requirements for team entry into hazardous
environments (e.g., minimum number for entry and backup, medical
treatment and transport available); and
> Post-release equipment and personnel cleanup and decontamination.
PLANNING COORDINATION
One of the most important issues in an emergency response program is deciding which
response actions will be assigned to employees and which will be handled by offsite
personnel. As a result, talking to public response organizations will be critical when
you develop your emergency response procedures. Although EPA is not requiring you
to be able to respond to a release alone, you should not simply assume that local
responders will be able-to manage an emergency. You must work with them to
determine what they can do, and then expand your own abilities or establish mutual
aid agreements or contracts to handle those situations for which you lack the
appropriate training or equipment.
November 19. 1998
-------
Chapter?
7-13 Emergency Response Program
If you have already coordinated with local response agencies on how to respond to
potential releases of regulated substances and you have ensured an effective response,
you do not need to take any further action. •
Keep in mind: Your coordination must involve planning for releases of regulated
substances from all covered processes and must cover:
4- What offsite response assistance you will require for potential release
scenarios, including fire-fighting, security, and notification of the public;
•*• How you will request offsite response assistance; and
4- Who will be in charge of the response operation and how will authority be
delegated down the internal and offsite chain of command.
Coordination equivalent to that required for planning for extremely hazardous
substances under EPCRA sections 302-303 will be considered sufficient to meet this
requirement. A more detailed discussion of this element is provided in 7.6.
EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT
If you already have written procedures for using and maintaining your emergency
response equipment, you do not need to write new procedures.
Keep in mind: Your procedures must apply to any emergency equipment relevant to a
response involving a covered process, including all detection and monitoring
equipment, alarms and communications systems, and personal protective equipment
not used as part of normal operations (and thus not subject to the prevention program
requirements related to operating procedures and maintenance). The procedures must
describe:
4 How arid when to use the equipment properly;
4. How and when the equipment should receive routine maintenance; and
4 How and when the equipment should be inspected and tested for readiness.
'
Written procedures comparable to those necessary for process-related equipment
under the OSHA PSM Standard and EPA's Program 3 Prevention Programs will be
considered sufficient to meet this requirement. .
EMPLOYEE TRAINING
If you already train-your employees in how to respond to (or evacuate from) releases
of regulated substances, then you do not need a new training program.
, Keep in mind: Your training must address the actions to take in response to releases
of regulated substances from all covered processes. The training should be based
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 7
Emergency Response Program 7-14
, directly on the procedures that you have included in your emergency response plan
and must be given to all employees and contractors on site. Individuals should receive
training appropriate to their responsibilities:
•*• If they will only need to evacuate, then their training should cover when and
how to evacuate their location.
•*• If they may need to activate an alarm system in response to a release event,
then their training should cover when and how to use the alarm system.
+ If they will serve on an emergency response team, then their training should
cover how to use emergency equipment and how the incident command
system works.
Emergency response training conducted in compliance with the OSHA HAZWOPER
Standard and 29 CFR 1910.38 will be considered sufficient to meet this requirement.
RESPONSE PLAN EVALUATION
If you already have a formal practice for regular review and updates of your plan
based on changes at the facility, you do not need to develop additional procedures.
Keep in mind: You must also identify the types of changes to the facility that would
cause the plan to be updated (e.g., a new covered process) and include a method of
communicating any changes to the plan to your employees (e.g., through training).
You may want to set up a regular schedule on which you review your entire
emergency response plan and identify any special conditions-(e.g., a drill or exercise)
that could result in an interim review.
7.6 COORDINATION WITH LOCAL EMERGENCY PLANNING ENTITIES (§ 68.95(c))
Once you determine that you have at least one covered process, you should open
communications with local emergency planning and response officials, including your
local emergency planning committee if one exists. Because your LEPC consists of
representatives from many local emergency planning and response agencies, it is
likely to be the best source of information on the critical emergency response issues in
your community. However, in some cases, there may not be an active LEPC in your
community. If so, or if your state has not designated your community as an
emergency planning district under EPCRA, you will likely need to contact loc'al
agencies individually to,determine which entities (e.g., fire department, emergency
management agency, police department, civil defense office, public health agency)
have jurisdiction for your facility.
KEY COORDINATION ISSUES
If you have any of the toxic regulated substances above the threshold quantity, you
should have already designated an emergency coordinator to work with the LEPC on
chemical emergency preparedness issues (a requirement for certain facilities regulated
under EPCRA). If you have not (or if your facility has only regulated flammable
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter .7
7-15 Emergency Response Program
substances), you may want to do so at this time. The emergency coordinator should
be the individual most familiar with your emergency response program (e.g., the
person designated as having overall responsibility for this program in your
management system — see Chapter 5).
Involvement in the activities of your LEPC can have a dramatically positive effect on
your emergency response program, as well as on your relationship with the
surrounding community; Your LEPC can provide technical assistance and guidance
on a number of topics, such as conducting response training and exercises, developing
mutual aid agreements, and evaluating public alert systems. The coordination process
will help both the community and the facility prepare for an emergency, reducing
expenditures of time and money, as well as helping eliminate redundant efforts.
You should consider providing the LEPC with draft -versions of any emergency
response program elements related to local emergency planning efforts. This
submission can initiate a dialogue with the community on potential program
improvements and lead to coordinated training and exercise efforts. In return, your
LEPC can support your emergency response program by providing information from
its own emergency planning efforts, including:
4- Data on wind direction and weather conditions, or access to local
meteorological data, to help you make decisions related to the evacuation of
employees and public alert notification;
+ Lists of .emergency response training programs available in the area for
training police, medical, and fire department personnel, to help you identify
what training is already available; -
•* Schedules of emergency exercises designed'to test the community response
plan to spur coordinated community-facility exercises;
^ Lists of emergency response resources available from both public and private
sources to help you determine whether and how a mutual aid agreement could
.Support your program; and
4 Details on incident command structure, emergency points of contact,
availability of emergency medical services, and public alert and notification
i systems.
Upon completion of your emergency response plan, you should coordinate with the
LEPC, local response organizations, local hospitals, and other response organizations
(e.g., state hazmat team) and offer them a copy of the plan. In some instances, only a
portion of the plan may be of use to individuals or organizations; in such cases, you
should consider making only that portion of the plan available. For instance, it may be:
appropriate to send a hospital only the sections of your plan that address emergency
medical procedures and decontamination.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 7
Emergency Response Program 7-16
You may also want to provide your LEPC and local response entities with a
description of your emergency response program elements, as well as any important
subsequent amendments or updates, to ensure that the community is aware of the
scope of your facility response efforts prior to an'emergency. Although the summary
of your emergency response program will be publicly available as part of your RMP,
this information may not be as up-to-date or as comprehensive. Remember, the LEPC
has been given the authority under EPCRA and Clean Air Act regulations to request
any information necessary for preparing the community response plan.
November 19,1998
-------
CHAPTER 8: RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (PART 68, SUBPART G)
You must submit one risk management plan (RMP) to EPA for all of your covered
processes (§ 68.150). EPA is developing an electronic submission program for your
use. If you cannot submit electronically, you may request a hardship waiver and
. submit your RMP on paper. In either case, your RMP is due no later than the latestof
the following dates: ,
June-21, 1999; " •
The date on which a regulated substance is first present above a threshold
quantity in a process; or
Three years after the date on which a regulated substance is first listed by
" " -. EPA.
EPA's automated tool for submitting RMPs, RMP*Submit™, discussed below, wijl
be available in January 1999. •
8.1 ELEMENTS OF THE RMP
The length and content of your RMP will vary depending on the number and program
• . level of the covered processes at your facility. See Chapter 2 for detailed guidance on
. >how to determine the program levels of each of the covered processes at your facility.
Any facility with one or more .covered processes must include in its RMP:
An executive summary (§68.155); .
The registration for the facility (§ 68.160);
The certification statement (§68.185); •
. A worst-case scenario for each Program 1 process; at least one worst-case
scenario to cover all Program 2 and 3 processes involving regulated toxic
substances; at least one worst-case scenario to cover all Program 2 and 3
' •- • processes involving regulated flammables (§68.165(a));
The five-year accident history for each process (§ 68.168); and
A summary of the emergency response program for the facility (§ 68.180).
Any facility with at least one covered process in Program 2 or 3 must also include in
its RMP:
At least one alternative release'scenario for each regulated toxic substance in ,
Program 2 or 3 processes and at least one alternative release scenario to cover
all regulated flammables in Program 2 or 3 processes (§ 68.165(b));
• November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 8
Risk Management Plan . 8-2
A summary of the prevention program for each Program 2 process
(§ 68.170); and
A summary of the prevention program for each Program 3 process (§ 68,175).
Subpart G of part 68 (see Appendix A) provides more detail on the data required for
each of the elements. The actual RMP form, however, will contain more detailed
guidance to make it possible to limit the number of text entries. For example, the rule
requires you to report on the major hazards identified during a PHA or hazard review
and on public receptors affected by worst-case and alternative case scenarios. The
RMP will pro vide'a list of options for you to check for these elements. Except for the
executive summary, the RMP will consist primarily of yes/no answers, numerical
information (e.g., dates, quantities, distances), .and a few text answers (e.g., names,
addresses, chemical identity). Where possible, RMP*Submit™ will provide "pick
lists" to help you complete the form. For example, RMP*Submit™ will provide a list
of regulated substances and automatically fill in the CAS numbers when you select a
substance. "
EPA will provide instructions for each of the data elements to be reported in the RMP
with RMP*Submit™. The instructions will explain each data element and help you
understand what acceptable data are for each. The instructions will be made available
with the software and will be posted on EPA's web site.
8.2 RMP SUBMISSION
ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION
By January 1999, EPA will make RMP*Submit™ available to complete and file your
RMP. RMP*Submit™ will do the following:
Provide a user-friendly, PC-based RMP Submission System available on
diskettes and via the Internet; •
Use a standards-based, open systems architecture so private companies can
create compatible software; and
Perform data quality checks, accept limited'graphics, and provide on-line help
including defining data elements and providing instructions.
The software will run on Windows 3.1 and above. There will not be a DOS or MAC
version.
Further details on this system will be made available as the system is completed.
RMPs will be submitted to an EPA RMP Record Center on disk.
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 8
8-3 , Risk Management Plan
HARD COPY SUBMISSION
If you are unable to submit electronically for any reason, just fill but the Electronic
Waiver form available in the RMP*Submit™ manual and send it in with your RMP.
See the RMP*Submit manual for more information on the Electronic Waiver.
8.3 RESUBMISSION AND UPDATES (§68.190)
When you are required to update and resubmit your RMP is based on whether and
what changes occur at your facility. Please refer to the Exhibit 8-1 and note that you
are required to update and resubmit your RMP on the earliest of the dates that apply
to your facility:
WHEN DOES THE OFFSITE CONSEQUENCE ANALYSIS (OCA) NEED TO BE REVISED?
You'll need to revise your OCA when a change at your facility results in the distance
to an endpoint from a worst-case release rising or falling by at least a factor of two.
. For example, if you increase your inventory substantially or install passive mitigation
to limit the potential release rate, you should re-estimate the distance at an endpoint.
• - If the distance is at least doubled or halved, you must revise the RMP. For most
, • substances, the quantity that would be released would have to increase by more than a
factor of five to double the distance to an endpoint.
How Do I DE-REGISTER?
. '-" ' ' If your facility is no longer covered by this rale, you must submit a letter to the RMP
Record Center within six months indicating that your stationary source is no longer
covered. . •
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 8
Risk Management Plan
8-4
EXHIBIT 8-1
RMP UPDATES
CHANGE THAT OCCURS AT YOUR FACILITY •
No changes occur
A newly regulated substance is first listed by EPA
A regulated substance is first present above its
threshold quantity in:
a process already covered; or
a new process.
A change occurs that results in a revised PHA or
hazard review
A change occurs that requires a revised offsite
consequence analysis
A change occurs that alters the Program level that
previously applied to any covered process
A change occurs that makes the facility no longer
subject to the requirements to submit a Risk
Management Plan
DATE BY WHICH You MUST UPDATE AND
SUBMIT YOUR RMP
Within 5 years of initial submission
Within 3 years of the date EPA listed the newly
regulated substance
On or before the date the quantity of the regulated
substance exceeds the threshold in the process.
Within 6 months of the change
Within 6 months of the change
Within 6 months of the change
Submit a revised registration (indicating that the
RMP is no longer required) to EPA within 6
months of the change
Q&A
"REVISING" A PHA
Q. The rule states that I have to update my RMP whenever I revise a PHA. What constitutes a
revised PHA? Every time I go through management of change procedures I make a notation in the
PHA file for the process, but would that constitute a revised PHA if the change did not affect the
validity of the PHA? . .
A. All changes (except replacement in kind) are subject to the management of change of procedures.
When processes undergo minor changes (e.g., minor rerouting of a piping run), information is
typically added to a PHA file to reflect the change, even though the validity of the PHA is not affected
by the modification. These minor changes and the addition of information about the change to the
PHA file are not considered a 'revision' of the PHA under .the part 68. Major changes that invalidate' a
PHA, leading you to 'update' or 'revalidate' the PHA so that it accurately reflects the hazards of the
process, are considered a revision of the PHA under part 68.
November 19,1998
-------
Chapters
8-5 '. Risk Management Plan
November 19, 1998
-------
-------
CHAPTER 9: IMPLEMENTATION
9.1 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY
The implementing agency is the federal, state, or local agency that is taking the lead
for implementation and enforcement of part 68. The implementing agency will review
RMPs, select some RMPs for audits, and conduct on-site inspections. The
implementing agency should be your primary contact for information and assistance.
WHO Is MY IMPLEMENTING AGENCY?
Under the CAA, EPA will serve as the implementing agency until a state or local
agency seeks and is granted delegation under CAA section 112(1) and 40 CFR part 63,
, subpartE. You should check with the EPA Regional Office to determine if your state
has been granted delegation or is in the process of seeking delegation. The Regional
Office will be able to provide contact names at the state or local level. See Appendix
C for addresses and contact information for EPA Regions and state,implementing
. agencies.
IF THE PROGRAM Is DELEGATED, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
To gain delegation, a state or local agency must demonstrate that it has the authority
and resources to implement arid enforce part 68 for all covered processes in the state
. or local area. Some states may, however, elect to seek delegation to implement and
enforce the rule for only sources covered by an operating permit program under Title
V of the CAA. When EPA determines that a state or local agency has the required
authority and resources, EPA may delegate the program. If the state's rules differ
from part 68 (a state's rules are allowed to differ in certain specified respects, as
discussed below), EPA will adopt, through rulemaking, the state program as a
substitute for part 68 in the state,, making the state program federally enforceable. In
most cases, the state will take the lead in implementation and enforcement, but EPA
maintains the ability to enforce part 68 in states in which EPA has delegated part 68.
Should EPA decide that it is necessary to take an enforcement action in the state, the
, action would be based on the state rule that EPA has adopted as a substitute for part
68. Similarly, citizen actions under the CAA would be based on the state rules that
EPA has adopted.
Under 40 CFR 63.90, EPA will not delegate the authority to add or delete substances
from § 68.130. EPA also plans to propose, in revisions to part 63, that authority to
revise Subpart G (relating to RMPs) will not be delegated. With respect to RMPs, you
would continue to be required to file your part 68 RMP, in the form and manner
. specified by EPA, to the central location EPA designates. You should check with
your state to determine whether you need to file additional data for state use or submit
amended copies of the RMP with the state to cover state elements or substances.
If your state has been granted delegation, it is important that you contact them to
determine if the state has requirements in addition to those in part 68. State rules
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 9
Implementation
9-2
may be more stringent than pan 68. This document does not cover state
requirements.
QS&AS
DELEGATION
Q. What states have been granted delegation or are in the process of seeking delegation?
A. Georgia has been granted delegation. The following states have indicated that they are interested
in delegation:
California Delaware Florida Hawaii Louisiana * Mississippi
Missouri New Jersey Nevada North Carolina Ohio Rhode Island
South Carolina
Check with your EPA Regional contacts (see Appendix C) for a current list of states granted or seeking
delegation.
Q. In what ways may state rules be more stringent? Does this document provide guidance on state
differences?
A. States may impose more detailed requirements, such as requiring more documentation or more
frequent reporting, specifying hours of training or maintenance schedules, imposing equipment
requirements or call for additional analyses. Some states are likely to cover at least some additional
chemicals and may use lower thresholds. This document does not cover state differences.
Q. Will the general duty clause be delegated?
A. The general duty clause (CAA section 112(r)(l)) is not included in part 68 and, therefore, will not
be delegated. States, however, may adopt their own general duty clause under state law.
9.2 REVIEWS/AUDITS/INSPECTIONS (§ 68.220)
The implementing agency is required under part 68 to review and conduct audits of
RMPs. Reviews are relatively quick checks of the RMPs to determine whether they
are complete and whether they contain any information that is clearly problematic.
For example, if an RMP for a process containing flammables fails to list fire and
explosion as a hazard in the prevention program, the implementing agency may flag
thai as a problem. The RMP data system will perform some of the reviews
automatically by flagging RMPs submitted without necessary data elements
completed.
. . . . . ^
Facilities may be selected for audits based on any of the following criteria, set out in
§68.220:
Accident history of the facility
November 19, 1998
-------
• Chapter 9
9-3 ' Implementation
Accident history of other facilities in the same industry
Quantity of regulated substances handled at the site
Location of the facility and its proximity to public and environmental
receptors
The presence of specific regulated substances
The hazards identified in the RMP -
A plan providing for random, neutral oversight
WHAT ARE AUDITS AND How MANY WILL BE CONDUCTED?
Under the CAA and part 68, audits are conducted on the RMP. Audits will generally
be reviews of the RMP to review its adequacy and require revisions when necessary to
ensure compliance with part 68. Audits will help identify whether the underlying risk
. management program is being implemented properly. The implementing agency will
look for any inconsistencies in the dates reported for compliance with prevention
program elements. For example, if you report that the date of your last revision of
operating procedures was in June 1998 but your training program was last reviewed or
revised .in December 1994, the implementing agency will ask why the training
program was not reviewed to reflect new operating procedures. ' .
The agency will also look at other items that may indicate problems with
implementation. For example, if you are reporting on a distillation column at a
refinery, but used a checklist as your PHA technique, or you fail to list an appropriate
set of process hazards for the process chemicals, the agency may seek further
explanations as to why you reported in the way you did. The implementing agency
may compare your data with that of other facilities in the same industrial sector using
the same chemicals to identify differences that may indicate compliance problems.
If audits indicate potential problems, they may lead to requests for more information
or to on-site inspections. If the implementing agency determines that problems exist,
it will issue a preliminary determination listing the necessary revisions to the RMP, an
. explanation of the reasons for the revisions, and a timetable. Section 68.220 provides
details of the administrative procedures for responding to a preliminary determination.
The number of audits conducted will vary from state to state and from year to year.
Neither the CAA nor part 68 sets a number or percentage of facilities that must be
audited during a year. Implementing agencies will set their own goals, based on their
resources and particular concerns. •
WHAT ARE INSPECTIONS?
Inspections are site visits to check on the accuracy of the RMP data and on the
implementation of all part 68 elements. During inspections, the implementing agency
will probably review the documentation for rule elements, such as the PHA reports,
operating procedures, maintenance schedules, process safety information, and
training. Unlike audits, which focus on the RMP but may lead to determinations
concerning needed improvements to the risk management program, inspections will
focus on the underlying risk management program itself.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 9
Implementation 9-4
Implementing agencies will determine how many inspections they need to conduct.
Audits may lead to inspections or inspections may be done separately. Depending on
the focus of the inspection (all covered processes, a single process, or particular part
of the risk management program) and the size of the facility, inspections may take
several hours to several weeks.
9.3 RELATIONSHIP WITH TITLE V PERMIT PROGRAMS
Part 68 is an applicable requirement under the CAA Title V permit program and must
be listed in a Title V air permit. You do not need a Title V air permit solely because
you are subject to part 68. If you are required to apply for a Title V permit because
you are subject to requirements under some other part of the CAA, you must:
List part 68 as an applicable requirement in your permit
Include conditions that require you to either submit a compliance schedule for
meeting the requirements of part 68 by the applicable deadlines or include
compliance with part 68 as part of your certification statement.
You must also provide the permitting agency with any other relevant information it
requests.
The RMP and supporting documentation are not part of the permit and should not be
submitted to the permitting authority. The permitting authority is only required to,
ensure that you have submitted the RMP and that it is complete. The permitting
authority may delegate this review of the RMP to other agencies.
If you have a Title V permit and it does not address the part 68 requirement, you
should contact your permitting authority and determine whether your permit needs to
be amended to reflect part 68.
9.4 PENALTIES FOR NON-COMPLIANCE
Penalties for violating the requirements or prohibitions of part 68 are set forth in CAA
section 113. This section provides for both civil and criminal penalties. EPA may
assess civil penalties of not more than $27,500 per day per violation. Any one
convicted of knowingly violating part 68 may also be punished by a fine pursuant to
Title 18 of the U-S. Code or by imprisonment for no more than five years, or both;
anyone convicted of knowingly filing false information may be punished by a fine
pursuant to Title 18 or by imprisonment for no more than two years.
November 19,1998
-------
9-5
. Chapter 9
Implementation
Qs&As
AUDITS
Q. If we are a Voluntary Protection Program (VPP) facility under OSHA's VPP program, are we
exempt from audits?
A. You are exempt from audits, based on accident history of your industry sector or on random,
neutral oversight. An implementing agency that is basing its auditing strategy on other factors may
include your facility although EPA expects that VPP facilities will generally not be a high priority for
audits unless they have a serious accident.
Q. If we have been audited by a qualified third party, for ISO 14001 certification or for other
programs, are we exempt from audits?
A. No, but you may want to inform your implementing agency that you have gained such certification
and indicate whether the third party reviewed part 68 compliance as part of its audit. The
implementing agency has the discretion to determine whether you should be audited.
Q. Will we be audited if a member of the public requests an audit of our facility?
A. The implementing agency will have to decide whether to respond to such public requests. EPA's
intention is that part 68 implementation reflect that hazards are primarily a local concern.
November 19, 1998 .
-------
Chapter 9
Implementation 9-6
November 19, 1998
-------
CHAPTER 10: COMMUNICATION WITH THE PUBLIC
Once you have prepared and submitted your RMP, EPA will make it available to the
public. Public availability of the RMP is a requirement under section 114(c) of the,
Clean Air Act (the Act provides for protection of trade secrets, and EPA will
accordingly protect any portion of the RMP that contains Confidential Business
Information). Therefore, you can expect that your community will discuss the hazards
and risks associated with your facility as indicated in your RMP. You will necessarily
be part of such discussions. The public and the press are likely to ask you questions
because only you can provide specific answers about your facility and your accident
• prevention program. This dialogue is a most important step in preventing chemical
. . accidents and should be encouraged. You should respond to these questions honestly
and candidly. Refusing to answer, reacting defensively, or attacking the regulation as
unnecessary are likely to make people suspicious and willing to assume the worst. A
basic fact of risk communication is that trust, once lost, is very hard to regain. As a
result, you should prepare as early as possible to begin talking about these issues with
the community, Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs), State Emergency
Response Commissions (SERCs), other local and state officials, and other interested
parties.
Communication with the public can be an opportunity to develop your relationship
with the community and build a level of trust among you, your neighbors, and the
community at large. By complying with the RMP rule, you are taking a number of
steps to prevent accidents and protect the community, These steps are the individual
elements of your risk management program. A well-designed and properly
implemented risk management program will set the stage for informative and
productive dialogue between you and yourcommunity. The purpose of this chapter is
to suggest how this dialogue may occur. In addition, note that some industries have
developed "guidance and other materials to assist in this process; contact your trade
association for more information.
10.1 BASIC RULES OF RISK COMMUNICATION
Risk communication means establishing and maintaining a,dialogue with the public
about the hazards at your operation and discussing the steps that have been or can be
taken to reduce the risk posed by these hazards. Of particular concern under misrule
., -. are the hazards related to the chemicals you use and what would happen if you had an
accidental release.
Many companies, government agencies, and other entities have confronted the same
issue you may face: how to discuss with the public the risks the community is subject
to. Exhibit 1(M outlines seven "rules" of risk communication that have been
developed based on many experiences of dealing with the public about risks.
A key message of these "rules" is the importance and legitimacy of public concerns.
People generally are less tolerant of risks they cannot control'than those they can. For
example, most people are willing to accept the risks of driving because they have
some control over what happens to them. However, they are generally more
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 10
Communication with the Public
10-2
uncomfortable accepting the risks of living near a facility that handles hazardous
chemicals if they feel that they have no control over whether the facility has an
accident. The Clean Air Act's provision for public availability of RMPs gives public
an opportunity to take part in reducing the risk of chemical accidents that might occur
in their community.
EXHIBIT 10-1
SEVEN CARDINAL RULES OF RISK COMMUNICATION
1. Accept and involve the public as a legitimate partner
2. Plan carefully and evaluate your efforts
3. Listen to the public's specific concerns
4. Be honest, frank, and open
5. Coordinate and collaborate with other credible sources
6. Meet the needs of the media
7. Speak clearly and with compassion
HAZARDS VERSUS RISKS
Dialogue in the community will be concerned with both hazards and risks; it is useful
to be clear about the difference between them.
Hazards are inherent properties that cannot be changed. Ammonia is toxic when
inhaled or ingested; propane is flammable. There is little that you can do with these
chemicals to change their toxicity or flammability. If you are in an earthquake zone or
an area affected by hurricanes, earthquakes and hurricanes are hazards. When you
conduct your hazard review or process hazards analysis, you will be identifying your
hazards and determining whether the potential exposure to the hazard can be reduced
in any way.
Risk is usually evaluated based on several variables, including the likelihood of a
release occurring, the inherent hazards of the chemicals combined with the quantity
released, and the potential impact of the release on the public and the environment.
For example, if a release during loading occurs frequently, but the quantity of
chemical released is typically small and does not generally migrate offsite, the overall
risk to the public is low. If the likelihood of a catastrophic release occurring is
extremely low, but the number of people who could be affected if it occurred is large,
the overall risk may still be low because of the low probability that a release will
November 19,1998
-------
• Chapter 10
10-3 Communication with the Public
occur. On the other hand, if a release occurs relatively frequently and a large number
of people could be affected, the overall risk to the public is high.
The rule does not require you to assess risk in a quantitative way because, in most
cases, the data you would need to estimate risk levels (e.g,, one in 100 years) are not
available. Even in cases where data such as equipment failure rates are available,
there are large uncertainties in using that data to determine a numerical risk level for
your facility, because your facility is probably not the same as other facilities, and your
situation may be dynamic. Therefore, you may want to assign qualitative values (high,
medium, low) to the risks that you have identified at your facility, but you should be
prepared to explain the terms if you do. For example, if you believe that the -
worst-case release is very unlikely to occur, you must give good reasons; you must be
able to provide specific examples of measures that you have taken to prevent such a
release, such as installation of new equipment, careful training of your workers,
rigorous preventive maintenance, etc. You should also be able to show documentation
to support your claim. ,
WHO WILL ASK QUESTIONS? _ • , ' .
Your Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) and other facilities can help you
identify individuals in the following groups who may be reviewing RMP data and
asking questions. Interested parties may include:
(1) Persons living near the facility and elsewhere in the community or working at'
a neighboring facility
(2) Local officials from zoning and planning boards, fire and police departments,
health and building code officials, elected officials, and various county and
state officials
(3) Your employees
(4) Special interest groups including environmental organizations, chambers of
commerce, unions, and various civic organizations .
(5) • Journalists, reporters, and other media representatives
(6)' Medical professionals; educators, consultants, neighboring companies and
others with special expertise or interests
In general, people will be concerned about accident risks at your facility, how you
manage the risks, and potential impacts of an accident on health, safety, property,
natural resources, community infrastructure, community image, property values, and
other matters. Those individuals in the public and private sector who are responsible
for dealing/with these impacts and the associated risks also will have an interest in
working with you to address these risks. . "
November 19/1998
-------
Chapter 10
Communication with the Public 10-4
WHAT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR FACILITY is AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC?
Even though the non-confidential information you provide in your RMP is available to
the public, it is likely that people will want additional information. Interested parties
will know that you retain additional information at your facility (e.g., documentation
of the results of the offsite consequence analysis reported in your RMP) and are
required to make it available to EPA or its implementing agency during inspections or
compliance audits. Therefore, they may request such information. EPA encourages
you to provide public access to this information. If EPA or its implementing agency
were to request this information, it would be available to the public under section
114(c)oftheCAA.
The public may also be interested in other information relevant to risk management at
your facility, such as:
Submissions under sections 302, 304, 311-312, and 313 of the
Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA)
reporting on chemical storage and releases, as well as the community
emergency response plan prepared under EPCRA section 303
Other reports on hazardous materials made, used, generated, stored,
spilled, released and transported, that you submitted to federal, state,
and local agencies
Reports on workplace safety and accidents developed under the
Occupational Safety and Health Act that you provide to employees,
who may choose to make the information publicly available, such as
medical and exposure records, chemical data sheets, and training
materials
Any other information you have provided to public agencies that can
be accessed by members of the public under the federal Freedom of
Information Act and similar state laws (and that may have been made
widely available over the Internet)
Any published materials on facility safety (either industry- or
site-specific), such as agency reports on facility accidents, safety
engineering manuals and textbooks, and professional journal articles
on facility risk management, for example
10.2 SAMPLE QUESTIONS FOR COMMUNICATING WITH THE PUBLIC
Smaller businesses may not have the resources or time to develop the types of
outreach programs, described later in this chapter, that many larger chemical
companies have used to handle public questions and community relations. For many
November 19,1998
-------
• • Chapter 10
10-5 Communication with the Public
small businesses, communication with the public will usually occur when you are
asked questions about information in your RMP. It is important that you respond to
these questions constructively. Go beyond just answering questions; discuss what you
have done to prevent accidents and work with the community to reduce risks. The
people in your community will be looking to you to provide answers.
To help you establish a productive dialogue with the community, the rest of this
section presents questions you are likely to be asked and a framework for answering
them. These are elements of the public dialogue that you may anticipate.'The person
from your facility designated as responsible for communicating with the public should
review the following and talk to other community organizations to determine which
questions are most likely to be raised and identify other foreseeable issues. Remember
that others in the community, notably LEPCs and other emergency management
organizations are also likely to be asked these and other similar questions. You should
consider the unique features of your facility, your RMP, and your historical
relationship with the community (e.g., prior accidents, breakdowns in the coordination
of emergency response efforts, and management-labor disputes), and work together
with these other organizations to answer these questions for your situation and to
resolve the issues associated with them. •
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 10
Communication with the Public 10-6
WHAT DOES YOUR WORST-CASE RELEASE DISTANCE MEAN?
The distance is intended to provide an estimate of the maximum possible area that might be affected
under catastrophic conditions. It is intended to ensure that no potential risks to public health are
overlooked, but the distance to an endpoint estimated under worst-case conditions should not be
considered a "public danger zone."
In most cases, the mathematical models used to analyze the worst-case release scenario as defined in
the rule may overestimate the area that would be impacted by a release. In other cases, the models
may underestimate the area. For distances greater than approximately six miles, the results of toxic
gas dispersion models are especially uncertain, and you should be prepared to discuss such
possibilities in an open, honest manner.
Reasons that modeling may underestimate the distance generally relate to the inability of some
models to account for site-specific factors that might tend to increase the actual endpoint distance.
For example, assume a facility is located in a river valley and handles dense toxic gases such as
chlorine. If a release were to occur, the river valley could channel the toxic cloud much farther than it
might travel if it were to disperse in a location with generally flat terrain. In such cases, the actual
endpoint distance might be longer than that predicted using generic lookup tables.
Reasons that the area may be overestimated include:
For toxics, the weather conditions (very low wind speed, calm conditions) assumed for a
worst-case release scenario are uncommon and probably would not last as long as the time
the release would take to travel the distance estimated. If weather conditions are different,
the distance would be much shorter. . . •
For flammables, although explosions can occur, a release of a flammable is more likely to
disperse harmlessly or burn. If an explosion does occur, however, this area could be affected
by the blast; debris from the blast could affect an even broader area.
In general, some models cannot take into account other site-specific factors that might tend to
disperse the chemicals more quickly and limit the distance. '
Note: When estimating worst case release distances, the rule does not allow facilities to take into
account active mitigation systems and practices that could limit the scope of a release. Specific
systems (e.g., monitoring, detection, control, pressure relief, alarms, mitigation) may limit a release or
prevent the failure from occurring. Also, if you are required to analyze alternative release scenarios
(i.e., if your facility is in Program 2 or Program 3), these scenarios are generally more realistic than
the worst case, and you can offer to provide additional information on those scenarios.
\
November 19,1998
-------
10-7
Chapter 10
Communication with the Public
WHA TDOES IT MEAN THA T WE COULD BE EXPOSED IF WE LIVE/WORK/SHOP/GO TO
SCHOOL X MILES AWAY?
(For an accident involving a flammable substance):
The distance means that people who are in that area around the facility could be hurt if the contents of
a tank or other vessel exploded. The blast of the explosion could shatter windows and damage
buildings. Injuries would be the result of the force of the explosion and of flying glass or falling
debris.
(For an accident involving a toxic substance): ' , •
The. distance is based on a concentration of the chemical that you could be exposed to for an hour
without suffering irreversible health effects or other symptoms that would'make it difficult for you to
escape. If you are within that distance, you could be exposed to a greater concentration of the
chemical. If you were exposed to higher levels for an extended period of time (10 minutes, 30
minutes, or longer), you could be seriously hurt. However, that does not mean that you would be.
Remember, for worst case scenarios, the rule requires you to make certain conservative assumptions
with respect to, for example, wind speed and atmospheric stability. If the wind speed' is higher than
that used in the modeling, or if the atmosphere is more unstable, a chemical release would be
dispersed more quickly, and the distances would be much smaller and the exposure times would be
shorter. If the question pertains to an alternative release scenario, you probably assumed typical
weather conditions in the modeling. Therefore, the actual impact distance could be shorter or longer,
and you should be prepared to acknowledge this and clearly explain how you chose the conditions for
your release scenario.
In general, the possibility of harm depends on the concentration of the chemical you are exposed to
and the length of time you are exposed.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 10
Communication with the Public
10-8
IF THERE IS AN ACCIDENT, WILL EVERYONE WITHIN THA T DISTANCE BE HURT? WHA T
ABOUT PROPERTY DAMAGE?
In general, no.
For ammonia, whether someone is hurt by a release depends on many factors. First,, the released
chemical would usually move in the direction of the wind (except for some dense gases, which may be
constrained by terrain features to flow in a different direction). Generally, only people downwind
from the facility would be at risk of exposure if a release occurred, and this is normally only a part of
the population inside the circle. If the wind speed is moderate, the chemicals would disperse quickly,
and people would be exposed to lower levels of the chemical. If the release is stopped quickly, they
might be exposed for a very short period time, which is less likely to cause injury. However, if the
wind speed is low or the release continues for a long time, exposure levels will be higher and more
dangerous. The population at risk would be a larger proportion of the total population inside the
circle. You should be prepared to discuss both possibilities.
Generally, it is the people who are closest to the facility — within a half mile or less — who would
face the greatest danger if an' accident occurred.
Damage to property and the environment will depend on the type of chemical released.For a vapor
release, environmental effects and property damage may occur as a result of the reactivity or
corrosivity of the chemical or toxic contamination.
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 10
10-9 " Communication with the Public
How SURE ARE You OF YOUR DISTANCES?
Perhaps the largest single difficulty associated with hazard assessment is that different models and
modeling assumptions will yield somewhat different results. There is no one model or set of
assumptions that will yield "certain" results. Models represent scientists' best efforts to account for all
the variables involved in an accidental release. While all models are generally based on the same
physical principles, dispersion modeling is not an exact science due to the limited opportunity for real-
world validation of results. No model is perfect, and every model represents a somewhat different
analytical approach. As a result, for a given scenario, people can use different consequence models
and obtain predictions of the distance to the toxic endpoint that in some situations might vary by a
factor often. Even using the same model, different input assumptions can cause wide variations in the
predictions. It follows that, when you present a single predicted value as your best estimate of the
predicted distance, others will be able to claim that the answer ought to.be different, perhaps greater,
perhaps smaller, depending on the assumptions used in modeling and the choice of model itself.
You therefore need to recognize that your predicted distance lies within a considerable band of
uncertainty, and to communicate this fact to those who have an interest in your results. A neighboring
facility handling the same covered substances as you do may have come up with a different result for
the same scenario for these reasons.
If you use EPA's RMP Offsite Consequence Analysis Guidance or one of the industry-specific
guidance documents that EPA has developed, you will be able to address the issue of uncertainty by
stating that the results you have generated are conservative (that is they are likely to overestimate
distances). However, if you use other models, you will have to provide your own assessment of where
your specific prediction lies within the plausible range of uncertainties.
WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO PREVENT RELEASES?
If you have rigorously implemented your risk management program, this question will be your chance,
if you have not already done so, to tell the community about your prevention activities, the safe design
features of your operations, the specific activities that you are performing such as training, operating
procedures, maintenance, etc., and any industry codes or standards you use to operate safely. If you
have installed new equipment or safety systems, upgraded training, or had outside experts review your
site for safety (e.g., insurance inspectors), you could offer to share the results. You may also want to
mention state or federal rules you comply with.
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 10
Communication with the Public
10-10
WHAT ARE You DOING To PREPARE FOR RELEASES?
For such questions, you will need to talk about any coordination that you have done with the local fire
department, LEPC, or mutual aid groups. Such coordination may include activities such as defining
an incident command structure, developing notification protocols, conducting response training and
exercises, developing mutual aid agreements, and evaluating public alert systems. This description is
particularly important if your employees are not designated or trained to respond to releases of
regulated substances.
If your employees will be involved in a response, you should describe your emergency response plan
and the emergency response resources available at the facility (e.g., equipment, personnel), as well as
through response contractors, if appropriate. You also may want to indicate the types of events for
which such resources are applicable. Finally, indicate your schedule for internal emergency response
training and drills and exercises and discuss the results of the latest relevant drill or exercise, including
problems found and actions taken to address them.
WHY ARE YOUR DISTANCES DIFFERENT FROM THE DISTANCES IN THE EPA LOOKUP TABLES?
If you did your own modeling, this question may come up. You should be ready to explain in a
general way how your model works and why it produces different results. EPA allows using other
models (as long as certain parameters and conditions specified by the rule are met) because it realizes
that EPA lookup table results will not necessarily reflect all site-specific conditions.
In addition, although all models are generally based on the same physical principles, dispersion
modeling is not an exact science due to the limited opportunity for real-world validation of the results.
Thus, the method by which different models combine the basic factors such as wind speed and
atmospheric stability can result in distances that readily vary by a factor of two (e.g., five miles versus
ten miles). The introduction of site-specific factors can produce additional differences.
EPA recognizes that different models will produce differing predictions of the distance to an endpoint,
especially for releases of toxic substances. The Agency has provided a discussion of the uncertainties
associated with the model it has adopted for the OCA Guidance. You need to understand that the
distances produced by another model lie within a band of uncertainty and be able to demonstrate and
communicate this fact to those who are reviewing your results.
November 19,1998
-------
. . • Chapter 10
10-11 Communication with the Public
HOW LIKELY ARE THE WORST-CASE AND ALTERNATIVE RELEASE SCENARIOS?
It is generally not possible to provide accurate numerical estimates of how likely these scenarios are.
EPA has stated that providing such numbers for accident scenarios rarely is feasible because the data
needed (e.g., on rates for equipment failure and human error) are not usually available. Even when
data are available, there are large uncertainties in applying the data because each facility's situation is
unique. ,
In general, the risk of the worst-case scenario is low. Although catastrophic vessel failures have
occurred, they are rare events. Combining them .with worst-case weather conditions makes the overall
scenario even less likely. This does not mean .that such events cannot or will not happen, however.
For the alternative scenario, the likelihood of the release is greater and will depend, in part, on the
scenario you chose.. If you selected a scenario based on your accident history or industry accident
history, you should explain this to the public. You should also discuss any steps you are taking to
prevent such an accident from recurring. '.
IS THE WORST-CASE RELEASE YOU REPORTED REALL Y THE WORST ACCIDENT YOU CAN HA VE?
The answerto this question will depend on the type of facility you have and how you handle
chemicals. EPA defined a specific scenario (failure of .the single largest vessel) to provide a common'
basis of comparison among facilities nationwide. So, if you have only one vessel, EPA's worst case is
likely to be the worst event you could have.
On the other hand, if you have a process which involves multiple co-located or interconnected vessels,
it (is possible that you could have an accident more severe than EPA's worst case scenario. If credible
scenarios exist that could be. more serious (in terms of quantities released or consequences) than the
EPA worst case scenario, you should be ready to discuss them. For example, if a fire or explosion at
the facility could release larger quantities if multiple vessels are involved, you should be ready to
frankly discuss such a scenario with the public. If you take precautions to prevent such scenarios from
occurring, you should explain these precautions also.
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 10
Communication with the Public
10-12
WHA T ABOUT THE ACCIDENT A T THE [NAME OF SIMILAR FACILITY] THA T HAPPENED LAST MONTH?
This question highlights an important point: you need to be aware of events in your industry (e.g.,
accidents, new safety measures) for two reasons. First, your performance likely will be compared to
that of your competitors. Second, learning about the circumstances and causes of accidents at other
facilities like yours can help you prevent such accidents from occurring at your facility.
You should be familiar with accidents that happen at facilities similar to yours, and you should have
evaluated whether your facility is at risk for similar accidents. You should take the appropriate
measures to prevent the accident from occurring and be prepared to describe these actions. If your
facility has experienced a similar release in the past, this information may be documented in your
accident history or other publicly available records, depending on the date and nature of the incident,
the quantity released, and other factors. If you have already taken steps specifically designed to
address this type of accident, whether as a result of this accident, a prior accident at your facility, or
other internal decision-making, you should describe these efforts. If, based on your evaluation, you
determine that the accident could not occur at your facility, you should discuss the pertinent
differences between the two facilities and explain why you believe those differences should prevent
the accident from occurring at your facility.
WHAT ACTIONS HAVE YOU TAKEN TO INVOLVE THE COMMUNITY IN YOUR ACCIDENT PREVENTION AND
EMERGENCY PLANNING EFFORTS?
If you have not actively involved the community in accident prevention and emergency planning in the
past, you should acknowledge this as an area where you could improve and start doing so as you
develop your risk management program. First, you may want to begin participating in the LEPC and
regional mutual aid organizations if you aren't doing so already. Other opportunities for community
involvement are fire safety coordination activities with the local fire department, joint training and
exercises with local public and private sector response personnel, the establishment of green fields
between the facility and the community, and similar efforts.
When discussing accident prevention and emergency planning with the community, you should
indicate any national programs in which you participate, such as OSHA's Voluntary Protection
Program. If fully implemented, these programs can help improve the safety of the facility and the
community. You may have future plans to participate in areas described previously or have new
initiatives associated with the risk management program. Be sure you ask what else the community
would like you to do and explain how you will do it.
November 19,1998
-------
' • • Chapter 10
10-13 - , Communication with the Public
CAN WE SEE THE DOCUMENTATION YOU KEEP ON SITE?
If the requested information .is not confidential business information, EPA encourages you to make it
available to the public. Although you are hot required to provide this information to the public,
refusing to provide it simply because you are not compelled to is not the best approach. If you decide
not to provide any or most of this material, you should have good reasons for not doing so and be
prepared to explain these reasons to the public. Simply taking a defensive position or referring to the
extent of your legal obligations is likely to threaten the effectiveness of your interaction with the
community. Offer as much information as possible to the public; if particular documents would reveal
proprietary .information, try to provide a redacted copy, summary, or some other form that answers the
community's concerns. You may want to work with your LEPC on this issue. You should also be
aware that information that EPA or the implementing agency obtains as part of an inspection or
investigation conducted under section 114 of the Clean Air Act would be available to the public under
section 114(c) of the Act to the extent it does not reveal confidential business information..
10.3 COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES AND TECHNIQUES
Although this section is most applicable to larger companies, small businesses may
want to review it and use some of the ideas to expand their communications with the
public. To prepare for effective communication with the community, you should:
(1) Adppt an organizational policy that includes basic risk communication
principles (see exhibit 10-1)
(2) Assign responsibilities and resources to implement the policy
(3) Plan to use "best communication practices"
ADOPT AN ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS POLICY .
An organizational policy will support communication with the public on your RMP
and make it an integral part of management practices. Otherwise, breakdowns are
likely to occur, which could cause mistrust, hostility and conflicts. , .' •
A policy helps to establish communication as a normal organizational function and to
present it'as an opportunity rather than a burden or threat. The policy can be
incorporated in an organization's policies, an approach taken by many companies.
Remember that what you communicate is more important than the type of
communication policy or program you use, and what you actually do to maintain a
safe facility is more important than anything you say. Your company's safety.and
prevention steps in your risk management program should serve as the core elements
of any risk communication program.
November 19, 1998
-------
I!" ,
-------
- Chapter 10
10-15 Communication with the Public
, Use your RMP's executive summary to begin the dialogue with the
community; be sure you have taken all of the steps you present
- Taking a community perspective, identify which data elements need to
be clarified, interpreted, or amplified, and which are most likely to
raise community concerns; then compile the information needed to
respond and determine the most understandable methods (e.g., use of
graphics) for presenting the information
At Submittal . , ' , '
Review the RMP to assure that you are familiar with its data elements
and how they were developed. In particular, review the hazard
' assessment, prevention, and response program features, as well as
documentation of the methods, data, and assumptions used, especially
if an outside consultant performed the analyses and developed these
materials. You have certified their accuracy and your spokesperson
should know them intimately, as they reflect your plan
Review your performance in implementing the prevention and
response programs and prepare to discuss problems identified and
actions taken , ,
Review your performance in investigating accidents and prepare to
discuss any corrective actions that followed
Other Steps ,
Identify the most likely concerns about risks identified in the RMP but
not fully addressed, consult with management and safety engineering,
and determine additional measures the organization will take to resolve
these concerns
Avoid misrepresentations and minimize the roles of public relations
specialists
Identify "best communication practices" (as described in the next
section) and plan how to use them
USE "BEST COMMUNICATION PRACTICES"
Many facilities already have gained considerable experience in communicating with ,
the public. Lessons from their experiences are described below. However, the value
November 19, 1998
-------
Chapter 10
Communication with the Public 10-16
of these best practices and your credibility will depend on your facility's possession
and ongoing demonstration of certain essential qualities:
• Top management commitment (e.g., owner and facility manager) to
improving safety
Honesty, openness, and concern for the community
Respect for public concerns and perceptions
Commitment to maintaining a dialogue with all sectors of the
community, to learning from this dialogue, and to being prepared to
• change your practices to make your facility more safe
Commitment to continuous improvement through internal procedures
for evaluating incidents and promoting organizational learning
Knowledge of safety issues and safety management methods
Good working relationships with the LEPC, fire department, and other
local officials
Active support for the LEPC and related activities
11111 •' . ' ' ' , , .' ' ' '. '•.' ' ' ' iifF
Employee support and commitment
Continuation of commitment despite potential public hostility or
mistrust
Another note: Because each facility and community involves a unique combination of
factors, the practices used to achieve good risk communication in one case do not
necessarily ensure the same quality result when used in another case. Therefore, while
it is advisable for you to review such experience to identify "best communication
practices," you should carefully evaluate such practices to determine if they can be
adapted to fit your unique circumstances. For example, if your facility is in the middle
of an urban area, you probably will use different approaches than you would use if it
were located in an industrial area far from any residential populations. These
practices are complementary approaches to delivering your risk management message
and responding to the concerns of the community.
'/ ', |M •
With these cautions in mind, a number of "best" practices are outlined below for
consideration. First, you will want to establish formal channels for
information-sharing and communication with stakeholders. The most basic
approaches include:
November 19,1998
-------
, ' " • Chapter 10
10-17 Communication with the Public
Convene public meetings for discussion and dialogue regarding your
risk management program and RMP and take steps (to have the facility
owner or manager and all sectors of the community participate,
including minorities and low-income residents ,
Arrange meetings with local media representatives to facilitate their
understanding of your risk management program and the program
summary presented in your RMP -
Establish a repository of information on" safety matters for the LEPC
and the public and, if electronic, provide software for public .use.
Some organizations also have provided computer terminals for public
use in the community .library or fire department , -
Other, more resource-intensive activities of this type to consider include:
Create and convene focus groups (small working groups) to facilitate
. dialogue and action on specific concerns, including technical matters,
and take steps to assure that membership in each group reflects a cross
section of the community and includes technically trained persons
(e.g., engineers, medical professionals)
Hold seminars on hypothetical release scenarios, prevention and
response programs, applicable standards and industry practices,
analytic methods and models (e.g., on dispersion of airborne, releases,
health effects of airborne concentrations), and other matters of special
concern or complexity
Convene special meetings to foster dialogue and collaborations with
- the LEPC and the fire department and to establish a mutual assistance
network with other facility managers in the community or region
. Establish hot lines for telephone and e-mail communications between
interested parties and your designated risk communication staff and, if
feasible, a web site for posting useful information
In all of these efforts, remember to use plain language and commonly understood
terms; avoid the use of acronyms and technical and legal jargon. In addition,
depending on your audience, keep in mind that the preparation of multilingual
materials may be useful or even necessary.
Secondly, you may want to initiate or expand programs that more directly involve the
community in your operations and safety programs. Traditional approaches include:
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 10
Communication with the Public 10-18
Arrange facility tours so that members of the public can view
operations and discuss safety procedures with supervisors and
employees
Schedule drills and simulations of incidents to demonstrate how
prevention and response programs work, with participation by
community responders and other organizations (e.g., neighboring
companies)
Conduct.a "Safety Street" - a community forum generally sponsored by
several industries in a locality, where your representatives present
facility safety information, explain risks, and respond to public
questions (see Section 10.4 for a reference to more information on this
program)
Periodically reaffirm and demonstrate your commitment to safety in
accordance with and beyond regulatory requirements and present data
on your safety performance, using appropriate benchmarks or
measures, in newsletters and by posting the information at your web
site
•/'''', "
Publicly honor and reward managers and employees who have
performed safety responsibilities in superior fashion and citizens who
have made important contributions to the dialogue on safety
If community interest is significant, you may also want to consider the following
activities:
Invite public participation in monitoring implementation of your risk
management program elements
Invite public participation in auditing your performance in safety
responsibilities, such as chemical handling and tracking procedures
and analysis and follow-up on accidents and near misses
'. , . , • ,'. . • . ** . ';' • . '
Organize a committee comprised of representatives from the facility,
other industry, emergency planning and response organizations, and
community groups and chaired by a community leader to
•independently evaluate your safety and communication efforts (e.g., a
Community Advisory Panel). You may also want to finance the
committee to pay for an independent engineering consultant to assist
with technical issues and learn what can be done to improve safety,
. ; and thereby share control with the community
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 10
10-19 Communication with the Public
Your communication staff should review these examples, consider designing their
own activities as well as joint efforts with other local organizations, and ultimately
decide with the community on which set of practices are feasible and can best create a
healthy risk communication process in your community. Once these decisions are
made, you may want to integrate the chosen set of practices in an overall
communication program for your facility, transform some into standard procedures,
and monitor and evaluate them for continuous improvement.
OTHER COMMUNICATION OPPORTUNITIES
By complying with the RMP rule and participating in the communications process
with the community, you should have developed a comprehensive system for
~ preventing, mitigating, and responding to chemical accidents at your facility. Why not
share this knowledge .with your staff, others you do business with (e.g.,.customers,
distributors, contractors), and, perhaps through industry groups, others in your
industry? If you transfer this knowledge to others, you can help improve their
chemical safety management capabilities, enhance public safety beyond your
1 • community, and possibly gain economic benefits for your organization.
10.4 FOR MORE INFORMATION /
Among the numerous publications on risk communication, the following may be
particularly helpful:
Improving Risk Communication, National Academy Press,
' Washington, D.C., 1989
"Safety Street" and other materials on the Kanawha Valley
Demonstration Program, Chemical Manufacturers Association,
Arlington, VA
Community Awareness and Emergency Response Code of
Management Practices and various Guidance, Chemical Manufacturers
Association, Arlington, VA
1 Communicating Risks to the Public, R. Kasperson and P. Stallen, eds.,
Kluwer Publishing Co., 1991
"Challenges in Risk and Safety Communication with the Public," S.
,- . Maher, Risk Management Professionals, Mission Viejo, CA, April
1996
Primer on Health Risk Communication Principles and Practices,
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, on the World
Wide Web at atsdrl.atsdr.cdc.gov:8080
November 19,1998
-------
Chapter 10
Communication with the Public 10-20
Risk Communication about Chemicals in Your Community: A Manual
for Local Officials, US Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
EPCRA/Superfund/RCRA/CAA Hotline
i' ' !, , ' , ,',''• ' ^ 'i
Risk Communication about Chemicals in Your Community:
Facilitator's Manual and Guide, US Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA EPCRA/Superfund/RCRA/CAA Hotline
Chemicals, the Press, and the Public: A Journalist's Guide to
Reporting on Chemicals in the Community, US Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA EPCRA/Superfund/RCRA/CAA Hotline
November 19,1998
-------
Appendix A
40CFRpart68
-------
§67143
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-96 Edition)
shall be paid to the State or local
agent.
§67.43 Procedure where a formal
State hearing was held.
(a) In reviewing a penalty calculation
for which a hearing conforming to
§67.11(b)(4) was held, the Administrator
may invite comment on issues identi-
fied by him as relevant to his review
and shall propose or make findings as
to the correctness of the determination
and shall evaluate the accuracy and
adequacy of the material transmitted
pursuant to §67.11(b}(5).
(b) The Administrator shall notify all
participants in the State hearing of his
findings and conclusions. If the Admin-
istrator finds that the State deter-
mination conformed to the require-
ments of the Act, part 66 (as modified
by §67.11), the Technical Support Docu-
ment, and the Instruction Manual, his
determination shall constitute a final
action pursuant to section 320. If the
Administrator finds that the State de-
termination did not conform to the re-
quirements of the Act or of part 66 (as
modified fay §67.11) or to the Technical
Support Document or Instruction Man-
ual, the findings shall constitute pro-
posed findings, and the notice shall in-
vite participants to file exceptions to
his proposed findings and, if necessary,,
schedule a time for argument.
(c) Within 60 days of receipt of any
briefs or exceptions or after oral argu-
ment, the Administrator shall affirm,
modify, or revoke his proposed findings
that the State or local agent's deter-
mination did not conform to the re-
quirements of the Act or of part 66 (as
modified by §67.11) or the Technical
Support Document or Instruction Man-
ual. The decision shall be in writing.
Notice and a copy of the decision,
which shall constitute final adminis-
trative action by EPA pursuant to sec-
tion 120, shall be provided to the source
owner or operator and to all other par-
ticipants in the State hearing.
(d) If the Administrator finds, that
deficiencies in the State or local
agent's hearing record prevent him
from determining whether the State or
local agent's determination conformed
to the requirements of the Act and part
66 (as modified by §67.11) or the Tech-
nical Support Document or Instruction
Manual, he shall notify the State or
local agent of his decision and specify
what deficiencies exist and schedule a
hearing in accordance with subpart F
of part 66. Such notice shall operate to
withdraw EPA's delegation of author-
ity to the State or local agent over the
facility in question unless the State or
local agent within 15 days schedules a
supplemental hearing to correct the de-
ficiencies.
(e) Unless otherwise provided in the
Administrator's notice to the State or
local agent, any noncompliance pen-
alties owed by the source owner or op-
erator shall be paid to the State or
local agent.
APPENDIX A TO PART 67—TECHNICAL '
SUPPORT DOCUMENT
NOTE: EPA will make copies of appendix A
available from: Director. Stationary Source
Compliance Division, EN-341-, 401 M Street.
SW.. Washington, DC 20460.
[54 FR 25259, June 20. 1989]
APPENDIX B TO PART 67-
; MANUAL
-INSTRUCTION
NOTE: EPA will make copies of appendix B
available from: Director, Stationary Source
Compliance Division, EN-341. 401 M Street,
SW.. Washington. DC 20460.
[54 FR 25259. June 20. 1989]
APPENDIX C TO PART 67—COMPUTER
PROGRAM
NOTE: EPA will make copies of appendix C
available from: Director, Stationary Source
Compliance Division, EN-341. 401 M Street,
SW.. Washington. DC 20460.
[54 FR 25259. June 20. 1989]
PART 68—CHEMICAL ACCIDENT
PREVENTION PROVISIONS
Subpart A—General
Sec.
68.1 Scope.
68.2 Stayed provisions.
68.3 Definitions.
68.10 Applicability.
68.12 General requirements.
68.15 Management.
Subpart B—Hazard Assessment
68.20 Applicability.
68.22 Offsite consequence analysis param-
eters.
68.25 Worst-case release scenario analysis.
1212
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§68.2
68.28 Alternative release scenario analysis.
68.30 Defining offsite impacts population. -
68.33 Defining offsite impacts environment.
68.36 Review and update.
68.39 Documentation.
68.42 Five-year accident history.
Subpait C—Program 2 Prevention Program
68.48 Safety information.
68.50 Hazard review.
68.52 Operating procedures.
68.54 Training.
.68.56 Maintenance. .
68.58 Compliance audits.
68.60 Incident investigation.
Subpart D—Program 3 Prevention Program
68.65 Process safety information.
68.67 Process hazard analysis.
68.69 Operating procedures.
68.71 Training. ' ,
68.73 Mechanical integrity.
68.75 Management of change.
68.77 Pre-startup review. _,
68.79 Compliance audits.
68.81 Incident investigation.
68.83 Employee participation. ,
' 68.85 Hot work permit.
68.87 Contractors.
Subpart E—Emergency Response
68.90 Applicability. .
68.95 Emergency response program.'
Subpart F— Regulated Substances for
Accidental Release Prevention
68.100 Purpose.
68.115 Threshold determination.
68.120 Petition process.
68.125 Exemptions.
68.130 List, of substances.
Subpart G—Risk Management Plan
68.150 Submission.
68.155 Executive summary.
68.160 Registration.
68.165 Offsite consequence analysis.
68.168 Five-year accident history.
68.170 Prevention program/Program 2.
68.175 Prevention program/Program 3.
68.180 Emergency response program.,
68.185 Certification.
68.190 Updates. ,
Subpart H—Other Requirements
68.200 Recordkeeping.
68.210 Availability of information to the
public.
68.215 Permit content and air permitting
authority or designated agency require-
ments!
68.220 Audits. ' -
APPENDIX A TO PART 68—TABLE OF Toxic
ENDPOINTS
AUTHORITY: 42 U.S.C. 7412(r), 7601(a)(l).
7661-7661f.
SOURCE: 59 FR 4493, Jan. 31, 1994. unless
otherwise noted.
Subpart A—General
§68.1 Scope.
This part sets forth the list of regu-
lated substances and thresholds, the
petition process for adding or deleting
substances to the list of regulated sub-
stances, the requirements for owners or
operators, of stationary sources , con-
cerning the prevention of accidental
releases, and the State accidental re-
lease prevention programs approved
under section 112(r). The list of sub-
stances, threshold quantities, and acci-
dent prevention regulations promul-
gated, under this part do not limit in
any way the general duty provisions
under section 112(r)(l).
§ 68.2 Stayed provisions.
(a) Notwithstanding any other provi-
sion of this part, the effectiveness of
the following provisions is stayed from
March 2. 1994 to December 22, 1997.
' • (1) In Sec. 68.3, the definition of "sta-
tionary source," to the extent that
such definition includes naturally oc-
curring hydrocarbon reservoirs or
transportation subject to oversight or
regulation" under a state natural gas or
hazardous liquid program for which the
state has in effect a certification to
DOT under 49 U.S.C. 60105;
(2) Section 68.115(b)(2) of this part, to
the extent that such provision requires
an owner or operator to treat as a regu-
lated flammable substance:
(i) Gasoline, when in distribution or
related storage for use as fuel for inter-
nal combustion engines;
(ii) Naturally occurring hydrocarbon
mixtures prior to entry into a petro-
leum refining process unit or a natural
gas processing plant. Naturally occur-
ring hydrocarbon mixtures include any
of the following: condensate, crude oil,
field gas, and produced water, each as
defined in paragraph (b) of this section;
(iii) Other mixtures that contain a
regulated flammable substance and
1213
-------
§68.3
40 CFR Ch, I (7-1-96 Editipn)
that do not have a National Fire Pro-
tection Association flammability haz-
ard rating of 4, the definition of which
is in the NFPA 704, Standard System
for the Identification of the Fire Haz-
ards of Materials. National Fire Pro-
tection Association, Quincy, MA, 1990,
available from the National Fire Pro-
tection Association, 1 Batterymarch
Park, Quincy, MA 02269-9101; and
(3) Section 68.130(a).
(b) From March 2, 1994 to December
22, 1997, the following definitions shall
apply to the stayed provisions de-
scribed in paragraph (a) of this section:
Condensate means hydrocarbon liquid
separated from natural gas that con-
denses because -of changes in tempera-
ture, pressure, or both, and remains
liquid at standard conditions.
Crude oil means any naturally occur-
ring, unrefined petroleum liquid.
Field gas means gas extracted from a
production well before the gas enters a
natural gas processing plant.
Natural gas processing plant means
any processing site engaged in the ex-
traction of natural gas liquids from
field gas, fractionation of natural gas
liquids to natural gas products, or
both. A separator, dehydration unit.
heater treater, sweetening unit, com-
pressor, or similar equipment shall not
be considered a "processing site" un-
less such equipment is physically lo-
cated within a natural gas processing
plant (gas plant) site.
Petroleum refining process unit means
a process unit vised in an establishment
primarily engaged in petroleum "refin-
ing as defined in the Standard Indus-
trial Classification code for petroleum
refining (2911) and used for the follow-
ing: Producing transportation fuels
(such as gasoline, diesel fuels, and jet
fuels), heating fuels (such as kerosene,
fuel gas distillate, and fuel oils), or lu-
bricants; separating petroleum; or sep-
arating, cracking, reacting, or reform-
ing intermediate petroleum streams.
Examples of such units include, but are
not limited to, petroleum based solvent
units, alkylation units, catalytic
hydrotreating, catalytic hydrorefining,
catalytic hydrocracking, catalytic re-
forming, catalytic cracking, crude dis-
tillation, lube oil processing, hydrogen
production, ispmerization, polymeriza-
tion, thermal processes, and blending,
sweetening, and treating processes. Pe-
troleum refining process units include
sulfur plants.
Produced water means water ex-
tracted from the earth from an oil or
natural gas production well, or that is
separated from oil or natural gas after
extraction.
[59 FR 4493. Jan. 31. '1994. as amended at 61
FR 31731. June 20. 1996]
§68.3 Definitions.,
For the purposes of this part:
Accidental release means an unantici-
pated emission of a regulated sub-
stance or other extremely hazardous
substance into the ambient air from a
stationary source.
Act means the Clean Air Act as
amended (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.)
Administrative controls mean written
procedural mechanisms used for hazard
control.
Administrator means the adminis-
trator of the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency.
AIChE/CCPS means the American In-
stitute of Chemical Engineers/Center
for Chemical Process Safety.
API means the American Petroleum
Institute.
Article means a manufactured item,
as defined under 29 CFR ;i910.1200(b),
that is formed to a specific shape or de-
sign during manufacture, that has end
use functions dependent in whole or in
part upon the shape or design during
end use, and that does not release or
otherwise result in exposure to a regu-
lated substance under normal condi-
tions of processing and use.
ASMS means the American Society
of Mechanical Engineers.
CAS means the Chemical Abstracts
Service.
Catastrophic release means a major
uncontrolled emission, fire, or explo-
sion, involving one or "more regulated
substances that presents imminent and
substantial endangerment to public
health and the environment.
Classified information means "classi-
fied information" as defined in the
Classified Information Procedures Act,
18 U.S.C. App. 3, section l(a) as "any
information or material that has been
determined by the United States Gov-
ernment pursuant to an executive
order, statute, or regulation, to require
1214
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§68.3
protection against unauthorized disclo-
sure for reasons of national security."
Covered process means a process that
has a regulated substance present - in
more than a threshold quantity as de-
termined under §68.115.
Designated agency means the state,
local, or Federal agency designated by
the state under the provisions of
§68.215(d) .
DOT means the United States De-
partment of Transportation.
Environmental receptor means natural
areas such as national or state parks,
forests, or monuments; officially des-
ignated wildlife sanctuaries, preserves,
refuges, or areas; and Federal wilder-
ness areas, that could be exposed at
any time to toxic concentrations, radi-
ant heat, or overpressure greater than
or equal to the endpoints provided in
§68.22(a) , as a result of an accidental
release and that can be identified on
local U. S. Geological Survey maps.
Hot work means work involving elec-
tric or gas welding, cutting, brazing, or
similar flame or spark-producing oper-
ations.
Implementing agency means the state
or local agency that obtains delegation
for an accidental release prevention
program under subpart E, 40 CFR part
63. The implementing agency may, but
is not required to, be the state or local
air permitting agency. If no state or
local agency, is granted delegation,
EPA will be the implementing agency
for that state.
Injury means any effect on a human
that results either 'from direct expo-
sure to toxic concentrations; radiant
heat; or overpressures from accidental
releases or from the direct con-
sequences of a vapor cloud explosion
(such as flying glass, debris, and other
projectiles) from an accidental release
and that requires medical treatment or
hospitalization.
Major change means, introduction of a
new process, process equipment, or reg-
ulated substance, an alteration of proc-
ess chemistry that results in any
change to safe operating limits, or
other alteration that introduces a new
hazard.
Mechanical integrity means the proc-
ess of ensuring that process equipment
is fabricated from the proper materials
of construction and is properly in-
stalled, maintained, and replaced to
prevent failures and accidental re-
leases.
Medical treatment means treatment,
other than first aid, administered by a
physician or registered professional
personnel under standing orders from a
physician. , •
Mitigation or mitigation system means
specific activities, technologies, or
equipment designed or deployed to cap-
ture or control substances upon loss of
containment to minimize exposure of
the public or the environment. Passive
mitigation means equipment, devices,
or technologies that function without
human, mechanical, or other energy
input. Active mitigation means equip-
ment, devices, or technologies that
need human, mechanical, or other en-
ergy input to function.
NFPA means the National Fire Pro-
tection Association.
Offsite means areas beyond the prop-
erty boundary of the stationary source,
and areas within the property bound-
ary to which the public has routine and
unrestricted access during or outside
business hours.
OSHA means the U.S. Occupational
Safety and Health Administration.
Owner or operator means any person
who owns, leases, operates, controls, or
supervises a stationary source.
Population means the public.
Process means any activity involving
a regulated substance' including any
use, storage, manufacturing, handling,
or on-site movement of such sub-
stances, or combination of these activi-
ties. For the purposes of this defini-
tion, any group of vessels that are
interconnected, or separate vessels
that are located such that a regulated
substance could be involved in a poten-
tial release, shall be considered a. sin-
gle process.
Public means any person except em-
ployees or contractors at the station-
ary source.
Public receptor means offsite resi-
dences, institutions (e.g., schools, hos-
pitals), industrial, commercial, and of-
fice buildings, parks, or recreational
areas inhabited or occupied by the pub-
lic at any time without restriction by
,,the stationary source where members
of the public could be exposed to toxic
1215
-------
§68.10
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-96 Edition)
concentrations, radiant heat, or over-
pressure, as a result of an accidental
release.
Regulated substance is any substance
listed pursuant to section 112(r)(3) of
the Clean Air Act as amended, in
§68.130.
Replacement in kind means a replace-
ment that satisfies the design speci-
fications.
RMP means the risk management
plan required under subpart G of this
part..
SIC means Standard Industrial Clas-
sification.
Stationary source means any build-
ings, structures, equipment, installa-
tions, or substance emitting stationary
activities which belong to the same in-
dustrial group, which are located on
one or more contiguous properties,
which are under the control of the
same person (or persons under common
control), and from which an accidental
release may occur. A stationary source
includes transportation containers
that are no longer under active ship-
ping papers and transportation con-
tainers that are connected to equip-
ment at the stationary source for the
purposes of temporary storage, loading,
or unloading. The term .stationary
source does not apply to transpor-
tation, including the storage incident
to transportation, of any regulated
substance or any other extremely haz-
ardous substance under the provisions
of this part, provided that such trans-
portation is regulated under 49 "CFR
parts 192, 193, or 195. Properties shall
hot be considered contiguous solely be-
cause of a railroad or gas pipeline
right-of-way.
Threshold quantity means the quan-
tity specified for regulated substances
pursuant to section 112(r)(5) of the
Clean Air Act as amended, listed in
§68.130 and determined to be present at
a stationary source as specified in
§68.115 of this part.
Typical meteorological conditions
means the temperature, wind speed,
cloud cover, and atmospheric stability
class, prevailing at the site based on
data gathered at or near the site or
from a local meteorological station.
Vessel means any reactor, tank,
drum, barrel, cylinder, vat, kettle,
boiler, pipe, hose, or other container.
Worst-case release means the release
of the largest quantity of a regulated
substance from a vessel or process line
failure that results in the greatest dis-
tance to an endpoint defined in
§68.22(a).
[59 FR 4493, Jan. 31. 1994. as amended at 61
FR 31717. June 20. 1996]
EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: At 61 FR 31717. June
20, 1996. §68.3 was amended by adding the
•definitions for Act, Administrative controls,
AIChE/CCPS, API. ASME, Catastrophic release.
Classified information. Covered process. Des-
ignated agency. Environmental receptor. Hot
work. Implementing agency. Injury, Major
change, Mechanical integrity. Medical treat-
ment. Mitigation or mitigation system, NFPA,
Offsite, OSHA, Population, Public, Public re-
ceptor. Replacement in kind, RMP, SIC, Typical
meterological conditions, and Worst-case re-
lease, effective Aug. 19, 1996.
§68.10 Applicability.
(a) An owner or operator of a station-
ary source that has more than a
threshold quantity of a regulated sub-
stance in a process, as determined
under §68.115, shall comply with the re-
quirements of this part no later than
the latest of the following dates: .
. (1) June 21, 1999;
(2) Three years after the date on
which a regulated substance is first
listed under §68.130; or
(3) The date on which a regulated
substance is first present above a
threshold quantity in a process.
(b) Program 1 eligibility require-
ments. A covered process is eligible for
Program 1 requirements as provided in
§68.12(b) if it meets all of the following
requirements:
(1) For the five years prior to the
submission of an RMP, the process has
not had an accidental release of a regu-
lated substance where exposure to the
substance, its reaction products, over-
pressure generated-by an explosion in-
volving the substance, or radiant heat
generated by a fire involving the sub-
stance led to any of the following off-
site:
(i) Death;
(ii) Injury; or
(iii) Response or restoration activi-
ties for an exposure of an environ-
mental receptor;
(2) The distance to a toxic or flam-
mable endpoint for a worst-case release
assessment conducted under Subpart B
1216
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
and §68.25 is less than the distance to
any public receptor, as defined in
§ 68.30; and
(3) Emergency response procedures
have been coordinated between the sta-
tionary source and local emergency
planning and response organizations.
(c) Program 2 eligibility require-
ments. A covered, process is subject to
Program 2 requirements if it does not
meet the eligibility requirements of ei-
ther paragraph (b) or paragraph (d) of
this section.
(d) Program 3 eligibility require-
ments. A covered process is,subject to
Program 3 if the process does not meet
the requirements of paragraph (b) of
this section, and if either of the follow-
ing conditions is met:
(1) The process is in SIC code 2611,
2812, 2819, 2821, 2865, 2869. 2873, 2879, or
2911; or ,
(2) The process is subject to the
OSHA process safety management
standard, 29 CFR 1910.J19.
(e) If at any time a covered process
no longer meets the eligibility criteria
of its Program level, the,owner or oper-
ator shall comply with the require-
ments of the new Program level that
applies to the process and update the
RMP as provided in §68.190.
[61 FR 31717. June 20, 1996]
EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: At 61 FR 31717. June
20. 1996, §68.10 was added, effective Aug; 19,.
1996.
§ 68.12 General requirements.
(a) General requirements. The owner
or operator of a stationary source sub-
ject to this part shall submit a single
RMP, as provided in §§68.150, to 68.185.
The RMP shall include a registration
that reflects all covered processes.
(b.) Program 1 requirements. In addi-
tion to meeting the requirements of
paragraph (a) of this section, the owner
or operator of a stationary source with
a process eligible for Program 1, as pro-
vided in §68.10 (b), shall: '
(1) Analyze the worst-case release
scenario for the processes), as provided
in §68.25; document that the nearest
public receptor is beyond the distance
to a toxic or flammable endpoint de-
fined in §68.22(a); and submit in the
RMP the worst-case release scenario as
provided in §68.165;
§68.12
(2) Ccimplete the five-year .accident
history for the process as provided in
§68.42 of this part and submit it in the
RMP as provided in §68.168;
(3) Ensure that response actions have
been coordinated with local emergency
planning and response agencies; and
(4) Certify in the RMP the following:
"Based on the criteria in 40 CFR 68.10,
the distance to the specified endpoint
for the worst-case accidental release
scenario for the following process (es) is
less than the distance to the nearest
public receptor: [list process (es)]. With-
in the past five years, the process (es)
has (have) had no accidental release
that caused offsite impacts provided in*
the risk management program rule (40
CFR 68.10(b)(l)). No additional meas-
ures' are necessary to prevent offsite
impacts from accidental releases. In
the event of fire, explosion, or a release
of a regulated substance from "the proc-
ess (es), entry within the distance to
the specified endpoints may pose a dan-
ger to public emergency responders.
Therefore, public .emergency respond-
ers should not enter this area except as
arranged with 'the emergency contact
indicated in the RMP. The undersigned
certifies that, to the best of my knowl-
edge, information, and belief, formed
after reasonable inquiry, the informa-
tion submitted is true, accurate, and
. complete. [Signature, title, date
signed]."
(c) Program 2 requirements. In addi-
tion to meeting the requirements of
paragraph (a) of this section, the owner
or operator of a stationary source with
a process subject to Program 2, as pro-
vided in § 68.10(c), shall:
(1) Develop and implement a manage-
ment system as provided in §68.15;
(2) Conduct a hazard assessment as
provided in §§68.20 through 68.42;
(3) Implement the Program 2 .preven-
tion steps provided in §§68.4? through
68.60 or implement the Program 3 pre-
vention steps provided in §§68.65
through 68.87;
(4) Develop and implement an emer-
gency response' program as provided in
§§68.90 to 68.95; and ' ' '
(5) Submit as part of the RMP the
data on prevention program elements
for Program 2 processes as provided in
§68.170.
1217
-------
§68.15
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-96 Edition)
(d) Program 3 requirements. In addi-
tion to meeting the requirements of
paragraph (a) of this section, the owner
or operator of a stationary source with
a process subject to Program 3, as pro-
vided in §68.10(d) shall:
(i) Develop and implement a manage-
ment system as provided in §68.15;
(2) Conduct a hazard assessment as
provided in §§68.20 through 68.42;
(3) Implement the prevention re-
quirements of §§68.65 through 68.87;
(4) Develop and implement an emer-
gency response program as provided in
§§68.90 to 68.95 of this part; and
(5) Submit as part of the RMP the
data on prevention program elements
for Program 3 processes as provided in
§68.175.
J61 FR 31718. June 20. 1996]
EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: At 61 FR 31718. June
20. 1996. §68.12 was added, effective Aug. 19.
1996.
§68.15 Management.
(a) The owner or operator of a sta-
tionary source with processes subject
to Program 2 or Program 3 shall de-
velop a management system to oversee
the implementation of the risk man-'
agement program elements.
(b) The owner or operator shall as-
sign a qualified person or position that
has the overall responsibility for the
development, implementation, and in-
tegration of the risk management pro-
gram elements.
(c) When responsibility for imple-
menting individual requirements of
this part is assigned to persons other
than the person identified under para-
graph (b) of this section, the names or
positions of these people shall be docu-
mented and the lines of authority de-
fined through an organization chart or
similar document.
[61 FR 31718. June 20. 1996]
EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: At 61 FR 31718. June
20, 1996. §68.15 was added, effective Aug.-19.
1996.
Subpart B—Hazard Assessment
SOURCE: 61 FR 31718. June 20. 1996. unless
otherwise noted.
EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: At 61 FR 31718. June
20. 1996, subpart B was added, effective Aug.
19, 1996.
§68.20 Applicability.
The owner or operator of a station-
ary source subject to this part shall
prepare a worst-case release scenario
analysis as provided in §68.25 of this
part and complete the five-year acci-
dent history as provided in §68.42. The
owner or operator of a Program 2 and 3
process must comply with all sections
in this subpart for these processes.
§ 68.22 Offsite consequence - analysis
parameters.
(a) Endpoints. For analyses of offsite
consequences, the following endpoirits
shall be used:
(1) Toxics. The toxic endpoints pro-
vided in appendix A of this part.
(2) Flammables. The endpoints for
flammables vary according to the sce-
narios studied:
(i) Explosion. An overpressure of 1
psi.
(ii) Radiant heat/exposure time. A ra-
diant heat of 5 kw/m2 for 40 seconds.
(iii) Lower flammability limit. A
lower flammability limit as provided in
NFPA documents or other generally
recognized sources.
(b) Wind speed/atmospheric stability
class. For the worst-case release analy-
sis, the owner or operator shall use a
wind speed of 1.5 meters per second and
F atmospheric stability class. If the
owner or operator can demonstrate
that local meteorological data applica-
ble to the stationary source show a
higher minimum wind speed or less sta-
ble atmosphere at all times during the
previous three years, these minimums
may be used. For analysis of alter-
native scenarios, the owner or operator
may use the typical meteorological
conditions for the stationary source.
(c) Ambient temperature/humidity.
For worst-case release analysis of a
regulated toxic substance, the owner or
operator shall use the highest daily
maximum temperature in the previous
three years and average humidity for
the site, based on temperature/humid-
ity data gathered at the stationary
source or at a local meteorological sta-
tion; an owner or operator using the
RMP. Offsite Consequence Analysis
Guidance may use 25°C and 50 percent
humidity as values for these variables. -
For analysis of alternative scenarios,
the owner or operator may use typical
1218
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
temperature/humidity data gathered at
the stationary source or at a local me-
teorological station.
(d) Height of release. The worst-case
release of a regulated toxic substance
shall be analyzed assuming a ground
level (0 feet) release. For an alternative
scenario analysis of a regulated toxic
substance, release height may be deter-
mined by the release scenario.
(e) Surface roughness. The owner or.
operator shall use either urban or rural
topography, as 'appropriate. Urban
means that there are many obstacles in
the immediate area; obstacles include
buildings or trees. Rural means there
are no buildings in the immediate area
and the terrain is generally flat and
unobstructed.
(f) Dense or neutrally buoyant gases.
The owner or operator shall ensure
that tables or models used for disper-
sion analysis of regulated toxic sub-
stances appropriately account for gas
density.
(g) Temperature of released sub-
stance. For worst case, liquids other
than gases liquified by refrigeration
only shall be considered to be released
at the highest daily maximum tem-
perature, based on data for the pre-
vious three years appropriate for the
stationary source, or at process tem-
perature, whichever is higher. For 'al-
ternative scenarios, substances may be
considered to be released at a process
. or ambient temperature that is appro-
priate for the scenario.
§68.25 Worst-case release scenario
analysis.
,(a) The owner or operator shall ana-
lyze and report in the RMP:
' (1) For Program 1 processes, one
worst-case release scenario for each
Program 1 process;
(2) For Program 2 and 3 processes:
(i) One worst-case release scenario
that is estimated to create the greatest
distance in any direction to an
endpoint provided in appendix A of this
part resulting from an accidental re-
lease of regulated "toxic substances
from covered processes under 'worst-
case conditions defined in §68.22;
(ii) One worst-case release scenario
that is estimated to create the greatest
distance in any direction to an
endpoint defined in §68,22(a) resulting-
§68.25
from an accidental release of regulated
flammable substances from covered
processes under worst-case conditions
defined in §68.22; and
(iii) Additional worst-case release
scenarios for a hazard class if a worst-
case release from another covered proc-
•' ess at the stationary source potentially
affects public receptors different from
those potentially affected by the worst-
case release scenario developed under
paragraphs (a)(2)(i) or (a)(2)(ii) of this
section.
(b) Determination of worst-case release
quantity.. The worst-case release quan-
tity shall be the greater of the follow-
'•ing: .
(1) For substances in a vessel, the
greatest amount held iri a single vessel,
taking into account administrative
controls that limit the maximum quan-
tity; or
(2) For substances in pipes, the great-
est amount in a pipe, taking into ac-
count administrative controls that
limit the maximum quantity.
(c) Worst-case release scenario—toxic
gases. (1) For regulated toxic sub-
stances that are normally gases at am-
bient temperature and handled as a gas
or as a liquid under pressure, the owner
or operator shall assume that the
quantity in the vessel or pipe, as deter-
mined under paragraph (b) of this sec-
tion, is released as a gas over 10 min-
utes. The release rate shall be assumed
to be the total quantity divided by 10
unless passive mitigation systems are
in place.
, (2) For gases handled as refrigerated
liquids at ambient pressure:
(i) If the released substance is not
contained by passive mitigation sys-
tems or if the contained . pool would
have a depth of 1 cm pr less, the owner
or operator shall assume that the sub-
stance is released as a gas in 10 min-
utes;
(ii) If the released substance is con-
tained by passive mitigation systems
in a pool, with a depth greater than 1
cm, the owner or operator may assume
that the quantity in the vessel or pipe,
as determined under paragraph (b) of
this section, is spilled instantaneously
'1219
-------
§68.28
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-96 Edition)
to form a liquid pool. The volatiliza-
tion rate (release rate) shall be cal-
culated at the boiling point of the sub-
stance and at the conditions specified
in paragraph (d) of this section.
(d) Worst-case release scenario—toxic
liquids? (1) For regulated toxic sub-
stances that are normally liquids at
ambient temperature, the owner or op-
erator shall assume that the quantity
in the vessel or pipe, as determined
under paragraph (b) of this section, is
spilled instantaneously to form a liquid
pool.
(i) The surface area of the pool shall
be determined by assuming that the
•liquid spreads to 1 centimeter deep un-
less passive mitigation systems are in
place that serve to contain the spill
and limit the surface area. Where pas-
sive mitigation is in place, the surface
area of the contained liquid shall be
used to calculate the volatilization
rate.
(ii) If the release would occur onto a
surface that is not paved or smooth,
the owner or operator may take into
account the actual surface characteris-
tics.
(2) The volatilization rate shall ac-
count for the highest daily maximum
temperature occurring in the past
three years, the temperature of the
substance in the vessel, and the con-
centration of the substance if the .liq-
uid spilled is a mixture or solution.
(3) The rate of release to air shall be
determined from the volatilization rate
of the liquid pool. The owner or opera-
tor may use the methodology in the
RMP Offsite Consequence Analysis
Guidance or any other publicly avail-
able techniques that account for the
modeling conditions and are recognized
by industry as applicable as part of
current practices. Proprietary models
that account for the modeling condi-
tions may be used provided the owner
or operator allows the implementing
agency access to the model and de-
scribes model features and differences
from publicly available models to local
emergency planners upon request.
(e) Worst-case release scenario—
flammables. The owner or operator shall
assume that the quantity of the sub-
stance, as determined under paragraph
(b) of this section, vaporizes resulting
in a vapor cloud explosion. A yield fac-
tor of 10 percent of the available en-
ergy released in the explosion shall be
used to determine the distance to the
explosion endpoint if the model used is
based on TNT-equivalent methods.
(f) Parameters to be applied. The owner
or operator- shall use the parameters
defined in §68.22 to determine distance
to the endpoints. The owner or opera-
tor may use the methodology provided
in the RMP Offsite Consequence Analy-
sis Guidance or any commercially or
publicly available air dispersion model-
ing techniques, provided the techniques
account for the modeling conditions
and are recognized by industry as ap-
plicable as part of current practices.
Proprietary models that account for
the modeling conditions may be used
provided the owner or operator allows
the implementing agency access to the
model and describes model features and
differences from publicly available
models to local emergency planners
upo;n request.
(g) Consideration of passive mitigation.
Passive mitigation systems may be
considered for the analysis of worst
case provided that the mitigation sys-
tem is capable of withstanding the re-
lease event triggering the scenario and
would still function as intended.
(h) Factors in selecting a worst-case sce-
nario. Notwithstanding the provisions
of paragraph (b) of this section, the
owner or operator shall select as the
worst case for flammable regulated
substances or the worst case for regu-
lated toxic substances, a scenario based
on the following factors if such a sce-
nario would result in a greater distance
to an endpoint defined in §68.22(a) be-
yond the stationary source boundary
than the scenario provided under para-
graph (b) of this section:
(1) Smaller quantities handled at
higher process temperature or pres-
sure; and
(2) Proximity to the boundary of the
stationary source.
§68.28 Alternative release scenario
analysis.
(a) The number of scenarios. The
owner or operator shall identify and
analyze at least one alternative release
scenario for each regulated toxic sub-
stance held in a covered process (es) and
1220
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
68.36
at least one alternative release sce-
nario to represent all flammable sub-
stances held in covered processes.
(b) Scenarios to consider. (1) For each
scenario required under paragraph (a)
of this section, the owner or operator
shall select a scenario:
(i) That is more likely to occur than
the worst-case release scenario under
§68.25; and
(ii) That will reach an endpoint off-
site, unless no such scenario exists.
(2) Release scenarios considered
should include, but are not limited to,
the following, where applicable:
(i) Transfer hose releases due to
splits or sudden hose uncoupling;
(ii) Process piping releases from fail-
ures at flanges, joints, welds, valves
and valve seals, and drains or bleeds;
(iii) Process vessel or pump releases
due to cracks, seal failure, or drain,
bleed, or plug failure;
(iy) Vessel overfilling and spill, or
•overpressurization and venting through
relief valves or rupture disks;, and
(v) Shipping container mishandling
and breakage or puncturing leading to
a spill.
(c) Parameters to be applied. The
owner or operator shall use the appro-
priate parameters defined in §68.22 to
determine distance to the endpoints.
The owner or operator may use either
the methodology provided in the RMP
Offsite Consequence Analysis Guidance
or any commercially or publicly avail-
able air dispersion modeling tech-
niques, provided the "techniques .ac-
count for the specified modeling condi-
tions and are recognized by industry as
applicable as part of current practices.
Proprietary models that account for
the modeling conditions may be used
provided the owner or operator allows
the implementing agency access to the,
model and describes model features and
differences from publicly available
models to local emergency planners
upon request.
(d) Consideration of mitigation. Ac-
tive and passive mitigation systems
may be considered provided they are
capable of withstanding the event that
triggered the release and would still be
functional.
(e) Factors in selecting scenarios.
The owner or operator shall .consider
the following in selecting alternative
release scenarios:
(1) The five-year accident history
provided in §68.42; and
(2) Failure scenarios identified under
§68.50 or §68.67.
§ 68.30 Defining offsite impacts—popu-
lation.
(a) The owner or operator shall esti-
mate in the RMP the population within
a circle with its center at the point of
the release and a radius determined by
the distance to the endpoint defined in
§68.22(a).
(b) Population to be defined. Popu-
lation shall include residential popu-
.lation. The presence of institutions
(schools, hospitals, prisons), parks and
recreational areas, and major commer-
cial, office, and industrial buildings
shall be noted in the RMP., ,
(c) Data sources acceptable. The owner"
or operator may use the most recent
Census data, or other updated informa-
tion, to estimate the population poten-
tially affected. -
(d) Level of accuracy. Population shall
be estimated to two significant digits.
§68.33 Defining offsite impacts—envi-
ronment.
(a) The owner or operator shall list in
the, RMP environmental receptors
within a circle with its center at the
point of the release and a radius deter-,
mined by the distance to the endpoint
defined in §68.22(a) of this part.
(b) Data sources acceptable. The
owner or operator may rely on infor-
mation provided on local U.S. Geologi-
cal Survey maps or on any data source
containing U.S.G.S. data to identify
environmental receptors.
68.36 Review and update.
(a)" The owner or operator shall re-
view and update the offsite con-
sequence analyses at least once every
five years.
(b) If changes in processes, quantities
stored or handled, or any other aspect
of the' stationary source might reason-
ably be expected to increase or de-
crease the distance to the endpoint by
a factor of two or more, the owner or
operator shall complete a revised anal-
ysis within six months of the change
1221
-------
§68.39
40 CFR Ch. J (7-1-96 Edition)
and submit a revised risk management
plan as provided in §68.190.
§ 68.39 Documentation.
The owner or operator shall maintain
the following records on the offsite
consequence analyses:
(a) For worst-case scenarios, a de-
scription of the vessel or pipeline and
substance selected as worst case, as-
sumptions and parameters used, and
the rationale for selection; assump-
tions shall include use of any adminis-
trative controls and any passive miti-
gation that were assumed to limit the
quantity that could be released. Docu-
mentation shall include the antici-
pated effect of the controls and mitiga-
tion on the release quantity and rate.
(b) For alternative release scenarios,
a description of the scenarios identi-
fied, assumptions and parameters used,
and the rationale for the selection of
specific scenarios; assumptions shall
include use of any administrative con-
trols and any mitigation that were as-
sumed to limit the quantity that could
be released. Documentation shall in-
clude the effect of the controls and
mitigation on the release quantity and
rate.
(c) Documentation of estimated
quantity released, release rate, and du-
ration of release.
(d) Methodology used to determine
distance to endpoints.
(e) Data used to estimate population
and environmental receptors poten-
tially affected.
§ 68.42 Five-year accident history.
(a) The owner or operator shall in-
clude in the five-year accident history
all accidental releases from covered
processes that resulted in deaths, inju-
ries, or significant property damage on
site, or known cffsite deaths, injuries,
evacuations, sheltering in place, prop-
erty damage, or environmental dam-
age.
(b) Data required. For each accidental
release included, the owner or operator
shall report the following information:
(1) Date, time, and approximate dura-
tion of the release;
(2) Chemical(s) released;
(3) Estimated quantity released in
pounds;
(4) The type of release event and its
source;
(5) Weather conditions, if known;
(6) On-site impacts;
(7) Known offsite impacts;
(8) Initiating event and contributing
factors if known;
(9) Whether offsite responders were
notified if known;.and
(10) Operational or process changes
that resulted from investigation of the
release.
(c) Level of accuracy. Numerical esti-
mates may be provided to two signifi-
cant digits.
Subpart C—Program 2 Prevention
Program
SOURCE: 61 FR 31721, June 20. 1996, unless
otherwise noted.
EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: At 61 FR 31721. June
20. 1996, subpart C was added, effective Aug.
19. 1996.
§ 68.48 Safety information._
(a) The owner or operator shall com-
pile and maintain the following up-to-
date safety information related to the
regulated substances, processes, and
equipment:
(1) Material Safety Data Sheets that
meet the requirements of 29 CFR
1910.1200(g);,
(2) Maximum intended inventory of
equipment in which the regulated sub-
stances are stored or processed;
(3) Safe upper ,and lower tempera-
tures, pressures, flows, and composi-
tions;
(4) Equipment specifications; and
(5) Codes and standards used to de-
sign, build, and operate the process.
(b) The owner or operator shall en-
sure that the process is designed in
compliance with recognized and gen-
erally accepted good engineering prac-
tices. Compliance with Federal or state
regulations that address industry-spe-
cific safe design or with industry-spe*
cific design codes and standards may be
used to demonstrate compliance with
this paragraph.
(c) The owner or operator shall up-
date the safety information if a major
change occurs that makes the informa-
tion inaccurate.
1222
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§68.54
§ 68.50 Hazard review.
(a) The owner or operator shall con-
duct a review of the hazards associated
with the regulated substances, process,
and procedures. The review shall iden-
tify the following:
(1) The hazards associated with the
process and regulated substances;
(2) Opportunities for equipment mal-
functions or human errors that could
cause an accidental release;
(3) The safeguards used or needed to
control the hazards or prevent equip-
ment malfunction or human error; and
(4) Any steps used or needed to detect
or monitor releases.
(b) The owner or operator may use
checklists developed by persons or or-
ganizations knowledgeable about the
process and equipment as a guide to
conducting the review. For processes
. designed to meet industry standards or
Federal or state design rules, the haz-
ard review shall, by inspecting all
equipment, determine whether the.
•process is designed, fabricated, and op-
erated in accordance with the applica-
ble standards or rules.
(c) The owner or operator shall docu-
ment the results of the review and en-
sure that problems identified are re-
solved in a timely manner.
(d) The review shall be updated at
least once every five years. The owner
or operator shall also conduct reviews
whenever a major change in the proc-
ess occurs; all issues identified in the
review shall be resolved before startup
of the changed process.
§68.52 Operating procedures.
(a) The owner or operator shall pre-
pare written operating procedures that
provide clear instructions or steps.for
safely conducting activities associated
with each covered process consistent
with the safety information for -that
process. Operating procedures or in-
structions provided by equipment man-
ufacturers or developed by persons or
organizations knowledgeable about the
process and equipment may be used as
a basis for a stationary source's operat-
ing procedures.
{b) The procedures shall address the
following:
(1) Initial startup;
(2) Normal operations;
(3) Temporary operations;
(4) Emergency shutdown and oper-
ations:
(5) Normal shutdown;
(6) Startup following a normal or
emergency shutdown or a major change
that requires a hazard review;
(7) Consequences of deviations and
steps required to correct or avoid devi-
ations: and
(8) Equipment inspections.
(c) The owner or operator shall en-
sure that the operating procedures are
updated, if necessary, whenever a
major change occurs and prior to start-
up of the changed process.
§68.54 Training.
(a) The owner or operator shall en-
sure that each employee presently op-
erating a process, and each employee
newly assigned to a covered process
have been trained or tested competent
in the operating procedures provided in
§68.52 that pertain to their duties. For
those employees 'already operating a
process on June 21, 1999, the owner or
operator may certify in writing that
the employee has the required knowl-
edge, skills, and abilities to safely
carry out the duties and responsibil-
ities as provided in the operating pro-
cedures.
(b) Refresher training. Refresher
training shall be provided at least
every three years, and more often if
necessary, to each employee operating
a process to ensure that the employee
understands and adheres to the current
operating procedures of the process.
The owner or operator, in consultation
with the employees operating the proc-
ess, shall determine the appropriate
frequency of refresher training.
(c) The owner or operator may use
training conducted under Federal or
state regulations or under industry-
specific standards or codes or training
conducted by covered process equip-
ment vendors to demonstrate compli-
ance with this section to the extent
that the training meets the require-
ments of this section.
(d) The owner or operator shall en-
sure that operators are trained in any
updated or new procedures prior to
startup of a process after a major
change.
1223
-------
§68.56
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-96 Edition)
§68.56 Maintenance.
(a) The owner or operator shall pre-
pare and implement procedures to
maintain the on-going mechanical in-
tegrity of the process equipment. The
owner or operator may use procedures
or instructions provided by covered
process equipment vendors or proce-
dures in Federal or state regulations or
industry codes as the basis for station-
ary source maintenance procedures.
(b) The owner or operator shall train
or cause to be trained each employee
involved in maintaining the on-going
mechanical integrity of the process. To
ensure that the employee can perform
the job tasks in a safe manner, each
such employee shall be trained in the
hazards of the process, in how to avoid
or correct unsafe conditions, and in the •
procedures applicable to the employ-
ee's job tasks.
(c) Any maintenance contractor shall
ensure that each contract maintenance
employee is trained to perform the
maintenance procedures developed
under paragraph (a) of this section.
(d) The owner or operator shall per-
form or cause to be performed inspec-
tions and tests on process equipment.
Inspection and testing procedures shall
follow recognized and generally accept-
ed good engineering practices. The fre-
quency of inspections and tests of proc-
' ess equipment shall be consistent with
applicable manufacturers' rec-
ommendations, industry standards or
codes, good engineering practices, and
prior operating experience.
§68.58 Compliance audits.
(a) The owner or operator shall cer-
tify that they have evaluated compli-
ance with the provisions of this sub-
part at least every three years to ver-
ify that the procedures and practices
developed under the rule are adequate
and are being followed.
(b) The compliance audit shall be
conducted by at least one person
knowledgeable in the process.
(c) The owner or operator shall de-
velop a report of the audit findings.
(d) The owner or operator shall
promptly determine and document an
appropriate response to each of the
findings of the compliance audit and
document that deficiencies have been
corrected.
(e) The owner or operator shall retain
the two (2) most recent compliance
audit reports. This requirement does
not apply to any compliance audit re-
port that is more than five years old..
§ 68.60 Incident investigation.
(a) The owner or operator shall inves-
tigate each incident which resulted in,
or could reasonably have resulted in a
catastrophic release.
(fa) An incident investigation shall be
initiated as promptly as possible, but
not later than 48 hours following the
incident.
(c) A summary shall be prepared at
the conclusion of the investigation
which includes at a minimum:
(1) Date of incident;
(2) Date investigation began;
(3) A description,of the incident;
(4) The factors that contributed to
the incident; and,
(5) Any recommendations resulting
from the investigation.
(d) The owner or operator shall
promptly address and resolve the inves-
tigation findings and recommenda-
tions. Resolutions and corrective ac-
tions shall be documented.
(e) The findings shall be reviewed
with all affected personnel whose job
tasks are affected by the findings.
(f) Investigation summaries shall be
retained for five years.
Subpart D—Program 3 Prevention
Program
SOURCE: 61 FR 31722. June 20, 1996, unless
otherwise noted.
EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: At 61 FR 31722, June
20. 1996, subpart D was added, effective Aug.
19. 1996.
§68.65 Process safety information.
(a) In accordance with the schedule
set forth in §68.67, the owner or opera-
tor shall complete a compilation of
written process safety information be-
fore conducting any process hazard
analysis required by the rule. The com-
pilation of written process safety infor-
mation is to enable the pwner or opera-
tor and the employees involved in oper-
ating the process to identify and under-
stand the hazards posed by those proc-
esses involving regulated substances.
1224
'iiii.Jih;;,!:,l Ij lii"
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§68.67
This process safety information shall
include information pertaining to the
hazards of' the regulated substances
used or produced by the process, infor-
mation pertaining to the technology of
the process, and information pertain-
ing to the equipment in the process.
(b) Information pertaining to .the
hazards of the regulated substances in
the process. This information shall
consist of at least the following:
' (1) Toxicity information;
(2) Permissible exposure limits;
(3) Physical data;
(4) Reactivity data:
(5) Corrosivity data;
(6) Thermal and chemical stability
data; and
(7) Hazardous effects of inadvertent
mixing of different materials that
could foreseeably occur.
NOTE TO PARAGRAPH (B): Material Safety
Data Sheets meeting the requirements of 29
CFR 1910.1200(g) may be used to comply with
this requirement to the extent they contain
the information required by this subpara-
graph.
(c) Information pertaining to the
technology of the process.
(1) - Information concerning the tech-
nology of the process shall include at
least the following:
(i) A block flow diagram or simplified
process flqw diagram;
(ii) Process chemistry;
(iii) Maximum intended inventory;
(iy) Safe upper and lower limits for
such items as temperatures, pressures,
flows or compositions; and,
(v) An evaluation of the consequences
of deviations.
(2) Where the original technical in-
formation no longer exists, such infor-
mation may be developed in conjunc-
tion with the process hazard analysis
in sufficient detail to support the anal-
ysis. ' ,
(d) Information pertaining1 to the
equipment in the process.
(1) Information pertaining ,to the
equipment in the process shall include:
(i) Materials of construction;
(ii) Piping and instrument diagrams
(P&ID's);
(iii) Electrical classification;
(iv) Relief system design and design
basis;
(v) Ventilation system design;
(vi) Design codes and standards em-
ployed;
(vii) Material and energy balances for
processes built after June 21, 1999; and
(viii) Safety systems (e.g. interlocks,
detection or suppressi.ori systems).
"(2) The owner or operator shall docu-
ment that equipment complies with
recognized and generally accepted good
engineering practices.
(3) For existing equipment designed
and constructed in accordance with
codes, standards, or practices that are
no longer in general use, the owner or
operator shall determine and document
that the equipment is designed, main-
tained, inspected, tested, and operating
in a safe manner. •
§ 68.67 Process hazard analysis.
' (a) The owner or operator shall per-
form an initial process hazard analysis
(hazard evaluation) on processes cov-
ered by this part. The' process hazard
analysis shall be appropriate to the
complexity of the process and shall
identify, evaluate, and control the haz-
ards involved in the process. The owner
or operator shall determine and docu-
ment the priority order for conducting
process hazard analyses based on a ra-
tionale which includes such consider-
ations as extent of the process hazards,
number of potentially affected employ-
ees, age of the process, and operating
history of the process. The process haz-
ard analysis shall be conducted as soon
as possible, but not later than June 21,
1999. Process hazards analyses com-
pleted to comply with 29 CFR
1910.119(e) are acceptable as initial
process hazards analyses. These process
hazard analyses shall be updated and '
revalidated, based on their completion
date.
(b) The owner or operator shall use
one or more of- the following meth-
odologies that are appropriate to deter-
mine and evaluate the hazards of the
process being analyzed.
(1) What-If;
(2) Checklist;
(3) What-If/Checklist;
(4) Hazard and Operability Study
(HAZOP);
(5) Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
(FMEA):
(6) Fault Tree Analysis; or
1225
-------
§68.69
(7) An appropriate equivalent meth-
odology.
(c) The process hazard analysis shall
address:
(1) The hazards of the process;
(2) The identification of any previous
incident which had a likely potential
for catastrophic consequences.
(3) Engineering and administrative
controls applicable to the hazards and
their interrelationships such as appro-
priate application of detection meth-
odologies to provide early warning of
releases. (Acceptable detection meth-
ods might include process monitoring
and control instrumentation with
alarms, and detection hardware such as
hydrocarbon sensors.):
(4) Consequences of failure of engi-
neering and administrative controls;
(5) Stationary source siting;
(6) Human factors; and
(7) A qualitative evaluation of a
range of the possible safety and health
effects of failure of controls.
(d) The process hazard analysis shall
be performed by a team with expertise
in engineering and process operations,
and the team shall include at least one
employee who has experience and
knowledge specific to the process being
evaluated. Also, one member of the
team must be knowledgeable in the
specific process hazard analysis meth-
odology being used.
(e) The owner or operator shall estab-
lish a system to promptly address the
team's findings and recommendations;
assure that the recommendations are
resolved in a timely manner and that
the resolution is documented; docu-
ment what actions are to be taken;
complete actions as soon as possible;
develop a written schedule of when
these actions are to be completed; com-
municate the actions to operating,
maintenance and other employees
whose work assignments are in the
process and who may be affected by the
recommendations or actions.
(f) At least every five (5) years after
the completion of the initial process
hazard analysis, the process hazard
analysis shall be updated and revali-
dated by a team meeting the require-
ments in paragraph (d) of this section,
to assure that the process hazard anal-
ysis is consistent with the current
process. Updated and revalidated proc-
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-96 Editipn)
ess hazard analyses completed to com-
ply with 29 CFR 1910.119(e) are accept-
able to meet the requirements of. this
paragraph.
(g) The owner or operator shall re-
tain process hazards analyses and up-
dates or revalidations for each process
covered by this section, as well as the
documented resolution of recommenda-
tions described 'in paragraph (e) of this
section for the life of the process.
§ 68.69 Operating procedures.
(a) The owner or operator shall de-
velop and implement written operating
procedures that provide clear instruc-
tions for safely conducting activities
involved in each covered process con-
sistent with the process safety infor-
mation and shall address at least the
following elements.
(1) Steps for each operating phase:
(i) Initial startup;
(ii) Normal operations;
(iii) Temporary operations;
(iv) Emergency shutdown including
the conditions under which emergency
shutdown is required, • and the assign-
ment of shutdown responsibility to
qualified operators to ensure that
emergency shutdown is executed in a
safe and timely manner.
(v) Emergency operations;
(vi) Normal shutdown; and,
(vii) Startup following a. turnaround,
or after an emergency shutdown.
(2) Operating limits:
(i) Consequences of deviation; and
(ii) Steps required to correct or avoid
deviation.
(3) Safety and health considerations:.
(i) Properties of, and hazards pre-
sented by, the chemicals used in the
process;
(ii) Precautions necessary to prevent
exposure, including engineering con-
trols, administrative controls, and per-
sonal protective equipment;
(iii) Control measures to be taken if
physical contact or airborne exposure
occurs;
(iv) Quality control for raw materials
and control of hazardous chemical in-*
ventory levels;'and,
(v) Any special or unique hazards.
(4) Safety systems and their func-
tions.
1226
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
(b) Operating procedures shall be
readily accessible to employees who
work in or maintain a process.-
(c) The operating procedures shall be
reviewed as often as necessary to as-
sure that they reflect current operat-
ing practice, including changes that re-
sult from changes in process chemicals,
technology, and equipment, and
changes to stationary sources. The
owner or operator shall certify annu-
ally that these operating procedures
ar'e current and accurate.
(d) The owner or operator shall de-
velop and implement safe work prac-
tices to provide for the control of haz-
ards during operations such as lockout/
tagout; confined space entry; opening
process equipment or piping; and con-
trol over entrance into a stationary
source by maintenance, contractor,
laboratory, or other support personnel.
These safe work practices shall apply
to employees and contractor employ-
§68.71 Training. . <
(a) Initial training. (1) Each employee
presently involved in operating a proc-
ess, and each employee before being in-
volved in operating a newly assigned
process, shall be trained in an overview
of the process and in the operating pro-
cedures as specified in §68.69. The
training shall include emphasis on the
specific safety and health hazards,
emergency operations including shut-
down, and safe work practices applica-
ble to the employee's job tasks.
(2) In lieu of initial training for those
employees already involved in operat-
.ing a process on June 21, 1999 an owner
or operator may certify in writing that
the employee has the required knowl-
edge, skills, and abilities to safely
carry out the duties and responsibil-
ities as specified in the operating pro-
cedures.
(b) Refresher training. Refresher train-
ing shall be provided at least every
three years, and more often if nec-
essary, to each employee involved in
operating a process to assure that the
employee understands and adheres to -
the current operating procedures of the
process. The owner or operator, in con-
sultation with the employees involved
in operating the process, shall deter-
§68.73
mine the appropriate frequency of re-
fresher training.
(c) Training documentation. The owner
or operator shall ascertain that each
employee involved in operating a proc-
ess has received and understood the
training required by this paragraph:
The owner or operator shall prepare, a
record which contains the identity of
the employee, the date of training, and
the means used to verify that the em-
ployee understood the training:
§ 68.73 Mechanical integrity.
(a) Application. Paragraphs (b)
through (f) of this section apply to the
following process equipment:
. , (1) Pressure vessels and storage
tanks;
(2) Piping systems (including piping
components such as valves);
(3) Relief and vent systems and de-
vices; ' . .
(4) Emergency shutdown systems;
(5) Controls (including monitoring
devices and sensors, alarms, and inter-
locks) and, • - .
(6) Pumps. " ,
(b) Written procedures. The owner or
operator shall establish and implement
.written procedures to maintain the on-
going integrity of process equipment.
(c) Training for process maintenance
activities. The owner or operator shall
train each employee involved in main-
taining the on-going integrity of proc-
ess equipment in an overview of that
process and its hazards and in the pro-
cedures applicable to the employee's
job tasks to assure that the employee
can perform the job tasks in a safe
manner.
(d) Inspection and testing. (1) Inspec-
tions and tests shall be performed ,on
process equipment.
(2) Inspection and testing procedures
shall follow recognized and generally-,
accepted good engineering practices.
(3) The frequency of inspections and
tests of process equipment shall be con-
sistent with applicable manufacturers'
recommendations and good engineering
practices, and more frequently if deter-
mined to be necessary by prior operat-
ing experience.
(4) The owner or operator shall docu-
ment each inspection and test that has
been performed on process equipment. -
The documentation shall identify the
1227
-------
§68.75
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-96 Edition)
da.te of the inspection or test, the name
of the person who performed the in-
spection or test, the serial number or
other identifier of the equipment on
which the inspection or test was per-
formed, a description of the inspection
or test performed, and the results of
the inspection or test.
(e) Equipment deficiencies. The owner
or operator shall correct deficiencies in
equipment that are outside acceptable
limits (defined by the process safety in-
formation in §68.65) before further use
or in a safe and timely manner when
necessary means are taken to assure
safe operation.
(f) Quality assurance. (1) In the con-
struction of new plants and equipment,
the owner or operator shall assure that
equipment as it is fabricated is suit-
able for the process application for
which they will be used.
(2) Appropriate checks and inspec-
tions shall be performed to assure that
equipment is installed properly and
consistent with design specifications
and the manufacturer's instructions.
(3) The owner or operator shall as-
sure that maintenance materials, spare
parts and equipment are suitable for
the process application for which they
will be used.
§68.75 Management of change.
(a) The owner or operator shall estab-
lish and implement written procedures
to manage changes (except for "re-
placements in kind") to process chemi-
cals, technology, equipment, and proce-
dures; and, changes to stationary
sources that affect a covered process.
(b) The procedures shall assure that
the following considerations are ad-
dressed prior to any change:
(1) The technical basis for the pro-
posed change;
(2) Impact of change on safety and
health;
(3) Modifications to operating proce-
dures;
(4) Necessary time period for the
change; and,
(5) Authorization requirements for
the proposed change.
(c) Employees involved in operating a
process arid maintenance and contract
employees whose job tasks will be af-
fected by a change in the process shall
be informed of, and trained in. the
change prior to start-up of the process
or affected part of the process.
(d) If a change covered by this para-
graph results in a change in the process
safety information required by §68.65 of
this part, such information shall be up-
dated accordingly. ' '
(e) If a change covered by this para-
graph results in a change in the operat-
ing procedures or practices required by
§68.69, such procedures or practices
shall be updated accordingly.
§ 68.77 Pre-startup review.
(a) The owner or operator shall per-
form a pre-startup safety review • for
new stationary sources and for modi-
fied stationary sources when the modi-
fication is significant enough to re-
quire a change in the process safety in-
formation.
(b) The pre-startup safety review
shall confirm that prior to the intro-
duction of regulated substances to a
process:
(1) Construction and equipment is in
accordance with design specifications; •
(2) Safety, operating, maintenance,
and emergency procedures are in place
and are adequate;
(3) For new stationary sources, a
process hazard analysis has been per-
formed and recommendations have
been resolved or implemented before
startup; and modified stationary
sources meet the requirements con-
tained in management of change,
§68.75.
(4) Training of each employee in-
volved in operating a process has been
completed.
§ 68.79 Compliance audits.
(a) The owner or operator shall cer-
tify that they have evaluated compli-
ance with the provisions of this section
at least every three years to verify.
that the procedures and practices de-
veloped under the standard are ade-
quate and are being followed.
,(b) The compliance audit shall be
conducted by at least one person
knowledgeable in the process.
(c) A report of the findings of the
audit shall be developed.
(d) The owner or operator shall
promptly determine and document an
appropriate response to each of the
findings of the compliance audit, and
1228
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§68.87
document that deficiencies have been
corrected.
(e) The owner or operator shall retain.
the two (2) most recent compliance
audit reports. •
§ 68.81 Incident investigation.
(a) The owner or operator shall inves-
tigate each incident which resulted in,
or could reasonably have resulted in a
catastrophic release of a regulated sub-
stance.
(b) An incident investigation shall be
initiated as promptly as possible, but,
not later than 48 hours following the
incident.
(c) An incident- investigation .team
shall be established and consist of at'
least one person knowledgeable in the
process involved, including a contract
employee if the incident involved work
of the contractor, and other persons
with appropriate knowledge and experi-
ence to thoroughly investigate and
.analyze the incident.
• (d) A report shall be prepared at the
conclusion of the investigation which
includes at a minimum:
(1) Date of incident;
(2) Date investigation began;
(3) A description of the incident;
(4) The factors that contributed to
the incident; and,
(5) Any recommendations resulting
from the investigation.
(e) The owner,or operator shall estab-
lish a system to promptly address and
resolve the incident report findings and
recommendations. Resolutions and cor-
rective actions shall be documented.
(f) The report shall be reviewed with
all affected personnel whose job tasks
are relevant to the incident findings in-
cluding contract employees, where ap-
plicable.
(g) Incident investigation reports
-shall be retained for five years.
§ 68.83 Employee participation.
(a) The owner or operator shall de-
velop a written plan of action regard-
ing the implementation of the em-
ployee participation required by this
section.
(b) The owner or operator shall con-
sult with employees and their rep-
resentatives on the conduct and devel-
opment of process hazards analyses and
on the development of the other ele-
ments of process'safety management in
this-rule.
(c) The owner or operator shall pro-.
vide to employees and their representa-
tives access to process hazard analyses
and to all other information required
to be developed under this rule.
§ 68.85 Hot work permit.
(a) The owner or operator shall issue
a hot work permit for hot work oper-
ations conducted on or near a covered
process.
(b) The permit shall document that
the fire prevention and protection re-
quirements in 29 CFR 1910.252(a) have
been implemented prior to beginning
the hot work operations; it shall- indi7
cate the date(s) • authorized for hot
work; and identify the object on which
hot work is to be performed. The per-
mit shall be kept on file until comple-
tion of the hot work operations.
§ 68.87 Contractors.
(a) Application. This section applies
to contractors performing maintenance
or repair, turnaround," major renova-
tion, or specialty work on or adjacent
to a covered process. It does not apply
to contractors providing incidental
services which do not influence process
safety, such as janitorial work, food
and drink services, laundry, delivery or
other supply services.
(b) Owner or operator responsibilities.
(1) The owner or operator, when select-
ing a contractor, shall obtain and
evaluate information regarding the
contract owner or operato'r's safety
performance and programs.
(2) The owner or operator .shall in-
form contract owner or operator of the
known potential fire, explosion, or
toxic release hazards related to the
contractor's work and the process.
(3) The owner or operator shall ex-
plain to the contract owner or operator
the applicable provisions of subpart E
of this part.
(4) The owner or operator shall de-
velop and implement safe work prac-
tices consistent with §68.69(d), to con-
trol the entrance, presence, and exit of
the contract owner or operator and
contract employees in covered process
areas. .
(5) The owner or operator shall peri-
odically evaluate the performance of
1229
-------
§68.90
40 CFR Ch. 1 (7-1-96 Edition)
the contract owner or operator in ful-
filling their obligations as specified in
paragraph (c) of this section.
(c) Contract owner or operator respon-
sibilities, (l) The contract owner or op-
erator shall assure that each contract
employee is trained in the work prac-
tices necessary to safely perform his/
her job.
(2) The contract owner or operator
shall assure that each contract em-
ployee is instructed in the known po-
tential fire, explosion, or toxic release
hazards related to his/her job and the
process, and the applicable provisions
of the emergency action plan.
(3) The contract owner or operator
shall document that each contract em-
ployee has received and understood the
training required by this section. The
contract owner or operator shall pre-
pare a record which contains the iden-
tity of the contract employee, the date
of training, and the means used to ver-
ify that the employee understood the
training.
(4) The contract owner or operator
shall assure that each contract em-
ployee follows the safety rules of the
stationary source including the safe
work practices required by §68.69(d).
(5) The contract owner or operator
shall advise the owner or operator of
any unique hazards presented by the
contract owner or operator's work, or
of any hazards found by the contract
owner or operator's work.
Subpart E—Emergency Response
'. SOURCE: 61 FR 31725. June 20. 1996. unless
otherwise noced.
EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: At 61 FR 31725, June
20, 1996, subpart E was added, effective Aug.
19. 1996.
§68.90 Applicability.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph
(b) of this section, the owner or opera-
tor of a stationary source with Pro-
gram 2 and Program 3 processes shall
comply with the requirements of §68.95.
(b) The owner or operator of station-
ary source whose employees will not
respond to accidental releases of regu-
lated substances need not comply with
§68.95 of this part provided that they
meet the following:
(1) For stationary sources with any
regulated toxic substance held in a
.process above the' threshold quantity,
the stationary source is included in the
community emergency response plan
developed under 42 U.S.C. 11003;
(2) For stationary sources with only
regulated flammable substances held in
a process above the threshold quantity,
the owner or operator has coordinated
response actions with the local fire de-
partment; and
(3) Appropriate mechanisms are in
place to notify emergency responders
when there is a need for a response.
§ 68.95 Emergency response program.
(a) The owner or operator shall de-
velop and implement an emergency re-
sponse program for the purpose of pro-
tecting public health and the environ-
ment. Such program shall include the
following elements:
(1) An emergency response plan,
which shall be maintained at the sta-
tionary source and contain at least the
following elements:
(i) Procedures for informing the pub-
lic and local emergency response agen-
cies about accidental releases;
(ii) Documentation of proper first-aid
and emergency medical treatment nec-
essary to treat accidental human expo-
sures; and
(iii) Procedures and measures for
emergency response after an accidental
release of a regulated substance;
(2) Procedures for the use of emer-
gency response equipment and for its
inspection, testing, and maintenance;
(3) Training for all employees in rel-
evant procedures; and
(4) Procedures to review and update,
as appropriate, the emergency response
plan to reflect changes at the station-
ary source and ensure that employees
are informed of changes.
(b) A written plan that complies with
other Federal contingency plan regula-
tions or is consistent with the ap-
proach in the National Response
Team's Integrated Contingency Plan
Guidance ("One Plan") and that,
among other matters, includes the ele-
ments provided in paragraph (a) of this
section, shall satisfy the requirements
of this section if the owner or operator
also complies with paragraph (c) of this
section.
1230
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§68.115
(c) The emergency response-plan de-
veloped under paragraph (a)-(l) of this
section shall be coordinated with the
community emergency response plan
developed under 42 U.S.C. 11Q03. Upon
request of the local emergency plan-
ning committee or emergency response
officials, the owner or operator shall
promptly provide to the local emer-
gency 'response officials information
necessary for developing and imple-
menting the community emergency re-
sponse plan.
Subpart F—-Regulated Substances
for Accidental Release Prevention
.SOURCE: 59 FR 4493, Jan. 31, 1994, unless
otherwise noted. Redesignated at 61 FR 31717.
June 20. 1996.
EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: At 61 FR 31717. June
20. 1996, subpart C was redesignated as sub-
part F, effective Aug. 19. 1996.
§68.100 Purpose.
This subpart designates substances
to be listed under section 112(r)(3), (4),
and (5) of the Clean Air Act, as amend-
ed, identifies their threshold quan-
tities, and establishes the requirements
for petitioning to .add or delete sub-
stances from the list.
§68.115 Threshold determination.
'(a) A threshold quantity of a regu-
lated substance listed in §68.130 is
present at a stationary source if the
total quantity of the regulated sub-
stance contained in a process exceeds
the threshold.
(b) For the purposes of determining
whether more than a threshold quan-
tity of a regulated substance is present
at the stationary source, the following
exemptions apply:
(1) Concentrations of a regulated toxic
substance in' a mixture. If a regulated
substance is present in a mixture and
the concentration of the substance is
below one percent by weight of the
mixture, the amount of the substance
in the mixture need not be considered
when determining whether more than a
threshold quantity is present at the
stationary source. Except for oleum,
toluene 2,4-diisocyanate, toluene 2.6-
diisocyanate, and toluene diisbcyanate
(unspecified isomer), if the concentra-
tion of the regulated substance in the
mixture is one percent or greater by
weight, but the owner or operator can
demonstrate that the partial pressure
of the regulated substance in the mix-
ture (solution) under handling or stor-
age conditions in any portion of the
process is less than 10 millimetera of
mercury (mm HgX the amount of the
substance in the mixture in that por-
tion of the process need not be consid-
ered when determining whether more
than a threshold quantity is present at
the stationary source. The owner or op-
erator shall document this partial pres-
sure measurement or estimate.
(2) Concentrations of a regulated flam-
•mable substance in a mixture. If a regu-
lated substance is present in a mixture
and-the concentration of the substance
is below one percent by weight of the
mixture, the mixture need not be con-
sidered when determining whether
more than a threshold quantity of the
regulated substance is present at the
stationary source. If the concentration
of the regulated substance in the mix-
ture is one percent or greater by
weight, then, for purposes of determin-
ing whether more than a threshold
quantity is present at the stationary
source, the entire weight of the mix-
ture shall be treated as the regulated
substance unless the owner or operator
can demonstrate that the mixture it-
self does not meet the criteria for flam-
mability of flash point below 73?F
• (22.8°C) and boiling point below lOOT
" (37.8°C). The owner or operator shall
document these flash point and boiling
point measurements or estimates.
(3) Concentrations of a regulated explo-
sive substance in a mixture. Mixtures of .
Division 1.1 explosives listed in 49 CFR
172.101 (Hazardous Materials Table) and
other explosives need not be included
yvhen determining whether a threshold
quantity is present in a process', When
the mixture is intended to be used on- .
site in a non-accidental release -in a
manner consistent with applicable
BATF regulations. Other mixtures of
Division 1.1 explosives listed in 49 CFR
172.101 and other explosives shall be in-
cluded in determining whether more
than a threshold quantity is present in
a process if such mixtures would be
treated as Division 1.1 explosives under
49 CFR parts 172 and 173.
1231
-------
§68.120
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-96 Edition)
(4) Articles. Regulated substances con-
tained in articles need not be consid-
ered when determining whether more
than a threshold quantity is present at
the stationary source.
(5) Uses. Regulated substances, when
in use for the following purposes, need
not be included in determining whether
more than a threshold quantity is
present at the stationary source:
(i) Use as a structural component of
the stationary source;
(ii) Use of products for routine jani-
torial maintenance;
(iii) Use by employees of foods, drugs,
cosmetics, or other personal items con-
taining the regulated substance; and
(iv) Use of regulated substances
present in process water or non-contact
cooling water as drawn from the envi-
ronment or municipal sources, or use
of regulated substances present in air
used either as compressed air or as part
of combustion.
(6) Activities in laboratories. If a regu-
lated substance is manufactured, proc-
essed, or used in a laboratory at a sta-
tionary source under the supervision of
a technically qualified individual as de-
fined in §720.3(ee) of this chapter, the
quantity of the substance need not be
considered in determining whether a
threshold quantity is present. This ex-
emption does not apply to:
(i) Specialty chemical production;
(ii) Manufacture, processing, or use
of substances in pilot plant scale oper-
ations; and
(iii) Activities conducted outside the
laboratory.
§ 68.120 Petition process.
(a) Any person may petition the Ad-
ministrator to modify, by addition or
deletion, the list of regulated sub-
stances identified in §68.130. Based on
the information presented by the peti-
tioner, the Administrator may grant or
deny a petition.
(b) A substance may be added to the
list if, in the case of an accidental re-
lease, it is known to cause or may be
reasonably anticipated to cause death,
injury, or serious adverse effects to
human health or the environment.
(c) A substance may be deleted from
the list if adequate data on the health
and environmental effects of the sub-
stance are available to determine that
the substance, in the case of an acci-
dental release-, is not known to cause
and may not be reasonably anticipated
to cause death, injury, or serious ad-
verse effeqts to human health or the
environment.
(d) No substance for which a national
primary ambient air quality standard
has been established shall be added to
the list. No substance regulated under
title VI of the Clean Air Act, as amend-
ed, shall be added to the list.
(e) The burden of proof is on the peti-
tioner to demonstrate that the criteria
for addition and deletion are met. A pe-
tition will be denied if this demonstra-
tion is not made.
(f) The Administrator will not accfept
additional petitions on the same sub-
stance following publication of a final
notice of the decision to grant or deny
a petition, unless new data becomes
available that could significantly af-
fect the basis for the decision.
(g) Petitions to modify the list of
regulated substances must contain the
. following:
(1) Name and address "of the peti-
tioner and a brief description of the or-
ganization (s) that the petitioner rep-
resents, if applicable;
(2) Name, address, and telephone
number of a contact person for the pe-
tition;
(3) Common chemical name(s), com-
mon synonym (s). Chemical Abstracts
Service number, and chemical formula
and structure;
(4) Action requested (add 6r delete a
substance);
(5) Rationale supporting the petition-
er's position; that is, how the sub-
stance meets the criteria for addition
and deletion. A short summary of the
rationale must be submitted along
with a more detailed narrative; and
(6) Supporting data; that is, the peti-
tion must include sufficient informa-
tion to scientifically support the re-
quest to modify the list. Such informa-
tion shall include:
(i) A list of all support documents;
(ii) Documentation of literature
searches conducted, including, but not
limited to, identification of the
database(s) searched, the search strat-
egy, dates covered, and printed results;
(iii) Effects data (animal, human, and
environmental test data) indicating
1232
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§68.130
the potential for death, injury, or seri-
ous adverse human and environmental
impacts from acute exposure following
an' accidental release; printed copies of
the data sources, in English, should be
provided; and
(iv) Exposure data or previous acci-
dent history data, indicating the po-
tential for serious adverse human
health or environmental effects from
an accidental release. These data may
include, but are not limited to, phys-
ical and chemical properties of the sub-
stance, such as vapor pressure; model-
ing results, including data and assump-
tions used and model documentation;
and historical accide.nt datat citing
data sources.
(h) Within 18 months of receipt of a
petition, the Administrator shall pub-
lish in the FEDERAL. REGISTER a notice
either denying the petition or granting
the petition and proposing a listing.
§68.125 Exemptions.
Agricultural nutrients. Ammonia used
as an agricultural nutrient, when held
by farmers, is exempt from all provi-
sions of this part.
§68.130 List of substances.
(a) Explosives listed by DOT as Divi-
sion 1.1 in 49 CFR 172.101 are covered
under section 112(r) of the Clean Air
Act. The threshold quantity for explo-
sives is 5,000 pounds.
(b) Regulated' toxic and flammable
substances under section 112(r) of the
Clean Air Act are the substances listed
in Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4. Threshold quan-
tities for listed toxic and flammable
substances are specified in the tables:
(c) The basis for placing toxic and
flammable substances on the list of
regulated substances are explained in
the notes to the list.
TABLE 1 TO §68.130.—LIST OF REGULATED
Toxic SUBSTANCES AND THRESHOLD QUAN-
TITIES FOR ACCIDENTAL RELEASE PREVENTION
[Alphabetical Order—77 Substances]
TABLE 1 jo §68.130.—LIST OF REGULATED
Toxic SUBSTANCES AND THRESHOLD QUAN-
TITIES FOR ACCIDENTAL RELEASE
PREVENTION—Continued
(Alphabetical Order—77 Substances]
Chemical name
Acrolein [2-
Propenal].
Acryfonitrile [2-
Propenenitrile],
CAS No.
107T-02-S
107-13-1
Threshold
quantity
(Ibs)
5,000
20,000
Basis for
listing
b,
b
Chemical name
Acrylyl chloride
[2-Propenoyl
chloride].
Allyl alcohol [2-
Propen-l-ol].
Allylamine [2-
Propen-l-amine],
Ammonia (anhy-
drous).
Ammonia (cone
20% or greater).
Arsenous tri-
chloride.
Arsine
Boron trichloride
[Borane,
trichloro-].
Boron trifiuoride
(Borane,
trifluoro-].
Boron trifiuoride
compound with
methyl ether
(1:1) [Boron,
trifluoro [oxjtois
[metane]]-, T-4-.
Bromine
Carbon disulfide
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
[Chlorine oxide
(CI02)].
Chloroform [Meth-
ane, trichloro-].
Chloromethyl
ether [Methane,
oxybis[chloro-].
Chloromethyl
methyl ether
[Methane.
chloromethoxy-).
Crotonaldehyde
[2-Butenal].
Crotonaldehyde,
(E)- [2-Butenal,
(EH.
Cyanogen chlo-
ride.
Cyclohexylamine
[Cyclohexana-
mine].
Diborane
Dimethyldichloro-
silane [Silane,
dichlorodimeth-
1,1-
Dimethylhydra-
zine [Hydra-
zine, 1,1 -di-
methyl-].
Epichlorohydrin
[Oxirane,
(Chloromethyl)-].
CAS No.
814^-68-6
107-18-61
107-11-9
7664-41-7
7664-41-7
7784-34-1
7784-42-1
10294-34-5
7637-07-2
353-42-4
7726-9S-6
75-15-0
7782-50-5
10049-04-4
67-66-3
542-88-1
107-30-2
4170-30-3
123-73-9
, 506-77-4
108-91-8
19287-45-7
75-78-5
57-14-7
106-89-8
Threshold
quantity
(Ibs)
5,000
15,000
10,000
10,000
20,000
15,000
1,000
5,000
5,000
15,000
-
10,000
20,000'
2,500
1,000
20,000
1,000
5,000
20,000
20,000
10,000
15,000
2,500
5,000
15,000
20,000
Basis for
listing
b
b
b
a,b ,
a.b
b
b
b
b
b
a.b
b
a.b
c
b
b
b
b
b
c
b
b
b
b
b
1233
-------
§68.130
TABLE 1 TO §68.130.—LIST OF REGULATED
Toxic SUBSTANCES AND THRESHOLD QUAN-
TITIES FOR ACCIDENTAL RELEASE
PREVENTION—Continued
[Alphabetical Order—77 Substances]
Chemical name
Ethylenediamine
[1.2-
Ethanediamine].
Ethyleneimine
[Aziridine].
Elhylone oxide
[Oxirane].
Fluorine »..««..«..
Formaldehyde
(solution).
Furan H«««..««»..
Hydrazkie ..... — .
Hydrochloric add
(cone 30% or
greater).
Hydrocyanic add
Hydrogen chloride
(anhydrous)
[Hydrochloric
aod].
Hydrogen fluo-
ride/
Hydrofluoric
add (cone 50%
or greater)
[Hydrofluoric
acid].
Hydrogen sete-
Hydrogen sulfide
Iron,
pentacarbonyl-
[Iron carbonyl
(Fe(CO)5). (TB-
S-11H
Isobutyronitrile
[Propanenitrile,
2-melhyl-].
Isopropyl
chtoroformaie
[Carbonochlori-
dfcacid. 1-
methytelhyl
ester].
Methacrykxvitrtle
[2-
Propenenitrile,
2-methyl-].
Methyl chloride
[Methane.
chtoro-J.
Methyl
cWorof ornate
[Carbonochlori-
dicackl.
methytester].
Methyl hydrazine
[Hydrazine,
methyl-].
Methyl isocyanate
(Methane.
isocyanato-].
Methyl mercaptan
[Mcthaneihiol].
' CAS No.
107-15-3
151-56-4
75-21-8
7782-41-4
50-00-0
110-00-9
302-01-2
7647-01-0
74-90-8
7647-01-0
7664-39-3
7783-07-5
7783-06-4
13463-40-6
78-82-O
108-23-6
126-98-7
74-87-3
79-22-1
60-34-4
624-83-9
74-93-1
Threshold
quantity
(Ibs)
20,000
10,000
10,000
1,000
15,000
5,000
15,000
15,000
2,500
5,000
1,000
500
10,000
2,500
20,000
15,000
10,000
10,000
5,000
15,000
10,000
10,000
Basis for
listing
b
b
a.b
b
b
b
b
d '
a.b
a
a,b
b
a.b
b
b
b
b
a
b
b
a,b
b
40 CFRCh. I (7-1-96 Edition)
TABLE 1 TO §68.130.—LIST OF REGULATED
Toxic SUBSTANCES AND THRESHOLD QUAN-
TITIES FOR ACCIDENTAL RELEASE
PREVENTION—Continued
[Alphabetical Order—77 Substances]
Chemical name
Methyl
thiocyanate
[Thiocyantc
acid, methyl
ester].
Methyltrichlorosil-
ane [Silane,
trichloromethyl-].
Nickel carbonyl ...
Nitric add (cone
80% or greater).
Nitric oxide [Nitro-
gen oxide (NO)].
Oleum (Fuming
Sulfuric acid)
[Sulfuric acid,
mixture with
sulfur trioxide]'.
Peracetic acid
[Ethaneperoxoi-
cacid].
Pefchloromethyl-
mercaptan
[Methanesulfen-
yl chloride.
triehioro-J.
Phosgene [Car-
bonic dichlo-
ride].
Phosphine
Phosphorus
oxychloride
[Phosphoryl
chloride].
Phosphorus tri-
chloride [Phos-
phorous tri-
chloride].
Piperidine
Propionitrile
[Propanenitrile].
Propyl
chlorofomate
[Carbonochlori-
die acid.
• propylester].
Propyleneimine
[Aziridine, 2-
methyl-].
Propylene oxide
[Oxirane. meth-
yl-].
Sulfur dioxide
(anhydrous).
Sulfur tetra-
fluoride [Sulfur
fluoride (SF4),
(T-4H
Sulfur trioxide
Tetramethyllead
[Plumbane,
tetramethyl-].
Tetranitro-
methane [Meth-
ane, tetranitro-].
CAS No. ,
556^64-9
75-79-6
13463-39-3
7697-37-2
10102-43-9
8014-95-7
79-21-0
594--)2-3
75-44-5
7803-51-2
10025-87-3
7719-12-2
110-89-4
107-12-0
109-61-5
75-55-8
75-56-9
7446-09-5
7783-60-O
7446-11-9
75-74-1
509-14-8
Threshold
quantity
(Ibs)
20,000
5,000
1,000
15,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
500
5,000
5,000
15,000
15,000
10,000
15.000
10,000
10,000
5,000
2,500
10,000
10,000
10,000
Basis for
listing
b
b
b
b
b
e
b
b-
a. b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
a,b
b
a, b
b
b
1234
t1!
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§68.130
TABLE 1 TO §68.130.—LIST OF REGULATED
Toxic SUBSTANCES AND THRESHOLD QUAN-
TITIES FOR ACCIDENTAL RELEASE
PREVENTION—Continued
[Alphabetical Order—77 Substances]
TABLE 1 TO §68,130.—LIST OF REGULATED
Toxic SUBSTANCES AND THRESHOLD QUAN-
TITIES FOR ACCIDENTAL RELEASE
PREVENTION—Continued
[Alphabetical Order—77 Substances]
Chemical name
Titanium tetra-
chloride [Tita-
nium chloride
(TiCI4) (T-4B
Toluene 2,4-
diisocyanate
[Benzene, 2.4-
diisocyanatc~1-
methyl-]'.
Toluene 2,6-
diisocyanate
[Benzene, 1,3-
diisocyanato-2-
methyl-]'.
Toluene
diisocyanate
(unspecified
isomer) [Ben-
zene, 1,3-
diisocyanatom-
ethyl-]'.
CAS No.
7550-45-0
584-84-9
. 91-O8-7
26471-62-5
Threshold
quantity
(Ibs)'
2,500
10,000
10,000
10,000
Basis for
listing
b
a
a
a
Chemical name
Trimethylchlorosil- .
ane [Silane,
chlorotrimethyl-].
Vinyl acetate .
monomer [Ace-
tic acid ethenyl
ester].
CAS No.
75-77-4
108-05-4
Threshold
quantity
(Ibs)
10,000
15,000
Basis foe-
listing
b
b
' The mixture exemption in §68.115(b)(1) does not apply to
the substance.
NOTE: Basis for Listing:
a Mandated for listing by Congress.
b On EHS list, vapor pressure 10 mmHg or greater.
c Toxic gas.
d Toxicity of hydrogen chloride, potential to release hydrc-
gen'chloride, and history of accidents.
e Toxicity of sulfur trioxide and sulfuric acid, potential to
release sulfur trioxide, and history of accidents.
TABLE 2 TO §68.130.—LIST OF REGULATED Toxic SUBSTANCES AND THRESHOLD QUANTITIES FOR
ACCIDENTAL RELEASE PREVENTION
[CAS Number Order—77 Substances] '
CAS No.
50-00-0
57 14-7
60-34—4
67—66-3
74-87-3
74—90-8
'74— 93^-1
75-15-0
75-21-8
75-44-5
75-55-8
75-56-9
75-74-1
75-77-4
75-78-5
75- 79-6
78-82-O
79-21-0
79-22-1
91-08-7
106-89-8
107-02-8
107—11-9
107-12-0
107 13-1
107-15-3 :
107-18-6
107-30-2 . . .
108-05-4
108-23-6
108-91-8
109-61—5
110-00-9
1 10-89-4
123-73-9
Chemical name
Formaldehyde (solution) :
Methyl chloride [Methane, chloro-]
Methyl chloroformate [Carbonochloridic acid, methylester]
Allylamine [2-Propen-1-amine] .....'. — -
Propionitrile [Propanenitrile] —
Acrylonitrile [2-Propenenitrile] .'.
Ethylenediamine [1 ,2-Ethanediamine] —
Allyl alcohol [2-Propen-1-o(]
Isopropyl chloroformate [Carbonochloridic acid, 1-methylethyl ester]' „
Furan
Piperidlne .. . ' .
Crotonaldehvde. (El- f2-Butenal, (EM .'. ;
Threshold
quantity
(Ibs)
15,000
15000
15000
20,000
10,000
2500
10000
20,000
10,000
500
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
5.000
5,000
20,000
10,000
, 5,000
10,000
20,000
5,000
10,000
10,000
20,000
20,000
15,000
5.000
15,000
15.000
15,000
15,000
5,000
15,000
20.000
Basis for
listing
b
b
b
b
a
a b
b
b
a, b
a, b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
a
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
1235
-------
§68.130
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-96 Edition)
TABLE 2 TO § 68.130.—LIST OF REGULATED Toxic SUBSTANCES AND THRESHOLD QUANTITIES' FOR
ACCIDENTAL RELEASE PREVENTION—Continued
•.'.•: [CAS Number Order—77 Substances]
CAS No.
Chemical name
Threshold
quantity
(Ibs)
Basis for
listing
126-98-7 ................... Methacrylonitrile [2-Propenenitrile, 2-methyl-] 10,000 b
151-56-4 1 Ethyieneimine [Aziridine] 10,000 b
302-01-2 _. Hydrazine _ 15,000 b
353-42-4. ...— Boron trifluoride compound with methyl ether (1:1) [Boron, 15,000 b
trifluoro{oxybis[methanej]-, T-4-.
506-77-4 „„.....„« Cyanogen chloride „ 10.000 -c
509-14-8 . Tetranitromethane [Methane, tetranitro-) 10,000 b
542-88-1 Chloromethyl ether [Methane, oxybis[chloro-] 1,000 b
556-64-9 ..............— Methyl thiocyanate [Triiocyanic add, methyl ester] 20,000 b
584-84-9 _.._._...— Toluene 2,4-diisocyanate [Benzene, 2,4-diisocyanato-1-methyl-]1 10,000 a
594-42-3 _.....„,...... Perchloromethylmercaptan [Methanesulfenyl chloride, trichloro-] 10,000 b
624-83-9 ._._„_ Methyl isocyanate [Methane, isocyanato-J : 10,000 a. b
814-68-6 Aciylyl chloride [2-Prapenoyl chloride] _ 5,000 b
4170-30-3 , ...... Crotonaldehyde [2-Butenal] 20,000 b
7446-09-5 _....„ Sulfur dioxide (anhydrous) 5,000 a, b
7446-11-9 ............. Sulfur trioxide 10,000 a, b
7550-45-0 —.._.!— Titanium tetrachloride CHtanium chloride (TiCl4) (T-4)-] 2,500 b
7637-07-2 ..™^,I.~... Boron trifluoride [Borane, trifluoro-] _ '. 5,000 b
7647-O1-0 ™.v_r— Hydrochloric acid (cone 30% or greater) 15,000 d
7647-01-0 _ ...— Hydrogen chloride (anhydrous) [Hydrochloric acid] 5,000 a
7664-39-3 ™— Hydrogen fluoride/Hydrofluoric acid (cone 50% or greater) [Hydrofluoric acid] 1,000 a, b
7664—41-7 _ Ammonia (anhydrous) _ 10,000 a, b
7664—41-7 . ™ Ammonia (cone 20% or greater) 20,000 a, b
7697-37-^2 ._ Nitric aa'd (cone 80% or greater) 15,000 b
7719^-12-2 ..—..„.— Phosphorus trichloride [Phosphorous trichloride] , 15,000 b
7726-95-6 . ...... Bromine 10,000 a, b
7782-41-4 ^....... Fluorine 1^000 b
7782-50-5 Chlorine 2.500 a, b
7783-O6-4 ............. Hydrogen sulfide '. ; 10,000 a, b
7783-07^5 ................. Hydrogen selenide : 500 b
7783-60-0 '...— Sulfur tetraduoride [Sulfur fluoride (SF4), (T-4)-] 2,500 b
7784-34-1 ........™ Arsenous trichloride 15,000 b
7784—42—1 ........,« Arsine 1,000 b
7803-51—2 . ........ Phosphine „ 5,000 b
8014-95-7 ™... Oleum (Fuming Sulfuric acid) [Sulfuric acid, mixture with sulfur trioxide]' 10,000 e
10025-87-3 ._. ..._ Phosphorus oxychtoride [Phosphoryl chloride] 5,000 b
10049-04-4 Chlorine dioxide [Chlorine oxide (CIQ.)] 1,000 c
10102-43^9 ......._..._ Nitric oxide [Nitrogen oxide (NO)] 10,000 b
10294-34-5 „— Boron trichloride [Borane, trichloro-] .1 _ 5,000 b
13463-39-3 „..„. Nickel carbonyl 1,000 b
13463-40-6 -,.._.. Iron, pentacarbonyl- [Iron carbonyl (Fe(COi), (TB-5-11)-] - 2,500 b
19287—45—7 Diborane „ „ 2,500 b
26471-62-5 Toluene diisocyanate (unspecified isomer) [Benzene, 1.3-diisocyanatomethyl- 10,000 a
• • „:::; | I]1. . ; | |
'The mixture exemption in §68.115(b)(1) does not apply to the substance.
NOTE: Basis for Listing:
a Mandated for listing by Congress.
b On EHS list, vapor pressure 10 mmHg or greater.
c Toxic gas.
< Toxidty of sulfur trioxide and Sulfuric acid, potential to release sulfur trioxide, and history of accidents.
TABLE 3 TO §68.130.—LIST OF REGULATED FLAMMABLE SUBSTANCES AND THRESHOLD QUANTITIES
-i: , , FOR ACCIDENTAL RELEASE PREVENTION • " ,'„
[Alphabetical Order—63 Substances]
Chemical name
CAS No.
Threshold
quantity
(Ibs)
Basis for
listing
AcetaWehyde .
Acetylene [EthyneJ .
Bnxnotrifluorethylene [Ethene, bromotrifkioro-]
1.3-B
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§68.130
TABLE 3 TO §68.130.—LIST OF REGULATED FLAMMABLE SUBSTANCES AND THRESHOLD QUANTITIES
•FOR ACCIDENTAL RELEASE PREVENTION—Continued
[Alphabetical Order—63 Substances]
Chemical name
Carbon oxysulfide [Carbon oxide sulfide (COS)]
2-ChloropropyIene [1-Propene, 2-chioro-]
Cyclopropane • .. ... ... ... •••• ' - .. ... - ...
Difluoroethane [Ethane, 1 ,1 -difluoro-j
Dimethylamtne [Methanamine N-methyl-J t
Ethyl chloride [Ethane, chloro-] .. . ....',„
Ethylene [Ethene] ............
Ethvl ether lEthane 1 1'-oxvbis-l , ... ... ..
Ethyl nitrite [Nitrous acid ethyl ester] *
3-Methyl-1-butene .-
2-MethyM-butene " * .
2-Pentene {£)-
Propane .....
Propylene [1-Propene] «
Silane . .
Tetramethylsilane [Silane, tetramethyl-] ...
Trimethylamine [Methanamine, N,N-dimethyI-] ~...".......
Vinyl ethyl ether [Ethene ethoxy-]
Vinyl fluoride [Ethene, fluoro-3 _ -
Vinylidene chloride [Ethene, 1,1-dichloro-] '.
Vinylidene fluoride [Ethene, 1,1-difluoro-] .'
Vinyl methyl ether [Ethene, methoxy-]
CAS No.
590-18-1
624-64-6
463^-58-1
7791-21-1
5S7-9&-2
590-21-6
460-19-5
75-19-4
4109-96-0
75-37-6
124-40-3
463-82-1
74-84-0
107-00-6
75-04-7
'• 75-00-3
74-85-1
60-29-7
75_08_1
109-95-5
1333-74-O
75-28-5
78-78-4
78-79-5
75-31-0
75-29-6
74-82-8
74-89-5
563-45-1
563-46-2
115-10-6
107-31-3
115-1 1-7
504-60-9
109-66-0
109-67-1
646-04-8
627-20-3
463-49-O
74-98-6
115-07-1
74_gg_7
7803-62-5
116-14-3
75-76-3
10025-78-2
79-38-9
75-50-3
689-97—4
75-01-4
109-92-2
75-02-5
75-35-4
75-38-7
107-25-5
Threshold
quantity
Obs)y
10,000
10,000
10.000
10,000
10.000
10,006
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10.000
10000
10,000
10,000
~ 10,000
10,000
10000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10000
10,000
10,000
10000
10,000
' 10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10.000
10,000
10,000
10000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10.000
10,000
10,000
10,000
Basis for
, listing
1
1
f
f
g
g
f
f
f
f
f
f
f
f
f
f
f
f
f
f
g
f
f
f
f
f
f
g
g
1
g
f
a, f
g
f
g
f
f
NOTE: Basis for Listing:
a Mandated for listing by Congress.
f Flammable gas.
g Volatile flammable liquid.
1237
-------
§68.130 40 QFR Ch. | (7-1-96 Edition)
TABLE 4 TO § 68.130.—LIST OF REGULATED FLAMMABLE SUBSTANCES AND THRESHOLD QUANTITIES
•'. *, FOR ACCIDENTAL RELEASE PREVENTION
'. [CAS Number Order—63 Substances]
CAS No.
60-29-7 „;_„ .„„..
74-82-8 ..
74-84-0 I
74-65-1 .._ . .
74-86-2 ..............
74-89-5
74-98-6 ...„„
74-99-7 ... ._
75-00-3 ......_„_
75-01-4
75-02-5 .„_ ,
7S-04-7 ........ „„.._
7S-07-0 ....... ,
7S-08-1 _ .
75-19-4 ™.....™].™.«.
75-28-S .,.'._J1.......
75-29^6 ____._I1.__
75-31-0 _. ™l._... .
75-35-4 -. .«."„
75-37-6 „...„...„
75-38-7 ..__.....__.....
75-50-3
75-76-3 .. _..
7$-7@-4 _
78-79-5 „_..-...
79-38-9 .,
106-97-8 ____'„ ...
106-98-9 ..........
196-99-0
107-00-6 /....„.
107-O1-7
107-25-5 _... .
107-31-3 ...™._
109-66-0 .„.„_..„...
109-67-1
109-92-2 _...__.._._..
109-95-5 « „ .
11S-O7-1 „
115-10-6 ...
115-11-7 ._...._.._....
116-14-3
124-40-3 _......„.._„.
460-19-5 ..._™__.._..
463-49-0 _..™_-_
463-58-1
463-82-1 _._.._..—.
504-60-9 ._.....„_
S57-98-2
563-45-1 .
563-46-2 ... .
590-18-1 . .......
59P-21-6
598-73-2 .» _,
624-64-6 ..................
627-20-3 ..„.„._„__
646-04-8 .. .._
689-97-4
1333-74-0
4109-96-0
7791-21-1
7803-62-5 ........ ..
10025-78-2
25167-67-3 „
Chemical name
Ethyl ether [Ethane. 1.1'-oxybis-]
Methane
Ethane „
Elhylene [Ethene]
Acetylene [Ethyne]
Methylamine [Methanamine] „
Propane
Propyne [1 -Propyne] „
Elhyl chloride [Ethane, chloro-]
Vinyl chloride [Ethene, chloro-] '.
Vinyl fluoride [Ethene, fluoro-J _.
Ethylamlne [Ethahamine]
Acetaldehyde
Ethyl mercaptan [Ethanethiof] . . .
Cyclopropane
Isobutane [Propane, 2-methyl] '.
Isopropyt chloride [Propane, 2-chloro-]
Isopropylamine [2-Propanamine]
Vinylidene chloride [Ethene, 1,1-dichloro-J
Vinylidene fluoride [Ethene, 1,1-difluoro-]
Trimethylamlne [Methanamine, N, N-dimethyl-]
Tetramethylsilane [Silane tetramethyl-]
Isopentane [Butane, 2-methyl-]
Isoprene [1,3,-Butadiene, 2-methyl-] _
Trifluorocnloroethylene [Ethene chlorotrifluoro-]
Butane „. .
1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
Ethyl acetylene [1-Butyne]
2-Butene
Vinyl methyl ether [Ethene, methoxy-]
Methyl formate [Formic acid, methyl ester]
Pentane
1-Pentene
Vinyl ethyl ether [Ethene, ethoxy-J
Ethyl nitrite [Nitrous acid, ethyl ester]
Propylene [1-Propene]
Methyl ether [Methane, oxybis-]
2-MethyIpropene [1-Propene, 2-methyl-]
Tetrafluoroethylene [Ethene, tetrafluoro-]
Dimethylamine [Methanamine, N-methyl-]
Cyanogen [Elhanedinitrile]
Propadiene [1,2-Propadiene]
Carbon oxysulfide [Carbon oxide sulfide (COS)]
2^-Kmethylpropane [Propane, 24-dimethyl-]
1^-Pentadiene
Z-Chloropropylene [1-Propene, 2-chloro-]
3-Methyl-1-butene
2-MethyH-butene
2-Butene-cis ..... .
-Chloropropylene [1-Propene, 1-chloro-]
iromotrifluorethylene [Ethene, bromotrifluoro-J
2-Butene-trans [2-Butene, (E)]
2-Pentene, (2)-
2-Pentene, (£)-
Vinyl acetylene [1-Buten-3-yne] „
iydrogen , „ v
Jichlorosilane [Silane, dfchtoro-]
Chlorine monoxide [Chlorine oxide]
Silane
Trichtorositane [Silane,trichlorc-]
Butene
CAS No.
6O-29-7
74-82-8
74-85-1
74-86-2
74-39-5
74—98-6
74-99-7
75-00-3
75-01-4
75-02-5
75-04—7
75-07-0
75...19-4
75-28-5
75-29-6
75-31-0
75-35-4
' 75-38-7
75-50-3
75-76-3
78—78—4
78-79-S
79-38-9
106-97-8
106-98-9
106-99-0
107-00-6
107—25-5
107-31-3
109-66-0
1 09-67-1
109-92-2
109-95-5
115-07—1
115—10-6
115-11-7
116—14—3
124-40-3
460-19-5
463' -43-0
463-58-1
463-82-1
504-60-9
557-98-2
563-45-1
563—46-2
590—18—1
590-21-6
598-73-2
624-64-6
627-20-3
646-O4-8
689-97--t
1333-74-0
4109-96-0
7791—21—1
7803-62-^5
10025-78—2
25167-67-3
Threshold
quantity
(Ibs)
10000
10 ooo
10 000
10 ooo
. 10 000
10000
10,000
10 000
10000
10,000
•10 000
10000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10 000
10,000
10.000
10 000
10000
10,000
10*000
10000
10,000
10,000
10 000
10 000
10,000
10,000
10 000
10,000
10 000
10 000
10 000
10,000
10 000
10,600
10,000
10 000
10.000
10,000
10 000
10,000
10000
10 000
10000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10.000
10 000
10 000
10 000
10,000
Basis for
listing
f
f
f
1
f
f
f
a f
f
f
f
f
9
f
f
9
f
f
f
f
f
f
9
g
g
f
f
f
'
•
3
!
g
1
Note: Basts for Listing: a Mandated for listing by Congress. f Flammable gas. g Volatile flammable liquid.
1238
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
Subpart G—Risk Management
Plan
SOURCE: 61 FR 31726, June 20, 1996, unless
otherwise noted.
EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: At 61 FR 31726, June
20. 1996. subpart G was added, -effective Aug.
19, 1996. ,
§68.150 Submission.
(a) The owner or operator shall sub-
mit a single RMP that includes the in-
formation required by §§68.155 through
68.185 for all covered processes. , The
RMP shall be submitted in a method
and format to a central point as speci-
fied by EPA prior to June 21, 1999.
(b) The owner or operator shall sub-
mit the first RMP no later than the
latest of the following dates:
(1) June 21, 1999;
(2) Three years after the date on
which a regulated substance is first
listed under §68.130; or
(3) The date on which a regulated
substance is first present above- a
threshold quantity in a process. :
(c) Subsequent submissions of RMPs
shall be in accordance with §68.190.
(d) Notwithstanding the provisions of
§§68.155 to 68.190, the RMP shall ex-
clude classified information. Subject to
appropriate procedures to protect such
information- from public disclosure,
classified data or information excluded
from the RMP may be made available
in a classified annex to the RMP for re-
view by Federal and state representa-
tives who have received the appro-
priate security clearances.
§ 68.155 Executive summary.
The owner or operator shall provide
in the RMP an executive summary that
includes a brief description of the fol-
lowing elements: ,
(a) The accidental release prevention
and emergency response policies at the
stationary source;
(b) The stationary source and regu-
lated substances handled;
(c) The worst-case release scenario (s)
and the alternative release scenario(s),
including administrative controls and
mitigation measures to- limit the dis-
tances for each reported scenario;
§68.160
(d) The general accidental release
prevention program and chemical-spe-
cific prevention steps;
(e) The five-year accident history;
(f) The emergency response program;
and
(g) Planned changes to improve safe-
ty-
§ 68.160 Registration.
(a) The owner or operator shall com-
plete a single registration form and in-
clude it in the RMP. The form shall
cover all regulated substances handled
in covered processes.
(b) The registration shall include the
following data:
(1) Stationary source name, street,
city, county, state, zip code, latitude,
and longitude; •
(2) The stationary source' Dun and
Bradstreet number:
(3) Name and Dun and Bradstreet
number of the corporate parent com-
pany;
(4) The name, telephone number, and
mailing address of the owner or opera-
tor;
(5) The name and title of the person
or position with overall responsibility
for RMP elements and implementation;
(6) The name, title, telephone num-
ber, and 24-hour telephone number of
the emergency contact:
(7) For each covered process, 'the
name and CAS number of each regu-
lated substance held above the thresh-
old quantity in the process, the maxi-
mum quantity of each regulated sub-
stance or mixture in the process (in
pounds) to two significant digits, the
SIC code, and-the Program level of the
process;
(8) The stationary source EPA identi-
fier:
(9) The number of full-time employ-
ees at the stationary source: ..
(10) Whether the stationary source is
subject to 29 CFR 1910.119;
(11) Whether the stationary source is
subject to 40 CFR part 355;
(12) Whether the stationary source
has a CAA Title V operating permit;
and
(13) The date of the last safety in-
spection of the stationary source by a
Federal, state, or local government
agency and the identity of the inspect-
ing entity. .
1239
-------
§68.165
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-96 Edition)
§ 68.165 Offsite consequence analysis.
(a) The owner or operator shall sub-
mit in the RMP information:
(l) One worst-case release scenario
for each Program 1 process; and
(2) For Program 2 and 3 processes,
one worst-case release scenario to rep-
resent all regulated toxic substances
held above the threshold quantity and
one wbrst!-case release scenario to rep-
resent all regulated flammable sub-
stances held above the threshold quan-
tity. If additional worst-case scenarios
for toxics or flammables are required
by §68.25 (a) (2) (iii), the owner or opera-
tor shall submit the same information
on the additional scenario(s). The
owner or operator 'of Program 2 and 3
processes shall also submit information
on one alternative release scenario for
each regulated toxic substance held
above the threshold quantity and one
alternative release scenario to -rep-
resent all regulated flammable sub-
stances held above the threshold quan-
tity.
(b) The owner or operator shall sub-
mit the following data:
(1) Chemical name;
(2) Physical state (toxics only);
(3) Basis of results (give model name
if used):
(4) Scenario (explosion, fire, toxic gas
release, or liquid spill and vaporiza-
tion);
(5) Quantity released in pounds;
(6) Release rate;
(7) Release duration;
(8) Wind speed and atmospheric sta-
bility class (toxics only);
(9) Topography (toxics only);
(10) Distance to endpoint;
(11) Public and environmental recep-
tors within the distance;
(12) Passive mitigation considered;
and
(13) Active mitigation considered (al-
ternative releases only);
§68.168 Five-year accident history.
The owner or operator shall submit
in the RMP the information provided
in §68.42(b) on each accident covered by
§68.42(a).
§68.170 Prevention program/Program
2. '
(a) For each Program 2 process, the
owner or operator shall provide in the
RMP the information indicated in
paragraphs (b) through (k) of this sec-
tion. If the same information applies to
more than one covered process, the
owner or operator may provide the in-
formation only once, but shall indicate
to which processes the information ap-
plies.
(b) The SIC code for the process.
(c) The name(s) of the chemical (s)
covered.
(d) The date of the most recent re-
view or revision of the safety informa-
tion and a list of Federal or state regu-
lations or industry-specific design
codes and standards used to dem-
onstrate compliance with the safety in-
formation requirement.
(e) The date of completion of the
most recent hazard review or update.
(1) The expected date of completion
of any changes resulting from the haz-
ard review;
(2) Major hazards identified;
(3) Process controls in use:
(4) Mitigation systems in use;
(5) Monitoring and detection systems
in use; and •
(6) Changes since the last hazard re-
view.
(f) The date of the most recent review
or revision of operating procedures.
(g) The date of the most recent re-
view or revision of training programs;
(1) The type of training provided—
classroom, classroom plus on the job,
on thejob; and
(2) The type of competency testing
used.
(h) The date of the most recent re-
view or revision of maintenance proce-
dures and the date of the most recent
equipment inspection or test and the
equipment inspected or tested.
(i) The date of the most recent com-
pliance audit and the expected date of
completion of any changes resulting
from the compliance audit.
(j) The date of the most recent inci-
dent investigation and the expected
date of completion of any changes re-
sulting from'the investigation.
(k) The date of the most recent
change that triggered a review or revi-
sion of safety information, the hazard
review, operating or maintenance pro-
cedures, or training.
1240
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§68.190
§68.175
3.
Prevention program/Program
(a) For each Program 3 process, the
owner or operator shall provide the in-
formation indicated in paragraphs (b)
through (p) of this section. If the same
information applies to more than one
covered process, the owner or operator
may provide the information only
once, but shall indicate to which proc-
esses the information applies.
(b) The SIC code for the process.
(c) The name(s) of the substance (s)
covered.
(d) The date on which the'safety in-
formation was last reviewed or revised.
(e) The date of completion of the
most recent PHA or update and the
technique used.
(1) The expected date of completion
of any changes resulting from the PHA;
. (2) Major hazards identified:
(3) Process controls in use;
(4) Mitigation systems in use:
(5) Monitoring and detection systems
in use; and
(6) Changes since the last PHA,
(f) The date of the most recent review
or revision of operating procedures.
(g) The date of the most recent re-
view or revision of training programs;
(1) The type of training provided—
classroom, classroom plus on the job,
on thejob; and
(2) The type of competency testing
used.
(h) The date of the. most recent re-
view or revision of maintenance proce-
dures and the date of the most recent
equipment inspection or test and the
equipment inspected or tested.
(i) The date of ' the most recent
• change that triggered management of
change procedures and the date of the
most recent review or revision of man-
agement of change procedures.
(j) The date of the most,recent pre-
startup -review.
(k) The date of the most recent com-
pliance audit and the expected date of
completion of • any changes resulting
from the compliance audit;
(1) The date of the .most recent inci-
dent investigation and the expected
date of completion of any changes re-
sulting from the investigation;
(m) The date of the most recent re-
view or revision of employee participa-
tion plans;
(n) The date of the most recent re-
view or revision of hot work permit
procedures;
(o) The date of the most recent re-
view or revision of .contractor safety
procedures; and
(p) The date of the most recent eval-
uation of contractor safety perform-
ance.
§68.180 Emergency response program.
(a) The owner or operator shall pro-
vide in the RMP the following informa-
tion:
(1) Do you have a written emergency
response plan?
(2) Does the plan include specific ac-
tions to be taken in response to an ac-
cidental releases of a regulated sub-
stance?
(3) Does the,plan include procedures
for informing the public and local
agencies responsible for responding to
accidental releases?
(4) Does the plan include information
on emergency health care?
(5) The date of the most recent re-
view or update of the emergency re-
sponse plan;
(6) The date of the mos.t recent emer-
gency response training for employees.
(b) The owner or operator shall pro-
vide the name and telephone number of
the local agency with which the plan is
coordinated. . •
(c) The owner or operator shall list
other Federal or state emergency plan
requirements to which the stationary
source is subject.
§68.185 Certification.
(a) For Program 1 processes, the
owner or operator shall submit in the
RMP the certification statement pro-
vided in §68.12(b) (4).
(b) For all other covered processes,
the owner or operator shall submit in
the RMP a single certification that,,.to
the best of the signer's knowledge, in-
formation, and belief formed after rea-
sonable inquiry, the information sub-
mitted is true, accurate, and complete.
§68.190 Updates.
(a) The owner or operator shall re-
view and update the RMP as specified
in paragraph (b) of this section and
submit it in a method and format to a
1241
-------
§68.200
central point specified by EPA prior to
June 21, 1999.
(b) The owner or operator of a sta-
tionary source shall revise and update
the RMP submitted under §68.150 as
follows:
(1) Within five years of its initial sub-
mission or most recent update required
by paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(7) of
this section, whichever is later.
(2) No later than three years after a'
newly regulated'Substance is first list-
ed by EPA;
(3) No later than the date on which a
new regulated substance is first
present in an already covered process
above a threshold quantity;
(4) No later than the date on which a
regulated substance is first present
above a threshold quantity in a new
process;
(5) Within six months of a change
that requires a revised PHA or hazard
review;
(6) Within six months of a change
that requires a revised offsite con-
sequence analysis as provided in §68.36;
and
(7) Within six months of a change
that alters the Program level that ap-
plied to any covered process.
(c)! If a stationary source is no longer
subject to this part, the owner or oper-
ator shall submit a revised registration
to EPA within six months indicating
that the stationary source is no longer
covered.
Subpart H—Other Requirements
SOURCE: 61 FR 31728. June 20. 1996, unless
otherwise noted.
EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: At 61 FR 31728, June
20. 1996. subpart H was added, effective Aug.
19. 1996.
§68.200 Recordkeeping.
The owner or operator shall maintain
records supporting the implementation
of this part for five years unless other-
wise provided in subpart D of this part.
§68.210 Availability of information to
the public.
(a) The RMP required under subpart
G of this part shall be available to the
public under 42 U.S.C. 7414(c).
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-96 Edition)
(b) The disclosure of classified infor-
mation by the Department of Defense
or other Federal agencies or contrac-
tors of such agencies shall be con-
trolled by applicable laws, regulations,
or executive orders concerning the re-
lease of classified Information.
§68.215 Permit content and air per-
mitting authority or designated
agency requirements.
(a) These requirements apply to any
stationary source subject to this part
68 and parts 70 or 71 of this chapter.
The 40 CFR part 70 or part 71 permit for
the stationary source shall contain: .
(1) A statement listing this part as
an applicable requirement;
(2) Conditions that require the source
owner or operator to submit:
(i) A compliance schedule for meet-
ing the requirements of this part by
the date provided in §68.10(a) or;
(ii) As part of the compliance certifi-
cation submitted under 40 CFR
70.6(c)(5), a certification statement
that the source is in compliance with
all requirements of this part, including
the registration and submission of the
RMP.
(b) The owner or operator shall sub-
mit any additional relevant informa-
tion requested by the air permitting
authority or designated agency.
(c) For 40 CFR part 70 or part 71 per-
mits issued prior to the deadline for
registering and submitting the RMP
and which do not contain permit condi-
tions described in paragraph (a) of this
section, the owner or operator or- air
permitting authority shall initiate per-
mit revision or reopening according to
the procedures of 40 CFR 70.7 or 71.7 to
incorporate the terms and conditions
consistent with paragraph (a) of this
section.
(d) ' The state may delegate the au-
thority to implement and ^enforce the
requirements of paragraph (e) of' this
section to a state or local agency or
agencies other than the air permitting •
authority. An up-to-date copy of any
delegation instrument shall be main-
tained by the air permitting authority.
The state may enter a written agree-
ment with the Administrator under
which EPA will implement and enforce
the requirements of paragraph (e) of
this section.
1242
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§68.220
(e) The' air .permitting authority or
the agency designated by delegation or
agreement under paragraph (d) of this
section shall, at a minimum:
(1) Verify that the source owner or
operator has registered and submitted
an RMP or a revised plan when re-
quired by this part;
(2) Verify that the source owner or
operatpr has' submitted a source cer-
tification or in its absence has submit-
ted a compliance schedule consistent
with paragraph (a) (2) of this section;
(3) For some or all of the sources sub-
ject to this section, use one or more
mechanisms such as, but not limited
to, a completeness check, source au-,
dits, record reviews, or facility inspec-
tions to ensure that permitted sources
are in compliance with the require-
ments of this part; and
(4) Initiate enforcement action based
on paragraphs (e)(l) and (e)(2) of this
section as appropriate.
§68.220 Audits.
(a) In addition to inspections for the
purpose of regulatory development and
enforcement of the Act, the imple-
menting agency shall periodically
audit RMPs submitted under subpart G
of this part to review the adequacy of
such RMPs and require revisions of
RMPs when necessary to ensure com-
pliance with subpart G of this part.
(b) The'implementing agency shall
select stationary sources for audits
based on any of the following criteria:
(1) Accident history of the stationary
source;
(2) Accident history of other station-
ary sources in the same industry;
(3) Quantity of regulated substances
present at the stationary source;
(4) Location of the stationary source
and its proximity to the public and en-
vironmental receptors;
(5) The presence of specific regulated
substances;,
(6) The hazards identified in the
RMP; and
(7) A plan providing for neutral, ran-.
dom oversight.
(c) Exemption from audits. A station-
ary source with a Star or Merit rank-
ing under OSHA's voluntary protection
program shall be exempt from audits
under paragraph (b)(2) and (b)(7) of this
section.
(d) The implementing agency shall
have access to the stationary source,
supporting documentation, and any
area where an accidental release could
occur.
(e) Based on the audit, the imple-
menting agency may issue the owner
or operator of a stationary source a
written preliminary determination of,
necessary revisions to the stationary
source's RMP to ensure that the RMP
meets the criteria of subpart G of this
part. The preliminary determination
shall include an explanation for the
basis for the revisions, reflecting indus-
try standards and guidelines (such as
AIChE/CCPS guidelines and ASME and
API standards) to the extent that such
standards and guidelines are applica-
ble, and shall include a timetable for
their implementation.
(f) Written response to a preliminary de-
termination. (1) The owner or operator
shall respond in writing to a prelimi-
nary determination made in accord-
ance, with paragraph (e) -of this section.
The response shall state the owner or
operator will implement the revisions
contained in the preliminary deter-
mination in accordance with the time-
table included in the preliminary de-
termination or shall state that the
owner or operator rejects the revisions
in whole or' in part. For each rejected
revision, the owner or operator shall
explain the basis for rejecting such re-
vision. Such explanation may include
substitute revisions.
(2) The written response under para-
graph (f)(l) of this section shall.be re-
ceived by the implementing agency
within 90 days of the issue of the pre-
liminary determination or a shorter
period of time as the implementing
agency specifies in the preliminary de-
termination as necessary to protect
public health and the environment.
Prior to the written response being due
and upon written request from the
owner or operator, the implementing
agency may provide in writing addi-
tional time for the response to be re-
ceived.
(g) After providing the owner or oper-
ator an opportunity to respond under
paragraph (f) of this section, the imple-
menting agency may issue the owner
1243
-------
§68.220
or operator a written final determina-
tion of necessary revisions to the sta-
tionary source's RMP. The final deter-
mination may adopt or modify the re-
visions contained in the preliminary
determination under paragraph (e) of
this sectjpn or may adopt or modify
the substitute revisions provided in the
response under paragraph (f) of this
section. A final determination that
adopts a revision rejected by the owner
or operator shall include an expla-
nation of the basis for the revision. A
final determination that fails to adopt
a substitute revision provided under
paragraph (f) of this section shall in-
clude an explanation of the basis for
finding such substitute revision unrea-
sonable.
(h) Thirty days after completion of
the actions detailed in the implemen-
tation schedule set in the final deter-
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-96 Edition)
mination under paragraph (g) of this
section, the owner or operator shall be
in violation of subpart G of this part
and this section unless the owner or
operator revises the RMP prepared
under subpart G of this part as required
by the final determination, and sub-
mits the revised RMP as required
under §68.150.
(i) The public shall have access to the
preliminary determinations, responses,
and final determinations under this
section in a manner consistent with
§68.210.
(j) Nothing in this section shall pre-
clude, limit, or interfere in any way
with the authority of EPA or the state
to exercise its enforcement, investiga-
tory, and information gathering au-
thorities concerning this part under
the Act.
1244
-------
APPENDIX A TO PART 68—TABLE OF Toxic ENDPOINTS
< [As defined In §68.22 of this part]
CAS No.
107-02-8
107-13-1
814-68-6
107-18-6
107-1 1-9 '.
7664-41-7 : ..
7664-41-7
7784-34-1 :
7784-42-1
10294-34-5
7637-07-2 :. .. .
353-42-4
7726-95-6
75-15-0
7782-50-5 . .
10049-04-4
67-66-3
542-88-1
107-30-2
4170-30-3 „..
123-73-9
506-77-4 :-.
108-91-8 ;
19287-45-7
75-78-5 :
57-14-7
106-89 8
107-15-3
151-56-4
75-21-8
7782-41-4 '. .:
50-00-0 ...
1 10-00-9
302-01-2
7647-01-0
74-90-8
7647-01-0 ;
7664-39-3
7783-07-5
7783-06-4
13463-40-6
7B-82-0 ... .
.108-23-6 . .
Chemical name
Acroleln (2-Propenal) , ;
Acrylonitrile [2-Propenenitrile] ' . ' - -
Acrylyt chloride [2-Propenoyl chloride) .
Allyl alcohol [2-Propen-l-ol] .
Ammonia (anhydrous) ...
Ammonia (cone 20% or greater) .-. .7.7. . . .
Arsenous trichloride ; . .
Boron trichloride [Borane, trichloro-) ,.; . . . .
Boron trifluoride (Borane, trifluoro-) .-...
Bromine
Carbon disullide
Chlorine ' • -J"
Chlorine dioxide [Chlorine oxide (CI02)] ' . . .
Chloroform [Methane, trichloro-] .....;.
Chloromethyl ether [Methane, oxybis[chloro-) . .
Chloromethyl methyl ether [Methane, chloromethoxy-) ... - t
Crotonaldehyde [2-Butenal] ...
Crotonaldehyde, (E)-, [2-Bulenal, (E)-)
Cyanogen chloride ....
Cyclohexylamine [Cyclohexanamirie) .-.
Diborane , L .
Dimelhyldichlorosllane [Silane, dlchlorodhmelhyl-) .... . •'
1,1-Dimelhylhydrazlne[Hydrazine, 1,1 -dimethyl-] „ ....
Eplchlorohydrin [Oxirane, (Chloromethyl)-) '.
Ethylenediamine [1,2-Elhanediamine] .......". '.
Ethyleneimlne [Azlridine] .
Elhylene oxide [Oxirane] ... .. •
Fluorine : .-, -
Formaldehyde (solution) : . . .
Furan i - -
Hydrazine ., ^- . .. .
Hydrochloric acid (cone 30% or greater) ;.. ;.. .
Hydrocyanic acid
Hydrogen chloride (anhydrous) [Hydrochloric acid) ... -
Hydrogen Iluoride/Hydrolluorio acid (cone 50% or greater) [Hydrofluoric acid] :
Hydrogen selenide .
Hydrogen sulfide . . *
Iron, pentacarbonyl- [Iron carbonyl (Fe(GO)5), (TB-5-11)-] . ^
Isobulyronllrile [PropanenllrilB, 2-melhyl-]
Isopropyl chloroformale [Carbonochloride acid, 1-melhylelhyl ester)
Toxic
endpolnt
(mg/L)
00011
000090
0036
014
014
0010
0010
00087
00028
049
000025
00018
0029
0029
0030
016
0026
0012
0076 "
049
0018
0090
0012
00012
0011
0030
0011
0016
000044
014
010
m
•3
CD
I
a
o
(O
O)
CO
•o
TI
-------
Pt. 68, App. A
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-96 Edition)
m CD e
oooo
a -8
X *
Ill
i :
; :
I i
s i
:
;
i *
: :
: ;
i :
: :
; ;
" •
: : : :
; : : :
: : : :
: : : ;
, „
; = :
; : :
,: : :
CM 7 CM
:
: .
:
«?
; i :
• : i
: : :
'«? ; _
9
i
,. :
: :
!
:
:
•?
.^finp7inJ^coc\iT?l?codjd)ei^-^TinTN.cpYT
ifoTcM Ttn i^-encM'*- I IptpT- t T T •w I Tim
<\j i T--«-^T i in 1 co*-
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§69.11
[61 FR 31729, June 20, 1996]
EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: At 61 FR 31729, June
20, 1996, appendix A was added to part 68, ef-
fective Aug. 19, 1996. '
PART 69—SPECIAL EXEMPTIONS"
FROM REQUIREMENTS OF THE
CLEAN AIR ACT
Subpart A—Guam
Sec.
69.11 New exemptions.
69.12 Continuing exemptions.
Subpart B—American Samoa [Reserved]
69.21 New exemptions. [Reserved]
Subpart C—Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands [Reserved]
69.31 New exemptions. [Reserved]
AUTHORITY: Sec. 325, Glean Air Act, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 7625-1).
SOURCE: 50 FR 25577, June 20, 1985. unless
. otherwise noted. , .
Subpart A—Guam
§69.11 New exemptions.
(a) Pursuant to section 325 (a) of the
Clean Air Act ("CAA") and a petition
Submitted by the Governor of Guam
("Petition"), the,Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
("EPA") conditionally exempts elec-
tric generating units on Guam from
certain CAA requirements.
(1) A waiver of the requirement to ob-
tain a prevention of significant, dete-
rioration ("PSD") permit prior to con-
struction is granted for the electric
generating units identified in the Peti-
tion as Cabras Diesel No. 1, the Tenjo
project, and three 6-megawatt diesel
generators to be constructed at Orote,
with the following conditions:
(i) Each electric generating unit
shall not be operated until a final PSD
permit is issued for that unit;
(ii) Each electric generating unit
shall not be operated until that unit
complies with all requirements of its
PSD permit, including, if necessary,
retrofitting with the best available
control technology ("BACT");
(iii) The PSD application for each
electric generating unit shall be
deemed complete without the submit-
tal of the required one year of on-site
meteorological data, however, EPA
will not issue a PSD permit to such a
unit prior to submission of such data
or data which the EPA finds to be an
equivalent and acceptable substitute;
and . •
(iv) If any electric generating unit
covered by' this paragraph is operated
either prior to the issuance'of a 'final
PSD permit or without BACT equip-
ment, that electric generating unit
shall be deemed in violation of this
waiver and the CAA beginning on the
date of commencement of construction
of that unit.
(2) A waiver of the three nonattain-
ment area requirements (a construc-
tion ban, the use of lowest achievable
emission rate control equipment, and
emission offset requirements) cur-
rently applicable to the Cabras-Piti
area is granted for electric generating
' units with the following conditions:
(i) A tower and meteorological sta-
tion shall be constructed in the Cabras-
Piti area by May 1, 1993;
(ii) Meteorological data shall be col-
lected from the Cabras-Piti station
which is sufficient to run air quality
models both to demonstrate no current
exceedences of the primary national
ambient air quality standard for sulfur
dioxide ("sulfur dioxide NAAQS"), as
set forth at 40 CFR 50.4, and sufficient
to submit a complete Bequest for redes-
ignation of the area to attainment;
(iii) Ambient sulfur dioxide monitors
shall be installed and operated in ac-
cordance with the procedures set forth
at 40 CFR part 58, the PSD air monitor-
ing requirements, and any additional
monitoring requested by EPA to verify
the efficacy of the intermittent control
strategy ("ICS") of fuel switching;
(iv) Within three years from the ef-
fective date of this waiver, the Gov-
ernor of Guam shall submit to the EPA'
a complete request that the Cabras-
Piti area be redesignated to attain-
ment for the sulfur dioxide NAAQS;
(v) Electric generating units to be
constructed in the Cabras-Piti area
must submit applications for PSD per-
mits as though the area had been re-
designated to attainment for the sulfur
dioxide NAAQS;
(vi) The Cabras-Piti area electric
generating units shall comply with the
1247
-------
-------
Monday
August 25, 1997
~—=
Part VIII
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 68
List of Regulated Substances and
Thresholds for Accidental Release
Prevention; Final Rule
. .4512
-------
-------
45130 Federal Register /Vol. 62. No. 164 /'Monday, August 25, 1.997 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40CFRPart68
[FRL-5881-8] ,
List of Regulated Substances and
Thresholds for Accidental Release
Prevention
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking final action to
modify the list of regulated substances
and threshold quantities authorized by
section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act as
amended. EPA is vacating the listing
and related threshold for hydrochloric
acid solutions with less than 37%
concentrations of hydrogen chloride.
The current listing and threshold for all
other regulated substances, including
hydrochloric acid solutions with 37% or
_ greater concentrations and the listing
and threshold for anhydrous hydrogen
chloride, are unaffected by today's
rulemaking. Today's action implements,
in part, a settlement agreement between
EPA and the General Electric Company
(GE) to resolve GE's petition for review
of the rulemaking listing regulated
substances and-establishing thresholds
under the accidental release prevention
regulations.
DATES: This rule is effective August 25,
1997. ,
ADDRESSES: Docket: The .docket for this
rulemaking is A-97-28. This rule
amends a final rule, the docket for •
which is A-91-74. The docket may be
inspected between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, at EPA's
Air Docket, Room Ml500, Waterside
Mall, 401 M St., SW, Washington, DC
20460; telephone (202) 260-7548. A
reasonable fee may be charged for
copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sicy
Jacob, Chemical Engineer, Chemical
Emergency Preparedness and .
Prevention Office, Environmental
Protection Agency, MC 5104, 401 M St.,
SW, Washington, DC 20460. (202) 260-
7249.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :
Regulated Entities
Entities potentially affected by this
action include the following types of
facilities if the facility has more than the
15,000-pound threshold quantity of
hydrochloric acid solutions with
concentrations of less than 37%
hydrogen chloride.
Category
Chemical
manufactur-
ers.
Petrochemical
Other manu- •
facturers.
Wholesalers ..
Federal
sources.
Example of regulated entities
Industrial inorganics.
*
Plastics and resins:
Pulp and paper mills, primary
metal production, fab-
ricated metal products,
electronic and other elec-
tric equipment, transpor-
tation equipment, industrial
machinery and equipment,
food processors.
Chemical distributors.
Defense and energy installa-
tions.. • •
This table is not intended to.be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. This table lists
types'of entities that the EPA is now
aware could potentially be affected by
this action. Other types of entities not
listed in the table could be affected. To
determine whether your facility is
affected by this action, you should
carefully examin? today's notice. If you
have questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person
listed in the" preceding For Further
Information Contact section.
The following outline is provided to
aid in reading this preamble to the rule:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction and Background
A. Statutory Authority ' _'
B. Regulatory History
C. List Rule Litigation
II, Discussion of the Final Rule and Public
Comments
HI. Judicial Review
IV. Required Analyses
A. Executive Order 12866
B. Regulatory Flexibility
C. Paperwork Reduction
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Submission to Congress and the General
Accounting Office
I. Introduction and Background
A. Statutory Authority
This final rule is being issued under
sections 112(r) and 301 of the Clean Air
Act .(Act) as amended.
B. Regulatory History
The Clean Air Act (CAA or Act),
section 112(r), requires EPA to
promulgate an initial list of at least 100
substances ("regulated substances")
that, in the event of an accidental
release, are known to cause or may be
reasonably expected to cause death,
injury, or serious adverse effects to
human health and the environment. The
CAA also requires EPA to establish a
threshold quantity for each chemical at
the time of listing. Stationary sources
that have more than a threshold
quantity of a regulated substance are
subject to accident prevention
regulations promulgated under CAA
section 112 (r) (7), including the
requirement to develop risk
management plans.
On January 31, 1994, EPA
promulgated the list of regulated
substances and thresholds that identify
stationary sources subject to the
accidental release prevention
regulations (59 FR 4478) (the "List
Rule"). This list included hydrochloric
acid solutions with concentrations of
30% or greater. Such solutions were
assigned a threshold quantity of 15,000
pounds. EPA subsequently promulgated
a rule requiring owners and operators of
stationary sources with listed .
substances above their threshold
quantities to develop programs
addressing accidental releases and to
make publicly available risk
management plans ("RMPs")
summarizing these programs. (61 FR
3166.8, June 20, 1996) (the "RMPRule").
For further information on these
regulations, section 112(r), and related
statutory provisions, see these notices.
These rules can be found in 40 CFR part
68, "Chemical Accident Prevention
Provisions," and collectively are
referred to as the accidental release
prevention regulations.
C. List Rule Litigation
The General Electric Company (GE)
filed a petition for judicial review of the
List Rule regarding EPA's listing criteria
under the List Rule, the listing of certain
substances in the List Rule, the setting '
of threshold quantities for certain
substances in particular and all-
regulated toxic substances generally,
and the petition process for adding and
deleting regulated substances to the list.
Recognizing that the public's-interest
wpuld best be served by settlement of
all issues raised.in this litigation, GE
and EPA agreed to a settlement on April
7, 1997. Under the terms of the
settlement agreement, on May 22. 1997
(62 FR 27992), EPA proposed to vacate
the listing and related threshold for
hydrochloric acid solutions with less
than 37% concentrations of hydrogen
chloride. EPA is today taking final,
action on this proposal.
H. Discussion of the Final Rule and
Public Comments
Today's final rule adopts without
modification the May 22, 1997 (62 FR
27992), proposal to vacate provisions of
the accidental release prevention
regulations that specifically address
hydrochloric acid solutions with less
than 37% hydrogen chloride. The basis
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 164 / Monday, August 25, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 45131
and purpose of this rulemaking is set
out in the above referenced proposal. As
discussed in the proposal, this action
addresses the essential element of the
dispute between EPA and GE while
eliminating the collateral uncertainty
that would exist about the regulatory
status of the remaining chemicals if the
litigation proceeded. EPA has
vigorously advocated responsible
accident prevention efforts by industry
even before enactment of section 112(r).
The Agency is concerned that
prolonging this dispute may encourage,
owners and operators of sources who
are solely concerned about regulatory
compliance to defer engaging in
responsible accident prevention
activities. By implementing the
settlement agreement with'GE and by
implementing the settlement agreements
reached in the other two challenges to
the List Rule, EPA will be able to retain
on the list of regulated substances
nearly all of the chemicals originally
listed and eliminate uncertainty about
their regulatory status. As also
discussed in the proposal, the general
duly clause of section 112(r) (1) and the
retention on the list of solutions with
concentrations of 37% or greater
ensures that today's rule is protective of
public health in several respects.
EPA received 11 letters commenting
on 'the proposed rule. All of the
comments were from industry and trade
associations. All commenters supported
vacating the listing of hydrochloric acid
in concentration below 37%. Several of
them specifically supported EPA's
stated position that this proposal is
protective of public health in several
respects and that this action will
eliminate uncertainty in the regulated
community regarding RMP compliance
for hydrochloric acid solutions.
Several commenters brought up
technical issues regarding the basis for
listing hydrochloric acid in aqueous
solution. EPA stated in the proposed
rule that it was not reopening the
rulemaking record on the listing of
hydrochloric acid within the range of
30% to 37%. Any technical issues
related to the listing of hydrochloric
acid solutions will be addressed if EPA
undertakes future regulatory actions
regarding such solutions. In agreeing to
the settlement with GE and in this
related rulemaking. EPA has not
conceded or acknowledged any
technical deficiencies in its original
listing of HC1 solutions with less than
37% concentration.
One commenter said that solutions at
37%, as well as those below 37%,
should be delisted. EPA considers this
issue outside the scope of the current
rulemaking. The listing of solutions at
37% and above was decided in the
original List Rule and was not reopened
by this rulemaking; objections to the
listing of 37% solutions should have
been made by seeking review of the
original List Rule and are now untimely.
To the extent that the commenter
wishes to reopen the technical merits of
listing solutions that are precisely 37%
HC1. EPA would address that issue
along with other technical issues if EPA
were to take further action on
hydrochloric acid solutions.
Two commenters referred to
comments submitted on the original
proposal to list hydrochloric acid
solution. EPA addressed comments on
the proposed List Rule when it
promulgated the final rule (January 31,
1994).
Several commenters questioned the
accident history of hydrochloric acid
solutions and stated that EPA's accident
database does not support listing
hydrochloric acid solutions. To the
extent'to which it is relevant, EPA will
consider the up-to-date accident history
if it takes any further regulatory actions
on the listing of hydrochloric acid
solutions.
One commenter stated that EPA
overestimated the number of regulated
sources that would not have to comply
with the List rule as a result of this
vacatur. EPA's estimate of 800 sources
was based on preliminary, conservative
assumptions that EPA used to determine
that a regulatory impact analysis was
not required and was not related to the
basis for the proposal. The number and
type of sources that are affected by a
listing are irrelevant under sections
112(r)(3) and (4). The Agency recognizes
that this estimate may represent a
conservative picture of the effect of the
rule on the regulated community.
One commenter stated his
understanding that hydrochloric acid
solutions of 36.94% would not be
covered by the RMP rule. EPA confirms
that all solutions that can be accurately
measured at less than 37% are
excluded.
EPA also proposed on May 22, 1997,
to extend the RMP rule compliance
deadline for hydrochloric acid solutions
with concentrations of 30% to 37% if
EPA did not take final action to vacate
the hydrochloric acid listing as
proposed. Because EPA is vacating the
listing of such solutions by the final
action today, no action is necessary on
this alternative proposal. If EPA were to
relist these solutions in the future, then
sources would have three years from the
new listing to comply with the RMP
rule.
Finally, as stated in the proposal, EPA
wishes to clarify that this rule will not
affect in any way the listing of
anhydrous hydrogen chloride.
Anhydrous hydrogen chloride will
retain its 5000-pound threshold.
Threshold determination provisions for
regulated toxic substances would apply
to anhydrous hydrogen chloride.
Anhydrous mixtures of hydrogen
chloride would be subject to the mixture
provisions for regulated toxic
substances. Aqueous mixtures of
hydrochloric acid would be affected to
. the extent that the minimum
concentration cutoff would be revised.
Based on the reasons discussed above,
EPA is vacating the listing in part 68 of ,
hydrochloric acid solutions at
concentrations of less than 37% (from'
30% up to 37%) hydrogen chloride.
Solutions of 37% or greater will not be
, affected by today's rule and remain on
the list. In addition, EPA is vacating
other provisions of the accidental
release prevention regulations insofar as
they apply to hydrochloric acid
solutions at concentrations less than
37% hydrogen chloride. For example,
the reference to "hydrochloric acid
(cone 30% or greater)" in the toxic
endpoint table for 40 CFR part 68 will
be revised to refer to concentrations of
37% or greater.
III. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(l) of the Clean
Air Act _(CAA), judicial review of the
actions taken by this final rule is
available only on the filing of a petition
for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals
fop the District of Columbia Circuit
within 60 days of today's publication of
this action. Under section 307(b) (2) of
the CAA, the requirements that are
subject to today's notice may not be
challenged later in civil or criminal
proceedings brought by EPA to enforce
these requirements.
IV. Required Analyses
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735. October 4, 1993), the Agency
must judge whether the regulatory
action is "significant," and therefore
subject to OMB review and the
requirements of the Executive Order.
The Order defines "significant
regulatory action" as one that is likely
to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
state, local, or tribal government or
communities;
-------
45232 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 164 / Monday, August 25, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
It has been determined that this rule
is not a "significant regulatory action"
under the terms of Executive Order
12866 and, therefore, is not subject to
OMB review.
B. Regulatory Flexibility
EPA has determined that, it is not .
necessary to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis in connection with
this final rule. EPA has also determined
that this rule will not have a significant
negative economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This final rule will not have a
significant negative impact on a
. substantial number of small entities
because it will reduce the range of
hydrochloric acid solutions listed-under
part 68 and thus reduce the number of
stationary sources subject to part 68.
C. Paperwork Reduction
This rule does not include any
information collection requirements for
OMB to review under the provisions of
the Paperwork Reduction Act,
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. L. '
104-4, establishes requirements for
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local,
and tribal governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
EPA generally must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules
with "Federal mandates" that may
result in expenditures to State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or to the private sector", of $100 million
or more in any one year. Before
promulgating an EPA rule for which a
written statement is needed, section 205
of the UMRA generally requires EPA to
identify and cohsider a reasonable
number of regulatory alternatives and
adopt the least costly, most cost-
effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule.
The provisions of section 205 do not
apply when they are inconsistent with
applicable law. Moreover, section 205
allows EPA to adopt an alternative other
than the least costly, most cost-effective
or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final
rule an explanation of why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA
establishes any regulatory requirements
that may significantly or uniquely affect
small governments, including tribal
governments, it must-have developed
under section 203 of the UMRA a small
government agency plan. The plan, must.
provide for notifying potentially
affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments
to have meaningful and timely input in
the development of EPA regulatory
• proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
EPA has determined that this rule
does not contain a Federal mandate that
may result in expenditures of $100
million or more for State, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
the private sector in any one year.
Today's rule will reduce the number of
sources subject to part 68. Thus, today's
rule is not subject to the requirements ,
of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
For the same reason, EPA has
determined that this rule contains no
regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments.
E. Submission to Congress and the
General Accounting Office
Under 5 U.S.C. 801 (a)(l)(A) as added
by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA
submitted a report containing this rule
and other required information to the
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the General Accounting
Office prior to publication of the rule in
today's Federal Register. This rule is
not a "major rule" as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 68
Environmental protection, Chemicals,
Chemical accident prevention,
Extremely hazardous substances.
Incorporation by reference.
Intergovernmental relations, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: August 19, 1997.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I, subchapler
C, part 68 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 68—CHEMICAL ACCIDENT
PREVENTION PROVISIONS
1. The authority citation for part 68
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7412(r), 7601(a)(l),
7661-7661f. •
§68.130 Tables 1 and 2 [Amended]
2. In §68.130 List of substances. Table
1 is amended by revising the listing in
the column "Chemical name" from
"Hydrochloric acid (cone 30% or
greater)" to "Hydrochloric acid (cone
37% or greater)."
3. In § 68.130 List of substances. Table
2 is'amended by revising the listing in
the column "Chemical name" from
"Hydrochloric acid (cone 30% or
greater)" to "Hydrochloric acid (cone
.37% or greater)," and by adding a note
"d" between note "c" and "e" at the
end of the table to read as follows:
"d Toxicity of hydrogen chloride,
potential to release hydrogen chloride,
and history of accidents."
Appendix A of Part 68 [Amended]
4. Appendix A of Part 68 is amended
by revising the listing in the column
"Chemical name" from "Hydrochloric
acid (cone 30% or greater)" to
"Hydrochloric acid (cone 37% or
greater)."
[FR Doc. 97-22511 Filed 8-22-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
-------
if \
-------
Tuesday
January 6, 1998
Part IV
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 68
List of Regulated Substances and
Thresholds for Accidental Release
Prevention; Final Rule
V . .
63
-------
-------
640
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 3 /Tuesday. January-6. 1998 / Rules and. Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40CFRPart68
[FRL-5940-4]
RIN2050-AE35
List of Regulated Substances and
Thresholds for Accidental Release
Prevention; Amendments
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is modifying the rule
listing regulated substances and
threshold quantities under section
112(r) of the Clean Air Act as amended.
EPA is deleting the category of Division
1.1 explosives (as listed by DOT) from
the list of regulated substances.
Regulated flammable substances in
gasoline used as fuel and in naturally
occurring hydrocarbon mixtures prior to
initial processing are exempted from
threshold quantity determinations, and
the provision for threshold
determination of flammable substances
in a mixture is clarified. The definition
of stationary source is modified to
clarify the exemption of transportation
and storage incident to transportation
and to clarify that naturally occurring
hydrocarbon reservoirs are not
stationary sources or parts of stationary
sources. In addition, EPA is clarifying
that the Chemical Accident Prevention
Provisions do not apply to sources -
located on the Outer Continental Shelf.
EPA believes these changes will better
focus accident prevention activities on
stationary sources with high hazard
operations and reduce duplication with
other similar requirements.
DATES: This rule is effective January 6,
1998. .
ADDRESSES: Docket: The docket for this
rulemaking is A-96-O8. This rule
amends a final rule, the docket for
which is A-91-74. The docket may be
inspected between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, at EPA's
Air Docket, Room M1500, Waterside
Mall, 401 M St., SW, Washington, DC
20460; telephone (202) 260-7548. A
reasonable fee may be charged for
copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Vanessa Rodriguez, Chemical Engineer,
(202), 260-7913, Chemical Emergency
Preparedness and Prevention Office,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
MC-5101. 401 M St. SW, Washington,
DC 20460, or the Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Hotline
at 1-800-424-9346.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: -
Regulated Entities
Entities potentially affected by this
action are those stationary sources that
have more than a threshold quantity of
a regulated substance in a process.
Regulated categories and entities
include:
Category
Chemical Manufacturers
Petrochemical '.
Other Manufacturing
Agriculture
Public Sources ; '.
Utilities :
Others '.
Federal Sources
Examples of regulated entities
Industrial organics & inorganics paints Pharmaceuticals adhesives
sealants, fibers.
Refineries industrial gases plastics & resins synthetic rubber
Electronics semiconductors paper fabricated metals industrial ma-
chinery, furniture, textiles.
Fertilizers pesticides
Drinking and waste water treatment' works
Electric and Gas Utilities
Oil and gas exploration and* production natural gas processing • food
and cold storage, propane retail, warehousing and wholesalers.
Military and energy installations
This table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action.. Other types of
entities not listed in the table also could
be affected. To determine whether a
stationary source is affected by this
action, carefully examine the provisions
of today's notice. If you have questions
regarding the applicability of this action
to a particular entity, consult the person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
The following outline is provided to
aid in reading this preamble:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction and Background
A. Statutory Authority
B. Regulatory History
C. List Rule Litigation
II. Discussion of the Final Rule and Public
Comments
A. Explosives
B. Regulated Flammable Substances in
Gasoline and in Naturally Occurring
Hydrocarbon Mixtures
C. Clarification of Threshold Determination
of Regulated Flammable Substances in
Mixtures .
D. Definition of Stationary Source
E. Applicability to Outer Continental Shelf
HI. Summary of Revisions to the Rule
IV. judicial Review
V. Required Analyses
A/Executive Order 12866
B. Regulatory Flexibility
C. Paperwork Reduction
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Submission to Congress arid the General
Accounting Office
F. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
I. Introduction and Background
A. Statutory Authority
This final rule is being issued under
sections 112(r) and 301 of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act) as amended.
B. Regulatory History
The CAA, section 112(r), requires EPA,
to promulgate an initial list of at least
100 substances ("regulated substances")
that, in the event of an accidental
release, are known to cause or may be
reasonably expected to cause death, :
injury, or serious adverse effects to
human health and the environment. The
CAA also requires EPA to establish a
threshold quantity for each chemical at
the time of listing. Stationary sources
that have more than a threshold
quantity of a regulated substance are
subject to accident prevention
regulations promulgated under CAA
section 112 (r) (7), including the
requirement to develop risk
management plans. .
On January 31, 1994, EPA
promulgated the list of regulated
substances and thresholds that identify
stationary sources subject to the
accidental release prevention
regulations (59 FR 4478) (the "List
Rule"). The listed substances included
77 acutely, toxic substances, 63
flammable gases and volatile flammable
liquids, and Division 1.1 high explosive
substances as listed by the United States
Department of Transportation (DOT) in
49 CFR 172.101. EPA subsequently
promulgated a rule requiring owners
-------
'"Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 3 / Tuesday, January 6, 1998 / Rules and Regulations
641
and operators of stationary sources with
listed substances above their threshold
quantities to develop programs
addressing accidental releases and to
make publicly available risk
management plans ("RMPs")
summarizing these programs (61 FR
31668, June 20. 1996) (the "RMP Rule").
For further information on these
regulations, section 112(r), and related
Statutory provisions, see these notices.
These rules can be found in 40 CFR part
68, "Chemical Accident Prevention
Provisions," and collectively are
referred to as the accidental release
prevention regulations.
C, List Rule Litigation
The American Petroleum Institute
(API) and the Institute of Makers of
Explosives (IME) filed petitions for
judicial review of the List Rule
(American Petroleum Institute v. EPA,
No. 94-1273 (D.C. Cir.) and
consolidated cases). On March 28, 1996,
EJPA made available for public comment
tinder CAA section 113(g) proposed
settlement agreements with API and
IME (61 FR 13858, March 28. 1996).
Consistent with these agreements, EPA
proposed amendments to the List Rule
On April 15, 1996 (61 FR 16598). On
June 20, 1996, EPA promulgated a stay
of certain provisions of the List Rule
that were affected by the proposed
amendments (61 FR 31730). EPA is
today taking final action on the
amendments proposed in April 1996.
II. Discussion of the Final Rule and
Public Comments
In this final rule, EPA is taking the
following actions to amend the List
Rule: delisting explosives; exempting
from threshold determination regulated.
flammable substances in gasoline and in
naturally occurring hydrocarbon
mixtures prior to initial processing:
clarifying the provision for threshold
determination of flammable substances
in mixtures to exempt mixtures that do
not have a National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) flammability hazard
rating of 4; modifying the definition of
stationary source to clarify the
exemption of transportation and storage
incident to transportation and to clarify
that naturally occurring hydrocarbon '
reservoirs are not stationary sources or
parts of stationary sources; and
clarifying that the chemical accident
prevention provisions do not apply to
sources located on the Outer
Continental Shelf ("OCS sources").
These amendments were proposed on
April 15. 1996. EPA received 37 letters
commenting on the proposal. Major
comments are discussed below.
Summaries of all comments and the
Agency's responses can be found in the
summary and response to comments
document in the docket.
A. Explosives
EPA is amending the List Rule to
delete the category of high explosives
from the list of regulated substances.
Explosives were initially listed because
of their potential to cause offsite effects
from blast waves. In addition, EPA
believed that there existed potential
gaps in emergency planning and
response communication that made risk
management planning appropriate for
sources with explosives. In accordance
with the Settlement Agreement, IME has
developed and will implement safety
practices that will provide additional
information and enhance the
coordination between explosives
• facilities and the emergency planners
and responders. As discussed in the
preamble to the proposed rule of April
15, 1996. EPA concluded that current
regulations and current and
contemplated industry practices
promote safety and accident prevention
in storage, handling, transportation, and
use of explosives. As a result, these
regulations and practices adequately
protect the public and the environment
from the hazards of accidents involving
explosives. The Agency believes these
actions effectively close the remaining
gap in emergency planning and
response communications. Therefore,
EPA is taking final action to delist
explosives from the list of regulated
substances under section 112(r).
EPA received six comment letters on
the proposal to delist explosives. All the
commenters supported EPA's proposal,
citing current regulations, current and
contemplated industry practices, and
the regulatory burden imposed by
listing explosives.
B. Regulated Flammable Substances in
Gasoline and in Naturally Occurring
Hydrocarbon Mixtures
EPA is taking final action to provide
specific exemptions from threshold
determination for regulated flammable
substances in gasoline used as fuel for -
internal combustion engines and for
regulated substances in naturally
occurring hydrocarbon mixtures prior to
initial processing in a petroleum
refining process unit or a natural gas
processing plant. These exemptions
reflect EPA's original intent to exempt
flammable mixtures that do not meet the
criteria for a National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) flammability hazard
rating of 4 and clarify the regulatory
status of gasoline and naturally
occurring hydrocarbon mixtures.
Naturally occurring hydrocarbon
mixtures would include any or any
combination of the following: natural
gas condensate, crude oil, field gas, and
produced water. This rule includes
definitions of these substances as well
as definitions of natural gas processing
plant and petroleum refining process
unit.
EPA is making minor changes to the
definitions proposed for natural gas
processing plant and petroleum refining
process unit. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) code has been added to the
definition for natural gas processing
plant in this final rule. In addition, part
of the proposed definition has been
dropped, because it included the term
being defined and, as a result,
potentially could cause confusion. The
NAICS code also has been added to the
definition of petroleum refining process
unit. The proposed definition of
petroleum refining process unit
included the Standard Industrial
Classification (SIC) code (which is still
cited in the definition); however, SIC
codes have been replaced by NAICS
codes.
EPA received 12 letters in support of
the gasoline exemption. No comments
were submitted opposing this
exemption. Several of the commenters
who supported the exemption also
suggested broadening the exemption to
include blendstocks, natural gasolines,
and other fuels. Several suggestions
were made for clarifying the gasoline
exemption.
EPA does not believe the exemption
should be broadened. Individual
flammable substances that do not meet
the criteria for NFPA 4 for flammability
were not considered for listing as
flammables in development of the list of
regulated substances. Although
substances such as blendstocks and
natural gasoline are not specifically
exempted, any flammable mixtures,
including blendstocks and natural
gasoline, that do not meet the criteria for
an NFPA rating of 4 for flammability are
exempt from threshold determination
(see Clarification of Threshold
Determination of Regulated Flammable
Substances in Mixtures, discussed
below). EPA believes that substances
and mixtures that meet the criteria for
NFPA 4, including blendstocks and
fuels, should be covered by the rule,
regardless of their use. EPA believes
such substances have the same intrinsic
hazards whether they are used as
gasoline blendstocks, as fuels, or for
other purposes. EPA's analysis indicates
that risks associated with the storage
and handling of flammable substances
are a function of the properties of the
materials, not their end use. EPA is
-------
642
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 3 / Tuesday, January 6, 1998 / Rules and Regulations
exempting gasoline because it does not
meet the NFPA 4 criteria, and EPA
believes it does not represent a
significant threat to the public of vapor
cloud explosions.
EPA received 16 letters supporting the
exemption of naturally occurring
hydrocarbons prior to initial processing.
One commenter suggested modifying
the exemption to incorporate site-
specific factors because conditions
conducive to vapor cloud explosions
might exist at some facilities with
exempted flammable substances,
particularly in the case of oil and gas
production facilities located adjacent to
chemical production facilities. EPA
recognizes that there may be cases
" where a facility may not be subject to
the RMP requirements because of this
exemption, but where the potential for
vapor cloud explosions may exist.
Neither Congress nor EPA intended the
List Rule to capture every substance that
may pose a hazard in particular
circumstances. Instead, the statute
required EPA to select the chemicals
posing the greatest risk of serious effects
from accidental releases. To implement
these criteria. EPA focused primarily on
chemicals that posed the most
• significant hazards because site-specific
factors vary too greatly to be considered,
at the listing stage of regulation. EPA
believes the hazards of naturally
occurring hydrocarbon mixtures prior to
entry into a natural gas processing plant
or petroleum refining process unit do
not warrant regulation. The genera! duty
clause of section 112(r)(l) would apply
when site-specific factors make an
unlisted chemical extremely hazardous.
Also, the particular risk cited by the
commenter probably would be
addressed by the RMP Rule even with
the exemption as promulgated today. In
the case of a chemical facility located
adjacent to an oil and gas production
facility, the owner or operator of the
chemical facility is likely to have
processes covered due to other regulated
substances and would have to consider
site-specific conditions such as the
presence of an adjacent oil and gas
production facility. Therefore, it is.
inappropriate to condition this
exemption on site-specific factors.
C. Clarification of Threshold
Determination of Regulated Flammable
Substances in Mixtures
To clarify threshold determination for
regulated flammable substances in
mixtures. EPA is taking final action to
provide that, for mixtures that have one
percent or greater concentration of a
regulated flammable substance, the
entire weight of the mixture shall be
treated as the regulated substance unless
the owner or operator can demonstrate
that the mixture does not have an NFPA
flammability hazard rating of 4, as
defined in the NFPA Standard System
for the Identification of Fire Hazards of
Materials, NFPA 704-1996.
In its proposed rule, to define NFPA
4, EPA cited and proposed to
' incorporate by reference NFPA 704,
Standard System for the Identification
- of Fire Hazards of Materials (1990
edition). For the definition and
determination of boiling point and flash
point, EPA cited and proposed to
incorporate by reference NFPA 321,
Standard on the Basic Classification of
Flammable and Combustible Liquids
(1991 edition). In this final rule. EPA is
updating these references and
incorporating by reference the 1996
edition of NFPA 704 and the 1996
edition of NFPA 30, Flammable and
Combustible Liquids Code, which
replaces NFPA 321.
Nine comments were submitted
supporting this clarification. No
opposing comments were submitted.
D. Definition of Stationary Source
EPA is promulgating the amendments
to the definition of stationary source
that were proposed on April 15, 1996.
First, EPA is clarifying that the '
exemption for regulated substances in
transportation, or in storage incident to
such transportation, is not limited to
pipelines. In addition, EPA is modifying
the definition of stationary source to
clarify that naturally occurring
hydrocarbon reservoirs are not
stationary sources or parts of stationary
sources. Finally, EPA is modifying the
definition of stationary source to clarify
that exempt transportation shall
include, but not be limited to,
transportation activities subject to
regulation or oversight under 49 CFR
parts 192, 193. or 195, as well as
^transportation subject to natural gas or
hazardous liquid programs for which a
state has in effect a certification under
49 U.S.C. section 60105.
EPA considers the transportation
exemption to include storage fields for
natural gas where gas taken from
pipelines is stored during non-peak
periods, to be returned to the pipelines-
when needed. Such storage fields
include, but are not limited to, depleted
oil and gas reservoirs, aquifers, mines,
and caverns (e.g., salt caverns). For
purposes of this regulation, this type of
storage is incident to transportation and,
therefore, is not subject to the RMP rule.
The transportation exemption also
applies to liquefied natural gas (LNG)
facilities subject to oversight or ;
regulation under 49 CFR parts 192, 193,
or 195, or a state natural gas or
hazardous liquid program for which the
state has in effect a certification to DOT
under 49 U.S.C. section 60105. These
facilities include those used to liquefy
natural or synthetic gas or used to
transfer, store, or vaporize LNG in
conjunction with pipeline
transportation.
EPA believes there still may be
potential for confusion regarding the
jurisdiction and regulatory
responsibility of EPA and DOT for
pipelines and for transportation
containers at stationary sources.
"Transportation in commerce" is
defined by DOT pursuant to Federal
Hazardous Materials Transportation
Law (Federal HAZMAT Law, 49 U.S.C.
sections 5107-5127). As a result of
continued questions regarding the scope
of Federal HAZMAT Law and the
applicability .of the regulations issued
thereunder, the DOT is currently
working to better delineate and more
clearly define the applicability of its
regulations. DOT currently
contemplates clarifying its jurisdiction
through the rulemaking process. As a
result, there may be a future need for
EPA to further amend the definition of '
stationary source to better comport with
DOT clarifications or actions. The
Agency will continue to work closely
with DOT to minimize confusion
regarding transportation containers and
will coordinate with DOT to ensure that
compatible interpretations about
regulatory coverage are provided to the
regulated community.
EPA received 15 letters in support of
the exemption of transportation
activities from the definition of
stationary source. No one opposed this
exemption. A number of commenters,
however, believed the modifications
would not eliminate overlap and
confusion between EPA and DOT rules.
A number of commenters also favored
exempting from the stationary source
definition transportation containers no
longer under active shipping papers and
transportation containers connected to
equipment for purposes of temporary
storage, loading, or unloading. Some
commenters stated that.EPA would be
undermining DOT's authority by
regulating activities that are under DOT
jurisdiction. Four commenters
recommended exempting all containers
that are suitable for transportation.
EPA developed the transportation
exemptions discussed here in
consultation with DOT. EPA's
regulations do not supersede or limit
DOT's authorities and, therefore, are in
compliance with CAA section 310. EPA
believes these provisions are consistent
with other EPA regulations, such as the
Emergency Planning and Community
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 3 / Tuesday, January 6, 1998 / Rules and Regulations
643
Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) regulations
under parts 355 and 370. EPA disagrees
that suitability for transportation should
be the criterio,rj for determining whether
a container should be considered part of
the stationary source. For example, EPA
believes that a railroad tank car
containing a regulated substance could
be considered a stationary source or part
of a stationary source, even though the
tank car is "suitable for transportation."
Such a tank car could remain at one
location for a long period of time,
serving as a storage container, and could
pose a hazard to the community. EPA
considers a container to be in
transportation as long as it is attached
to the motive power that delivered it to
the site (e.g., a truck or locomotive). If
a container remains attached to the
motive power that delivered it to the
site, even if a facility accepts delivery,
it would be in transportation, and the
contents would not be subject to
threshold determination. As stated
earlier, EPA will continue to work with
DOT to avoid regulatory confusion.
EPA agrees with commenters who
stated that active shipping papers may
not be a suitable criterion for
determining whether a container is in
transportation. EPA is aware that
shipping papers are not always
generated, nor are they required under
DOT rules. Therefore. EPA has modified
the definition pf stationary source to
remove the reference to active shipping
papers, EPA also has modified the
definition to remove the reference to
temporary storage. This reference may
have been confused with storage
incident to transportation.
EPA has received questions regarding
the statement in the stationary source
definition that properties shall not be
considered contiguous solely because of
a railroad or gas pipeline right-of-way.
In response to these questions, EPA is
clarifying this statement by deleting the
word "gas." EPA always intended that
neither a railroad right-of-way nor any
pipeline right-of-way should cause
properties to be considered contiguous.
E. Applicability to Outer Continental
Shelf
EPA is providing an applicability
exception for sources on the outer
continental shelf (OCS sources) to
clarify that Part 68 does not apply.to
these sources. This exception is
consistent with CAA section 328, which
precludes the applicability of EPA CAA
rules to such sources when such rules
are not related to attaining or
maintaining ambient air quality
standards or to the "prevention of
significant deterioration" provisions of
the CAA. Eleven commenters supported
this exception, and no one opposed it.
IE. Summary of Revisions to the Rule
EPA is amending several sections of
part 68 of title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations.
In § 68.3, the definition of stationary
source is revised. The revised definition
specifically states that naturally,
occurring hydrocarbon reservoirs are
not stationary sources or parts of
stationary sources. The definition states
that exempt transportation includes, but
is not limited to, transportation
activities subject to oversight or
regulation under 49 CFR parts 192, 193,
or 195, as well as transportation subject
to natural gas or hazardous liquid
programs for which a state has in effect .
a certification under 49 U.S.C. section
60105. In addition, the agency has made
non-substantive wording changes to
improve the clarity of this definition.
Several new definitions are added for
§ 68.3, for condensate, crude oil, field
gas, natural gas processing plant,
petroleum refining process unit, and
produced water.
Section 68.10 is amended to clarify
that part 68 does not apply to OCS
sources.
Several revisions are made to §68.115
on threshold determination. Section
68.115(b)(2) is modified to state that the
entire weight of the mixture containing
a regulated flammable substance shall
be treated as the regulated substance
unless the owner or operator can
demonstrate that the mixture does not
have an NFPA flammability hazard
rating of 4. Another modification to
§ 68.115(b)(2) exempts from threshold
determination regulated flammable
substances in gasoline used as fuel in
internal combustion engines. Regulated
substances in naturally occurring
hydrocarbon mixtures (including
condensate, crude oil, field gas, and
produced water), prior to entry into a
natural gas processing plant or a
petroleum refining process unit, also are
exempt from threshold determination.
Section 68.115(b)(3), on concentrations
of a regulated explosive substance in'a
mixture, is deleted, and §§68.115(b)(4),
68.115(b)(5), and 68.115(b)(6) are
redesignated as §§ 68.115 (b) (3),
68.115(b)(4), and 68.115(b)(5),
respectively.
Section 68.130 is modified by the
deletion of (a), explosives listed by DOT
as Division 1.1. Section 68.130(b) is
redesignated as §§68.130(a), and
§§68.130(c)as68.130(b).
IV. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(l) of the Clean
Air Act (CAA), judicial review of the
actions taken by this final rule is
available only on the filing of a petition
for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit
within 60 days of today's publication of
this action. Under section 307 (b) (2) of
the CAA, the requirements that are
subject to today's notice may'not be
challenged later in civil or criminal
proceedings brought by EPA to enforce
these requirements.
V. Required Analyses
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4. 1993), the Agency
must judge whether the regulatory
action is "significant," and therefore
subject to OMB review and the
requirements of the Executive Order.
The Order defines "significant
regulatory action" as one that is likely
to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $ 100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
state, local, or tribal government or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
It has been determined that this rule
is not a "significant regulatory action"
under the terms of Executive Order
12866 and, therefore, is not subject to
OMB review.
B. Regulatory Flexibility
EPA has determined that it is not
necessary to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis in connection with .
this final rule. EPA has also determined
that this rule will not have a significant
negative economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This final rule will not have a
significant negative impact on a
substantial number of small entities
because it reduces the number of
substances that would be used to
identify stationary sources for regulation
and provides exemptions that will
reduce the number of stationary sources
subject to the accidental release
prevention requirements.
-------
644
Federal Register / Vol. 63,. No. 3 / Tuesday, January 6, 1998 / Rules and Regulations
C. Paperwork Reduction
This rule does not include any
information collection requirements for
OMB to review under the provisions of
the Paperwork Reduction Act.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on .State, local,
and tribal governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
EPA generally must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules
with "Federal mandates" that may
result in expenditures to State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or to the private sector, of $100 million
or more in any one year. Before
promulgating an EPA rule for which a
written statement is needed, section 205
of the UMRA generally requires EPA to
identify and consider a reasonable
number of regulatory alternatives and
adopt the least costly, most cost-
effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule.
The provisions of section 205 do not
apply when they are inconsistent with
applicable law. Moreover, section 205
allows EPA to adopt an alternative other
' than the least costly, most cost-effective
or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final
rule an explanation of why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA
establishes any regulatory requirements
that may significantly or uniquely affect
small governments, including tribal
governments, it must have developed
under section 203 of the UMRA a small
government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially
affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments
to have meaningful and timely input in
the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
EPA has determined that this rule
does not contain a Federal mandate that
may result in expenditures of $ 100
million or more for State, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
the private sector in any one year.
Today's rule will reduce the number of
sources subject to part 68. Thus, today's
rule is not subject to the requirements •/
of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
For the same reason, EPA has
determined that this rule contains no
regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments.
E.'Submission to Congress and the
General Accounting Office
Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(l)(A) as added
by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA-
submitted a report containing this rule
and other required information to the
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller.
General of the General Accounting
Office prior to publication of the rule in
today's Federal Register. This rule is
not a "major rule" as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
F. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Under section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act ("NTTAA"), the Agency is required
to use voluntary consensus standards in
its regulatory activities unless to do so
would be inconsistent with applicable
law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications,
test methods, sampling procedures,
business practice, etc.) which are
developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standard bodies. Where
available and potentially applicable
voluntary consensus standards are not
used by EPA, the Act requires the
Agency to provide Congress, through
the Office of Management and Budget,
an explanation of the reasons for not
using such standards.
EPA developed its list of regulated
flammable substances for this rule based
on analysis of the hazards of flammable
substances conducted in a review of the
EPCRA section 302 list. As part of this
analysis, EPA identified and evaluated
existing listing and classification
systems, including listing arid
classification systems developed for
voluntary consensus standards. This
final rule incorporates, by reference, the
use of a voluntary consensus standard to
identify the chemicals which are
covered according to their flammability,.
namely NFPA 704, "Standard Syste'm
for the Identification of the Hazards of
Materials for Emergency Response."
EPA identified no other potentially
applicable voluntary consensus
standards.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 68
Environmental protection, 'Chemicals,
Chemical accident prevention, Clean
Air Act. Extremely hazardous
substances. Hazardous substances.
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: December 18, 1997.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I, subchapter
C, part 68 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 68—CHEMICAL ACCIDENT
PREVENTION PROVISIONS
The authority citation for part 68
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7412(r), 7601(a)(l),
7661-7661f.
SubpartA—General
2. Section 68.3 is amended by adding
the following definitions in alphabetical
order and revising the definition of
"stationary source" to read as follows: -
§68.3 Definitions.
* * * * * •
Condensate means hydrocarbon
liquid separated from natural gas that
condenses due to changes in
temperature, pressure, or both, and
remains liquid at standard conditions,
******
Crude oil means any naturally
occurring, unrefined petroleum liquid.
*****
Field gas means gas extracted from a
production well before the gas enters a
natural gas processing plant,
*-****
Natural gas processing plant (gas
plant) means any processing site
engaged in the extraction of natural gas -
. liquids from field gas, fractionation of
mixed natural gas liquids to natural gas
products, or both, classified as North
American Industrial Classification
System (NAICS) code 211112
(previously Standard Industrial
Classification (SIC) code 1321).
***** :
Petroleum refining process unit means
a process unit used in an establishment
primarily engaged in petroleum refining
as defined in NAICS code 32411 for
petroleum refining (formerly SIC code
2911) and used for the following:
Producing transportation fuels (such as
gasoline, diesel fuels, and jet fuels),
heating fuels (such as kerosene, fuel gas
distillate, and fuel oils), or lubricants;
Separating petroleum; or Separating,
cracking, reacting, or reforming
intermediate petroleum streams.
Examples of such units include, but are
not limited to, petroleum based solvent
units, alkylation units, catalytic
hydrotreating, catalytic hydrorefining,
catalytic hydrocracking, catalytic
reforming, catalytic cracking, crude
distillation, lube oil processing,
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 3 / Tuesday, January 6, 1998 / Rules and Regulations 645
hydrogen production, isomerization,
polymerization, thermal processes, and
blending, sweetening, and treating
processes. Petroleum refining process
units include sulfur plants.
m » » * *
Produced wafer means water
extracted from the earth from an oil or
natural gas production well, or that is
separated from oil or natural gas after
extraction.
* M » * *
Stationary source means any
buildings, structures, equipment,
installations, or substance emitting
stationary activities which belong to the
same industrial group, which are
located on one or more contiguous
properties, which are under the control
of the same person (or persons under
common control), and from which an
accidental release may occur. The term
stationary source does not apply to
transportation, including storage
incident to transportation, of any
regulated suSstance or any other
extremely hazardous substance under
the provisions of this part. A stationary
source includes transportation
containers used for storage not incident
to transportation and transportation
containers connected to equipment at a
stationary source for loading or
unloading. Transportation includes, but
is not limited to. transportation subject
to oversight or regulation under 49 CFR
pins 192. 193. or 195. or a state natural
gas or hazardous liquid program for
which the state has in effect a
certification to DOT under 49 U.S.C.
section 60105. A stationary source does
not include naturally occurring
hydrocarbon reservoirs. Properties shall
not be considered contiguous solely
because of a railroad or pipeline right-
of-way.
V ¥ * * *
3, Action 68.10 is amended by
adding a paragraph (f) to read as
follows:
§68.10 Applicability.
*• *. * * . * . '. .
(f) The provisions of this part shall
not apply to an Outer Continental Shelf
("OCS") source, as defined in 40 CFR
55.2,
Subpart F—Regulated Substances for
Accidental Release Prevention
4. Section 68.115 is amended by
revising paragraph (b) introductory text
and paragraph (b)(2); removing
paragraph (b) (3); and by redesignating
paragraphs (b)(4) through (b)(6) as (b)(3)
through (b)(5) to read as follows:
§ 68.115 Threshold determination.
* * * * *
(b) For the purposes of determining
whether more than a threshold quantity
of a regulated substance is present at the
stationary source, the following
exemptions apply:
***** .
(2) Concentrations of a regulated
flammable substance in a mixture, (i)
General provision. If a regulated
substance is present in a mixture and
the concentration of the substance is
below one percent by weight of the
mixture, the mixture need not be
considered when determining whether
more than a threshold quantity of the
regulated substance is present at the
stationary source. Except as provided in
paragraph (b)(2) (ii) and (iii) of this
section, if the concentration of the
substance is one percent or greater by
weight of the mixture, then, for
purposes of determining whether a
threshold quantity is present at the
stationary source, the entire weight of
the mixture shall be treated as the
regulated substance unless the owner or
operator can demonstrate that the
mixture itself does not have a National ,
Fire Protection Association flammability
hazard rating of 4. The demonstration
shall be in accordance with the
definition of flammability hazard rating
4 in the NFPA 704, Standard System for
the Identification of the Hazards of
Materials for Emergency Response,
National Fire Protection Association,
Quincy, MA, 1996. Available from the
National Fire Protection Association, 1
Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02269-
9101. This incorporation by reference
was approved by the Director of the
Federal Register in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies
may be inspected at the Environmental
Protection Agency Air Docket (6102),
Attn: Docket No. A-96-O8, Waterside
Mall. 401 M. St. SW., Washington D.C.;
or at the Office of Federal Register at
800 North Capitol St., NW, Suite 700,
Washington, D.C. Boiling point and
flash point shall be defined and
determined in accordance-with NFPA
30, Flammable and Combustible Liquids
Code, National Fire Protection
Association, Quincy, MA, 1996.
Available from the National Fire
Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch
Park. Quincy, MA 02269-9101. This
incorporation by reference was
approved by the Director of the Federal
Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and,l CFR part 51. Copies may
be inspected at the Environmental
Protection Agency Air Docket (6102),
Attn: Docket No. A-96-O8, Waterside
Mall, 401 M. St, SW., Washington D.C.;
or at the Office of Federal Register at
800 North Capitol St., NW, Suite 700,
Washington, D.C. The owner or operator
shall document the National Fire
Protection Association flammability
hazard rating.
(ii) Gasoline. Regulated substances in
gasoline, when in distribution or related
storage for use as fuel for internal
combustion engines, need not be
considered when determining whether
more than a threshold quantity is
present at a stationary source.,
(iii) Naturally occurring hydrocarbon
mixtures. Prior to entry into a natural
gas processing plant or a petroleum
refining process unit, regulated
substances in naturally occurring
hydrocarbon mixtures need not be
considered when determining whether
more than a threshold quantity is
present at a stationary source. Naturally
Occurring hydrocarbon mixtures include
any combination of the following:
condensate, crude oil, fie)d gas, and
produced water, each as defined in '
§68.3 of this part.
§68.130 [Amended]
5. Section 68.130 is amended by
removing paragraph (a) and
redesignating paragraphs (b) and (c) as
paragrpahs (a) and (b). The tables to the
section remain unchanged.
[FR Doc. 98-267 Filed 1-5-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 656Q-50-P
-------
APPENDIX B
SELECTED NAICS CODES
November 19,1998
-------
', I:'; "!",',
-------
SELECTED 1997 NAICS CODES ,
22 Utilities
2213 Water, Sewage and Other Systems,
22131 Water Supply and Irrigation Systems
22132 Sewage Treatment Facilities
31-33 Manufacturing
311 Food Manufacturing
3111 Animal Food Manufacturing •'
311111 Dog and Cat Food Manufacturing
311119 Other Animal Food Manufacturing
31121 Flour Milling and Malt Manufacturing
311211 Flour Milling
311212 Rice Milling •
311213 Malt Manufacturing
31122 Starch and Vegetable Fats and Oils Manufacturing
311221 Wet Corn Milling
311222 Soybean Processing
31l'223 Other Oilseed Processing
311225 Fats and Oils Refining and Blending
3L123 Breakfast Cereal Manufacturing
3113 Sugar and Confectionery Product Manufacturing
31131 Sugar Manufacturing - •
311311 Sugarcane Mills
311312 Cane Sugar Refining
311313 Beet Sugar Manufacturing
31132 Chocolate and Confectionery Manufacturing from
Cacao Beans
31133 Confectionery Manufacturing from Purchased
Chocolate
31134 . Non-Chocolate Confectionery Manufacturing
3114 Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty
Food Manufacturing
311411 Frozen Fruit, Juice and Vegetable Manufacturing
311412 Frozen Specialty Food Manufacturing
311421 Fruit and Vegetable Canning
311422 Specialty Canning
311423 Dried and Dehydrated Food Manufacturing
3115 Dairy Product Manufacturing
311511 Fluid Milk Manufacturing '
311512 Creamery Butter Manufacturing
311513* Cheese Manufacturing
311514 Dry, Condensed, and Evaporated Dairy
Product Manufacturing
31152 Ice Cream and Frozen Dessert Manufacturing
3116 Meat Product Manufacturing
311611 Animal (except Poultry) Slaughtering
311612 Meat Processed from Carcasses
311613 Rendering and Meat By-product Processing
311615 Poultry Processing
3117 Seafood Product Preparation and Packaging
311711 Seafood Canning
311712 Fresh and Frozen Seafood Processing
3118 Bakeries and Tortilla Manufacturing
311811 Retail Bakeries ,
311812 Commercial Bakeries
311813 Frozen Bakery Product Manufacturing
311821 Cookie and Cracker Manufacturing
311822 Flour Mixes and Dough Manufacturing from
Purchased Flour
311823 Pasta Manufacturing
31183 Tortilla Manufacturing
3119 Other Food Manufacturing
31191 Snack Food Manufacturing
311911 Roasted Nuts and Peanut Butter Manufacturing
31.19 J 9 Other Snack Food Manufacturing
31192 Coffee and Tea Manufacturing
31193' Flavoring Syrup and Concentrate Manufacturing
311941 Mayonnaise, Dressing and Other Prepared
Sauce Manufacturing
311942 Spice and Extract Manufacturing
31199 All Other Food Manufacturing
311991 Perishable Prepared Food Manufacturing
311999 All Other Miscellaneous Food Manufacturing
312 Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing
3121 Beverage Manufacturing
312111 Soft Drink Manufacturing
312112 Bottled Water Manufacturing
312113 Ice Manufacturing
31212 Breweries
31213 Wineries
31214 Distilleries
31221 Tobacco Stemming and Redrying
31222 Tobacco Product Manufacturing
312221 Cigarette Manufacturing
312229 . Other Tobacco Product Manufacturing
324 Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing
32411 Petroleum Refineries
325 Chemical Manufacturing
3251 Basic Chemical Manufacturing
32511 Petrochemical Manufacturing
32512 Industrial Gas Manufacturing
32513 Dye and Pigment Manufacturing
325131 Inorganic Dye and Pigment Manufacturing
325132 Organic Dye and Pigment Manufacturing
32518 Other Basic Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing -
325181 Alkalies and Chlorine Manufacturing
325182 Carbon Black Manufacturing
325188 All Other Basic Inorganic Chemical
Manufacturing t
32519 Other Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
325191 Gum and Wood Chemical Manufacturing
325192 Cyclic Crude and Intermediate Manufacturing
325193 Ethyl Alcohol Manufacturing
*** November 19, 1998 ***
-------
Appendix B
NAICS Codes
325199 All Other Basic Organic Chemical
Manufacturing
3252 Resin, Synthetic Rubber, and Artificial and
- Synthedc Fibers and Filaments Manufacturing
32521 Resin and Synthetic Rubber Manufacturing
325211 Plastics Material and Resin Manufacturing
325212 Synthetic Rubber Manufacturing
32522 Artificial and Synthetic Fibers and Filaments
Manufacturing
325221 Cellulosic Organic Fiber Manufacturing
325222 Noncellulosic Organic Fiber Manufacturing
3253 Pesticide, Fertilizer and Other Agricultural .
Chemical Manufacturing
32531 Fertilizer Manufacturing
325311 Nitrogenous Fertilizer Manufacturing
325312 Phosphatic Fertilizer Manufacturing
325314 Fertilizer (Mixing Only) Manufacturing
32532 Pesticide and Other Agricultural Chemical
Manufacturing
3254 Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing
32541 Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing
325411 Medicinal and Botanical Manufacturing
325412 Pharmaceutical Preparation Manufacturing
325413 In-Vitro Diagnostic Substance Manufacturing
325414 Biological Product (except Diagnostic)
Manufacturing
3255 Paint, Coating, Adhesive, and Sealant Manufacturing
32551 Paint and Coating Manufacturing
32552 Adhesive Manufacturing
3256 Soap, Cleaning Compound and Toilet Preparation
Manufacturing
32561 Soap and Cleaning Compound Manufacturing
325611 Soap and Other Detergent Manufacturing
325612 Polish and Other Sanitation Good Manufacturing
325613 Surface Active Agent Manufacturing
32562 Toilet Preparation Manufacturing
3259 Olher Chemical Product Manufacturing
32591 Printing Ink Manufacturing
32592 Explosives Manufacturing
32599 All Other Chemical Product Manufacturing
325991 Custom Compounding of Purchased Resin
325992 Photographic Film, Paper, Plate and Chemical
" Manufacturing
325998 All Other Miscellaneous Chemical Product
Manufacturing
333 Machinery Manufacturing
33341 Ventilation, Heating, Air-Conditioning and
Commercial Refrigeration Equipment
Manufacturing
333411 Air Purification Equipment Manufacturing
333412 Industrial and Commercial Fan and Blower
Manufacturing
333414 Heating Equipment (except Electric and Warm
Air Furnaces) Manufacturing
333415 Air-Conditioning and Warm Air Heating
Equipment and Commercial and Industrial
' Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing
42 Wholesale Trade
422 Wholesale Trade, Nondurable Goods
' 4224 Grocery and Related Product Wholesalers
42241 General Line Grocery Wholesalers
42242 Packaged Frozen Food Wholesalers
42243 Dairy Product (except Dried or Canned)
Wholesalers
42244 Poultry and Poultry Product Wholesalers
42245 Confectionery Wholesalers
• 42246 Fish and Seafood Wholesalers
42247 Meat and Meat Product Wholesalers
42248 Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Wholesalers
42249 Other Grocery and Related Products Wholesalers
4225 Farm Product Raw Material Wholesalers
42251 Grain and Field Bean Wholesalers
42259 Other Farm Product Raw Material Wholesalers
4226 Chemical and Allied Products Wholesalers
42269 Other Chemical and Allied Products Wholesalers
42281 Beer and Ale Wholesalers
42282 Wine and Distilled Alcoholic Beverage Wholesalers
4229 Miscellaneous Nondurable Goods Wholesalers
42291 Farm Supplies Wholesalers
493 Warehousing and Storage Facilities
49311 General Warehousing and Storage Facilities
49312 Refrigerated Warehousing and Storage Facilities
49313 Farm Product Warehousing and Storage Facilities •
49319 Other Warehousing and Storage Facilities
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
54171 Research and Development in the Physical
Sciences and Engineering Sciences
54172 Research and Development in the Life Sciences
62 Health Care and Social Assistance
62151 Medical and Diagnostic Laboratories
621511 Medical Laboratories
62211 General Medical and Surgical Hospitals
6222 Psychiatric and Substance Abuse Hospitals
62221 Psychiatric and Substance Abuse Hospitals
6223 Specialty (except Psychiatric and Substance
' Abuse) Hospitals
62231 Specialty (except Psychiatric and Substance
Abuse) Hospitals
*** November 19, 1998 ***
-------
Appendix C
PART 68 CONTACT INFORMATION
-------
APPENDIX^ PART 68 CONTACT INFORMATION
Region or State
Regional Office
Implementing Agency
Small Business Assistance
(S) = Stale only toll free
(N) = National Toll free
Region 1
Connecticut
US EPA Region J
Office of Environmental Stewardship (SPP)
JFK Federal Building
One Congress St.
Boston. MA. 02203-2211
(617)565-9232
(617) 565-4939 PAX
Email: dinardo.rey@epa.gov
Glen Duraskevich
Small Business Assistance Program
Department of Environmental Protection
Environmental Quality Division
79 Elm St.
Hartford, CT 06106
860-424-3545
fax 860-424-4063 •
(S) 800-760-7036
glen.daraskevich@po.state.cl.us
Maine
Massachusetts
Brian Kavanah
Office of Pollution Prevention
Station 17
State House
Augusta, ME 04333
207-287-6188
fax 207-287-7826
(S) 800-789-9802
George Frantz ,
Office of Technical Assistance
Exec. Office of Environmental. Affairs
100 Cambridge St., Suite 2109
Boston, MA 02202
617-727-3260, ext. 631
fax 617-727-3827
gcorge.frantz@state.nia.us
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Implementing Agency
Small Business Assistance
(S) = State only toll free
(N) = National Toll free
New Hampshire
Rudolph Cartier, Jr.
Air Resources Division
Department of Environmental Services
64 North Main Street
Caller Box 2033
Concord, NH 03302-2033
603-271-1379
FAX 603-271 -138 1
(S) 800-837-0656
cartier@desarsb.mr.com
Rhode Island
Pam Annarummo
Dept. of Environmental Management
Office of Technical & Customer Assistance
235 Promenade Street
Providence, RI 02908
401-277-66822,ext. 7204
fax 401-277-3810
Vermont
Judy Mirro
VT Environmental Assistance Division
Laundry Building
103 S. Main St.
Waterbury, VT 05671
802-241-3745
fax 802-24 1-3273
Region 2
tfe EPA Region ' ' \ %
•Emergency Response and Remedial Division'
(MS21I)' >;V. \ '
2890 Woodbr|
-------
Region or State
New York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
Region 3
Delaware
Regional Office
US EPA Region 3
CEPP ihd Site'Assessment Section (3HS33)
1650 Arch Street
(215)414-3254 FAX
Email: shabi«z.mikut@epanmil,epa,gov
Implementing Agency
Small Business Assistance
(S)* State only (oil free
(N) = National Toll free
M
Marian Mudar
Environmental Program Manager
NYS Env. Pwil. Corp.
50 Wolf Rd.-Room 598
Albany, NY 12205
518-457-9135
fax 518-485-8494
(S) 800-780-7227
Maria L. Rivera
PREQB-SBAP
HC-91Box9197
Vega Alia, PR 00692-9607
787-767-8025, ext. 29fr-
fax 787-756-5906
Marylyn Stapleton
Suite 231
8000 Nisky Center
Charlotte Amulie
St. Thomas, V.I. 00802
809-777-4577
fax 809-775-5706
Bob Barrish
DE DNREC
715 Gran tham Lane
New Castle, DE
19720
302-323-4542
fax 302-323-4561
-------
Region or State
District of Columbia
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virginia
Regional Office
Implementing Agency
Small Business Assistance
(S) = State only loll free
(N) = National Toll free
Olivia Achuko
ERA/ARMD
2100 M.L. King Ave.,SE
Washington, DC 20020
202-645-6093, ext. 3071
fax 202-645-6102
Linda Moran
Small Business Assistance Program
Air & Radiation Mgmt. Adm.
MD Department of the Environment
2500 Broening Hwy.
Baltimore, MD 21224
410-631-4158
fa* 410-631-3896
(N) 800-433-1247
Cecily Beall
PRC Env. Management Inc.
6th Floor
1800 JFK Blvd.
Philadelphia, PA 19103
215-656-8709
fax 215-972-0484
(S) 800-722-4743
beallc@prcemi.com
Richard Rasmusscn
VA DEQ/Air Division
Small Business Assistance Program
PO Box 10009
Richmond, VA 23240
804-698-4394 '
fax 804-698-4501
(S) 800-592-5482
rgrasmusse@deq.state.va.us
Fred Durham
WV Office of Air Quality
Air Program Annex
1558 Washington St. East
Charleston, WV 25302
304-558-1217
fax 304-558-1222
(S) 800-982-2472
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Implementing Agency
Small Business Assistance
(S) = Stale only toll free
(N) = National Toll free
Region 4
US EPA Region 4
Air Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division
Atlanta Federal Center
61PorsyihSuee»,SW
Atlanta, OA 30303
(404)562-9121
(404) 562-9095 FAX
Email: patmon.michelle@epa.gov
Alabama
James Moore
AL DEM Air Division
PO Box 301463
Montgomery, AL
36130-1463
334-271-7861
fax 334-271-7950
(N) 800-553-2336
Florida
Eve Rainy
State of Florida
Dept. of Community Affairs-
Division of Emergency Management
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, Fla. .32399-2100
(850)413-9914 phone
(850) 488-1739 fax
eve.rainey@DCA.STATE.FL.US
Beth Hardin
Division of Air Resources and Management
Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, Fla. 32399-2400
(850)921-9549 phone
(850) 922-6979 fax
Hardin_E@dep.state.fl.us
Elsa Bishop
Division of Air Res. Mgmt.
PL Dept. of Env. Protection
2600 Blair Stone Rd.
MS5500
Tallahassee, FL
32399-2400
904-488-0114
fax 904-922-6979
(S) 800-722-7457
-------
Region or State
Georgia
Regional Office
Implementing Agency
KentHowell
Georgia Dept. Of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division
7 M.L. King Jr. Drive, Suite 139
Atlanta, Ga. 30334
(404) 656-6905 phone
(404) 657-7893 fax
kent_howell@mail.dnr.state.ga.us
Small Business Assistance
(S) = State only toll free
(N) = National Toll free
Anita Dorsey-Word
DNR/EPD/APB
Suite 120
4244 Intl. Parkway
Atlanta, GA 30354
404-362-4842
fax 404-362-2534 .
anita_dorsey-word@mail.dnr.state.ga.us
Kentucky
Gregory C. Copley
Director, BEAP
University of Kentucky
227 Bus. & Eco. Bldg.
Lexington, KY 40506-0034
606-257-1131
fax 606-257-1907
(N) 800-562-2327
gccopl 1 @pop.uky.edu
Mississippi
Danny Jackson
Mississippi Dept. of Environmental Quality
Office of Pollution Control, Air Division
P.O. Box 10385
Jackson, Ms. 39289-0385
(601)961-5225 phone
(601)961-5725 fax
Jackson_Danny@deq.state.ms.us
Danny Jackson
Air Quality
Office of Policy Control/DEQ
PO Box 10385
Jackson, MS 39289-0385
601-961-5171 '
fax 601-961-5742
North Carolina
Mike Chapman
Air Quality Section
North Carolina Dept of Environment, Health
and Resources
P.O.Box 29580
Raleigh, N.C. 27626-0580
(919) 715-3467 phone
(919) 733-1812 fax
micheal_chapman@aq;ehnr.state.nc.us
Fin Johnson
Depl. of Env. Health & Nat. Resources
PO Box 29583
Raleigh, NC 27626
919-733-1267
fax 919-715-6794
fin Johnson ©owr.ehnr.state.nc.us
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Implementing Agency
Small Business Assistance
(S) a Stale only loll free
(N)* National Toll free
South Carolina
Rhonda B. Thompson
Bureau of Air Quality Control
South Carolina Department of Health and
Environmental Health
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, S.C, 29201
(803) 734-4750 phone
(803) 734-4556 fax
Ihompsrb@columb31 .dhec.stale.sc.us
Chad Pollock
SC DHEC
EQC Administration
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, SC 29201
803-734-2765
fax 803-734-9196
(N) 800-819-9001
pollocrc@columb30.dhec.slate.sc.us
Tennessee
Linda Sadler
Small Business Assist. Program
8th Floor
L&C Annex
401 Church St.
Nashville, TN 37243
615-532-0779
fax 615-532-0614
(S) 800-734-3619
Regions
US EPA Region 5
Superfund Division (SC6J)
77 W. Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604
(312) 88&406J
(312) 886-6064 FAX
Email: mayhugh.rDbert@epii.gov
Illinois
Mark Enstrom
III. Dept. of Commerce & Community Affairs
620 East Adams St. S-3
Springfield, IL 62701
217-524-0169
fax 217-785-6328 '
mestrom@mhd084rl.state.il.us
Indiana
Cheri Storms
IDEM/OPP&TA/VOC
Room 1320
I DON. Senate
PO Box 6015
Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015
317-233-1041
fax 317-233-5627
cstor@opn.dem.state.in.us
-------
Region or State
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
Region ,6,
;$>??
Regional Office
USBPAIleiionfi'
Supe^funbpivis!pn(6
1445 Ross- Avenue N
Dallas, TX 75202-2733*
Email: mason.sieve@epa.gov *
Implementing Agency
Small Business Assistance
(S) = Slate only toll free
(N) = National Toll free
Dave Fiedler
Environmental Services Division
MI DEQ
PO Box 30457
Lansing, MI 48909
517-373-0607 '
fax 517-335-4729
(S) 800-662-9278
Barbara Conti
MPCA/AQPD/SBAP'
520 Lafayette Rd.
St. Paul, MN 55155-4194
612-297-7767
fax 612-297-7709
(N) 800-657-3938
barbara.conti@pca.state.inn.us
Risk Carleski
OH EPA
Division of Air Pollution Control
1600 Watermark Dr.
Columbus, OH 432 15
614-728-1742 .
fax 6 14-644-3681
richard carleski ©central.epa.ohio.gov
Pam Christenson
Wl Clean Air Assistance Program
Department of Commerce, 9lh Floor
1 23 W. Washington Ave
Madison. WI 53703
608-267-9214
fax 608-267-0436
(N) 800-435-7287.
pchriste@mail.state.wi.us
, j
f
-------
« 7 I
1 I
Region or State
Regional Office
Implementing Agency
Small Business Assistance
(S)s Slate only loll free
(N) = National Toll free
Arkansas
Robert E Graham
ARDPE
PO Box 8913
LiltleRock,AR72219-89l3
501-682-0708
fax 501-562-0297
Louisiana
Vic Tompkins
LA Dept. of Env. Quality (Air)
7290 Bluebonnct
P.O. Box 82135
Baton Rouge, LA 70884-2135
504-765-2453
FAX 504-765-0921
(S) 800-259-2890
vic_t@deq.state.la.us
: s
New Mexico
Cecilia Williams
Lanny Weaver
NM ED/AQB
Harold Runnels Bldg.
Santa Fe,NM 87502'
505-827-0042 (cwilliams)
505-827-0043 (Iweaver)
(8)800-810-7227
Oklahoma
Alwin Ning
OK DEQ/SBAP
1000 N.E. 10th St.
Oklahoma City, OK 73117-1212
405-271-1400
fax 405-271-1317
Texas
Kerry Drake
Small Business Tech. Asst. Program
PO Box 13087
Austin, TX 78711-3087
512-239-1112
fax 512-239-1065
(S) 800-447-2827
kdrake@tnrcc.state.tx.us
-------
Region or State
Region? .xx" ' s*x
*• , ' 'stx " • > ^
- > ' ,>s t if- • x s
-x*. «^1'1 ,«, -,."
x ^ ' -, <,«, - «-x .,v
/ - ** * -1 .; i*.. -"^
, »<» . .<< •> _/ _ -,> < ^ « *!
0 ' \T J
/ 1 ^ 1 tx ^ \ ' \ '
- 3 J - r ^
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Regional Office
•US EPA Region 7 - i' > ' •' - , ^ "*
Air, RCRA, and Toxics Division v *v/ \
CARTD/TSPP) ? 'V;' . .N"- '•* '
726 Minnesota AveJ ' " ^ , ^ ; ' «' '
NKan^Cily,KS^661or ""' , - ' ^
r(913)55Ir?876 ^VC' ' '- ^
1(913)531-7*^^ " '' " ,'<
' Email: smithnwka@epa.gav ;^ ' t
-
!
Implementing Agency
* • N-; i^>
% , ' X^ s-'
" * :- ^ V'^^s
1 „• ^ i4 " r *'^' ' .
,, , vtT ' " ^ «'•"
Ax11 , ' ^ >l ' , I ' x
»*> f> * ' J,-~ A *' , , > , 0
"•«X* ' 4''^ ^"
^ . / ^ . ;M -.' ,M
A \ ^ /,%
'%0 lt\*'? )J
; ' ' ' -
*
Small Business Assistance
(S) = Stale only toll free
(N) = National Toll free
' ' ! ~ 1 ^ K" ^
*'x^\ ii -ju- ^ "
* *•*' ", < V* ' « > - '« '•*'
V s v jS *; ' t * .* ' ,
,<».| > ' * -.,'
x fr i'S " '
->'l; , *>£ ,.,t
Somnath Dasgupta ,
John Konefes
IA Waste Reduction Center
Unv. Of^Northern Iowa
75 Biol. Resf.Comp.
Cedar Falls, IA 50614-0185
319-273-2079
fax 3 19-273-2926
(8)800-422-3109
dasgupta@uni.edu
Frank Orzulak
. Director of Continuing Education
Continuing Education Bldg.
U. of Kansas
Lawrence, KS 66045-2608
913-864-3978
fax 9 13-864-5827
(8)800-578-8898 . •
forzulnli@falcon-.cc.ukans.edu
Byron Shaw
DNR Technical Assistance Program
Jefferson State Office Building
PO Box 176
Jefferson City, MS 65 102
314-526-5352
fax 3 14-526-5808
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Implementing Agency
Small Business Assistance
(S)» Stale only loll free
(N) = Nalional Toll free
Nebraska
Dan Eddingcr
Public Advocate
Dept. of Environmental Quality
PO Box 98922
Lincoln. NE 68509-8922
402-471-3413
fax 402-441-2909
dedding@juno.com
Region 8
US EPA Region 8
Ecosystems Protection and Remediation
(8EPR-ER)
;0ne Denver Place
999-18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2405
(303)312.6760
(303) 312-6071 PAX
Email: benoy.barbara@epa,gov
Colorado
Nick Melliadis
Air Pollution Control Division
Dept. of Public Health & the Environment
4300 Cherry Creek Drive - South
Denver, CO 80222-1530
303-692-3175
fax 303-782-5493
(N) 800-333-7798
nick.melliadis ©state.co.us
Montana
Adcl Johnson
Dept. Of Environmental Quality
Air Quality Division
Metcalf Bldg.
1520E.6thAve.
Helena, MT 59620-0501
406-444-4194
fax 406-444-5275
(S) 800-433-8773
-------
Region or State
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
'***» '\; ,v ' .v< ;
-. - ,' % , -tf ' Nv > , ,,
' 41 "JV '- V , -
» • *s ' ,,*$» * V >: r< <* >' *
N *'.\l - > .. 4 t' V * ^ / , , ,, J' '',^
SuperfundDivyon^SFD"-5) s ,., , ., >f
75 IJawthonie Street^'-* . *. />s ^
Son PmhciscoICA 94)05, , ^,-i ,
(415)?44-2320I " " " "' * '" '
(415);7^4-I916FAX ' ^ > ' - ''• >•' '". ri'^ A>S ' '. • - ','' t«
* - «.• > ^ ,:. < '
, ^^ 1 4 J*'*O ^ '> '""" i
?*J \ "*//*
f ^ ; / / \ ! e o
- -V' {/J>- " ' \ ',; ""
\^s^ ^^Nt//i^
, ^ 1 i ^ ^/ ' ^ ^
Small Business Assistance
(S) = Slate only toll free
(N) = National Toll free
Tom Bachman
NDDept. of Health
Division of Environmental Engineering
1200 Missouri A ve.
PO Box 5520 '
Bismark, ND 58506-5520
701-328-5188
fax 70 1-328-5200
(8)800-755-1625
Bryan Gustafson
Dept. Env. & Nat. Resources
JoeFossBldg.
523 East Capital Ave.
Pierre. SD 57501
605-773-3351
fax 605-773-6035
Frances Bernards
UT DEQ
Div. of Air Quality
PO Box 144820
Salt Lake City, UT 841 14-4820
801-536-4056 . -
fax 80 1-536-4099
(8)800-270-4440.
fbcrnard@deq.state.ut.us
Charles Raffelson
Dept. of Env. Quality
Div. of Air Quality
1 22 W. 25th Street
Cheyenne, WY 82002
307-777-7391
fax 307-777-56 16
craf fe@ missc.state.wy.us
> ' ' % ;, , ' «-
/ \ "* , # ( d i*
^ n, ^ 'A * ^ f
*\* "'. ' \ ^ •;
-« A. ' ^. ' X,,^ .0-
. s, '« * '' s^ i' 4v-^
;; . .*...*• * «-,... , -
-------
Region or State
Arizona
California
Guam
Hawaii
Nevada
Region 10 '
Regional Office
US EPA Region 10
Emergency Response & Site Cleanup Unit
(ECL-W) . /
Office of Environmental Cleanup •
U,S. EPA Region 10. -
l200Si«hsAve, v '' /•
Seattle, WA 98101 - -
206-553-0285 ; -."
Implementing Agency
Small Business Assistance
(S) = Slale only toll free
(N) = National Toll free
Greg Workman
DEQ/Customer Service
3033 N. Central Ave.
Phoenix. AZ 85012
602-207-4337
fax 602-207-4872
(S) 800-234-5677 (x4337)
workman.gregory@ev.staie.nz,us
Peter Venturini
CA EPA - Air Resource Board
Stationary Source
2020 L Street
Sacramento CA, 95814-4219
916-445-5023
fax 916-445-5023
Robert Tam
HI Department of Health
Clean Air Branch
919 Ala Moana Blvd.
Honolulu, HI 96814
808-586-4200
fax 808-586-4370
David Cowperthwaite
Small Business Program Manger
Div. Of Env. Protection
333 West Nye Lane
Carson City, NV 89710
702-687-4670x3118
fax 702-687-5856
(S) 800-992-0900 x4670
-------
Region or State
Alaska.
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
Regional Office
Implementing Agency
Small Business Assistance
(S) = State only toll free
(N) = National Toll free
Scott Lytle
Alaska Department of Env. Conservation-
555 Cordova St.
Anchorage, AK 99501-2617
907-269-7571
fax 907-269-7600
(S)800-S 10-2332
slytle@envircon.state.ak.us
Doug McRoberts
IDEQ/PL&E
Statehouse Mail
1410 North Hilton
Boise, ID 83706-1290
208-373-0497
fax 208-373-0169
dmcrober@deq.stale.icl.us
Terry Obteshka
ODEQ
Air Quality Division
8llS.W.6thAve.
Portland, OR 97204-1390
503-229-6147 •
fax 503-229-5675
(S) 800 452-4011 •
lerry.obleshka@state.or.us
Bernard Brady
Department of Ecology
PO Box 47600
Olympia, WA'98504-7600
360-407-6803
fax 360-407-6802
bbra461 ©ecy.wa.gov
-------
-------
Appendix D
OSHA Contacts
-------
-------
APPENDIX D: OSHA CONTACTS
Region or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
jRegion 1
JFK Federal Building
Room'E340, 'V
I *5.H' ,. I -1 ^
Boston, MA-02203
phoneY (6 f7) 565^9860
faxj(617)56$-9827 -
Connecticut
Connecticut Department of
Labor
Division of Occupational
Safety & Health
38 Wolcott Hill Road
Wethersfield, Connecticut
06109
(203)566-4550
(203) 566-6916 FAX
steve. wj eeter @ ct-ce-
wethrsfld.psha.gov E-mail
Department of Labor
200 Folly Brook Boulevard
Wethersfield, CT 06109
Program Director's Office
Steven Wheeler
phone: (860) 566-4550 fax:
(860)566-6916
James P. Butler,
Commissioner
(860)-566-5123 (f) (860) 566-
1520
Maine
Division of Industrial Safety
Maine Bureau of Labor
State House Station #82
Augusta, Maine 04333
(207) 624-6460
(207) 624-6449 FAX
david.e.wacker@state.me.us
E-mail
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consullive Program
State Plan States
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Commonwealth of
Massachusetts
Dept. of Labor & Industries
1001 Watertown Street
West Newton, Massachusetts
02165
(617)727-3982.
(617) 727-4581 FAX
jlamalva@N218.osha.gov E-
mail
New Hampshire Department
of Health
Division of Public Health
Services
6 Hazen Drive
Concord, New Hampshire
03301-6527
(603)271-2024
(603) 271-2667 FAX
jake@nh7cl.mv.com E-mail
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
Rhode Island
Rhode Island Department of
Health
Division of Occupational
Health
3 Capital Hill
Providence, Rhode Island
02908
(401)277-2438
(401) 277-6953 FAX
oshacon@ids.net E-mail
Vermont
Division of Occupational
Safety & Health
Vermont Department of Labor
and Industry
National Life Building,
Drawer 20 • -
Montpelier, Vermont
05602-3401
(802)828-2765
(802) 828-2748 FAX
web@labor.lab.state.vt.us
E-mail
Department of Labor and
Industry
National Life Building -
Drawer 20
120 State Street
Montpelier, VT 05620
Robert McLeod, Project
Manager
phone: (802) 828-2765 fax:
(802)828-2195
Steve Jansen, Commissioner
(802) 828-2288 (f) (802) 828-
2748
Region'aY/;/ f]l'" 't?1' r \
Varick Stret' ' '"
hone; (212) 337-23?| '
fax: &) 337-237 l«v-i
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consullive Program
State Plan States
New Jersey
Department of Labor
Div. of Publi Safety and
Occupational Safety and
Health
225 E. State Street, 8th Floor
West
P.O. Box 953
Trenton, NJ 08625-0953
609-292-3923
609-292-4409 FAX
carol.farley@nj-c-
trenton.osha.gov E-mail
New York
Division of Safety and Health
State Office Campus
Building 12, Room 130
Albany, New York 12240
(518)457-1169
(518) 457-3454 FAX
j ames .rush @ ny-ce-
albany.osha.gov E-mail
Department of Labor
W. Averell Harriman State
Office Building: 12, Room
500
Albany, NY 12240
Richard Cuculo, Program
Director
phone: (518) 457-3518 fax:
(518)457-6908
James McGowan,
Commissioner
(518) 457-2741 (f) (518) 457-
6908
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
Puerto Rico
Occupational. Safety and
Health Office
Dept. of Labor & Human
Resources, 21st Floor
505 Munoz Rivera Avenue
Hato Rey, Puerto Rico 00918
(809)754-2188
(809) 767-6051 FAX
Department of Labor and
Human Resources
Prudencio Rivera Martinez
Building
505 Munoz Rivera Avenue
Hato Rey, Puerto Rico 00918
•Cesar J. Almodovar-
Marchany, Secretary
phone: (787) 754-2119 fax:
(787) 753-9550
Assistant Secretary's Office
Ana Lopez
phone: (787) 754-211.9 or
2171 : -
fax: (787) 767-6051
Virgin Islands
Division of Occupational
Safety and Health . .
Virgin Islands Department of
Labor
3021 Golden Rock
Christiansted
St. Croix, Virgin Island 00840
(809)772-1315
(809) 772-4323 FAX
Department of Labor
2131 Hospital Street
Box 890^ Christiansted
St. Croix, Virgin Islands
00820-4666
Raymond Williams, Program
Director
phone: (809) 772-1315 fax:
(809)772-4323
-------
Region or State
Regions
Delaware
District of Columbia
Regional Office
Gateway Building
Suite 2100;
3535 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104
phone: (215) 596-1201
fax: (215) 596-4872 •
Comullive Program
Delaware Department of Labor
Division of Industrial Affairs
Occupational Safety and
Health
4425 Market Street
Wilmington, Delaware 19802
(302) 761-8'219
(302) 761-6601 FAX
Hrznadel@state.de.us E-mail
DC Department of
Employment Services
Office of Occupational Safety
and Health
950 Upshur Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20011
(202) 576-6339
(202) 576-7282 FAX
jcates@n217.osha.gov
State Plan States
it!
'Si
: : f; • it _1
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
Maryland
Division of Labor and Industry
312 Marshall Avenue, Room
600
Laurel, MD 20707
410-880-4970
410-880-6369 FAX
Division of Labor and Industry
Dept. of Licensing and
Regulation
1100 North Eutaw Street,
Room 613
Baltimore, MD 21201-2206
John P. O'Conner,
Commissioner
phone: (410) 767-2215 fax:
(410)767-2003
Ileana O'Brien, Deputy
Commissioner
phone: (410) 767-2992 fax:
(410)767-2003
Pennsylvania
Indiana University of
Pennsylvania
Safety Sciences Department
205 Uhler Hall
Indiana, Pennsylvania
15705-1087
(412) 357-2561
(412) 357-2385 FAX
rchriste@grove.iup.edu E-mail
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consullive Program
State Plan States
Virginia
Virginia Department of Labor
and Industry
Occupational Safety and
Health
Training and Consultation
13 South 13th Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
(804) 786-6359
(804) 786-8418 FAX
njakubecdoli@sprintmail.com
E-mail
Department of Labor and
Industry
Powers-Taylor Building
13 South 13th Street
Richmond, VA 23219
Theron Bell, Commissioner
phone: (804) 786-2377 fax:
(804)371-6524
Charles Lahey, Deputy
Commissioner
phone: (804) 786-2383 fax:
(804) 371-6524
West Virginia
West Virginia Department of
Labor
Capitol Complex Building #3
1800 East Washington Street,
Room 319
Charleston, West Virginia
25305
(304) 558-7890
(304) 558- 3797 FAX
Region 4
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30303
phone: (404) 562-2300
fax: .(404) 562-2295
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
Alabama
Safe State Program
University of Alabama
432 Martha Parham West
PO Box 870388
Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487
(205) 348-3033
(205) 348-3049 FAX
bweems@ua.edu E-mail
Florida
Florida Dept. of Labor and'
Employment Security
7(c)(l) Onsite Consultation
Prog. Div< of Safety
2002 St. Augustine Road,
Building E, Suite 45
Tallahassee; Florida 32399
(850) 922-8955
(904) 922-4538 FAX
brettcreco@safetyfl.org E-mail
Georgia
Onsite Consultation Program
Georgia Institute of
Technology
O'Keefe Building, Room 22
Atlanta, Georgia 30332
(404) 894-2646
(404) 894-8275 FAX
paul.middendorf@gtri.gatech.e
du E-mail
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
Kentucky
Division of Education and
Training
Kentucky Labor Cabinet
1049 U.S. Highway 127 South
Frankfort, Kentucky 40601
(502) 564-6895
(502) 564-4769 FAX
arussell(§mail.lab.state.ky.gov
E-mail
Labor Cabinet
1047 U.S. Highway 127 So.,
Suite 2
Frankfort, Kentucky 40601
Joe Norsworthy, Secretary
phone (502) 564-3070 fax:
(502) 564-5387
Steven A. Forbes, Fed/State
Coordinator
phone: (502) 564-2300 fax:
(502) 564-1682
Mississippi
Mississippi State University
Center for Safety and Health
2906 North State Street, Suite
201
Jackson, Mississippi 39216
(601)987-3981
(601) 987-3890 FAX
Kelly@nl98.osha.gov E-mail
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
North Carolina
Bureau of Consultative
Services
North Carolina Dept. of Labor
319 Chapanoke Road, Suite
105
Raleigh, North Carolina
27603-3432
(919) 662-4644
(919) 662-4671 FAX
wjoyner@dol,state.nc.us
E-mail ,
Department of Labor
319 Chapanoke Road
Raleigh, NC 27603
Harry Payne, Commissioner
phone: (919) 662-4585 fax:
(919) 662-4582
Charles Jefress, Deputy
Commissioner
phone (919) 662-4585 fax:
(919)662-4582
South Carolina
South Carolina Department of
Labor
Licensing and Regulation
3600 Forest Drive
PO Box 11329
Columbia, South Carolina
29204
(803)734-9614
(803) 734-9741 FAX
scoshaovp@infoave.net
E-mail
Department of Labor,
Licensing, and Regulation
Koger Office Park, Kingstree
Building
110 Centerview Drive
PO Box 11329
Columbia, SC 29210
William Lybrand, Program
Director
phone: (803) 734-9594 fax:
(803) 734-9772
Lewis Gossett, Director
(803) 896-4300 (f) (803) 896-
4393
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
Tennessee
OSHA Consultative Services
Tennessee Department of
Labor
710 James Robertson
Parkway, 3rd Floor
Nashville, Tennessee
37243-0659
(615) 741-7036
(615) 532-2997 FAX -
mike.maenza@tn-c-
nashville.osha.gov E-mail
Department of Labor
710 James Robertson Parkway
Nashville, TN 37243
David R. Inman, Program
Director
phone: (615) 741-2793 fax:
(615) 741-3325
AlphonsoR. Bodie,
Commissioner
(615) 741-2582 (f) (615) 741-
5078
Region 5
230 South Dearborn Street
Room 3244 -
Chicago, IL 60604
phone: (312) 353-2220
fax; (312) 353-7774
Illinois
Industrial Service Division
Department of Commerce &
Community Affairs
State of Illinois Center, Suite
3-400
100 West Randolph Street
Chicago, Illinois 60601
(312)814-2337
(312) 814-7238 FAX
sfryzel @ commerce, state.il. us
E-mail
-------
Region or State
Indiana
Regional Office
Consultive Program
Bureau of Safety, Education
and Training
Division of Labor, Room
W195
402 West Washington ,
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
(317)232-2688
(317) 232-0748 FAX
Jon.mack@nin-ce-
indianpls.osha.gov E-mail
State Plan States
Department of Labor
State Office Building
402 West Washington Street,
Room Wl 95
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Timothy Joyce, Commissioner
phone: (317) 232-2378 fax:
(317)233-3790
John Jones, Deputy
Commissioner
phone: (317) 232-3325 fax:
(317)233-3790
Michigan
Michigan Dept of Public
Health
Division of Occupational
Health ;
3423 North Martin Luther
King Boulevard
Lansing, Michigan 48909
(517)335-8250
(517) 335-8010 FAX
john.peck@cis.state.mi.us E-
mail
Department of Consumer and
Industry Services North
3423 No. Martin Luther King
Boulevard
PO Box 30649
Lansing, MI 48909
Kathleen M. Wilbur, Director
phone: (517) 373-7230 fax:
(517)373-2129
Douglas E. Earle, •
Program Director for Safety
and Health
phone: (517) 322-1814 fax:
(517)335-8010
-------
Region or State
Minnesota
Ohio
Regional Office
ConsulUve Program
Department of Labor and
Industry
443 LaFayette Road
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155
(612) 297-2393
(612) 297-1953 FAX
james.collins@state.mn.us E-
mail
Bureau of Employment
Services
145 S. Front Street
Columbus, Ohio 43216
(614) 644-2246
(614) 644-3133 FAX
Owen@n222.osha.gov E-mail
State Plan States
Department of Labor and
Industry
443 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155
GretchenB. Maglich,
Commissioner
phone: (612)296-2342 fax:
(612)282-5405
Roslyn Wade, Assistant
Commissioner
phone: (612) 296-6529 fax:
(612) 282-5405
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Gonsultive Program
State Plan States
Wisconsin
Wisconsin (Health)
Wisconsin Department of
Health and Human Services
Section of Occupational
Health, Room 112
1414 East Washington Avenue
Madison; Wisconsin 53703
(608) 266-8579
(608) 266-9711 FAX
Wisconsin (Safety)
Wisconsin Department of
Industry
Labor and Human Relations
Bureau of Safety Inspections
401 Pilot Court, Suite C
Waukesha, Wisconsin 53188
(414)521-5063
(414) 521-8614 FAX
LI 163@n215.osha.gov E-mail
Region 6
-f ' '
Room 602 r 7 /{ ":
Dallas, TX;75202 "V
;phohe;s (214) 7674731
" U2l4)767.-4137 \\
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Comulllvc Program
State Plan States
Arkansas
OSHA Consultation
Arkansas Department of Labor
10421 West Markham
Little Rock, Arkansas 72205
(501) 682-4522
(501) 682-4532 FAX
clark@n237.osha.gov E-mail
Louisiana
7(c)(l) Consultation Program
Louisiana Department of
Labor
Post Office Box 94094
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804
(504) 342-9601
(504) 342-5158 FAX
oshacons@eatel.net E-mail
New Mexico
New Mexico Environment
Dept
Occupational Health and
Safety Bureau
525 Camino de Los Marquez,
Suite 3
PO Box 26110
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87502
(505) 827-4230
(505) 827-4422 FAX
deborah@n023.osha.gov E-
mail
Environment Department
1190 St. Francis Drive
PO Box 26110
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87502
Mark E. Weilder, Secretary
phone: (505) 827-2850 fax:
(505) 827-2836
Sam A. Rogers, Chief
phone: (505) 827-4230 fax:
(505) 827-2836
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
Oklahoma
Oklahoma Department of
Labor
OSHA Division
4001 North Lincoln Boulevard
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
73105-5212
(405) 528-1500
(405) 528-5751 FAX
Ieslie@n238.osha.gov E-mail
Texas
Workers' Health and Safety
Division
Workers' Compensation
Commission
Southfield Building
4000 South I H 35
Austin, Texas 78704 •
(512)440-3854
(5 12) 440-3831 FAX
margaret. nugent @ mail .capnet.
state.tx.us
Region.'"?
*•*
• f ,
City Center Square
Kaiisas Ci? Misri 64105
iplione: (Sjl
T\
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
Iowa
7(c)(l) Consultation Program
Iowa Bureau of Labor
1000 East Grand Avenue
Des Moines, Iowa 50319
(515) 281-5352
(515) 281-4831 FAX
Division of Labor Services
1000 E. Grand Avenue
Des Moines, Iowa 50319
Mary L. Bryant, Administrator
phone: (515) 281-3469 fax:
(515)281-7995
Byron K. Orton,
Commissioner
(515) 281-3447 (f) (515) 242-
5144
Kansas
Dept. of Human Resources
512 South West 6th Street
Topeka, Kansas 66603
(913) 296-7476
(913) 296-1775 FAX
rudy .leutzinger @ ks-ce-
topeka.gov E-mail
Missouri
Division of Labor Standards
Dept. of Labor & Industrial
Relations
3315 West Truman Boulevard
P.O. Box 449
Jefferson City, Missouri 65109
(573)751-3403
(573) 751-3721 FAX
rsimmons @ services. state, mo. u
s E-mail
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
Nebraska
Division of Safety Labor &
Safety Standards
Nebraska Department of Labor
State Office Building, Lower
Level
301 Centennial Mall, South
Lincoln, Nebraska 68509-5024
(402)471-4717
(402) 471-5039 FAX
amy@n214.osha.gov E-mail
, ?
Region 8,
1099 Broadway '
Denver^, GO 80202
ph^ne: (363)^844-1600!
fax; 303) 844-1616 n
Colorado
Colorado State University
Occupational Safety and
Health Section
115 Environmental Health
Building
Fort Collins, Colorado 80523
(303)491-6151
(303) 49 1 -7778 FAX
jdsand@lamar.colostate.edu
E-mail
-------
Region or Slate
Regional Office
Consul live Program
State Plan States
Montana
Montana
Dept. of Labor and Industry
Bureau of Safety
PO Box 1728
Helena, Montana 59624-1728
(406)444-6418
(406) 444-4140 FAX
dfolsom@mt.gov E-mail
North Dakota
Division of Environmental
Engineering
1200 Missouri Avenue, Room
304 •
Bismarck, North Dakota
58506-5520
(701) 328-5188
(701) 328-5200 FAX
ccmail.lhuber@ranch.state.nd.
us E-mail
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
South Dakota
Engineering Extension
Onsite Technical Division
South Dakota State University
Box 510 .
West Hall
907 Harvey Dunn Street
Brookings, South Dakota
57007
(605)688-4101
(605) 688-6290 FAX '
scoshaovp@infoave.net
E-mail
Utah
Utah Industrial Commission
Consultation Services
160 East 300 South
Salt Lake City, Utah
84114-6650
(801) 530-6868
(801) 530-6992 FAX
icmain.nandetso @ state.ut.us
E-mail
Labor Commission
160 East 300 South, 3rd Floor
PO Box 146650
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-
6650
Jay W. Bagley, Administrator
phone: (801) 530-6898 fax:
(801)530-7606
R. Lee Ellertson,
Commissioner
(801) 530-6898 (f) (801) 530-
6880
-------
Rcgion or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
Wyoming
Wyoming Department of
Employment
Workers' Safety and
Compensation Division
Herschler Building, 2 East
122 West 25th Street
Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002
(307) 777-7786
(307) 777-3646 FAX
Department of Employment
Worker's Safety and
Compensation Div.
Herschler Building, 2nd Floor
East
122 West 25th Street
Cheyenne, WY 82002
Stephan R. Foster, Safety
Administrator
phone: (307) 777-7786 fax:
(307) 777-5850
Region 9
71 Stevenson Street
Room 420
San Francisco, CA 94105
phone: (415) 975-4310
fax:(415)744-4319 ,
Arizona
Consultation and Training
Industrial Commission of
Arizona
Division of Occupational
Safety & Health
800 West Washington
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
(602) 542-5795
(602) 542-1614 FAX
henry@n245.osha.gov E-mail
Industrial Commission
800 W. Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85007
Derek Mullins, Program
Director
phone: (602) 542-5795 fax:
(602)542-1614
Larry Etchechury, Director
(602) 542-5796 (f) (602) 542-
1614
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
California
CAL/OSHA Consultation
Service
Department of Industrial
Relations
Room 1260
45 Freemont Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415)972-8515
(415) 972-8513 FAX
DCBare@hq.dir.ca.gov E-mail
Department of Industrial
Relations
45 Freemont Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Dr. John Howard, Chief
phone: (415) 972-8500 fax:
(415)972-8513
John Duncan, Director
(415) 972-8835 (f) (415) 972-
8848
Guam
OSHA Onsite Consultation
Dept. of Labor, Government of
Guam
PO Box 9970
Tamuning, Guam 96931
(671)475-0136
(671)477-2988 FAX
Hawaii
Consultation & Training
Branch
Dept of Labor and Industrial
Relations
830 Punchbowl Street
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
(808) 586-9100
(808) 586-9099 FAX
Department of Labor and
Industrial Relations
830 Punchbowl Street
Honolulu, HI 96813
Loraine H Akiba, Director
phone: (808) 586-8844 fax:
(808) 586-9099
Jennifer Shishido,
Administrator
phone: (808) 586-9116 fax:
(808) 586-9104
-------
Region or State
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
Nevada
Division of Preventive Safety
Department of Industrial
Relations, Suite 106
2500 West Washington
Las Vegas, Nevada 89106
(702) 486-5016
(702) 486-5331 FAX
dalton.hooks@nv-ce-
lasvegas.osha.gov E-mail
Division of Industrial
Relations
400 West King Street
Carson City, Nevada 97502
Ron Swirczek, Administrator
phone(702) 687-3032 fax:
(702) 687-6305
Danny Evans, Assistant
Administrator
phone: (702) 687-3250 fax:
(702) 687-6150
Region 10
1111 Third Avenue
Suite 715
Seattle, Washington 98101-
3212
phone: (206) 553-5930
fax:(206)553-6499
Alaska
ADOL/OSHA Division of
Consultation
3301 Eagle Street
P.O. Box 107022
Anchorage, Alaska 99510
(907) 269-4957
(907) 269-4950 FAX
timothybundy@labor.state.ak.
us E-mail
Department of Labor
1111W. 8th Street, Room 306
Juneau, AK 99801
Alan W. Dwyer, Program
Director
phone: (907) 465-4855 fax:
(907) 465-3584
Tom Cashen, Commissioner
(907) 465-2700 (f) (907) 465-
2784
ill
-------
Region or State
Idaho
Regional Office
Consulljve Program
Boise State University, Dept.
of Health Studies
1910 University Drive,
ET-338A '
Boise, Idaho 83725
(208) 385-3283
(208) 385-4411 FAX
lstokes@bsu.idbsu.edu E-mail
State Plan States
Oregon
Department of Consumer and
Business Services
Oregon Occupational Safety
and Health Division
350 Winter Street NE, Room
430.
Salem, Oregon 9731-0
(503)378-3272
(800) 922-2689 TOLL FREE
(5,03) 378-5729FAX
steve.g.beech@state.or.us or
consult.web@state.or.us
E-mail
Occupational Safety and
Health Division
Dept. of Consumer & Business
Services .
350 Winter Street, NE, Room
430
Salem, OR 97310
Peter Deluca, Administrator
phone: (503) 378-3272 fax:
(503)378,4538
David Sparks, Deputy
Adminsistrator
phone: (503)378-3272 fax:
(503) 378-4538
-------
Region or Slate
Regional Office
Consultive Program
State Plan States
Washington
Washington Dept of Labor and
Industries
Division of Industrial Safety
and Health
PO Box 44643
Olympia, Washington 98504
(360) 902-5443
(360) 902-5459 FAX
jame235@lni.wa.gov E-mail
Department of Labor and
Industries
General Administration
Building
PO Box 44001
Olympia, WA 980504-4001
Gary Moore, Director
phone: (360) 902-4200 fax:
(360) 902-4202
Michael Silverstein, Assistant
Director
phone: (360) 902-5495 fax:
(360) 902-5529
-------
APPENDIX E
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
November 19, 1998
-------
November 19.1998
-------
APPENDIX E: TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
WHERE CAN I GET HELP?
This appendix provides points of contact for the resources that are available to facilities in
complying with 40 CFR part 68 from EPA, OSHA, and several other entities involved in
process 'safety and risk management issues.. For specific points of contact for EPA
regional offices, RMP implementing agencies, and Clean Air Act small business
assistance programs, refer to Appendix C. For specific points of contact for OSHA
regional offices, OSHA.state consultative programs, and OSHA state plan states, refer to
Appendix D.
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
401 M Street, SW -
Washington, DC 20460
(202)260-8600 , • . •
www.epa.gov/swercepp •
CEPPO administers the RMP program at the national level. TheCEPPO
homepage on the Internet provides access to, downloadable versions of numerous
risk management program documents, many of which are also available upon
request from the National Center for Environmental Publications and Information
see below.
Toll-Free: (800)424-9346
Local: (703)412-9810 ' .'•'"'-
TDD: (800)553-7672
TDD Local:. (703) 412-3323 ~ .
Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 6:00 pm EST
www.epa.gov/epaoswer/h6tline/index.htm
Questions or comments: epahotline@bah.com
EPA'-s RCRA, Superfund, and EPCRA Hotline is a publicly accessible service
that provides up-to-date information on EPA programs. The Hotline responds to
factual questions on a variety of federal EPA regulations, including those
developed under Clean Air Act section 112(r). The Hotline also responds to
requests for individual .copies of documents.
P.O. Box 42419
November 19,1998
-------
Appendix E
Technical Assistance
E-2
Cincinnati, OH 45242
Phone: (800)490-9198
Fax: (513)489-8695
www.epa.gov/ncepihom/ . ' -' '
Orders must be limited to five titles per two-week period, one complimentary
copy of each in-stock publication. As supplies are depleted you will be referred to
the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), the Government Printing
Office (GPO), or the Educational Resource Information Center (ERIC) to obtain
your documents at cost.
Technology Administration
U.S. Department of Commerce
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Phone: (800) 553-6847 (toll-free)
Phone: (703) 487-4650 (local)
Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 8:00 pm EST
Fax: (703) 321-8547 (verify receipt at (703) 487-4679)
www.ntis.gov/
i E-Mail: orders@ntis.fedworld.gov
The National Technical Information Service is the official resource for
government-sponsored U.S. and worldwide scientific, technical, engineering, and
business-related information. Documents not available through the EPA Hotline
are often available from NTIS. You can place your order by telephone, mail, fax,
or e-mail. NTIS also offers online ordering for products added to the NTIS
collection within the last 90 days using NTlS OrderNow.
www.epa.gov/ttn/sbap/
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 requires that all States develop a
program to assist small businesses in meeting the requirements of the Act. EPA
has established its own Small Business Assistance Program (SBAP) to provide
technical assistance to these State small business programs. This site has been
developed to allow State and EPA programs to share information about their small
business assistance materials and activities.
Small Business Ombudsman Office
(800)368-5888
November 19,1998
-------
Appendix E
E-3 Technical Assistance
www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/ , ~ .
The Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards administers EPA's operating
permit program. Permits incorporate terms and conditions to assure that the
source complies with all applicable requirements. The RMP regulations are
considered to.be an applicable requirement.
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (OSHA)
OSHA administers the Process Safety Management Standard (29 CFR 1910.119), which
mandates actions similar to that of EPA's prevention program. In about half of the states
(see Appendix D), OSHA programs are run by state agencies.
U.S. Department of Labor
RoomN3647
200 Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20210
(202)523-8151
www.osha.gov
www.osha-slc.gov/SLTC/ProcessSafetyManagement/index.html
The PSM homepage on the Internet provides access to downloadable versions of
numerous process safety management documents.
www.osha.gov/oshprogs/consult.html '
Using a free consultation service largely funded by OSHA, employers can find out
about potential hazards at their worksites, improve their occupational safety and
health management systems, and even qualify for a one-year exemption from
routine OSHA inspections. Primarily targeted for smaller businesses, this safety
and health consultation program is completely separate from the OSHA inspection
effort.
Head Registrar >
OSHA Training Institute
Des Plaines, Illinois
(847)297-4913
www.osha-slc.gov/Training/index.html
November 19,1998
-------
Appendix E
Technical Assistance
E-4,
The OSHA Office of Training and Education offers short-term training through
the OSHA Training Institute. The Office also administers the OSHA Training
Institute Education Centers program, in which designated nonprofit organizations
in each federal region offer the most frequently requested courses for the private
sector and other Federal agency staff.
Division of Voluntary Programs " '
(202)219-7266
www.osha.gov/oshprogs/vpp/osha2.html
OSHA Voluntary Protection Programs are designed to recognize and promote
effective safety and health management. In the VPP, management, labor, and
OSHA establish a cooperative relationship at a workplace that has implemented a
strong program. .
Room N3101
Washington, DC 20210
(202) 523-9667
The Publications Office provides single copies of various documents.
www.dsha-slc.gov/ ~. • •
This site provides links to OSHA Standards and related documents, including
OSHA Regulations, Federal Register notices, Interpretations and Compliance
Letters, OSHA Regulations (preambles to final rules),. Review Commission
decisions, Congressional Testimony, OSHA Directives and Fact Sheets,
Memorandums of Understanding.
Windows and Macintosh dual platform
U.S. Government Printing Office , • . ' ,
Stock # 729-013-00000-5
Phone: (202)512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250
Price: $38/year (four quarterly releases), $15 (single copy)
This CD-ROM contains electronic copy of the text of all OSHA regulations,
selected documents, and technical information from the OSHA Computerized
Information System. •
November 19,1998
-------
Appendix E
E-5 Technical Assistance
OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
1200 19th St., NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20036
(202)857-1110
www.iiar.org
IIAR publishes a guidance document for OSHA PSM compliance as well as other
guidance and standards for ammonia refrigeration systems.
345 E. 47th St.
New York, NY 10017-2395
(212)705-7338
www.aiche.org/
345 E. 47th St., 12th Fl.
New York, NY 10017-2395
(212)705-7319
www.aiche.org/docs/research/ccps.htm
(800) AIC-HEME (242-4363) ."
Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm EST
E-Mail: xpress@aiche.org
AIChE prints a Continuing Education catalog for its educational and training
programs and an annual Publications Catalog from which documents can be
purchased.
409 Third Street, SW
Washington, DC-20416
(800)827-5722 ,
www.sba.gov/
SBA was created to help America's entrepreneurs form successful small
enterprises. SBA's program offices in every state offer financing, training and
advocacy for small firms. In addition, the SBA works with thousands of lending,
educational, arid training institutions nationwide.
' November 19, 1998
-------
Appendix E
Technical Assistance
E-6
November 19,1998
Superintendent of Documents
Washington, DC 20402
(202) 783-3238
wWw.gp6.g6v/su_docs/index.html
E-mail: gpoaccess@gpo.gov
Phone: (202) 512-1530 (local)
Phone: (888) 293-6498 (toll-free)
Fax: (202) 512-1262
I1"*!1 »'» ' ,
-------
APPENDIX F
OSHA GUIDANCE ON PSM
-------
-------
APPENDIX F
OSHA GUIDANCE ON PSM
The following text is taken directly from OSHA's.non-mandatory appendix C to the PSM standard
(29 CFR 1910.119). The only change has been to rearrange the sections to track the order of part 68.
PROCESS SAFETY INFORMATION
Complete and accurate written information concerning process chemicals, process technology, and process
equipment is essential to an effective process safety management program and to a process hazards
analysis. The compiled information will be a necessary resource to a variety of users including the team
that will perform the process hazards analysis; those developing the training programs and the operating
procedures; contractors whose employees will be working with the process; those conducting the
pre-startup reviews; local emergency preparedness planners; and insurance and enforcement officials.
The information tp be compiled about the chemicals, including process intermediates, needs to be '
comprehensive enough for an accurate assessment of the fire and explosion characteristics, reactivity
hazards, the safety and health hazards to workers, and the corrosion and erosion effects on the process
equipment and monitoring tools. Current material safety data sheet (MSDS) information can be used to
help meet this requirement, which must be supplemented with process chemistry information including
runaway reaction and over pressure hazards if applicable.. • s
Process technology information will be a part of the process safety information package and it is expected
that it will include diagrams as well as employer established criteria for maximum inventory levels for
process chemicals; limits beyond which would be considered-upset conditions; and a qualitative estimate
of the consequences or results of deviation that could occur if operating beyond the established process ,
limits. Employers are encouraged to use" diagrams which will help users understand the process. ' ,
A block flow diagram is used to show the major process equipment and interconnecting process flpw lines
and show flow rates, stream composition, temperatures, and pressures when necessary for clarity. The
block flow diagram is a simplified diagram.
Process flow diagrams are more complex and will show all main flow streams including valves to .enhance
the understanding of the process, as well as pressures and temperatures on all feed and product lines within
all major vessels, in and out of headers and heat exchangers, and points of pressure and temperature
control. Also, materials of construction information, pump capacities and pressure heads, compressor
horsepower and vessel design pressures and temperatures are shown when necessary for clarity. In
addition, major components of control loops are usually shown along with key utilities on process flow
diagrams. • , , .
Piping and instrument diagrams (P&IDS),may be the more appropriate type of diagrams to show some of
the above details and to display the information for the piping designer and engineering staff. The P&IDS
are to be used to describe the relationships between equipment and instrumentation as well as other
relevant information that will enhance clarity. Computer software programs which do P&IDS or, other
diagrams useful to the information package, may be used to help meet this requirement.
The information pertaining to process equipment design must be documented. In other words, what were
the codes and standards relied on to establish good engineering practice. These codes and standards are
-------
Appendix F
OSHA Guidance on PSM F-2
published by such organizations as the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, American Petroleum
Institute, American National Standards Institute, National Fire Protection Association, American Society
for Testing and Materials, National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors, National Association
of Corrosion Engineers, American Society of Exchange Manufacturers Association, and model building
code groups. In addition, various engineering societies issue technical reports which impact process
design. For example, the American Institute of Chemical Engineers has published technical reports on
topics such as two phase flow for venting devices. This type of technically recognized report would
constitute good engineering practice.
For existing equipment designed and constructed many years ago-in accordance with the codes and
standards available at that time and no longer in general use today, the employer must document which
codes and standards were used and that the design and construction along with the testing, inspection and
operation are still suitable for the intended use. Where the process technology requires a design which
departs from the applicable codes and standards, the employer must document that the design and
construction is suitable for the intended purpose.
:"' PROCESS HAZARD ANALYSIS ^ ' ,' '_ '.', ''"... '
A process hazard analysis (PHA), sometimes called a process hazard evaluation, is one of the most
important elements of the process safety management program. A PHA is an organized and systematic
effort to identify and analyze the significance of potential hazards associated with the processing or
handling of highly hazardous chemicals. A PHA provides information which will assist employers and
employees in making decisions for improving safety and reducing the consequences of unwanted or
unplanned releases of hazardous chemicals.
A PHA is directed toward analyzing potential causes and consequences of fires, explosions, releases of
toxic or flammable chemicals and major spills of hazardous chemicals. The PHA focuses on equipment,
jnstrulnentatioh, utilities'^ human actions (routine and non-routine), and external factors that might impact
the process. These considerations assist in determining the hazards and potential failure points or failure
modes in a process.
The selection of a PHA methodology or technique will be influenced by many factors including the
amount of existing knowledge about the process. Is it a process that has been operated for a long period of
time with little or no innovation and extensive experience has been generated with its use? Or, is it a new
process or one which has been changed frequently by the inclusion of innovative features? Also, the size
and complexity of the process will influerice the decision as to the appropriate PHA methodology to use.
All PHA methodologies are subject to certain limitations. For example, the checklist methodology works
well when the process is very stable and no changes are made, but it is not as effective when the process
has undergone extensive change. The checklist may miss the most recent changes and consequently the
changes would not be evaluated. Another limitation to be considered concerns the assumptions made by
the team or analyst. The PHA is dependent on good judgment and the assumptions made during the study
need to be documented and understood by the team and reviewer and kept for a future PHA.
The team conducting the PHA need to understand the methodology that is going to be used. A PHA team
can vary in size from two people to a number of people with varied operational and technical backgrounds.
Some |eam members may only be a part of the team for a limited time. The team leader needs to be fully
knowledgeable in the proper implementation of the PHA methodology that is to be used and should be
-------
Appendix F
F-3 OSHA Guidance on PSM
impartial in the evaluation. The other full or part time team members need to provide the team with
expertise in areas such as process technology, process design, operating procedures and practices,
including how the work is actually performed, alarms, emergency procedures, instrumentation,
maintenance procedures, both routine and non-routine tasks, including how the tasks are authorized,
procurement of parts and supplies, safety and health, and any other relevant subject as the need dictates. At
least one team member must be familiar with the process.
The ideal team will have an intimate knowledge of the standards, codes, specifications and regulations
applicable to the process being studied. The selected team members need to be compatible and the team
leader needs to be able to manage the team and the PHA study. The team needs to be able to work together
while benefiting from the expertise of others on the team or outside the team, to resolve issues, and to forge
a consensus on the findings of the study-and the recommendations.
The application of a PHA to .a process may involve the use of different methodologies for various parts of
the process. For example, a process involving a series of unit operations of varying sizes, complexities, and
ages may use different methodologies and team members for each operation. Then the conclusions can be
integrated into one final study and evaluation. ... • .
A more specific example is the use of a checklist PHA for a standard boiler or heat exchanger and the use
of a Hazard and Operability PHA for the overall process. Also, for batch type processes like custom batch
operations, a generic PHA of a representative batch may be used where there are only small changes of
monomer or other ingredient ratios and the chemistry is documented for the full range and ratio of batch
ingredients. Another process that might consider using a generic type of PHA is a gas plant. Often these
plants are simply moved from site to site and therefore, a generic PHA may be used for these movable
plants. Also, when an employer has several similar size gas plants and no spur gas is being processed at
the site, then a generic PHA is feasible as long as the variations of the individual sites are accounted for in
the PHA. , '
Finally, when an employer has a large continuous process which has several control rooms for different
portions of the process such as for a distillation tower and a blending operation, the employer may wish to
do each segment separately and then integrate the final results.
Additionally, small businesses which are covered by this rule, will often have processes that have less
storage volume, less capacity, and less complicated than processes at a large facility. Therefore, OSHA
would anticipate that the less complex methodologies would be used to meet the process hazard analysis
criteria in the standard. These process hazard analyses can be done in less time and with a few people
being involved. A less complex process generally means that less data, P&IDS, and process information is
needed to perform a process hazard analysis-. , ' .. '
Many small businesses have processes that are not unique, such as cold storage lockers or water treatment
facilities. Where employer associations have a number of members with such facilities, a generic PHA,
evolved from a checklist or what-if questions, could be developed and used by each employer effectively to
reflect his/her particular process; this would simplify compliance for them.
When the employer has a number of processes which require a PHA, the employer must set up a priority
system of which PHAs to cpnduct first.-A preliminary or gross hazard analysis may be useful in
prioritizing the processes that the employer has determined are subject to coverage by the process safety
-------
Appendix F
OSHA Guidance on PSM F-4
management standard. Consideration should first be given to those processes with the potential of
adversely affecting the largest number of employees. This prioritizing should consider the potential
severity of a chemical release, the number of potentially affected employees, the operating history of the
process such as the frequency of chemical releases, the age of the process and any other relevant factors.
These factors would suggest a ranking order and would suggest either using a weighing factor system or a
systematic ranking method. The use of a preliminary hazard analysis would assist an employer in
determining which process should be of the highest priority and thereby the employer would obtain the
greatest improvement in safety at the facility. -
OPERATING PROCEDURES
Operating procedures describe tasks to be performed, data to be recorded^ operating conditions to be
^maintained, samples to be collected, and safety and health precautions to be taken. The procedures need to
be technically accurate, understandable to employees, and revised periodically to ensure that they reflect
current operations. The process safety information package is to be used as a resource to better assure that
the operating procedures and practices are consistent with the known hazards of the chemicals in the
process and that the operating parameters are accurate. Operating procedures should be reviewed by
engineering staff and operating personnel to ensure that they are accurate and provide practical instructions
on how to actually carry out job duties safely.
Operating procedures will include specific instructions or details on what steps are to be taken or followed
in carrying out the stated procedures. These operating instructions for each procedure should include the
applicable safety precautions and should contain appropriate information on safety implications. For
example, the operating procedures addressing operating parameters will contain operating instructions
about pressure limits, temperature ranges, flow rates,.what to do when an upset condition occurs, what
alarms and instruments are pertinent if an upset condition occurs, and other subjects. Another example of
using operating instructions to properly implement operating procedures is in starting up or shutting down
the process. In these cases, different parameters will be required from those of normal operation. These
operating instructions need to clearly indicate the distinctions between startup and normal operations such
as the appropriate allowances for heating up a unit to reach the normal operating parameters. Also the
operating instructions need to describe the proper method for increasing the temperature of the unit until
the normal operating temperature parameters are achieved. ,
Computerized process control systems add complexity to operating instructions. These operating
instructions need to describe the logic of the software as well as the relationship between the equipment
and the control system; otherwise, it may not be apparent to the operator.
Operating procedures and instructions are important for training operating personnel. The operating
procedures are often viewed as the standard operating practices (SOPs) for operations. Control room
personnel and operating staff, in general, need to have a full understanding of operating procedures. If
workers are not fluent in English then procedures and instructions need to be prepared in a second
language understood by the workers. In addition, operating procedures need to be changed when there is a
change in the process as a result of the management of change procedures. The consequences of operating
procedure changes need to be fully evaluated and the information conveyed to the personnel. For example,
mechanical changes to the process made by the maintenance department (like changing a valve from steel
lo brass or other subtle changes) need to be evaluated to determine if operating procedures and practices
also need to be changed. All management of change actions must be coordinated and integrated with
-------
Appendix F
F-5 ' .. . OSHA Guidance on PSM
current.operating procedures and operating personnel must be oriented to the changes in procedures before
the change is made. When the process is shutdown to make a change, then the operating procedures must
be updated before startup of the process.
Training in how to handle upset conditions must be accomplished as well as what operating personnel are
to do in emergencies such as when a pump seal fails or a pipeline ruptures. Communication between
operating personnel and workers performing work within the process area, such as non-routine tasks, also
must be.maintained. The hazards of the tasks are to be conveyed to operating personnel in accordance
with established procedures arid to those perforaJng the actual tasks. When the work is completed,
operating personnel should be informed to provide closure on the job. '
TRAINING
All employees, including maintenance and contractor employees, involved with highly hazardous
chemicals need to fully understand the safety and health hazards of the chemicals and processes they work
with for the protection of themselves, their fellow employees and the citizens of nearby communities.
Training conducted in compliance with 1910.1200, the Hazard Communication standard, will help -'
employees to be more knowledgeable about the chemicals they work with as well as familiarize them with
reading and understanding MSDS. However, additional training in subjects such as operating procedures
and safety work practices, emergency evacuation and response, safety procedures, routine and non-routine
work authorization activities, and other areas pertinent to process safety and health will need to be covered
by an employer's training program.
•*.*'* j •
In establishing their training programs, employers must clearly define the employees to be trained and what
subjects are to be covered in their training. Employers in setting up their training program will need to
clearly establish the goals and objectives they wish to achieve with the training that they provide to their
employees. The learning goals or objectives should be written in clear measurable terms before the training
begins. These goals and objectives need to be tailored to each of the specific training modules or segments.
Employers should describe the important actions and conditions under which the employee will
demonstrate competence, or knowledge as well as what is acceptable performance.
Hands-on-training where employees are able to use their senses beyond listening, will enhance learning.
For example, operating personnel, who will work in a control room or at control panels, would benefit by
being trained at a simulated control panel or panels. Upset conditions of various types could be displayed
on the simulator, and then the employee could go through the proper operating procedures to bring the .
simulator panel back to the normal operating parameters. A training environment could be created to help
the trainee feel the full reality of the 'situation but, of course, under controlled conditions. This realistic
type of training can be very effective in teaching employees correct procedures while allowing them to also
see the consequences of what might happens if they do not follow established-operating procedures. Other
training techniques using videos or on-the-job training can also be very effective for teaching other job
tasks, duties, or other important information. An effective training program will allow the employee to
fully participate in the training process and to practice their skill or knowledge. . \
Employers need to periodically evaluate their training programs to see if the necessary skills, knowledge,
and routines are being properly understood and implemented by their trained employees. The means or
methods for evaluating the training should be developed along with the training program goals and
objectives. Training program evaluation will help employers to determine the amount of training their
-------
Appendix F
OSHA Guidance on PSM F-6
employees understood, and whether the desired results were obtained. If, after the evaluation, it appears
that the trained employees are not at the level of knowledge and skill that was expected, the employer will )
need to revise the training program, provide retraining, or provide more frequent refresher training sessions
until the deficiency is resolved. Those who conducted the training and those who received the training.
should also be consulted as to how best to improve the training process. If there is a language barrier, the
language known to the trainees should be used to reinforce the training messages and information.
Careful consideration must be given to assure that employees including maintenance and contract
employees receive current and updated training. For example, if changes are made to a process, impacted
employees must be trained in the changes-and understand the effects of the changes on their job tasks (e.g.,
any new operating procedures pertinent to their tasks).v Additionally, as already discussed the evaluation of ;
the employee's absorption of training will certainly influence the need for training.
MECHANICAL INTEGRITY
f in . t i ' i MI:II
Employers will need to review their maintenance programs and schedules to see if there are areas where
"breakdown" maintenance is used rather than an on-going mechanical integrity program. Equipment used
to process, store, or handle highly hazardous chemicals needs to be designed, constructed, installed and
maintained to mirjimizethe risk of releases of such chemicals. This requires that a mechanical integrity
program be in place to assure the continued integrity of process equipment. ' . '
Elements of a mechanical integrity program include the identification and categorization of equipment and
instrumentation, .inspections and tests, testing;and inspection frequencies, development of maintenance
procedures, training of maintenance personnel, the establishment of criteria for acceptable test results, ,
documentation of test and inspection results, and documentation of manufacturer recommendations as to
meantime to failure for equipment and instrumentation.
The first line of defense an employer has available is to operate and maintain the process as designed, and
to keep the chemicals contained. This line of defense is backed up by the next line of defense which is the
controlled release of chemicals through venting to scrubbers or flares, or to surge or overflow tanks which
are designed to receive such chemicals, etc. These lines of defense are the primary lines of defense or
means to prevent unwanted releases. The secondary lines of defense would include fixed fire protection
systems like sprinklers, water spray, or deluge systems, monitor guns, etc., dikes, designed drainage
systems, and other systems which would control or mitigate hazardous chemicals once an unwanted release
occurs. These.primary and secondary lines of defense are what the mechanical integrity program needs to
protect and strengthen these primary and secondary lines of defenses where appropriate.
The first step of an effective mechanical integrity program is to compile and categorize a list of process
equipment and instrumentation for inclusion in the program. This list would include pressure vessels,
storage tanks, process piping, relief and vent systems, fire protection system components, emergency *
shutdown systems and alarms and interlocks and pumps. For the categorization of instrumentation and the
listed equipment the employer would prioritize which pieces of equipment require closer scrutiny than
others! ' ' '" ' ' ' - , '• , i •'• *
Meantime to failure of various instrumentation and equipment parts would be known from the
manufacturer's data or the employer's experience with the parts, which would then influence the inspection
and testing frequency and associated procedures. Also, applicable codes and standards such as the National
-------
. Appendix F
F-7 OSHA Guidance on PSM
Board Inspection Code, or those frdta the American Society for Testing and Material, American Petroleum
Institute, National Fire Protection Association, American National Standards Institute, American Society of
Mechanical Engineers, and other groups, provide information to help establish an effective testing and
inspection frequency, as well as appropriate methodologies.
The applicable codes and standards provide criteria for external inspections for such items as foundation
and supports, anchor bolts, concrete or steel supports, guy wires, nozzles and sprinklers, pipe hangers,
grounding connections, protective coatings and insulation,-and external metal surfaces of piping and
vessels, etc. These codes and standards also provide information on methodologies for internal inspection,
' and a frequency formula based on the corrosion rate of the materials of construction. Also, erosion both
internal and external needs to be considered along with corrosion effects for piping and valves. Where the
corrosion rate is not known, a maximum inspection frequency is recommended, and methods of developing
the corrosion rate are available in the codes. Internal inspections need to cover items such as vessel shell,
bottom and head; metallic linings; nonmetallic linings; thickness measurements for vessels and piping;
inspection for erosion, corrosion, cracking and bulges; internal equipment like trays, baffles, sensors and
•screens for erosion, corrosion or cracking and other deficiencies. Some of these inspections may be
performed by state :or local government inspectors under state and local statutes. However, each employer
needs to develop procedures to ensure that tests and inspections are conducted properly and that
consistency is maintained even where different employees may be involved. Appropriate training is to be
provided to maintenance personnel to ensure that they understand the preventive maintenance program
procedures, safe practices, and the proper use and application of special equipment or unique tools that
may be required. This training is part of the overall training program called for in the,standard.
A quality assurance system is needed to help ensure that the proper materials of construction are used, that
fabrication and inspection procedures are proper, and that installation procedures recognize field
installation concerns. The quality assurance program is an essential part of the mechanical integrity
program and will help to maintain the primary and secondary lines of defense that have been designed into
the process to prevent unwanted chemical releases or those which control or mitigate a release. "As built"
drawings, together with certifications of coded vessels and other equipment, and materials of construction
need to be verified and retained in the quality assurance documentation.
Equipment installation jobs need to be properly inspected in the field for use of proper materials and
procedures and to assure that qualified craftsmen are used to do the job. The use of appropriate gaskets,
packing, bolts, valves, lubricants and welding rods need to be verified in the field. Also, procedures for
installation of safety devices need to be verified, such as the torque on the bolts on ruptured disc
installations, uniform torque on flange bolts, proper installation of pump seals, etc. If the quality of parts is
a problem, it may be appropriate to conduct audits of the equipment supplier's facilities to better assure
proper purchases of required equipment which is suitable for its intended service. Any changes in. •
equipment that may become necessary will need to go through the management of change procedures.
MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE .
To properly manage changes to process chemicals, technology, equipment and facilities, one must define
what is meant by change. In this process safety management standard, change includes all modifications to
equipment, procedures, raw materials and processing conditions other than "replacement in kind." These
changes need to be properly managed by identifying and reviewing them prior to implementation of the
change. For example, the operating procedures contain the operating parameters (pressure limits,
-------
Appendix?
OSHA Guidance on PSM F-8
temperature ranges, flow rates, etc.) and the importance of operating within these limits. While the
pperatbr must have the flexibility to maintain safe operation within the established parameters, any
operation outside of these parameters requires review and approval by a written management of change
procedure. Management of change covers changes in process technology and changes to equipment and
instrumentation. Changes in process technology can result from changes in production rates, raw
materials, experimentation, equipment unavailability, new equipment, new product development, change
in catalyst and changes in operating conditions to improve yield or quality. Equipment changes include
among others change in materials of construction, equipment specifications, piping pre-arrangements,
experimental equipment, computer program revisions and changes in alarms and interlocks. Employers
need to establish means and-methods to detect both technical changes and mechanical changes.
Temporary changes have caused a number of catastrophes over the years, and employers need to establish
Ways to detect temporary changes as well as those that are permanent. It is important that a time limit for
temporary changes be established and monitored since, without control, these changes may tend to become
permanent. Temporary changes are subject to the management of change provisions. In addition, the
management of change procedures are used to insure that the equipment and procedures are returned to
their original or designed conditions at the end of the temporary change. Proper documentation and review
of these changes is invaluable in assuring that the safety and health considerations are being incorporated
into the operating procedures and the process. Employers may wish to develop a form or clearance sheet
to facilitate the processing of changes through the management of change procedures. A typical change
form may include a description and the purpose of the change, the technical basis for the change, safety ',
and health considerations, documentation of changes for the operating procedures, maintenance
procedures, inspection and testing, P&IDS, electrical classification, training and communications,
pre-startup inspection, duration if a temporary change, approvals and authorization. Where the impact of
the chajige is minor and well understood, a check list reviewed by an authorized person with proper
communication to others who are affected may be sufficient.
"However, for a more complex or significant design change, a hazard evaluation procedure with approvals
by operations, maintenance, and safety departments may be appropriate. Changes in documents such as
P&IDS, raw materials, operating procedures, mechanical integrity programs, electrical classifications, etc.,
need to be noted so that these revisions can be made permanent when the drawings and procedure manuals
are updated. Copies of process changes need to be kept in an accessible location to ensure that design
changes are available to operating personnel as well as to PHA team members when a PHA is being done
or one is being updated.
.• i . . sti" ;' , . • .' "e'i/'i ; • , " i1;' ',. ' • :' ' • : • : ,. '••. . ' ;H-! '. "" • ->:' ; ; '
PRE-STARTUP REVIEW
For new processes, the employer will find a PHA helpful in improving the design and construction of the
process from a reliability and quality point of view. The safe operation of the new process will be enhanced
by making use of the PHA recommendations before final installations are completed. P&IDs are to be
completed along with having the operating procedures in place and the operating staff trained to run the
process before startup. The initial startup procedures and normal operating procedures need to be fully
evaluated as part of the pre-startup review to assure a safe transfer into the normal operating mode for
meeting the process parameters.
For existing processes that have been shutdown for turnaround, or modification, etc., the employer must
assure that any changes other than "replacement in kind" made to the process during shutdown go through
-------
Appendix F
F-9 ' OSHA. Guidance on PSM
the management of change procedures. P&IDS will need to be updated as necessary, as well as operating
procedures and instructions. If the changes made to the process during shutdown are significant and impact
the training program, then operating personnel as well as employees engaged in routine and non-routine
work in the process area may need some refresher or additional training in light of the changes. Any
incident investigation recommendations, compliance audits or PHA recommendations need to be reviewed
as well to see what impacts they may have on the process before beginning the startup.
COMPLIANCE AUDITS . ,
Employers need to select a trained individual or assemble a trained team of people to audit the process
safety management system and program. A small process or plant may need only one knowledgeable
person to conduct an audit. The audit is to include an evaluation of th'e design and effectiveness of the
process safety management system and a field inspection of the safety and health conditions and practices
to verify that the employer's systems are effectively implemented. The audit should be conducted or led
by a person knowledgeable in audit techniques and who is impartial towards the facility or area being
audited. The essential elements of an audit program include planning, staffing, conducting the audit,
evaluation and corrective action, follow-up and documentation.
'Planning in advance is essential to the success of the auditing process. Each employer needs to establish
the format, staffing, scheduling and verification methods prior to conducting the audit. The format should
be designed to provide the lead auditor with a procedure or checklist which details the requirements of
each section of the standard. The names of the audit team members should be listed as part of the format as
well. The checklist, if properly designed, could serve as the verification sheet which provides the auditor
with tnt necessary information to expedite the review and assure that no requirements of the standard are
omitted. lnis> verification sheet format could also identify those elements that will require evaluation or a
response to correct deficiencies. This sheet could also be used for developing the follow-up and
documentation requirements.
The selection of effective audit team members is critical to the success of the program. Team members
should be chosen for their experience, knowledge, and training and should be familiar with the processes
and with auditing techniques, practices and procedures. The size of the team will vary depending on the
size and complexity of the process under consideration. For a large, complex, highly instrumented plant,
it may be desirable to have team members with expertise in process engineering and design, process
chemistry, instrumentation and computer controls, electrical hazards, and classifications, safety and health
disciplines, maintenance, emergency preparedness, warehousing or shipping, and process safety auditing.
The team may use part-time members to provide for the depth of expertise required as well as for what is
actually done or followed, compared to what is written. . •
An effective audit includes a review of the relevant documentation and process safety information,
inspection of the physical facilities, and interviews with all levels of plant personnel. Using the audit
procedure and checklist developed in the preplanning stage, the audit team, can systematically analyze
compliance with the provisions of the standard and any other corporate policies that are relevant. For .
example, the audit team will review all aspects of the training program as part of the overall audit. The
team will review the written training program for adequacy of content, frequency of training, effectiveness
of training in terms of its goals and objectives as well as to how it fits into meeting the standard's
requirements,.documentation, etc. Through interviews, the team can determine the employee's knowledge
and awareness of the safety procedures, duties, rules, emergency response assignments, etc. During the
-------
Appendix F
OSHA Guidance on PSM F-10
inspection, the team can observe actual practices such as safety and health policies* procedures, and work
authorization practices. This approach enables the team to identity deficiencies and determine where
corrective actions or improvements are necessary.
An audit is a technique used to gather sufficient facts and information, including statistical information, to
verify compliance with standards. Auditors should select as part of their preplanning a sample size
sufficient to give a degree of confidence that the audit reflects the level of compliance with the standard.
The audit team, through this systematic analysis, should document areas which require corrective action as
well as those areas where the process safety management system is effective and working in an effective
manner. This provides a record of the audit procedures and findings, and serves as a baseline of operation
data for future audits. It will assist future auditors in determining changes or trends from previous audits.
Corrective action is one of the most important parts of the audit. It includes not only addressing the
identified deficiencies, but also planning, follow up, and documentation. The corrective action process
normally begins with a management review of the audit findings. The purpose of this review is to
determine what actions are appropriate, and to establish priorities, timetables, resource allocations and
requirements and responsibilities. In some cases, corrective action may involve a simple change in
procedure or minor maintenance effort to remedy the concern. Management of change procedures need to
be used, as appropriate, even for what may seem to be a minor change. Many of the deficiencies can be
acted on promptly, while some may require engineering studies or in-depth review of actual procedures
and practices. There may be instances where no action is necessary and this is a valid response to an audit
finding. All actions taken, including an explanation where no action is taken on a finding, needs to be
documented as to what was done and why.
It is important to assure that each deficiency identified is addressed, the corrective action to be taken
noted, and the audit person or team responsible be properly documented by the employer.
To control, the corrective action process, the employer should consider the use of a tracking system. This
tracking system might include periodic status reports shared with affected levels of management, specific
reports such as completion of an engineering study, and a final implementation report to provide closure
for audit findings that have been through management of change, if appropriate, and then shared with
affected employees and management. This type of tracking system provides the employer with the status
of the corrective action. It also provides the documentation required to verify that appropriate corrective
actions were taken on deficiencies identified in the audit.
INCIDENT INVESTIGATION ' ' ... ' , ". , ^ " , , . '
Incident investigation is the process of identifying the underlying causes of incidents and implementing
steps to prevent similar events from occurring. The intent of an incident investigation is for employers to
learn from past experiences and thus avoid repeating past mistakes. Some of the events are sometimes
referred to as "near misses," meaning that a serious consequence did not occur, but could have.
: .• ". • ' .• '•' -
Employers need to develop in-house capability to investigate incidents that occur in their facilities. A team
deeds to be assembled by the employer and trained in the techniques of investigation including how to
conduct interviews of witnesses, needed documentation and report writing. A multi-disciplinary team is
better able to gather the facts of the event and to analyze them and develop plausible scenarios as to what
-------
Appendix?
F-ll OSHA Guidance on PSM
happened, and why. Team members should be selected on the basis of their training, knowledge and •
ability to contribute to a team effort to fully investigate the incident.
Employees in the process area where the incident occurred should be consulted, interviewed or made a
member of the team. Their knowledge of the events form a significant set of facts about the incident which
occurred. The report, its findings and recommendations are to be shared with those who can benefit from
the information. The cooperation of employees is essential to an effective incident investigation. The
focus of the investigation should be to obtain facts, and not to place blame. The team and the investigation
process should clearly deal with all involved individuals in a fair, Ojp°.n and consistent manner.
EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION
Section 304 of the Clean Air Act Amendments states that employers are to consult with their employees
and their representatives regarding the employers efforts in the development and implementation of the
process safety management program elements and hazard assessments. Section 304 also requires
employers to train and educate their employees and to inform affected employees of the findings from
incident investigations required by the process safety management program. Many employers, under their
safety and health programs, have already established means and methods to keep employees and their
representatives informed about relevant safety and health issues and employers may be able to adapt these
practices and procedures to meet their obligations under this standard. Employers who have not
implemented an occupational safety and health program may wish to form a safety and health committee of
employees and management representatives to help the employer meet the;obligations specified by this
standard. These committees can become a significant ally in helping the employer to implement and
maintain an effective process safety management program for all employees.
HOT WORK PERMIT
Non-routine work which is conducted in process areas needs to be controlled by the employer in a
consistent manner. The hazards identified involving the work that is to be accomplished must be
communicated to those doing the work, but also to those operating personnel whose work could affect the
safety of the process. A work authorization notice or permit must have a procedure that describes the steps
the maintenance supervisor, contractor representative or other person needs to follow to obtain the
necessary clearance to get the job started. The work authorization procedures need to reference and
coordinate, as applicable, lockout/tagout procedures, line breaking procedures, confined space entry
procedures and hot work authorizations. This procedure also needs to provide clear steps to follow once
the job is completed to provide closure for those that need to know the job is how completed and
equipment can be returned to normal. , .
CONTRACTORS
Employers who use contractors to perform work in and around processes that involve highly hazardous
chemicals, will need to establish a screening process so that they hire and use contractors who accomplish
the desired job tasks without compromising the safety and health of employees at a facility. For
contractors, whose safety performance on the job is riot known to the hiring employer, the employer will
need to obtain information on injury and illness rates and experience and should obtain contractor
references. Additionally, the employer must assure that the contractor has the appropriate job skills,
knowledge and certifications (such as for pressure vessel welders). Contractor work methods and
-------
Appendix F
OSHA Guidance on PSM
F-12
experiences should be evaluated. For example, does the contractor conducting demolition work swing
loads over operating processes or does the contractor avoid such hazards?
Contract employees must perform their work safely. Considering that contractors often perform very
specialized and potentially hazardous tasks such as confined space entry activities and non-routine repair
activities it is quite important that their activities be controlled while they are working on or near a covered
process. A permit system or work authorization system for these activities would also be helpful to all
affected employers. The use of a work authorization system keeps an employer informed of contract
employee activities, and as a benefit the employer will have better coordination and more management
control over the work being performed in the process area. A well run and well maintained process where
employee safety is fully recognized will benefit all of those who work in the facility whether they be
contract employees or employees of the owner.
------- |