SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL & COUNTERMEASURES
FACILITY RESPONSE PLANS
OUTREACH COURSE MANUAL
JUNE 1995
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region 111, Superfund Removal Branch
Oil and Title III Section (3HW34)
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 19107
-------
MANUAL ORGANIZATION
PART A - SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURE
(SPCC) COURSE MODULE
SECTION 1: SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURE
(SPCC)
Information Guide
SECTION 2: SPCC/FRP OUTREACH CONTACT NUMBERS
MOST COMMONLY USED CWA-OPA-SPCC ACRONYMS
SPCC IMPORTANT DEFINITIONS
SECTION 3: SPCC COURSE SLIDES
SECTION 4: WHAT TO EXPECT DURING AN SPCC INSPECTION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND RECORD OF SPCC/FRP
INSPECTION/PLAN REVIEW
SECTIONS: FACT SHEET: OPA Q's & A's ,
PART B - FACILITY RESPONSE PLAN (FRP) COURSE MODULE
SECTION 1: FRP OUTREACH CONTACT NUMBERS
SECTION 2: MOST COMMLY USED CWA-OPA-ACRONYMS
SECTION 3: FACT SHEET: OPA Q's & A's
SECTION 4: FACT SHEET: FACILITY RESPONSE PLANS (FRP's)'
SECTION 5: FRP DEFINITIONS
SECTION 6: FINAL RULE MAKING for 40 C.F.R. PARTS 9 AND 112
dated JULY 1, 1994
SECTION?: FRP COURSE SLIDES
SECTION 8: 40 C.F.R. PART 112.20
CERTIFICATION OF SUB HARM FORM .
SUB HARM FLOW CHART
APPENDDC "F"
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
PART A - SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL, AND
COUNTERMEASURE (SPCC)
COURSE MODULE
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL, AND
COUNTERMEASURE (SPCQ)
INFORMATION GUIDE
EMERGDICir
RESPONSE
TEAM .
SECTION 1
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . . • i
FOREWORD .......... iii
KEY POINTS OF PREVENTION REGULATION 1
ELEMENTS OF AN SPCC PLAN 5
QUESTIONS FREQUENTLY ASKED . . : 9
Appendix A, Example SPCC Plan (7 Pages)
Appendix B, Dike Designs . , (1 Pages)
Appendix C, 40 CFR 109
Criteria for State, Local, and Regional Oil Removal Contingency Plans ... (2 Pages)
Appendix D, 40 CFR 110
Discharge of Oil (3 Pages)
Appendix E, 40 CFR 112
Oil Pollution Prevention (10 Pages)
Appendix F, 33 CFR PART 153.201
Notice of the Discharge of Oil or a Hazardous Substance (5 Pages)
Appendix G, 40 CFR 114
Civil Penalties (4 Pages)
Appendix H, Notice of Proposed Rule Making SPCC Revision for
40 C.F.R. Part 112 dated October 22, 1991 (14 Pages)
Appendix I, Interim Final Rule for 40 C.F.R. Part 112
dated November 4, 1992 (4 Pages)
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
11
-------
FOREWORD
This document has been prepared by Region HI of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency as an informational and educational guide, and may be used in developing Spill
Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans as required under Title 40, Code of
Federal Regulations, Part 112 (40 CFR 112). The information contained in this manual has
been compiled from existing regulations, EPA documents, and other guidance documents.
This document should not be relied upon as the sole source in developing a site-specific
SPCC Plan; it is intended to be used only as a guide in explaining the SPCC regulations. 40
CFR 112, which is included in Appendix E, is the standard against which SPCC Plans are
judged and should be used as the primary guide in developing SPCC Plans.
For additional information concerning SPCC regulations, call or write the SPCC Coordinator
as follows:
Regina A. Starkey, SPCC Coordinator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Superfund Removal Branch
Oil and Title IH Section (3HW34)
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215)597-1395
Should the SPCC Coordinator be unavailable to answer questions, please leave a message on
the voice mail system.
m
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
IV
-------
KEY POINTS OF PREVENTION REGULATION
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation,
Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 112 (40 CFR 112), addresses non-transportation-
related facilities. The main requirement of facilities subject to the regulation is the
preparation and implementation of a Plan to prevent any discharge of oil into waters of the
United States. Such a Plan is referred to as a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure
(SPCC)Plan. .
The main thrust of the SPCC regulation is "prevention" of a discharge as opposed to
"after-the-fact" (or "reactive") clean-up measures commonly described in spill contingency
plans. The regulation applies to any facility engaged in drilling, producing, gathering,
storing, processing, refining, transferring or consuming oil and oil products, providing that
all three of the following conditions are met:
• The facility is non-transportation-related (see definition of "non-transportation" in
Appendix E).
• The aboveground storage capacity of single container is in excess of 660 gallons,
or the aggregate aboveground storage capacity is greater than 1,320 gallons, or the
total underground storage capacity is greater than 42,000 gallons.
• Due to its location, oil spilled at the facility could reasonably be expected to reach
waters of the United States.
Facilities that are subject to 40 CFR 112 must prepare and implement an SPCC Plan
in accordance with guidelines outlined in the regulation. The persons actually responsible for
preparing and implementing the Plan are owners or operators of facilities subject to
regulation, including persons in charge of departments, agencies, and instrumentalities of the
Federal or state governments.
-------
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPCC PLAN
There is no rigid format for an SPGC Plan. The guidelines in 40 CFR 112 state that
the SPCC Plan must be carefully thought out, prepared in,accordance with good engineering
practices, and approved by management at a level with the authority to commit the resources
necessary to implement the Plan.
The SPCC Plan should clearly address three areas:
• Operating procedures to prevent the occurrence of oil spills. .
• Control measures to prevent a spill from entering navigable waters.
• Countermeasures to contain, clean up and mitigate the effects of an oil spill that
impacts navigable water.
SPILL PREVENTION
An essential element of an SPCC Plan is a description of measures designed to
prevent operational error and equipment failure, which cause most spills. Operational
errors can be minimized through training programs to maintain a high level of personnel
efficiency and awareness of the importance of spill prevention. Equipment failures can be
minimized through proper initial selection and construction of processing and storage vessels
and pipelines. Regular maintenance of structural integrity and function, and frequent
inspections (visual and mechanical) to detect leaks around tank seams, gaskets, rivets and
bolts, flange joints, expansion joints, valves, catch pans, and so forth should be conducted.
While personnel training and equipment maintenance programs are based on industry
standards and sound engineering practices, the full support of management is essential to
develop and implement effective facility-specific programs for training and maintenance.
SPILL CONTROL
Another important element of the SPCC Plan is spill control. EPA Region m is
generally concerned with prevention of spills from facilities where positive containment
devices and systems are practicable and effective. Dikes, retaining walls, curbing, spill
diversion ponds, sumps, etc., fall into the category of positive containment. Only where it
is not practicable to provide positive containment does the facility have the option of taking
the "contingency" plan approach to spill control. In such a case, the facility owner/operator
must clearly demonstrate the impracticability of providing positive containment. The
owner/operator must also provide a strong Oil Spill Contingency Plan following the provision
of 40 CFR 109 (see Appendix C) and a written commitment of personnel, equipment, and
materials required to expeditiously control and remove any harmful quantity of oil
discharged.
"Impracticability" pertains mainly to those cases where severe space limitations may
preclude installation of structures or equipment to prevent oil from reaching water.
Demonstrating "impracticability" on the basis of financial considerations is unacceptable
-------
because the commitment of resources required to control, remove, and dispose of spilled oil
expeditiously would.not normally offer any significant economic advantage over providing
positive containment.
SPILL COUNTERMEASURES
Contingency plans are considered "reactive" in nature in that they generally describe
after-the-fact actions (spill countermeasures) that when properly performed can be expected
to mitigate the effects of a spill after it occurs. The aim of the SPCC regulation is to keep
spills from occurring, therefore, spill prevention and spill control measures must be given
first priority consideration.in the preparation of the SPCC Plan.
AMENDMENTS TO THE SPCC PLAN
Once an SPCC Plan has been developed, it may be amended by the U.S. EPA
Regional Administrator under certain circumstances or by the facility owner or operator.
The Regional Administrator may require amendments to the Plan following a single
discharge at the facility in excess of 1,000 gallons, or following two discharges in "harmful
quantities" that occur within any twelve-month period and are repbrtable under the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act.
i
The SPCC regulation requires the owner or operator to amend the Plan whenever
there is a change in facility design, construction, operation, or maintenance that materially
affects the facility's potential for discharging oil. Such amendments must be fully
implemented not later than six months after the change occurs. The regulation also requires
the owner or operator to review and evaluate the SPCC Plan every three years, and
amending the Plan may be part of this review. Within six months following the review, the
owner or operator may amend the Plan to incorporate more effective control and prevention
technology if the technology will significantly reduce the likelihood of a release, and the
technology has been field proven at the time of the.review.
All amendments must be certified by a registered professional engineer per Section
112.3 (d) of the SPCC regulation.
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
ELEMENTS OF AN SPCC PLAN
While each SPCC Plan is unique, there are certain elements that must be included
almost without exception to make the SPCC Plan comply with the provisions of 40 CFR 112.
These elements include, but may not be limited to, the following:
1. Name of Facility - The name of the facility may be different from the name of the
company that the facility operates under. Include both names if they are different.
2. Type of Facility - Describe briefly the purpose of the facility and the type of activities
conducted there.
3. Date of Initial Operation - Provide the date that the facility began operation.
4. Location of the Facility - Provide either a description of the location or an address
that can be supported by area maps. Location and topographic maps should be
included in the Plan as they can be critical in determining the adverse consequences of
an oil spill. Sources for such maps include: the U.S. Geological Survey, state
highway department, county highway engineer, local land surveys, and city engineer.
5. Name and Address of Owner - The address of the owner may be the same as or
different from the facility location.
6. Designated Person Responsible for Oil Spill Prevention - Provide the name and title
of the person with overall responsibility for the facility's spill prevention program.
This person should be thoroughly familiar with the SPCC regulation and with the
facility's SPCC Plan.
7. • Oil Spill History - Provide a detailed history of significant spill events, if any, that
occurred in the twelve-month period (from January 10, 1973 to January 10, 1974)
prior to the effective date of the regulation. For each spill that occurred within the
period, include the following information:
-------
a. Type and amount of oil spilled.
b. Location, date and time of spill(s).
c. Watercourse affected.
d. Description of physical damage.
e. Cost of damage.
f. Cost of clean-up.
g. Cause of spill.
h. Action taken to prevent recurrence.
8. Management Approval - Provide a statement about the facility's commitment to the .
Plan, signed by a person with the authority to commit management to implementation
of the SPCC Plan.
9. Certification - Provide a statement of SPCC Plan certification under the seal and
signature of a registered professional engineer. The state of registration and the
registration number of the certifying engineer must also be provided. The certifying
engineer is not required to be registered in the state in which the facility is located.
10. Facility Analysis - Describe the facility operation and indicate the largest magnitude
of spill possible. The description should include a discussion of the amount and type
of storage, normal increments of transfer or patterns of usage, distribution, processes,
etc. In the analysis the direction of flow of spilled oil should be indicated along with
any factors that are pertinent or influence spill potential. It is appropriate to support
this type of information by charts, tables, plot plans, etc., to aid clarity or promote
brevity. .
11. Facility Inspection - Incorporate an up-to-date inspection report covering the facility
in terms of equipment, containment, operation, drainage, security, etc., if available!
An inspection report would best serve more complex facilities and is not necessarily
considered an element common to all SPCC Plans.
12. Review of the SPCC Plan - Provide documentation of Plan reviews conducted by the
owner or operator. The facility owner or operator must review the SPCC Plan at
least once every three years. These reviews must be documented.
13. Amendments to the SPCC Plan - Make amendments of the completed Plan as required
by the SPCC regulation.
The complete SPCC Plan, which must follow the sequence outlined in Section 112.7
of the regulation, must include a discussion of the facility's site-specific conformance with
the relevant guidelines in the regulation. The SPCC Plan must be certified by a registered
professional engineer.
A copy of the entire SPCC Plan must be maintained at the facility if the facility is
normally attended at least eight hours per day, or at the nearest field office if the facility is
not so attended. The SPCC Plan must be made available to the EPA Regional
Administrator, or to a duly authorized representative, for on-site review during normal
working hours. '
-------
SPCC PLAN GUIDELINES
Several industrial trade associations have developed suggested guidelines for use by
their members in preparing SPCC Plans. Generally, such guidelines are available for
particular types of facilities and may be very helpful. For example, the American Petroleum
Institute has prepared a bulletin entitled "Suggested Procedure for Development of Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plans" (API Bulletin D 16). This bulletin, designed
primarily for oil production facilities, may be used in addition to the regulations and other
guidance documents to develop an SPCC Plan. Care should be taken, however, to not rely
completely on any standardized format. Each SPCC Plan must be unique to the facility.
Development of a unique Plan requires detailed knowledge of the facility and of the potential
impact that any spill may have.
An example SPCC Plan for a modest-sized oil storage facility is included as Appendix
A.
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
QUESTIONS FREQUENTLY ASKED
What is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Oil Pollution Prevention
Regulation?
It is a regulation that tries to prevent a discharge of oil into or upon the navigable
waters of the United States by establishing certain requirements for owners or
operators of facilities that drill, produce, gather, store, process, refine, transfer, or
consume oil. The text of the regulation is found in Title 40 of the Code of Federal .
Regulations, Part 112 (40 CFR 112).
What does the regulation require a facility to do?
The regulation requires that all subject facilities have a fully prepared and
implemented Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan. Facilities in
existence at the time the regulation went into effect in 1974 were required to have a
Plan prepared within six months of the effective date of the regulation, and to have
implemented the Plan within one year of the effective date of the regulation. New
facilities must prepare an SPCC Plan within six months of the date they commence
operations; they must implement the Plan within one year of the date operations
begin.
3
What constitutes an SPCC Plan?
An SPCC Plan is a detailed, site-specific written description of how a facility's
operation complies with the guidelines in the regulation (Section 112.7).
Who is required to prepare an SPCC Plan?
The owner or operator of the facility subject to regulation is required to prepare a
written SPCC Plan, which must be certified by a registered professional engineer.
When did this regulation go into effect?
The regulation was promulgated on December 11, 1973, and went into effect on
January 10, 1974.
Which facilities are subject to the regulation?
A facility is subject to the regulation if it is a non-transportation-related facility (either
onshore or offshore), if due to its location it could reasonably be expected to
discharge oil into waters of the United States if a spill should occur and if it has:
1. Total aboveground oil storage capacity in excess of 1,320 gallons or a single
container (tank, drum, transformer, etc.) in excess of 660 gallons; or
-------
2. Total underground oil storage capacity in excess of 42,000 gallons.
The facility must address all aboveground and underground storage capacities once
subject to 40 CFR 112.
A facility may be exempt from the regulation if due to its location it could not
reasonably be expected to discharge oil into or upon the navigable waters of the
United States. The exemption determination is based on consideration of such
geographical aspects of the facility as proximity to navigable waters, land contour,
drainage, and so forth. The determination must exclude consideration of man-made
features such as dikes, equipment, or other structures that would inhibit a discharge
from reaching navigable waters.
What is a non-transportation-related facility?
(1) Onshore or offshore well drilling facilities;
(2) Onshore or offshore mobile well drilling platforms, barges, trucks or other
mobile facilities when in the fixed position for drilling operations;
(3) Onshore or offshore oil production facilities, fixed or mobile, including all
equipment and appurtenances such as wells, wellhead separators, and storage
facilities;
/
(4) Oil refining facilities, including all equipment and appurtenances such as
processing units^ storage units, piping, drainage systems, and waste treatment
units;
(5) Oil storage facilities, including all equipment and appurtenances, such as bulk
storage, terminal oil storage, consumer storage, pumps and drainage systems
used in the storage of oil;
(6) Industrial facilities which store oil;
(7) Commercial facilities which store oil;
(8) Agricultural facilities which store oil;
(9) Public facilities which store oil;
(10) Waste treatment facilities, including in-plant pipelines, effluent discharge lines,
and storage tanks. ,
What is a transportation related facility?
(1) Onshore and offshore terminal facilities, including transfer hoses, loading arms,
and other equipment and appurtenances used for the purpose of handling or
10
-------
transferring oil in bulk (including oily ballast or tank washings) to. or from a
vessel;
(2) Interstate and intrastate, onshore and offshore, pipeline systems;
(3) Highway vehicles and railcars used for the transport of oil interstate or intrastate
commerce.
Can a facility be both transportation and non-transportation related?
Yes. Part of a facility's operation may be transportation-related and part may be non-
transportation-related. Those parts that are non-transportatipn-related are subject to
the SPCC regulation.
What determines the reasonability of a discharge to navigable waters?
Reasonability is determined on the basis of the location of the facility in relation to a
stream, ditch, or storm sewer; the volume of material likely to be spilled; drainage
patterns; soil conditions; and so forth. The presence of manmade structures that
would inhibit the flow of oil is not considered when making the determination.
Is a facility still subject to the regulation if it is located in such a manner that any spill
that may occur would not be expected to discharge into the waters of the United States?
No. However, the determination of exemption should be made very carefully. If any
oil could reach a sewer line, drainage ditch, etc., that discharges into navigable
waters, either directly or indirectly, then the facility is subject to the regulation.
Who determines whether or not a facility would reasonably be expected to discharge oil
into navigable waters?
The facility owner or operator makes the determination.
What if the owner or operator decides the facility is exempt from the regulation and the
decision is wrong?
The facility could be subject to the penalty provisions of the regulation for failure to
comply.
What are the requirements for certifying the Plan by a registered professional engineer
(P.E.)?
The engineer should be familiar with the provisions of 40 CFR 112, must have
examined the facility and be a registered professional engineer in at least one state.
The engineer need not be registered in the state in which the facility is located. The
engineer's name, registration number, and state of registration must be included as
part of the SPCC Plan (Section 112.3). In addition, the engineer's seal must be '
affixed to the Plan as part of the certification.
11' '. ; :
-------
When the SPCC Plan is completed and certified, is it sent to EPA for review?
No. A certified copy of the SPCC Plan is required to be available at the facility for
EPA on-site review if the facility is attended at least eight hours a day. If the facility
is attended less than eight hours a day, then the SPCC Plan must be kept at the
nearest company office. However, if the facility has a single discharge of more than
1,000 gallons or two discharges of harmful quantities in any twelve month period, the
Plan must be sent to the EPA for review.
Who reviews the SPCC Plan and how often is the SPCC Plan reviewed?
The owner or operator is required to review the SPCC Plan at least once every three
years. The review must be documented.
Who can amend an SPCC Plan?
The owner or operator of a facility may amend an SPCC Plan to include updated
information and to reflect changes in procedure. In certain cases, the EPA Regional
Administrator may require the amendment of a facility's SPCC Plan.
When must an SPCC Plan be amended by the facility operator?
The regulation requires the owner or operator to amend the Plan within six months
following a review to incorporate more effective control and prevention technologies
if the technology will significantly reduce the likelihood of a release, and the
technology has been field proven at the time of the review. The owner or operator
must also amend the SPCC Plan whenever there is a change in the facility design,
construction, operation or maintenance that materially affects the facility's potential
for discharge into navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines
(Section 112.5). Such amendments must be fully implemented no later than six
months after the change occurs.
Amendments must be certified by a registered professional engineer in accordance
with Section 112.3 of the regulation.
When might an SPCC Plan be amended by the EPA?
The U.S. EPA Regional Administrator may amend the'Plan following a single
discharge at the facility in excess of 1,000 gallons, or following two discharges within
any twelve-month period that are in "harmful quantities" and are reportable under the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Within 60 days following such a discharge(s),
the facility owner or operator must submit the SPCC Plan to the Regional
Administrator and to the state agency in charge of water pollution control activities.
The owner or operator must also submit a description of the causes of the spill and
the corrective actions taken. Additional information pertaining to the Plan or spill
event that the Regional Administrator may reasonably require must also accompany
the Plan.
12
-------
After review of the SPCC Plan, the Regional Administrator may inform the facility
owner or operator that amendments to the Plan are proposed as deemed necessary to
prevent any future discharges. Within 30 days of notification of the Regional
Administrator's decision, the owner or operator may submit written information,
views, and arguments on the proposal. The Regional Administrator will consider this
new information and may either notify the owner or operator of any amendments
required or rescind the original proposal. Any required amendments must become
part of the facility's SPCC Plan within 30 days after notification and must be
implemented within six months after the amendments become part of the Plan.
Amendments made in this manner must also be certified by a registered professional
engineer in accordance with Section 112.3 of the regulation.
When a production lease consists of several operations, such as wells, oil/water
separators, collection systems, tank batteries, etc., does each operation require a
separate SPCC Plan?
No. One SPCC Plan may include all operations within a single geographical area;
however, each operation must be addressed in the SPCC Plan.
Is every loss of oil or oil product subject to a penalty?.
A discharge is defined in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as including, but
not limited to, any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, or
dumping that enters the waters of the U.S. or the adjoining shorelines in harmful
quantities. If a discharge occurs and enters the water, a penalty may be assessed.
Penalties are determined using the following factors:
seriousness of violation,
economic benefit to violator resulting from violation.
degree of culpability involved.
penalties for same incident from other agencies.
violation history.
efforts by the violator to minimize effects of discharge.
economic impact of the penalty on violator. •
any other matters as justice may require.
•
What is considered to be a harmful quantity?
A harmful quantity of oil is a discharge that results in a violation of applicable water
quality standards; causes a film or sheen upon the water or adjoining shorelines;
discolors the water or adjoining shorelines or causes an emulsion or sludge to be
deposited beneath the surface of the water or upon adjoining shorelines.
13
-------
What are considered navigable waters?
Navigable waters of the U.S. are defined in Section 502(7) of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (FWPCA), and include:
1) All navigable waters of the U.S., as defined in judicial decisions prior to
the passage of the 1972 amendments to the FWPCA, and the tributaries of
such waters;
»
2) Interstate waters, including interstate wetlands;
3) Intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams which are utilized by interstate travelers
for recreational or other purposes; and
4) Intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams from which fish or shellfish are taken
and sold in interstate commerce.
What penalties are assessed for failure to comply with the regulation?
40 CFR 112.6 authorizes the U.S. EPA Regional Administrator to assess civil
penalties.
The guidance for determining penalties is addressed in 40 CFR 114.
When should the National Response Center (800-424-8802, toll free) be called?
Any discharge of oil involving U.S. waters must be reported to the National Response
Center by the person in charge of the vessel, facility or vehicle from which the
discharge occurs. -Threats of discharges or releases should also be reported. The
procedures for such notifications are set forth in 33 CFR 153, 40 CFR 110, 40 CFR
112 and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
. (NCP), 40 CFR 300.
Does a state spill plan meet the requirements of a Federal SPCC Plan?
Not necessarily. If the state spill plan is intended to be used as the Federal SPCC
Plan, it must meet or exceed all the requirements under 40 CFR Part 112. The state
spill plan must express clearly that it addresses both the state and Federal regulations.
What counts toward storage capacity?
Storage capacity includes the capacity of all containers such as tanks, portable tanks,
transformers, 55-gallon drums, 5-gallon buckets, etc. The capacity of any empty
containers that may be used to store oil and are not permanently taken put of service
are also counted in the facility total storage capacity.
14
-------
Does the term "oil" include vegetable oil, transformer oil, and other non-petroleum
based oil?
Yes. "Oil" is defined in 40 CFR 112.2 as oil of any kind or in any form, including,
but not limited to, petroleum, fuel oil, sludge, oil refuse and oil mixed with wastes
other than dredged spoil. This definition has been interpreted to include vegetable
oil, mineral oil, transformer oil and other oils.
Are transformers covered under SPCC regulation?
Electrical transformers and similar equipment are covered by the SPCC regulation
provided that they contain sufficient quantities of oil, and, due to location, can
reasonably be expected to spill their oil into navigable waters or adjoining shorelines.
If the drainage from a facility discharges into a sewer system, is this facility required to
have an SPCC Plan?
If the sewer is a storm sewer or combined sewer and the spill could reasonably be
expected to reach navigable waters, a Plan would be required. If the flow from the
sewer is entirely treated in the facility's sewage treatment plant, then an engineering
assessment should be made by the owner or operator as to whether or not the
treatment system could handle the maximum possible volume of oil without exceeding
the permitted amount at the plant. If the system could not handle the oil, then an
SPCC Plan would be required.
Are SPCC Plans required for hazardous substances or hazardous wastes?
•
Only in the event that the hazardous substances or hazardous wastes are mixed with
oil. ,
Must secondary containments be provided for transfer operations (i.e., for a tanker
truck loading/unloading fuel at a facility)?
Yes. The secondary containment system should be designed to hold at least
maximum capacity of any single compartment of a tank car or tank truck loading or
unloading at the facility. This is not to say that a truck must park within a diked area
for loading/unloading. The regulation allows flexibility here for diversion structures
such as curbing or diking to channel a potential spill to a secondary containment
structure. Transfer of oil to water transportation vessels is not covered under the
SPCC regulations.
If a tank is taken out of service, what measures must a facility take hi order to be
exempt from SPCC regulations?
Any tank taken out of service must have all pipes and fittings sealed in order to be
excluded from facility storage capacity calculations. If, after the tanks are taken out
of service, the facility storage capacity is below regulatory amounts then the facility
will be exempt from the SPCC regulations.
; 15 —: :
-------
Do the SPCC regulations spell out design requirements for diking, curbing, etc?
The SPCC regulations require diked areas for storage tanks to be sufficiently
impervious to contain any spilled oil. All bulk storage tank installations should be
constructed so that a secondary means of containment is provided for the entire
contents of the largest single tank plus sufficient freeboard to allow for precipitation.
Containment curbs and pits are sometimes used as secondary containments, but they
may not always be appropriate.
Are double walled tanks and other alternative aboveground storage tanks satisfactory to
meet the secondary containment requirements for SPCC?
Double walled tanks may provide adequate secondary containment; however, the
valving must be designed so that accidental release from the inner tank (from such
occurrences as an inadvertent valve opening or a failure) are completely contained
within the outer tank. The inner tank should be an Underwriters' Laboratory-listed
steel tank, the outer wall should be constructed in accordance with nationally accepted
industry standards (e.g., those codified by the American Petroleum Institute, the Steel
Tank Institute, and American Concrete Institute), the tank should have an overfill
alarm and an automatic flow restrictor or flow shut-off, and all product transfers
should be constantly monitored.
Other "alternative aboveground storage tanks," such as small tanks with an attached
shop-fabricated containment dike, with capacities less than 12,000 gallons, may be
satisfactory in meeting the secondary containment requirements for SPCC. If
"alternative aboveground storage tanks" are utilized, an SPCC Plan must still be
prepared and certified by a registered professional, engineer. If the engineer does not
certify that these tanks will provide adequate secondary containment, other
containment systems must be implemented.
o -
Must each tank, drum, or other oil storage container have individual secondary
containment?
Not necessarily. A single dike may be used for a group of containers. A dike for a
tank battery is required to contain the volume of the largest single tank within the
battery plus sufficient freeboard to allow for precipitation. The dike should be
sufficiently impervious to contain any spilled oil from the tank battery.
Should tanks be inspected by the facility?
Yes. All aboveground tanks should be subject to periodic integrity testing, taking into
account tank design and using such techniques as hydrostatic testing, visual inspection
or a system of non-destructive shell thickness testing. Tank supports and foundations
should be included in these inspections.
Buried storage tanks represent a potential for undetected spills. A new buried
installation should be protected from corrosion by coatings. Buried tanks should at
least be subject to regular pressure testing.
16 _
-------
Is a partially buried tank or a tank in an underground basement or vault considered to
be underground storage? '
No. To qualify as buried storage, a tank must be completely covered by earth. Tanks
that are in an underground basement or vault and those that are partially buried do not
qualify as underground storage. Buried tanks have inherent release protection from
the containing action of the surrounding earth, whereas vaulted and partially buried
tanks do not.
What authorities do states have under SPCC regulation?
Section 311 of the Clean Water Act does not permit EPA to delegate the SPCC
Program to the states. States may perform SPCC inspections at the request of the
EPA; however, the overall review process of the inspection is the responsibility of the
EPA. This review process is handled within the Regional EPA office.
Where can I get additional information concerning SPCC regulations?
Call or write the SPCC Coordinator as follows:
Regina A. Starkey, SPCC Coordinator - 3HW34
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region HI
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215)597-1395
Should the SPCC Coordinator be unavailable to answer questions, please leave a
message on the voice mail system.
17
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
18
-------
APPENDIX A
EXAMPLE SPCC PLAN
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
SAMPLE
SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL, AND COUNTERMEASURE PLAN
TEX'S BULK STORAGE TERMINAL
100 Everspill Roac
Post Office Box 311 (K)\N
Oily City, VA;U345
SJ Oil
P.O. Bo
CrueTevCity, V
ility Manager
CERTIFICATION: I herebyt cefjtify^haj; I have examined the facility and, being familiar with
the provisions^ 40 CFfR^rt 1 l2f attest that this SPCC Plan has been prepared in
accordanc^wrtivgood engendering practices.
I /
Engineer:"-"
mons
Signature:
Registration Number: 98765
State: Commonwealth of Virginia
Date: June 11, 1974
rf*
Eric.
or
Uf
\
r
-------
INTRODUCTION
Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) plans for facilities are prepared and
implemented as required by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) regulations contained
in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 112 (40 CFR 112). A non-transportation related facility
is subject.to SPCC regulations if: the capacity of any aboveground storage tank exceeds 660
gallons; or the total aboveground storage capacity exceeds 1,320 gallons; or the underground
storage capacity exceeds 42,000 gallons; and if, due to its location, the facility could reasonably be
expected to discharge oil into or upon the navigable waters of the United States.
The SPCC plan is not required to be filed with U.S. EPA, but a copy must be available for on-site
review by the regional administrator during normal working hours. The^^PCC plan must be
submitted to the U.S. EPA Region III regional administrator and the state agency along with the other
information specified in §112.4 if either of the following occurs:
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
The facility discharges more than 1,000 U.S. gallons of oil into or up
of the United States or adjoining shorelines in a single event;
The facility discharges oil in harmful quantities in twcKill events withir
period.
'••-., x
/\
'thefacl
m
navigaBje waters
V
^'ffy/twelve month
%*
facility and normal daily throughput;
diagrams, and topographical map;
endments;
ilure analysis of system or subsystem in which
Spill information must be reported to U.S. EPA RegioivJ.ll and thXst^te^ehcy within 60 days if
either of the above thresholds are reached. The^pe'boiT'tslo contairiHne^pflbwing information: "
/. '} \ V
X t 1
Name of the facility;
Name(s) of the owner or operator^
Location of the facility;
Date and year of initial facility oper
Maximum storage or hand]ingcapaaty'*ii
Description of the facility,
A complete copy of the S
The cause(s) of such spill(s), ir
failure occurredXVxx.
9 The corrective aclifi^&?dn4/or counter&easures taken, including an adequate description of
equipment repairssa^d/dfjreplacernents;
10 Additional preventiVX^^s~tw£j?< taken or contemplated to minimize the possibility of
recurje-fvee,^ \ ^
1 1 Sucfif0tfTeMnfomnation ^s\the regional administrator may reasonably require that is pertinent
to (h£ planpr-spjll event '
^
-------
FACILITY INFORMATION
Facility Name: Tex's Bulk Storage Terminal
Mailing Address:
Street Address:
Owner:
Contact Name:
Other Personnel:
Location:
Facility Description:
Fixed Storage:
Portable Storag
Total Oil Storage:
in-Plant Treatment:
P.O. Box 311 (K)
Oily City, VA 12345
lOOEverspill Road
Oily City, VA 12345
Telephone: (123) 222-2222
SJ Oil Company
P.O. Box 00002
Crude City, VA 77000
Telephone: (123) 222-3333
Steve Doe, Facility Manager
505 Oil Road
Oily City, VA 12345
Telephone: (123) 222-4444
Secretary-Bookkeeper
Dispatcher
The facility is locatedm North-W^st-County, Virginia approximately 250 yards
west of Carol Creek/Xhe facilrty^bc-rdered to the north by Everspill Road
and to the west by tne^e§ina Expressway. Approximate facility coordinates
are latitude/4Q°-00'-oV\r»CTtt) and longitude 77°-00'-00" west.
(2)
Tex's Bulk Sto>a^€C^e)^inaVhandles, stores, and distributes petroleum
products in the fiarmSfTnptor gasoline, kerosene, and No. 2 fuel oil. Figure
yshpws the site\.oundanes, nearby waterways, adjacent highways; oil
hariyttrjftHacilities, antUhe office.
-vgaJJ6ri
DOO-galjfian aboveground vertical tanks (one premium gasoline and
one regular gasoline)
(2) 20,b.OQ-gallon aboveground vertical tanks (No. 2 fuel)
20,obp-gallon aboveground vertical tank (kerosene)
5,000-gallon underground horizontal tank (No. 2 fuel)
1,000-gallon aboveground horizontal tank (regular gasoline)
266,000 gallons
A 3,000-gallon oil/water separator used to treat drainage is located in the
north-east comer of the facility. Separator effluent is discharged into Carol
Creek under state and federal permits.
Vehicles:
(1) Transport Truck
(4) Tankwagon Delivery Trucks
-------
TEX'S BULK STORAGE TERMINAL
/^N \ SJ OIL COMPANY
/> \\ ifiO EVERSPILL ROAD
(( \) OIL CITY, VA 12345
\^y
EMERGENCY
SPILL
EQUIPMENT
DIKE
CURBING
DRAINAGE
FENCE
GATE
LIGHT
WATER
|
(D
X
co
r^>
o
3
CO
(D
(D
Q)
m
-------
SPCC PLAN REVIEW - 40 CFR 112.5(b)
The owner or operators must complete a review and evaluation of the SPCC plan at least once every
three years. Evidence of these reviews shall be recorded in the plan.
Signature
oLJ(
'oe
Date
6/10/77
6/03/80
6/01/83
5/21/86
5/15/89 V\
5/13/92
MANAGEMENT APPROVAL - 40 CFR 1
This SPCC plan is fully approved
implemented as described.
5/1
Steve Doe - Facility
Writte Description of Spil
of Tex's Bulk Storage Terminal and has been
6/11/74
Date
PAST SPILL EJ£PERIENCEVv40rCFRvtl2.7(a)
t, Corrective Actions Taken Plan for Preventing Recurrence
On 5/17783^6 oil/v^ajer
separator ma|functi0m5d,
allowing 3 to^glajjpris of
oil to enter Carol Creek.
On 11/7/91, tank 3 was
overfilled during refilling
after the visual level gauge
failed. Approximately 300
gallons were spilled.
A boom was placed on
Carol Creek immediately
after the malfunction
was discovered.
No. 2 fuel spilled within
secondary containment
and was cleaned-up using
absorbent. Contaminated
soil was removed.
The oil/water separator was
repaired. Inspection and
maintenance of the separator
was improved to minimize the
chances of future recurrence.
High level alarms were installed
on all aboveground tanks in
addition to the 100,000-gallon
tanks. The level indicators and
alarms are regularly tested to ensure
proper operation.
-------
POTENTIAL EQUIPMENT FAILURES - 40 CFR 112.7(b)
Potential Event Spill Direction Volume Released
Complete failure
of a full tank
Partial failure
of a full tank
Tank overfill
Pipe failure
Leaking pipe or
valve packing
East to Carol Creek 100,000 gallons
East or north to 1 to 99,000 gallons
Carol Creek or the
oil/water separator
Spill Rate
Instantaneous
Gradual to
instantaneous
North to the oil/
water separator
1 to many gallons
1 gallon
r minute
North or east to the Up to 20,000 gallons
oil/water separator
or Carol Creek
North or east to the Several ouhc:;
oil/water separator to several gaiter)
Tank truck leak or Northeast to the oil/
failure
Hose leak during
truck loading
Pump rupture or
failure
water separator
Oil/water separator East to Cai
malfunction /\.
gallons
Northeast to thespil/ 1 tixseyeral gallons
water separate
North o;
oil/wat
I gallons
to several gallons
Up to 1xgallon
minute
radual to
instantaneous
Up to 1 gallon
per minute
Up to 1 gallon
per minute
Up to 1 gallon
per minute
CONTAINMENT AND DIVERSIONARY STRUCTURES - 40 CFR 112.7(c)(1)
\ ' S ***•
\vy
i Dikes^re^irovided alptfnd tanks 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, which store oil products.
jnloading'area for tank trucks is curbed to provide secondary containment.
iii Surface^Srainag^ at the facility is engineered so that oil spilled outside of diked or curbed
areas at IfteJacfjiJy will drain into the oil water separator.
iv Weirs, booms, or other barriers are available from the local clean-up contractor.
vii Sorbent materials are provided in emergency spill equipment lockers located strategically
through out the facility.
DEMONSTRATION OF PRACTICABILITY - 40 CFR 112.7(d)
Facility management has determined that use of the containment and diversionary structures or
readily available equipment to prevent discharged oil from reaching navigable waters is practical and
effective at this facility.
-------
FACILITY DRAINAGE - 40 CFR 112.7(e)(1)
i Drainage from diked storage areas is restrained by valves to prevent a spill or other
excessive leakage of oil into the facility's drainage system.
ii Gate valves are used to drain diked areas. .
iii In the event of a spill from a tank, the oil should be contained within a dike. If a spill occurs
during transfer or in a manner that cannot be contained in a dike, the material is in a
drainage area, as indicated in Figure 1. Facility drainage from undiked areas with the*
potential of receiving spilled oil terminates at the oil water separator.
v Facility drainage systems are adequately engineered to prevent ojJ'frpfn reaching navigable
water in the event of equipment failure or human error.
BULK STORAGE TANKS - 40 CFR 112.7(e)(2)
i Each aboveground tank is of UL-142 construction and,is\compatible with thXBljs*'they contain
and conditions of storage. \\
All aboveground tanks have concrete dikes fopsecondary cohtalnmerif^ith a volume greater
than 110 percent of the largest single tank' •"""" X v "''
iii Drainage of rainwater from diked areas, bypassing/treatment, is accomplished if:
A The bypass valve is normally Sealed closec
B Run-off rainwater is inspected ^b'Xrtsure compliance with applicable water quality
standards and will
C The bypass valve is openeckand feseajed under supervision.
D Records are X§£Mi^.rainage events on the form shown in Attachment C.
iv ' The underground storage^ja'nlkS&Jlioated and cathodically protected to prevent an undetected
spill. Jhesburied tankj^'also subject to regular pressure testing.
//~J ' ' \\
v There are po-partially bcped tanks at the facility and should be avoided in the future.
* ****s*^^ j^^^^t, ^\
XL ^S^^ % \
vi Aboveground tanks? are periodically tested using a system of non-destructive shell thickness
testing. G&raptfn'sron records are maintained. Visual inspections are performed according
to the prcteedefre located in Section XIII and include inspection of tank supports and
foundations.
vii There are no internal heating coils at this facility.
viii Each tank is equipped with a direct-reading level gauge. The 100,000-gallon tanks are
equipped with high-level alarms. Venting capacity is suitable for the fill and withdrawal rates.
ix Plant effluent discharged into Carol Creek is observed frequently to detect possible upsets
in the oil water separator.
-------
x Oil leaks which result in a loss of oil from tank seams, gaskets, rivets, and bolts are promptly
corrected.
xi The portable oil tank and other mobile oil storage, such as 55-gallon drums, will be located
to prevent spilled oil from reaching navigable water, provided with secondary containment,
and located where they will not be subject to periodic flooding.
TRANSFER OPERATIONS, PUMPING, AND IN-PLANT PROCESSES - 40 CFR 112.7(e)(3)
i Buried piping is coated and cathodically protected as warranted to protect against corrosion.
If a section of buried line is exposed, it is carefully examined for deterioration. If corrosion
damage is found, additional examination and corrective action will broken as indicated by
the magnitude of the damage.
Pipelines not in service or on standby for an extended period a
and marked as to their origin.
iii All pipe supports are properly designed to minimize abrasion and corrosi
expansion and contraction.
iv All aboveground pipelines and valves are^exanqjned m
Pressure testing for piping is conducted as'wa'rTajited.
blank flanged
to allow for
ess their condition.
v Warning signs are posted as needed
pipelines.
TANK CAR AND TANK TRUCK LOADIN
i The tank truck loading an
U.S. Department of Transpd
ii Curbing is instatfed^at the vehicta^ioadihg/unloading rack and holds the single largest
compartment of an^-^r&Gk^used at thlteJfacility.
are provided at the loading/unloading rack to prevent
Vehicles from damaging aboveground
/
DADING^ACK - 40 CFR 112.7(e)(4)
res meet the minimum requirements of the
iii -Warning signs an
prema*we,,yehicular
iv Thfe (lowermost.drainVnd all outlets on tank trucks are inspected prior to filling and
dec
INSPECTIONS
?ORDS - 40 CFR 112.7(e)(8)
Daily visual inspections consist of a complete walk through of the facility property to check for tank
damage or leakage, stained or discolored soils, excessive accumulation of water in diked areas,
plant effluent discharged from the oil water separator, and to ensure the dike drain valves are
securely closed.
The checklist provided in Attachment B is used during monthly inspections, These inspections are
performed in accordance with written procedures such as API standards and engineering
specifications. Written inspection procedures and monthly inspections are signed by the inspector
and are maintained in the office for three years.
• 8
-------
SECURITY - 40 CFR 112.7(e)(9)
i The facility is surrounded by steel security fencing and the entrance gates are locked when
the facility is unattended.
ii The master flow and drain valves are locked in the closed position when in non-operating or
non-standby status.
iii The electrical starter controls for the oil pumps are located in the office, which is locked when
the pumps are not in use.
iv The loading and unloading connections of oil pipelines are capped.wben not in service or
when in standby service for and extended time.
'<
v Two area lights are located in such a position so as to illuminate-,!
areas. Consideration was given to discovering spills at night and p
through vandalism.
PERSONNEL, TRAINING, AND SPILL PREVENTION PRO&EBURES - 40
jment i
i Facility personnel have been instructed by
of oil pollution prevention equipment and
The facility manager, Steve Doe, is accoun
Terminal.
iii Yearly spill prevention briefings
ensure adequate underst
events or failures and rece:
on oil spill prevention, cont'
vehicular spill has been conduct
for possible spill p§sppjise. Reco
on the form showfe xWiJttachment D,
storage
ccurring
opefaiton and maintenance
fy^regulations.
>r'pif spill prevention at Tex's Bulk Storage
/ Rianagement for operating personnel to
plan. These briefings highlight any past spill
utionary measures. Training has been held
feval methods. A simulation of an on-site
exercises shall be periodically held to prepare
these briefings and spill prevention training are kept
1 ructions and phone numbers regarding the reporting
of a spill to the Nath?nal;R£sp.onse Center and the state are listed below and have been
publicized and posttedjrf Jh'e
EMERGENCYTE^EPHONE MEMBERS
^
A.
^ ).}
1. FaciliVJafiagfer, Steve Doe
(123) 222-3333
2. National Response Center (800) 424-8802
3. State Emergency Response Commission (123) 555-2221
B. Clean-up Contractors
1. E-Z Clean Environmental
2 O.K. Engineers, Inc.
(123) 222-3038
(123) 222-2207
-------
C. Supplies and Equipment
1. Oil City Equipment Co.
2. Northwestern Sorbent Co.
(123)222-8372
(123) 222-9217
10
-------
CERTIFICATION OF SUBSTANTIAL HARM DETERMINATION FORM
Facility Name: Tex's Bulk Storage Terminal • •
Facility Address: 100 Everspill Road .
Oil City. VA 12345
1. Does the facility transfer oil over water to or from vessels and does the facility have a total oil storage
capacity greater than or equal to 42,000 gallons?
YES
NO
2.
Does the facility have a total oil storage capacity greater than or equal to 1 million gallons and does
the facility lack secondary containment that is sufficiently large to contain the^apacity of the largest
aboveground oil storage tank plus sufficient freeboard to allow for precipitatjonjtfnhin any aboveground
storage tank area?
YES
3.
Does the facility have a total oil storage capacity greater than or equal to 1 mmip'rvsaltons and is the
facility located at a distance (as calculated using the appropriate formula in Attasjjjtient C-lll to this
appendix or a comparable formula1) such that a discharge foprn the facility could cause injury to fish
and wildlife and sensitive environments? For further descriptionof fish and wildlife and sensitive
environments, see Appendices I, II, and III to DOC/j^lQZWs^GuidancXW Facility and Vessel Response
Plans: Fish and Wildlife and Sensitive Envirorin?e'nts\(9ee Append^M^tt) this part, section 10, for
availability) and the applicable Area Contingency Plan.
YES A
4.
Does the facility have a total oil storage
facility located at a distance £a§ calculc
appendix or a comparable
drinking water intake2?
YES
city greate^ihan or equal to 1 million gallons and is the
I the appropriate formula in Attachment C-lll to this
scharge from the facility would shut down a public
5.
Does the facility havesa\totak>Tl'stprage capacity greater than or equal to 1 million gallons and has the
facility experienced ayepQrt^bte.^oihspill in an amount greater than or equal to 10,000 gallons within
.1 i_,_.i c ^ V \f *
NO
CERTIFICA1
I certify under pena^tvofJaWthat I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted
in this document, a^uQ^based on my inquiry of those individuals responsible for obtaining this information,
I believe that the submitted information is true, accurate, and complete.
2x»
Facility Manager
Signature
Steve Doe
Title
Name (please type or print)
/.. 1994
Date
1 If a comparable formula is used documentation of the reliability and analytical soundness of the comparable
formula must be attached to this form.
2 For the purposes of 40 CFR part 112, public drinking water intakes are analogous to public water systems
as described at 40 CFR 143.2(c).
Attachment A, Page 11
-------
FACILITY INSPECTION CHECKLIST
Instructions: This inspection record will be completed every month. Place an X in the appropriate box for each
item. If any response requires elaboration, do so in the Descriptions and Comments space provided. Further
descriptions or comments should be attached on a separate sheet of paper if necessary.
Tank surfaces show signs of leakage
Tanks are damaged, rusted, or deteriorated
Bolts, rivets, or seams are damaged
Tank supports are deteriorated or buckled
Tank foundations have eroded or settled
Level gauges or alarms are inoperative
Vents are obstructed
Valve seals or gaskets are leaking
Pipelines or supports are damaged or de1
Buried pipelines are exposed
Loading/unloading area is damaged orM&eribratjci
,wx. vs
Connections are not capi
Secondary containment is
fro
Dike drainlde va|yes~3rev open
Oil/water separatgris functioning property
Oil/water separator effluent has a sheen
Fencing, gates or lighting is non-functional
Remarks:
Yes No Descnptions and Comments
Signature:
Date:
Attachment B, Page 12
-------
RECORD OF DIKE DRAINAGE
Instructions: This record will be completed when rainwater from diked areas is drained into a storm drain or
into an open water course, lake, or pond, and bypasses the in-plant treatment. The bypass valve normally
should be sealed closed and only opened and reseated following drainage under responsible supervision.
Diked Area Date Presence of Oil Time Started Time Finished Signature
- . Attachment C, Page 13
-------
RECORD OF SPILL PREVENTION BRIEFINGS
Instruction: Briefings will be scheduled and conducted by the owner or operators for operating personnel at
intervals frequent enough to assure adequate understanding of the SPCC plan for this facility. These briefings
should also highlight and describe known spill events or failures, malfunctioning components, and recently
developed precautionary measures. Personnel will also be instructed in operation and maintenance of
equipment to prevent the discharges of oil and applicable pollution control laws, rules, and regulations. During
these briefings there will be an opportunity for facility operators and other personnel to share recommendations
concerning health, safety, and environmental issues encountered during operation of the facility.
Date:
Attendees:
Subjects
Recommendations
and Suggestions:
Attachment D, Page 14
-------
APPENDIX B
DIKE DESIGNS
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
SAMPLE DIKE HEIGHT CALCULATION
50,000
20,000
10,000
Calculations for this example:
a) minimum containment volume (mcv) = to capacity of largest tank in a tank
installation, in this example 50,000 gallons, mcv ='50000 x 0.1337 cu. ft/gal. =
6.685 cu. ft.
* factor in freeboard per local requirements.
b) dike area (proposed) Length x Width
c) dike height (proposed)
d) dike volume (dike area x dike height)
e) displacement volume (tank area x tank height of dike wall)
* Volume of tank (cylinder) = -jn^h
f) effective secondary containment
dike volume - displacement volume = x
1) if x is greater than the mvc then the secondary containment may be adequate, if
sufficient freeboard for precipitation is factored in
2) if x is less than mcv, adjust the dike area n dike height accordingly, the
recalculate.
-------
TfflS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
APPENDIX C
40 CFR PART 109
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§109.4
PART 109—CRITERIA FOR STATE,
LOCAL AND REGIONAL OIL RE-
MOVAL CONTINGENCY PLANS
See.
109.1 Applicability.
109.2 Definitions.
109.3 Purpose and scope.
109.4 Relationship to Federal response ac-
tions. .
10941 Development and implementation
criteria for State, local and regional oil
removal contingency plans.
109.9 Coordination.
AD
U.S.C. 116KJX1XB).
•r See. ll(J)dXB). 84 Stat. 96.33
SOUBCC 30 FR 22485. Nov. 25,1971, unless
otherwise noted.
8109.1 Applicability.
The criteria in this part are provided
to assist State, local and regional agen-
cies in the development of oil removal
contingency plans for the nft-"h. wildlife, and
public and private property, shore-
lines, and beaches.
(d) Major disaster means any hurri-
cane. tornado, storm, flood, high
water, wind-driven water, tidal wave.
earthquake, drought, fire, or other ca-
tastrophe in any part of the United
States which, in the determination of
the President, is or threatens to
become of sufficient severity and mag-
nitude to warrant rHy**t*
-------
§1093
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-91 Edition)
a result of such duplica-
charger or non-Federal entities, the
Federal on-scene iromfnvd'tr will take
control of the response activity in ac-
cordance with section IKcXl) of the
Federal Act.
§ 109.5 Deretopment and implementation
criteria for State, local and regional oil
remoTal.eonunfenej plant.
Criteria for the development and im-
plementation of State, local and re-
gional oil removal contingency plans
are:
(a) Definition of the authorities, re-
sponsibilities and duties of all persons.
organizations or agencies which are to
be Involved or could be involved in
planning or directing oil removal oper-
ations, with particular care to clearly
define the authorities, responsibilities
and duties of State and local govern-
mental agencies to avoid unnecessary
duplication of cnntrf confusion
could be generated in an emerge
situation as
tions.
(b) Establishment of notification
procedures for the purpose of early de-
tection n"ri tintaiy notification of an
oil discharge including!
(1) The identification of critical
water use areas to facilitate the re-
porting of and response to oil dis-
charges.
(2) A current list of names, tele-
phone numbers and addresses of the
responsible persons and alternates on
call to receive notification of an oil dis-
charge as well as the names, telephone
numbers and addresses of the organi-
zations and agencies to be notified
when an oil discharge is discovered.
(3) Provisions for access to a reliable
communications system for timely no-
tification of an oil discharge and incor-
poration in the communications
system of the capability for intercon-
nection with the ***-1tm* sys-
tems established under related oil re-
moval contingency plans, particularly
State ***d National plans.
(4) An established, prearranged pro-
cedure for requesting assistance
during a major disaster or when the
situation exceeds the response capabil-
ity of the State, local or regional au-
thority.
(c) Provisions to assure that full re-
source capability is known and can be
committed during an oil discharge sit-
uation including:
(1) The identification BP«* inventory
of applicable equipment, n"***1^*1* and'
supplies which are available locally
and regionally.
(2) An estimate of the equipment,
materials and supplies which would be
required to remove the maximum oil
discharge to be anticipated.
(3) Development of agreements and
arrangements in advance of an oil dis-
charge for the acquisition of equip-
ment, materials »"d supplies to be
used in responding to such a dis-
charge.
(d) Provisions for well defined and
specific actions to be taken after dis-
covery «md notification of an oil dis-
charge
-------
APPENDIX D
40 CFR PART 110
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§ 110.1
PART 110—DISCHARGE OF OIL
See.
110.1 Definitions.
110.2 Applicability.
110.3 Discharge into navigable waters of
such Quantities as may be harmful.
110.4 Discharge into contiguous zone of
such quantities as may.be harmful.
110.5 Discharge beyond contiguous zone of
such quantities as may be harmful.
110.6 Discharge prohibited. ..
110.7 Exception for vessel engines.
110.8 Dispersants.
110.9 Demonstration projects.
110.10 Notice.
110.11 Discharge at deepwater ports.
AUTHORITY: Sees. 311 (b)(3) and (b)(4) and
SOKa). Federal Water Pollution Control
Act. as amended (33 0JS.C. 1321 (b)(3) and
(b)(4) and 1361
-------
§110.2
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-91 Edition)
eign nation, except when such vessel is
engaged in commerce;
Sheen means an iridescent appear-
ance on the surface of water;
Sludge means an aggregate of oil or
oil and other matter of any kind in
any form other than dredged spoil
having a combined specific gravity
equivalent to or greater than water;
United States means the States, the
District of Columbia, the Common-
wealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, Ameri-
can Samoa, the Virgin Islands, and the
Trust Territory of the Pacific T«i«m«te;
Vessel means every description of
watercraft or other artificial, contriv-
ance used, or capable of being used, as
a means of transportation on water
other than a public vessel; and
Wetlands means those areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface or
ground water at a frequency or dura-
tion sufficient to support, and that
under normal circumstances do sup-
port, a prevalence of vegetation typi-
cally adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands generally Include
playa lakes, swamps, marshes, bogs
and similar areas such as sloughs, prai-
rie potholes, wet 'meadows, prairie
river overflows, mudflats, and natural
ponds.
§ 110.2 Applicability.
The regulations of this part apply to
the discharge of oil prohibited by sec-
tion 311(b)(3) of the Act This includes
certain discharges into or upon the
navigable waters of the United States
or adjoining shorelines or into or upon
the waters of the contiguous zone, or
in connection-with activities under the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act or
the Deepwater Port Act of 1974, or
that may affect natural resources be-
longing to. appertaining to. or under
the exclusive management authority
of the United States (including re-
sources under the Magnuson Fishery
Conservation and Management Act).
The regulations of this part also
define the term "discharge" for pur-
poses of section 18(m)(3) of the Deep-
water Port Act of 1974, as provided
under S 110.11 of this part.
§ 110.3 Discharge into navigable waters of
such quantities as may be harmful.
For purposes of section 311(b) of the
Act, discharges of oil into or upon the
navigable waters of the United States
or adjoining shorelines in such quanti-
ties that It has been determined may
be harmful to the public health or
welfare of the United States, except as
provided in S 110.7 of this part, include
discharges of oil that:
(a) Violate applicable water quality
standards, or
(b) Cause a film or sheen upon or
discoloration of the surface' of the
water or adjoining shorelines or cause
a sludge or emulsion to be deposited
beneath the surface of the water or
upon adjoining shorelines.
§ 110.4 Discharge into contiguous zone of
such quantities as may be. harmful.
For purposes of section 311(b> of the
Act, discharges of oil into or upon the
waters of the contiguous zone in such
quantities that it has been determined
may be harmful to the public health
or welfare of the United States, except
as provided in § 110.7, include dis-
charges of oil that:
(a) Violate applicable water quality
standards, or
(b) Cause a film or sheen upon or
discoloration of the surface of the
water or adjoining shorelines or cause
a sludge or emulsion to be deposited
beneath the surface of the water or
upon adjoining shorelines.
§ 110.5 Discharge beyond contiguous zone
of such quantities as may be harmful.
For purposes of section 311(b) of the
Act. discharges of oil into or upon
waters seaward of the contiguous zone
in connection with activities under the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act or
the Deepwater Port Act of 1974, or
that may affect natural resources be-
longing to, appertaining to. or under
the exclusive management authority
of the United States (including re-
sources under the Magnuson Fishery
Conservation and Management Act) in
such quantities that It has been deter-
mined may be harmful to the public
health or welfare of the United States.
except as provided in § 110.7, include
discharges of oil that:
(a) Violate applicable water quality
standards, or
(b) Cause a film or sheen upon or
discoloration of the surface of the
water or adjoining shorelines or cause
a sludge or emulsion to be deposited
beneath the surface of the water or
upon adjoining shorelines.
B 110.6 Discharge prohibited.
As provided in section 311(b)(3) of
the Act. no person shall discharge or
cause or permit to be discharged into
or upon the navigable waters of the
United States or adjoining shorelines
or into or upon the waters of the con-
tiguous zone or into or upon waters
seaward of the contiguous zone in con-
nection with activities under the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act or
the Deepwater Port Act of 1974. or
that may affect natural resources be-
longing to. appertaining to. or under
the exclusive management authority
of the United States (including re-
sources under the Magnuson Fishery
Conservation and Management Act)
any oil in such quantities as may be
harmful as determined In {§ 110.3.
110.4. and 110.5. except as the same
may be permitted in the contiguous
zone and seaward under MARPOL 73 /
78. Annex I, as provided in 33 CFR
151.09.
B 110.7 Exception for vessel engines.
'For purposes of section 311(b) of the
Act. discharges of oil from a properly
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§110.10
functioning vessel engine are not
deemed to be harmful, but discharges
of such oil accumulated in a vessel's
bilges shall not be so exempt.
§ 110.8 Dispenants.
Addition of dispersants or emulsifi-
ers to oil to be discharged that would
circumvent the provisions of this part
is prohibited.
§ 110.9 Demonstration projects.
Notwithstanding any other provi-
sions of this part, the Administrator
may permit the discharge of oil. under
section 311 of the Act. in connection
with research, demonstration projects.
or studies relating to the prevention.
control, or abatement of eil pollution.
§ 110.10 Notice.
Any person in charge of a vessel or
of an onshore or offshore facility
shall, as soon as he or she has knowl-
edge of any discharge of oil from such
vessel or facility in violation of § 110.6.
immediately notify the National Re-
sponse Center (NRC) (800-424-8802; in
the Washington. DC metropolitan
area. 426-2675). If direct reporting to
the NRC is not practicable, reports
may be made to the Coast Guard or
EPA predesignated On-Scene Coordi-
nator (OSC) for the geographic area
where the discharge occurs. All such
reports shall be promptly relayed to
the NRC. If it Is not possible to notify
the NRC or the predesignated OCS
immediately, reports may be made im-
mediately to the nearest Coast Guard
unit, provided that the person in
charge of the vessel or onshore or off-
shore facility notifies the NRC as soon
as possible. The reports shall be made
in accordance with such procedures as
the Secretary of Transportation may
prescribe. The procedures for such
notice are set forth in U.S. Coast
Guard regulations. 33 CFR pan 153.
subpart B and in the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Con-
tingency Plan. 40 CFR pan 300. sub-
pan E. (Approved by the Office of
Management and Budget under the
control number 2050-0046)
§ 110.11 Discharge at deepwater ports.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph
(b) below, for purposes of section
18(m)(3) of the Deepwater Port Act of
1974. the term "discharge" shall in-
clude but not be limited to, any spill-
ing, leaking, pumping, pouring, emit-
ting, emptying, or dumping into the
marine environment of quantities of
oil that:
(1) Violate applicable water quality
standards, or
(2) Cause a film or sheen upon or
discoloration of the surface of the
water or adjoining shorelines or cause
a sludge or emulsion to be deposited
beneath the surface of the water or
upon adjoining shorelines.
(b) For purposes of section 18(m)(3)
of the Deepwater Port Act of 1974. the
term "discharge" excludes:
(1) Discharges of oil from a properly
functioning vessel engine, (including
an engine on a public vessel), but not
discharges of such oil accumulated in
a vessel's bilges (unless in compliance
with MARPOL 73/78. Annex I); and
(2) Discharges of oil permitted under
MARPOL 73/78, Annex I.
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
APPENDIX E
40 CFR PART 112
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-91 Edition)
PART 112— OIL POLLUTION
PREVENTION
Sec.
112.1 General applicability.
112.2 Definitions.
112J Requirements lor preparation and
Implementation of Spill Prevention Con-
• trol and Countermeasure Plans.
112.4 Amendment of SPCC Plans by Re-
gional Administrator.
112.5 Amendment of Spill Prevention Con-
trol and Countermeasure Plans by
owners or operators.
112.6 Civil penalties for violation of oil pol-
lution prevention regulations.
112.7 Guidelines for the preparation and
implementation of a Spill Prevention
Control and Countermeasure Plan.
— MZKOKAHDUII or UirenutAiranto
BCTWITW THE SECBEIAIY or THAN STOKTA-
TTOH AMD TRX ADKUTISTBATOB OT TBX EN-
VXROlflfXIfTAX. PROTCCTXOlf AUJENC'Y
AUTHORITY: Sees. 3110X1X0. 31KJX2).
SOKa). Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(sec. 2. Pub: L. 92-500. 86 Stat. 816 et seq.
(33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.)): sec. 4(b). Pub. L.
92-500. 86 Stat. 897: 5'TLS.C. Reorg. Plan of
1970 No. 3 (1970). 35 PR 15823. 3 CFR 1966-
1970 Comp4 E.O. 11735. 38 FR 21243. 3
CFR.
Somtcc 38 FR 34165. Dec. 11. 1973. unless
otherwise noted.
B 112.1 General applicability.
(a) This part establishes procedures,
methods and equipment and other re-
quirements for equipment to prevent
the discharge of oil from non-trans-
portation-related onshore and off-
shore facilities into or upon the navi-
gable waters of the United States or
adjoining shorelines.
(b) Except as provided in paragraph
(d) of this section, this part applies to
owners or operators of non-transporta-
tion-related onshore and offshore fa-
cilities engaged in drilling, producing.
gathering, storing, processing, refin-
ing. transferring, distributing or con-
suming oil and oil products, and
which, due to their location, could rea-
sonably be expected to discharge oil in
harmful quantities, as defined in part
110 of this chapter, into or upon the
navigable waters of the United States
or adjoining shorelines.
(c) As provided in section 313 (86
Stat. 875) departments, agencies, and
instrumentalities of the Federal eov-
ernment are subject, to these regula-
tions to the same extent as *"y
person, except for the provisions of
1112.8.
.-(d) This part does not apply to:
-<1) Facilities, equipment or oper-
ations which are not subject to the Ju-
risdiction of the TBmripMriTnfntral Pro-
tection Agency, as follows:
(1) Onshore and offshore faculties,
which, due to ttmtr iftfutlflT', could not
reasonably be expected to discharge
ofl into .or upon the navigable waters
of ;the ..United States or adjoining
This determinatlcR
be baaed solely upon a consideration
of the geographical, Inraflnrml aspects
of the facility (such,as proximity to
navigable waters or adjoining shore-
lines, i*t«i contour, drainage, etc.) and
•hnii exclude consideration of man-
made i^atures such as dUres, equip-
ment or other structures which may
serve to restrain, hinder, contain, or
otherwise prevent a discharge of oil
from reaching navigable waters of the
United States or adjoining shorelines;
and
(11) Equipment or operations of ves-
sels or transportation-related onshore
and offshore facilities which are sub-
ject to authority and control of the
Department of Transportation, as de-
fined in the Memorandum of Under-
standing between the Secretary of
Transportation and the Administrator
of the Environmental Protection
Agency, dated November 24. 1971. 36
PR 24000.
(2) Those facilities which, although
otherwise subject to the Jurisdiction of
the Environmental Protection .Agency.
meet both of the following require-
ments
(1) The underground buried storage
capacity of the facility is 42.000 gal-
lons or less of oil, and
(11) The storage capacity, which Is
not buried, of the faculty is 1.320 gal-
lons or less of oil. provided no single
container has a capacity in excess of
660 gallons.
(e) This part provides for the prepa-
ration and implementation of Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeas-
ure Plans prepared in accordance with
( 112.7. designed to complement exist-
ing laws, regulations, rules, standards,
policies and procedures pertaining to
safety «*•«>«•»••<• fire .prevention and
pollution prevention rules, so as to
form- a comprehensive balanced Feder-
al/State spill prevention program to
m
-------
Environm
•I Protection Agency
ty of any kind located in. on. or under
any land within the United States.
other than submerged lands, which is
not a transportation-related facility.
(d) Offshore facility means any facil-
ity of any kind located in. on. or under
any of the navigable waters of the
United States, which is not a transpor-
tation-related facility.
(e) Owner or operator means any
person owning or operating an on-
shore facility or an offshore facility.
and in the case of any abandoned off-
shore facility, the person who owned
or operated such facility immediately
prior to such abandonment.
(f) Person includes an individual.
firm, corporation, association, and a
partnership.
(g) Regional Administrator, means
the Regional Administrator of the En-
vironmental Protection Agency, or his
designee. in and for the Region in
which the facility is located.
(h) Transportation-related and non-
transportation-rclated as applied to an
onshore or offshore facility, are de-
fined in the Memorandum of Under-
standing between .the Secretary of
Transportation and'the Administrator
of the Environmental Protection
Agency, dated November 24. 1971. 36
PR 24080.
\i) SpUl event means a discharge of
oil into or upon the navigable waters
of the United States or adjoining
shorelines in harmful Quantities, as
defined at 40 CFR part 110.
(J) United States means the States.
the District of Columbia, the Com-
monwealth of Puerto Rico, the «"«^n1
Zone. Guam. American Samoa, the
Virgin Islands, and the Trust Terri-
tory of the Pacific Islands.
(k) The term navigable waters of the
United States means navigable waters
as defined in section 502(7) of the
FWPCA, and includes:
.(1) All navigable waters of the
United States, as defined in Judicial
decisions prior to passage of the 1972
Amendments to the FWPCA (Pub. L.
92-500). and tributaries of such
waters;
(2) Interstate waters;
(3) Intnstate lakes, rivers, and
streams which are utilized by inter-
state travelers for recreational or
other purposes: and
(4).-Intnstate lakes, rivers, and
streams from which fish or «h»iiftgh
are taken and sold in interstate com-
merce.
(1) Vessel means every description of
watercralt or other artificial contriv-
ance used, or capable of being used as
* means of transportation on water,
other than a public vessel.
8112J Requirement* for preparation and
implementation of Spill Prevention
Control and Countennemrare Plant.
(a) Owners or operators of onshore
and offshore facilities in operation on
or before the effective date of this
part that have discharged or. due to
their location, could reasonably be ex-
pected to discharge oil in harmful
quantities, as defined in 40 CFR part
110. into or upon the'navigable waters
of the United States or adjoining
shorelines, shall prepare a Spill Pre-
vention Control and Countermeasure
Plan (hereinafter "SPCC Plan"), in
writing and in accordance with § 112.7.
Except as provided for in paragraph
(f) of this section, such SPCC Plan
shall be prepared within six months
after the effective date of th<< pan
and shall be fully implemented as soon
as possible, but not later than one
year after the effective date of this
part.
(b) Owners or operators of onshore
and offshore facilities that become
operational after the effective date of
this part, and that have discharged or
could reasonably be expected to dis-
charge oil in harmful quantities, as de-
fined in 40 CFR part 110. into or upon
the navigable waters of the United
States or adjoining shorelines, shall
prepare an SPCC Plan in accordance
with i 112.7. Except as provided for in
paragraph (f) of this section, such
SPCC Plan shall be prepared within
six months after the date such facility
begins operations and shall be fully
implemented as soon as possible, but
not later than one year after such fa-
cility begins operations.
(c) Owners or operators of onshore
and offshore mobile or portable facili-
ties, such as onshore drilling or wor-
kover rigs, barge mounted offshore
drilling or workover rigs, and portable
fueling facilities" «><«Ji prepare and im-
plement an SPCC Plan as required by
paragraphs (a), (b) and (d) of this sec-
tion. The owners or operators of such
facility need not prepare a new SPCC
Plan each time the facility is moved to
a new site. The SPCC Plan may be a
general plan, prepared In accordance
with {112.7. using good engineering
practice. When the mobile or portable
facility is moved. It must be located
and installed using the spill preven-
tion practices outlined in the HPCC
Plan for the facility. No mobile or
portable facility subject to this regula-
tion shall operate unless the SPCC
Plan has been implemented. The
SPCC Plan shall only apply while the
facility is in a fixed (non-transporta-
tion) operating mode. '
(d) No SPCC Plan shall be effective
to satisfy the requirements of thi«
part unless it has been reviewed by a
Registered Professional Engineer and
certified to by such Professional Engi-
neer. By means of th<« certification
the engineer, having examined the fa-
cility and being familiar with the pro-
visions of «**<« part, shall attest that
the SPCC Flan has been prepared in
accordance with good engineering
practices. Such certification .shall in
no way relieve the owner or operator
of an onshore or offshore facility of
-------
§11Z4
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-91 Edition)
his duty to prepare and fully Imple-
ment such Plan in accordance with
J 112.7. as required by paragraphs (a).
(b) and (cJ of this section.
(e) Owners or operators of a facility
for which an SPCC Plan is required
pursuant to paragraph, a), (b) or (c) of
this section shall mam ruin a complete
copy of the Plan at such facility if the
facility is normally attended at least 8
hours per day, or at the nearest field
office if the facility is not so attended.
and shall make such Plan available to
the Regional Administrator for on-site
review during normal working hours.
(f) Extensions of time.
(1) The Regional Administrator may
authorize an extension of time for the
preparation ttnri full implementation
of an SFCC "'Ian beyond the time per-
mitted for ,ae preparation and imple-
mentation of an SPCC Plan pursuant
to paragraph (a), (b) or (c) of this sec-
tion where he finds that the owner or
operator of a facility subject to para-
graphs (a), (b) or (c) of this section
cannot fully comply with the require-
ments of this pan as a result of either
nonavailability of qualified personnel.
or delays in construction or equipment
delivery beyond the control and with-
out the fault of such owner or opera-
tor or their respective agents or em-
ployees. .
(2) Any owner or operator seeking
an extension of time pursuant to para-
graph (f XI) of tfH« section may submit
a letter of request to the Regional Ad-
ministrator. Such letter shall Include:
(1) A complete copy of the SPCC
Plan, if completed:
(11) A full explanation of the cause
for any such delay and the specific as-
pects of the SPCC Plan affected by
the delay;
(111) A full discussion of actions being
^•^TTI or contemplated to m*yntn
-------
Environmental Protection Agoncy
§112.4
clllty.
(d) After review of the SPCC Plan
for a facility subject to paragraph (a)
of this section, together with all other
Information submitted by the owner
or operator .of such facility, and by the
.State agency under paragraph (c) of
this section, the Regional Administra-
tor may require the owner or operator
of such facility to amend the SPCC
Plan if he finds that the Plan does not
meet the requirements of this part or
that the «m»nrim«»nt of the Plan is
necessary to- prevent and to contain
discharges of oil from such facility.
(e) When the Regional Administra-
tor proposes to require an amendment
to the SPCC Flan, he shall notify the
facility operator by certified mail ad-
dressed to. or by personal delivery to,
the facility owner or operator, that he
proposes to require an *irt»m*mmt to
.the Plan, and shall specify the terms
of such amendment. If the facility
owner or operator is a corporation, a
copy of such notice shall also be
mailed to the registered agent, if any,
of such corporation in the State where
such facility is located. Within 30 days
from receipt of such notice, the facili-
ty owner or operator may submit writ-
ten information, views, and arguments
on the amendment. After considering
all relevant material presented, the
Regional Administrator shall notify
the facility owner Or operator of any
required or shall rescind
the notice. The amendment required
by the Regional Administrator «h«n
become pan of the Plan 30 days after
such notice, unless the Regional Ad-
ministrator. for good cause, shall
specify another effective date. The
owner or operator of the facility shall
implement the amendment of the
Plan as soon as possible, but not later
t^ian gjx pinnth" after the «»n»mh»n»nt
becomes part of the Plan, unless the
Regional Administrator specifies an-
other date.
(f ) An owner or operator may appeal
a decision made by the Regional Ad-
ministrator requiring an "yiyp<1rn*r't
to an SPCC Flan. The appeal shall be
made to the Administrator of the
United States Environmental Protec-
tion Agency and must be made in writ-
ing within 30 days of receipt of the
notice from the Regional Administra-
tor requiring the •»n»T»fitn»nt j± com-
plete copy of the appeal must be sent
to the Regional Administrator at the
time the appeal is made. The appeal
shall contain a clear and concise state-
ment of the issues and points of fact
in the case. It may also contain addi-
tional information from the owner or
operator, or from any other person.
The Administrator or his draignee
may request additional information
from the owner or operator, or from
any other person. The Administrator
or his designee shall render a decision
within 60 days of receiving the appeal
and shall notify the owner or operator
of his decision.
C38 FR 34165. Dec. 11. 1973. as amended at
41 FR 12658. Mar. 26. 1976]
9ll££ Amendment of Spill Prevention
Control and Countcrmeaaure Plana by
ownera or operator*.
(a) Owners or operators of facilities
subject to § 112.3 (a), (b) or (c) shall
amend the SPCC Flan for such facility
in accordance with § 112.7 whenever
there is a change in facility design.
construction, operation or mainte-
nance which materially affects the fa-
cility's potential for the discharge of
oil into or upon the navigable waters
of the United States or adjoining
shore lines. Such nrr*'T'rimfnts «hnii be
fully implemented as soon as possible.
bt:t not later than six months after
such change occurs.
(b) Notwithstanding compliance
with paragraph (a) of this section.
owners and operators of facilities sub-
ject to $ 112J (a), (b) or (c) shall com-
plete a review and evaluation of the
SPCC Flan at least once every three
years from the date such facility be-
comes subject to this part. As a result
of this review and evaluation, the
owner or operator shall amend the
SPCC Plan within six months of the
review to include more effective pre-
vention and control technology if: (1)
Such technology will significantly
reduce the likelihood of a spill event
from the facility, and (2) if such tech-
nology has been field-proven at the
time of the review.
(c) No amendment to an SPCC Plan
shall be effective to satisfy the re-
quirements of this section unless it
has been certified by a Professional
Engineer in accordance with
0 112.6 Civil penalties for violation of oil
pollution prevention refutations.
. Owners or operators of facilities sub-
ject to 1 112.3 (a), (b) or (c) who vio-
late the requirements of this part 112
by failing or refusing to comply with
any of the provisions of 8 112J. { 112.4
or { 112.5 shall be liable for a civil pen-
alty of not more than SS.OOO for each
day such violation continues. Civil
penalties shall be imposed in accord-
ance with procedures set out in pan
114 of this subchapter D.
(Sees. 31KJ). SOKa). Pub. L. 92-500. 86 Stat.
868.885 (33 U-S.C. 1321CJ). 1361U)))
(39 FR 31602. Aug. 29.19741
§ 112.7 Guideline* for the preparation and
implementation of a Spill Prevention
Control and Countcrmeaanre Plan.
The SPCC Plan shall be a carefully
thought-out plan, prepared in accord-
ance with good ecgineering practices.
and which has the full approval of
management at a level with authority
to commit the necessary resources. If
the plan *»»« for additional facilities
-------
40 CFR Ch. t (7-1-91 Edition)
or procedures, methods, or equipment
not yet fully operational, these items
should be discussed in separate para-
graphs, and the details of installation
and operational start-up should be ex-
plained separately. The complete
SPCC Plan shall follow the sequence
outlined below, and include a discus-
sion of the facility's conf ormance with
the appropriate guidelines listed:
(a) A facility which has experienced
one or more spill events within twelve
months prior to the effective date of
this pan should Include a written de-
scription of each such spill, corrective
action taken and plans for preventing
recurrence.
(b) Where experience indicates a
reasonable potential for equipment
failure (such as tank overflow, rup-
ture. or leakage), the plan should in-
clude a prediction of the direction.
rate of flow, and total quantity of oil
which could be discharged from the
facility as a result of each major type
of failure.
(c) Appropriate containment and/or
diversionary structures or equipment
to prevent discharged oil from reach-
ing a navigable water course should be
provided. One of the following preven-
tive systems or its equivalent should
be used as a
(1) Onshore facilities:
(1) Dikes, benns or retaining walls
sufficiently impervious to contain
spilled oil:
(li)Curbing;
(ill) Culverting. gutters or other
drainage systems:
(iv) Weirs, booms or other barriers:
(v) Spill diversion ponds:
(vi) Retention ponds:
(vii) Sorbent materials.
(2) Offshore facilities:
(i) Curbing, drip pans:
(11) Sumps and collection systems.
(d) When it is determined that the
installation of structures or equipment
listed In 5112.7(c) to prevent dis-
charged oil from reaching the naviga-
ble waters is not practicable from any
onshore or offshore facility, the owner
or operator should clearly demon-
strate such impracticability and pro-
vide the following:
(1) A strong oil spill contingency
plan following the provision of 40 CFR
pan 109.
(2) A written commitment of man-
power, equipment and materials re-
quired to expeditiously control and
remove any harmful quantity of oil
discharged.
(e) In addition to the minimal pre-
vention standards listed under
{ 112.7(c). sections of the Plan should
include a complete discussion of con-
formance with the following applica-
ble guidelines, other effective spill pre-
vention and containment procedures
(or. if more stringent, with State rules.
regulations and guidelines):
(1) Facility drainage (.onshore); {ex-
cluding production facilities), (it
Drainage from diked storage areas
should be restrained by valves or other
positive means to prevent a spill or
other excessive leakage of oil Into the
drainage system or inplant effluent
treatment system, except where plan
systems are designed to handle such
leakage. Diked areas may be emptied
by pumps or ejectors: however, ihese
should be manually activated and the
condition of the accumulation should
be examined before starting to be sure
no oil will be discharged into the
water.
(11) Flapper-type drain valves should
not be used to drain diked areas.
Valves used for the drainage of diked
areas should, as far as practical, be of
manual, open-and-closed design. .When
plant drainage drains directly into
water courses and not into wastcwater
treatment plants, retained storm
water should be inspected as provided
in paragraphs
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§112.7
(111) Drainage of rainwater from the
diked area into a storm drain or an ef-
fluent discharge that empties into an
open water course, lake, or pond, and
bypassing the in-plant treatment
system may be acceptable if:
(A) The bypass valve is normally
sealed closed.
(B) Inspection of the run-off rain
water ensures compliance with appli-
cable water quality standards and will
not cause a harmful discharge as de-
fined in 40 CFR pan 110.
(C) The bypass valve is opened, and
reaealed following drainage under re-
sponsible supervision.
(D). Adequate records are kept of
such events.
(Iv) Buried metallic storage tanks
represent a potential for undetected
spills. A new buried Installation should
be protected from corrosion by coat-
ings, cathodic protection or other ef-
fective methods compatible with local
soil conditions. Such buried tanks
should at least be subjected to regular
pressure testing.
(v) Partially buried metallic tanks
for the storage of oil should be avoid-
ed. "niM$ the buried section of the
shell is adequately coated, since par-
tial burial in damp- earth ***** cause
rapid corrosion of metallic surfaces.
especially at the earth/air interface.
(vl> Aboveground tanks should be
subject to periodic integrity testing.
talcing into account tank design (float-
Ing roof, etc.) and using such tech-
niques as hydrostatic testing, visual in-
spection or a system of non-destruc-
tive shell thl'Mtn^y testing. Compari-
son records should be' kept where ap-
propriate, and tank supports and foun-
dations should be included in these in-
spections. In addition, the outside of
the tank should frequently be ob-
'served by operating personnel for
signs of deterioration, leaks which
might cause a spill, or accumulation of
oil inside diked areas.
(vii) To control leakage through de-
fective internal heating coils, the fol-
lowing factors should be considered
and applied, as appropriate.
(A) The steam return or exhaust
lines from internal heating coils which
discharge into an open water course
should be monitored for contamina-
tion, or passed through a settling
tank, skimmer, or other separation or
retention system.
(B) The feasibility of installing an
external heating system should also be
considered.
(vill) New and old tank installations
should, as far as practical, be fail-safe
engineered or updated into a fail-safe
engineered installation to avoid spills.
Consideration should be given to pro-
viding one or more of the following de-
vices:
(A) High liquid level alarms with an
audible or visual signal at a constantly
manned operation or surveillance sta-
tion: in smaller plants an audible air
vent may suffice.
(B) Considering size and complexity
of the facility, high liquid level pump
cutoff devices set to stop flow at a pre-
determined tank content level.
(C) Direct audible or code signal
communication between the tank
gauger and the pumping station.
(D) A fast response system for deter-
mining the liquid level of each bulk
storage tank such as digital comput-
ers, telepulse. or direct vision gauges
or their equivalent.
(£) Liquid level sensing devices
should be regularly tested to insure
proper operation.
(ix) Plant effluents which are dis-
charged into navigable waters should
have disposal facilities observed fre-
quently enough .to detect possible
system upsets that could cause an oil
spill event.
(x) Visible oil leaks which result in a
loss of oil from tank seams, gaskets.
rivets and bolts sufficiently large to
cause the accumulation of oil in diked
areas should be promptly corrected.
(xl) Mobile or portable oil storage
tanks (onshore) should be positioned
or located so as to prevent spilled oil
from reaching navigable waters. A sec-
ondary means of containment, such as
dikes or catchment basins, should be
furnished for the largest single com-
partment or tnnir These facilities
should be located where they will
not be subject to periodic flooding or
washout.
(3) Facility transfer operations,
pumping, and, in-plant process (.on-
shore); (.excluding production facili-
ties), (i) Buried piping installations
should have a protective wrapping and
coating and should be cathodically
protected if soil conditions warrant. If
a section of buried line.is exposed for
any reason, it should be carefully ex-
amined for deterioration. If corrosion
damage is found, additional examina-
tion and corrective action should be
taken as indicated by the magnitude
of the damage. An alternative would
be the more frequent use of exposed
pipe corridors or galleries.
(11) When a pipeline is not in service.
or In standby service for an extended
time the terminal connection at the
transfer point should be capped or
blank-flanged, and marked as to
origin.
(Ill) Pipe supports should be proper-
ly designed to minimize abrasion and
corrosion and allow for expansion and
contraction.
(Iv) All aboveground valves and pipe-
lines should be subjected to regular
examinations by operating personnel
at which time the general condition of
items, such as flange joints, expansion
joints, valve glands and bodies, catch
pans, pipeline supports, locking of
valves, and metal surfaces should be
assessed. In addition, periodic pressure
testing may be warranted for piping in
areas where facility drainage is such
that a failure might lead to a spill
-------
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1.91 Edition)
event.
(v) Vehicular traffic granted entry
into the facility should be warned ver-
bally or by appropriate signs to be
sure that the vehicle, because of its
size, will not endanger above ground
piping.
(4) Facility tank car and tank truck
loading/unloading rack (onshore). (1)
Tank car and »-»"fc truck loading/ un-
loading procedures should meet the
IP
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§112.7.
a blowout prevention (BOP) assembly
and well control system should be in-
stalled that is capable of controlling
any well head pressure that is expect-
ed to be encountered while that BOP
assembly is on the well. Casing and
BOP installations should be in accord-
ance with State regulatory agency re-
quirements.
(7) Oil drilling, production, or work-
over facilities (.offshore), (i) Definition:
"An oil drilling, production or wor-
kover facility (offshore)" may include
all drilling or workover equipment.
wells, flowlines, gathering lines, plat-
forms, and auxiliary nontransporta-
tion-related equipment and facilities
in a single geographical oil or gas field
operated by a single operator.
(11) Oil drainage collection equip-
ment should be used to prevent and
control small oil spillage around
pumps, glands, valves, flanges, expan-
sion joints, hoses, drain lines, separa-
tors, treaters. te"1"5 and allied equip-
ment. Drains on the facility should be
controlled and directed- toward a cen-
tral collection sump or equivalent col-
lection system sufficient to prevent
discharges of oil into the navigable
waters of the United States. Where
drains and sumps are not practicable
oil contained in collection equipment
should be removed as often as neces-
sary to prevent overflow.
(ill) For facilities employing a sump
system, sump and drains should be
adequately sized and a spare pump or
equivalent method should be available
to remove liquid from the sump and
assure that oil does not escape. A regu-
lar scheduled preventive maintenance
inspection and testing program should
be employed to assure reliable oper-
ation of the liquid removal system and
pump start-up device. Redundant
automatic sump pumps and control de-
vices may be required on some instal-
lations.
(iv) In areas where separators and
treaters are equipped with dump
valves whose predominant mode of
failure is in the closed position and
pollution risk is high, the facility
should be specially equipped to pre-
vent the escape of oil. This could be
accomplished by extending the flare
line to a diked area if the separator is
near shore, equipping it with a high
liquid level sensor that will automati-
cally shut-in wells producing to the
separator, parallel redundant dump
valves, or other feasible alternatives to
prevent oil discharges.
(v) Atmospheric storage or surge
tanks should. be equipped with high
liquid level sensing devices or other ac-
ceptable alternatives to prevent oil dis-
charges.
(vi) Pressure tanks should be
equipped with high and low pressure
sensing devices to activate an alarm
and/or control' the flow or other ac-
ceptable alternatives to prevent oil dis-
charges.
(vll) Tanks should be equipped with
suitable corrosion protection.
(viii) A written procedure fo'r in-
specting and testing pollution preven-
tion equipment and systems should be
prepared and maintained at the facili-
ty. Such procedures should be includ-
ed as part of the SPCC Plan.
(ix) Testing and inspection of the
pollution prevention equipment and
systems at the facility should be con-
ducted by the owner or operator on a
scheduled periodic basis commensu-
rate with the complexity, conditions
and circumstances of the facility or
other appropriate regulations.
(x) Surface and subsurface well
shut-in valves and devices in use at the
facility should be sufficiently de-
scribed to determine method of activa-
tion or control, e.g.. pressure differen-
tial, change in fluid or flow conditions.
combination of pressure and flow,
TP»""nl or remote control mecha-
nisms. Detailed records for each well.
while not necessarily part of the plan
should be kept by the owner or opera-
tor.
(xl) Before drilling below any casing
string, and during workover operations
a blowout preventer (BOP) assembly
and well control system should be in-
stalled that is capable of controlling
any well-head pressure that is expect-
ed to be encountered while that BOP
assembly is on the welL Casing and
BOP Installations should be in accord-
ance with State regulatory agency re-
quirements.
(xil) Extraordinary well control
measures should be provided should
emergency conditions, including fire.
loss of control and other abnormal
conditions, occur. The degree of con-
trol system redundancy should vary
with hazard exposure and probable
consequences of failure. It is recom-
mended that surface shut-in systems
have redundant or "fail close" valving.
Subsurface safety valves may not be
needed in producing wells that will not
flow but should be installed as re-
quired by applicable State regulations.
(xiii) In order that there will be no
misunderstanding of joint and sepa-
rate duties and obligations to perform
work in a safe and pollution free
manner, written instructions should be
prepared by the owner or operator for
contractors and subcontractors to
follow whenever contract activities in-
clude servicing a well or systems ap-
purtenant to a well or pressure vessel.
Such instructions and procedures.
should be maintained at the offshore
production facility. Under certain cir-
cumstances and conditions such con-
tractor activities may require the pres-
ence at the facility of an authorized
representative of the owner or opera-
tor who would intervene when neces-
sary to prevent a spill event.
(xiv) All manifolds (headers) should
be equipped with chr'JE valves on indi-
vidual flowlines.
' (xv) If the shut-in well pressure is
greater than the working pressure of
-------
§11Z7
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-91 Edition)
the flowline and manifold valves up to
and Including the header valves associ-
ated with that individual flowline. the
flowline should be equipped with a
high pressure sensing device and shut-
in valve at the wellhead unless provid-
ed with a pressure relief system to pre-
vent over pressuring.
(xvl) All pipelines appurtenant to
the facility should be protected from
corrosion. Methods used, such as pro-
tective coatings or cathodic protection.
should be discussed.
(zvll) Sub-marine pipelines appurte-
nant to the facility should be ade-
quately protected against environmen-
tal stresses and other activities such as
fishing operations.
(xviii) Sub-manne pipelines appurte-
nant to the facility should be in good
operating condition at all ti**"** gr"^ In-
spected on a scheduled periodic basis
for failures. Such inspections should
be documented and maintained at the
facility.
(8) Inspections and records. Inspec-
tions required by this pan should be
in accordance with written procedures
developed for the facility by the owner
or operator. These written procedures
and a record of the inspections, signed
by the appropriate supervisor or in-
spector. should be made pan of the
SPCC PI**1 fr^d maintained for a
period of three years.
(9) Security (excluding oil produc-
tion facilities). (1) All plants handling.
processing, and storing oil should be
fully fenced, and entrance gates
should be locked and/or guarded when
the plant is not in production or is un-
attended.
(11) The master flow and drain valves
and any other valves that will permit
direct outward flow of the tank's con-
tent to the surface should be securely .
locked in the closed position when in
non-operating or non-standby status.
(ill) The starter control on all oil
pumps should be locked in the "off"
position or located at ajite accessible
only to authorized personnel .when the
pomps are in a non-operating or non-
standby status.
(Iv) The iftaHittyytmirtarihty connec-
tions of oil pipelines should be secure-
ly capped or blank-flanged when not
in service or standby service for an ex-
tended time. This security practice
should also apply to pipelines that are
emptied of liquid content either by
draining or by inert gas pressure.
(v) Facility lighting should be com-
mensurate with the type and location
of the facility. Consideration should
be given to: (A) Discovery of spills oc-
curring during hours of darkness, both
by operating personnel, if present, and
by non-operating personnel (the gen-
eral public, local police, etc.) and (B)
prevention of spills occurring through
acts Of TranrinHyn
(10) Personnel, training and spill
prevention procedures. (1) Owners or
operators are responsible for properly
instructing their personnel in the op-
eration and maintenance 'of equipment
to prevent the discharges of oil and
applicable pollution control laws, rules
and regulations.
(11) Each applicable facility should
have a designated person who is ac-
countable for oil spill prevention and
who reports to line management.
(ill) Owners or operators should
schedule and conduct spill prevention
briefings for their operating personnel
at Intervals frequent enough to assure
adequate understanding of the SPCC
Plan for that facility. Such briefings
should highlight and describe . known
spill events or failures,
components, and recently developed
precautionary measures.
APPENDIX—MEMORANDUM or UNDEH-
STANDOTG BETWEEN THE SECRETARY
or TRANSPOHTATION AND THE AD-
MURSTBATOR OF THE ENVTHOWKEH-
TAX. PROTECTION AGJINUIE
SECTION XX—DVLH1IIOIVS
The Environmental Protection Agency
and the Department of Transportation
agree that for the purposes of Executive
Order 11548. the term:
(1) "Non-transportation-related onshore
and offshore facilities" means:
(A) Fixed onshore end offshore oil well
drilling facilities including all equipment
mod appurtenances related thereto used In
drilling operations for exploratory or devel-
opment wells, but excluding- any terminal
faculty, unit or process integrally associated
with, Hr1? Qindung>_or transferring of ail in
bulk to or from a vessel. ' .
(B) Mobile onshore and offshore oil well
drilling platforms, barges, trucks, or other
mobile t»f\\\ti»f including' all equipment and
appurtenances related thereto when such
mobile faculties are fixed In position for the
purpose of drilling operations for explorato-
ry or development wells, but excluding any
terminal faculty, unit or process integrally
associated with the handling or transferring
of oil In bulk to or from a vessel.
(C) Fixed onshore and offshore oil pro-
duction structures, platforms, derricks, and
rigs including all equipment and appurte-
nances related thereto, as well as completed
wells and the wellhead separators, oil sepa-
rators, and storage faculties used in the pro-
duction of oil. but excluding any terminal
faculty, unit or process integrally associated
with the handling or transferring of oil to
bulk to or from a vessel.
(D) Mobile onshore and offshore oil pro-
duction faculties Including all equipment
and appurtenances related thereto as well
as completed wells and wellhead equipment.
piping from wellheads to oil separators, .oil
separators, and storage faculties used In the
production of oil when such mobile faculties
are fixed In position for the purpose of oU
production operations, but excluding any
terminal faculty, unit or process Integrally
associated with the handling or transferring
of oil In bulk to or from a vessel.
(E) Oil refining facilities Including all
equipment and appurtenances related there-
to as well as In-plant processing units, stor-
age units, piping, drainage systems and
waste treatment units used In the refining
of oil. but excluding any terminal facility,
unit or process Integrally associated with
the handling or transferring of oil in'bulk to
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
Pt. 112, App.
or from a vessel.
(F) Oil storage facilities Including all
equipment and appurtenances related there-
to as well as fixed bulk plant storage, termi-
nal oil storage facilities, consumer storage.
pumps and drainage systems used In the
storage of oil. but excluding Inline or break-
out storage tanks needed for the continuous
operation of a pipeline system and any ter-
minal facility, unit or process Integrally as-
sociated with the handling or transferring
of oil in bulk to or from a vessel.
(G) Industrial, commercial, agricultural or
public facilities which use and store oil. but
excluding any terminal facility, unit or
process integrally associated with the han-
dling or transferring of oil in bulk to or
from a vessel.
(H) Waste treatment facilities intruding
in-plant pipelines, effluent discharge lines.
and storage t^n1" but excluding waste
treatment facilities located on ve&iels and
terminal storage tanks and appurtenances
for the reception of oily ballast water or
tank washings from vessels and associated
(ystems used for off-loading vessels.
(I) T^«rftT»y racks, transfer hoses, loading
arms and other equipment which are appur-
tenant to a nontransportation-related facili-
ty or terminal facility and which are used to
transfer oil in bulk to or from highway vehi-
cles or railroad cars.
(J) Highway vehicles and railroad ears
which are used for the transport of oil ex-
clusively within the confines of a nontrans-
portatlon-related facility and which are not
Intended to transport oil in Interstate or
intrastate commerce.
(K) Pipeline systems which are used for
the transport of oil exclusively within the
confines of a nontransportation-related fa-
cility or terminal facility *"rt which are not
intended to transport oil in interstate or
intrastate commerce, but excluding pipeline
systems used to transfer oil In bulk to or
from a vessel.
-(2) "Transportation-related onshore and
offshore facilities" **»•*»%«-
(A) Onshore and offshore terminal facili-
ties including transfer hoses, '"«»<'"y arms
and other equipment and appurtenances
used for the purpose of handling Or trans-
ferring oil in bulk to or from a vessel as well
as storage tanks and appurtenances for the
reception of oily ballast water or tank wash-
ings from vessels, out excluding terminal
waste treatment facilities and terminal oil
storage facilities.
(B) Transfer hoses, loading arms and
other equipment appurtenant to a non-
transportation-related faculty which is used
to transfer oil in bulk to or from a vessel.
(C) Interstate and intrastate onshore and
offshore pipeline systems including pumps
and appurtenances related thereto as well
as in-line or breakout storage tanks needed
for the continuous operation of a pipeline
system, and pipelines from onshore and off-
shore oil production facilities, but excluding '
onshore and offshore piping from wellheads
to oil separators and pipelines which are
used for the transport of oil exclusively
within the confines of a nontransportation*
related facility or terminal facility and
which are not intended to transport oil in
interstate or intrastate commerce or to
transfer oil in bulk to or from a vessel.
(O) Highway vehicles and railroad cars
which are used for the transport of oil In'
interstate or intrastate commerce and the
equipment and appurtenances related there-
to, and equipment used for the fueling of lo-
comotive units, as well as the rights-of-way
on which they operate. Excluded are high-
way vehicles and railroad cars and motive
power used exclusively within the confines
of a nontransponation-related facility or
terminal facility and which are not Intended
for use in interstate or intrastate commerce.
-------
APPENDIX F
33 CFR PART 153.201
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
33 CFR Ch. I (7-1-92 Edition)
Subpart B—Notice of the Discharge
pf Oil or a Hazardous Substance
8153.201 Purpose.
The purpose of this subpart Is to
prescribe the manner in which the
notice required in section 311(b)(5) of
the Act is to be given and to list the
government officials to receive that
notice.
8151203 Procedure for the notice of dis-
charge.
Any person in charge of a vessel or
of an onshore or offshore facility
shall, as soon as they have knowledge
of any discharge of oil or a hazardous
substance from such vessel or facility
in violation of section 311(b)(3) of the
Act. immediately notify the National
Response Center (NRC). U.S. Coast
Guard. 2100 Second Street. SW., >
Washington. DC 20593. toll free tele-
phone number 800-424-8802 (in Wash-
ington. DC metropolitan area. (202)
267*2675). If direct reporting to the
NRC is not practicable, reports may be
made to the Coast Guard or EPA pre-
designated OSC for the geographic
area where the discharge occurs. All
such reports shall be promptly relayed
to the NRC. If it is not possible to
notify the NRC or the predesignated
OSC immediately, reports may be
made immediately to the nearest
Coast Guard unit, provided that the
person in charge of the vessel or on-
shore or offshore facility notifies the
NRC as soon as possible.
NOTE Geographical jurisdiction of Coast
Guard and EPA OSC's are specified in the
applicable Regional Contingency Plan. Re- '
gional Contingency Plans are available at
Coast Guard District Offices and EPA Re-
gional Offices as indicated in Table 2. Ad-
dresses and telephone numbers for these of-
fices are listed in Table 1.
(CGD 84-067. 51 PR 17966. May 16. 1986. as
amended by CGD 88-052. 53 PR 25121. July
1.1988]
8153.205 Fines.
Section 311(b)(5) of the Act pre-
scribes that any person who fails to
notify the appropriate agency of the
United States Government immediate-
ly of a discharge is. upon conviction.
subject to a fine of not more than
$10,000. or to imprisonment of not
more than one year, or both.
TABLE 1—ADDRESSES AND TELEPHONE NUM-
BERS OF COAST GUARD DISTRICT OFFICES
AND EPA REGIONAL OFFICES
EPA Raonnai Olticas
Bagnn:
1...
II
III —
IV ....
V _— .
VI.....
VII _
VIII ...
IX
X. —
Jorm F. Komsov Faderat Blag..
Boston. MA 02203.
26 Fadaral Plus. Naw Yon. NY
10278.
841 Cnastnut Straat PWadat-
pfiUL PA 19107.
345 CourBano Straat NE. Atlan-
ta. QA 30365.
230 S. Daaroom Slraat 1301
Floor. Cncaoo. IL 60604.
1445 Ross A».. 120) Floor.
Suita 1200. Dallas. TX 75202.
726 Mimaaoia Avanua. Kansas
City. KS 66101.
999 180) SL. Suita 500. Danvar.
CO 80202-2405.
215 Framont Straat San Fran-
coco. CA 94105.
1200 601 Avanua. SaaOM. WA
98101.
617-565-3715
212-264-2525
215-597-9600
404-347-4727
312-353-2000
214-655-6444
913-236-2800
303-293-1603
415-974-6071
206-U2-S810
Coast Guam Ontnct Omen
Ournet
l«_
2nd-
50l_
70t._
80k-
901—
1101.
1301.
1401.
1701.
408 Atlantic Av*.. Boston. MA
02110-2209.
1430 OtfcM SL. SL Louis. MO
63103.
r«Mm Bldo.* 431 Crawford SL.
Portsmouth,' VA 23705-5004.
Fadaral Bk»g_ Room 1221. 51
S.W. 1st Av*. Morn. FL
33130.
817-223-6444
31 t 425 «855
itnj ^nn rtmn
305-536-5651
Haw Bogos Faosral BMg.. 500 504-569-6901
Camp SL. Naw Onaana. LA
70130-3396.
1240 East 901 SL. Oavwand.
OH 44199.
union Bank Bid*. 400 Oesan-
oata. Long Baacn. CA 90822-
5399.
Faoaral BUg. 915 Sacand A«*..
Saatoa. WA 96174.
Prinoa Kalananaa* Fadaral
8KJg_ 300 Ala Moans Blvd.
901 Floor. Honolulu. HI 96650.
P.O Box 3-5000. Junaau. AK
99602.
216-522-3919
213-499-5330
-
208-442-5850
808-541-2114
907-586-7195
TABLE 2—STANDARD ADMINISTRATIVE RE-
GIONS OF STATES AND CORRESPONDING
COAST GUARD DISTRICTS AND EPA REGIONS
Statas and EPA region
Rsgnnt:
Naw Harnosnra
Varment
All axeaot Nortnwastam
Massacnusans..
Rhoda island
II:
Naw Vont:
Coastal araa and Eastam ooreon—
Graat Lakas araa and omar pornont
Naw Jarsay:
Uooar portion..
Lowar portion..
Coast
Guard
1st
1st
1st
1st
IS!
1st
1st
9tn
1st
5tn
-------
TABLE 2—STANDARD ADMINISTRATIVE RE-
GIONS OF STATES AND CORRESPONDING
COAST GUARD DISTRICTS AND EPA RE-
GIONS—Continued
Sum and EPA region
PiMrto fi ico «»*.... «.»»» I.. ....i I,. . «. .
Vtfgtn islands — . . „.... .......................
Ragnn III:
1 Coast
i Guara
i Otjtnci
i
._ | 7m
_ | 7tn
i
RagoniV:
Ftonda:
Ana/me and GuH ooaau.
Pannanow araa
UOMOI.
Nam
Soumam.
Normam..
Raonn V:
imand'manaraa.
aonan:
GnMt Lakaaaraa.
Gnat Lakaa ana.
Inland fivan a^aa •»
wa: .
Graai Laua araa-
RaonnVl:
OUaflc
7th
J em
Stn
2nd
em
2nd
9th
2nd
Mi.
2nd
em
9th
2nd
9th
2nd
9m
2nd
em
em
2nd
2nd
j em
• ' ' -»
agon Vlll:
r__i__A_i__
Soum Oafrnii
2nd
2nd
2nd
13m
2nd
lim
2nd
2nd
2nd
I iim
Guam
Amancan $i«*og ,
Trust Tamnxv of ma Paerhc liianu..
Nunnain Manana i
!l1tn
iim
J 14m
di4tn
I4tn
i I4tn
I4tn
wa»
AIAMA
J 13m
-..! 13m
J )3tn
j i7m
tCGD 84-067. 51 FR 17967. May 16. 1986. as
amended by CCD 88-052. 53 FR 25121. July
1. 19881
-------
APPENDIX G
40 CFR PART 114
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
PART 114—CIVIL PENALTIES FOR
VIOLATION OF OIL POLLUTION
PREVENTION REttULAfiONS
NOH •TaunronmoR Rxuxn OHSROU AMD
See.
114.1
114J
114.3
114.4
114.6
114.7
114.8
114.0
114.10
114.11
Ccneni applicability.
Violation.
Oeteixamation of penalty.
Notice of Violation.
Request for hearing.
Presiding- Off leer.
Consolidation.
Preheannc conference.
Conduct of hearing.
Decision.
Appeal to Administrator.
AuTBoazrr Sees. 31KJ). SOl(a). Pub. L.
92-500. 80 Stat. 868. 885 (33 U.S.C. 1321CJ).
1361(s».
Soomcr 39 PR 31602. Aug. 28.1974. unless
otherwise noted.
Noir-TKAKSPORIATXOn RCLAXZD
ONSHORE AND OITSHORK fAczurzrs
0114.1 General applicability.
Owners or operators of facilities sub-
ject to S 112.3 (a), (b) or (c) of this sub-
chapter who violate the requirements
of Part 112 of this Subchapter o by
falling or refusing to comply with any
of the provisions of 8 11&3. 112.4. or
112J of this subchapter shall be liable
for a civil penalty of not more than
$5.000 for each day such violation con-
tinues. Civil penalties shall be assessed
and compromised in accordance with
this pan. No penalty shall be assessed
until the owner or operator shall have
been given notice and an opportunity
for hearing in accordance with this
pan.
§114.2 .Violation.
Owners or operators of facilities
shall be liable for a civil penalty for
noncompliance with the requirements
of Pan 112 of this subchapter. includ-
ing but not limited to failure to:
(a) Prepare a Spill Prevention Con-
trol and Countermeasure (SPCC) plan
In accordance with 1112^ of this sub-
chapter
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-90 Edition)
(b) Have a SPCC plan certified by a
Registered Professional ntnyint^T as
required by i 112.3 of this subchapter:
(c) Implement the SPCC plan as re-
quired by i 112J of this subchapter:
(d) Submit information after a spill
as required by { 112.4 of this subchap-
ter:
(e) Am»nd plan as required by
§ 112.4 of this subchapter:
quired by f 112.4 of this subchapter:
(g) Amend plan after change in facil-
ity design as required by i 1124 of this
subchapter:
(h) Review plan every three years as
required by i 112J of this subchapter:
(D Amend plan after review as re-
quired by } 112J; or
(j) Have amendment certified as re-
quired by 1112J of this subchapter
and
ion of penalty.
(a) In determining f-h*
the penalty to be innfimnrt the follow-
ing factors «h«n be considered:
(1) Gravity of the violation: and
(2) Demonstrated good faith efforts
to achieve rapid «»*"«pUnT<** after noti-
fication of a violation.
(b) The amount of the civil penalty
to be ********* may be settled by com-
promise at any stage of the proceed-
ings.
• (c) Civil penalties may be assessed by
the Regional Administrator where
there is no request for a hearing pur-
suant to i 114~5.
§1144 Notice of Violation.
The Notice of Violation shall be sent
to the person charged with a violation
and shall specify the:
(a) Date of
(b) Nature of violation, including the
law or regulation that he is charged
with violating;
(c) Amount of the '•""^-tymiTn penal-
ty:
(d) Amount of the proposed civil
penalty;
(e) The right to present written ex-
planations. information or any materi-
als in answer to the charges or in miti-
gation of the penalty, or bearing on
the person's efforts to achieve compli-
ance after notification of the violation:
-------
Environmental Protection Agoncy
§114.9
(f) Manner of the payrrr-.r r.' 1=7
money which may be paid to the
United States:
( g; Right to request a hearing: and
(h) The procedures lor requesting a
hearing including the right to be rep-
resented by counsel.
9 114.5 RcqneR for hearing.
Within thirty (30) days of the date
• of receipt of a Notice of Violation, the
person named in the Notice may re-
quest a hearing by submitting a writ-
ten request signed by or on behalf of
such person by a duly authorized offi-
cer. director, agent, or attoraey-in-
f act. to the Regional Administrator.
(a) Requests for hearings shall:
(1) State the name and address of
the person requesting the hearing;
(2) Enclose a copy of the Notice of
Violation: and
(3) State with particularity the
issues to be raised by such person at
the hearing.
(b) After a request for hearing
which complies with the requirements
of paragraph (a) of this section has
been filed, a hearing shall be sched-
uled for the earliest practicable *Mtfg.
(c) Extensions of the time for the
of the hearing ™«y be
granted for good cause shown.
9114.6 Prendin* Officer.
The hearing 1****^ be conducted by
the Presiding Officer.' The Regional
Administrator *"*y designate nr|y at-
torney in the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency to act as the Presiding Of-
ficer. No person shall serve as a Pre-
siding Officer where he has any prior
connection with the case Including
without limitation the performance of
investigative or prosecuting functions
or any other such functions. The Pre-
siding Officer appointed shall have
the full authority to conduct the hear-
ing. decide issues and to assess a civil
penalty as appropriate.
8 114.7 Consolidation.
The Presiding Officer may. In his
discretion, order *»m«««n«
-------
§114.10
formed. In the event tne matter
cannot be resolved by settlement the
person charged with the violation
shall be informed in writing, of the de-
cision ot the Presiding Officer and
snail be advised of his right to appeal.
§114.10 Dceuion.
Within thirty (30) days after the
conclusion of the hearings, the Presid-
ing Officer shall issue findings with re-
spect to the matter, including, where
appropriate to the amount of the civil
penalty. In assuming the civil penalty
the Presiding Officer shall consider
the factors set forth in {114.3. A copy
of the Presiding Officers decision
snail be sent to the person charged In
the Notice of Violation. The decision
of the Presiding Officer shall become
the final decision of the Environmen-
tal Protection Agency unless within
fifteen (15) days from the date of re-
ceipt of such decision, the person as-
sessed the penalty appeals the deci-
sion to the Administrator, or ""!»«•
the Administrator shall have stayed
the effectiveness of the decision pend-
ing review.
9114.11 Appeal to Administrator.
(a) The person assessed a penalty In
the Presiding Officer's determination
shall have the right to appeal an ad-
verse decision to the Administrator
upon filing a written Notice of Appeal
In the form required by paragraph, (b) ,
of this section within fifteen (IS) days
of the date the receipt of the Presid-
ing Officer's decision.
(b) The Notice of Appeal shall:
(1) State the name and address of
the person filing the Notice of Appeal:
(2) Contain a concise statement of
the facts on which the person relies:
(3) Contain a concise statement of
the legal basis on which the person
relies: and
(4) Contain a concise statement set-
ting forth the action which the person
proposed that the Administrator take.
(c) The Administrator may delegate
this authority to act in a given case.
(d) The Administrator, after a
Notice of Appeal in proper form has
been filed, shall render a decision with
respect to the appeal promptly. In ren-
dering hi" decision, the Administrator
may. adopt, modify, or set aside the de-
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-90 Edition)
cision of the Presiding Officer in any
respect and shall Include in his deci-
sion a concise statement of the basis
therefore. The decision of the Admin-
istrator on appeal shall be effective
when rendered.
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
APPENDIX H
Notice of Proposed Rule Making SPCC Revision for
40 C.F.R. Part 112 dated October 22, 1991
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
Tuesday
October 22, 1991
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 112
Oil Pollution Prevention; Non-
transportation-related Onshore and
Offshore Facilities; Proposed Rules
Printed on Recycled Paper
I0999
OOOUOOX21-OCT-9I-13:48:47)
F4717.FMT...(16,32J...l-07-88
-------
54612
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22, 1991 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 112
[SW H-FRL-3671-4]
RIN 20SO-AC62
OH Pollution Prevention; Non-
transportation-related Onshore and
Offshore Facilities
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency is proposing to revise
the Oil Pollution Prevention regulation
(40 CFR part 112) promulgated under
section 311(j)(l)(C) of the Clean Water
Act (CWA), as amended by the Oil
Pollution Act of 1990. This proposed rule
establishes requirements for Spill
Prevention. Control, and
Countermeasures (SPCC). Plans to
prevent spills of oil by non-
transportation-related onshore and
offshore facilities into the waters of the
United States or adjoining shorelines.
The proposed revision involves changes
in the applicability of the regulation and
the required procedures for the
completion of SPCC Plans, as well as
the addition of a facility notification
provision. The proposed rule also
reflects changes in the jurisdiction of
section 311 of the CWA made by 1977
and 1978 amendments to the CWA.
DATES: EPA will consider comments
submitted on or before December 23,
1991.
Comments: Comments should be
submitted in triplicate to: Emergency
Response Division. Attention: Superfund
Docket Clerk. Docket Number SPCC-lP,
Superfund Docket, room M2427. U.S. .
Environmental Protection Agency. 401M
Street. SW.. Washington, DC 20460.
Docket: Copies of materials relevant
to this rulemaking are contained in the
Superfund Docket, room M2427 at the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
401 M Street. SW.. Washington. DC
20460 [Docket Number SPCC-lP]. The
docket is available for inspection
between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday,'excluding
Federal holidays. Appointments to
review the docket should be made by
calling 1-202/260-3046. The public may
copy a maximum of 267 pages from any
regulatory docket at no cost. If the
number of pages copied exceeds 267,
however, a charge of 15 cents will be
incurred for each page after 100 pages.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Monica L. McEaddy, Response
S-310999 0002(OOX2t-OCT-9l-l3:48:49)
Standards and Criteria Branch,
Emergency Response Division (OS-210).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
401 M Street. SW.. Washington. DC
20460 at 1-202-260-1358 or Bobbie
Lively-Diebold at 1-703-356-8774; the
ERNS/SPCC Information line at 1-202^-
260-2342: or RCRA/Superfund Hotline
at 1-600-424-9346 (in the Washington,
DC metropolitan area, 1-703-920-9810).
The Telecommunications Device for the
Deaf (TDD) Hotline number is 1-800-
553-7672 (in the Washington, DC
metropolitaiFarea, 1-703-486-3323).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of today's preamble are listed
in the following outline:
1. Introduction
A. Statutory Authority
B. Background of this Rulemaking
C. The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA)
II. General Issues
A. Notification
B. Contingency Planning
C. New Discretionary Provisions
III. Proposed Changes in Each Section of 40
CFR Part 112
A. Section 112.1—General Applicability
and Notification
B. Section 112.2—Definitions
C. Section 112.3—Requirements to
Prepare and Implement a Spill
Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasures Plan
D. Section 112.4—Amendment of SPCC
Plans by Regional Administrator
E Section 112.5—Amendment of SPCC
Plans by Owners or Operators
F. Section 112.6—Civil Penalties for
Violation of the Oil Pollution Prevention
Regulation
G. Section 112.7—Spill Prevention. .
Control, and Countermeasures Plan
General Requirements
H. Section 1123—Spill Prevention.
Control, and Countermeasures Plan
Requirements for Onshore Facilities
(Excluding Production Facilities)
I. Section 112.9—Spill Prevention.
Control, and Countenneasures Plan
Requirements for Onshore Oil Production
Facilities
I. Section 112.10—Spill Prevention,
• Control, and Countenneasures Plan
Requirements for Onshore Oil Drilling
and Workover Facilities
K. Section 112.11—Spill Prevention.
Control, and Countenneasures Plan
Requirements for Offshore Oil Drilling,
Production, or Workover Facilities
IV. Relationship to Other Programs
A. Underground Storage Tanks
B. State Programs
C. Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) Title
III Integration With Local Emergency
Planning
D. Wellhead Pro: ;ction
E. Flood-Related Acquirements
F. Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
V. Request for Comments
VI. Regulatory Analyses
A. Economic Analyses
4701.FMT...[16,30]...12-28-90
B. Executive Order No. 12291 '
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
List of Subjects
I. Introduction
A. Statutory Authority
Section 311(j)(l)(C) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C.
1251 etseq., also known as the Clean
Water Act (CWA). authorizes the
President to issue regulations
establishing procedures, methods.
equipment, and other requirements to
prevent discharges of oil from vessels
and facilities and to contain such
discharges. The authority to regulate
non-transportation-related onshore and
offshore facilities under section
311(j)(l)(C) of the CWA was delegated
by the President to the Administrator of
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA or the Agency) by
Executive Order 11735. In this same
Executive Order, authority over onshore
and offshore transportation-related
facilities and vessels was delegated to
the department in which the U.S. Coast
Guard (USCG) is operating (currently.
the U.S. Department of Transportation).
A Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) between the Secretary of
Transportation and the EPA
Administrator, dated November 24.1971
(36 FR 24080), establishes the
responsibilities of EPA and the
Department of Transportation for
purposes of administering their
respective spill prevention programs.
The definitions set forth in this MOU
(i.e., the definitions of "non-
transportation-related onshore and
offshore facilities" and "transportation-
related onshore and offshore facilities")
are included as an appendix to 40 CFR
part 112.
B. Background of This Rulemaking
The Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation, also known as- the Spill
Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasures (SPCC) regulation,
was originally promulgated on
December 11,1973 (38 FR 34164). under
the authority of section 3ll(j)(l)(C) of
the CWA. The regulation established
spill prevention procedures, methods,
and equipment requirements for non-
transportation-related facilities with
aboveground (non-buried) oil storage
capacity greater than 1.320 gallons (or
greater than 660 gallons aboveground in
•a single tank) or buried underground oil
storage capacity greater than 42,000
gallons. Regulated facilities were also
limited to those that, because of.their
location, could reasonably be expected
to discharge oil into the navigable
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
54613
waters of the United States or adjoining
shorelines.
In addition to the Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation, EPA has
promulgated related regulations defining
oil discharges-that may be harmful (40
CFR part 110) and procedures for
imposing the civil penalties provided for
in the Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation (40 CFR part 114). As
described below, penalty provisions
have been revised by the Oil Pollution
Act of 1990 (OPA). The USCG has
promulgated regulations on oil pollution
prevention for vessel transfer facilities
(the USCG regulations do not apply to
pipelines or other modes of
transportation) (33 CFR part 154). /
pursuant to the November 24,1971,
MOU described above. The USCG also
has promulgated requirements for the
reporting of oil discharges (33 CFR part
153), and regulations relating to
discharges from ships (33 CFR part 155).
Two previous revisions have been
made to the Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation. On August 29,1974, the
regulation was amended (39 FR 31602) to
set out the Agency's policy on civil
penalties for violation of the CWA
section 311 requirements. On March 26,
1976. 40 CFR part 112 was again
amended (41 FR 12567), primarily to
clarify the criteria for determining
whether or not a facility is subject to the
regulation. Other revisions made in the
March 26,1976, rule clarified that SPCC
Plans must be in written form and
specified the procedures for
development of SPCC Plans for mobile
facilities.
Implementation of the regulation since
the 1976 revisions has indicated a need
for other changes, primarily for purposes
of clarification and simplification.
Changes in 40 CFR part 112 also have
been made necessary by amendments to
CWA section 311.
On May 20,1980 (45 FR 33814), EPA
proposed revisions to the Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation similar to
revisions proposed today. These
proposed revisions would have reflected
changes in the jurisdiction of CWA
section 311 made by the 1977 CWA
amendments. Also proposed were
requirements concerning new facilities,
the content of SPCC Plans, the
availability of SPCC Plans for review by
EPA personnel, and the review of SPCC
Plans by owners or operators.
One of the revisions proposed on May
20,1980, was a clarification that certain
"guidelines" in § 112.7 are mandatory .
rather than discretionary. Based on a
subsequent decision by the Agency that
the proposed modifications to 40 CFR
part 112 were not required at that time,
the revisions proposed on May 20,1980,
were not finalized. As described below,
however, continuing experience with
administering this program
demonstrates a need for the
clarifications to 40 CFR 112.7.
Accordingly, the Agency is proposing
certain changes to 40 CFR 112.7 that are
similar to those proposed on May 20,
1980.
On January 2,1988, the collapse of a '
• four-million-gallon aboveground storage
tank owned by the Ashland Oil
Company in Floreffe. Pennsylvania,
resulted in a spill of approximately 3.8
million gallons of diesel fuel. Of this
amount, approximately 750.000 gallons
of diesel fuel were released into the
Monongahela River. This event led to
the formation of an Oil Spill Prevention,
Control, and Countermeasures Program-
Task Force (the SPCC Task Force) to
examine Federal government regulations
governing spills of oil from aboveground.
storage tanks. The SPCC Task Force
was composed of senior personnel from
EPA Headquarters. Regional offices.
other Federal agencies, and State offices
with significant oil spill response
responsibilities. The Task Force issued
its findings and recommendations in a
May 13,1988, report.1 The Task Force
report focused on the prevention of large
catastrophic spills, but made
recommendations on many aspects of"
the Federal oil spill prevention, control,
and countermeasures program.
The SPCC Task Force recommended
that EPA clarify that certain provisions
described in the Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation in terms that could be
interpreted as guidelines are required
practices. The Task Force also
recommended that EPA establish
additional technical requirements for all
facilities subject to the regulation, and
that EPA expand the scope of the
regulation to include requirements for
facility-specific oil spill contingency
planning. The Task Force further found
that EPA does not have an adequate
inventory of facilities subject to the
regulation and recommended that EPA
gather specific information about these
facilities (e.g., the number of
aboveground storage tanks at a facility).
The Task Force also recommended
strengthening the facility inspection
program to better identify violations and
enforce compliance. A subsequent
General Accounting Office (GAO) report
contained similar recommendations.2
1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "The Oil
Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeaaure*
Program Talk Force Report" Interim Final Report.
May 13.1988. Thii document it available for
inipection at the Superfund-Docket room M2427.
U.S. EPA. 401 M Street SW.. Washington. DC 20480.
* General Accounting Office. "Inland Oil Spill*:
JStronger Regulation and Enforcement Needed to
As a result of major oil spills such as the
Ashland Oil Company spill discussed
previously and the findings from the
SPCC Task Force and the GAO reports.
EPA is today proposing revisions to 40
CFR part 112.
EPA has decided to address the SPCC
Task Force findings and
recommendations, together with OPA
requirements, in two phases. A two-
phase approach has been chosen
because several of the Task Force
recommendations require further
information gathering and analysis
before determining specific additional
changes to the existing regulation,
whereas other recommendations can be
implemented more readily. Phase One
revisions, which include provisions that
generally do not require substantial
additional Agency data gathering (e.g..
technical amendments to clarify
regulatory language, notification
requirements), are being proposed
today. Phase Two revisions, which will
be addressed in a separate rulemaking
and proposed at a later date, will
address other, more substantive
regulatory recommendations, such as
facility-specific contingency planning
and aboveground storage tank integrity
testing requirements. Phase Two will
also implement applicable requirements
of the OPA. For further discussion of the
Phase Two revisions as they relate to
the OPA, see Section I.C. of this
preamble.
After consideration of comments
received in response to this proposed
rule, a final rule will be promulgated. In
addition to a general request for
comments, the Agency requests
comments on specific proposed
revisions throughout the preamble. The
provisions are also summarized in
Section V of this preamble. If the
comments received indicate sufficient
need, the Agency will consider holding a
public hearing on the.proposed revisions
to permit further expression of views
prior to the final rulemaking. EPA will
publish a notice of its intent to hold any
such public hearing in the Federal
Register. Any statements made at such a
hearing would be included in the public
record of the rulemaking.
C. The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA)
The OPA was signed into law by the
President on August 18.1990. The OPA
contains significant modifications to
many of the provisions of section 311 of
the CWA. including section 311(j). The
Avoid Future IncidenU." February 1989 (GAO/
RCED-89-65). Thi* document ii available for
inipection at the Superfund Docket, room M2427.
U.S. EPA, 401 M Street. SW.. Washington. DC 20480.
S-310999 0003(OOX21-OCT-9I-13:48:53)
4701.FMT...[16.30]...12-28-90
-------
54614 .Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
specific language of section 311(j)(l)(C),
however, is not changed. The principal
provisions of the OPA that will impact
the SPCC program are summarized
below.
•Section 1004 of the OPA sets a
number of limits on liability of owners
or operators of vessels and facilities for
oil spills to U.S. waters. The liability
limits include $350 million for onshore
facilities and deepwater ports; $75
million plus removal costs for offshore
.facilities; and $1,200 per gross ton or up
to $10 million, whichever is greater, for
tank vessels. The President must report
to the Congress on the desirability of
adjusting these liability limits, and EPA
is addressing this issue for onshore, non-
transportation-related facilities. There is
no liability limit when spills are caused.
by willful misconduct or gross
negligence or by violation of Federal
safety, construction, or operating
regulations; or in cases of failure or
refusal to report the discharge, failure to
cooperate in oil removal actions, or
comply with orders issued by the
Federal agency in charge of cleanup.
Under OPA section 1002, the scope of
damages for which oil dischargers may
be liable is expanded to .include
damages for injury to, or loss of
subsistence use of, natural resources;
damages for injury to property; loss of
revenues, profits, or earning capacity,
and costs of public services during or
after oil removal activities.
The OPA establishes that the Oil Spill
Liability Trust Fund under section 9509
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
shall be used to pay for removal costs
and damages not recovered from
responsible parties. The existing fund
under CWA section 311(k) and other oil
spill compensation and liability funds
are dissolved; the assets and liabilities
of these funds are consolidated in the
Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund.
Section 4113 of the OPA requires the
President to conduct a study on whether
liners or other secondary means of
containment should be used to prevent
or help detect leaks from onshore bulk
oil storage facilities. EPA is currently
undertaking such a study and will
prepare a Report to Congress on the
results.
Under OPA section 4201(a), Federal
authority under the CWA for the
removal of oil and hazardous
substances defined under the CWA is
expanded; for example, the Federal
government is required to direct removal
adtions for discharges posing a
substantial threat to the public health or
welfare of the U.S. Also, new ,
discretionary authority to direct the
spider's removal actions under other
S-310999 0004
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules 54615
characteristics. Partially buried tanks
and bunkered tanks, as defined in
proposed § 112.2, are included in
determining the capacity of
aboveground storage, and facilities with
such tanks are subject to the notification
requirement. In addition. EPA is
proposing that all facilities that become
subject to this regulation in the future by
virtue of their aboveground oil storage
capacity must notify the Agency prior to
beginning operations at the facility.
Many facilities subject to the Oil
Pollution Prevention regulation by virtue
of their underground storage capacity
are already subject to notification
requirements under the Underground
Storage Tank (UST) program (40 CFR
part 280). and EPA is proposing to
exempt many such UST-regulated
facilities from the Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation. The remaining
SPCC-regulated facilities with only
underground storage tanks, as defined in
proposed § 112.2(v), would not be
subject to the proposed notification
requirement. The proposed notification
provision in § 112.1(e) would require
that facility owners and operators
furnish their names; the name and
address of the facility; the number and
size of aboveground oil storage tanks at
the facility: the facility's total
aboveground oil storage capacity; the
distance of the facility to the nearest
navigable waters: the facility's Dun &
Bradstreet D-U-N-S number, if available:
and the facility's primary Standard
Industrial Classification, if applicable
and available. This information is to be
supplied using a proposed standard
form, which is included as appendix B of
today's proposed regulation. In addition,
the Agency is considering requiring
information on the latitude and
longitude of the facility, location of
environmentally sensitive areas and
potable water supplies, presence of
secondary containment, spill history,
leak detection equipment and alarms.
age of tanks, and potential for adverse
weather. This additional information
would assist in implementing the facility
response plan requirements that are
mandated by the OPA. The facility
response plan requirements will be
proposed in the Phase two rulemaking.
Specifically, the information may be
useful in determining which facilities
could reasonably be expected to cause
"substantial harm" or "significant and
substantial harm" by discharging into
the navigable waters, adjoining
shorelines, or the exclusive economic
zone and. therefore, must submit their
facility response plan. EPA requests
comments on collecting this additional
information through the notification
S-310999 0005
-------
54616 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 /Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
secondary containment or diversionary
measures complete a site-specific
contingency plan. Because as part of
Phase Two' EPA is currently considering
requirements for more comprehensive
facility-specific contingency plans in
response to the recommendations of the
Task Force and the requirements of the
OPA. the Agency wishes to provide an
opportunity for commenters to submit
additional information and '
recommendations on contingency
planning during the development of such
requirements. Therefore. EPA is
requesting comments and supporting
•data on oil spill contingency planning
needs.
C. New Discretionary Provisions
In addition to proposing changes to
clarify and strengthen the Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation. EPA is proposing
a number of provisions as
recommendations. These new provisions
are described individually in Section III
of this preamble. Among the new
recommendations are the following two
provisions: .
• Proposed § 112.B(d)(4). It is
recommended that facilities have all
buried piping 3 tested for integrity and
leaks annually or have buried piping
monitored monthly in accordance with
the provisions of 40 CFR part 280. In
addition, it is recommended that records
of the testing or monitoring be kept for
five years (does not apply to offshore
facilities or production facilities).
• Proposed § 112.8(d)(5). It is
recommended that facilities post vehicle
weight restrictions to prevent damage to
underground piping (does not apply to
offshore facilities or production
facilities).
EPA is proposing these two provisions
and other provisions as
recommendations rather than
requirements. The Agency is concerned
that these provisions may not for all
facilities achieve the standard of
provisions based on good engineering
practice, which is the basic standard of
the regulation. EPA. however believes
that implementation of these provisions
at most facilities would contribute to the
facilities' overall effort to prevent oil
discharge and to mitigate those spills
that may occur. Consequently, EPA is
proposing these discretionary provisions
so that the owners and operators of
facilities subject to the Oil Pollution
Prevention Regulation can decide
whether the suggested practices are
3 The change from the use of "pipeline" to
"piping" i> to eliminate any possible confuiion
between the regulation's use of "pipeline", and
"pipelines" regulated by DOT9 Office of Pipeline
Safety.
S-310999 0006(00X2 l-OCT-91-13:49:03)
warranted under the existing regulatory
requirements. At many facilities the
proposed provisions are consistent with
the general requirement that the SPCC
Plan be prepared in accordance with
good engineering practices. At the same
time, the Agency recognizes that for
some facilities implementation of these
provisions is inappropriate for
technological or other reasons or is not
necessary because of other facility-
specific practices or circumstances. For
such facilities, not implementing these
discretionary provisions would be
consistent with the existing requirement
concerning good engineering practices.
The Agency requests comments and
supporting data (including information
on likely environmental impacts or
benefits) regarding whether these
discretionary provisions should be made
requirements. EPA is particularly
interested in receiving comments and
information on the advisability of
establishing the two provisions as
requirements for large facilities, but as
recommendations for small facilities.
This is consistent with the SPCC Task
Force recommendation that EPA
regulate larger facilities more stringently
than smaller facilities. EPA considered
defining a "large facility" for this
specific purpose as a facility with more
than 42,000 gallons of SPCC-regulated
storage capacity. The Agency believes
that larger volumes of oil stored at a
facility increases the chances of a spill
occurring, and that spills from large-
capacity facilities may be greater in
magnitude than those from smaller
facilities, thus posing a greater potential
threat to the waters of the United States.
Section 311(j)(l)(C) of the CWA,
however, does not explicitly authorize
differential requirements based on
facility size. EPA is also requesting
comment on the option of applying these
provisions as requirements to all sizes of
SPCC-regulated facilities under
§ 311(j)(l)(i) of the CWA.
In addition. EPA is requesting
comments on two other practices that
are not included in the proposed
revisions. These practices are:
• That owners and operators of
facilities affix a signed and dated
statement to the SPCC Plan indicating
that the revision has taken place and
whether or not amendment of the Plan is
required.
• That owners and operators of
onshore facilities other than production
facilities state the design capabilities of
their drainage system in the SPCC Plan
if the system is relied upon to control
spills or leaks.
EPA believes that these practices may
improve the quality of a facility's SPCC
4701.FMT...|16.30)..,12-28-90
Plan and may be appropriate to include
in the Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation as discretionary practices.
The Agency has not included these
practices in the proposed rule because
of the lack of data for the benefits likely
to result from these practices. EPA
specifically requests commeats
regarding the extent to which these
provisions would further improve the
effectiveness of the Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation.
III. Proposed Changes in Each Section of
40 CFR Part 112
In this section, the principal changes
and clarifications being proposed today
to each of the sections of 40 CFR part
112 are discussed and explained. Minor
grammatical and- editorial changes also
have been made to the text of the
proposed rule. To more effectively
organize § 112.7. it has been divided into
five separate sections (proposed
§i 112.7,112.8,112.9,112.10, and 112.11).
based on facility type. This
reorganization will aid in the
clarification of SPCC Plan requirements
for different types of facilities.
A. Section 112.1—General Applicability
and Notification
The geographic scope of the
applicability of the Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation, which is stated in
paragraphs (a), (b), and (d) of § 112.1, is
proposed to be extended to conform
with the 1977 CWA amendments that
extended the geographic scope of EPA's
authority under CWA section 311. CWA
section 311(b)(l) as amended in 1977,
establishes a national policy prohibiting
discharges of oil or hazardous
substances into or upon the navigable
waters of the United States or adjoining
shorelines, or into or upon the waters of
the contiguous zone, or in connection
with activities under the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act or the
Deepwater Port Act of 1974, or that may
affect natural resources belonging to,
appertaining to, or under the exclusive
management authority of the United
States (including resources under the
Magnuson Fishery Conservation and
Management Act). As a result, the
applicability of the SPCC regulations as
stated in paragraphs (a) and (b) of
§ 112.1 and in subsequent paragraphs of
the rule is proposed to be revised to
reflect the statutory language.
In light of amendments to the CWA in
1978, EPA is revising the phrase
"harmful quantities" in § 112.1(b). The
revised phrase—"quantities that may be
harmful, as described in part 110"—
includes oil discharged in quantities that
violate applicable water quality .
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules 54617
standards, cause a film or sheen upon or
discoloration of the surface of the water
or adjoining shorelines, or cause a
sludge or emulsion to be deposited
•beneath the surface of the water or upon
adjoining shorelines (40 CFR 110.3).4
Since the implementation of the SPCC
regulation in 1973. EPA has received
numerous questions concerning the ••
scope of the definition of oil. Section
311(a)(l) of the CWA defines "oil" as
"oil of any kind or in any form,
including, but net limited to. petroleum,
fuel oil, sludge, oil refuse, and oil mixed
with wastes other than dredged spoil."
EPA interprets this definition to include
crude oil and refined petroleum products
. as well as non-petroleum oils such as
vegetable and animal oils. The Agency
solicits comments on the
appropriateness of this interpretation for
the SPCC program.
The facilities, equipment,and
operations that are exempt from this
regulation are described in § 112.1(d).
EPA is proposing several changes to this
section. In proposed paragraph (d)(l)(i),
a reference to proposed § 112.1(b)(l),
which delineates the scope of the Oil
Pollution Prevention rule, has been
added.
To avoid duplicative and
unnecessarily burdensome regulation,
the Agency is proposing in the new
§ 112.1(d)(4) to exempt underground
storage tanks (defined by proposed
§ 112.2(v)) that are now subject to the
technical requirements of EPA's
Underground Storage Tank (UST)
program (40 CFR part 280). In addition,
EPA is proposing in § 112.1(d)(2)(i) to
exclude the capacity of UST-regulated
underground storage tanks from the
calculation of underground oil storage
capacity made to determine whether a
facility is subject to this regulation.
Under proposed § 112.7(a)(3). however.
any facility subject to this regulation
must have the location and contents of
all tanks marked on the facility diagram
for informational purposes.
Notwithstanding differences in the
scope and focus of the SPCC and UST
programs. EPA believes that the UST
technical requirements codified in 40
CFR part 280 are consistent with the
underlying regulatory purposes of the
SPCC program and are equally
protective for purposes of preventing
discharges of oil into waters of the
United States. For example, under the
UST program, new and existing tanks
must meet specific corrosion protection
requirements, be equipped with
• Amendments lo the CWA made by the OPA in
1990 broaden the concept of quantities thai may be
harmful to include not only "the public health or
welfare" but also "the environment."
catchment basins, automatic shutoff
devices, and alarms, and be subjected to
periodic tank tightness testing. These
requirements achieve a level of
protection needed to ensure that a
discharge.of oil will not reach bodies of
water protected by the CWA.
It is important to note that the
proposed § 112.1(d)(2)(i) and
§ 112.1(d)(4) exemptions apply only to
UST-regulated tanks that meet the
definition of "underground storage tank"
proposed in § 112.2(v). The proposed
rule makes this clear in § 112.1(b)(3), by
providing that "bunkered tanks" and
"partially buried tanks" (defined by the
proposed .§ 112.2(c) and'! 112.2(n).
respectively), as well as tanks in
subterranean vaults, are considered
aboveground storage tanks for the
purposes of this regulation and are
subject to the requirements of the
regulation. Compared to completely
buried tanks, spills from these tanks are
more likely to enter surface waters
regulated under the CWA. For further
discussion of the relationship of the
SPCC program to the UST program, see
Section IV.A. of this preamble.
EPA is proposing in both § 112.1(d)(2)
(i) and (ii) to exempt from the
calculation of storage capacity, tanks
and facilities that are "permanently
closed," as defined in the proposed
§ 112.2(o). This proposed approach
results from experience gained by EPA
in administering the SPCC program,
which indicates that tanks and facilities
properly closed on a permanent basis
need not continue maintaining current
SPCC Plans, Such tanks and facilities
cannot reasonably be expected to
discharge oil in quantities that may be
harmful in the manner described in the
proposed. § 112.1(b)(l). Therefore, the
Agency is proposing to exempt oil
storage tanks meeting the criteria for
being "permanently closed" in proposed
§ 112.2(0) and facilities at which all
tanks are permanently closed. The
Agency has considerable experience
with applying the criteria to show that
they are appropriate for defining SPCC-
regulated facilities that do not represent
a significant threat of a discharge of oil
in quantities that may be harmful.
However, the Agency specifically
solicits comments on the
appropriateness of these criteria.
including supporting data and
descriptions of suggested alternative
criteria for defining "permanently
closed" tanks.
Facilities with some permanently
closed tanks, where other tanks contain
sufficient capacity and are not
permanently closed, remain subject to
this regulation unless otherwise
exempted under § 112.1(d). The Agency
has also found that, in contrast to
facilities and tanks that are permanently
closed, facilities and tanks used for
standby storage, seasonal storage, or
temporary storage can reasonably be
expected to discharge oil as described in
proposed § il2.1(b)(l). EPA is, therefore,
clarifying in proposed § 112.1(b)(2) that
such facilities and tanks are not
considered permanently closed.
To avoid redundancy with the
requirements of the U.S. Department of •
the Interior's Minerals Management . .
Service (MMS), the Agency is proposing
in § 112.1(d)(3) to exempt from this .
regulation offshore oil production or
exploration facilities subject to MMS
Operating Orders, notices, and
regulations. This proposal is based on
analysis of the MMS Operating Orders
and the conclusion that they require
adequate spill prevention, control, and
counter-measures practices that are
directed more specifically to the
facilities subject to these requirements.
As described in section U.A of this
preamble. EPA is proposing a new
facility notification requirement as
§ 112.1(e). Notification would be
provided to EPA on a standard form,
which is proposed as appendix B of 40
CFR part 112.
EPA is proposing to amend current
§ 112.1(e) (redesignated as proposed
§ 112.1(f)) to clarify that adherence to
the SPCC regulation does not relieve
facility owners and operators from
complying with applicable local, State,
and Federal regulations. These
regulations include, but are not limited
to. those issued by the USCG. the
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), the Federal
Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA). and EPA's UST program. The
Agency is also proposing that owners
and operators consider current
applicable regulations, standards, and
codes, including certain standards and
recommended practices established by
the American Petroleum Institute (API)
(series 12, 620. and 650). the National
Fire Protection Association (NFPA) (30
and 30A). the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
Standards, the National Association of
Corrosion Engineers (NACE) Standards,
American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) (B31.3), and Underwriters
Laboratories (UL) Standards, in
determining practices that may be
required for particular facilities by the
requirement that all SPCC Plans be
prepared in accordance with good
engineering practice. The standard of
good engineering practice, which applies
to all SPCC Plans, will require that
S-310999 0007(OOX2I-OCT-9I-I3:49:06)
4701.FMT.,. (16.301. ..12-2R-QO
-------
54618 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
appropriate provisions of applicable
codes, standards, and regulations be
incorporated into the SPCC Plan for a
particular facility.
B. Section 112.2—Definitions
Definitions for the following terms
have been proposed to be revised,
added or modified as follows:
• A definition of "discharge" has been
revised to reflect changes to the definition in
the 1978 amendments to the CWA.
Discharges in compliance with a permit under
section 402 of the CWA are not considered a
discharge for the purposes of this part.
• A definition of "navigable waters" has
been revised to conform with revisions to the
regulation on the discharge of oil (40 CFR
part 110).
• A definition of "offshore facility" has
been revised to conform with the CWA and
the March 8.1990. revisions to the NCP.
Offshore facilities are any facility of any kind
located in. on, or under any of the navigable
waters of the United States, and any facility
of aqy kind that is subject to the jurisdiction
of the United States and is located in. on. or
under any other waters.
• A definition of "United States" has been
revised to conform with revisions to the
definition of the United States in the 1978
amendments to the CWA. The
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands has been added to the definition.
'• A definition of "contiguous zone" has
been added to conform with the amendments
to the CWA in 1978 and the March 8.1990,
revisions to the NCP.
• A definition of "wetlands" has been
added to define the term as used in the
definition of "navigable waters." The
' definition conforms with the definition in the
oil discharge regulation (40 CFR part 110).
• Definitions for the terms "breakout tank"
and "bulk storage tank" have been added to
clarify the distinction between facilities
regulated by DOT and EPA: EPA regulates
facilities with bulk storage tanks. Breakout
tanks are used to compensate for pressure
surges or control and maintain pressure
through pipelines. These tanks are frequently
in-line and are regulated by DOT.
• A definition of "bunkered tank" has been
added to clarify that bunkered tanks are a
subset of "partially buried tanks." Bunkered
tank means a tank constructed or'placed in
the ground by cutting the earth and
recovering in a manner whereby the tank
breaks the natural grade of the land. As such.
bunkered tanks are subject to the provisions
of 40 CFR part 112 as aboveground tanks.
• A definition of "facility" has been added
based on the MOU between the Secretary of
Transportation and the EPA Administrator
dated November 24.1971 (38 FR 24080). More
detailed discussion of the types of facilities
covered is in Appendix A.
• Definitions of "oil production facilities
(onshore)" and "oil drilling, production, or
workover facilities (offshore)" have been .
moved from existing { 112.7(e)(5)(i) and
$ 112.7(e)(7)(i). respectively.
• A definition of "partially buried tank"
has been added to clarify the distinction
between partially buried tanks and
underground storage tanks, the latter being
defined in this proposed rulemaking for SPCC
purposes as those tanks completely covered
with earth. Partially buried tanks are subject
to the provisions of 40 CFR part 112 as
aboveground tanks.
• A definition of "permanently closed"
was added to clarify the scope of facilities
and tanks excluded from coverage by this
part. EPA solicits comments on the
requirement to ensure that tank vapors
remain below the lower explosive limit.
• A definition of "SPCC Plan" has been
added to further explain its purpose and
scope. The Plan provides a written
explanation of a facility's compliance with
the requirements of the regulation, including
equipment, manpower, procedures, and steps
to prevent, control, and provide adequate
countermeasures to an oil spill.
• The definition of "spill event" was •
modified to correspond to the changes
described in the applicability section of this
rule relating to the expanded scope of CWA
jurisdiction.
• A definition for "storage capacity" has
been added to clarify that it includes the total
capacity of a tank or container capable of
storing oil or oil mixtures. Because the
percentage of oil in a mixture is determined
by the operator and can be changed at will,
the total capacity of a tank or container is
considered in determining applicability under
this part, regardless of whether the tank or
container is filled with oil or a mixture of oil
and another substance, as long as the mixture
would violate standards in 40 CFR part 110.
• A definition of "underground storage
tank" has been added.' The SPCC program
defines the term more narrowly than the UST
program under RCRA Subtitle I. Under the
SPCC program. EPA proposes to regulate any
tanks that are not completely buried as
aboveground tanks, because tanks with
exposed surfaces exhibit' a potential to
discharge into navigable waters and
adjoining shorelines. See also the discussion
in the preamble regarding the relationship
between the SPCC and the UST programs.
,EPA is not proposing any changes to
the definition of "oil" (except its
redesignation from $ ll£2(a) to
C. Section 112.3 — Requirement to
Prepare and Implement a Spill
Prevention. Control, and
Countermeasures Plan
This section describes the
requirements for the preparation and
implementation of SPCC Plans. Most of
the proposed modifications to $ 112.3
have been provided for clarification.
However, in paragraph (b) of the current
rule, a new facility is required to prepare
a Plan within six months after
operations begin and to implement the
Plan within one year. In. proposed
paragraph (b), a new facility is required
to prepare and fully implement a Plan
before beginning operations, unless an
extension has been granted by the-
Regional Administrator (proposed
§ 112.5(a) requires that Plans be
amended before any change is made
that materially affects the facility's
potential for discharge of oil into the
waters of the United States). Experience
with the implementation of this
regulation shows that many types of
failures occur during or shortly following
facility startup and that virtually all
prevention, containment, and
countermeasures practices are a part of
the facility design or construction.
Therefore, the Agency believes that new
facilities should be required to plan and
execute the provisions governing spill
prevention prior to starting operations.
EPA assumes for the purpose of this
proposed provision that all existing
facilities subject to this rule have had
their SPCC Plans prepared since the
regulation was issued, therefore, only
new facilities would be affected by this
proposed change in timing for the
submittal of their Plans.
EPA also assumes in § 112.3(c) that
owners/operators of existing onshore
and offshore mobile or portable facilities
have prepared and implemented a
facility SPCC Plan as required by
§ 112.3(b); therefore, only hew facilities
are affected by the change in timing for
the submission of the SPCC Plans.
Additional requirements concerning
Plan certification by a Registered
Professional Engineer are specified in
§ 112.3(d). The existing language states
that "no SPCC Plan shall be effective to
satisfy the requirements of this part
unless it has been reviewed by a
Registered Professional Engineer and
certified to by such Professional
Engineer. By means of this certification
the engineer, having examined the
facility and being familiar with the
provisions of this part, shall attest that
the SPCC Plan has been prepared in
accordance with good engineering
practices. Such certification shall in no
way * * *."
This existing language states that the
Professional Engineer (PE) must only be
certified. The Agency is soliciting
comments on the advantages and
disadvantages associated with the PE
being registered in the State in which
the facility is located and the additional
requirement that this PE should not be
an employee of the facility or have any
other direct financial interest in the
facility
The U.S. General Accounting Office
(GAO), in a 1989 report, "Inland Oil
Spills: Stronger Regulation and
Enforcement Needed to Avoid Future
Incidents" (GAO/RCED-89-65), '
recommended that EPA evaluate the
advantages and disadvantages of
S-310999 0008(OOX2I-OCT-9I-I3:49:10)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules 54619
requiring facilities to obtain certification
from independent engineers.
The Agency notes that not having the
PE otherwise associated with the facility
may avoid any potential conflicts of
interest or appearance of conflicts of
interest that could arise from allowing
an employee of a regulated party to
certify a SPCC Plan. The Agency also
notes that a requirement that a PE be
licensed in the State in which the facility
is located would allow the State
licensing board to more easily address
the actions of the PE under its
jurisdiction, and that the PE may have
greater familiarity with the State and
local requirements related to the facility
under review.
The Agency notes that disadvantages
associated with the above approaches
have been expressed by several
organizations, who object to such
requirements as challenging the integrity
of professional engineers. They also
point out that these requirements would
impose substantial costs without
enhancing the integrity of the
certification process.
To assist the Agency in addressing the
GAO and Task Force recommendations
cited above, EPA specifically solicits
comments or data regarding the
ramifications of requiring that the
certifying professional engineer not be
an employee of the owner or operator.
In addition, under the proposed rule,
the Engineer must attest that required
testing has been completed and that the
Plan meets the requirements of
regulation for the facility. These
revisions promote the Agency's intent in
the original promulgation of § 112.3(d)
that SPCC Plans be certified by a
Registered Professional Engineer
exercising independent judgment. The
Agency intends these new requirements
to be met when a new Plan is prepared
after promulgation of this proposed rule.
or an existing Plan is amended, pursuant
to § 112.5. During inspections for
compliance with the current SPCC
requirements, some facility owners and
operators have argued that they have
not interpreted the current regulatory
language to require that the certifying
Engineer physically visit the facility EPA
believes the current regulatory language
(e.g., requiring the engineer to examine
the facility) clearly requires the
certifying Engineer to visit the facility
prior to certifying the SPCC Plan. The
proposed change clarifies this .
requirement by specifying that the
Professional Engineer must be
physically present to examine the
facility. ,
As described in paragraph (e), the
SPCC Plan must be available at a
facility if the facility is normally
S-310999 0009
-------
54620
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
Professional Engineer in accordance
with § 112.3(d). EPA is proposing an
exception to this provision for any
changes to the SPCC Plan emergency
contact list (required by the proposed
§ 112.7(a)(3)(ix)). This change does not
affect the technical/engineering aspects
of the SPCC Plan, or the characteristics
of the facility and, therefore, does not
require certification by a Professional
Engineer, it is important that the SPCC
Plan emergency contact list be current in
order to rapidly respond to spills.
F: Section 112.6—Civil Penalties for
•Violation of OH Pollution Prevention
Regulation
This section describes the penalties
associated with failure to comply with
certain listed sections of the rule. In this
proposed rule. §§ 112.1{e), 112.7.112.8.
112.9,112.10. and 112.11 are added to the
list of required provisions.
The OPA changes the penalty
structure under the CWA (see Section
I.C. of this preamble. Oil Pollution Act of
1990, for changes in liability limits and
penalties). All violations of this
regulation on or after August 18,1990
are subject to the procedures set out in
section 311 of the CWA as amended by
the OPA; The Agency is reviewing the
need for clarifying changes to § 112.6
and to 40 CFR part 114 in light of the
OPA amendments.
G. Section 1^2.7—Spill Prevention.
Control, and Countermeasures Plan
General Requirements
• The Agency is proposing to separate
existing provisions of 40 CFR 112.7 into
five sections (§5 112.7,112.8.112.9,
112.10. and 112.11) based on facility
type. Proposed § 112.7 provides general
requirements for preparing SPCC Plans
while §§ 112.8,112.9,112.10, and 112.11
address detailed Plan requirements for
onshore facilities (excluding production
facilities); onshore production facilities;
onshore oil drilling and workover
facilities; and offshore oil drilling,
production, and workover facilities,
respectively. The purpose of the
reorganization of the current $ 112.7 is
for clarity and ease in using the
regulation but is not intended to make
substantive changes to the regulation;
the new regulatory citations created by
the reorganization do not by themselves
require rewriting or recertification of
SPCC Plans.
Section 112.3(a) of the current rule
requires that SPCC Plans be prepared in
accordance with § 112.7. The Agency
believes, however, that clarification of
the existing regulation is necessary
because of confusion oh the parf of .
some owners or operators who have ••
interpreted the current rule's use of the
S-310999 OOKXOOX21-OCT-91-U:49:17)
words "should" and "guidelines" as
indications that compliance with
applicable provisions of § 112.7 is •
optional. The current regulation requires
that all SPCC Plans be prepared in
accordance with good engineering
practice. The Agency originally
promulgated § 112.7 (now reorganized
as prpposed §5 112.7,112.8,112.9.112.10,
and 112.11) to require that SPCC Plans
be prepared in accordance with the
appropriate provisions in that section in
the belief that such practices are good
engineering practice for facilities
described in the regulation. However,
the regulatory language "should" was
used in most provisions to provide
flexibility for facilities with unique
circumstances that could show that such
practices do not represent good
engineering practice.
To eliminate any misunderstanding,
the words "requirements" and "shall"
have generally been substituted for the
words "guidelines" and "should" in the
proposed revisions to § § 112.7,112.8,
112.9.112.10. and 112.11.
Nevertheless, because of the
differences in facility design, the Agency
continues to recognize that it is not
always feasible or consistent with good
engineering practice to mandate the
same requirements for every facility to
prevent and to contain oil spills. Thus,
the Agency has reviewed each of the
provisions of proposed S§ 112.7,112.8,
112.9,112.10. and 112.11 and, where
appropriate, is proposing the provision
as a recommendation for consideration
by facility owners or operators in
evaluating the requirements of good
engineering practice.
Furthermore, as is the case in the
current regulation, the prpposed revision
continues to provide for deviation from
the requirements of 8 112.7 where the
owners or operators cannot meet the
specific requirements set forth in the
rule. A new proposed technical waiver
in § 112.7(a)(2) allows for the owner or
operator to provide equivalent alternate
protection that is not specified in
§5 112.7(c). 112.8,112.9.112.10, and
112.11. EPA, in the exercise of its
authority to inspect facilities and SPCC
plans, of course, retains the authority to
find that such alternative methods of
protection do not provide equivalent
protection.
In addition to clarifying language, the
Agency has proposed in today's rule two
other series of changes. First, the
Agency has specified many of the
inspection and monitoring time periods
referred to in §5 112.7.112.8.112.9.
112.10. and 112.11. In the current rule,
many time periods are determined by
the owner or operator and listed in the
SPCC Plan, in accordance with good
4701.FMT...[16,30)...12-28-90
engineering practice. The Agency is
proposing to define most of the time
periods, while leaving only a few to
interpretation by the owner or operator.
By specifying time periods based on
engineering practice, the Agency intends
to provide the regulated community with
greater certainty concerning its
obligations. However, because of the
diversity of facilities subject to this
regulation, not all time periods can be
standardized based on engineering •
practice. . .
Second, in various places in § § 112.8
and 112.9 of the proposed rule,
recommendations have been added to
follow relevant industry standards or
recommended practices, such as API
series 12.620.650, and 2000: ASME
B31.3, B96.1, and section VIII; NFPA 30.
31. and 31a; and UL142. While the
proposed rule does not specifically
incorporate these standards, the Agency
believes that adherence to appropriate
industry standards is, in most cases,
strong evidence of adherence to good
engineering practice. The Agency
recommends that these publications and
others on recommended practices and
procedures be consulted when
developing a Plan.
The following discussion focuses on
revised provisions, new requirements.
and new recommendations in each
paragraph in proposed § 112.7.
In S 112.7(a) of the current rule.
facilities are required to include in the
Plan information about spill events
occurring prior to the effective date of
the original Oil Pollution Prevention rule
(1973). Because such information has
little current relevance, the provision is
proposed to be deleted. Proposed
paragraph (a) includes a general
description of the SPCC Plan, which is in
the introductory text of § 112.7 of the
current rule. Four new paragraphs have
been proposed for addition to paragraph
(a).
In proposed paragraph (a)(2),
deviation from the requirements of
paragraph (c) of this section and the
requirements of §| 112.8.112.9.112.10.
and 112.11. which apply to a specific
facility and which include specific
provisions for structures and equipment.
is allowed, as long as that equivalent
protection is provided by other means.
This provision is intended to provide
much of the flexibility to incorporate
differences in a diverse regulated
community that was previously intended
by the use of the regulatory language
"should." Taken together with
provisions clearly defined as
requirements, this provision provides a
clearer description of the Agency's
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
54621
expectations for the purposes of Plan
preparation.
Proposed paragraph (a)(3) clarifies the
characteristics of a facility that must be
described in the Plan, including unit-by-
unit storage capacity, type and quantity
of oil stored, estimates of quantity of
oils potentially discharged, possible spill
pathways, spill prevention measures. .
spill control measures, spill
countermeasures, provisions for
disposal of recovered materials, and a
contact list with appropriate phone
numbers. The description of the
facility's physical plant must also
include a facility diagram on which the
location and contents of all tanks must
be marked, regardless of whether the
tanks are subject to all the provisions of
40 CFR part 280. A complete facility
diagram will assist in response actions.
Proposed paragraph (aj(4) requires
documentation in the Plan to enable a
person reporting a spill to provide
essential information (based on Agency
experience) to organizations on the
contact list. As the result of Agency
experience during emergency
conditions, proposed paragraph (a)(5)
requires that portions of the Plan
describing procedures to be used in
emergency circumstances be organized
in a manner to make them readily
useable in an emergency.
Paragraph (b) of the proposed rule
(§ 112.7(b) of the current rule) changes
the "should" to "shall" for purposes of
clarification. Section 112.7(c) of the
current rule lists appropriate
containment and diversionary structures
and requires that dikes, berms. or
retaining walls be sufficiently
impervious to contain spilled oil. A
proposed revision to this paragraph
clarifies that the entire containment
system, including walls and floor, must
be impervious to oil for 72 hours. EPA
believes that the specificity of a 72-hour
standard provides the'regulated . -
community with greater clarification
and flexibility than the phase
"sufficiently impervious" currently in
the regulation.
The Agency recognizes that spills
occur while facilities are unattended;
however, EPA believes that most
facilities are attended at some time
during a 72-hour period. Therefore, a
containment system that is impervious
to oil for 72 hours will allow time for
discovery and removal of an oil spill in
most cases. This requirement is
consistent with the provision for diked
areas surrounding bulk storage tanks in .
proposed § 112.8(c)(2). Another
proposed revision to this paragraph
clarifies and further defines the phrase
"containment system that is impervious
to oil" as being a system constructed so
S-310999 0011(OOX21-OCT-91-13:49:21)
that spills will not permeate, drain or
infiltrate or otherwise escape to surface
waters before cleanup occurs.
The Agency is aware that for certain
facilities, such as some electrical
substations that have gravel beds
surrounding equipment to prevent
•electrical and fire hazards, compliance
with proposed § 112.7(c) may not be
practicable. For these facilities.
§ 112.7(d) of the current rule describes
the procedures for facilities where the
installation of structures and equipment
listed in paragraph (c) is not practicable.
The Agency believes that the alternative
requirements of § 112.7(d) provide the '
regulated community with additional
flexibility on complying wrthr the Oil
Pollution Prevention regulation while
fulfilling the intent of the CWA.
The proposed rule would add several
new requirements. First, facilities would
be required to conduct integrity testing
of tanks every five years at a minimum.
This is in contrast to the proposed
requirement in § 112.8(c)(8) for integrity
testing of tanks every ten years at
facilities, that are able to incorporate
secondary containment features. In
addition, the proposed rule would
require facilities without secondary
containment to conduct integrity and
leak testing of the valves and piping
every year at a minimum. Annual testing
has been proposed because valve and
piping system failures are a major
contributor to oil spills.5
The current § 112.7(d) requires that a
strong oil spill contingency plan and a
written commitment of manpower,
equipment, and materials for spill
control and removal be provided for
facilities without secondary
containment. Since these facilities do
not have oil spill technology that uses
secondary containment, prevention and
countermeasures become of primary
importance and these measures will
have to be implemented immediately to
prevent spills from reaching navigable
waters. Proposed paragraph (d) clarifies
that the contingency plan must be
provided to the Regional Administrator. '
In addition, proposed paragraph (d)
references proposed § 112.4(d), allows
the Regional Administrator to approve
the Plan or require amendment of the
Plan.
The contingency plan is a subsection
of an SPCC Plan. An SPCC Plan can be
divided into two major concepts: (1)
Design, operation, and maintenance
procedures to prevent and control spills,
and (2) how a facility's personnel are to
5 Twelve percent of all release* are cauied by
pipe leaks and valve failures. "Aboveground
Storage Tank Incident Information Project." API.
Washington. DC. December 20.1988.
4701.FMT...flB.3ni...l ?.-
respond to a discharge. The contingency
plan is designed to deal with the second
concept. It is proposed that the
contingency plan shall be., a separate
section of the SPCC Plan because it
would be more accessible during
emergencies.
One of the first steps in developing a
contingency plan is to define the
potential hazard. Requirements to define
a hazard are in § 112.7(b). Typically, to
determine the potential hazard, the
following would be examined: Potential
failures, the size of a spill resulting from
each type of failure, how fast and long
the spill event would take to occur, and
what the spill might impact. To
determine what the spill may impact,
the potential spill size, rate of flow, and
direction of travel needs to be analyzed.
The OPA requires facilities that pose a
substantial threat or harm (e.g., facilities
without secondary containment) to the
navigable waters to prepare a facility
specific response plan. This requirement
will be addressed in Phase 0 revisions
to the SPCC regulation..
Paragraph (d)(l) of the current rule
states that an oil contingency plan must
follow the provisions of 40 CFR part 109.
The proposed paragraph no longer refers
to 40 CFR part 109, but, specifies basic
requirements for an oil contingency
plan. The proposed revisions to this
paragraph would require that the Plan
include a description of response-plans.
personnel needs, methods of mechanical
containment, removal of spilled oil. and
access and availability of sorbents,
booms, and other equipment. Proposed
paragraph (d)(l) would require that the
Plan not rely upon response methods
other than containment and physical
removal of oil from the water, unless
such response methods have been
approved for the contingency plan by
the Regional Administrator. The
additional approval for the actual use of
dispersants a.nd other chemicals to .
respond to oil spills in navigable waters
would continue to be governed by 40
CFR part 300, subpart J of the National
Contingency Plan.
Proposed paragraph (d)(2) contains a
recommendation that the facility owner
or operator consider factors such as
financial capability in making the
written commitment of manpower,
equipment, and materials.
Section 112.7(e) of the existing
regulation lists the provisions specific to
various types of facilities. This section
has been reorganized and divided into
§ J 112.8.112.9.112.10, and 112.11. The
remaining paragraphs in proposed in
§ 112.7 are discussed below.
Proposed Section 112,7(e): Inspection.
tests and records. This is § 112.7(e)(8) in
-------
54622 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
the current regulation. A facility should
continually conduct self-inspections and
regular maintenance on its equipment.
In the proposed rule, all records of
inspections and tests are to be
maintained with the SPCC Plan because
these records need to be readily
accessible to EPA personnel and the
certifying PE. The proposed rule changes
from three to five years the period for
which records of inspections and all test
results (along with the written
procedures for performing the
inspections and tests) must be
maintained with the SPCC Plan. The
records of tests, inspections, and
maintenance should be updated
continuously. If these records were part
of the Plan, as stated in the existing rule,
the Plan would need to be amended
each time old records were removed and
new records added. The use of
"maintained with" is intended to
eliminate this problem.
The proposed rule change from three
to five years for retention of records of
inspections, test results, and written
procedures for performance is consistent
with the Federal statute of limitations on
assessment of civil penalties for SPCC
regulatory violations. Extending this
requirement to five years will ensure
that facility owners or operators have
records needed to establish compliance
with the Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation. The provision requiring
inclusion of all records of test results is
a clarification of what inspections
' include.
Proposed § 112.7(fl: Personnel.
training, and spill prevention
procedures. This section is § 112.7(e)(10)
in the current regulation. Included in this
section are requirements for training
facility personnel. A new
recommendation that training exercises
be conducted yearly, and that new
employees be .trained within their first
week of work is proposed in
§ 112.7(f)(l). A high percentage of spills
are caused by operator error, therefore,
training and briefings are important for
the safe and proper functioning of a
facility. Training encourages up-to-date
planning for the control and response to
a spill. Training courses help sharpen
operating and response skills, introduce
the latest ideas and techniques, and
promote contact with the emergency
response organization and familiarity
with the SPCC Plan. Refresher training
must be carried out in a consistent and
regular manner to ensure currency and
capability of employees. New
• employees may have a higher
probability for operation errors and,
therefore, need training as soon as
possible after their employment. Facility
S-310999 0012(OOX2I-OCT-91-13:49:24V
training in emergency response
operations could be held in conjunction
with local contingency planning efforts
in accord with SARA Title III
requirements.
Proposed § 112.7(g): Security
(excluding oil production facilities).
This section is § 112.7(e)(9) in the
current regulation. Requirements for
fencing, locks, lighting, and other
security measures at facilities are
described in this section.
Vandalism is a factor in many spills
from facilities, therefore, there is a need
for adequate and effective security to
prevent access to the site by
unauthorized persons and to prevent
tampering with equipment and tanks.
Paragraph (e)(9)(ii) of the current rule
requires that master flow and drain
•valves be securely locked in the closed
position when in non-operating or non-
standby status. Because of changes in
technology and the use of manual and
electronic valving, the Agency believes
that this provision should be clarified to
require closure of valves; however, the
method of securing valves is left to the
discretion of the facility and good
engineering practice, as described in
proposed § 112.7(g)(2).
Paragraph (e)(9)(iv) of the current rule
requires that the loading/unloading
connections of oil pipelines be securely
capped or blank-flanged when not in
service or stand-by service for an
extended time. Proposed paragraph
(g)(4) clarifies "an extended time" to be
a time greater than "six months." This
time period is based on experience in
the Regions. Regional personnel found
that some spills were caused by loading
or unloading oil through the wrong
pipeline or turning the wrong valve
when the pipeline in question was
dctually out-of-service. Since this rule
applies to facilities and tanks operating
seasonally and since a number of
loading/unloading connections are used
seasonally, a period of six months is
proposed. .
Proposed § 112.7(h): Facility tank car
and tank truck loading/unloading rack
(excluding offshore facilities). This
section is § 112.7(e)(4) in the current
regulation. Because many onshore
facilities subject to the SPCC regulation
have tank car and tank truck loading/
unloading racks, this paragraph was
kept in the general applicability section.
Proposed § 112.7(i). This section
references conformance with the
applicable provisions in proposed
5§ 112.8,112.9.112.10. and 112.11 and if
more stringent, with'State rules.
regulations, and guidelines.
4701 .FMT...[16.301...12-28-00
H. Section 112.8: Spill Prevention.
Control, and Countermeasures Plan
Requirements for Onshore Facilities
(Excluding Production Facilities)
This section combines §§ 112.7(e)(l).
112.7(e)(2), and 112.7(e)(3) of the current
regulation. The word "plant" is changed
to "facility" to clarify EPA's intent.
Current § 112.7(e)(l) discusses facility
drainage systems and is proposed to be
renumbered as paragraph (b).
Proposed § 112.8(b)(3) clarifies that
only undiked areas of a facility's
property that are located such that they
have a reasonable potential to be
contaminated by an oil spill are required
to drain into a pond, lagoon, or
catchment basin. A good SPCC Plan
should seek to separate reasonably
foreseeable sources of contamination
and non-contamination.
In proposed § 112.8(b)(4), "plant
drainage" is changed to "facility
drainage"; "ditches" is changed to
"drainage" to clarify the meaning of the
section. It is proposed that spilled oil
shall be retained in the plant rather than
returned to the plant. This change
follows the spill prevention and control
intent of this rule. Furthermore, it should
be easier to retain spilled oil rather than
retrieve oil that has been spilled and
discharged from the facility. This should
enhance efforts to prevent the discharge
from reaching navigable waters.
Current § 112.7(e)(i)(v) is proposed as
§ 112.8(b)(5) and has been reworded to
improve its clarity.
Proposed § 112.8(b)(6) includes a
clarification that compliance with the
SPCC regulation does not preclude the
need for owners or operators to comply
with the requirements of Federal. State
and local agencies such as those for
facilities in areas subject to flooding.
The Plan should address these
additional measures related to flooding.
This is consistent with the FEMA
promulgated requirements in 44 CFR
part 60 for aboveground storage tanks
located in flood hazard areas. For
further discussion of FEMA's flood plain.
management requirements, see section
1V.E. of this preamble.
Current § 112.7(e)(2) discusses bulk
storage containers and is proposed to be
renumbered as § 112.8(c). Proposed
§ 112.8(c)(l) contains a new
recommendation that tanks conform
with relevant industry standards as
"good engineering practice". Paragraph
(e)(2)(ii) of the current rule requires that
tank installations include a secondary
means of containment for the contents
of the largest single tank and sufficient
freeboard to allow for precipitation.
Although the current rule and the
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22, 1991 / Proposed Rules 54623
proposed revisions do not set a standard
for "sufficient" freeboard, EPA
recommends freeboard sufficient to
contain a 25-year storm event. Certain
facilities may have equipment such as
electrical transformers that contain
significant quantities of oil for
operational purposes rather than storage
purposes. EPA has determined for safety
.and other considerations that such oil
filled equipment should not be subject to
the provisions of proposed § 112.8(c) or
§ 112.9(d) addressing bulk storage
containers at onshore facilities because
the primary purpose of this equipment is
not the storage of oil in bulk.
Consequently, facilities with equipment
containing oil for ancillary purposes do
not need to provide secondary
containment for this equipment nor
implement the other provisions of
proposed § 112.8(c) or § 112.9(d). Oil-
filled equipment must meet other
applicable SPCC requirements including
the general requirements and the
requirements of § 122.7, including
§ 112.7(c), to provide appropriate
containment and or diversionary
structures to prevent discharged oil from
reaching a navigable water course. The
general requirement for secondary
containment, which can be provided by
various means including drainage
systems, spill diversion ponds, etc., will
provide for safety and also meet the
goals of section 311(j)(l)(c) of the CWA.
The oil storage capacity of the
equipment, however, must be included
in determining the total storage capacity
of the facility, which determines
whether a facility is subject to the Oil
Pollution Prevention regulation. The
Agency believes that this interpretation
will ensure that facilities containing oil
storage capacity above the quantity cut-
offs prepare SPCC Plans while, at the
same time, recognizing that certain
types of equipment use oil in specialized
ways for which the provisions of
proposed § 112.B(c) or § 112.9(d) are not
necessary.
The SPCC Plan, however, will not
require that specific oil spills prevention
measures designed for storage tanks,
such as dikes, be installed. EPA also
solicits comments and data that might
identify operational rather than storage
uses of oil. other than electrical
transformers, for facilities that may not
currently use secondary containment as
a common industry practice.
The current rule also requires that
diked areas must be sufficiently
impervious to contain spilled oil. The
proposed § 112.8(c)(2) clarifies that
these diked areas must be able to
contain spilled oil for at least 72 hours
S-310999 0013(OOX2I-OCT-91-13:49:28)
(see previous discussion of § 112.7(c) in
this preamble).
Current paragraph (e)(2)(iv) addresses
underground metallic storage tanks and
is proposed to be renumbered as
§ 112.8(c)(4). Because tanks currently
subject to the technical requirements of
the UST regulation (40 CFR part 280)
would be generally exempted from
SPCC requirements under proposed
§ 112.1(d)(4). proposed § 112.fl(c)(4)
would only apply to tanks not covered
by the UST requirements.
Paragraph (e)(2)(iv) in the current rule
requires buried tanks to be subjected to
regular pressure testing. Under proposed
§ 112.8(c)(4), regular leak testing is
recommended for such tanks. Leak
testing is specified, rather than pressure
testing, in order to be consistent with
many State regulations. The Agency is
not proposing to require leak testing
under the Oil Pollution Prevention rule
until further data are generated. The
Agency is aware that this technology is
evolving rapidly with new volumetric
testing designs, acoustic detection
methods, and tracer gas techniques in
various stages of commercial
development. EPA's Office of
Underground Storage Tanks will be
reviewing these new techniques and
subsequently may issue technical
requirements for tanks for which
technical provisions under 40 CFR part
280 are currently deferred. These
technical provisions may be
incorporated into this regulation.
Under § 112.7(e)(2)(v) of the current
rule, partially buried metallic tanks are
to be avoided unless the shell is coated.
Under proposed § 112.8(c)(5), it is
recommended that partially buried or
bunkered metallic tanks be avoided
altogether. If such tanks are used,
however, they must be protected from
corrosion by coatings, cathodic
protection, or other methods. This
proposed provision is consistent with
the requirements for completely buried
tanks.
Paragraph (e)(2)(vi) of the current rule
requires that aboveground tanks be
subject to periodic integrity testing and
lists suggested testing techniques.
Proposed § 112.8(c)(6) specifies that the
testing must be performed every ten
years and when material repairs are
conducted. An example of such testing
is a full hydrostatic test performed when
a tank is reconstructed or when the tank
has undergone major repairs or major
alterations. A major repair or alteration
may include removing or replacing the
annular plate ring, replacement of the
tank bottom, or jacking of a tank shell.
EPA believes that a ten-year testing
interval is standard industry practice
4701.FMT...[16.30J...12-28-90
although many types of tanks, such as
those storing types of crude oil, may
require more frequent testing. In
addition to hydrostatic testing, visual
testing, and a system of non-destructive
shell testing, as listed in the current rule.
the Agency recommends such
techniques as radiographic, ultrasonic.
or acoustic emissions testing for testing
the integrity of aboveground tanks. The .
Agency does not believe that visual
tests alone are sufficient for anlntegrity
test, and that they should be used in
combination with the aforementioned
techniques.
Studies of the Ashland oil spill
suggest that the tank collapse resulted
from a brittle fracture in the shell of the
tank. Adequate fracture toughness of the
base metal of existing tanks is an
important consideration in spill
prevention, especially in cold weather.
Although no definitive non-destructive
test exists for testing fracture toughness,
the API 650 standard establishes
material toughness criteria that reduce
the risk of brittle fracture; therefore, the
Agency recommends that this standard
be used as a starting point.
Section 112.7(e)(2)(vii) of the current
rule discusses the factors to be
considered to control leakage from
defective internal heating coils. Under
. paragraph (e)(2)(vii)( A) of the current
rule, steam return or exhaust lines from
internal heating coils that discharge into.
an open water course must be monitored
or passed through a settling tank.
skimmer, or other separation or
retention system. In proposed
§ 112.8(c)(7)(i), the Agency recommends
that these systems be designed to hold
the entire contents of the affected tank,
be of sufficient size to contain a spill
that may occur when the system is not
being monitored, or have fail-safe oil
leakage detectors. The revision in
.. proposed § 112.8(c)(7)(ii) clarifies that
consideration of the feasibility of
installing an external heating system is
a discretionary provision.
Paragraph (e)(2)(viii) of the current
rule lists several devices to ensure that
new and old tank installations are fail-
safe engineered; one or more of these
devices is required at a facility. Testing
frequency of these devices may vary
depending on the type of sensor and the
manufacturer. The Agency is not
specifying a time frame for testing
sensing devices, but recommends
regular testing in accordance with
manufacturer specifications and
schedules. Proposed § 112.8(c)(8)(v)
allows for the use of other newly
developed sensing devices if these
devices will provide equivalent
protection consistent with § 112.7(a).
-------
54624 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
Paragraph (e)(2)(x) of the current rule
requires that oil leaks from tank seams,
gaskets, rivets, and bolts sufficiently
large to cause accumulation of oil in
diked areas be promptly corrected.
Proposed § 112.8(c)(10) adds a
requirement that the accumulated oil or
oil-contaminated materials must be
removed within 72 hours from the time
the spill event occurs. This time frame is
consistent with the requirement for
diked areas as specified in proposed
§ 112.7(c).
Paragraph (e)(2)(xi) of the current rule
discusses the requirements for mobile or
portable oil storage tanks. In proposed
§ 112.8(c)(ll), it is recommended that
these systems have a secondary means
of containment for the largest container.
Since many mobile and portable tanks
are sited for a short duration at
construction sites and moved frequently
from location to location, EPA
recognizes that it will not always be.
feasible to have secondary containment.
If it is not technically feasible, the SPCC
plan should include a complete
discussion of why it is not .feasible, and
state the countermeasures to be used in
case of a spill.
Section 112.7(e)(3) of the current
regulation discusses facility transfer
operations, pumping, and in-plant
process and is proposed to be
renumbered § 112.8(d). The current
§ 112.7(e)(3)(i) requires that buried
piping installations have a protective
coating and be cathodically protected if
soil conditions warrant. Proposed
§ 112.8(d)(l) requires protective coating
and cathodic protection for new or
replaced buried piping, regardless of soil
conditions. Based on EPA experience,
the Agency believes that all soil
conditions warrant protection of buried
piping. However, the Agency is not
requiring currently in-place buried
piping to have a protective wrapping
and be cathodically protected. The
owner or operator of a facility in the
past may have determined that soil
conditions do not warrant these
protection methods. Further, the Agency
also believes that the activities
associated with replacing all
unprotected buried piping would
possibly cause more spills than it would
prevent. The proposed paragraph would
allow facilities the option of complying
with other corrosion protection
standards for piping specified in 40 CFR
part 280.
In proposed § 112.8(d)(l). it is
recommended that piping installations
shall be placed aboveground whenever
possible. The Agency encourages the
placement of these installations in'leak-
proof galleys that feed to the facility's
S-310999 0014
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
54625
facilities. EPA suggests that monthly
examinations are appropriate for most
facilities, .
/. Section 112.10: Spill Prevention.
Control, and Countermeasures Plan
Requirements for Onshore Oil Drilling
and Workover Facilities
This section is § 112.7(e)(6) in the
current rule and includes requirements
for onshore oil drilling and workover
facilities. Paragraph (e)(6)(i) of the
current rule requires that mobile drilling
or workover equipment be located so as
to prevent spilled oil from reaching
navigable waters.
Proposed § 112.10(d) requires that
"when necessary," a blowout prevention
assembly and well control system be
installed that is capable of controlling
any anticipated wellhead pressure that
is expected to be encountered while that
blowout assembly is on the well. EPA
recognizes that a blowout prevention
assembly is not necessary where
pressures are not great enough to cause
a blowout (gauge negative) and need not
be required in all cases. However, a
gauge negative reading must be
evaluated in conjunction with an
examination of the known history of the
pressures encountered when drilling on
the oil reservoir. The history of the
reservoir may indicate that a blowout
prevention assembly and well control
system is needed. Where the history of
the reservoir is not known, then a
blowout prevention assembly and well
control system must be installed.
K. Section 112.11: Spilt Prevention,
Control, and Countermeasures Plan
Requirements for Offshore Oil Drilling,
Production, or Workover Facilities
This section is 1112.7(e){7) in the
current regulation and includes the
requirements for offshore oil drilling,
production, and workover facilities. The
definition of these facilities has been
moved to § 112.2 (j). Numerous other
editorial changes have been made to
clarify the intent of this section;
As indicated in § 112.11(b) of this
proposed regulation, offshore oil drilling,
production, and workover facilities that
are subject to the Operating Orders.
notices, and regulations of the MMS are
not subject to this part. Paragraph
(e)(7)(ii) of the current rule requires
removal of oil in collection equipment as
often as necessary to prevent overflow.
The proposed § 112.11(c) has been
amended to require removal of collected
oil at least once a year. EPA believes
that yearly oil removal will prevent
buildup of accumulated oils. A
protracted removal period could lead to
an accidental excess buildup and
resultant overflow.
S-310999 001S(OOX21-OCT-91-I3:49:3S)
Paragraph (e)(7)(iii) of-the current rule
requires a regularly scheduled
maintenance program for the liquid
removal and pump start-up device.
Because offshore facilities have less
ability to control spills in navigable
waters than onshore facilities, their
' containment devices are particularly
important. In the proposed § 112.11(d),
"regularly scheduled" is clarified as
"monthly."
• • With regard to corrosion protection in
proposed § 112.11(h), the Agency
recommends that the appropriate NACE
standards be followed in determining
suitable corrosion protection for tanks.
Proposed § 112.11(j) cites simulated spill
testing as a preferred method to test and
inspect oil spill prevention equipment
and systems. Experience has
demonstrated that properly maintained
and functioning pollution prevention
equipment is the most cost-effective
way to control oil spills. These systems
are crucial at offshore oil drilling,
production, and workover facilities
where a reduced ability to prevent oil
from reaching navigable waters exists.
Therefore, proposed § 112.11(j) has also
-been revised to require scheduled
periodic testing and inspection of
pollution prevention equipment not less
than monthly.
Paragraph (e)(7)(x) of the current rule
requires the owner or operator to
describe well shut-in valves and devices
. and to keep detailed records for each
well. Proposed § 112.11(k) clarifies that
this documentation must be maintained
at the facility for a period of no less that
five years (see Section III.G. and
§ 112.7(e)).
Paragraph (e)(7)(xii) of the current rule
describes extraordinary well control
measures for emergency conditions. In
proposed § 112.11(m), such measures are
restated as recommendations. Further
measures will be examined in the
context of spill contingency planning.
Contingency planning will be a major
topic of the Phase Two rulemaking and
the provisions in this proposed
paragraph will be reviewed at that time.
The order of sections in the current
§ 112.7(e)(7)(xiii) has been changed for
clarity. Section 112.7(e)(7)(xiii) of the
current rule is proposed to be
renumbered as § 112.11(s), and
paragraphs (e)(7)(xiv) through
(e)(7)(xviii) of the current rule are
proposed to be renumbered as § 112.11
(n) through (r), accordingly.
IV. Relationship to Other Programs
A. Underground Storage Tanks
A number of underground and .
abovegrouhd petroleum storage tanks
(as defined by the proposed revisions to
4701.FMT...[16,30]...12-28-90
40 CFR part 112) are subject to both the
Oil Pollution Prevention regulation and
the UST regulation (40 CFR part 280)
issued under subtitle I of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA).
A goal of both the SPCC and UST
programs is to prevent releases of
petroleum, although there are
differences in applicability, approach.
and the regulated community. For
example, the current Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation is applicable~~to
the owners or operators of facilities: (1) .
Possessing either underground storage
capacity greater than 42,000 gallons of
petroleum (or any other oil), or total •
aboveground storage capacity greater
than 1,320 gallons of oil (or greater than
660 gallons of oil in a single
aboveground tank): and (2) that, because
of their location, could reasonably be
expected to discharge oil into or upon
the navigable waters of the United
States or adjoining shorelines. The UST
regulations apply to owners or operators
of underground petroleum tank systems
(as defined in 40 CFR part 280) that have
a volume at least ten percent beneath
the surface of the ground. (The UST
program also regulates underground
storage tanks containing hazardous
substances as defined by the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act. as amended (CERCLA)).
In addition, the SPCC program is
designed to protect surface waters.
whereas the UST program under RCRA
subtitle I is intended, in part, to provide
protection for ground water. Finally, the
regulatory focus of the SPCC and UST
programs currently differs significantly
as they relate to underground storage
tanks. The SPCC program regulates
facilities with relatively large
underground storage capacity, whereas
the bulk of the currently regulated
universe under the UST technical
standards (40 CFR part 280) is small-
capacity USTs at facilities such as
gasoline filling stations. Because EPA
believes that the UST program offers
equivalent protection, EPA is proposing
to exclude from SPCC coverage (with
two limited exceptions described below)
underground storage tanks that are
covered by all of the UST program
provisions in 40 CFR part 280.
It is important to note that application
of the technical standards under the
UST regulation has been deferred for
several types of UST systems, including
systems with field-constructed tanks (40
CFR 280.10(c)(5)). Therefore, such
systems are not "subject to all of the
UST provisions" and. thus, are subject
to SPCC requirements under this
-------
54626 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
proposal. Further, this exclusion from
SPCC coverage for underground storage
tanks subject to all UST program
provisions is limited to USTs meeting
the proposed SPCC regulation definition
of an underground storage tank, i.e., a
tank completely covered with earth. The
definition used in the UST program. 40
CFR part 280. is broader and includes
partially buried tanks. The SPCC
program proposes to regulate any tanks
that are not completely buried because
tanks with exposed surfaces exhibit a
greater potential to discharge into
navigable waters of the United States
and other surface waters. Thus, a
facility may have some tanks that are
exempt from SPCC requirements and
some tanks that are not exempt.
The applicability of 40 CFR part 112 is
limited to facilities with underground or
aboveground capacity as previously
outlined (i.e., facilities possessing
underground oil storage capacity greater
than 42,000 gallons, total aboveground
oil storage capacity greater than 1,320
gallons, or oil storage capacity greater
than 660 gallons in a single aboveground
tank). As a result of the proposed
exclusion from SPCC program coverage
for tanks currently subject to all UST
program provisions in 40 CFR part 280,
the calculation of a facility's
underground storage capacity should
not include those tanks.
Finally, there is a qualification in this
proposed rule that affects the general
exclusion for USTs currently regulated
under 40 CFR part 280. Although an UST
may be exempt from the SPCC
requirements, if the facility has non-
exempt tanks for which it must prepare
a facility SPCC Plan, the location and
contents of the exempt tanks must be
marked on the facility diagram. All
tanks must be marked on the facility
diagram so that response personnel are
able to easily identify dangers from
either fire or explosion, or physical
impediments during spill response
activities. In addition, facility diagrams
may be referred to in the event of design
modifications.
B. State Programs
State and local'govemments are
encouraged to supplement the Federal
SPCC program using their own
authorities. An increasing number of
States have established or are
considering State-authorized oil
pollution prevention programs. Some of
the State programs have imposed
requirements more stringent than the
Federal requirements or have added
new requirements, such as tank
licensing, tank standards, and location -
specifications. In addition, many States
are currently assessing the adequacy of '
S-310999 0016(OOX21-OCT-91-13:49:38)
related programs or are considering
legislation on aboveground oil storage
tanks. Compliance with the SPCC
program requirement does not alleviate
the responsibility of owners and
operators of affected facilities to comply
with these various State requirements.
' C. Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA)
Title III Integration With Local
Emergency Planning
Section 311 of the CWA does not
authorize EPA to delegate elements of
the SPCC program to the States. The
Agency does recognize, however, that
local officials, such as fire marshals.
frequently inspect the installation of
aboveground storage tanks to enforce
local codes and are often the first on-
scene responders to oil spills. Therefore,
to ensure better local involvement and
awareness of a potentially harmful spill,
the Agency is proposing to require that
the facility SPCC Plan include telephone
numbers to contact various local
authorities. The Agency believes that
this contact list will aid in emergency
planning and response in the event of an
oil spill.
Beyond this, coordination between
Federal/State/local agencies is possible
through additional authorities—in
particular, sections 311 and 312 of the .
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) or SARA
Title III (42 U.S.C. 11021.11022). These
provisions require facilities that are
directed to prepare or have available
material safety data sheets (MSDSs)
under regulations of the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA). to submit MSDSs and annual
inventory data for "hazardous
chemicals" to State Emergency
Response Committees (SERCs). Local
Emergency Planning Committees
(LEPCs). and fire departments, if the
amount present on site at any time
exceeds specified threshold levels.
Petroleum products fall within the
definition of "hazardous chemicals"
under SARA Title III. This reporting
requirement affects all types of facilities.
Beyond State-authorized oil pollution
prevention programs, the community
right-to-know requirements of sections
311 and 312 of SARA Title III can be an
effective component of State and local
involvement in spill prevention and
control activities. Specifically, by
receiving MSDSs for all petroleum and .
other hazardous chemical facilities, the
LEPC, using hazard analysis techniques.
can establish priorities for addressing
hazards in the community. Instead of
addressing a regulated population of
over 400.000 facilities, as the Federal
government does in the SPCC program.
4701.FMT...[16,30]...12-28-90
each LEPC can identify and focus on a
smaller population of priority local
facilities in evaluating preparedness and
available response* resources and
preparing a local emergency response
plan, thus supplementing and
complementing the Federal SP(JC
program, and later, local area committee
plans. The LEPC. industries, and other
interest groups can develop a
constructive dialogue that assists in
developing prevention techniques and
identifying procedures for responding to
releases. EPA expects to work closely
with States to develop mechanisms for
sharing information about facilities and
oil spills to improve the protection of
navigable waters from discharges of oil.
and human health and the environment.
In addition to coordination among
Federal. State, and local regulatory
entities under SARA Title III. facility
owners or operators should ensure that
their contingency plans, developed
under the SPCC regulations, are .
compatible and coordinated with local
emergency plans, including those
developed under SARA Title III. As
discussed in Section II of this preamble,
although the proposed revisions to the
SPCC regulation do not amend
materially the contingency planning
requirements contained in the existing
regulation, EPA will address this issue
in depth in the Phase Two modifications
to the regulation. To implement the
provisions of the OPA. EPA will propose
to require certain facilities to prepare
and submit a plan for responding, to the
maximum extent practicable, to the
largest foreseeable discharge in adverse
weather conditions. Under the current
regulation, facilities are required to
implement a contingency plan when it is
impracticable to implement certain oil
spill prevention practices.
D. Wellhead Protection
Compliance wjth the requirements of
section 311 of the CWA and their
facility's SPCC Plan does not alleviate
the need for facility owners or operators
to be in compliance with State Wellhead
Protection (WHP) programs required by
section 1428 of the Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA). Many public water supply
wells are located in permeable
formations b'ordering streams or surface
waters, which at times recharge these
surface waters. These wells may be
vulnerable to contamination if an oil
spill should occur and. therefore, may
require added protection. WHP
programs are designed to protect public
• water supply wells located in these type
of settings.
Section 1428 of the SDWA requires
that each State adopt and submit to
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No.. 204 / Tuesday.. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules 54627
EPA, a WHP program that, at a
minimum:
• Specifies the duties of State
agencies, local government entities, and
public water supply systems with
respect to the development and
implementation of programs;
• For each wellhead, determines the
wellhead protection area (WHPA). as
defined in section 1428(e), based on all
reasonably available hydrogeologic
information;
• Identifies within each WHPA all
potential anthropogenic sources of
contaminants that may have adverse
effects on human health:
• Describes a program that contains,
as appropriate, technical and financial
assistance, implementation of control
measures, education, training, and
demonstration projects to protect the
water supply within WHP As from
contaminants;
• Includes contingency plans for the
provision of alternative drinking water
supplies in the event of contamination;
• Includes a requirement to consider
all potential sources of such
contaminants within the expected
wellhead area of a new water well,
which serves a public water supply
system: and
• Includes a requirement for public
participation in the development of the
WHP program.
At this time. EPA has received WHP
submittals for review from 30 States.
This proposed rule indicates that •
owners and operators must comply with
both the State WHP program and the«
SPCC regulations. Meeting the
requirements of the SPCC program does
not necessarily ensure compliance with
a State WHP program.
E. Flood-Related Requirements
In § 112.8(b)(6) and § 112.9(c)(3) of the
proposed rule, it is recommended, in
accordance with Executive Order 11988,
Floodplain Management, that the SPCC
Plan address precautionary measures
for facilities in locations subject to
flooding. The National Flood Insurance
Program (NF1P) definition of structures
includes abovegrbund oil storage tanks.
At a minimum, acceptable mitigation
measures are specified in Executive
Order 11988 and reference the NFIP's
flood loss reduction standards: those
standards should be addressed in the
SPCC Plan for aboveground storage
tanks located in a flood hazard area.
Standards for newly constructed or
substantially improved aboveground
storage tanks are contained in 44 CFR
60.3.
NFIP requires, among other things,
that tanks be designed so that the
S-3J0999 0017(OOX21-OCT-91-13:49:42)
lowest floor is elevated to or above the
base flood level or be designed so that
the structure below the base level is
watertight with walls substantially
impermeable to the passage of water,
with structural components having the
capability of resisting hydrostatic and
hydrodynamic loads, and with the
capability to resist effects of buoyancy.
For structures that are intended to be
made watertight below the base flood
level, a Registered Professional Engineer
must develop and/or review the
structural design, specifications, and
plans for construction, and certify that
they have been prepared in accordance
with accepted standards of practice.
Additionally, the NFIP has specific
standards for coastal high hazard areas.
Existing tanks located in coastal high
hazard areas will be subject to high
velocity waters, wave action, and the
accompanying potential for severe
erosion and scour. Retrofitting measures
for tanks should be tailored to the
unique hazards of the coast and may
include flood protection works,.
floodproofing, and other modifications
to facilities that will reduce the damage
potential. In complying with the
requirements of the SPCC regulation
while developing a SPCC Plan, owners
or operators are encouraged to consider
and comply with the requirements in 44
CFR 60.3.
/. Occupational Safety and Health
. Administration
A number of aboveground storage
tanks are subject to OSHA requirements
under 29 CFR 1910.108. OSHA regulates
occupational settings where flammable
and combustible liquids are present.
Requirements for tanks and ancillary
equipment, secondary containment,
inspections and testing, and contingency
planning are set forth in the OSHA
regulations.
OSHA requires tanks to be spaced
three to 20 feet apart, and proper venting
and fire resistant supports to be
installed. API 620 and 2000, the ASME
Boiler and Pressure Code. ANSI 31. and
UL standards are incorporated into
OSHA guidelines. Dikes must be able to
contain 100 percent of each tank's
capacity, the dike walls must average
six feet in height, and earthen dikes
must be more than three feet in height
and two feet in width at the top. OSHA
requires only a one-time test (including
hydrostatic testing) for strength and
tightness; however, compliance with
ASME. API. or UL standards must be
marked on all tanks prior to use.
OSHA requirements outlined in 29
CFR 1910.106 are important to good spill
prevention programs and should be
incorporated into SPCC Plans whenever
4701.FMT...[16,30]...12-28-90
doing so represents good engineering
practice.
V. Request For Comments
As discussed in section II of this
preamble, the Agency is soliciting
comments and data on the proposed
notification requirements, spill
contingency planning needs, the
discretionary nature of certain
provisions, and the possibility of making
certain provisions requirements only for
large facilities. Also in Section II of the
preamble. EPA requests comments on
other practices that are not proposed at
this time, including: (1) That owners or
operators attach a signed and dated
statement to the SPCC Plan upon
completion of Plan review; and (2) that
owners or operators of onshore facilities
other than production facilities describe
the design capabilities of their drainage
systems in the SPCC Plan. Section III of
the preamble contains a request for
comments on the advantages and
disadvantages associated with the
professional engineer being registered in
the State in which the facility is located
and the Additional requirement that the
professional engineer not be an
employee of the facility or have any
direct financial ties to the facility. EPA
also solicits comments and data on
criteria for defining "permanently
closed" tanks.
In addition to the specific requests
described above, EPA solicits comments
and information on several other issues.
One particular issue involves facilities
with equipment, such_as electrical'
transformers, that contain significant
quantities of oil used for operational
purposes. As described in section III.H,
the Agency has determined that such
equipment is not subject to the
provisions addressing bulk storage
containers. EPA solicits comments oh
whether there are examples of other
facilities with similar equipment
containing oil for ancillary purposes that
should not be subject to the proposed
bulk storage provisions. Also, EPA
solicits comments from owners or
operators of facilities with SPCC plans
currently in place as to whether they
believe existing plans would be
adequate to meet the requirements of
the regulation, as proposed. In particular
the Agency would like comments on this
issue from owners and operators of
farms, electrical facilities, and facilities
storing food oils. Including information
as to the extent to which the proposed
requirements may impose hew
compliance costs.
-------
54628 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
VI. Regulatory Analyses
A. Economic Analyses
EPA has prepared two preliminary
economic analyses to support today's
. proposed rule; an initial economic
impact analysis and a supplemental
cost/benefit analysis. Both analyses
estimate the societal benefits resulting
from fewer oil spills, and the economic
effects on the SPCC-regulated
community on the following proposed
revisions: (1) The proposed one-time
notification form: (2) The proposed
regulatory language modifications; and
(3) two new proposed discretionary
practices. However, these two analyses
differ primarily in assumptions
regarding how the regulated community
would interpret certain proposed
revisions, and. therefore, how the
behavior of SPCC-regulated facilities
would change. •
The initial economic impact analysis
developed cost estimates only for the
proposed notification form. No costs or
benefits were estimated for the
proposed changes in regulatory language
and the two new proposed discretionary
practices because these were assumed
not to alter significantly the behavior of
the SPCC-regulated community. Based
on the findings of the initial economic
impact analysis, the proposed rule
would be expected to be non-major
because the economic effects would
result in estimated costs of
approximately $9.9 million during the
first year the rule is in effect and
approximately $200,000 in each
subsequent year. The present value of
the cost, discounting at 10-percent over
a 10-year period, is about $10 million.
EPA performed an additional analysis
to estimate the economic effects of the
proposed rule based on alternative
expectations about how the regulated
community would interpret certain
proposed revisions. Specifically, a
supplemental cost/benefit analysis was
performed to estimate the economic
effects of: (1) Certain proposed revisions
(described in Section III of the
preamble) to the regulatory language
based on the assumption that a
substantial proportion of the regulated
community would need to change their
behavior to comply with these
provisions; and (2) two new proposed
discretionary provisions (described in
Section 1I.C of the preamble) based on
the assumption that a substantial
proportion of the regulated community
would need to change their behavior as
a result of these new requirements. The
. estimated cost and benefits of the
proposed notification form as calculated
in the initial analysis also were
presented. Based on this supplemental
analysis, the proposed rule would be a
major rule as defined by Executive
.Order No. 12291, because the annualized
estimated cost (based on a 10-year time
horizon and a 10-percent discount rate)
is about $145 million. Both the
"Economic Impact Analysis of the *
Proposed Revisions to the Oil Pollution
Prevention Regulation" and the
"Supplemental Cost/Benefit Analysis of
the Proposed Revisions to the Oil
Pollution Prevention Regulation" are
available for inspection as part of the
administrative record for this proposed
regulation (Docket Number SPCC-1P).
This record is available to the public in
room M2427 at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street. SW..
Washington. DC 20460. The estimated
cost and benefits of the three groups of
proposed revisions are summarized
below.
The present and annualized value of
the cost and benefit estimates of the
proposed notification form, based on a
10-year time horizon and a 10-percent
discount rate, are presented in Table 1.
TABLE 1.—PROPOSED NOTIFICATION PROVISION
Present Value
Benefits'
$26 million
LtltnUen
Costs
$10 million
11 o miaton
Netbenefits
$16 million.
$2.6 minion.
_ _ _ _ _ _ Bthodotogy used to
estimate these benefits is included in appendix 2-A and 2-6 of the Supplemental Cost/Benefit Analysis ol the Proposed Revisions' to the Oil Pollution Prevention
Regulation. EPA invites comment on both the methodology used and the results obtained, especially information which might indicate that substantial benefits or
costs have been included.
Tables 2 and 3 show the present and
annualized value of the cost and benefit
estimates of the proposed regulatory
language changes and the two new
proposed discretionary provisions.
These estimates were developed in the
supplemental cost/benefit analysis,
based on assumptions about how the
behavior of the regulated community
would change as a result of interpreting
these proposed revisions as substantive
changes in required conduct.
TABLE 2.—PROPOSED CHANGES IN REGULATORY LANGUAGE
Present Value
Annualized ..
flnri mtitm
Dvnems
$1.000 million „ „
$162.6 million
Costs
$441 million
$71 8 million
Net benefits
$559 million.
$91 0 million.
The cost estimates for the proposed
changes in regulatory language
presented above are based on a detailed
analysis of six of approximately 60
changes in regulatory language
("should" to "shall" changes). These
• major provisions are expected to
generate the largest total costs and.
therefore, are expected to capture
virtually all compliance cost for all
SPCC-regulated facilities to comply with
all the "should" to "shall" regulatory
changes. The methodology used to
estimate these costs is included in
appendix 1-C of the Supplemental Cost/
Benefit Analysis of the Proposed
Revisions to the Oil Pollution Prevention
Regulation. EPA invites comment on
both the methodology used and the
results .obtained, especially information
which might indicate that substantial
benefits or costs have been included.
S-310999 OOI8(01X21-OCT-91-I3:51:06)
4701.FMT...[16.30)...12-28-90
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
54629
TABLE 3.—PROPOSED DISCRETIONARY PROVISIONS '
Upper Bound:
Present value „
Armualffed
Lower Bound:
Present Value
AnnualiztKl ,
Benefits
$495 million
$80 5 million
$248 million
$40 4 million .
Costs
$441 million
$71 6 million
$441 mHlkxi :
$71 B million
Net benefit*
$54 million.
$8.7 million.
$-193 million.
$-31.4 million.
1 While upper and lower bound monetary benefit estimates were developed in the supplemental cost/benefit analysis, upper and lower bound cost estimates tor
these two new proposed discretionary provisions were not developed in the initial economic analysis.
In addition. EPA is soliciting
comments on two other practices that
are not included in today's proposed
revisions but are described in section
II.C of this preamble. Specifically, these
two provisions are: (1) A statement by
the facility owner or operator that the
SPCC Plan review has occurred; and (2)
a statement to be included in the SPCC
Plan that addresses the design
capabilities of a facility's drainage
system to control oil spills or leaks. By
recommending that facility owners or
operators state that a triennial review
has been performed, EPA would expect
to increase the degree to which upper
management takes an active role to
ensure that the Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation is fully implemented at the
facility. Increased managerial oversight
may improve the overall quality and
effectiveness of SPCC Plans, thereby
reducing the number and'severity of c<
spills from SPCC-regulated facilities.
Similarly, by including in the Plan a
written statement indicating the
adequacy of the facility's drainage
system in handling leaking oil, those
facility personnel responsible for
drafting this statement could be
encouraged to take a more active role to
ensure that these existing systems are
adequately designed to control oil leaks.
While cost estimates were developed for
these two practices, monetized benefit
estimates were not developed because
these two provisions involve paperwork
activities and no data or case studies •
are available to adequately analyze the
degree to which their implementation
will lead to avoided oil spills. EPA
requests data and analysis indicating
the extent to which these
recommendations would further
improve the effectiveness of the Oil
Pollution Prevention regulation, as well
as data and analysis concerning
appropriate analytical methods to
estimate these benefits and costs,
especially information indicating how
the Agency could improve its analytical
methods prior to promulgation of the
final rule. The present value of the cost
of these two provisions is estimated at
$128 million.
S-3I0999 0019(01X21-OCT-9I-I3:51:09)
In summary, the present value of the
cost of the proposed rule based on the
results of the supplementaLcost/benefit
analysis for the proposed notification
form, the proposed changes in regulatory
language, and the two new proposed
discretionary provisions is estimated at
about $892 million, while the present
value of the monetized benefits range
from $1.3 billion to $1.5 billion. Based on
these preliminary analyses, the present
value of the monetized benefit estimate
exceeds the cost by about $382 to $539
million, in addition, quantified estimates
of the benefits associated with the
proposed revisions analyzed include
only two benefits associated with
reducing the number of oil spills:
avoided cleanup costs and the value of
the lost product (i.e., the value of the
product in commerce prior to being lost
in a spill). In addition, society is
expected to gain other benefits in the
form of avoided losses to commercial
and recreational fishing and other
resource damages, avoided lost
recreational opportunities including
beach use. boating, and waterfowl
hunting, avoided damage to private
property, and avoided public health
risks, among others. EPA invites
comments on the methodology used to
estimate these benefits and costs,
especially information indicating how
the Agency could improve its analytical
method prior to promulgation of the final
rule.
B. Executive Order No. 12291
Executive Order (E.O.) No. 12291
requires that regulations be classified as
major or non-major for purposes of
review by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB). According to E.O.
No. 12291. major rules are regulations
that are likely to result in:
(1) An annual effect on the economy
of $100 million or more; or
(2) A major increase in costs orprices
for consumers, individual industries.
Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions; or
(3) Significant'adverse effects on
competition'employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of United States-based
enterprises to compete with foreign-
based enterprises in domestic or export
markets. Based on the assumption that
regulated parties interpret both the
proposed changes in regulatory language
and the two new proposed
recommendations as requiring
substantive changes in conduct, the
results of economic analyses performed
by the Agency indicate that the
proposed rule is expected to be major
rule because the annual estimated costs
would exceed $100 million. Specifically,
the upper bound annualized value of the
cost of the proposed rule is. estimated to
be $145 million and the annualized value
of the benefit estimate is expected to
range from $207 million to $248 million.
This proposed rule has been submitted
to OMB for review as required by EO.
No. 12291.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
requires that a Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis be performed for all rules that
are likely to have a "significant impact
on a substantial number of small
entities." To determine whether a
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was
necessary for this proposed rule, a
preliminary analysis was conducted.
The results of Regulations. Chapter 6,
January 1991, available for inspection in
Room M2427 at the U.S Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street, SW..
Washington, DC 20460). Therefore,
because this proposed rule is not
expected to have a significant impact on
small entities. EPA certifies that no
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is
necessary.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements in this proposed rule will
be submitted for approval to OMB as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. A draft
Information Collection Request (ICR)
document has been prepared by EPA
(ICR No. 1548.01) and a copy may be
obtained from Sandy Farmer,
Information Policy Branch (PM-223Y),
-------
54630 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
401 M Street, SW.. Washington. DC
20460 or by calling 1-202-260-2740.
Public reporting burden for the
proposed notification form affecting all
SPCC-reguiated facilities is estimated to
range from one half hour to 1.5 hours per
response, and the reporting burden for
the recommended recordkeeping
provision affecting medium and large
SPCC-regulated facilities is estimated to
range from 5 hours tp 10 hours annually.
Overall, the public reporting burden for
both proposed provisions is estimated to
range from one half an hour to 11.5
hours with an average reporting burden
of approximately 1.9 hours per response.
These reporting burden estimates
include the time required for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, storing the data, estimating
the information required, and
completing and reviewing the collection
on information.
Send comments regarding the burden
estimate or any other aspect of this
collection' of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden, to
Chief. Information Policy Branch (PM-
223). U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M Street. SW., Washington.
DC 20460: and to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs.
Office of Management and Budget.
Washington, DC 20503. marked
"Attention: Desk Officer for EPA." The
final rule will respond to any OMB or
public comments on the information
collection requirements contained in this
proposal.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 112
Fire prevention. Flammable materials.
Materials handling and storage. Oil
pollution. Petroleum. Tanks. Water
pollution control, Water resources.
Dated: October 3. 1991.
William K. Reilly,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40. chapter I, part 112 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, is
proposed to be amended as set forth
below.
1. Part 112 is revised to read as
follows:
PART 112-OIL POLLUTION
PREVENTION
112.1 General applicability and notification.
11U Definitions. .
112.3 Requirement to prepare and
implement a Spill Prevention, Control.
and Countermeasures Plan.
Sec.
112.4 Amendment of Spill Prevention,
Control, and Countermeasures Plan by .
Regional Administrator.
112.5 Amendment of Spill Prevention.
Control, and Countermeasures Plan by
owners or operators.
112.6 Civil penalties for violation of the Oil
Pollution Prevention regulation.
112.7 Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasures Plan general
requirements.
112.8 Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasures Plan requirements for
onshore facilities (excluding production
facilities).
112.9 Spill Prevention. Control, and
Countermeasures Plan requirements for
onshore oil production facilities.
112.10 Spill Prevention. Control, and
Countermeasures Plan requirements for
onshore oil drilling and workover
facilities.
112.11 Spill Prevention. Control, and
Countermeasures Plan requirements for
offshore oil drilling, production, or
' workover facilities. .
Appendix A—Memorandum of
Understanding Between the Secretary of
Transportation and the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency. Section
II—Definitions
Appendix B—Notification Form for Oil
Storage Tank*
Authority: 33 U.S.C 1321 and 1361: EO.
11735. 38 FR 21243,3 CFR 1971-1975 Comp.. p.
791.
PART 112—OIL POLLUTION
PREVENTION
§112.1
notMcaUon.
(a) This part establishes procedures.
methods, equipment, and other
requirements to prevent the discharge of
oil from non-transportation-related
onshore and offshore facilities into or
upon the navigable waters of the United
States or adjoining shorelines, or into or
upon the waters of the contiguous zone,
or in connection with activities under
the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
or the Deepwater Port Act of 1974, or
that may affect natural resources.
belonging to, appertaining to. or under
the exclusive management authority of
the United States (including resources
under the Magnuson Fishery
Conservation and Management Act).
(b) Except as provided in paragraph
(d) of this section:
(1) This part applies to owners or
operators of non-transportation-related
onshore and offshore facilities engaged
in drilling, producing, gathering, storing,
processing, refining, transferring.
distributing, or consuming oil and oil
products, which due to their location
could reasonably be expected to
discharge oil in quantities that may be
harmful, as described in part 110 of this
chapter, into or upon the navigable .
waters of the United States or adjoining
shorelines, or into or upon the waters of
the contiguous zone, or in connection
with activities under the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act or the
Deepwater Port Act of 1974, or that may
affect natural resources belonging to,
appertaining to, or under the exclusive
management authority of the United
States (including resources under the
Magnuson Fishery Conservation and
Management Act).
(2) This part applies to facilities
having containers that are used for
standby storage, for seasonal storage, or
for temporary storage, or not otherwise
considered "permanently closed" under
§ 112.2(o).
(3) This part applies to facilities
having "bunkered tanks" and "partially
buried tanks" as defined in § 112.2(c)
and § 112.2(n), respectively, as well as
tanks in subterranean vaults, all of
which are considered aboveground
storage containers for the purposes of
this part.
(c) As provided in section 313'of the
Clean Water Act (CWA), departments.
agencies, and instrumentalities of the
Federal government are subject to these
regulations to the same extent as any
person, except for the provisions of
fi 112.6.
(d) Except as provided in paragraph
(e) of this section and the first sentence .
of § 112.7(a)(3), this part does not apply
to:
(1) Facilities, equipment, or operations
that are not subject to the jurisdiction of
the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) under section 311(j)(l)(C) of the
CWA. as follows:
(i) Onshore and offshore facilities
that, due to their location, could not
reasonably be expected to discharge oil
as described in § 112.1(b)(l) of this part.
This determination shall be based solely
upon a consideration of the geographical
and location aspects of the facility (such
as proximity to navigable waters or
adjoining shorelines, land contour,
drainage, etc.). and shall exclude
consideration of manmade features such
as dikes, equipment or other structures.
which may serve to restrain, hinder.
contain, or otherwise prevent a
discharge of oil from reaching navigable
waters of the United States or adjoining
shorelines; and
(ii) Equipment or operations of vessels
or transportation-related onshore and
offshore facilities that are subject to
authority and control of the' Department
of Transportation, as defined in the
Memorandum of Understanding
between the Secretary of Transportation
S-310999 0020(01X2l-OCT-91-13:51:12)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules 54631
and the EPA Administrator, dated
November 24.1971. 36 FR 24080.
(2) Those facilities that meet both of
the following requirements:
(i) The underground storage capacity
of the facility is 42.000 gallons or less of
oil. For purposes of this exemption, the
underground storage capacity of a
facility does not include the capacity of
underground storage tanks, as defined in
§ 112.2(v), that are currently subject to
the technical requirements of 40 CFR •-
part 280. The underground storage
capacity of a facility does not include
the capacity of underground storage
tanks that are "permanently closed." as
defined in § 112.2(o).
(ii) The aboveground storage capacity
of the facility is 1,320 gallons or less of
oil, provided no single container has
capacity in excess of 660 gallons. For
purposes of this exemption, the
aboveground storage capacity of a
facility does not include the'capacity of
tanks that are underground storage
tanks as defined in § 112.2(v) or that are
"permanently closed" as defined in
§ 112.2(o).
(3) Offshore oil drilling, production, or
workover facilities that are subject to
the Operating Orders, notices, and
regulations of the Minerals Management
Service.
(4) Underground storage tanks, as
defined in § 112.2(v). at any facility.
where such tanks are subject to the
technical requirements of 40 CFR part
280.
(e) Notification requirements. (1)
Notification must be provided by the
owner or operator of facilities that are
subject to EPA jurisdiction under the
CWA and have total aboveground
storage capacities greater than 1.320
gallons of oil or aboveground storage in
a single container greater than 660
gallons of oil. The owner or operator of
these facilities must submit a written
notice to EPA by (Insert date two
months after date of publication of the
final rule). This notice is required on a
one-time basis for current facility
owners or operators. Owners or
operators of facilities that begin
operations or who increase storage
capacity so as to comply under the
jurisdiction of this rule after (Insert date
60 days after date of publication of the
final rule) also must notify the Regional
Administrator before beginning facility
operations.
[2] The written notice shall include the
following: (i) The name of the owner
and/or operator of the facility:
(ii) The name, address, and zip code
of the facility: and
(iii) A listing of the total number and
size of aboveground tanks at the facility.
total aboveground storage capacity of
S-310999 0021(01X21-OCT-91-I3:5I:15)
the facility, distance to the nearest
navigable waters, and where applicable
and available, the facility's primary Dun
& Bradstreet number and the primary
Standard Industrial Classification.
(3) The notice does not require
information concerning the number and
size of underground storage tanks
defined in § 112.2(v).
(f) This part provides for the
preparation and implementation of Spill
Prevention. Control, and
Countermeasures (SPCC) Plans
prepared in accordance with §§ 112.7,
112.8.112.9.112.10, and 112.11 designed
to complement existing laws,
regulations, rules, standards, policies,
and procedures pertaining to safety
standards, fire prevention, and pollution
prevention rules, to form a
comprehensive balanced Federal/State
spill prevention program to minimize the
potential for oil discharges. The SPCC
Plan shall address all relevant spill
prevention, control, and
countermeasures necessary at the
specific facility. Compliance with this
part does not in any way relieve the
owner or operator of an onshore or an
offshore facility from compliance with
other Federal, State, or local laws.
51112 DvflnWora.
For the purposes of this part: (a)
Breakout tank means a container that is
part of a pipeline facility regulated by
the Department of Transportation and is
used solely for the purpose of
compensating for pressure surges or to
control and maintain the flow of oil
through pipelines. Such tanks are
frequently in-line.
(b) Bulk storage tank means any
container used to store oil. These .tanks
are used for purposes including, but not
limited to. the storage of oil prior to use,
while being used, or prior to further
distribution in commerce.
(c) Bunkered tank means a storage
tank constructed or placed in the ground
by cutting the earth and recovering in a
manner whereby the tank breaks the
natural grade of the land.
(d) Contiguous zone means the zone
established by the United States under
Article 24 of the Convention of the
Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone,
that is contiguous to the territorial sea
and that extends nine miles seaward
from the outer limit of the territorial
area.
(e) Discharge includes, but is not
limited to, any spilling, leaking,
pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, or
dumping, but excludes discharges in .
compliance with a permit under section
402 of the CWA; discharges resulting
from circumstances identified, reviewed,
and made a part of the public record
4701.FMT...[16.30]...12-28-90
with respect to a permit issued or
modified under section 402 of the CWA.
and subject to a condition in such
permit; or continuous or anticipated
intermittent discharges from a point
source, identified in a permit or permit
application under section 402 of the
CWA. that are caused by events
occurring within the scope of relevant
operating or treatment systems. For
purposes of this part, the term.
"discharge" shall not include any
discharge of oil that is authorized by a
permit issued pursuant to section 13 of
the River and Harbor Act of 1899 (30
Stat. 1121. 33 U.S.C. 407).
(f) Facility means any mobile or fixed,
onshore or offshore building, structure,
installation, equipment, pipe, or pipeline
used in oil well drilling operations, oil
production, oil refining, oil storage, and
waste treatment, as described in
Appendix A to this part. The boundaries
of a facility may depend on several site-
specific factors, including, but not
limited to. the ownership or operation of
buildings, structures, and equipment on
the same site and the types of activity at
the site.
(g) Navigable waters means the
waters of the United States, including
the territorial seas. The term includes:
(1) All waters that are currently used,
were used in the past, or may be
susceptible to use in interstate or foreign
commerce, including all waters subjeqt
to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(2) All interstate waters, including
interstate wetlands;
(3) All other waters such as intrastate
lakes, rivers, streams (including
intermittent streams), mudflats.
sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie
potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or
natural ponds, the use. degradation, or
destruction of which could affect
interstate or foreign commerce including
any such waters:
(i) That are or could be used by
interstate or foreign travelers for
recreational or other purposes; or,
(ii) From which fish or shellfish are or
could be taken and sold in interstate or
foreign commerce: or,
(iii) That are used or could be used for
industrial purposes by industries in
interstate commerce:
(4) All impoundments of waters >
otherwise defined as waters of the
United States under this section:
(5) Tributaries of waters identified in
paragraphs (g)(l) through (4) of this
section:
(6) The territorial sea: and
(7) Wetlands adjacent to waters
(other than waters that are themselves
wetlands) identified in paragraphs (g)(l)
through (6) of this section.
-------
54632
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
Waste treatment systems, including
treatment ponds or lagoons designed to
meet the requirements of the CWA
(other than cooling ponds as defined in
40 CFR 123.11 (m) which also meet the
criteria of this definition) are not waters
of the United States.
(h) Offshore facility means any
facility of any kind (other than a vessel
or public vessel) located in, on. or under
any of the navigable waters of the
United States, and any facility of any
kind that is subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States and is located in, on,
or under any other waters.
(i) Oil means oil of any kind or in any
form, including, but not limited to,
petroleum, fuel oil. sludge, oil refuse,
and oil mixed with wastes other than
dredged spoil.
(j) Oil drilling, production, or
workover facilities (offshore) may
include all drilling or workover
equipment, wells, flowlines, gathering
lines, platforms, and auxiliary non-
transportation-related equipment and
facilities in a single geographical oil or
gas field operated by a single operator.
(k) Oil production facilities (onshore)
. may include all wells, flowlines.
separation equipment, storage facilities,
gathering lines, and auxiliary non-
transportation-related equipment and
facilities in a single geographical oil or
gas field operated by a single operator.
(1) Onshore facility means any facility,
of any kind located in. on, or under any
land within the United States, other than
submerged lands.
(m) Owner or operator means any
person owning or operating an onshore
facility or an offshore facility, and in the
case of any abandoned offshore facility.
the person who owned or operated or
maintained such facility immediately
prior to such abandonment.
(n) Partially buried tank means a
storage tank that is partially inserted or
constructed in the ground, but not fully
covered with earth.
(o) Permanently closed is any tank or
facility that has been closed in the
following manner
(1) AH liquid and sludge must be
removed from each tank and connecting
lines. Any waste products removed must
be disposed of in accordance with all
applicable State and Federal
requirements.
(2) Each tank must be rendered free of
explosive vapor by testing the tank with
a combustible gas indicator, or
explosimeter, or other type of
atmospheric monitoring instrument in
order to determine the lower explosive
limit (LEL). The EPA and Occupational
Safety and Health Administration
standard for a hazardous atmosphere,
based on extensive industrial
S-310999 0022(01K21-OCT-91-I3:51:I8)
experience, is one that contains a
concentration of combustible gas, vapor.
or dust greater than 25 percent of the
l-P-I- of the material. Provisions must be
« made to eliminate the danger imposed
by the tank as a safety hazard due to the
presence of flammable vapors. Facilities
are to ensure that closure is permanent,
and that the tank vapors remain below
the LEL.
(3) All connecting lines must be
blanked off. and valves are to be closed
and locked. Conspicuous signs are to be
posted on the tank warning that it is a
permanently closed tank and that
vapors above the LEL are not present.
(p) Person includes an individual,
firm, corporation, association, or a
partnership.
(q) Regional Administrator means the
EPA Regional Administrator or a
designee of the Regional Administrator,
in and for the Region in which the
facility is located.
(r) SPCC Plan or Plan means the
document required by § 112.3 of this part
that details the equipment, manpower.
procedures, and steps to prevent.
control, and provide adequate
countermeasures to an oil spill. The Plan
is a written description of the facility's
compliance with the procedures in this
part.
(s) Spill event means a discharge of
oil as described in § 112.1(b)(l) of this
part.
(t) Storage capacity of a tank or
container, for purposes of determining
the applicability of this part means the
total capacity of the tank or container.
whether the tank or container is filled
with oil or a mixture of oil and other
substances.
(u) Transportation-related and non-
transportation-related, as applied to an
onshore or offshore facility, are defined
in Appendix A of this part, the
Memorandum of Understanding
between the Secretary of Transportation
and the EPA Administrator, dated
November 24.1971. 36 FR 24080.
(v) Underground storage tank means
any tank completely covered with earth.
Tanks in subterranean vaults, bunkered
tanks, or partially buried tanks are
considered aboveground storage
containers for the purpose of this part.
(w) United States means the States,
the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, Guam. American Samoa, the
U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Pacific
Island Governments.
(x) Vessel means every description of
watercraft or other artificial contrivance
used, or capable of being used, as a
means of transportation on water, other
than a public vessel.
470i.FMT...[16,30]...12-28-90
(y) Wetlands means those areas that
are inundated or saturated by surface or
ground water at a frequency or duration
sufficient to support, and that under
normal circumstances do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically
adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands generally include
playa lakes, swamps, marshes, bogs.
and similar areas such as sloughs,
prairie potholes, wet meadows, prairie
river overflows, mudflats, and natural
ponds.
§ 112.3 Requirement to prepare end
Implement e Spill Prevention, Control, end •
Counterawaeuree Plan.
(a) Owners or operators of onshore •
and offshore facilities in operation on or
before (Insert date 60 days after date of
publication of the final rule) that have
discharged or, due to their location.
could reasonably be expected to
discharge oil as described in
§ 112.1(b)(l) of this part, shall maintain
a prepared and fully implemented
facility SPCC Plan in writing and in
accordance with § 112.7. and in
accordance with §§ 112.8,112.9.112.10.
and 112.11 as applicable to the facility.
(b) Owners or operators of onshore.
and offshore facilities that become
operational after (Insert date 60days.
after date of publication of the filial
rule), and could reasonably be expected
to discharge oil as described in
§ 112.1 (b)(l) of this part, shall prepare a
facility SPCC Plan in accordance with .
5 112.7, and in accordance with any of
the following sections that apply to the
facility: 55 112.8,112.9.112.10. and
112.11. The Plan shall be prepared and
fully implemented before a facility
begins operations, unless an extension
. has been granted by the Regional
Administrator as provided for in
paragraph (f) of this section.
(c) Owners or operators of onshore
and offshore mobile or portable
facilities, such as onshore drilling or
workover rigs, barge mounted offshore
drilling or workover rigs, and portable
fueling facilities shall prepare.
implement, and maintain a facility SPCC
Plan as required by paragraph (a), (b).
and (d) of this section. The owners or
operators of such facility need not
prepare a new Plan each time the
facility is moved to a new site. The Plan
may be a general plan, prepared in
accordance with § 112.7. and in
accordance with §§ 112.10 and 112.11
where applicable to the facility, using
good engineering practice. When the
mobile or portable facility is moved, it
must be located and installed using the
spill prevention practices outlined in the
Plan for the facility. No mobile or
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22, 1991 / Proposed Rules
54633
portable facility subject to this
regulation shall operate unless the Plan
has been implemented. The Plan shall
only apply while the facility is in a fixed
(non-transportation) operating mode.
(d) No SPCC Plan shall be effective to
satisfy the requirements of this part
unless it has been reviewed by a
Registered Professional Engineer and
certified by the Registered Professional
Engineer. By means of this certification,
the Engineer shall attest: (1) That the
Engineer is familiar with the
requirements of this part; (2) that the
Engineer has visited and examined the
facility; (3) that the Plan has been
prepared in accordance with good
engineering practice and with the
requirements of this part; (4) that
required testing has been completed;
and, (5) that the Plan is adequate for the
facility. Such certification shall in no
way relieve the owner or operator of an
onshore or offshore facility of the duty
to prepare and .fully implement such
Plan in accordance with § 112.7; in
.accordance with §§ 112.8,112.9.112.10.
and 112.11 where applicable: and as
required by paragraphs (a), (b), and (c)
of this section.
(e) Owners and operators of a facility
for which a facility SPCC Plan is
required pursuant to paragraph (a), (b).
or (c) of this section shall:
(1) Maintain a complete copy of thr
Plan at the facility if the 'facility is
normally attended at least four hours
per day, or at the nearest field office ii
the facility is not so attended: and
(2) Have the Plan available for the
Regional Administrator or authorized
representative for on-site review during
normal working hours
(f) Extensions of time.
(1) The Regional Administrator may
authorize an extension of .time for the
preparation and full implementation of a
Plan beyond the time permitted for the
preparation and implementation of a
Plan pursuant to paragraph (b) of this
section where it is determined that the
owner or operator of a facility subject to
paragraph (b) of this section cannot fully
comply with the requirements of this
part as a result of either nonavailability
of qualified personnel, or delays in
construction or equipment delivery
beyond the control and without the fault
of such owner or operator or their
respective agents or employees.
(2) Any owner or operator seeking an
extension of time pursuant to paragraph
(f)(l) of this section may submit a letter
of request to the Regional
Administrator. Such letter shall include:
(i) A copy of the Plan, if completed:
(ii) A full explanation of the cause for
any such delay and the specific aspects
of the Plan affected by the delay;
(iii) A full discussion of actions being
taken or contemplated to minimize or
mitigate such delay;
' (iv) A proposed time schedule for the
implementation of any corrective
actions being taken or contemplated.
including interim dates for completion of
tests or studies, installation and
operation of any necessary equipment,
or other preventive measures. In
addition, such owner or operator may
present additional oral or written
statements in.support of the letter of
request.
• (3) The submission of a letter of
request for extension of time pursuant to
paragraph (f)(2) of this section shall in
no way relieve the owner or operator
from the obligation to comply with the
requirements of § 112.3(b). Where an
extension of time is authorized by the
Regional Administrator for particular
equipment or other specific aspects of
the Plan, such extension shall in no way
affect the owner's or operator's
obligation to comply with the
requirements of § 112.3(b) with respect
to other equipment or other specific
aspects of the Plan for which an
extension has not been expressly .
authorized.
§112.4 Amendment of Spill Prevention.
Control, and Countwnwasures Plan by
Regional Administrator.
(a) Notwithstanding compliance with
§ 112.3, whenever a facility subject to
§ 112.3(a), (b) or (c) has discharged, in a
single spill event, more than 1.000 U.S.
gallons of oil as described in § 112.1(a),
or discharged oil as described in
§ 112.1(b)(l) in two spill events
occurring within any consecutive twelve
month period, the owner or operator of
such facility shall submit to the Regional
Administrator, within 60 days from the
time such facility becomes subject to
this section, the following:
(1) Name of the facility;
(2) Name(s) of the owner or operator
of the facility;
(3) Location of the facility:
(4) Name and address of the
registered agent of the owner or
operator, if any; -
(5) Date and year of initial facility
operation;
(6) Maximum storage or handling
capacity of the facility and normal daily
throughput:
. (7) Description of the facility,
including maps, flow diagrams, and
topographical maps:
(8) A complete copy of the Plan with
any amendments:
(9) The cause(s) of such spill, ,
including a failure analysis of the
system or subsystem in which the
failure occurred;
(10) Exactly what and how much was
spilled: w
(11) The corrective actions and/or
countermeasures taken, including an •
adequate description of equipment
repairs and/or replacements;
(12) Additional preventive measures
taken or contemplated to minimize the
possibility of recurrence; and
(13) Such other information as the
Regional Administrator may reasonably
require pertinent to the Plan or spill
event.
(b) Section 112.4 shall not apply until
the expiration of the time permitted for
the preparation and implementation of
the Plan pursuant to § 112.3(f).
(c) The owner or operator shall send
to the agency in charge of oil pollution
control activities in the State in which
the facility is located a complete copy of
all information provided to the Regional
Administrator pursuant to paragraph (a)
of this section. Upon receipt of such
information such State agency may
conduct a review and make
recommendations to the Regional
Administrator as to further procedures,
methods, equipment, and other
requirements for equipment necessary to
prevent and to contain discharges of oil
from such facility.
(d) After review of the SPCC Plan for
a facility subject to paragraph (a) of this
section, together with all other
information submitted by the owner or
operator of such facility, and by the
State agency under paragraph (c) of this
section, the Regional Administrator may
require the owner or operator of such
facility to amend the Plan if she/he finds
that the Plan does not meet the
requirements of this part or that
amendment of the Plan is necessary to
prevent and to contain discharges of oil
from such facility. After review of the
materials submitted by the owner or
operator of a facility as required in
§ 112.7(d), the Regional Administrator
may approve the Plan or require
amendment of the Plan.
(e) When the Regional Administrator
proposes to require an amendment to
the SPCC Plan, the facility operator shall
be notified by certified mail addressed
to, or by personal delivery to, the facility
owner or operator, that the Regional
Administrator proposes to require an
amendment to the Plan, and the terms of
such amendment shall be specified. If
the facility owner or operator is a
corporation, a copy of such notice also
shall be mailed to the registered agent, if
any, of such corporation in the State
where such facility is located. Within 30
days from receipt of such notice, the
facility owner or operator may submit'
written information, views, and
S-310999 0023(01X2I-OCT-9I-13:51:22)
-------
54634
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
arguments on the amendment. After
considering all relevant material
presented, the Regional Administrator
shall notify the facility owner or •
operator of any amendment required or
shall rescind the notice. The amendment
required by the Regional Administrator
shall become part of the Plan 30 days
after such notice, unless the Regional
Administrator, for good cause, specifies
another effective date. The owner or
operator of the facility shall implement
the amendment of the Plan as soon as
possible, but not later than six months
after the amendment becomes part of
the Plan, unless the Regional
Administrator specifies another date.
(f) An owner or operator may appeal a.
decision made by the Regional
Administrator requiring an amendment
to the SPCC Plan. The appeal shall be
made to the EPA Administrator and
must be made in writing within 30 days
of receipt of the notice from the Regional
Administrator requiring the amendment.
A complete copy of the appeal must be
sent to the Regional Administrator at
the time the appeal is made. The appeal
shall contain a clear and concise
statement of the issues and points of
fact in the case. It also may contain
additional information from the owner
or operator, or from any other person.
The EPA Administrator or her/his
designee may request additional
information from the owner or operator,
or from any other person. The EPA
Administrator or her/his designee shall
render a decision within 60 days of.
receiving the appeal and shall notify the
owner or operator of the decision.
§112.5 Amendment of Spill Prevention,
Control, and Countermeasures Plan by
owners or operators.
(a) Owners or operators of facilities
subject to § 112.3 (a), (b), or (c) shall
amend the SPCC Plan for such facility in
accordance with § 112.7, and with
§§ 112.8.112.9.112.10, and 112.11 where
applicable, when there is a change in
facility design, construction, operation.
or maintenance that materially affects
the facility's potential to discharge oil as
described in § 112.1(b)(l) of this part.
Changes requiring amendment of the
Plan include, but are not limited to:
Commission or decommission of tanks;
replacement, reconstruction, or
movement of tanks; reconstruction.
replacement, or installation of piping
systems; construction or demolition that
might alter secondary containment
structures; or revision of standard
operation or maintenance procedures at
a facility.
(b) Notwithstanding compliance with
paragraph (a) of this section, owners
and operators of facilities subject to
S-310999 0024<01X21-OCT-91-|3.51:25)
§ 112.3 (a), (b), or (c) shall complete a
review and evaluation of their
respective Plans at least once every
three years from the date such facility
becomes subject to this part. As a result
of this review and evaluation, the owner
or operator shall amend the SPCC Plan
within six months of the review to
.include more effective prevention and
control technology if: (1) Such
technology will significantly reduce the
likelihood of a spill event from the
facility; and (2) such technology has
been field-proven at the time of the
review.
(c) Except for changes to the contact
list required by § 112.7(a)(3)(ix), no
amendment to a Plan shall be effective
to satisfy the requirements of this
section unless it has been certified by a
Registered Professional Engineer in
accordance with § 112.3(d).
§ 112.6 Civil penalties for violation of the
ON Pollution Prevention regulation.
Owners or operators of facilities
. subject to § 112.3 (a), (b). or (c) who
violate the requirements of part 112 by
failing or refusing to comply with any of
the provisions of §§ 112.1(e). 112.3,112.4,
112.5.112.7.112.8.112.9,11210. or 112.11
shall be liable for a civil penalty in
accordance with the CWA, as amended
by the OPA of 1990.
§112.7 SpUl Prevention, Control, and
Countermessures Plan general
requirements.
(a) The SPCC Plan shall be a carefully
thought-out written description of the
facility's compliance with the
requirements of all applicable elements
of §§ 112.7.112.8,112.9.112.10. and
•112.11 and shall be prepared in
accordance with good engineering
practice. The Plan shall have the full
approval of management at a level with
authority to commit the necessary
resources to fully implement the Plan.
(1) The complete Plan shall follow the
sequence outlined below, and include a
discussion of the facility's conformance
with the requirements listed.
(2) The Plan may deviate from the
requirements in paragraph (c) of this
section and §§ 112.8,112.9.112.10. and
112.11. where applicable to a specific
facility provided equivalent protection is
provided by some other means of spill
prevention, control, or counter-measures.
Where the Plan does not conform to the
applicable requirements of paragraph (c)
of this section or §§ 112.8,112.9,112.10,
and 112.11. the Plan shall state the
reasons for non-conformance and
describe in detail alternate methods and
how equivalent protection will be
achieved. The Regional Administrator
can overrule the waiver/equivalent
4701.FMT...[16.30]...12-28-90
alternative measure if it is not
adequately protective,
(3) The complete Plan must describe
the facility's physical plant and include
a facility diagram, which must have the
location and contents of all tanks
marked. The Plan must also address the
following:
(i) Unit-by-unit storage capacity;
(ii) Type and quantity of oil stored:
(iii) Estimates of quantity of oils
potentially discharged;
(iv) Possible spill pathways;
(v) Spill prevention measures,
including procedures for routine
handling of products (loading,
unloading, and facility transfers, etc.):
(vi) Spill controls such as secondary
containment around tanks and other
structures, equipment, and procedures
for the control of a discharge;
(vii) Spill counter-measures for spill
discovery, response, and cleanup
(facility's capability and those that
might be required of a contractor);
(viii) Disposal of recovered materials
in accordance with applicable legal
requirements; and
(ix) Contact list and phone numbers
for the facility response coordinator.
National Response Center, cleanup
contractors, fire departments. Local
Emergency Planning Committee. State
Emergency Response Commission, and
downstream water suppliers who must
be contacted in case of a discharge to
navigable waters.
(4) Documentation in the Plan shall
enable a person reporting a spill to
provide information on the exact
address and phone number of the
facility, the spill date and time, the type
of material spilled, estimates of the total
quantity spilled, estimates of the
quantity spilled into navigable water.
the source of the spill, a description of
the affected medium, the cause of the
spill, any damages or injuries caused by
the spill, actions being used to stop.
remove, and mitigate the effects of .the
discharge, whether an evacuation may
be needed, and the names of individuals
and/or organizations who have also
been contacted.
(S) Portions of the Plan describing
procedures to be used in emergency
circumstances shall be organized in a
manner to make them readily useable in
an emergency with appropriate
supporting material included as
appendices.
(b) Experience has indicated that a
reasonable potential for oil discharge
from tank overflow, rupture, or leakage.
and faulty ancillary equipment exists.
Therefore, the Plan shall include a
prediction of the direction, rate of flow.
and total quantity of oil that could be
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22, 1991 / Proposed Rules
54635
discharged from the facility as a result
of each major type of failure.
(c) Appropriate containment and/or
drainage control structures or equipment
to prevent discharged oil from reaching
a navigable water course shall be
provided. The entire containment
system, including walls and floor, shall
be impervious to oil for 72 hours and
shall be constructed so that any
discharge from a primary containment
system, such as a tank or pipe, will not
permeate, drain, infiltrate, or otherwise
escape to surface waters before cleanup
occurs. One or more of the following
prevention systems or its. equivalent
shall be used as a minimum:
(1) Onshore facilities:
(i) Dikes, berms, or retaining walls:
(ii) Curbing;
(iii) Culverting. gutters, or other
' drainage systems:
(iv) Weirs, booms, or other barriers:
(v) Spill diversion ponds:
(vi) Retention ponds: or
. (vii) Sorbent materials
(2) Offshore facilities:
(i) Curbing, drip pans: or
(ii) Sumps and collection systems.
(d) When it is determined that the
installation of structures or equipment
listed in § 112.7(c) to prevent discharged
oil from reaching the navigable waters is
not practicable from any onshore or
offshore facility, the owner or operator
shall clearly demonstrate such
impracticability: conduct integrity
testing of tanks every five years at .a
minimum; conduct integrity and leak
testing of the valves and piping every
year at a minimum: and provide the
Regional Administrator for approval
under § 112.4(d) the following: . .
(1) An o'il spill contingency plan that
must include, at a minimum, a
description of response plans, personnel
needs, and methods of mechanical
containment: steps to be taken for
removal of spilled oil; access and
availability of sorbents, booms, and
other equipment: and such other
information as required by the Regional
Administrator. The oil spill contingency
plan is part of the Plan and. therefore, is
subject to review and approval by the
Regional Administrator. The oil spill
contingency plan shall be a stand-alone
section of the SPCC Plan. Oil spill
contingency plans provided to satisfy
the provisions of this paragraph shall
not rely in whole or in part upon the use
of dispersants and other chemicals
listed under subpart) of the National
Contingency Plan (NCP) (40 CFR part
300) unless the Regional Administrator
explicitly approves the inclusion of such
methods in the contingency plan, A
separate and additional approval is
required by subpart J of the NCP for the
use of such dispersants and other
chemicals.
(2) A written commitment of
manpower, equipment, and materials
required to control expeditiously and
remove any quantity of oil that may be
discharged. It is recommended that the
owner or operator consider factors such
as. financial capability in making a
written commitment of manpower,
equipment, and materials.
(e) Inspection, tests, and records.
Inspections and tests required by this
part shall be in accordance with written
procedures developed for the facility by
the owner or operator or the certifying
engineer. These written procedures and
a record of the inspections and tests.
signed by the appropriate supervisor or
inspector, shall be maintained with the
SPCC Plan and maintained for a period
of five years.
(f) Personnel, training, and spill
prevention procedures. (1) Owners or
operators are responsible for properly
instructing their personnel in the
operation and maintenance of
equipment to prevent discharges of oil
and in applicable pollution control laws.
rules, and regulations. Training
exercises should be conducted at least
yearly for all personnel, and training
should be given to new employees
within one week of beginning work.
(2) Each applicable facility shall have
a designated person who is accountable
for oil spill prevention and who reports
to line management.
(3) Owners or operators shall
schedule and conduct spill prevention
briefings for their operating personnel at
least once a year to assure adequate
understanding of the SPCC Plan for that
facility. Such briefings shall highlight
and describe known spill events or
failures, malfunctioning components.
and recently developed precautionary
measures.
(g) Security (excluding oil production
facilities).
(1) It is recommended that all plants
handling, processing, and storing oil be
fully fenced and when fenced, entrance
gates shall be locked and/or guarded
when the plant is not in production or is
unattended.
(2) The master flow and drain valves
and any other valves permitting direct
outward flow of the tank's contents to
the surface shall have adequate security
measures to ensure that they remain in
the closed position when in non-
operating or non-standby status.
(3) The starter control on all pumps
shall be locked in the "off1 position and
be located at a site accessible only to
authorized personnel when the pumps
are in a non-operating or non-standby
status.
(4) The loading/unloading connections
of oil piping shall be securely capped or
blank-flanged when not in service or
when in standby service for a period of
six months or more. This security
practice also shall apply to piping that is
emptied of liquid content either by
draining or by inert gas pressure.
(5) It is recommended that facility
.lighting be commensurate with the type
and location of the facility.
Consideration shall be given to: (i)
Discovery of spills occurring during
hours of darkness, both by operating
personnel, if present, and by non-
operating personnel (the general public,
local police, etc.) and (ii) prevention of
spills occurring through acts of
vandalism.
(h) Facility tank car and tank truck
loading/unloading rack (excluding
offshore facilities), (i) Tank car and
tank truck loading/unloading
procedures shall meet the minimum
requirements and regulations
established by State or Federal law.
(2) Where rack area drainage does not
flow into a catchment basin or treatment
facility designed to handle spills, a quick
drainage system shall be used for tank
truck loading and unloading areas. The
containment system shall be designed to
hold at least the maximum capacity of
any single compartment of a tank car or
tank truck loaded or unloaded in. the
plant.
(3) An interlocked warning light or
physical barrier system, or warning
signs, shall be provided in loading/
unloading areas to prevent vehicular
departure before complete
disconnection of flexible or fixed
transfer lines.
(4) Prior to filling and departure of any
tank car or tank truck, the lower-most
drain and all outlets of such vehicles
shall be closely examined for leakage,
and. if necessary, tightened, adjusted, or
replaced to prevent liquid leakage while
in transit.
(i) In addition to the minimal
prevention standards listed under
§ 112.7 (c), (e), (f). (g). and (h). sections
of the Plan shall include a complete
discussion of conformance with the
applicable requirements and other
effective spill prevention and
containment procedures listed in
§§ 112.8.112.9,112.10. and 112.11 (or, if
more stringent, with State rules,
regulations, and guidelines).
§ 112.8 Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeaaurea Plan requirement* for
onshore facilities (excluding production
facilities).
(a) In addition to the specific spill
prevention and containment procedures
S-310999 0025(01X21-OCT-9I-13:51:29)
4701.FMT... [16.301. ..12-28-90
-------
54636 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
listed under this section, onshore
facilities (excluding production
facilities) must also address the general
requirements listed under § 112.7 in the
SPCC Plan.
(b) Facility drainage (onshore);
(excluding production facilities). (1)
Drainage from diked storage areas shall
be restrained by valves or other positive
means to prevent a spill or other
excessive leakage of oil into the
drainage system or in-plant effluent
treatment system, except where facility
systems are designed to handle such
leakage. Diked areas may be emptied by
pumps or ejectors; however, these shall
be manually activated and the condition
of the accumulation shall be examined
i.efore starting to ensure no oil will be
discharged into the water.
(2) Flapper-type drain valves shall not
be used to drain diked areas. Valves
'ised for the drainage of diked areas
shall, as far as practical, be of manual,
open-and-closed design. When facility
'rainage drains directly into water
courses and not into wastewater
•reatment plants, retained storm water
shall be inspected as provided in
paragraphs (c)(3) (ii), (iii), and (iv) of this
section before drainage.
(3) Facility drainage systems from
jndiked areas with a potential for oil
spill contamination shall flow into
ponds, lagoons, or catchment basins
designed to retain oil or return it to the
facility. It is recommended that
catchment basins not be located in
areas subject to periodic flooding.
(4) If facility drainage is not
engineered as above, the final discharge
jf all in-plant drainage shall be
.•quipped with a diversion system that
-vould. in the event of an uncontrolled
spill, retain oil in the facility.
(5) Where drainage waters are treated
.n more than one treatment unit, it is
ecommended that natural hydraulic
flow be used. If pump transfer is needed.
•wo "lift" pumps shall be provided, and
t least one of the pumps shall be
provided, and at least one of the pumps
.hall be permanently installed when
••uch treatment is continuous. Whatever
echniques are used, facility drainage
systems shall be adequately engineered
so that, in the event of equipment failure
:ir human error at the facility, oil will be
prevented from reaching navigable
•.vaters of the United States, adjoining
horelines. or other waters that would
be affected by discharging oil as
described in § 112.1(b)(l) of this part.
(6) For facilities in locations subject to
Hooding, it is recommended that the
SPCC Plan address additional
requirements for events that occur
luring a period of flooding.
s-310999 002«OI)(21-OCT-91-13:5!:32^
(c) Bulk storage containers (onshore);
(excluding production facilities). (1) No
tank shall be used for the storage of oil
unless its material and construction are
compatible with the material stored and
conditions of storage such as pressure,
temperature, etc. It is recommended that
the construction, materials, installation,
and use of tanks conform with relevant
portions of industry standards such as
API, NFPA. UL, or ASME standards,
which are required in the application of
good engineering practice for the
construction and operation of the tank.
(2) All bulk storage tank installations
shall be constructed so that a secondary
means of containment is provided for
the entire contents of the largest single
tank and sufficient freeboard to allow
for precipitation. Diked areas shall be
sufficiently impervious to contain spilled
oil for at least 72 hours. Dikes,
containment curbs, and pits are
commonly employed for this purpose,
but they may not always be appropriate.
An alternate system could consist of a
complete drainage trench enclosure
arranged so that a spill could terminate
and be safely confined in an in-plant
catchment basin or holding pond.
(3) Drainage of rainwater from the
diked area into a storm drain or an
effluent discharge emptying into an open
watercourse, lake, or pond, and
bypassing the in-plant treatment system
may be, acceptable if:
(i) The bypass valve is normally
sealed closed.
(ii) Inspection of the run-off rainwater
ensures compliance with applicable
water quality standards and will not
cause a discharge that may be harmful,
as described in 40 CFR part 110.
(iii) The bypass valve is opened, and
resealed following draining under
responsible supervision.
(iv) Adequate records are kept of such
events.
(4) Underground metallic storage
tanks represent a potential for
undetected spills. A new buried ,
installation shall be protected from
corrosion by coatings, cathodic
protection, or other effective methods
compatible with local soil conditions. It
is recommended that such buried tanks
at least be subjected to regular leak
.testing.
(5) It is recommended that partially
buried or bunkered metallic tanks be
avoided, since partial burial in earth can
cause rapid corrosion of metallic
surfaces, especially at the earth/air
interface. Partially buried and bunkered
tanks shall be protected from corrosion
by coatings, cathodic protection, or
other effective methods compatible with
local soil conditions.
4701.FMT...[16,30]...12-28-90
(6) Aboveground tanks shall be
subject to integrity testing every ten
years and when material repairs, etc.
are done, taking into account tank
design (floating roof, for example) and
using such techniques or combinations
of such techniques as hydrostatic
testing, radiographic testing, visual
inspections, ultrasonic testing, acoustic
emissions testing, or a system of non-
destructive shell testing. Comparison
records shall be kept, and tank supports
and foundations shall be included in
these inspections. In addition, the
outside of the tank shall frequently be
observed by operating personnel for
signs of deterioration, leaks, or
accumulation of oil inside diked areas.
(7) To control leakage through
defective internal heating coils:
(i) The steam return or exhaust lines
from internal heating coils, which
discharge into an open water course.
shall be monitored for contamination, or
passed through a settling tank, skimmer,
or other separation or retention system.
It is recommended that these systems be
designed to hold the entire contents of
the affected tank, be of sufficient size to
contain a spill that may occur when the
system is not being monitored or
observed, or have fail-safe oil leakage
detectors.
(ii) It is recommended that the
feasibility of installing an external
heating system also be considered.
(8) New and old tank installations
shall, as far as practical, be fail-safe
engineered or updated into a fail-safe
engineered installation to avoid spills.
One or more of the following devices
shall be provided:
(i) High liquid level alarms with an
audible or visual signal at a constantly
manned operation or surveillance
station: in smaller plants an audible air
vent may suffice.
(ii) Considering size and complexity of
the facility, high liquid level pump cutoff
devices set to stop flow at a
predetermined tank content level.
(iii) Direct audible or code signal
communication between the tank gauger
and the pumping-station.
(iv) A fast response system for
determining the liquid level of each bulk
storage tank, such as digital computers.
telepulse. or direct vision gauges or their
equivalent.
(v) Other devices can be considered
for installation as alternate
technologies, as allowed under
§ 112.7(a){2).
(vi) Liquid level sensing devices shall
be regularly tested to ensure proper
operation.
(9) Effluents that are discharged into
navigable waters shall have disposal
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules
54637
facilities observed frequently enough to
detect possible system upsets that could
cause an oil spill event.
(10) Visible oil leaks, which result in a
loss of oil from tank seams, gaskets.
rivets, and bolts sufficiently large to
cause the accumulation of oil in diked
areas, shall be promptly corrected.
Accumulated oil or oil contaminated
materials resulting from such discharge
shall be completely removed within 72
hours from the time the spill event
occurs.
(11) Mobile or portable oil storage
tanks (onshore) shall be positioned or
located so as to prevent oil discharges.
It is recommended that a secondary
means of containment, such as dikes or
catchment basins, be furnished for the -
largest single compartment or tank. It is
recommended that these facilities be
located where they will not be subject to
periodic flooding or washout.
(d) Facility transfer operations.
pumping, and in-plant process (onshore)
(excluding production facilities). (1) It is
recommended that all piping shall be
placed.aboveground, where possible.
New or replaced buried piping •
installations shall have a protective
wrapping and coating and shall be
cathodically protected or otherwise
satisfy the corrosion protection
standards for piping in 40 CFR part 280.
If a section of buried line is .exposed for
any reason, it shall be carefully
examined for deterioration. If corrosion
damage is found, additional
examination and corrective action shall
be taken as indicated by the magnitude
of the damage. It is recommended that
buried piping installations comply to the
extent applicable with all of the relevant
provisions in 40 CFR part 280.
(2) When piping is not in service or in
standby service for six months or more,.
the terminal connection at the transfer
point shall be capped or blank-flanged.
and marked as to origin.
(3) Pipe supports shall be properly
designed .to minimize abrasion and
corrosion and allow for expansion and
contraction.
• (4) All aboveground valves, piping,
and appurtenances shall be subjected to
monthly examinations by operating
personnel, at which time the general
condition of items such as flange joints,
expansion joints, valve glands and
bodies, catch pans, pipe supports,
locking of valves, and metal surfaces
shall be assessed. In addition, it is
recommended that facility owners or
operators conduct annual integrity and
leak testing of buried piping or monitor
buried piping on a monthly basis.
Records of such testing or monitoring
shall be maintained for five years. It is
recommended that all valves, pipes, and
S-310999 0027(01X21-OCT-9I-I3:51:36)
appurtenances conform to relevant
industry codes such as ASME
standards.
(5) Vehicular traffic granted entry into
the facility shall be warned orally or by
appropriate signs to be sure that the
vehicle, because of its size, will not
endanger aboveground piping or other
oil transfer operations. It is
recommended that weight restrictions
be posted, as applicable, to prevent
damage to underground piping.
§ 112.9 Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure* Plan requirement* for
onshore oil production facilities.
(a) In addition to the specific spill
prevention and containment procedures
listed under this section, onshore
production facilities must also address
the general requirements listed under
§ 112.7 in the SPCC Plan.
(b) Onshore oil production facilities
are defined in § 112.2(k).
(c) Oil production facility (onshore)
drainage. (1) At tank batteries and
central treating stations where an
accidental discharge of oil would have a
reasonable possibility of reaching
navigable waters, the dikes or .
equivalent measures required under
§ 112.7(c)(l) shall have drains closed
and sealed at all times, except when
rainwater is being drained. Prior to
drainage, the diked area shall be
inspected and actions taken as provided
in § 112.8(c)(3) (ii). (iii), and (iv).
Accumulated oil on the rainwater shall
be removed and returned to storage or
disposed of in accordance with
approved methods.
(2) Field drainage ditches, road
ditches, and oil traps, sumps, or
skimmers, if such exist, shall be
inspected at regularly scheduled
intervals for accumulation of oil or oil-
contaminated soil that may have
escaped from small leaks. Any such
accumulations shall be removed within
72 hours.
(3) For facilities in locations subject to
flooding, it is recommended that the
SPCC Plan address additional
requirements for events that occur
during a period of flooding.
(d) OH production facility (onshore)
bulk storage tanks. [I] No tank shall be
used for the storage of oil unless its
material and construction are
compatible with the material stored and
the conditions of storage. It is
recommended that the construction,
materials, installation, and use of new
tanks conform with relevant portions of
industry standards, which are required
in the application of good engineering
practice for the construction and
operation of the tank.
4701.FMT...ri6.30l. 12-28-90
(2) All tank battery and central
treating plant installations shall be
provided with a secondary means of
containment for the entire contents of
the largest single tank in use and
sufficient freeboard to allow for
precipitation, if feasible, or alternate
systems, such as those outlined in
§ 112.7(c)(l). Drainage from undiked
areas showing a potential for
contamination shall be safely confined
in a catchment basin or holding pond.
(3) All tanks containing oil shall be
visually examined for deterioration and
maintenance needs at least once a year.
Such examination shall include the
foundation and supports of tanks above
the ground surface. The schedule and
records for examinations of tanks shall
be maintained by the owner or operator
for a period of five complete calendar
years irrespective of changes in
ownership.
(4) It is recommended that new and
old tank battery installations, as far as
practical, be fail-safe engineered or
updated into a fail-safe engineered
installation to prevent spills. It is
recommended that appropriate API.
NFPA. and ASME standards be
referenced. Consideration shall be given
to providing one or more of the
following:
(i) Adequate tank capacity to assure
that a tank will not overfill if a pumper/
gauger is delayed in making regular
rounds.
(ii) Overflow equalizing lines between
tanks so that a full tank can overflow to
an adjacent tank.
(iii) Adequate vacuum protection to
prevent tank collapse during a pipeline
run.
(iv) High level sensors to generate and
transmit an alarm signal to the computer
where facilities are a part of a computer
production control system.
(e) Facility transfer operations, oil
production facility (onshore). (1) All
aboveground valves and piping shall be
examined monthly for general condition
of items such as flange joints, valve
glands and bodies, drip pans, pipe
supports, pumping well polish rod
stuffing boxes, bleeder and gauge
valves. The schedule of examinations
shall be included in the SPCC Plan and
records of the examinations shall be
maintained for a period of five years.
(2) Salt water toil field brine) disposal
facilities shall be examined often.
particularly following a sudden change
in atmospheric temperature, to detect
possible system upsets capable of
causing an oil discharge.
(3) Production facilities shall have a
program of flowlinc maintenance to
prevent spills from this source. It is
-------
54638
*
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22, 1991 / Proposed Rules
recommended that the program include
monthly examinations, corrosion
protection, flowline replacement, and
adequate records.
§ 112.10 Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countertneasures Plan requirement* for
onshore oil drilling and workover facilities.
(a) In addition to the specific spill
prevention and containment procedures
listed under this section, onshore oil
drilling and workover facilities must
also address the general requirements
listed under § 112.7 in the SPCC Plan.
(b) Mobile drilling or workover
equipment shall be positioned or located
so as to prevent spilled oil discharges.
(c) Depending on the location,
catchment basins or diversion structures
may be necessary to intercept and
contain spills of fuel, crude oil, or oily
drilling fluids.
(d) Before drilling below any casing
string or during workover operations, a
blowout prevention (BOP) assembly and
well control system shall be installed*
when necessary, that is capable of
controlling any well-head pressure
expected to be encountered while that
BOP assembly is on the well. Casing and
BOP installations shall be in accordance
with State regulatory agency
requirements.
§ 112.11 Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeawres Plan requirements for
offshore oil drilling, production, or
workover facilities.
(a) In addition to the specific spill
prevention and containment procedures
listed under this section, offshore oil
drilling, production or workover
facilities must also address the general
requirements listed under § 112.7 in the
SPCC Plan.
(b) Offshore oil drilling, production,
and workover facilities are defined in
§ 112.2(j). As provided in § 112.1(d)(3).
such facilities that are subject to the
Operating Orders, notices, and
regulations of the Minerals Management
Service are not subject'to this part.
(c) Oil drainage collection equipment
shall be used to prevent and control
small oil spillage around pumps, glands.
valves, flanges, expansion joints, hoses,
drain lines, separators, treaters, tanks,
and allied equipment. Facility drains
shall be controlled and directed toward
a central collection sump or equivalent
collection system sufficient to prevent
the facility from discharging oil as
described in § 112.1(b)(l) of this part.
Where drains and sumps are not
practicable, oil contained in collection
equipment shall be removed as often as
necessary to prevent overflow, but not
less than once a year.
(d) For facilities employing a sump
system, the sump and drains shall be
S-J10999 0028(01X2I-OCT-91-13:51:39)
adequately sized and a spare pump or
equivalent method shall be available to
remove liquid from the sump and assure
that oil does not escape. A monthly
preventive maintenance inspection arid
testing program shall be employed to
assure reliable operation of the liquid
removal system and pump start-up
device. Redundant automatic sump
pumps and control devices may be
required on some installations.
(e) At facilities with areas where
separators and treaters are equipped
with dump valves for which the
predominant mode of failure is in the
closed position and pollution risk is
high, the facility shall be specially
equipped to prevent the escape of oil.
Prevention of escaped oil can be
accomplished by extending the flare line
to a diked area if the separator is near
shore, equipping the separator with a
high liquid level sensor that will
automatically shut-in wells producing to
the separator, installing parallel
redundant dump valves, or using other
feasible alternatives to prevent oil
discharges.
(f) Atmospheric storage or surge
containers shall be equipped with high
liquid level sensing devices or other
acceptable alternatives to prevent oil
discharges.
(g) Pressure tanks shall be equipped
with high and low pressure sensing
devices to activate an alarm and/or
control the flow or with other
acceptable alternatives to prevent oil
discharges.
(h) Tanks shall be equipped with
suitable corrosion protection. It is
recommended that appropriate National
Association of Corrosion Engineers
standards for corrosion protection be
followed.
, (i) A written procedure for inspecting
and testing pollution prevention
equipment and systems shall be
prepared and maintained at the facility.
Such procedures shall be included as
part of the SPCC Plan.
(j) Testing and inspection of the
pollution prevention equipment and
systems at the facility shall be
conducted by the owner or operator on a
scheduled periodic basis, but not less
than monthly, commensurate with the
complexity, conditions, and
circumstances of the facility or other
appropriate regulations. Simulated spill
testing shall be the method used for
testing and inspecting human and
equipment pollution control and
countermeasures systems unless the
owner or operator demonstrates that
another method provides equivalent
alternative protection.
(k) Surface and subsurface well shut-
in valves and devices in use at the
4701.FMT...(16,30]...12-28-90
facility shall be sufficiently described to
determine their method of activation or
control, e.g., pressure differential.
change in fluid or flow conditions.
combination of pressure and flow.
manual or remote control mechanisms.
Detailed records for each well, while not
necessarily part of the Plan, shall be
kept by the owner or operator for a
period of not less than five years.
(1) Before drilling below any casing
string and during workover operations, a
BOP preventor assembly and well
control system shall be installed that is
capable of controlling any well-head
pressure expected to be encountered
while that BOP assembly is on the well.
Casing and BOP installations shall be in
accordance with State regulatory agency
requirements.
(m) It is recommended that
extraordinary well control measures be
provided if emergency conditions,
including fire, loss of control and other
abnormal conditions, occur. It is
recommended that the degree of control
system redundancy vary with hazard
exposure and probable consequences of
failure. It is recommended that surface
shut-in systems include redundant or
"fail close" valving. Subsurface safety
valves may not be needed in producing
wells that will not flow, but they should
be installed as required by applicable
State regulations.
(n) All manifolds (headers) shall be
equipped with check valves on
individual flowlines.
(o) If the shut-in well pressure is
greater than the working pressure of the
flowline and manifold valves up to and
including the header valves associated
with that individual flowline, the
flowline shall be equipped with a high
pressure sensing device and shut-in
valve at the wellhead unless provided
with a pressure relief system to prevent
over-pressuring.
(p) All piping appurtenant to the
facility shall be protected from
corrosion. It is recommended that the
method used, such as protective
coatings or cathodic protection, be
discussed.
(q) Sub-marine piping appurtenant to
the facility shall be adequately
protected against environmental
stresses and other activities, such as
fishing operations.
(r) Sub-marine piping appurtenant to
the facility shall be in good operating
condition at all times and inspected on a
scheduled periodic basis for failures.
Such inspections shall be documented
and maintained at the facility for a
period of five years.
(s) To prevent misunderstanding of
joint and separate duties and
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 204 / Tuesday. October 22. 1991 / Proposed Rules . 54639
obligations for performing work in a safe
and pollution-free manner, it is
recommended that written instructions
be prepared by the owner or operator
for contractors and subcontractors to
follow whenever contract activities
include servicing a well or systems
appurtenant to a well or pressure vessel.
Such instructions and procedures shall
be maintained at the offshore
production facility. Under certain
circumstances and conditions, such
contractor activities may require the
presence at the facility of an authorized
representative of the owner or operatci
who would intervene when necessary to
prevent a spill event.
Appendix A—Memorandum of
Understanding Between the Secretary of
Transportation and the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency.
Section II—Definitions
The Environmental Protection Agency and
the Department of Transportation agree that
for the purposes of Executive Order 11548,
the term:
(1) Non-transportation-related onshore and
.offshore facilities means:
(A) Fixed onshore and offshore oil well
drilling facilities including all equipment and
appurtenances related thereto used in drilling
operations for exploratory or development
wells, but excluding any terminal facility,
unit or process integrally associated with the
handling or transferring of oil in bulk to or
from a vessel.
(B) Mobile onshore and offshore oil well
drilling platforms, barges, trucks, or other
mobile facilities including all equipment and
appurtenances related thereto when such
mobile facilities are fixed in position for the
purpose of drilling operations for exploratory
or development wells, but excluding any
terminal facility, unit or process integrally
associated with the handling or transferring
of oil in bulk to or from a vessel.
(C) Fixed onshore and offshore oil
production structures, platforms, derricks.
and rigs including all equipment and
appurtenances related thereto, as well as
completed wells and the wellhead separators. •
oil separators, and storage facilities used in
the production of oil. but excluding any
terminal facility, unit or process integrally
associated with the handling or transferring
of oil in bulk to or from'a vessel.
(D) Mobile onshore and offshore oil
production facilities including all equipment
and appurtenances related thereto as well as
completed wells and wellhead equipment,
piping from wellheads to oil separators, oil
separators, and storage facilities used in the
production of oil when such mobile facilities
are fixed in position for the purpose of oil
production operations, but excluding any
terminal facility, unit or process integrally
associated with the handling or transferring
of oil in bulk to or from'a vessel.
(E) Oil refining facilities including all
equipment and appurtenances related thereto
as well as in-plant processing units, storage
units, piping, drainage systems and waste
treatment units used in the refining of oil. but
excluding any terminal facility, unit or
process' integrally associated with the
handling or transferring of oil in bulk to or
from a vessel.
(F) Oil storage facilities including all
equipment and appurtenances related thereto
as well as fixed bulk plant storage, terminal
oil storage facilities, consumer storage,
pumps and drainage systems used in the
storage of oil. but excluding inline or
breakout storage tanks needed for the
continuous operation of a pipeline system
and any terminal facility, unit or process
' integrally associated with the handling or
transferring of oil in bulk to or from a vessel.
(G) Industrial, commercial, agricultural, or
public facilities which use and store oil. but
excluding any terminal facility, unit or
process integrally associated with the
handling or transferring of oil in bulk to or
from a vessel.
(H) Waste treatment facilities including in-
plant pipelines, effluent discharge lines, and
storage tanks, but excluding waste treatment
facilities located on vessels and terminal
storage tanks and appurtenances for the
reception of oily ballast water or tank
washings from vessels and associated
systems used for off-loading vessels.
(1) Loading racks, transfer hoses, loading
arms and other equipment which are
appurtenant to a non-transportation-related
facility or terminal facility and which are
used to transfer oil in bulk to or from
highway vehicles or railroad cars.
(I) Highway vehicles and railroad cars
which are used for the transport of oil
exclusively within the confines of a non-
transportation-related facility and which are
not intended to transport oil in interstate or
intrastate commerce.
(K) Pipeline systems which are used for the
transport of oil exclusively within the
confines of a non-transportation-reiated
facility or terminal facility and which are not
intended to transport oil in interstate or
intrastate commerce, but excluding pipeline
systems used to transfer oil in bulk to or from
a vessel.
(2) Transportation-related onshore and
offshore facilities means:
(A) Onshore and offshore terminal
facilities including transfer hoses, loading
arms and other equipment and appurtenances
used for the purpose of handling or •
transferring oil in bulk to or from a vessel as
well as storage tanks and appurtenances for
the reception of oily ballast water or tank
washings from vessels, but excluding
terminal waste treatment facilities and
terminal oil storage facilities.
(B) Transfer hoses, loading arms and other
equipment appurtenant to a non-
transportation-related facility which is used
to transfer oil in bulk to or from a vessel.
(C) Interstate and intrastate onshore and
offshore pipeline-systems including pumps
and appurtenances related thereto as well as
in-line or breakout storage tanks needed for
the continuous operation of a pipeline
system, and pipelines from onshore and
offshore oil production facilities, but
excluding onshore and offshore piping from
wellheads to oil separators and pipelines
which are used for the transport of oil
exclusively within the confines of a' non-
transportation-related facility or terminal
facility and which are not intended to
transport oil in interstate or intrastate
commerce or to transfer oil in.bulk to or from
a vessel.
(0) Highway vehicles and railroad cars
which are used for the transport of oil in
interstate or intrastate commerce and the
equipment and appurtenances related
thereto, and equipment used for the fueling of
locomotive units, as well as the rights-of-way
on which they operate. Excluded are highway
vehicles and railroad cars and motive power
used exclusively within the confines of a non-
transportation-related facility or terminal
facility and which are not intended for use in
interstate or intrastate commerce.
BILLOM CODE UM-W-M
S-310999 0029(01K2I-OCT-9.1-I3:5I:43)
4701.FMT...[16.30]...12-28-90
-------
TfflS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
APPENDIX I
Interim Final Rule for
40 C.F.R. part 112 dated November 4, 1992
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
Wednesday
November 4, 1992
Part V
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 112, at aU
CtvU Penalty Provisions for trie Oil
Pollution Prevention Regulations, Cttsn
Water Act Nottflcatton Provision and
Prohibition Against Unauthorized
Discharges of OH and Hazardous
Substances; Interim Final Rule
-------
52704 Federal Register / Vol. 57. No.'274 / Wednesday, November 4. 1992 / Rules and Regulations
ENVmOMaJCMTAk PROTECTION
AGENCY .'.-•"••*-••*•'••••••••-
40 CFR Peris 112, 114 md t17
•..••- ..•••*»;••.•.—••* .
--'-''
Civil Pena«y Provia*on« tor me OU
Pollution Prevention Refutation*.
dean Water Act Notification Pro
and ProMMten A9aMwt UnautftortMd
Diaenargs* of Oi and Haxardotta
Sunat
AOCNCT: Environmental Protection
Agency.
Acnoee Interim final rale. _ '
suttauurr The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) today publishes an
interim final rule which limit* the
applicability of the administrative
penally assessment provisions of the
Agency's regulations on oil pollution
prevention and nportable quantities for
hazardous substances. That* provisions
sre being amended in light of new
authorities for the assessment of civil
administrative end judicial penalties
under the OU Pollution Act (OPA).
OATtm CJZectt v« data; The intarun f***1
rule shall be effective November 4. 1992.
Comments: EPA will accept poet-
publication comments until December 4.
1992,
AOOMSSSK Peraons may mail two
copies of all commacuon tola interim
Anal rule to Cecilia L Smith. Offlee of '
Waste Programs Enforcement (OS-no),
Environmenut Protection Agency, 401 M
Street SW.W*ahinfloavDC204aa The* •
administrative reeded of thia •*«'•«•-*'<*§
it available and persons may inspect
comments at the above address;
Cecilia l_SatitiuOffio» of Waato . "
Environmental Protection Agency. 40t M
Street 3W, Watblngtnn. DC 20400. (703)
603-8843. ..
I. Preamble ' . ' .
Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation!
The civil penalty provision of the oil_
pollution prevention regulations (40 CFR
112.0). and the related civil penalty
provisions and procedures at 40 CFR
pan 114 wen promulgated in 1974
purtuant to lection 3ll(J) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act. 33 U.S.C
1321. also known as the Clean Water
Act (CWA) (39 FK 31002, August 29.
1974). Part 112 sets out. for onshore and
offshore non-transportation-related
Facilities, requirements designed to
prevent discharges of oil into) "navigable
waters and adjoining shorelines." 40
CFR UXoajsdlM.1 each provide mat .
vioktiaaa>oi the. oil pollution prereBdea..'
regulations may result in the aasasaasant •
of an administrative penalty of notaaorv.
than S&OOO per day of violation. 49>CFR••:"
lira and 114.1 are based on authority in".
CWA section 311(J){2J. which, bcfeeo its ..
amendment by the Oil Pollution Act of .
1990 (OPA). limited civil penalties-*•:•.£?
asseaeed for violations of regulations)
issued under section 3ll(J) to "notjaorer-
than U.OOO for eaoh such violation." • • *
The OPA repealed CWA section
311QH2) and amended CWA section
311(b)(fl) to provide that violators of '•
CWA section 311(1) may be asseaaed a
Clase 1 penalty of up to H04JOO psr /
violation (up to a maximum assaeaaatai .•
of 423.000). or a Class U penalty of np to
(10.000 per day of violation (up to a
maximum aasaaamant of S12&009V- •
Further, section 311(b)(e) now provides '
for different administrative proceedings
for these two classes of pemutiaa,
Respondents in Class I case* are-given a
reasonable opportunity to be heard and .:
to present evidence, but the hearing
need not meet the requirements of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) for
formal adjudications (5 U.S.C.SM). •
Class fl hearing!, however, era on the
record and subject to 5 U.S.C.SS4.
At a laaufc at the- savings provfateie;. •
section 0001 of the OPA. H lira and
114.1 continue in effect until repealed.
amended or superseded. Today's
regttlaiiott amende 40 (JKH lirA and
1H1 by meJdnt them applicable oniy to
violations occurring prior to Augojt it».
ycajs. or both." Aa e resulLof the .•
savings provision in section 0001 of the
OPA. 40 CFR 117 .22U) continues in
sfiact until repealed, amended, or
Bupeissileil Today's regulation amends
| IVJX*} by makinf it applicable only
td violations occurring prior to August
!•» 1990. the data of enactment of the Oil
Polation Act.
n Agaifltt Unauthorized
jh» data of enactment of the) OIL
PoUotkev Act, . ..
Th* OPA also amended CWA section
3ll(b) to provide for the judicial .
aseeeameat of dvU penalties of up to
"32MOB> pat day of violation." . .
40 CFR 117 generally establlshae the .
reportable quantities for haxardaor "
sobetaneeavdeelanated under 4OCFRll».
for puipoeoa of CWA section 31L 40 •
CFK11731 seta out the notiflcanon
requirement for dlecbarges of daeigsMaB
hacardous snbsunces pursuant to CWA '
section m(b)(5). 40 CFR 117 J2(a) •• • '
provides that vioiation(s) of the
notification requirement may reeeit ta t
fine of not mere than $10.000 or .
Imprisonment for not more than oca-
year, or both. 40 CFR ll7.22(a) is baaed
on language in former CWA section
3ll(bM«). which was later amended by—*
the OPA. Section 4301 of the OPA
amended CWA section 3ll(b)(S) to
provide that any criminal penalty for •
violation of the notification requireeaaot
in CWA section 3ll(b)(3) be "in
accordance with title 18. United States
Cade, or imprisoned for not more than 5
*4OCFR 117J2(b) provides that an
owner, operator or a person in charge of
a veaaal or facility that has discharged a
designated hazardoua substance
•xoaedtof the reportable quantity may
be flubfacs to a civil administrative
penalty assessment of up to SS.OOO per
violation. The regulation also states that
the Agency may pursue a judicial civil
penalty action, seeking up to S50.000 per
violation: where the discharge resulted
from willful negiiirace or willful
fflSBcenducL the qif«t"""» judicial civil
penalty is S28OOOO. 40 CFR 117.22 b) Is
baavd on language in former CWA
section 311(b)(5)(A). which wet
amended by the OP A.
Section 4301 of OPA repealed CWA
section 3ll(b)(8} and replaced it with a
new penalty assessment framework. •
CWA section 311(b)(8) now provides
that violators of the prohibition against
unauthorised discharge* In section
.JtKbXH anay be assessed a Class.I
petesltr«f up to S1OOOO per violation (up
to a maximum assessment of 523.000) or
a Class 0 penalty of up to S10.000 per
day of violation (up to a maximum
assessment of S125UXX)).
Aa a result of the savings provision in
auction eOOl of the OPA 40 CFR 117.22
continua* in effect until repealed.
amended or superseded. Today's
refalatian amends 40 CFR 117.22 by
ttaadrtf it applicable only to violations
oaanring prior to August 15. 1990. the
date of enactment of the OU Pollution
Act
Section 4301 of OPA also added CWA
MCOOO ail(b)(7), which provides for the
fadidal assessment of civil penalties for
rialattoaei o£ CWA section 3ll(b)(3) of
up to "323.000 per dey of violation '• or
up to "11.000 per barrel of oil or unit of
reportable quantity of hazardous
.substances." For violations of section
312{b)(3) that are e result of gross
negligence or willful misconduct, the
violator now Is subject to a dvil penalty
of 'not lees than ilOO.000 and not more
than S3.00D per barrel or oil or unit of
reportabte quantity or hazardous
disrhtraeo."
-------
Fedaiai Regular / Voi. 57. No. 214 / Wednesday. November 4. 1992 / Rdei and Begaiauao S270S
Canariacdca^intandcd that
vtoJanom at tta»etl poitadoa pxevsnnon
erf th* section
NxpBrejaaflt. an*
viola ttoaa of tte pnbftMm egetest
unauthorised ctoduqpv fas section
3ntf»}ffl.oujiuiu» aJha the OPA'a
tfaaa
"f™*!*0**™
previous?? «ce» tfae i
the OPA esteblishes procedure* that
differ ban due* eet forth in 40 CFR 114.
The Ageneye-uttenl under 40. CFR parta
112,114 aacLU? ha* aiw*y» been to
allaMttvilsjeettky assessment* up u> ,
tha mjudausftaaount allowed under th*
«iah|«« [^ Ugfrt of tha recent statutory
itte* provided for violations of
CWA section *n(J> regulations; CWA
section 9llfb)W i»d CWA section
3ll(b)(3J, the Agency's existing
regufationt on rhfrmatterneed to be
changed to cuufouu to the statutory
amendments. The Agency believes that
such a conforming change reflecting.
explicit Congressional intent doea net
warrant notice and opportunity for
comment under the Administrative
Procedure Act and that there it good
cause for publishing tide-rate In interim
final form. For the same reason, the
Agency believes there is good cause for
making the rule effective immediately.
Consequently, this rule is published as
an interim final rule amending 40 CPU
1118.114.1 and 117.22 with regard to
any violations occurring after the date of
tha OPA's enactment (August 18.1900).
40 CFR 112.8.114.1 and 117.22 still apply,
however, to violations that occurred
pnor to August 18.1990.
(nttrim Procedures
M e result of today's interim final
rule, there will be no promulgated rules
containing procedures for assessing
administrative penalties for CWA
Section 311 regulatory violations or
violations of oectlon 3ll(b)(3] occurring
after August 18. I960. The Agency,
however, will use two existing sets of
procedure* es guidance until it
completes a rulemaking to implement
the new CWA penalty provisions. For
Class I penalties, the Agency will follow
generally the procedures set forth In the
recently proposed 40 CFR 28. Non-APA
Consolidated Rules of Practice for
Administrative Assessment of Civil
Pensltiee (58 FR 29996. July 1.1991).
These procedures will be used as
guidance until the regulation is
published in the Federal Register as
final, at which time they will have the
force of law. For the assessment of
CWA section 311 Class II penalties, the'
Agency intends to use a* guidance- the
Consolidated Rule* of Practice
Governing the. Administrative)
Aaaeescaeni or Civil Penalties, and tha
Revocatan-or Suepeoatoa of Permit* at
40 CFR 22.40 CFR 22 satiefiee the
teqisHaaeensi al the APA far
adlodmteix huriagi as tfar warm. Tha
AgasjeriBtenda in thai near fabow a*
amend: 4» CFfc Ztte iacocponte. tt«
OPA Amandmaaa ta the CWA.
u. Prncaducai Jtaqumaanla
AL flaww Under Binvutfrt Order ttXtt
Executive- Order Na 12281 requires
that ail Proposed end final regulations
be classified ae ma|or or non-major
rules. The Agency has determined that
thiv final rule ta ant e maternda under
Executtvw Order 12291 because it will
not result in any of the Impact*
delineated fa the Executive Order.
& Rtviiw Uadtr th» Aigiiiatoty
FIuu'bilityAet
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980.
5 U AC. 801 etsvtr- requires drat a
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis be
performed feral! ruler mat an likely to
ha-ve "significant economic Impact on a
substantial number of smafl entities."
This regulation will not impose
significant costs on any small entities.
The overall Impact on small entities is
expected to be slight In addition, the
rule Is procedural and does not impose
additional regulatory requirements on
small entitles. Therefore, es required by
the Regulatory Flexibility Act EPA
hereby certifies that this final rule will
not have a significant impact en small
entities.
C Riviaw Undtr tht Poptrwork
Rfducuoit Act ]
This rule does not contain any
Information collection requirements
subject to OMB review under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980-(44
U.8.C. 3301 si seq.J.
IIL Additional Opportunity for Public
Comment
EPA has issued today's rule as an
Interim final rule in order to provids a
limited opportunity until December 4.
1902 for public comment. After
evaluating any comments which an
received. EPA will decide whether a
response is warranted.
Lie* of Subjects
40 CFR Part 112
Oil pollution. P«nat:ie«. Rappr.mg sad
recordkcepmg requirer.trr j.
4C.CFR Patent
AirminieJretfve practice end
procedure. OUacffuUcn. Peneltte*.
40 CFR Part U7
Haut*Joa»aubetanc«ai PenelHe*.
Reporting aadncordcae9iA9
Waat pallutiaaconzi
Adminituaton •
FarUureaaons.sstoulln.the.
preaable. parBHH, iu and 117 at
chapter. I of tttla.40 of the Coda ot
Federal Regulations, are, ameodad as sec
forth below.
P«EVEWTTOK
L The authority citation for pert 112 is
revised to read as follows:
Authority: See. Jit SOl(a). Federal Water
PollulioDCoattat Acrftee x. Puo. L iS-aoa
Be 8UL MM ••«;. (93 VJLC 1291 si seq.»i
M»4(bfc Pee. U»4oa.ag atat avnsuAC
Reofcv Man «4 1970 Ne. 3 (WTOL U FK.1M23.
2 CFR laee-tBTO Cooipj E.0. 11731 38 Fir
21243. 3 CFR. superseded by £.0. 127?7. ie FR
S47ST.
2. Section 112.8 is revised to read as
follows:
1 1 12.8 CMI penelttee «or vlototlon of ««
pollution prevention re^tiurtiooe.
(a) Applicability of lection. This
section shall apply to violations
specified in paragraph (b) of this section
which occurred prior to August 18. 1990.
(b) Owners or operators of facilities
iublect to 1 112.3 (a), (b) or (c) who
violate the requirements of this part 11:
by failing or refusing to comply with any
of the provisions of 1 1124. i 112.4 or
1 112.5 shall be liable for a civil penalty
of not more than W.OOO for each day
such violation continues. Civil penalties
shall be imposed in accordance with
procedures set out In pan 114 of this
subchapter D.
PART 114-CIVIL PENALTIES FOR
VIOLATION OP OIL POLLUTION
PREVENTION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for par: n-i u
revised to read u follows:
AuUwnty: Sees. HI. Ml(a). t^b t 32-500.
88Sui. saa. aas (33 U.s.C. 13:1. nsiun
2. Section 114.1 is revised to reai js
follows:
1 114.1 Qetwral appMcaMUty.
(a) Applicability of lection. This
section shall apply to violations
.specified in paragraph (b) of this section
which occurred pnor to August 18. 1990.
-------
527D6 Federal Register / Vol. 57. No. 214 / Wednesday. November 4. 1992 / Rule* and Regulations
fb) Owner* or operator* at fsdiities
iub|sct to < 13U (a), (b) or (e) of thU
lubchapter who violate the
raquirementa of paitltt of this-
luhchapter 0 by faiiiaf-or refusing to -
comply with tny of tbt provtatona of
1111*3. 1114. or 11U of thia • r
lubchapter thill b« Uthlo for • dvil .
penalty of cot more- thao f&OOO for tmeh
day roch violation continues. Qvil
penalties iball be aeaeased and
compromised ia accordance with thia
part No penalty shall bt eaaesaad until
the owner or operator ihail hava batn
given nonca and aa opportunity for
hearing ia accordance with thia part
PART 117-OETERUINATOfi OF
REPORTABLE QUANTITIES FOR
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
1. The authority dtadoa for part 117 la
•evised to read aa follow*
Authority: Sect, »l tad 801(a). Federal
.Yeter PoUuOOB Coaeroi Act (» UAC. 12S1 et
1*9.). ("the Act") end Bxenttve Order 1179S,
lupeneded by Execaeve Order 12777.56 PR
547S7.
t Section 11732 U rtviaed to road aa
followa:
(a) AppiioabUlty of uetien. Tola
aaetioa uiaU apply to violation!
ipecifito in parampha (b) and (c) of* •
thi* aaetioa whtah oceurrad prior to •• ••-••
Auauatie,1990L .
(b) Any panoa in chart e of a voaael or
an onahore or offahora fadlity who faila
to notify tha Unlttd Slataa Government *
of a prohibited diaebargt punuant to •
i 117.21 (except in tha eaaa of a.
diadtarn beyond tha eondfnoua lone.
where tha panoa in diarge of a vaaaai ia
not otharwia* enbjeet to the furiadietion
of the Unltad Stataa) ahall be aubftet to
a Una of not mort than iiaaoo or
impriaonauBt for not mot* than one
ytar. or both; punuant to aaction
3U(bK5).
(e) Tha owner, operator or panon in
charga of a vaaaai or aa onahora or
offahora fadlity from whidi la
diaduriad a haxardoua aubatanca-
deaignatadin40C7RpanilBin a
quantity aoiaal to or exceeding in any 24-
hour parted, tha reperubla quantity
ntabiiahad in thia part (axeapt hi tha
caaa of a diacharga beyond tha
eoatigooua zone, whart the panon hi
chaigt of a vaaaai ia not otharwiaa
aubfact to tha furiadlction of tha United
Stataa. shall be aaaaaaad a dvil penalty
of .up to 15.000 per'Violation under
tection ni(b)(0)(A). Alternatively, upon
a determination by tha Admlniatrator, a
dvil action will be^ommansedunder .
lection ni(b)(6)(B) to impose a penalty.
not to exceed tt&OOO unless such •
discharge is tha result of willful
negligence or willful misconduct within
tha privity and knowledge of .the owner.
operator, or person in charga. ia which ..
case-tha penalty ahall not exceed
Now Ike AOBinlatrater will take iota
•ccont the grevtty of tha efleaee end the
•undaid Of eare BuaileM by the owner.
opentoc. or penoo to chaiga IB determtomi •
waether a dvU aettea will be oomaMaeed
under aecuoa 311(bK«)TO- The gnvtty of the
off me wul be interpreted to todade the itt<
of the dUe&aifa. the deaiee of daaaer or hem
to the p«bUe health, safety, or tha
environment including ceaaideraiiea of
toxidty, dtsradabulQr. and dlepenal
chereetetiatice of the eubeuaoa. prrnoui
ipUl hialoiy. and pnvioue violation of «ny
.
emphaaia will be pieced an tha standard of
cere and the extant of mintattoa effort*
manifeit by tha owr-.-?. operetar. or pereen hi
charaa.
[PR Ooc, BWMol /iled ll-*-B2! tM am|
-------
SECTION 2
* SPCC/FRP OUTREACH CONTACT NUMBERS
* MOST COMMONLY USED CWA-OPA-SPCC
ACRONYMS
* SPCC IMPORTANT DEFINITIONS
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
SPCC/FRP OUTREACH:
SPILL PREVENTION CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURE
FACILITY RESPONSE PLAN
WHO CAN YOU CALL?
FRPInfoline 215-597-9562
SPCC/OPA Hotline 202-260-2342
National Response Center 800-424-8802
Region m Oil Personnel, Their Title and Phone Extension:
Dave Wright, Chief, Oil and Title m Section-597-5998
Linda Ziegler, Oil Program/FRP Coordinator-597-1395
Regina Starkey, Oil/SPCC Enforcement Coordinator-597-1395
Robert Sanchez, pil Inspector-215-597-1357
Michael Welsh, P.E., Oil Inspector-215:597-3152
Paula Curtin, Oil/SPCC Enforcement Specialist-304-234-0256
Bernie Stepanski, Investigator-597-3184
Frank Cosgrove, SPCC Oil Inspector~597-1357
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
COMMONLY USED CWA-OPA-SPCC ACRONYMS
ACP
AST
CERCLA
CWA
DOJ
DOT
ERNS
FRP
MOU
NCP
NPDES
NRC
NRT
OPA
PE
RA
RCP
RCRA
RQ
SIC
SPCC
USCG
UST
WHPA
Area Contingency Plan
Aboveground Storage Tank
Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, & Liability Act of 1980
Clean Water Act
Department of Justice
Department of Transportation
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Emergency Response Notification System
Facility Response Plan
Memorandum of Understanding
National Contingency Plan
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
National Response Center
National Response Team
Oil Pollution Act of 1990
Professional Engineer
Regional Administrator
Regional Contingency Plan
Resource Conservation & Recovery Act
Reportable Quantity
Standard Industrial Classification (Code)
Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (Plan)
United States Coast Guard
Underground Storage Tank
Wellhead Protection Area
-------
IMPORTANT SPCC DEFINITIONS
Oil is defined as "oil of any kind or in any form, including but not limited to
petroleum, fuel oil, sludge, oil refuse, and oil mixed with wastes other than dredge
spoil." Interpretations of this definition include non-petroleum oils such as vegetable
and animal oils.
Discharge involves but is not limited to, any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring,
emitting, emptying or dumping of a material. However, some "discharges" are
allowed as authorized by a permit issued under to section 13 of the River and Harbor
Act of 1899, or section 402 or 405 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(FWPCA) Amendments of 1972.
Spill Event is a discharge of in a harmful quantity into the navigable waters of the
US or the adjoining shorelines.
RQ or Reportable Quantity is established under the Superfund, Emergency
Planning, and Community Right-To-Know Program (40 CFR Part 302) as the quantity
of a given material, which when released by an owner or operator, requires
notification of the National Response Center.
Harmful Quantity is a quantity of oil which
(1) Violates applicable water quality standards; or
(2) Causes a film or sheen upon or discoloration of the surface of the water or
adjoining shorelines; or
(3) Causes a sludge or emulsion to be deposited beneath the surface of the water or
upon adjoining shorelines.
* - Discharges from properly operating vessel engines are exempted.
Applicable Water Quality Standards are water quality standards adopted by a state
pursuant to Section 303 of the FWPCA or promulgated by the EPA pursuant to that
section.
Navigable waters of the United Stated are defined in section 502(7) of the FWPCA,
and includes:
(1) All navigable waters of the United States, as defined in judicial decisions prior to
passage of the 1972 Amendments to the FWPCA, and tributaries of such waters;
(2) Interstate waters, including interstate wetlands;
(3) Intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams which are utilized by interstate travelers for
recreational or other purposes; and
(4) Intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams from which fish or shellfish are taken and
sold in interstate commerce.
-------
Owner or operator means any person owning or operating an onshore or an offshore
facility, and in the case of an abandoned offshore facility, the person who owned or
operated the facility immediately prior to abandonment.
Non-transportation related facility is defined in the Memorandum of Understanding
between the Secretary of Transportation and the Administrator of the EPA, as all
fixed facilities, including support equipment, but excluding interstate pipelines,
railroad tank cars en route, transport trucks en route, and terminals associated with
the transfer of bulk oil to and from a water transportation vessel. The term also
includes mobile or portable facilities such as onshore drilling or workover rigs, barge-
mounted offshore drilling or workover rigs, and portable fueling facilities while they
are in a fixed, operating mode.
Onshore facility means any facility of any kind located in, on, or under any land
within the United States, other than submerged lands, which is not a transportation-
related facility.
Offshore facility is defined as any facility of any kind located in, on or under any of
the navigable waters of the United States, which is not a transportation-related
facility.
Source: 4O CFR P.rt 112 (7-1-90)
-------
SECTION 3
* SPCC COURSE SLIDES
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
Notes
History/Background
Information
Sources of Oil Spills
Transportation Nda-Transportation
Breakdown of Oil Spill Reports
Region III-Fiscal Year 1992
1000,
I ..I-TT5"
800
600
400
200
PA VA.. WV MO DC DE
Source: Regional Response Ce.-.:&r -Sri «ea: Trencs:
-------
Inland Spill Classification
Notes
< 1,000 gallons — > MINOR
1,000 -10,000 gallons —> MEDIUM
> 10,000 gallons —> MAJOR
Source: 40 CFR 300.5 (NCP)
SPCC HISTORY
Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation
i
mm
Spill Prevention, Control and Counter-
measures (SPCC), became effective January
10,1974.
>• Derives authority from Section
311 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA).
^^^
SPCC HISTORY
Memorandum of Understanding (MOD)
Developed between the EPA and DOT to
clarify the meanings of Transportation and |
Non-Transportation-Related Facilities'.
-------
Notes
SPCC HISTORY
Amendments to SPCC Regulation
» August 29, 1974:
»• Set forth EPA's policy on civil penalties
for violating Section 311 of CWA.
a March 26,1976:
» Clarified SPCC applicability criteria.
*• Specified that SPCC plans must be
written.
»• Outlined procedures for developing an
SPCC plan for mobile facilities.
WCCHtovy
SPCC HISTORY
OIL
« Major Oil Spill T January 2, 1988
»• 4 million gallon AST collapsed and
spilled 3.8 million gallons of diesel
fuel.
» Approximately 750,000 gallons entered
into the Monongahela River.
» Affected the water supplies of 70
communities across 3 States.
SPCC HISTORY
SPCC Task Force Report
a Focused on prevention of large catastrophic
spills.
s Made recommendations regarding the
Federal SPCC program.
%WjV>^teV?WMj
-------
SPCC HISTORY
PROPOSED RULE
October 22, 1991:
> Developed to clarify that certain
provisions in the regulation are
mandatory.
> May require facilities to notify
EPA for the purpose of developing
a comprehensive inventory of SPCC-
regulated facilities.
Notes
»CC Hoary
SPCC HISTORY
OPA-1990
» Signed into law on August 18, 1990.
« Made significant modifications to Section
311ofCWA.
IWHMwy
OPA KEY PROVISIONS
Expands Federal Role In Response j
Establishes Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund
Requires Contingency Planning (FRP) j
j
Requires Double Hulls I
Provides For Research And Development '
Increases Liabilty For Spills ;
-------
OPA-1990
Liability Caps Can Be Broken
1. Spill was caused by gross negligence, willful
misconduct or the violation of federal safety,
construction, or operating regulations.
2. Failure to report a known spill.
3. Failure or refusal to cooperate with removal actions.
4. Failure to comply with an order Issued under the
CWA or the Intervention on the High Seas Act.
SPCCMtei'V
Notes
112.1
General Applicability
Section 112.1
SPCC applies to:
Non-transportation-related facilities that:
*• Due to their location, could reasonably be
expected to discharge oil into or upon the
navigable waters of the U.S. or adjoining
shorelines.
»• Have a total underground storage capacity
, > 42,000 gallons, or
*• Have a total aboveground storage capacity
> 1,320 gallons, or
> Have a single, aboveground storage tank
with a capacity > 660 gallons.
-------
The'SPCC regulation
Section 112.1
B Establishes procedures, methods, and equipment
to prevent oil discharges into or upon the navigable
waters of the U.S. or adjoining shorelines.
« Does not relieve the owner/operator from
compliance with other existing Federal, f~ -^
State, and Local laws. j OIL j
« Concentrates on prevention, not response to
discharges of oil in 'harmful quantities'.
« Complements existing laws, regulations, rules,
standards, polices and procedures.
Section 112.1
General Information
Organizations that should be considered for current
regulations, standards and codes:
• American Petroleum Institute (API)
• National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)
• American Society of Mechanical Engineers
(ASME)
• American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
• Underwriters Laboratory (UL)
Notes
112.2
Definitions
-------
Important Definitions
. Section 112.2
Source: 40 CFR 110.1 & 111.2
« on I
K Discharge; Spill Event . j
a Harmful Quantity; Applicable Water Quality !
Standards !
K Navigable Waters; Adjoining Shorelines j
« Owner or Operator
« Non-Transportation Related Facility
w Onshore and Offshore Facility
Notes
f.l 112.3
II '
| j Requirements for Preparation and
Implementation of Spill Prevention
Control and Countermeasures Plans
Time Requirements
Section 112.3
Facilities are required to:
• develop a plan within 6 months of
starting operations.
• fully Implement the plan within
1 year of starting operations.
%K&&Wfe^&&&&&^&&^^
-------
Section 112.3
Mobile Facilities
a Must have an SPCC plan prepared in .
accordance with 40 CFR Part 112.7
« No mobile facility can legally operate without
having an SPCC plan implemented.
-------
Notes
112.4
Amendment of SPCC Plans by the
Regional Administrator
Section 112.4
Submitting Plans to EPA
Inspector requests a copy, or
Oil is discharged into or upon the navigable
waters of the U.S. or adjoining shorelines:
• at >1,000 U.S. gallons in a single spill
event, or
• in 'harmful quantities' in two spill
events in any 12 month period.
Section 112.4
Written Reports Include:
» Copy of SPCC plan.
! & Facility name
j s> Owner/operator name,
i
{ & Location of facility.
j « Date of initial operation.
| it Maximum oil storage capacity and average daily
i throughput.
-------
Section 11 2.4
Written Reports (cont.)
KM
I
£ Facility description |
$ Cause(s) of the spill(s). :
» Corrective measures taken. j
$ Additional preventative measures. !
I
$ Other information requested by the RA. j
'"it.* 'A Ptfcr mrr.fndnwM*
Notes
Section 112.4
If the RA Proposes Amendment(s)
s The owner/operator will be notified via
certified mail, and must
make the amendment(s) part of the
plan within 30 days, and
implement the amendment(s) within
6 months.
Section 112.4
Appeals
Informal appeal to RA:
• Written statements or views opposing
the amendment.
Formal appeal to the EPA Administrator:
• Clear, concise statement of the issues.
• Additional information from'any other
person.
-------
Notes
112.5
Amendment of SPCC Plans by
Owners or Operators
Section 112.5
Owner/Operator Amendments
« The owner or operator must review the
facility's SPCC plan every 3 years.
8 The plan shall be amended within 6 months
of the review to include a more effective
technology If:
•• The technology significantly reduces the
likelihood of a spill event at the facility.
» The technology has been .field-proven. .
Section 112.5
Owner/Operator Amendments
« A facility's SPCC plan must be amended
when there is a 'change* in facility design,
construction, operation or maintenance that
materially affects the facility's potential to
discharge oil.
« The amendment(s) must be fully
implemented within 6 months.
-------
Section 112.5
Examples of changes:
a Commission or decommission of tanks.
» Replacement, reconstruction, or movement of
tanks.
& Replacement, reconstruction, or installation of
piping systems.
» Construction or demolition that might alter
secondary containment structures.
» Revision of standard operation or maintenance
procedures at a facility.
112.7
Guidelines for the Preparation
and Implementation of a SPCC
Plans
Notes
Section 112.7
General Information
£ SPCC plans should ce prepared using good
engineering practices, and
ss Have the full approval of management with »
the authority to commit the necessary !M1
resources. J
-------
Section 112.7
General Information (cont.)
Notes
An SPCC plan includes:
»• Predictions of equipment failure.
»• Appropriate containment or
diversionary structures.
112.7 Ptw. freovanon Gul9*'.h«i
Section 112.7
Containment or Diversionary Structures
& For onshore facilities:
— Dikes, berms or retaining walls
sufficiently impervious to contain
the spilled oil.
- Curbing.
- Culverting, gutters or other drain-.
age systems.
- Weirs, booms or other barriers.
- Retention ponds.
- Sorbent materials.
- Vaulted and doubled walled tanks.
2.7 -an V'fuu-ncr
Section 112.7
Containment or Diversionary Structures
& For offshore facilities:
*• Curbing, drip pans.
»• Sumps and collection systems. $
M?;/ Phi P'OKtrJnr
-------
, • • Section 112.7
Containment or Diversionary Structures
Notes
.» If installing staictures or equipment is not
practicable, you must:
»• Maintain a written spill contingency plan
(40CFR109), and
»• Have a written commitment of equipment
and materials to contain and abate a
spill.
III.? Pbn fmuuaon C>Jti«9n«
Section 112.7
Guidelines
'". Facility drainage, onshore. *
'• Bulk storage tanks, onshore. *
i 3. Facility transfer operations, pumping, and
in-plant processes. *
Facility tank car and tank truck loading/
unloading, onshore.
v, Inspection and records.
* Excludes production facilities
Guidelines (cont.)
Section 112.7
i 6. Security.*
i 7. Personnel training and spill prevention
| procedures.
| '•>. Oil production facilities, onshore.
I
. Oil drilling and workover facilities, onshore. |
Oil drilling, production, or workover
facilities, offshore.
* Excludes production facilities
-------
Action 112.7
* Facility Drainage - Onshore
« Drainage from diked storage areas
*• Should have positive restraint.
" »• Should be. manually activated.
•• Should be inspected.
« Drainage from undiked areas
» Should flow to a containment area
a diversionary system.
« Treatment systems
* Should be engineered to prevent overflow.
11?.? rton ?-e3fti«:lor. Ciiiis
Notes
*
JIC
Section 1 1 i
Bulk Storage Tanks - Onshore
a Tanks must be made of materials compatible
with the oil to be stored.
!st There must be secondary containment for all
tanks.
H Oil Storage
4*
>.7
|
1
..«
Section 11 2.7
* Bulk Storage Tanks - Onshore (cent.)
Rainwater from a diked area may bypass in-plant
treatment if:
»• The bypass is normally kept in the closed
position.
»• The discharge is inspected prior to
release.
»• The discharge does not violate applicable
water quality standards.
»• The valve is opened and reseated under
proper supervision.
> Proper records are kept.
-------
Section 112.7
* Bulk Storage Tanks - Onshore (cont.)
Notes
Buried metallic tanks
> Protect from corrosion
•• Pressure test regularly
Partially buried metallic tanks
» Should be avoided unless the buried
portion is protected from corrosion.
Section 112.7
* Bulk Storage Tanks - Onshore (cont.)
s Aboveground tanks
»• Periodic integrity testing.
»• Frequent visual inspections.
» Internal heating coils
» Exhaust should be monitored or treated.
Section 112.7
* Bulk Storage Tanks - Onshore (cont.)
» New and old tanks should be fail safe.
* Leaking tanks should be repaired promptly.
* Portable oil tanks need secondary
containment.
-------
Notes
Section 112.7
* Transfer Operations, Pumping, & In-Plant
Process - Onshore
» Buried pipes should be protected from corrosion.
* Out-of-service or standby status pipes should be
capped or blank flanged.
» Pipe racks should be designed to account for
expansion and minimize corrosion.
•» Aboveground piping and valves should be
inspected tegularly.
6 Warnings must be posted to warn traffic of
aboveground piping. v
•M.t-11
'.-•1.7 f>Un PtKVU
Section 112.7
Tank Car & Tank Truck Loading/Unloading racks
- Onshore
» Facilities must meet the minimum DOT standards.
* Rack areas should have secondary containment to
handle a spill from the largest tank compartment
filled at that location.
.*
* A system should be established to prevent vehicle
departures before disconnecting.
* All tank car and tank truck openings should be
Inspected for leaks before and after loading.
Section 112.7
Inspections and Records
» Inspections should be performed in
accordance with a written procedure.
» Inspection records should be signed by an
appropriate supervisor or inspector.
» Both the written procedures and the
inspection records should be made part of
the facility's SPCC plan for a period of 3
years.
-------
Section 112.7
* Security
Notes
& Facilities should be fenced with entrance tj®
gates locked and/or guarded. »\
B Master flow and drain valves, pump controls,
and loading/unloading connections should
be protected when not in use.
a Facility lighting should aid In spill detection
as well as deter vandals.
* Plan PmpaMk Must have secondary containment.
> lindiked areas should flow to a catchment
basin or holding pond.
» Mus; be visually inspected on. a regular
basis.
-------
Section 112.7
Oil Production Facilities: Bulk Storage Tanks -
Onshore
Tanks should be fail-safe engineered,
including:
» Adequate tank capacities.
»• Overflow equalizing lines Installed
between tanks.
» Vacuum protection.
» Level sensor alarm
Notes
Section 112.7.
Oil Production Facilities: Facility Transfer
Operations - Onshore
Aboveground pipes must be examined
periodically.
» Frequent examination of saltwater disposal
facilities must be conducted.
a The facility must maintain a program of
flowline maintenance.
Section 112.7
Drilling and Workover Facilities - Onshore
a Mobile equipment must be positioned so as
to prevent a spill into the water.
» Blowout prevention assemblies and well
controls should be used.
^
-------
Section 112.7
Drilling, Production, or Workover Facilities -
Offshore
I
Surface and sub-surface shut-in valves should be
easily identifiable.
I a Prior to drilling, a blowout prevention assembly
i and well control system should be installed.
a Extra-ordinary well control measures should be in
place in case of emergencies.
« Sub-marine pipelines should be protected from j.
environmental stress and other activities.
Notes
< '3.7 Plan Prrpaittten OukHKiu
Evaluation of the Plan/Program
» Is your plan current and effective?
x Do your people know what to do when a
spill occurs?
» Does the equipment work?
« Can your people use the equipment
safely and effectively?
a Do they know who to call for help?
PROPOSED RULE
Revision of Section 112.7
• Sectfo/1112.7 • SPCCp/an general requirements.
• Section 112.8 • SPCC plan requirements for
onshore facilities (excluding production
facilities.
• Section 112.9 • SPCC plan requirements for
onshore oil production facilities.
• Section 112.10- SPCC plan requirements for
onshore drilling and workover facilities.
• Section 112.11- SPCC plan requirements for
offshore oil drilling, production, or workover
facilities. .
-------
What to Expect During
an SPCC Inspection
Notes
Who is present at an inspection:
• Facility
- Facility representatlve(s) responsible for
maintaining the SPCC Plan.
• EPA
- EPA OSC
- EPA SPCC Program Representative, or
- Designated EPA Contractor
When can a facility be inspected:
- Facility's may be Inspected because of:
• Spill history
• Complaints
• Official request (State, Local), or
• Without advanced notification
-------
Notes
What will be done at the inspection:
i. Complete and sign Acknowledgement and
Record of SPCC Inspection/Plan Review.
2,. Verify P.E. Certification (signature, reg. #, seal).
3. Verify 3-year Plan review and/or amendment
re-certlflcatlon, If applicable.
4, Site tour/evaluation of effectiveness of the
SPCC Plan.
S* Other site-specific information (site maps, list
of tanks and storage capacity, route of entry
to nearest waterway, storm sewers, photo
documentation, etc.).
112.6
Civil Penalties for Violation
of Oil Pollution Prevention
Regulations
EPA's Goal:
COMPLIANCE
-------
Civil Penalties
» Penalties are determined using the following
factors:
- seriousness of violation.
- economic benefit to violator resulting from
violation.
- degree of culpability involved.
- penalties .for same incident from other agencies.
- violation history.
- efforts by the violator to minimize effects of
discharge.
- economic impact of the penalty on violator.
- any other matters as justice may require.
I12.S CMI P.n«»U!
Notes
Section 112.6
Civil Penalties
The November 4, 1992 Interim Rule amends
both Section 112.6 and 114.1.
•• These sections are now only applicable
to violations occurring prior to 8/18/90.
Violations occurring after 8/18/90 will be
subject to either a Class I or Class II civil
penalty, as outlined in Section 311(b)(6)
of the OPA amended CWA.
Types of Civil Penalties
Section 112.6
Class I Penalties:
» Can not exceed 310,000 per violation.
> Maximum penalty of 525,000.
2. Class II Penalties:
*• Can not exceed 310,000 per day for each
day the violation continues.
» Maximum penalty of $125.000.
?•. DOJ referrals
-------
Ceo
NUMBER OF VIOLATIONS j
i
— ___ !
TVPC I
i
STORAGE CAPACITY ;
SPILLHISTORY i
OUTANCC TO WATERWAY i
POTENTIAL THREAT j
FACILITY TYPE |
I
LEMOTH OF VIOLATION |
PROPOSED PENALTY j
9pH^X ' ;
1 VIOLATION !
FAILURE TO PREPARE PLAN (11U) '
1. OVER 1 MILLION (M)(4U OALIONS)
I ALL ABOVE OROUNO !
1 MINOR SPUL
LEU THAN 26 YARDS
SURFACE WATERS
1. ON-SHORE
2. OIL STORAGE AND COMMERCIAL
X WASTE TREATMENT
4. PIPELINES
S. VEHICLES A RAIL CARS
S YEAR STATUTORY LIMIT !
«1MOO . !
Notes
NUMBER OF VIOLATIONS
TYPE
STORAGE CAPACITY
SPILLHISTORY
DISTANCE TO WATERWAY
POTENTIAL THREAT
FACILITY TYPE
LENOTH OF VIOLATION
PROPOSED PENALTY
.....i ,,,,,, \t; i
ropony XT
1 VIOLATION
FAILURE TO PREPARE PLAN (112J)
1. LESS THAN 80,000 GALLONS AST
2. LESS THAN 42,000 GALLONS UST
NONE
29 TO SO YARDS
SURFACE WATERS/SHORELINE
1. ON4HORE
2. COMMERCIAL
, S YEAR STATUTORY LIMIT
$4,500
VrfJ
| NUMBER OF VIOLATIONS
TYPE
STORAGE CAPACITY
SPILLHISTORY
DISTANCE TO WATERWAY
POTENTIAL THREAT
FACILITY TYPE
LENGTH OF VIOLATION
PROPOSED PENALTY
,,
1 VIOLATION
• FAILURE TO PREPARE PLAN (112J)
138,000 GALLONS AST
NONE
i 200 YARDS
SURFACE WATERS
: 1. ONSHORE
2. INDUSTRIAL
X COMMERCIAL
4, VEHICLES ft RAIL CARS
S YEAR STATUTORY LIMIT
117,300
-------
Notes
Recap of Penalties for Companvs X, Y & 2
COMPANY
Z i
s4-500
PENALTY
PAID
$12,960 .32,000 .$14,040
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
SECTION 4
WHAT TO EXPECT DURING AN
SPCC INSPECTION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND RECORD
OF SPCC INSPECTION/PLAN REVIEW
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
WHAT TO EXPECT DURING AN SPCC INSPECTION
When an SPCC inspector visits your facility, there are a few tips that can
make the inspection proceed smoothly. The inspector will announce him/herself
and ask for the person responsible for the facility SPCC plan. The inspector
should be directed to a person who can present the inspector with the written
SPCC plan and answer questions about the plan. The inspection will start with
the completion of a form called an Acknowledgement and Record of SPCC
Inspection/Plan Review. Important information for the completion of this form
includes the facility address and phone number, owner or operator address and
phone number if different, a company contact and a brief synopsis of the facility
operations. The facility contact will be asked to sign the acknowledgement form,
and a copy will be given to him/her as a record of the inspection.
The inspection is an evaluation of the effectiveness of your written SPCC
plan and the application of that plan at your facility. The SPCC plan must have
been reviewed and certified by a professional engineer, and the inspector will
want to see the PE's registration number, signature and seal on the plan. The
plan must also contain documentation verifying that the Plan was reviewed every
three years. In addition, the inspector will want to verify if the Plan has been
amended as required and that the amendments were certified by a registered PE.
After reviewing the written plan, the inspector will conduct a site tour and
ask specific questions regarding the implementation of the facility Plan. Other
information that will be helpful include a site map, a list of tanks and their storage
capacity, and the location of the nearest navigable waters, storm sewers etc. Any
questions regarding the inspection can be posed to the OSC in charge of the
inspection.
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY - REGION III
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND RECORD OF SPCC/FRP INSPECTION/PLAN REVIEW
SPCC CASE NUMBER: FRP REGIONAL ID#: DATE:
TO: Vincent E. Zenone, OSC/SPCC Coordinator (3HW34)
CC: Linda J. Ziegler, FRP Coordinator (3HW34J (only if FRP applicable)
Inspector's Printed Name/Signature:
Inspection Team Members:
Name/Location of Facility:
Address: , ••••••:
City: Cbunty: ; State: Zip:
Facility Contact/Title:
Telephone Number:
Name of Owner/operator:
Address:
City: State: Zip:
Telephone Number:
* * See pages 12 to 14 for FRP only information
Synopsis of business operations:
Route of entry and estimated distance to waterway:
Acknowledgement:
I acknowledge that an SPCC/FRP inspection of this facility was conducted on trie day of
19
Facility Representative Printed Name/Signature:
NOTE: During this inspection the owner/operator of the facility was asked to provide an extra copy of the SPCC
Plan, which will be submitted with this report to the SPCC Coordinator. An extra copy of the SPCC Plan
was provided to the inspector (Y/N). If no, the owner/operator of the facility has been asked to send a
copy of the SPCC Plan, if available, via certified mail,, return receipt requested, within 14 days of the date
of this inspection to the SPCC Coordinator (mail code 3HW34) at the address on this letterhead (Y/N).
[original of this page to SPCC coordinator, copy to facility representative ]
(8/12/94)
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
SECTION 5
* FACT SHEET: OPA Q's & A's
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Publication 9360.8-01 FS
December 1991
vvEPA
OPAQ's&A's:
Overview of the Oil Pollution
Act of 1990
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
Emergency Response Division OS-210
Quick Reference Fact Sheet
Thousands of oil spills occur in the United States each year. Over the three-year period from 1988 through 1990, the
Federal government received 42,000 notifications of oil discharges - an average of 15,000 per year, or about 40 notifications
per day. In 1990 alone, there were 24 oil spills that exceeded 100,000 gallons, five of which were greater than 1 million
gallons. In 1989. 38 oil spills exceeded 100,000 gallons, including the devastating Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska's Prince
William Sound. In response to the new public awareness of the damaging effects of major oil spills, Congress unanimously
enacted tougher oil spill legislation and, on August 18, 1990, the President signed into law the Oil Pollution Act of 1990
(OPA or the Act).
On October 18,1991, the President issued Executive Order 12777, delegating the authority for implementing provisions
of the OPA to several Federal agencies and departments, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG). These "OPA Q's & A's" are part of a series of fact sheets that provide up-to-date
information on EPA's implementation of the OPA. This first fact sheet provides an overview of the various provisions of
the OPA and the Agency's responsibilities under the new law.
General Overview
Q1. What is the OPA?
A. The OPA (Pub. L. 101-380) is a comprehensive
statute designed to expand oil spill prevention, pre-
paredness, and response capabilities of the Federal
government and industry. The Act establishes a new
liability and compensation regime for oil pollution
incidents in the aquatic environment and provides
the resources necessary for the removal of discharged
oil. The OPA consolidates several existing oil spill
response funds into the Oil Spill Liability Trust
Fund, resulting in a Si-billion fund to be used to
respond to, and provide compensation for damages
caused by, discharges of oil. In addition, the OPA
provides new requirements for contingency planning
both by government and industry and establishes new
construction, manning, and licensing requirements
for tank vessels. The OPA also increases penalties
for regulatory noncompliance, broadens the response
and enforcement authorities of the Federal govern-
ment, and preserves State authority to establish laws
governing oil spill prevention and response.
Q2. How does the OPA affect existing laws and
regulations?
A. The OPA amends section 311 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (the Clean Water Act or
CWA, 33 U.S.C. 1321 et seq), to clarify Federal
response authority, increase penalties for spills,
establish USCG response organizations, require
tank vessel and facility response plans, and provide
for contingency planning in designated areas. Many
of the statutory changes will require corresponding
changes to the National Oil a'nd Hazardous Sub-
stances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), codified
at 40 CFR Part 300. In addition, the OPA repeals
the following statutory provisions and merges the
funds established under these laws with the Trust
Fund: (1) CWA section 311(k); (2) Title III of the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Amendments of
1978 (43 U.S.C. §1811 et seq); (3) section 18(0 of
the Deepwater Port Act of 1974 (33 U.S.C. §1502 et
seq); and (4) section 204(c) of the Trans-Alaska
Pipeline Authorization Act (43 U.S.C. §1651 et seq),
except for amounts necessary to pay remaining
claims. The OPA also makes the Trust Fund
available for actions taken in accordance with the
Intervention on the High Seas Act (33 U.S.C. §1486
et seq). The OPA, however, does not preempt
States' rights to impose additional liability or other
-------
requirements with respect to the discharge of oil
within a State or to any removal activities in
connection with such a discharge.
Q3. Which Federal agencies are responsible for
implementing the OPA?
A. On October 18,1991, the President issued Executive
Order 12777, delegating authority to implement the
OPA to various Federal agencies and departments,
including EPA and the USCG (via the U.S.
Department of Transportation or DOT). Forth-
coming memoranda, of understanding between EPA
and the USCG will address how the two agencies
will interact in carrying out their respective
responsibilities. In general, EPA is responsible for
oil spill prevention, preparedness, and response
activities associated with non-transportation-related
onshore facilities. The Agency has lead responsi-
• bility for implementing many of the OPA provisions
in the inland zone, including revising the NCP,
' developing non-transportation-related facility
response plan regulations, reviewing and approving
facility response plans, designating areas, appointing
Area Committee members, and establishing require-
ments for Area Contingency Plans.
In addition, the DOT (including, in some cases, the
USCG) generally is responsible for oil spill planning
and response activities for tank vessels, transpor-
tation-related onshore facilities, and deepwater ports.
The U.S. Department of Interior generally is
responsible for oil spill planning and response
activities for offshore facilities except deepwater
ports. Under the OPA, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration is developing regula-
tions for natural resource trustees to assess damages
to natural resources caused by oil discharges.
Q4. How are the EPA program offices carrying out
their responsibilities under the OPA?
A. Most OPA provisions delegated to EPA are being
implemented by EPA's Emergency . Response
Division (ERD.), a part of the Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response within the Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response. Within ERD, the
newly created Oil Pollution Response and Abate-
ment Section will play a major role in carrying out
the Agency's responsibilities under the OPA.
Moreover, to coordinate the many efforts required
under the Act. EPA formed the OPA Implementa-
tion Workgroup, chaired by the Director of ERD. A
variety of Headquarters and Regional offices are
represented on this workgroup: EPA Region 2
currently participates as the lead Regional
representative. Within the overall workgroup, a
number of other workgroups are implementing
specific OPA provisions (see Highlight I).
Highlight 1: EPA Workgroups
to Implement the OPA
The Regional Implementation workgroup is
developing recommendations on EPA's expanded
role and responsibilities in preventing and
responding to oil spills.
The Area Contingency Plans workgroup is
studying issues •associated with designating areas '
for which Area Committees and Area
Contingency Plans are to be established.
The Facility Response Plans workgroup, which
has been incorporated into the existing Spill
Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures
(SPCC) Phase Two Workgroup, is developing
regulations for facility response plans, as well as
interim guidance for reviewing such plans.
The NCP Revisions workgroup is developing the
revisions to the NCP required by the OPA. A
subworkgroup has been established to focus on
revising Subpart J to establish procedures for
using chemical agents to respond to oil spills.
The Enforcement workgroup is reviewing EPA
enforcement responsibilities in light of the new
penalty provisions added by the OPA.
The Liner Study workgroup is preparing a report
to Congress on whether liners or secondary
containment should be used to prevent discharges
from onshore facilities.
The Research and Development workgroup is
coordinating EPA's program of oil pollution
research and technology development and
demonstration.
Federal and State Roles
Q5. What is the Federal government's role when
responding to releases of oil?
A. Under section 311(c) of the CWA, as amended by
section 4201(a) of the OPA, the Federal
government must ensure the effective and
immediate removal of a discharge (or a substantial
threat of a discharge) of oil or hazardous substance:
(1) into or on navigable waters and adjoining
shorelines; (2) into or on the waters of the exclusive
economic zone; or (3) that may affect natural
resources of the U.S. In carrying out this provision,
the Federal government may: (1) remove or
arrange for the removal of a discharge, subject to
reimbursement from the responsible party; (2) direct
or monitor all Federal, State, and private actions to
remove a discharge; or (3) remove and, if necessary.
-------
. destroy a vessel discharging, or threatening to
discharge. If the discharge is of such' size or
character as to pose asubstantial threat to the public
health or welfare, the Federal government is
required to direct all public and private efforts to
remove the discharge. For all other discharges, the
Federal government has the discretion to take action,
direct, or monitor public or private actions to
remove the discharge. To facilitate and expedite
emergency responses to discharges' that pose a
substantial threat to the public health or welfare,
OP A section 4201 amends the CWA to exempt the
Federal, government from certain laws governing
contracting procedures and the employment of
personnel. In addition, an amendment to section
311(c) of the CWA provides an exemption from
liability for response costs and damages which result
from actions taken, 6r not taken, by a person
rendering care, assistance, or advice consistent with
the NCP. This exemption does not apply: (1) to a
responsible party; (2) to a response conducted
pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.)\ (3) with respect to personal
injury or wrongful death; or (4) if the person is
grossly negligent or engages in willful misconduct.
The intent of the OPA is to enable the Federal
government to direct responses that are both
immediate and effective. /
Q6. Many States have laws governing oil spill
prevention and response. Does the OPA
preempt State laws?
A. No; section 1018(a) of the OPA specifically provides
that the Act does not preempt State law. States may
impose additional liability (including unlimited
liability), funding mechanisms, requirements for
removal actions, and fines and penalties for
responsible parties. Section 1019 of the OPA
provides States the authority to enforce, on the
navigable waters of the State, OPA requirements for
evidence of financial responsibility. States are also
given access to Federal funds (up to $250,000 per
incident) for immediate removal, mitigation, or
prevention of a discharge, and may be reimbursed by
the Trust Fund for removal and monitoring costs
. incurred during oil spill response and cleanup efforts
that are consistent with the NCP.
Liability and Financial Responsibility I
Q7. What provisions for oil spill liability does the
OPA establish?
A. Title I of the OPA contains liability provisions
governing oil spills modeled after CERCLA and sec-
tion 311 of the CWA. Specifically, section 1002(a)
of the OPA provides that the responsible party for
a vessel or facility from which oil is discharged, or
which poses a substantial threat of a discharge, is
liable for: (1) certain specified damages resulting
from the discharged oil; and (2) removal costs
incurred in a manner consistent with the NCP.
Highlight 2 identifies the types of "damages" that
responsible parties are potentially liable for under
the OPA. Section 1002(d) also provides that if a
responsible party can establish that the removal
costs and damages resulting from an incident were
caused solely by an act or omission of a third party,
the third party will be held liable for such costs and
damages. In these cases, however, the responsible
party is still required to pay the removal costs and
damages resulting from the incident, but is entitled
by subrogation to recover all costs and damages
from the third party or the Trust Fund.
Highlight 2: Damages for Which Responsible
Parties Are Potentially Liable
The scope of damages for which oil dischargers may be
liable under section 1002 of the OPA includes:
• Natural resource damages, including the reasonable
costs of assessing these damages;
• Loss of subsistence use of natural resources;
• Real or personal property damages;
• Net loss of tax and other revenues;
• Loss of profits or earning capacity; and
• Net cost of additional public services provided
during or after removal actions.
Q8. Does the OPA provide defenses to its oil spill
liability provisions?
A. Yes; section 1002(c) of the OPA provides excep-
tions to the statute's liability provisions.. The
exceptions include: (1) discharges of oil authorized
by a permit under Federal, State, or local law; (2)
discharges of oil from a public vessel; or (3) dis-
charges of oil from onshore facilities covered by the
liability provisions of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline
Authorization Act.
In addition, section 1003 of the OPA provides the
responsible party with defenses to liability imposed
under section 1002 of the Act if the responsible
party establishes that the spill was caused solely by:
(1) an act of God; (2) an act of war; (3) an act or
-------
omission of a third party; or (4) any combination of
these events. To prevail in a third-party defense, the
responsible party must prove that it took due care in
handling the oil and took precautions against any
foreseeable acts of the third party and any
foreseeable consequences of those actions. However,
the defenses contained in section 1003 are not
available to responsible parties that: (1) do not
report an incident of which they are aware; (2) do
not cooperate with response officials during removal
actions; or (3) without sufficient cause, do not
comply with an order issued under section 311 of the
CWA, as amended^or the Intervention on the High
Seas Act.
Q9. Does the OPA establish limits on liability?
A. Yes; the OPA establishes significantly higher limits
of liability for tank vessels, facilities, and deepwater
ports than existed previously under section 311 of
the CWA. , Specifically, section 1004 of the OPA
increases the liability for tank vessels larger than
3,000 gross tons to Si,200 per gross ton or $10
million, whichever is greater. Responsible parties at
onshore facilities and deepwater ports are liable for
up to S350 million per spill; holders of leases or
permits for offshore facilities, except deepwater
ports, are liable for up to S75 million per spill, plus
removal costs. Section 1004(d)(l) of the OPA,
however, provides the Federal government with the
authority to adjust, by regulation, the 5350-milIion
liability limit established for onshore facilities,
"taking into account size, storage capacity, oil
throughput, proximity to sensitive areas, type of oil
handled, history of discharges, and other factors
. relevant to risks posed by the class or category of
facility." The Agency is currently assessing the ,
desirability of adjusting the liability limit for onshore
non-transportation-related facilities based on these
factors.
In addition, the OPA establishes the following
conditions under which liability would be unlimited:
(1) discharges caused by gross negligence, willful
misconduct, or violation of Federal safety,
construction, or operating regulations; (2) failure to
report a known spill; (3) failure or refusal to
cooperate in a removal action; or (4) failure or
refusal to comply with an order issued under section
311 of the CWA. as amended, or the Intervention on
the High Seas Act. In addition, the owner or
operator of an Outer Continental Shelf facility, or
vessel carrying oil as cargo from such a facility, is
required to pay for all removal costs incurred by the
U.S. Government or any State or local agency in
connection with a discharge, or substantial threat of
a discharce. of oil.
Q10. What penalties are responsible parties
subject to under the OPA?
A. Section 4301(a) of the OPA amends the CWA to
increase the criminal penalties for failure to notify
the appropriate Federal agency of a discharge.
Specifically, the fine is increased from a maximum
of $10,000 to a maximum of $250,000 for an
individual or $500,000 for an organization. The
maximum prison term is also increased from one
year to five years.
In addition, section 4301 (b) of the OPA amends the
CWA to authorize a civil penalty of $25,000 for
each day of violation or $1,000 per barrel of oil
discharged. These penalties are higher in cases of
gross negligence or willful misconduct. Failure to
comply with a Federal removal order can result in
civil penalties of up to $25,000 for each day of
violation or three times the resulting costs incurred
by the Trust Fund. Under section OPA 4301(c),
criminal penalties can range up to $250,000 and 15
years in prison. EPA and the USCG also have the
authority to administratively assess civil penalties of
up to $125,000 against violators of the Oil Pollution
Prevention Regulations (40 CFR Part 112) or those
responsible for the discharge of oil or hazardous
substances.
Q11. Are all parties regulated under the OPA
required to provide evidence of financial
responsibility?
A. No; owners and operators of onshore facilities .are
not required to maintain financial assurance mech-
anisms. Owners and operators of offshore facilities,
certain vessels, and deepwater ports, however, must
provide evidence of financial responsibility.
Specifically, section 1016 of the OPA requires that
offshore facilities maintain evidence of financial
responsibility of $150 million and vessels and
deepwater ports must provide evidence of financial
responsibility up to the maximum applicable liability
limitation amount. Any vessel subject to this
requirement that cannot produce evidence of
financial responsibility is not allowed to. operate in
U.S. waters. Methods of assuring financial
responsibility under the OPA include evidence of
insurance, surety bond, guarantee, letter of credit, or
qualification as a self-insurer. Also, OPA section
1016(f) provides that claims for removal costs and
damages may be asserted directly against the
guarantor providing evidence of financial
responsibility. ,
Q12. Are there funds available if cleanup costs and
damages cannot be recovered from responsible
parties?
A. Yes; the OPA authorizes the expenditure of funds
from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, established
-------
under section 9509 of the Internal Revenue Act of
1986 (26 U.S..C 9509),-to pay for removal costs
and/or damages resulting from discharges of oil into
U.S. waters or supplement existing sources of
funding. The Trust Fund, which is administered by
the USCG, is based on a five-cent-per-barrel
environmental fee on domestic and imported oil.
The OPA amends section 9509 of the Internal
Revenue Act of 1986 to consolidate funds estab-
lished under other statutes and to increase permitted
levels of expenditures. Specifically, section 9001(a)
of the OPA consolidates the assets and liabilities
remaining with, and the penalties paid pursuant to,
the funds established under: (1) section 311 of the
CWA; (2) section 18(f) of the Deepwater Port Act of
1974; (3) Title III of the Outer Continental Shelf
Lands Act of 1978; and (4) section 204 of the Trans-
Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act (after settlement
of existing claims). The OPA amends the resulting
Trust Fund by expanding permissible expenditures
from S500 million per incident, and a separate S250-
million per incident limit on natural resource claims,
to Si billion per incident and a S500-million per
incident spending limit on natural resource damages.
In addition, the OPA increases the Trust Fund
borrowing limit from S500 million to Si billion.
Oil Spill Preparedness and Prevention
Q13. How will implementation of the OPA help oil
spill planning and prevention efforts?
A. Section 4202 of the OPA strengthens planning and
prevention activities by: (1) providing for the
establishment of spill contingency plans for all areas
of the U.S.: (2) mandating the development of
response plans for individual tank vessels and certain
facilities; and (3) providing requirements for spill
removal equipment and periodic inspections. These
efforts are intended to result in more prompt and
effective cleanup or containment of oil spills, thereby
preventing spills from becoming larger and reducing
the amount of damage caused by oil spills.
The development of Area Contingency Plans will
assist the Federal government in planning response
activities. In addition, owners and operators of tank
vessels, offshore facilities, and any onshore facilities'
that because of their location could cause substantial
harm to the environment from a discharge, are re-
quired to prepare and submit to the Federal govern-
ment plans for responding to discharges, including a
worst case discharge or a threat of such discharge.
If response plans are not developed and approved as
required by section 311(j)(5) of the CWA, as
amended by the OPA, the tank vessel or facility will
be prohibited from handling, storing, or transporting
oil unless the tank vessel or facility submits a plan
to the Federal government and receives temporary
approval to continue operations (see Question #16
of this fact sheet). In addition, containment booms.
skimmers, vessels, and other major spill removal
equipment must be inspected .periodically; tank
vessels must carry removal equipment that uses the
.best technology 'economically feasible and is
consistent with the safe operation of (he vessel.
Moreover, the higher limits on liability and the
broader scope of damages for which dischargers may
be liable under the OPA should serve as added
incentives for facilities and vessels to prevent spills.
In addition, EPA is taking the lead or participating
in several studies and research and development
efforts that will aid in spill prevention. Other
requirements of the OPA being implemented by the
USCG -- such as establishing a National Response
Unit and District Response Groups and new
standards for tank vessel construction, crew
licensing, and manning - also will help to prevent
or mitigate spills.
Q14. What are Area Committees and Area Contin-
gency Plans?
A. Area Committees, to be composed of qualified
Federal, State, and local officials, will be created to
. develop Area Contingency Plans. At a minimum,
Area Contingency Plans are intended to ensure the
removal of a worst case discharge, and to mitigate
or prevent a substantial threat of such a discharge,
from a vessel or facility in or near the area covered
by the plan. In the case of an onshore facility, a
worst case scenario is defined as the largest
foreseeable discharge under adverse weather
conditions. Area Contingency Plans will describe
areas of special environmental importance, outline
the responsibilities of government agencies and
facility or vessel operators in the event of a spill,
and detail procedures on the coordination of
response plans and equipment. In accordance with
Executive Order 12777, EPA is responsible for
reviewing and approving Area Contingency Plans for
the inland zone, whereas the USCG has similar
responsibilities for the coastal zone.
Q15. Does the OPA require onshore facilities to
prepare and submit a facility response plan?
A. Yes; section 4202 of the OPA amends section
311(j)(5) of the CWA to require the owner or
operator of a tank vessel, offshore facility, and
• certain onshore facilities to prepare and submit to
the Federal government a plan for responding, to
the maximum extent practicable, to a worst case
discharge, or substantial threat of such a discharge,
of oil or hazardous substances. Specifically, OPA
-------
section 4202(a)(6) revises CWA section 311(j)(5) to
require the owner or operator of an onshore facility
that, because of its location, could reasonably be
. expected to cause "substantial harm" to the
environment as the result of an oil discharge, to
submit a response plan to the Federal government.
The OPA revisions to CWA section 311(j)(5) also
require the Federal government to review and either
approve, or require amendments to, the response
plans of tank vessels, offshore facilities, and those
onshore facilities that could reasonably be expected
to cause significant and substantial harm to the
environment from a discharge. Under Executive
Order 12777, the President has delegated the
authority to review and approve response plans, for
non-transponation-related onshore facilities to EPA.
Q16. What deadlines does the OPA place on the
preparation and submission of facility response
plans?
A. Section 4202(b) of the OPA establishes deadlines for
the preparation and approval of facility response
plans. Regulations addressing facility response plans
are required to be promulgated 24 months after the
date of enactment of the OPA (i.e., August 18,
1992). Owners and operators of affected facilities
are required to prepare and submit their plans 30
months after the date of enactment (i.e., February
18, 1993). Section 4202(b) of the OPA also states
that if the owner or operator of a facility required to
submit
-------
To ensure that the USCG can identify vessel per-
sonnel with motor vehicle offenses related to the use
of alcohol and drugs, OPA section 4101 requires
anyone applying for a license, certificate of registry,
or merchant mariners' document to provide a copy
of their driving record obtained from the National
Driver Registry. This requirement is intended to
provide background information on potential vessel
personnel with motor vehicle offenses related to the
use of alcohol and drugs. Applicants must also
submit to drug testing. Further,. OPA section 4103
provides additional authority for the expeditious
suspension of licenses and documents of merchant
mariners suspected of alcohol or drug abuse. OPA
section 4104 provides authority for the orderly
removal or relief of a vessel master or individual in
charge of the vessel suspected of being under the
influence of alcohol or a dangerous drug. The
inclusion of these provisions reflects the concern that
alcohol or drug impairment are serious threats to
safe vessel operation.
Section 4114 of the OPA also requires that new tank
vessel manning standards be set, both for U.S. and
foreign tank vessels. For U.S. tank vessels, licensed
seamen are not permitted to work more than 15
hours in any 24-hour period, or more than 36 hours
in any 72-hour period. Forthcoming regulations will
designate the conditions under which tank vessels
may operate with the autopilot engaged or the
engine room unattended. Crew members also must
be trained in maintenance of the navigation and
safety features of the tank vessel. For foreign tank
vessels, a USCG review will determine whether tank
vessel safety practices are at least the equivalent of
U.S. requirements. Tank vessels that do not satisfy
this standard will be prohibited from entering U.S.
waters. These new requirements, emanating from
issues raised in the investigation of the Exxon Valdez
spill, should lead to better trained and more well-
rested crews on tank vessels.
Other Provisions
Q20. What oil pollution research and development
efforts are-mandated by the OPA?
A. Section 7001 of the OPA requires that an
interagency committee be established to coordinate
the establishment of a program for conducting oil
pollution research, technology development, and
demonstration.' This program is specifically required
by the statute to provide research, development, and
demonstration in a number of areas, including:
• Innovative oil pollution technologies (e.g.,
development of improved tank vessel design or
improved mechanical, chemical, or biological
systems or processes);
• Oil pollution technology evaluation (e.g.,
controlled field testing and development of
testing protocols and standards);
• Oil pollution effects research (e.g., development
of improved fate and transport models);
• Marine simulation research (e.g., use and
application of geographic and vessel response
simulation models); and
• Simulated environmental testing (e.g.^ use of the
Oil and Hazardous Materials Simulated
Environmental Test Tank).
Q21. What provisions are included in the OPA to
protect Alaska's Prince William Sound?
A. title V of the OPA contains severer provisions
aimed at preventing future spills in Prince William
Sound. Specifically, the OPA: (1) authorizes the
Prince William Sound Oil Recovery Institute in
Cordova, Alaska; (2) establishes Oil Terminal
Oversight and Monitoring Committees for Prince
William Sound and Cook Inlet; (3) authorizes and
appropriates funds for construction of a navigation
light on Bligh Reef; and (4) requires all tank vessels
in Prince William Sound to be under the direction
and control of a pilot, who cannot be a member of
the crew of the tank vessel, licensed by the Federal
government and the State of- Alaska. In addition,
section 8103 of the OPA establishes a Presidential
Task Force on the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System.
The Task Force will conduct a comprehensive audit
of the pipeline system (including the terminal in
Valdez, Alaska) to assess compliance with
applicable laws.
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency (OS-120)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
First-Class Mail
Postage and Fees paid
EPA
Permit No. G-35
-------
FACILITY RESPONSE PLAN (FRP)
COURSE MODULE
EMERGENCY
RESPONSE
TtAU ,
PARTB
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
SECTION 1
* SPGC/FRP OUTREACH CONTACT NUMBERS
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
SPCC/FRP OUTREACH:
SPILL PREVENTION CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURE
FACILITY RESPONSE PLAN
WHO CAN YOU CALL?
FRPInfoline 215-597-9562
SPCC/OPA Hotline 202-260-2342
National Response Center 800-424-8802
Region III Oil Personnel, Their Title and Phone Extension:
Dave Wright, Chief, Oil and Title III Section-597-5998
Linda Ziegler, Oil Program/FRP Coordinator-597-1395
Regina Starkey, Oil/SPCC Enforcement Coordinator-597-1395
Robert Sanchez, Oil Inspector-215-597-1357
Michael Welsh, P.E., Oil Inspectoral5-597-3152
Paula Curtin, Oil/SPCC Enforcement Specialist-304-234-0256
Bernie Stepanski, Investigator—597-3184
Frank Cosgrove, SPCC Oil Inspector-597-1357
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
SECTION 2
* MOST COMMONLY USED
CWA-OPA-SPCC ACRONYMS
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
COMMONLY USED CWA-OPA-SPCC ACRONYMS
ACP
AST
CERCLA
CWA
DOj
DOT
EPA
ERNS
FRP
MOU
NCP
NPDES
NRC
NRT
OPA
PE
RA
RCP
RCRA
RQ
SIC
SPCC
USCG
UST
WHPA
Area Contingency Plan
Aboveground Storage Tank
Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, & Liability Act of 1980
Clean Water Act
Department of Justice
Department of Transportation
United State Environmental Protection Agency
Emergency Response Notification System
Facility Response Plan
Memorandum of Understanding
National Contingency Plan
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
National Response Center
National Response Team
Oil Pollution Act of 1990
Professional Engineer
Regional Administrator
Regional Contingency Plan
Resource Conservation & Recovery Act
Reportable Quantity
Standard Industrial Classification (Code)
Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (Plan)
United States Coast Guard
Underground Storage Tank
Wellhead Protection Area
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
SECTION 3
* FACT SHEET: OPA Q's & A's
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Publication 9360.8-01 FS
[December 1991
vvEPA
OPA Q's & A's:
Overview of the Oil Pollution
Act of 1990
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
Emergency Response Division OS-210
Quick Reference Fact Sheet
Thousands of oil spills occur in the United States each year. Over the three-year period from 1988 through 1990, the
Federal government received 42,000 notifications of oil discharges -- an average of 15,000 per year, or about 40 notifications
per day. In 1990 alone, there were 24 oil spills that exceeded 100,000 gallons, five of which were greater than 1 million
gallons. In 1989, 38 oil spills exceeded 100,000 gallons, including the devastating Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska's Prince
William Sound. In response to the new public awareness of the damaging effects of major oil spills, Congress unanimously
enacted tougher oil spill legislation and, on August 18, 1990, the President signed into law the Oil Pollution Act of 1990
(OPA or the Act).
On October 18,1991, the President issued Executive Order 12777, delegating the authority for implementing provisions
of the OPA to several Federal agencies and departments, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG). These "OPA Q's & A's" are pan of a series of fact sheets that provide up-to-date
information on EPA's implementation of the OPA This first fact sheet provides an overview of the various provisions of
the OPA and the Agency's responsibilities under the new law.
General Overview
Q1. What is the OPA?
A. The OPA (Pub. L. 101-380) is a comprehensive
statute designed to expand oil spill prevention, pre-
paredness, and response capabilities of the Federal
government and industry. The Act establishes a new
liability and compensation regime for oil pollution
incidents in the aquatic environment and provides
the resources necessary for the removal of discharged
oil. The OPA consolidates several existing oil spill
response funds into the Oil Spill Liability Trust
Fund, resulting in a Si-billion fund.to be used to
respond to, and provide compensation for damages
caused by, discharges of oil. In addition, the OPA
provides new requirements for contingency planning
both by government and industry and establishes new
construction, manning, and licensing requirements
for tank vessels. The OPA also increases penalties
for regulatory noncompliance, broadens the response
and enforcement authorities of the Federal govern-
ment, and preserves State authority to establish laws
governing oil spill prevention and response.
Q2. How does the OPA affect existing laws and
regulations?
A. The OPA amends section 311 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (the Clean Water Act or
CWA, 33 U.S.C. 1321 et seq), to clarify Federal
response authority, increase penalties for spills,
establish USCG response organizations, require
tank vessel and facility response plans, and provide
for contingency planning in designated areas. Many
of the statutory changes will require corresponding
changes to the National Oil and Hazardous Sub-
stances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), codified
at 40 CFR Part 300. In addition, the OPA repeals
the following statutory provisions and merges the
funds established under these laws with the Trust
Fund: (1) CWA section 311(k); (2) Title III of the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Amendments of
1978 (43 U.S.C. §1811 et seq); (3) section 18(f) of
the Deepwater Port Act of 1974 (33 U.S.C. §1502 et
seq); and (4) section 204(c) of the Trans-Alaska
Pipeline Authorization Act (43 U.S.C. §1651 et seq),
except for amounts necessary to pay remaining
claims. The OPA also makes the' Trust Fund
available for actions taken in accordance with the
Intervention on the High Seas Act (33 U.S.C. §1486
et seq). The OPA, however, does not preempt
States' rights to impose additional liability or other
-------
requirements with respect to the discharge of oil
within a State or to any removal activities in
connection with such a discharge.
03. Which Federal agencies are responsible for
implementing the QPA?
A. On October 18,1991. the President issued Executive
Order 12777, delegating authority to implement the
OPA to various Federal agencies and departments,
including EPA and the USCG (via the U.S.
Department of Transportation or DOT). Forth-
coming memoranda of understanding between EPA
and the USCG will address how the two agencies
will interact "in carrying out their respective
responsibilities. In general, EPA is responsible for
oil spill prevention, preparedness, and response
activities associated with non-transportation-related
onshore facilities. The Agency has lead responsi-
bility for implementing many of the OPA provisions
in the inland zone, including revising the NCP,
" developing non-transportation-related facility
response plan regulations, reviewing and approving
facility response plans, designating areas, appointing
.Area Committee members, and establishing require-
ments for Area Contingency Plans.
In addition, the DOT (including, in some cases, the
USCG) generally is responsible for oil spill planning
and response activities for tank vessels, transpor-
tation-related onshore facilities, and deepwater ports.
The U.S. Department of Interior generally is
responsible for oil spill planning and response
activities for offshore facilities except deepwater
ports. Under the OPA, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration is developing regula-
tions for natural resource trustees to assess damages
to natural resources caused by oil discharges.
Q4. How are the EPA program offices carrying out
their responsibilities under the OPA?
A. Most OPA provisions delegated to EPA are being
implemented by EPA's Emergency Response
Division (ERD), a part of the Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response within the Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response. Within ERD, the
newly created Oil Pollution Response and Abate-
ment Section will play a major role in carrying out
the Agency's responsibilities under the OPA.
Moreover, to coordinate the many efforts required
under the Act, EPA formed the OPA Implementa-
tion Workgroup, chaired by the Director of ERD. A
variety of Headquarters and Regional offices are
represented on this workgroup; EPA Region 2
currently participates as the lead Regional.
representative. Within the overall workgroup, a
number of other workgroups are implementing
specific OPA provisions (see Highlight 1).
Highlight 1: EPA Workgroups
to Implement the OPA
The Regional Implementation workgroup is
developing recommendations'on EPA's expanded
role and responsibilities in preventing and
responding to oil spills.
The Area Contingency Plans workgroup is
studying issues associated with designating areas
for which Area Committees and Area
Contingency Plans are to be established.
The Facility Response Plans workgroup, which
has been incorporated into the existing Spill
Prevention, .Control, and Countermeasures
(SPCC) Phase Two Workgroup, is developing
regulations for facility response plans, as well as
interim guidance for reviewing such plans.
The NCP Revisions workgroup is developing the
revisions to the NCP required by the OPA. A
subworkgroup has been established to focus on
revising Subpart J to establish procedures for
using chemical agents to respond to oil spills.
The Enforcement workgroup is reviewing EPA
enforcement responsibilities in light of the new
penalty provisions added by the OPA.
The Liner Study workgroup is preparing a report
to Congress on whether liners or secondary
containment should be used to prevent discharges
from onshore facilities.
The Research and Development workgroup is
coordinating EPA's program of oil pollution
research and technology development and
demonstration.
Federal and State Roles
Q5. What is the Federal government's role when
responding to releases of ojl?
A. Under section 311(c) of the CWA, as amended by
section 4201 (a) of the OPA, the Federal
government must ensure the effective and
immediate removal of a discharge (or a substantial
threat of a discharge) of oil or hazardous substance:
(1) into or on navigable waters and adjoining
shorelines; (2) into or on the waters of the exclusive
economic zone; or (3) that may affect natural
resources of the U.S. In carrying out this provision,
the Federal government may: (1) remove or
arrange for the removal of a discharge, subject to
reimbursement from the responsible party; (2) direct
or monitor all Federal, State, and private actions to
remove a discharge; or (3) remove and, if necessary,
-------
destroy a vessel discharging, or threatening to
discharge. If the discharge is of such size or
character as to pose a substantial threat to the public
health or welfare, the Federal government is
required to direct all public and private efforts to
remove the discharge. For all other discharges, the
Federal government has the discretion to take action,
direct, or monitor public or private actions to
remove the discharge. To facilitate and expedite
emergency responses to discharges that pose a
substantial threat to the public health or welfare,
OP A section 4201 amends the CWA to exempt the
Federal - government from certain laws governing
contracting procedures and the employment of
personnel. In addition, an amendment to section
311(c) of the CWA provides an exemption from
liability for response costs and damages which result
from actions taken, or not taken, by a person
rendering care, assistance, or advice consistent with
the NCP. This exemption does not apply: (1) to a
responsible party; (2) to a response conducted
pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.)\ (3) with respect to personal
injury or wrongful death; or (4) if the person is
grossly negligent or engages in willful misconduct.
The intent of the OPA is to enable the Federal
government to direct responses that are both
immediate and effective.
Q6. Many States have laws governing oil spill
prevention and response. Does the OPA
preempt State laws?
A. No; section 1018(a) of the OPA specifically provides
that the Act does not preempt State law. States may
impose additional liability (including unlimited
liability), funding mechanisms, requirements for
removal actions, and fines and penalties for
responsible parties. . Section 1019 of the OPA
provides States the authority to enforce, on the
navigable waters of the State, OPA requirements for
evidence of financial responsibility. States are also
given access to Federal funds (up to 5250,000 per
incident) for immediate removal, mitigation, or
prevention of a discharge, and may be reimbursed by
the Trust Fund for removal and monitoring costs
incurred during oil spill response and cleanup efforts
that are consistent with the NCP.
Liability and Financial Responsibility
Q7. What provisions for oil spill liability does the
OPA establish?
A. Title I of the OPA contains liability provisions
governing oil spills modeled after CERCLA and sec-
tion. 311 of the CWA. Specifically, section 1002(a)
of the OPA provides that the responsible party for
a vessel or facility from which oil is discharged, or
which poses a substantial threat of a discharge, is
liable for: (1) certain specified damages resulting
from the discharged oil; and (2) removal costs
incurred in a manner consistent with the NCP.
Highlight 2 identifies the types of "damages" that
responsible parties are potentially liable for under
the OPA. Section 1002(d) also provides that if a
responsible party can establish that the removal
costs and damages resulting from an incident were
caused solely by an act or omission of a third party,
the third party will be held liable for such costs and-
damages. In these cases, however, the responsible
party is still required to pay the removal costs and
damages resulting from the incident, but is entitled
by subrogation to recover all costs and damages
from the third party or the Trust Fund.
Highlight 2: Damages for Which Responsible
Parties Are Potentially Liable
The scope of damages for which oil dischargers may be
liable under section 1002 of the OPA includes:
• Natural resource damages, including the reasonable
costs of assessing these damages;
• Loss of subsistence use of natural resources;
• Real or personal property damages;
• Net loss of tax and other revenues;
• Loss of-profits or earning capacity; and
• Net cost of additional public services provided
during or after removal actions.
Q8. Does the OPA provide defenses to its oil spill
liability provisions?.
A. Yes; section 1002(c) of the OPA provides excep-
tions to the statute's liability provisions. The
exceptions include: (1) discharges of oil authorized
by a permit under Federal. State, or local law; (2)
discharges of oil from a public vessel; or (3) dis-
charges of oil from onshore facilities covered by the
liability provisions of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline
Authorization Act.
In addition, section 1003 of the OPA provides the
responsible party with defenses to liability imposed
under section 1002 of the Act if the responsible
party establishes that the spill was caused solely by:
(1) an act of God; (2) an act of war; (3) an act or
-------
omission of a third party; or (4) any combination of
these events: To prevail in a third-party defense, the
responsible party must prove that it took due care in
handling the oil and took precautions against any
foreseeable acts of the third party. and any
foreseeable consequences of those actions. However,
the defenses, contained in section 1003 are not
available to responsible parties that: (1) do not
report an incident of which they are aware; (2) do
not cooperate with, response officials during removal
actions; or (3) without sufficient cause, do not
comply with an order issued under section 311 of the
CWA, as amended, or the Intervention on the High
Seas Act. ~
09. Does the OPA establish limits on liability?
A. Yes; the OPA establishes significantly higher limits
of liability for tank vessels, facilities, and deepwater
ports than existed previously under section 311 of
the CWA. Specifically, section 1004 of the OPA
increases the liability for tank vessels larger than
3,000 gross tons to Sl,200 per gross ton or SlO
million, whichever is greater. Responsible panics at
onshore facilities and deepwater ports are liable for
up to S350 million per spill; holders of leases or
permits for offshore facilities, except deepwater
ports, are liable for up to 315 million per spill, plus
removal costs. Section 1004(d)(l) of the OPA,
however, provides the Federal government with the
authority to adjust, by regulation, the S350-million
liability limit established for onshore facilities,
"taking into account size, storage capacity, oil
throughput, proximity to sensitive areas, type of oil
handled, history of discharges, and other factors
relevant to risks posed by the class or category of
facility." The Agency is currently assessing the
desirability of adjusting the liability limit for onshore
non-transportation-related facilities based on these
factors.
In addition, the OPA establishes the following
conditions under which liability would be unlimited:
(1) discharges caused by gross negligence, willful
misconduct, or violation of Federal safety,
construction, or operating regulations; (2) failure to
report a known spill; (3) failure or refusal to
cooperate in a removal action; or (4) failure or
refusal to comply with an order issued under section
311 of the CWA. as amended, or the Intervention on
the High Seas Act. In addition, the owner or
operator of an Outer Continental Shelf facility, or
vessel carrying oil as cargo from such a facility, is
required to pay for all removal costs incurred by the
U.S. Government or any State or local agency in
connection with a discharge, or substantial threat of
a discharce, of oil.
Q10. What penalties are responsible parties
subject to under the OPA?
A. Section 4301 (a) of the OPA amends the CWA to
increase the criminal penalties for failure to notify
the appropriate Federal agency of a discharge.
Specifically, the fine is increased from a maximum
of $10,000 to a maximum of $250,000 for an
individual or $500,000 for an organization. The
maximum prison term is also increased from one
year to five years.
In addition, section 4301(b) of the OPA amends the
CWA to authorize a civil penalty of $25,000 for
each day of violation or $1,000 per barrel of 'oil
discharged. These penalties are higher in cases of
gross negligence or willful misconduct. Failure to
comply with a Federal removal order can result in
civil penalties of up to $25,000 for each day of
violation or three times the resulting costs incurred
by the Trust Fund. Under section OPA 4301 (c),
criminal penalties can range up to $250,000 and 15
years in prison. EPA and the USCG also have the
authority to administratively assess civil penalties of
up to $125,000 against violators of the Oil Pollution
Prevention Regulations (40 CFR Part 112) or those .
responsible for the discharge of oil or hazardous
substances.
Q11. Are all parties regulated under the OPA
required to provide evidence of financial
responsibility?
A. No; owners and operators of onshore facilities are
not required to maintain financial assurance mech-
anisms. Owners and operators of offshore facilities,
certain vessels, and deepwater ports, however, must
provide evidence of financial responsibility.
Specifically, section 1016 of the OPA requires that
offshore facilities maintain evidence of financial
responsibility of S150 million and vessels and
deepwater ports must provide evidence of financial
responsibility up to the maximum applicable liability
limitation amount. Any vessel subject to this
requirement that cannot produce evidence of
financial responsibility is not allowed to operate in
U.S. waters. Methods of assuring financial
responsibility under the OPA include evidence of
insurance, surety bond, guarantee, letter of credit, or
qualification as a self-insurer. Also, OPA section
1016(f) provides that claims for removal costs and
damages may be asserted directly against the
guarantor providing evidence .of financial
responsibility.
Q12. Are there funds available If cleanup costs and
damages cannot be recovered from responsible
parties?
A. Yes; the OPA authorizes the expenditure of funds
from the Oil Spill Liabilitv Trust Fund, established
-------
under section 9509 of the Internal Revenue Act of
1986 (26 U.S.C 9509), -to pay for removal costs
and/or damages resulting from discharges of oil into
U.S. waters or supplement existing sources of
funding. The Trust Fund, which is administered by
the USCG, is based on a five-cent-per-barrel
environmental fee on domestic and imported oil.
The OPA amends section 9509 of the Internal
Revenue Act of 1986 to consolidate funds estab-
lished under other statutes and to increase permitted
levels of expenditures. Specifically, section 9001(a)
of the OPA consolidates the assets and liabilities
remaining with, and the penalties paid pursuant to,
the funds established under: (1) section 311 of the
CWA; (2) section 18(0 of the Deepwater Port Act of
1974; (3) Title III of the Outer Continental Shelf
Lands Act of 1978; and (4) section 204 of the Trans-
Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act (after settlement
of existing claims). The OPA amends the resulting
Trust Fund by expanding permissible expenditures
from S500 million per incident, and a separate S250-
million per incident limit on natural resource claims,
to Si billion per incident and a S500-million per
incident spending limit on natural resource damages.
In addition, the OPA increases the Trust Fund
borrowing limit from S500 million to Si billion.
Oil Spill Preparedness and Prevention
Q13. How will Implementation of the OPA help oil
spill planning and prevention efforts?
A. Section 4202 of the OPA strengthens planning and
prevention activities by: (1) providing for the
establishment of spill contingency plans for all areas
of .the U.S.; (2) mandating the development of
response plans for individual tank vessels and certain
facilities; and (3) providing requirements for spill
removal equipment and periodic inspections. These
efforts are intended to result in more prompt and
effective cleanup or containment of oil spills, thereby
preventing spills from becoming larger and reducing
the amount of damage caused by oil spills.
The development of Area Contingency Plans will
"assist the Federal government in planning response
activities. In addition, owners and operators of tank
vessels, offshore facilities, and any onshore facilities
that because of their location could cause substantial
harm to the environment from a discharge, are re-
quired to prepare and submit to the Federal govern-
ment plans for responding to discharges, including a
worst case discharge or a threat of such discharge.
If response plans are not developed and approved as
required by section 311(j)(5) of the CWA, as
amended by the OPA, the tank vessel or facility will
be prohibited from handling, storing, or transporting
oil unless the tank vessel or facility submits a plan
to the Federal government and receives temporary
approval to continue operations (see Question #16
of this fact sheet). In addition, containment booms.
skimmers, vessels, and other major spill removal
equipment must be inspected periodically; tank
vessels must carry removal equipment that uses the
best technology economically feasible and is
consistent with the safe operation, of ihe vessel.
Moreover, the higher limits on liability and the
broader scope of damages for which dischargers may
be liable under the OPA should serve as added
incentives for facilities and vessels to prevent spills.
In addition, EPA is taking the lead or participating
in several studies and research and development.
efforts that will aid in spill prevention. Other
requirements of the OPA being implemented by the
USCG -- such as establishing a National Response
Unit and District Response Groups and new
standards for tank vessel construction, crew
licensing, and manning - also will help to prevent
or mitigate spills.
Q14. What are Area Committees and Area Contin-
gency Plans?
A. Area Committees, to be composed of qualified
Federal, State, and local officials, will be created to
develop Area Contingency Plans. At a minimum,
Area Contingency Plans are intended to ensure the
removal of a worst case discharge, and to mitigate
or prevent a substantial threat of such a discharge,
from a vessel or facility in or near the area covered
by the plan. In the case of an onshore facility, a
worst case scenario is defined as the largest
foreseeable discharge under adverse weather
conditions. Area Contingency Plans will describe
areas of special environmental importance, outline
the responsibilities of government agencies and
facility or vessel operators in the event of a spill,
and detail procedures on the coordination of
response plans and equipment. In accordance with
Executive Order 12777, EPA is responsible for
reviewing and approving Area Contingency Plans for
the inland zone, wjiereas the USCG has similar
responsibilities for the coastal zone.
Q15. Does the OPA require onshore facilities to
prepare and submit a facility response plan?
A. Yes; section 4202 of the OPA amends section
311(j)(5) of the CWA to require the owner or
operator of a tank vessel, offshore facility, and
certain onshore facilities to prepare and submit to
the Federal government a plan for responding, to
the maximum extent practicable, to a worst case
discharge, or substantial threat of such a discharge,
• of oil or hazardous substances. Specifically, OPA
-------
section 4202(a)(6) revises CWA section 311(j)(5) to
require the owner or operator of an onshore facility
that, because of its location, could reasonably be
expected to cause "substantial harm" to the
environment as the result of an oil discharge, to
submit a response plan to the Federal government.
The OPA revisions to CWA section 311(j)(5) also
require the Federalgovernment to review and either
approve, or require amendments to, the response
plans of tank vessels, offshore facilities, and those
onshore facilities that could reasonably be expected
to cause significant and substantial harm to the
environment from a discharge. Under Executive
^Order 12777, the President has delegated the
authority to review and approve response plans for
non-transportation-related onshore facilities to EPA.
Q16. What deadlines does the OPA place on the
preparation and submission of facility response
plans?
A. Section 4202(b) of the OPA establishes deadlines for
the preparation and approval of facility response
plans. Regulations addressing facility response plans
are required to be promulgated 24 months after the
date of enactment of the OPA (i.e., August 18,
1992). Owners and operators of affected facilities
are required to prepare and submit their plans 30
months after the date of enactment (i.e., February
18, 1993). Section 4202(b) of the OPA also states
that if the owner or operator of a facility required to
submit a plan has not done so by the deadline, that
facility must stop handling, storing, or transporting
oil. Furthermore, a facility required to prepare and
submit a response plan may not handle, store, or
transport oil unless: (1) the plan has been approved
(when plan approval is required); and (2) the facility
is operating in compliance with the plan. EPA may
authorize a facility which has submitted a plan to
operate without approval for up to two years if the
owner or operator certifies the availability of
personnel and equipment necessary to respond to a
worst case discharge or the substantial threat of such
a discharge.
Q17. What types of information must facility
response plans include?
A. The OPA requires owners or operators of a facility
to submit a response plan that is: (1) consistent
with the NCP and Area Contingency Plans; (2)
updated periodically; and (3) resubmitted for
approval with each significant change. Highlight 3
provides additional information that must be
included in the facility response plan. In conjunction
with the SPCC Phase II workgroup, the Facility
Response Plans workgroup is making preparations to
meet with trade associations representing the
regulated community to provide information and
seek comments on the possible contents, the level of
Highlight 3: Information That Must be
Included in Facility Resporise 1'lans
OPA section 4202(a) requires that each facility response
plan, at a minimum:
• Identify the individual with full authority to
implement removal actions, and requires immediate
communications between that individual, the
appropriate Federal official, and those providing
response personnel and equipment:
• Identify and ensure the availability of private
personnel and equipment necessary to remove to
the maximum extent practicable a worst case
discharge (including a discharge resulting from fire
or explosion), and to mitigate or prevent a
substantial threat of such a discharge; and
/
• Describe the training, equipment testing, periodic
unannounced drills, and response actions of persons
on the vessel or at the facility, to be carried out
under the plan to ensure the safety of the vessel or
facility and to mitigate or prevent the discharge, or
the substantial threat of a discharge.
detail, and guidance that may be useful for
preparing response plans. " ,.
Q18. Does the OPA contain provisions that address
tank vessel construction?
A. Yes; a major spill prevention feature of the OPA is
the requirement that tank vessels be equipped with
double hulls. Specifically, under section 4115 of the
OPA, newly constructed tank vessels must be
equipped with double hulls, with the exception of
vessels used only to respond to discharges of oil or
hazardous substances. In addition, newly
constructed tank vessels less than 5,000 gross tons
are exempt from the double-hull requirement if they
are equipped with a double containment system
proven to be as effective as a double hull for the
prevention of a discharge of oil. Existing tankers
without double hulls are to be phased out by size,
age, and design beginning in 1995, and are required
to be escorted by two towing vessels in specially
designated high-risk areas. Most tankers without
double hulls will be banned by 2015.
Q19. What other OPA requirements are designed to
prevent oil spills from tank vessels?
A. The OPA contains additional provisions that are
intended to prevent tank vessel spills from
occurring, including: (1) strict licensing require-
ments; and (2) manning and safety standards.
-------
To ensure that the USCG can identify vessel per-
sonnel with motor vehicle offenses related to the use
of alcohol and drugs, OPA section 4101 requires
anyone applying for a license, certificate of registry,
or merchant mariners' document to provide a copy
,of their driving record obtained from the National
Driver Registry. This requirement is intended to
provide background information on potential vessel
personnel with motor vehicle offenses related to the
use of alcohol and drugs. Applicants must also
submit to drug testing. Further,. OPA section 4103
provides additional authority for the expeditious
suspension of licenses and documents of merchant
mariners suspected of alcohol or drug abuse. OPA
section 4104 provides authority for the orderly
removal or relief of a vessel master or individual in
charge of the vessel suspected of being under the
influence of alcohol or a dangerous drug. The
inclusion of these provisions reflects the concern that
alcohol or drug impairment are serious threats to
safe vessel operation.
Section 4114 of the OPA also requires that new tank
vessel manning standards be set, both for U.S. and
foreign tank vessels. For U.S. tank vessels, licensed
seamen are not permitted to work more than 15
hours in any 24-hour period, or more than 36 hours
in any 72-hour period. Forthcoming regulations will
designate the conditions under which tank vessels
may operate with the autopilot engaged or the
engine room unattended. Crew members also must
be trained in maintenance of the navigation and
safety features of the tank vessel. For foreign tank
vessels, a USCG review will determine whether tank
vessel safety practices are at least the equivalent of
U.S. requirements. Tank vessels that do not satisfy.
this standard will be prohibited from entering U.S.
waters. These new requirements, emanating from
issues raised in the investigation of the Exxon Valdez
spill, should lead to better trained and more well-
rested crews on tank vessels.
Other Provisions
Q20. What oil pollution research and development
efforts are mandated by the OPA?
A. Section 7001 of the OPA requires that an
interagency committee be established to coordinate
the establishment of a program for conducting oil
pollution research, technology development, and
demonstration. This program is specifically required
by the statute to provide research, development, and
demonstration in a number of areas, including:
• Innovative oil pollution technologies (e.g.,
development of improved tank vessel design or
improved mechanical, chemical, or biological
systems or processes);
• Oil pollution technology evaluation (e.g.,
. controlled field testing and development of
testing protocols and standards);
• Oil pollution effects research (e.g., development
of improved fate and transport models).;
• Marine simulation research (e.g., use and
application of geographic and vessel response
simulation models); and
• Simulated environmental testing (e.g., use of the
Oil and Hazardous Materials Simulated
Environmental Test Tank).
Q21. What provisions are included in the OPA to
protect Alaska's Prince William Sound?
A. Title V of the OPA contains several provisions
aimed at preventing future spills in Prince William
Sound. Specifically, the OPA: (1) authorizes the
Prince William Sound Oil Recovery Institute in
Cordova, Alaska; (2) establishes Oil Terminal
Oversight and Monitoring Committees for Prince
William Sound and Cook Inlet; (3) authorizes and
appropriates funds for construction of a navigation
light on Bligh Reef; and (4) requires all tank vessels
in Prince William Sound to be under the direction
and control of a pilot, who cannot be a member of
the crew of the tank vessel, licensed by the Federal
government and the State of Alaska. In addition,
section 8103 of the OPA establishes a Presidential
Task Force on the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System.
The Task Force will conduct a comprehensive audit
of the pipeline system (including the terminal in
Valdez, Alaska) to assess compliance with
applicable laws.
-------
oEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency (OS-120)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
First-Class Mall
Postage and Fees Paid
EPA
Permit No. G-35
-------
SECTION 4
* FACT SHEET: FACILITY
RESPONSE PLANS (FRP'S)
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
OPA HOTLINE (202) 260-2342
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Publication 9360.8-06FS
February 1993
Facility Response Plans
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
.Emergency Response Division 5202G
Quick Reference Fact Sheet
In 1990, Congress passed the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) in pan to expand the scope of public and private
planning and response activities associated with discharges of oil. The OPA amends §311 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA) to augment Federal response authority, increase penalties for unauthorized spills, expand the organizational
structure of the Federal response framework, and provide a greater emphasis on preparedness and response activities.
CWA §311 requires the preparation of plans to respond to a worst-case discharge of oil, and sets forth specific
requirements for development of such plans. These response plan requirements apply to an owner/ operator of any
onshore facility that, because of its location, could reasonably be expected to cause substantial harm to the
environment by a discharge of oil into navigable waters,1 adjoining shorelines, or the exclusive economic zone (i.e.,
"substantial harm facilities"). Section 311 of the CWA requires that owner/operators of such "substantial harm
facilities* must submit their response plans by February 18,1993, or stop handling, storing, or transporting oil. CWA
§311 also provides that a subset of 'substantial harm facilities' (i.e., facilities that could reasonably be expected to
cause significant and substantial harm to the environment by discharging oil, or "significant and substantial harm
facilities') must have their plans approved by the Federal government
The President has delegated the authority to regulate non-transportation-related onshore facilities to the
Administrator of EPA. EPA is implementing the CWA §311 response plan requirements in a proposed revision to
the Oil Pollution Prevention regulation (40 CFR Pan 112). The purpose of this fact sheet is to provide general
information on how EPA intends to implement the CWA §311 requirements. Specifically, the fact sheet addresses
who must prepare plans, which plans must be approved, and what a facility response plan should contain.
WHO MUST PREPARE PLANS?
("SUBSTANTIAL HARM FACILITIES")
Under CWA §311, only certain facilities are
required to prepare and submit response plans, i.e.,
those facilities that could cause substantial harm to
the environment EPA has proposed two ways in
which a facility may be identified as posing substantial
harm: (1) through a self-selection process; or (2) by
determination of the Regional Administrator (RA).
For the self-selection process, §11120(f)(i) of
the proposed rule lists specific criteria to help
owner/operators evaluate whether their facilities pose
substantial harm (see Highlight 1). The proposed rule
also provides more detailed information to help
owner/operators interpret these criteria to determine
whether their facility should be regarded as a
'substantial harm facility.' For example, Appendix C
of the proposed rule provides formulas to help
evaluate whether a facility is located at a distance that
could cause injury taan environmentally sensitive area
or shut down operations at a public drinking-water
intake. (NOTE: Facility owner/operators may also
use an alternative formula provided that they
document such use, as appropriate.) Appendix D of
the proposed rule provides information on
environmentally sensitive areas.
i
Navigable water* are defined in CWA 5502(7) and at 40 CFR 110.1 aa water* of the United State* including the territorial
sea*. This definition includes, among other things, lake*, riven, stream* (including intermittent streams), mudflats, and wetlands.
-------
Highlight 1
SELF-SELECTION CRITERIA
Under the proposed rule, a facility would fall
under the "substantial barm" category if it meets at
least one of the following criteria:
• The facility, has a total storage capacity greater
than or equal to 42,000 gallons and performs over-
water oil transfers to or from vessels; OR
• The facility has a total storage capacity greater
than or equal to one million gallons, and meets any
one of the following conditions:
- Does not have adequate secondary containment
for each aboveground storage area;
- Is located such that a discharge could cause
"injury" to an environmentally sensitive area;
- Is located such that a discharge would shut
down a public drinking-water intake; or
- Has bad, in the past 5 years, a reportable spill
greater than or equal to 10,000 gallons.
The owner/operator of any facility currently
regulated by the existing Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation may consult the proposed rule for details
on the self-selection screening process. If the self-
selection process does indicate that a facility poses a
threat of 'substantial harm" to the environment, the
owner/operator would be required prepare and submit
a facility response plan to the appropriate EPA RA
CWA §311 requires that .owner/operators of
"substantial harm facilities" must submit their response
plans by February 18,1993, or stop handling, storing,
or transporting oil.
Under the proposal, the RA also would have
the authority to determine that a facility may cause
substantial harm, regardless of the results of the self-
selection screening process. Assetfbrthin§llL20(b)
of the proposed rule, the RA's determination would
be based on factors similar to the criteria used in the
self-selection screening process, as well as other site-
specific characteristics and environmental factors.
IN ADDITION TO THE SELF-SELECTION
PROCESS, THE RA MAY DETERMINE
THAT A FACILITY POSES
SUBSTANTIAL HARM.
Under the proposal, if an owner/operator
determines that the facility doesjiot have the potential
to cause substantial harm,.the owner/operator would
have to complete the certification form contained in
Appendix C of the proposed response plan
rulemaking. This form would be maintained at the
facility. In addition, if the self-selection process is
completed using ah alternative formula, the
owner/operator would be required to notify the RA in
writing and provide information on the reliability and
analytical soundness of the alternative formula.
WHICH PLANS MUST BE APPROVED?
("SIGNIFICANT AND SUBSTANTIAL
HARM FACILITIES")
In addition to the requirement to' prepare
response plans, CWA §311 establishes further
requirements for a subset of facilities that could cause
significant and substantial harm. CWA §311 requires
that EPA must review and approve the response plans
submitted for these facilities.
Under §11120(0(3) of the proposed rule, the
RA would identify these 'significant and substantial
harm facilities" using a series of risk-based screening
considerations. These considerations include factors
similar to the criteria to determine substantial harm,
as well as the age of the tanks, proximity to navigable
waters, and spill frequency. Facilities would be
notified in writing of their status as posing significant
and substantial harm.
Under CWA §311, if EPA does not review and
approve a "significant and substantial harm facility"
plan by August 18, 1993, the facility must stop
handling, storing, or transporting oil. However, the
number of plans needing review may prevent RAs
from approving all response plans by the statutory
deadline. CWA §311 allows a "significant and
substantial harm facility" owner/operator to seek
Federal authorization to operate for up to two years
after the plan has been submitted where the owner/
operator certifies that he or she has ensured by
contract or other approved means the availability of
private personnel and equipment necessary to respond
to a worst-case discharge.
Under §11120(b) of the proposed rule,
owner/operators who seek such authorization may
submit to the RA a certification statement and proof
that a written contractual agreement or other
approved means is in place. Examples of "other
approved means" may include:
-------
Certification that the owner/operator has
access to the necessary personnel and
equipment;
Active membership in spill organization that
ensures adequate access to the necessary
personnel and equipment; or
Other specific arrangements approved by the
RA upon the request of the owner/operator.
WHAT SHOULD A FACILITY
RESPONSE PLAN CONTAIN?
As discussed above, CWA §311 requires that
the response plan must address certain critical items.
CWA §311 requires that the response plan:
• Be consistent with the National Contingency
Plan and Area Contingency Plans;
• Identify a qualified individual having full
authority to implement removal actions, and
require immediate communication between
that person and appropriate Federal
authorities and responders;
• Identify and ensure availability of resources to
remove, to the maximum extent practicable, a
worst-case discharge;
• Describe training, testing, unannounced drills,
and response actions of persons at the facility,
• Be updated periodically; and
• Be resubmitted for approval of each
significant change.
To assist owners or operators in preparing
response plans. Appendix O of the proposed rule
includes a model facility response plan that addresses
CWA §311 provisions in a comprehensive and well-
organized manner. Highlight 2 outlines elements of
the model plan.
Under the proposal, the organization of the
model plan and the information contained in it would
be representative of the format and level of detail
needed to address the required response plan elements
in an acceptable manner. However, EPA recognizes
that there may be many facilities with existing
response plans. Therefore, owner/operators generally
Highlight 2
RESPONSE PLAN ELEMENTS
Under the proposed rule, elements of an effective
response plan would include the following:
- Emergency Response Action Plan*
- Facility name, type, location, owner, operator
information
- Emergency notification, equipment, personnel, and
evacuation information
- Identification and evaluation of potential spill
hazards and previous spills
- Identification of small, medium, and worst-case
discharge scenarios and response actions
- Description of discharge detection procedures and
equipment
- Detailed implementation plan for containment and
disposal
- Facility and response resource self-inspection,
training, and meeting logs
. Diagrams of facility and surrounding layout,
topography, and evacuation paths
• Security (fences, lighting, alarms, guards,
emergency cut-off valves and locks, etc.)
* A response plan would serve as both a planning and
action document, and the action portion should be
maintained as an easily-accessible, stand-alone section
of the overall plan.
would not need to prepare a separate plan to comply
with CWA §311 if they have already prepared a plan,
provided that the original plan: (1) satisfies the
appropriate requirements and is equally stringent; (2)
includes all the elements described in the model plan;
(3) is cross-referenced appropriately; and (4) contains
an Action Plan for use during a discharge.'
Although Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure (SPCC) plans (i.e-, prevention plans)
and response plans are different, and should be
maintained as separate documents, some sections of
the plans may be the same. The proposed rule would
allow the owner/operator to reproduce and use those
sections of the SPCC Plan in the response plan.
-------
SPILL PREVENTION (SPCC) PLANS
AND FACILITY RESPONSE PLANS
ARE DIFFERENT
The CWA §311 requirements to develop a
response plan.will affect many facilities that are
already subject to the Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation. This regulation, which has been in effect
since 1973, applies to facilities that meet the
characteristics set forth at 40 CFR §112.1 (see
Highlight 3).
The owner/operator of any facility subject to the
Oil Pollution Prevention regulation is required to
prepare and implement an SPCC Plan. SPCC Plans
focus on procedures to prevent and control oil spills.
In contrast, the facility response plans required by
CWA §311 are intended to focus on reactive
measures, such as how facility personnel are to
respond to a discharge. The response plan should be
maintained as a separate document from the SPCC
Plan and be easily accessible during an emergency.
Under CWA §311, certain facilities are required to
. submit only the response plan to EPA.
Highlight 3
FACILITIES SUBJECT TO THE OIL
POLLUTION PREVENTION REGULATION
The Oil Pollution Prevention regulation applies to
facilities with the following characteristics:
• Facility Type: Non-transportation-related on-
shore facilities.
• Oil Product Storage: The total aboveground
storage capacity at the facility is greater than.
1420 gallons (or greater than 660 gallons in a
single container), or the total underground
storage capacity is greater than 42,000 gallons.
• Location: Facilities that, because of their
location, could reasonably be expected to
discharge oil into the navigable waters of the
U.S. or adjoining shorelines.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
For more information, please call the SPCC Information Line at (202) 260-2342, or the specific EPA Regional
office. The mailing addresses for the offices and a map showing the geographic boundaries of the Regions are
contained in the proposed regulation.
EPA Region 1
(617) 860-4361
EPA Region 5
(312) 886-6236
EPA Region 9
(415) 744-1500
EPA Region 2
(908) 321-6656
EPA Region 6
(214) 655-2270
EPA Region 10
(206) 553-1090
EPA Region 3
(215) 597-5998/1357
EPA Region 7
(913) 551-5000
EPA Region 4
(404) 347-3931
EPA Region 8
(303) 293-1788
This document is not intended and cannot be relied upon to
create rights, substantive or procedural, enforceable by any pony
in litigation with the United States.
United SUtM
Environmental Protection
Agency (OS-120)
Washington, DC 20440
OfflclaJ Business
$300
Rmt-CtaMl
Poottgo and Foos Paid
EPA
P*rmft No. O-35
EPA Region 3
Oil & Title III Section
Mail Code: 3HW34
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
REGION III FACILITY RESPONSE PLAN COORDINATOR: Linda Ziegler
NOTE: REGION III FACILITY RESPONSE PLAN INFORMATION LINE (215) 597-9562
-------
SECTION 5
* FRP DEFINITIONS
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
IMPORTANT FRP DEFINITIONS
Complex - a facility possessing a combination of transportation-related and non-
transportation-related components that is subject to the jurisdiction of more than one Federal
agency under section 31 l(j) of the CWA.
Contract 'or other approved means
(1) A written contractual agreement with an oil spill removal organization(s) that
identifies and ensures the availability of the necessary personnel and equipment
within appropriate response times; and/or
(2) A written certification by the owner or operator that the necessary personnel and
equipment resources, owned or operated by the facility owner or operator, are
available to respond to a discharge within appropriate response times; and/or
(3) Active membership in a local or regional oil spill removal organization(s) that
has identified and ensures adequate access through such member ship to
necessary personnel and equipment to respond to a discharge within appropriate
response times in the specified geographic areas; and/or
(4) Other specific arrangements approved by the Regional Administrator upon
request of the owner or operator.
Maximum extent practicable - the limitations used to determine oil spill planning resources
and response times for on-water recovery and shoreline protection and cleanup for worst case
discharges from onshore non-transportation-related facilities in adverse weather. The
appropriate limitations for such planning are available technology and the practical and
technical limits on an individual facility owner or operator.
Permanently manifolded tanks - tanks that are designed, installed, and/or operated in such
a manner that the multiple tanks function as one storage unit.
Worst case discharge
Onshore storage facilities:
Single tank facilities:
For facilities containing only one aboveground oil storage tank, the final worst case
discharge volume equals the capacity of the oil storage tank. If adequate secondary
containment (sufficiently large to contain the capacity of the aboveground oil storage
tank plus sufficient freeboard to allow for precipitation) exists for the oil storage tank
the final worst case discharge volume is the capacity of the tank multiplied by 0.8.
-------
Multiple-tank facilities: .
Are all the aboveground oil storage tanks or groups of aboveground oil storage tanks
at the facility without adequate secondary containment?1
If the answer is yes, then the final worst case discharge volume equals the total
aboveground oil storage capacity at the facility.
If the answer is no, then the worst case volume is the total aboveground oil
storage capacity of the tanks without adequate secondary containment. If all
abqveground oil storage tanks or groups of aboveground oil storage tanks at the
facility have adequate secondary containment the worst case volume is zero. The
final worst case discharge volume is calculated by adding the capacity of the
largest single aboveground oil storage tank within an adequate containment area
or the combined capacity of a group of aboveground oil storage tanks
permanately manifolded together, whichever is greater, with the worst case
volume from above.
Onshore production facilities:
Please refer to Section F of this manual (FINAL RULE MAKING for 40 C.F.R.
PARTS 9 AND 112 dated JULY 1, 1994; page 34110; Appendix D to Part 112,
PARTB: WORST CASE DISCHARGE PLANNING VOLUME
CALCULATIONS FOR ONSHORE PRODUCTION FACILITIES).
Adverse weather conditions - means the weather conditions that make it difficult for
response equipment and personnel to cleanup or removed spilled oil, and that will be
considered when identifying response systems and equipment in a response plan for the
applicable operating environment. Factors to consider include significant wave height as
specified in Appendix E to this part, as appropriate, ice conditions, temperatures, weather-
related visibility, and currents within the area in which the systems or equipment are
intended to function.
Vessel - applies to any type of watercraft (e.g., barges), other than a public vessel, which
can be used as means of transportation on water.
Injury - means a measurable adverse change, either long- or short-term, in the chemical or
physical quality or the viability of a natural resource resulting either directly or indirectly
from exposure to a discharge of oil, or exposure to a product of reactions resulting from a
discharge of oil.
Source: 40 CFR Parts 9 and 112 (July 1. 1994)
1 Secondary containment is defined in 40 .CFR 112.7(e)(2). Acceptable methods and
structures for containment are also given in 40 CFR 112.7(c)(1).
-------
SECTION 6
FINAL RULE MAKING for 40 C.F.R. PART 9
AND 112 dated JULY 1, 1994
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
Friday
July 1, 1994
Part III
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Parts "9 and 112
Oil Pollution Prevention; Non-
Transportation-Related Onshore Facilities;
Final Rule
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
34070 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 9 and 112
[SW H-FRL 5002-6]
RIN 2050-AD30
Oil Pollution Prevention; Non-
Transportation-Related Onshore
Facilities
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule amends the Oil
Pollution Prevention regulation.
promulgated under the Clean Water Act
for transportation-related onshore and
offshore facilities. The revision
incorporates new requirements added
by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 that
direct certain facility owners and
operators to prepare plans for
responding to a worst case discharge of
oil and to a substantial threat of such a
discharge. Requirements to plan for a
small and medium discharge of oil, as
appropriate, are also added by this
revision.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 30.1994.
ADDRESSES: The official record for this
rulemaking is located in the Superfund
Docket, Room M2615 at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,'401
M Street SW., Washington. DC 20460
[Docket Number SPCC-2P]. The docket
is available for inspection between 9
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays.
Appointments to review the docket can
be made by calling 202-260-3046. The
public may copy a maximum of 266
pages from any regulatory docket at no
cost. If the number of pages copied
exceeds 266, however, a charge of 15
cents will be incurred for each
additional page, plus a 525.00
administrative fee.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bobbie Lively-Diebold, Oil Pollution
Response and Abatement Branch,
Emergency Response Division (5202G),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC
20460 at 703-356-8774; the ERNS/
SPCC Information line at 202-260-2342;
or the RCRA/Superfund Hotline at 800-
424-9346 (in the. Washington, DC
metropolitan area. 703-412-9810). The
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf
(TDD) Hotline number is 800-553-7672
(in the Washington, DC metropolitan
area, 703-412-3323).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of this preamble are listed in .
the following outline:
I. Introduction
A. Statutory Authority • .
B. The Oil Pollution Act of 1990
C Background of the Rulemaking
II. Summary of Revisions to the Oil Pollution
Prevention Regulation
A. Summary of Approach to Implementing
Facility Response Plan Requirements
B. Response to Major Issues Raised by
Commenters
C. Section-by-Section Analysis
III. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order 12866
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Display of OMB Control Numbers
I. Introduction
A. Statutory Authority
Section 4202(a)(6) of the Oil Pollution
Act of 1990 (OPA), Public Law 101-380,
amends section 311(j) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, also
known as the Clean Water Act (CWA),
and under CWA section 311(j)(5) (See
.33 U.S.Q 1321(j)(5)) directs the
President to issue regulations that
require owners or operators of tank
vessels, offshore facilities, and certain
onshore facilities to prepare and submit
to the President plans for, among other
things, responding, to the maximum
extent practicable, to a worst case
discharge of oil and to a substantial
threat of such a discharge.
Section 311(j)(l)(C) of the CWA
authorizes the President to issue
regulations establishing procedures,
methods, equipment, and other
requirements to prevent discharges of
oil from vessels and facilities and to
contain such discharges. (See 33 U.S.C.
1321(j)(l)(Q.) The President has
delegated the authority to regulate non-
transportation-related onshore facilities
under sections 311(j)(l)(C) and 311(j)(5)
of the CWA to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency).
(See Executive Order (E.O.) 12777,
section 2(b)(l), 56 FR 54757 (October
22,1991). superseding E.0.11735, 38
FR 21243.) By this same E.O., the
President has delegated similar
authority over transportation-related
onshore facilities, deepwater ports, and
vessels to the U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT), and authority
over other offshore facilities, including
associated pipelines, to the U.S.
Department of the Interior (DOI). A
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
among EPA, DOI, and DOT effective
February 3.1994. has redelegated the
responsibility to regulate certain
offshore facilities located in and along
the Great Lakes, rivers, coastal wetlands.
and the Gulf Coast barrier islands from
DOI to EPA. (See E.0.12777 § 2(i)
regarding authority to redelegate.) The
MOU is included as Appendix B to 40
CFR part 112. An MOU between the
Secretary of Transportation and the EPA
Administrator, dated November 24,
1971 (36 FR 24080, December 18,1971),
establishes the definitions of non-
transportation-related facilities and
transportation-related facilities. The
definitions from the MOU are currently
included in Appendix A to 40 CFR part
112.
B. The Oil Pollution Act of 1990
The OPA (Public Law 101-380,104
Stat. 484) was enacted to expand
prevention and preparedness activities,
improve response capabilities, ensure
that shippers and oil companies pay the
costs of spills that do occur, provide an
additional economic incentive to
prevent spills through increased
penalties and enhanced enforcement,
establish an expanded research and
development program, and establish a
new Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund,
administered by the U.S. Coast Guard
(USCG). As provided in sections
2002(b), 2003, and 2004 of the OPA. the
new Fund replaces the fund originally
established under section 311(k) of the
CWA and other oil pollution funds.
Section 4202(a) of the OPA amends
CWA section 311(j) to require
regulations for owners or operators of
facilities to prepare and submit "a plan
for responding, to the maximum extent
practicable, to a worst case discharge,
and to a substantial threat of such a
discharge, of oil or a hazardous
substance." This requirement applies to
all offshore facilities and any onshore
facility that, "because of its location,
could reasonably be expected to cause
substantial harm to the environment by
discharging into or on the navigable
waters, adjoining shorelines, or the
exclusive economic zone" ("substantial
harm facilities"). As stated in the
February 17,1993 proposed rule (58 FR
8824), this rulemaking addresses only
plans for responding to discharges of
oil.
Under CWA and the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA), the United States has
developed a National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
(NCP) (40 CFR part 300) and has
established Area Committees to develop
Area Contingency Plans (ACPs) as.
elements of a comprehensive oil and
hazardous substance spill response
system. As amended by the OPA, CWA
section 311(j)(5)(C) sets forth certain
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59. No. 126 / Friday, July 1. 1994 / Rules and Regulations 34071
minimum requirements for facility
response plans. The plans must:
• Be consistent with the requirements
oftheNCPandACPs;
• Identify the qualified individual
having full authority to implement
removal actions, and require immediate
communications between that
individual and the appropriate Federal
official and the persons providing
removal personnel and equipment;
• Identify and ensure by contract or
other approved means the availability of
private personnel and equipment
necessary to remove, to the maximum
extent practicable, a worst case
discharge (including a discharge
resulting from fire or explosion), and to
mitigate or prevent a substantial threat
of such a discharge;
• Describe the training, equipment
testing, periodic unannounced drills,
'and response actions of persons at the
facility, to be carried out under the plan
to ensure the safety of the facility and
to mitigate or prevent a discharge or the
substantial threat of a discharge; and
• Be updated periodically.
Under section 311(j)(5)(DJ, additional
review and approval provisions apply to
response plans prepared for offshore
facilities and for onshore facilities that,
because of their location, "could
reasonably be expected to cause
significant and substantial harm to the
environment by discharging into or on
the navigable waters or adjoining
shorelines or the exclusive economic
zone" (emphasis added) ("significant
and substantial harm facilities"). Under
authority delegated in E.0.12777, EPA
is responsible for the following
activities for each of these response
plans at non-transportation-related
onshore facilities:
• Promptly reviewing the response
plan;
• Requiring amendments to any plan
that does not meet the section 311(j)(5)
requirements;
• Approving any plan that meets
these requirements; and
• Reviewing each plan periodically
thereafter.
The CWA and the OPA require that
owners or operators of "substantial
harm facilities" submit their response
plans to EPA (as delegated by the
President in E.0.12777) by February 18,
1993, or stop handling, storing, or
transporting oil. In addition, under
OVA section 311(j)(5) and OPA section
4202(b)(4), a facility required to prepare
and submit a response plan under the
OPA may not handle, store, or transport
oil after August 18,1993 unless: (1) in
the case of a facility for which a plan is
reviewed by EPA. the plan has been
approved by EPA; and (2) the facility is
operating in compliance with the plan.
The statute provides that a "significant
and substantial harm facility" may be .
allowed to operate without an approved
response plan for up to two years after
the facility submits a plan for review (no
later than February 18,1995). if the
owner or operator certifies that he or she
has ensured by contract or other
approved means the availability of
private personnel and equipment
necessary to respond, to the maximum
extent practicable, to a worst case
discharge of oil, or a substantial threat
of such a discharge. Owners or operators
of "substantial harm facilities" are not
required to have their plans approved
by EPA, but, are required to operate in
compliance with their plans after
August 18.1993.
Under the OPA, facility owners or
operators who fail to comply with
section 311(j) requirements are subject
to new administrative penalties and
more stringent judicial penalties than
those imposed previously under the
CWA. Section 4301(b) of the OPA
amends CWA section 311 (b) to
authorize a civil judicial penalty of
$25,000 per day of violation for failure
to comply with regulations under CWA
section 311(j). In addition to these civil
penalties, OPA section 4301 (b) amends
CWA section 311(b) to authorize
administrative penalties for failure to
comply with section 311(j) regulations
of up to $10,000 per violation, not to
exceed $25,000 for Class I penalties, and
up to $10,000 per day per violation, not
to exceed $125,000 for Class n penalties.
The differences between "Class I" and
"Class II" administrative penalties are
the amounts of the potential penalties
and the hearing procedures used (for
instance, Class II procedures will
generally ensure the owner or operator
a more extensive opportunity to be
heard through the proceedings). These
revised penalty provisions are
applicable to violations occurring after
the August 18,1990, enactment of the
OPA. Violations occurring before
enactment of the OPA remain subject to
penalty provisions originally set forth in
CWA section 311.
C. Background of the Rulemaking
Jurisdictional Issues
Although the issue was not raised
specifically in the proposed rule, the
question of clarifying jurisdiction is a
pervasive issue in this rulemaking,
because there are a number of regulatory
agencies with OPA authority over the
same or similar entities.
By E.0.12777, the President
delegated certain OPA authorities to
EPA, DOI, and DOT. By terms of the
E.O., EPA must develop response plan
regulations for onshore non-
transportation-related facilities, while
the Minerals Management Service
(MMS) in DOI is granted similar
authority for offshore non-
transportation-related facilities. The
USCG must develop requirements for
vessels and offshore transportation-
related facilities, and the Research and
Special Programs Administration
(RSPA) has responsibility for onshore
pipelines and rolling stock. (The USCG
and RSPA are agencies in DOT.)
As it applies to the CWA, the term
"offshore facility" means any facility of
any kind located in, on, or under any of
the navigable waters of the United
States, and any facility of any kind that
is subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States and is located in, on, or
under any other waters, other than a
vessel or a public vessel. (See CWA
section 311(a)(ii).) The combined effect
of this definition and the delegations
under E.0.12777 gives DOI (MMS)
responsibility for non-transportation-
related fixed offshore facilities in inland
lakes and rivers. (See E.O. § 2(b)(3).)
However, EPA, DOI-MMS, and DOT
have agreed that EPA responsibility
should extend to these non-
transportation-related fixed offshore
facilities in inland lakes and rivers,
because EPA has the expertise to
provide oversight of facility functions,
and because the maintenance of
continuity in oversight will facilitate
compliance for the regulated
community. Under § 2(1) of E.0.12777,
the President authorized EPA, DOI, and
DOT to redelegate any of their
responsibilities under the OPA to the
head of any Executive department or
agency with the consent of the agency
head. The Secretaries of DOI and DOT,
and the Administrator of EPA signed an
MOU on February 3,1994. that gives to
EPA jurisdiction all non-transportation-
related fixed facilities located landward
of the "coast line." For purposes of the
MOU, the term "coast line" is defined
as in the Submerged Land Act (43
U.S.C. 1301(c)) to mean "the line of
ordinary low water along that portion of
the coast that is in direct contact with
the open sea and the line marking the
seaward limit of inland waters." MMS
has prepared detailed charts that reflect
the position of the "coast line" and can
be contacted for additional information
on the status of a particular facility.
EPA does not address response plan
requirements for non-transportation-
related fixed offshore facilities in this
final rule, but will do so under a
separate rulemaking. However, because
EPA now has Jurisdictional
responsibility over such facilities,.
-------
34072 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 1994,/ Rules and Regulations
response plans for these facilities must
be submitted to EPA rather than to
MMS. Until EPA promulgates a rule for
non-transportation-related fixed
offshore facilities formerly under MMS
authority, the Agency will review
response plans for these facilities under
the OPA statutory criteria. Until such a'
rule is promulgated, these facilities
should look to this final rule as
guidance.
Coordination with Other Federal
Programs
Federal and State Government
Coordination Efforts. EPA and other
Federal agencies with jurisdiction under
the OPA and E.0.12777 (including the
USCG, the Office of Pipeline Safety in
RSPA, and MMS) met during the
development of this rule to create an
implementation strategy that minimizes
duplication wherever practicable and
recognizes State oil pollution
prevention and response programs. The
Agency also participated in a workgroup
with representatives from the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), the Fish and
Wildlife Service, the National Park
Service, and other Federal agencies.
These meetings and workgroup sessions
were held to develop a consistent
approach among Federal agencies and
between Federal and State governments
for oil response planning, and to
develop guidelines and evaluation
criteria for drills/exercises and training
conducted to meet the OPA
requirements and for identification of
"environmentally sensitive areas" (now
"fish and wildlife and sensitive
environments").1 These meetings were
held at various times from January 1993
to January 1994.
One of the critical outgrowths of these
efforts was the development of a
consistent approach to regulate
"complexes." (A complex is a facility
with a combination of transportation-
related and non-transportation-related
components, e.g., a marine transfer
facility with aboveground storage tanks.)
A complex is subject to the jurisdiction
of more than one Federal agency under
the President's delegation implementing
section 311(j) of the CWA. Among the
ways EPA has reduced the complexity
of planning requirements for these
facilities is to better align EPA's
1 The term "environmentally sensitive areas" has
. been changed to the term "fish and wildlife and
sensitive environments" throughout this preamble
aid the final rule to be consistent with the
terminology used in proposed revisions to the NCP
(See 58 FR 54702) that implement OPA
requirement*. The terms have the same meaning
and the change is not meant to imply an expansion
in the types of areas identified for protection under
the OPA.
Appendix E (Appendix F in the
proposed rule renamed in this final rule
as "Determination and Evaluation of
Required Response Resources for
Facility Response Plans") with USCG
response resource rules developed for
marine transfer facilities (February 5,
1993. 58 FR 7330). (A complete
discussion of Appendix E appears later
in this preamble.) For non-
transportation-related facilities that
handle or store non-petroleum oils, EPA
also has adopted an approach similar to
the USCG's regulatory approach for
response equipment strategies (58 FR
7362).
The coordination efforts resulted in
several key decisions which are
described below and discussed in
greater depth later in this preamble. A
common theme of discussion among
agency representatives was the need to
facilitate the regulated community's
efforts to implement multiple sets of
response planning requirements. EPA
emphasizes that it will accept a
response plan prepared to meet State or
other Federal requirements as long as
the plan meets the requirements of this
final rule and is appropriately cross-
referenced. In response to the need to
provide owners or operators with
additional direction on conducting
drills/exercises to meet the OPA
requirements, the National Preparedness
for Response Exercise Program (PREP)
was developed through a joint effort of
the Federal agencies implementing OPA
response plan regulations with
involvement from other Federal
representatives (e.g., natural resource
trustees), State agencies, members of the
regulated community, and oil spill
response organizations. These efforts
resulted in the creation of guidelines to
assist owners or operators in following
the PREP. EPA references, as guidance,
PREP guidelines at § 112.21 of today's
final rule. The PREP draft guidelines are
available from Petty Officer Daniel Caras
at (202) 267-6570 or fax 267-4085/4065.
(See Appendix E to this part, section 10,
for availability). The USCG has
developed similar guidance for training,
and EPA references these training
guidelines at § 112.21 of today's final
rule, indicating that following these
guidelines (or demonstrating a
comparable program) is an acceptable
means to satisfy the OPA requirement to
describe training.
Another interagency effort that
resulted in a coordinated approach to
develop response plan requirements
involved the identification of fish and
wildlife and sensitive environments.
The Federal agencies implementing
OPA regulations contributed to the
development of a guidance document
prepared by the natural resource
trustees to assist owners or operators in
identifying fish and wildlife and
sensitive environments for the
evaluation of the substantial harm
criteria and for the development of a
response plan, if required. Although
EPA has removed the proposed
Appendix D that covered this subject,
facility owners and operators still must
consider fish and wildlife and sensitive
environments. EPA refers facility
owners or operators to Appendices I, II,
and ffl of the "Guidance for Facility and
Vessel Response Plans: Fish and
Wildlife and Sensitive Environments"
published by NOAA within the
Department of Commerce (DOC) in the
Federal Register at 59 FR 14714, March
29,1994. This document will provide
guidance on fish and wildlife and
sensitive environments until
geographic-specific annexes of ACPs are
fully developed. (See the discussion of
ACPs later in this preamble.) Owners or
operators are encouraged to contact the
appropriate Area Committee, EPA
Regional office (inland areas), USCG
Captain of the Port (coastal areas), or
natural resource agencies listed in the
DOC/NOAA Guidance for information
on fish and wildlife and sensitive
environments as it becomes available.
A final critical area where Federal
agencies implementing the OPA reached
agreement was the review of response
plans. For response purposes, the'NCP
divides the United States into inland
and coastal zones, with EPA responsible
for providing On-Scene Coordinators
(OSCs) for the inland zone, and the
USCG responsible for providing OSCs
for the coastal zone. EPA will provide
an opportunity for designated USCG
OSCs to review and comment on
response plans for non-transportation-
related onshore facilities subject to 40
CFR part 112, and geographically
located in the coastal zone. For facilities
subject to 40 CFR part 112, EPA will
maintain the responsibility for final
approval of the response plan; however,
the Regional Administrator (RA) will
consider any USCG OSC objection to a
response plan and attempt to resolve
any issues through interagency
discussions.
The NCP and ACPs. Section
311(j)(5)(C) of the CWA requires that
facility response plans be consistent
with the requirements of the NCP and
ACPs. The NCP provides the general
organizational structure and procedures
for addressing discharges of oil and
hazardous substances under the CWA,
as well as releases of hazardous
substances, pollutants, and
contaminants under CERCLA. Among
other things, the NCP specifies
-------
Federal Register /, Vol. 59, No, 126 / Friday, July 1, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
34073
responsibilities among Federal, State,
and local governments; describes
resources available for response;
summarizes State and local emergency
planning requirements under the
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA or SARA
Title HI); and establishes procedures for
undertaking removal actions under the
CWA. Until a revised NCP is published,
as mandated under OPA section
4201(c), facility response plans should
be consistent with the current NCP and,
if necessary, revised fo be consistent
with the pending NCP revisions when
they are promulgated. (Revisions to the
NCP were proposed on October 22,
1993, at 58 FR 54702.)
ACPs are mandated under CWA
section 311(j)(4) and prepared by Area
Committees comprised of members
appointed by the President from
qualified personnel of Federal, State,
and local agencies. When implemented
in conjunction with other elements of
the NCP, ACPs must be adequate to
remove a worst case discharge from a
facility operating in or near the area
covered by the plan. ACPs cover
discharges affecting all U.S. waters and
adjoining shorelines. EPA and the USCG
are responsible for establishing Area
Committees for the inland and coastal
zones, respectively. In the inland
Regions, ACPs have been completed and
approved by EPA. The ACP process,
however, is dynamic, and Area
Committees will continue to refine the
ACPs to provide more detailed
information on protection priorities,
develop protection strategies, and
identify appropriate cleanup strategies
for inland areas. Area Committees have
the option to further subdivide their
areas into smaller, geographically
distinct subareas and develop
geographic-specific annexes for these
subareas. Members of the public may
contribute to the ACP refinement
process through involvement with Area
Committees in the development of
geographic-specific annexes.
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). EPA regulations in Subpart
D of 40 CFR pan 264, and Subpart D of
40 CFR part 265 promulgated under
RCRA, require owners and operators of
hazardous waste facilities to develop
facility-specific contingency plans. The
plans must include response
procedures; a list of each person
qualified to act as a facility emergency
coordinator; a list of all emergency
equipment and, when required,
decontamination equipment at the
facility; evacuation plans, when
evacuation could be necessary; and
arrangements agreed to by local police
departments, fire departments.
hospitals, contractors, and State and
local emergency response teams to
coordinate emergency services. In
addition, newly promulgated 40 CFR
part 279 establishes facility-specific
contingency planning and emergency
procedure requirements for used oil at
reprocessing and refining facilities. To
avoid duplication of effort, owners or
operators of facilities subject to the
regulations in 40 CFR parts 264, 265,
and 279 may incorporate these RCRA
provisions and the response planning
requirements of other applicable Federal
regulations into their facility response
plans.
EPCRA. Among other things, EPCRA
requires local emergency planning
committees (LEPCs) to develop local
emergency response plans for their
community and review them at least
annually. Under EPCRA, the owner or
operator of a facility where a listed
"extremely hazardous substance" is
present in an amount in excess of the
threshold planning quantity must notify
the State emergency response
commission (SERC). In addition.upon
request of the LEPC, the owner or
operator must provide the LEPC with
any information necessary to develop
and implement the local emergency
response plan. Because of the
requirement that certain facilities
participate in emergency planning
under EPCRA. some overlap may exist
with response plan requirements
outlined in today's rule.
The OPA Conference Report states
that OPA facility response plans should
be consistent with plans prepared under
other programs, and that any
information developed under section
311(j) should be made available to
SERCs and LEPCs. (See OPA Conference
Report. H.R. Rep. No. 101-653.101st
Cong., 2d Sess. 1990 at p. 151.)
Therefore, a facility response plan
should be consistent with the local
emergency response plan for the
community in which the facility is
located, and to ensure such consistency,
facility owners or operators should
review the appropriate local emergency
response plan. In addition, upon request
of the LEPC or SERC. the facility should
provide a copy of the facility response
plan.
Clean Air Act. Under section 112(r) of
the Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended in
1990, EPA is to promulgate risk
management program regulations for the
prevention and detection of accidental
releases and for responses to such
releases, including requirements for a
risk management plan (RMP) for
chemical accidental release prevention.
The regulation listing the covered
chemicals and threshold quantities was
published in the. Federal Register on
January 31.1994 (59 FR 4478). The
proposed rule for the risk management
program was published in the Federal
Register on October 20,1993 (58 FR
54190).
Regulated facilities are required to do
three things: register with EPA; develop
and implement a risk management
program that includes a hazard
assessment, a prevention program, and
an emergency response program; and
develop and submit an RMP to the
Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigation Board, the implementing
agency, the SERC, and the LEPC. The
RMP is to be made available to the
public.
EPA anticipates that facilities affected
by both regulations can prepare one
response plan that meets the Oil
Pollution Act requirements for oil and
the CAA requirements for chemicals.
Prevention Technical Requirements
EPA's proposed rule for the facility
response plan rulemaking contained
certain provisions related to aspects of
40 CFR part 112 that did not address the'
OPA facility response plan
requirements. EPA has decided not to
include these provisions in today's final
rule. These provisions are more closely
related to the 40 CFR part 112 revisions •
proposed on October 22,1991 (56 FR
54612), and will be finalized when that
proposal is finalized. The proposed •,
provisions not included in today's final '
rule are as follows:
• § 112.1(d)(4)—Reiterating that
Underground Storage Tanks are to be
Marked on Diagrams;'
• § 112.1(g)—Regional Administrator
Authority to Require SPCC Plan
Preparation; ;
• § 112.2—Definitions of "Alteration",
and "Repair"; '
• §112.4(d>—Amendment of SPCC
Plan by Regional Administrator;
• §112.7(a)(2)—Submission of SPCC
Plans for Waiver of Technical
Requirements;
• § 112.7(d>—Requirement to Prepare
a Contingency Plan When the
Installation of Secondary Containment
Structures is not Practicable;
• § 112.7(f)—Prevention Training;
and
• § 112.7(i)/Appendix H—Ensuring
Against Brittle Fracture.
Only proposed changes to §§ 112.2
(except for the definitions of
"alteration" and "repair") and 112.20,
and the addition of §. 112.21 are
included in today's final rule. The
content of § 112.21 is adapted from
§ 112.7 of the proposed rule which
addressed training and drills/exercises
for both prevention and response.
-------
34074 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 126 I Friday, July 1, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
II. Summary of Revisions to the Oil
Pollution Prevention Regulation
This section provides a summary of
the response planning provisions
included in today's final rule. Section
II.A provides a brief summary of the
overall approach to implementation of
response plan requirements. In Section
II.B, EPA summarizes and responds to
major issues raised by the public during
the comment period. Finally, Section
II.C provides a section-by-section
discussion of changes from the
proposed rule to the final rule.
A. Summary of Approach to
Implementing Facility Response Plan
Requirements
EPA is finalizing an approach for
identifying facilities subject to response
planning requirements similar to that
outlined in the proposed rule. Only
owners or operators of "substantial
harm facilities" are required to prepare
and submit plans. EPA will approve
only those plans submitted for
"significant and substantial harm
facilities." Risk-based factors for
evaluating the potential to cause
substantial harm and significant and
substantial harm are established in
§112.20(f) of today's rule and include:
type of transfer operation; oil storage
capacity; lack of secondary
containment; proximity to fish and
wildlife and sensitive environments
(described as "environmentally
sensitive areas" in the proposal),
navigable waters, and drinking water
intakes; spill history; age of oil storage
tanks; and other facility-specific and
Region-specific information.
There are two methods by which an
onshore facility may be determined to
be a "substantial harm facility." The
first involves the use of substantial harm
criteria provided in § 112.20(f)(l) and in
the flowchart in Appendix C to 40 CFR
part 112 by owners or operators to
identify "substantial harm facilities."
The second provides each RA the
authority to determine whether any
facility subject to the Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation is a "substantial
harm facility" based on the specific
criteria in § U2.20(flCl], the factors in
§ 112.20(f)(2)(AHF), or other site-
specific characteristics and
environmental factors that may be
relevant under § 112.20(f)(2)(G). In
applying these factors, the RA may seek
input on specific facilities from other
agencies such as the USCG and natural
resource trustee agencies. The RA also
may consider petitions from the public
to determine whether a facility is a
"substantial harm facility."
To determine whether an onshore
facility could be a "significant and
substantial harm facility," the RA will
consider the substantial harm criteria in
§112.20(f)(2) as well as additional .
factors in § 112.20(f)(3), including site-
specific information such as local
impacts on public health.
In today's final rule, facility owners or
operators are provided with a process to
appeal the substantial harm and
significant and substantial harm .
determinations or the RA's decision not
to approve a response plan for which
approval is required.
Finally, under § 112.20(e), owners or
operators who are not required to
submit plans must maintain onsite at
the facility a signed certification form,
which indicates that the facility has
been determined by the facility owner
or operator not to meet the criteria in
§112.20(fl(l).
Discussion of Response Plans
Those facility owners or operators.
who submit plans must include a signed
response plan cover sheet (as provided
in 40 CFR part 112. Appendix F,
Attachment F-l). which indicates that
the information contained in the plan is
accurate, and that gives a basic .
summary of facility information,
including the results of the substantial
harm determination.
The required elements for response
planning in § 112.20(h) of this rule are
designed to direct a facility owner or
operator in gathering the information
needed to prepare a response plan. The
response plan elements address
requirements under CWA section
311(j)(5) (as amended by the OPA),
including requirements for response
training and participation in response
drills/exercises. Appendix F to the rule
includes a model response plan that
further describes the required elements
in § 112.20(h). The majority of elements
in the model plan are taken directly
from § 112.20(h) or are logical
extensions of the general requirements
in § 112.20(h) and are therefore
requirements prefaced by use of the
word "must" or "shall." EPA recognizes
that certain other elements may not be
applicable in all cases. To provide
flexibility for facilities with unique
circumstances, certain elements are
prefaced by use of the words "shall, as
appropriate" or are modified by use of
the words "or an equivalent." Finally,
other elements are presented as
recommendations and are prefaced by
use of the word "may."
As discussed previously in this
preamble, the requirements in
§ 112.20(h) and the model response plan
in Appendix F do not preclude the use
of a preexisting response plan. Owners
or operators may submit a plan prepared
to meet other Federal or State
requirements, as long as the elements in
§ 112.20 are addressed (including the
requirement for an emergency response
action plan), and a cross-reference to the
model response plan is provided.
Under today's rule, owners or
operators of "substantial harm
facilities" must prepare plans to
respond to a worst case discharge, and
small and medium discharges as
appropriate. Such response planning by
facilities will help ensure protection of
public health and welfare and the
environment by facilitating effective
response to discharges to navigable
waters or adjoining shorelines. The
requirement to plan for several different
spill sizes is consistent with other
agencies' (such as the USCG's)
implementation of OPA response
planning requirements. For example,
the average most probable discharge and
the maximum most probable discharge
under the USCG interim final rule set
out the same values in barrels as EPA
sets out in gallons for small and
medium spills (58 FR 7358. February 5,
1993). EPA is authorized to require
owners or operators to plan for small
and medium discharges by § 311(j)(l)(C)
of the CWA.
OPA section 4201 (b) (CWA section
311(a)(24)) defines "worst case
discharge" for a facility as the largest
foreseeable discharge in adverse
weather conditions. The OPA
Conference Report indicates that facility
owners or operators are expected to
prepare plans for responding to
discharges that are worse than either the
largest spill to date at the facility or the
maximum probable spill for that facility
type. (See H.R. Rep. No. 101-653,101st
Cong.. 2d Sess. 1990 at pp. 149-150.)
Today, EPA finalizes a requirement for
a facility's worst case discharge'
planning amount based on the capacity
of the largest single tank within a
secondary containment area, or the
combined capacity of a group of
aboveground tanks permanently
manifolded together within a common
secondary containment area lacking
internal subdivisions, whichever is
greater; plus an additional quantity
based on lack of secondary containment,
as appropriate. (For facilities that lack
secondary containment for all tanks, the
worst case discharge would be the total
storage capacity at the facility.)
Production facilities would also need to
consider production volumes. Single
tank facilities are allowed to reduce the
worst case discharge volume for the
presence of adequate secondary
containment.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 1994 / Rules arid Regulations 34075
EPA has provided worksheets in
Appendix D, which owners or operators
of storage and production facilities are
required to use in the calculation of
worst case discharge amounts. For
complexes, the worst case discharge
volume is the larger of the amounts
calculated for each component of the
facility regulated by a different agency
using procedures contained in the
respective regulations. EPA requires that
owners or operators of complexes (a
complex is a facility with a combination
of transportation-related and non-
transportation-related components, e.g.,
a marine transfer facility with
aboveground storage tanks) plan for the
single largest worst case discharge at the
facility. To facilitate this process, EPA
has modified Appendix E as described
in Section n.B of this preamble to be
consistent with the USCG's "Guidelines
for Determining and Evaluating
Required Response Resources for
Facility Response Plans."
In addition to planning for a worst
case discharge, under proposed
§ 112.20, facility owners and operators
are required to plan for (1) a small spill,
defined as any spill volume less than or
equal to 2,100 gallons, provided that
this amount is less than the worst case
discharge amount; and (2) a medium
spill, defined as any spill volume
greater than 2,100 gallons, and less than
or equal to 36,000 gallons or 10 percent
of the capacity of the largest tank at the
facility, whichever is less, provided that
this amount is less than the worst case
discharge amount. For facilities where
the worst case discharge is a medium
spill, the owner or operator is required
to plan for two amounts, a worst case
spill and a small spill. For facilities
where the worst case discharge is a
small spill, the owner or operator must
plan only for a worst case discharge.
For medium spills at complexes, the
owner or operator must first determine
a medium spill volume for the
transportation-related and non-
transportation-related components at
the facility. (The USCG's term
"maximum most probable discharge" is
generally equivalent to a medium spill.
See 58 FR 7354.) The owner or operator
must then compare the medium
planning amounts for each component
of the facility. Following this
comparison, the owner or operator must
select the larger of the quantities as the
medium planning amount for the
overall facility. A similar procedure
must be followed for a small spill. (The
USCG's term "average most probable
discharge" is generally equivalent to a -
small spill. See 58 FR 7353.) EPA
requires that owners or operators of
complexes plan for a single small and
medium spill at the facility in
accordance with the requirements in .
Appendix E.
Equipment Requirements
In Appendix E to today's rule, EPA
establishes requirements to determine
for planning purposes the quantity of
resources and response times necessary
to respond to the "maximum extent
practicable" to a worst case discharge,
and to other discharges, as appropriate.
The requirements were adapted from
similar requirements developed by the
USCG for vessel response plans and
facility response plans for marine
transportation-related onshore facilities.
These procedures recognize practical
and technical limits on response
capabilities that an individual facility
owner or operator can provide in
advance and on response times for
resources to arrive on scene. To address
these limitations, Appendix E
establishes operability criteria for oil
response resources and caps on
response resources that facility owners
or operators must identify and ensure
the availability of, through contract or
other approved means. The caps reflect
an estimate of the response capability at
a given facility that is considered a
•radical target to be met by 1993 and
Appendix E (Appendix F in the
proposed rule) has been renamed
"Determination and Evaluation of
Required Response Resources for
Facility Response Plans." EPA made
this change to clarify that facility
owners and operators must use this
appendix to determine whether they
have appropriate and adequate amounts
of resources to meet the planning
requirements in this final rule. In this
appendix, EPA has substituted the
words "shall" or "shall, as appropriate"
for the word "should" to clarify whether
the requirements are mandatory,
regardless of the circumstances. The
phrase "shall, as appropriate" is
consistent with EPA's intent in the
proposal to provide owners or operators
flexibility for facilities with unique
circumstances. As required at
§ 112.20(h)(3)(i), in cases where it is not
appropriate to follow part of Appendix
E to identify response resources to meet
the facility response plan requirements,
owners or operators must clearly
demonstrate in the plan why use of
Appendix E is not appropriate at the
facility and make comparable
arrangements for response resources.
Section 311(j)(5)(Q(iii) of the CWA
requires the facility response plan to
identify and ensure the availability, by
contracts or other means approved by
the President (as delegated to EPA), of
private personnel and equipment
necessary to respond to the maximum
extent practicable, to a worst case
discharge. For the purposes of today's
rule, "contract or other approved
means" is defined in § 112.2 of today's
final rule as:
• A written contractual agreement
with an Oil Spill Removal Organization
(OSRO(s)). The agreement must identify
and ensure the availability of the
necessary personnel and equipment
within appropriate response times; and/
or
• Written certification that the
necessary personnel and equipment
resources, owned or operated by the
facility owner or operator, are available
to respond to a discharge within
appropriate response times; and/or
• Active membership in a local or
regional OSRO(s), which has identified
and ensures adequate access, through
membership, to necessary personnel
and equipment within appropriate
response times in the specified
geographic areas; and/or
• Other specific arrangements
approved by the RA upon request of the
owner or operator.
If the owner or operator plans to rely
on facility-owned equipment to satisfy
the requirement at § 112.20(h)(3) to
identify and ensure the availability of
response resources, then equipment
inventories must be provided. When
relying on other arrangements, evidence
of contracts or approved means must be
included in the response plan so that
the availability of resources can be
verified during plan review. It is not
necessary to list specific quantities of
equipment in the facility response plan
when listing a USCG-classified OSRO(s)
that has sufficient removal capacity to
recover up to the rate indicated by the
associated caps. (See Section C.B of this
preamble for additional discussion on
this issue.)
Final Rule Application to Affected
Facilities
The following paragraphs present
EPA's approach to implement the
response plan requirements of OPA and
of this final rule. Section 112.20(a) of
the rule has been revised to reflect this
approach.
The Agency proposed in the February
17,1993 Federal Register (58 FR 8824)
its facility response plan rule for non-
transportation-related onshore facilities
under its jurisdiction. Before this
publication, EPA made available
outreach materials describing its basic
approach for implementation of the
OPA response plan requirements to
allow facility owners or operators the
opportunity to prepare and submit
-------
34076 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 126 / Friday. July 1. 1994 / Rules and Regulations
response plans by the February 18,
1993, OPA deadline. EPA received over
4,500 plans from owners or operators of
facilities that met the criteria to be a
"substantial harm facility." EPA
Regional personnel have identified the
subset of "significant and substantial
harm facilities" from those facilities that
submitted response plans by February
18,1993 and. as appropriate, issued
authorizations to these facilities to
continue to operate after August 18,
1993, based on a review of a facility's
certification of response resources. .
These plans will be reviewed and, if
appropriate, approved under the OPA
statutory requirements by February 18,
1995. For inadequate plans submitted
before the February 18,1993 statutory
deadline, RAs may notify facility
owners or operators that additional
information or plan revisions are
necessary in advance of February 18,
1995, for plan approval.
To recognize the compliance efforts of
owners or operators of those facilities in
existence on or before February 18,1993
who submitted response plans to meet
the OPA requirements by the statutory
deadline. EPA will allow them until
February 18,1995 to revise their
response plan, if necessary, to satisfy
the requirements of this rule and
resubmit their plans (or updated
portions) to the RA. (See
§ 112.20(a)(l)(i).) The revised plans for
"significant and substantial harm
facilities" will be reviewed periodically
thereafter on a schedule established by
the RA provided that the period
between plan reviews does not exceed
five years. (See § 112.20(c)(4).) RAs may
institute a process by which such plan
reviews are staggered so that not all
plans will need to be reapproved in the
same year.
Owners or operators of existing
facilities that were in operation on or
before February 18,1993 who failed to
submit a facility response plan to meet
the OPA requirements by February 18,
1993 must submit a response plan that
meets the requirements of this rule to
the RA by the effective date of the final
rule. (See § 112.20fa)(l)(ii).) EPA
recognizes that such facilities may have
prepared and submitted to the RA some
form of a response plan after the
statutory deadline. Owners or operators
may submit revised portions of the plan
to bring the plan into compliance with
the final rule requirements. Plans for
"significant and substantial harm
facilities" will be reviewed for initial
approval by RAs within a reasonable
time. Such plans will be reviewed
periodically thereafter on a schedule
established by the RA provided that the
period between plan reviews does not
exceed five years. RAs may choose to
stagger such plan reviews.
Owners or operators of facilities that
commenced operations after February
18,1993 but before the effective date of
this final rule must submit'a response
plan that meets the requirements of this
final rule to the RA by its effective date.
EPA recognizes that such facilities may '
have prepared and submitted some form
of a response plan to the RA prior to the
publication of this rule. Owners or
operator may submit revised portions of
the plan to bring the plan into
compliance with the final rule
requirements. (See § 112.20(a)(2)(i).)
RAs will review plans for "significant
and substantial harm facilities" for
initial approval within a reasonable
time. The plans will then be placed on
the Region's review cycle as described
in the preceding paragraphs.
The Agency recognizes that
identification of "substantial harm
facilities" will continue to occur as new
facilities come on-line and existing
facilities newly meet the criteria for
substantial harm as a result of a change
in operations or site characteristics. EPA
is requiring in § 112.20(a)(2)(ii) and (iii)
that: (1) newly constructed facilities
(facilities that come into existence after
the effective date of the final rule) that
meet the applicability criteria must
prepare and submit a response plan in
accordance with the final rule prior to
the start of operations (adjustments to
the response plan to reflect changes that
occur at the facility during the start-up
phase of operations must be submitted
to the Regional Administrator after an
operational trial period of 60 days); and
(2) existing facilities that become subject
to the response plan requirements as the
result of a planned change in operations
(after the effective date of the final rule)
must prepare and submit a response
plan in accordance with the final rule
prior to the implementation of changes
at the facility. RAs will review plans
submitted for such newly designated
"substantial harm facilities" to
determine if a facility is a "significant
and substantial harm facility." RAs will
review for approval plans for
"significant and substantial harm
facilities" within a reasonable time and
then place the plans on the Region's
review cycle as discussed previously.
An existing facility, however, may
become subject to the response plan
requirements through one or a
combination of unplanned events, such
as a reportable spill or the identification
of fish and wildlife and sensitive
environments adjacent to the site during
the ACP refinement process. In the
event of such an unplanned change, the
owner or operator is required to prepare
and submit a response plan to the RA
within six months of when the change
occurs (See § 112.20(a)(2)(iv).) The
Agency believes that allowing six
months from when a change caused by
an unplanned event occurs to prepare
and submit a plan is reasonable.
Under § 112.20(g)(2), facility owners
or operators are required to review
appropriate sections of the NCP and
ACP annually and revise their response
plans accordingly. In addition. •
§ 112.20(d)(l) requires the owner or
operator of a facility for which a
response plan is required to resubmit
relevant portions of the plan within 60
days of each material change in the
plan. For "substantial harm facilities,"
Regions will review such changes to
determine if the facility should be
reclassified as a "significant and
substantial harm facility." For
"significant and substantial harm
facilities," the Regions will review such
changes for approval as described in
§112.20(d)(4).
B. Response to Major Issues Raised by
Commenters
A total of 1282 comments were
received on the proposed rule. The
majority of these comments were one-
page form letters from members of. and
of. numerous environmental
on
professional groups and addressed the
issue of whether certification of
response plans by an independent party
was appropriate. A document entitled
"Response to Comments Document for
the Facility Response Plan Rulemaking"
that summarizes and provides responses
to all comments received on the
proposed rule is available in the public
docket. The major issues raised by the
commenters and the Agency's responses
are described in this section.
Option One vs. Option Two
In the preamble to the proposed rule,
the Agency discussed two options for
identifying facilities subject to facility
response plan requirements under this
rulemaking. In the proposed rule, EPA
proposed die first option, but requested
comment on the merits of both options.
The two alternatives are outlined briefly
in the next paragraph.
Under Option 1, EPA proposed to
require under CWA sections 311(j)(5)
and 311(j)(l)(C) that: (1) the owner or
operator of a "substantial harm facility"
prepare and submit a response plan, and
(2) "significant and substantial harm
facilities" have their plans promptly
reviewed for approval by EPA. Criteria
provided in § 112.20(0(1) coupled with
RA determinations would be used to
identify "substantial harm facilities"
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 1994 /- Rules and Regulations 34077
and a subset of "significant and
substantial harm facilities."
EPA's second approach was also
based on the authority contained in
CWA sections 311(j) (1) and (5). Under
Option 2, all facilities regulated under
40 CFR part 112 would be required to
prepare facility response plans; certain
small, low-risk facilities with secondary
containment structures would be
allowed to prepare an abridged version
of a response plan. Only "substantial
harm facilities" would only be required
to submit plans to EPA. "Significant and
substantial harm facilities" would
submit plans to EPA and have their
plans reviewed and approved.
The Agency received numerous
comments on the two options, with the
vast majority favoring Option 1.
Supporters of Option 1 stated that
Option 2 would create too great a
burden on facilities and EPA, in relation
to the relatively low environmental
benefits, derived from planning.
Commenters representing small, lower-
risk facilities expressed concern that
being required to prepare response
plans would impose unnecessary
financial burdens. In addition.
commenters felt that 40 CFR part 112
was sufficiently protective of the
environment for non-substantial-harm
facilities. A small number of
commenters representing both industry
and environmental groups supported
Option 2. stating that it most closely
reflected the mandates of the OPA and
that it would provide a more
comprehensive emergency response
planning network.
In today's final rule. EPA finalizes
Option 1. The Agency believes that this
option targets high-risk facilities in a
cost effective manner that is
nevertheless protective of the
environment. Owners or operators of
facilities covered by the Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation must evaluate
their facilities against a series of
substantial harm screening criteria.
Although EPA encourages all oil storage
facilities under its jurisdiction to
prepare oil spill response plans, owners
or operators of those facilities not
meeting the criteria provided in
§ 112.20(f)(l) are only required to
prepare a facility response plan if the
RA independently determines that the
facility is a "substantial harm facility."
Because of the size and diversity of the
regulated community under EPA's
jurisdiction pursuant to the OPA and
the tight timeframe established by the
OPA. EPA is implementing a substantial
harm selection process with two
components (i.e.. published criteria and
an RA determination). The published
criteria are designed to capture the vast
majority of "substantial harm facilities."
To simplify the process, EPA developed
specific selection criteria to be applied
in a consistent manner by all owners
and operators. Nevertheless, EPA
believes that there are facilities that do
not meet the criteria in § 112.20(f)(l),
but may, due to facility-specific or
location-specific circumstances; pose
sufficient risk to the environment to be
designated as "substantial harm
facilities." Accordingly, RAs. as the
designated representatives of EPA, are
granted authority to designate a facility
on a case-by-case basis as a "substantial
harm facility."
Substantial Harm Criteria
As required by § 112.20(0(1) and the
flowchart in Appendix C to 40 CFR part
112, a facility is a "substantial harm
facility" if either of the following two
criteria are met:
(1) The facility transfers oil dyer water
to or from vessels and has a total oil
storage capacity greater than or equal to
42,000 gallons; or .
(2) The facility's total oil storage
capacity is greater than or equal to 1
million gallons, and one or more of the
following is true:
• The facility does not have
secondary containment for each
aboveground storage area sufficiently
large to contain the capacity of the
largest aboveground storage tank within
each storage area plus sufficient
freeboard to allow for precipitation;
• The facility is located at a distance
(as calculated using the appropriate
formula in Appendix C or a comparable
formula) such that a discharge from the
facility could cause injury to fish and
wildlife and sensitive environments;
• The facility is located at a distance
(as calculated using the appropriate
formula in Appendix C or a comparable
formula) such that a discharge from the
facility would shut down operations at
a public drinking water intake; or
• The facility has had a importable
spill greater than or equal to 10.000
gallons within the last 5 years.
A number of commenters suggested
that EPA is attempting to regulate
transportation-related facilities that are.
covered by USCG regulations. Several of
these commenters stated that EPA's
approach would result in redundant and
conflicting regulations for such
facilities.
The Agency considered these
comments and decided to retain the
over-water transfers criterion
(§ 112.20(f)(l)(i)). The criterion was
designed to identify as posing a risk of
substantial harm to the environment
those facilities that store oil above a
certain quantity located in close
proximity to navigable waters. EPA is
not attempting to regulate marine
transfer operations. In 40 CFR 112.1,
EPA clearly explains which facilities
fall under its authority. The section
states that EPA jurisdiction does not
extend to transportation-related
facilities. The Agency has the authority,
however, to regulate the non-
transportation-related storage
component of facilities that may have a
marine transfer component.
Several commenters indicated that the
42,000 gallon cutoff for transfers over-
water is appropriate. Other commenters
questioned the potential of a 42,000
gallon spill to cause .substantial harm to
the environment.
EPA has decided that non-
transportation-related storage
components of complexes should be
regulated at a lower capacity threshold
than storage facilities without an over-
water transfer component (i.e., 42,000
gallons versus 1 million gallons),
because the location of over-water
transfer facilities poses a higher risk to
navigable waters. Spills at such facilities
are more likely to reach navigable
waters than spills from facilities located
further from navigable waters. Also, it is
likely that a higher percentage of the
total amount released will reach
navigable waters at a facility directly
adjacent to navigable waters than at a
facility located further away. Data
indicate that for oil discharges above
42,000 gallons, the number of-inddents
with reported effects including fishkills,
wildlife damage, or fire is greater than
for oil discharges below 42.000 gallons.
At the 0.01 level of significance, the size
of the release is related to the
occurrence of reported effects. For
certain release size thresholds other
than 42,000 gallons, however, a similar
statistically significant relationship ,
could not be shown.2
EPA requested comment in the.
proposed rule on the appropriateness of
the use of a proposed 1 million gallon
or a 200,000 gallon size cut-off for total '
storage capacity to determine a
threshold for substantial harm. (See
The Agency received numerous
, comments suggesting that the 1 million
gallon cutoff was appropriate. A smaller
number of commenters including other
Federal government agencies and i
environmental associations, indicated
that the size cut-off for substantial harm ,
should be 200,000 gallons or lower.
' Study prepared for EPA titled "Analysis of Data
Relating to Facility Size, Oil Discharge*, and
Environmental Effects." Available for inspection in
the Superfund Docket, Room M261S. at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street.
SW.. Washington. DC 20460.
-------
34078 Federal Register /. Vol. 59, No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 19.94 / Rules and Regulations
Advocates for a lower cut-off contended
that small facilities with a high
throughput may have a higher potential
to cause substantial harm than large
facilities with low throughput. These
commenters also suggested that the OPA
Conference Report indicated that the
requirement to prepare and submit
response plans should be applied
broadly, because even small discharges
from an onshore facility could result in
substantial harm under certain
circumstances. ',
Although EPA recognizes that large
storage capacity is a substantial harm
risk factor, the Agency also recognizes
that the intent of OPA was not to
exclude certain smaller facilities, such
as those near public drinking water
intakes or fish and wildlife and
sensitive environments, from
consideration as having the potential to
cause substantial harm. EPA intends
that the RA determination process be
used to identify additional high-risk
facilities that do not meet the criteria in
§ 112.20(f)(l) although nonetheless pose
substantial harm.
The Agency decided to identify
certain high-risk facilities that pose a
threat of substantial harm because of
their size in combination with facility-
specific characteristics (i.e., secondary
containment and spill history) or
location-specific .(i.e., proximity to fish
and wildlife and sensitive environments
and public drinking water intakes). The
largest oil spills, which could pose the
greatest risk to-the environment, occur
at large facilities. Data on the effects of
spills from aboveground storage tanks
indicate that when larger quantities of
oil are discharged, fish and wildlife
damage, off-site soil pollution, and
property damage are greater than for
smaller discharges.3 The Agency
believes that regulatory coverage and
protection of the environment will be
ensured, since facilities that are smaller
than 1 million gallons, but that could
cause substantial harm because of their
proximity to navigable waters or fish
and wildlife and sensitive
environments, could be selected under
the RA's authority to require a facility
to submit a response plan, regardless of
whether the facility meets the criteria in
§ 112.20(f)(l) (although the RA
considers these factors as part of the
determination).
In addition, several commenters
suggested that the average oil storage
inventory of a facility should be used
instead of capacity to determine the oil
storage threshold for substantial harm.
Commenters indicated that the normal
amount of oil stored at a facility is often
'Ibid.
less than the total capacity, because
facilities are overdesigned to meet
seasonal demands. Commenters also
contended that tanks dedicated for
standby service and tanks not in service
should not be counted in determining a
facility's capacity, and that certification
methods could be employed to ensure
that excess capacity is not being used.
In today's final rule, EPA retains
capacity rather than inventory as the
basis for assessing risk to the
environment. The decision was based
largely on the fact that substantial harm
determinations using inventory would
be difficult or impossible to enforce and
might not accurately reflect the true
worst case for the facility. EPA would be
unable to inspect facilities often enough
to ensure that their inventory is actually
below the substantial harm threshold.
Moreover, owners or operators would
likely find it difficult to constantly track
inventory to ensure that changes in
inventory did not trigger additional
regulatory requirements and at some
time the tank could be filled to capacity.
In addition, there is a need to maintain
consistency in the Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation, and the original
regulation uses storage capacity for
threshold determinations instead of
using inventory. However, EPA has
proposed in a separate rulemaking "
published on October 22,1991 (58 FR
54612), to allow owners or operators to
exclude permanently closed tanks (as
defined in § 112.2 of the proposed rule
published on October 22,1991) from the
total capacity of the facility for the
purposes of the Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation. If these changes are
finalized, permanently closed tanks
would not have to be considered in the
substantial harm evaluation.
Several commenters argued that the
10,000 gallon reportable spill criterion
(proposed at § 112.20(f)(ii)(D), 58 FR
8849) should be modified to allow a
facility owner the opportunity to
petition the RA for exclusion based
upon modifications to the facility or to
its spill prevention procedures made
after the release.
EPA agrees that continuous
improvements in spill prevention
procedures are important and tha"t
owners and operators that have
significantly upgraded their facility
within five years of a spill greater than
or equal to 10,000 gallons (by replacing
tanks or adding secondary containment,
for example) should be allowed to
request exclusion from the substantial
harm category.
The Agency includes a two-stage
appeals process in § 112.20(i) of today's
rule. The appeals process allows an
owner or operator to petition the RA to
remove a facility from the category of
substantial harm because of
improvements at the facility that lead to
greatly reduced risk to the environment.
The appeals process is discussed in
greater detail in the "Appeals Process"
section of this preamble. Of course, even
if a facility obtains relief through
appeal, the RA still retains authority to
require a Plan, under § 112.20(b) should
the circumstances on which the relief
was granted change in the future.
In the proposed rule, EPA provided
formulas in Appendix C for owners or
operators to determine appropriate
distances to fish and wildlife and
sensitive environments and drinking
water intakes for purposes of evaluating
the substantial harm criterion. EPA also
proposed to allow the use of an
alternative formula acceptable to the
RA. EPA solicited data and comments
on the appropriateness of the distance
calculations in Appendix C for inland
areas.
Several commenters supported the
overall approach of using a-calculated
distance to define proximity. However,
numerous commenters indicated that
the formulas used to calculate the
planning distances in Appendix C are
too complex, cumbersome, or
impracticable for general use.
The Agency does not agree. The
planning distance formulas proposed in
Appendix C are appropriate based on an
evaluation of engineering principles and
input from an interagency technical
workgroup that included representatives
from the Natural Resource Trustee
agencies, as well the agencies
responsible for measuring river height
and flow. The Agency's primary goal
was to provide a series of formulas that
were technically supportable. EPA has
provided the least complex formulas
that are still technically supportable.
Moreover, EPA allows owners or
operators to use comparable formulas to
calculate appropriate distances
provided that the formula is acceptable
to the RA and they send supporting
documentation on the reliability and
analytical soundness of the formulas
(see § 112.20(a)(3)).
Several commenters noted that the
formulas proposed in Appendix C did
not account for tides, currents, wind
direction, and other weather-dependent
flow rates. One commenter
recommended that EPA use .the USCG
planning distances for discharges into
tidal waters. To more accurately account
for the range of movement of spilled oil
in certain aquatic environments, EPA
includes in Appendix C of today's final
rule a section on oil transport in tidal
influence areas as a separate type of
calculation. EPA adopts the tidal
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59. No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
34079
influence area criteria from the USCG's
interim fin?l rule for Marine
Transportation-Related (MTR) Facilities
(58 FR 7358. February 5.1993).
Some commenters stated that the
proposed response times in Table 3 of
Appendix C for calculating the planning
distances were inappropriate and would
overpredict the area of the spill. Some
commenters noted that actual response
times could be considerably faster than
those proposed because some facilities
have their own response resources.
Conversely, one commenter expressed
concern that the response times are too
short and do not account for adverse
weather conditions or phased planning
required for certain discharges. Other
commenters noted that the proposed
response times in Table 3 of Appendix
'C were inconsistent with the response
times listed in Appendix F of the
proposed rule for determining response
resources for a worst case discharge and
should be changed. No data were
provided by commenters to support
alternative response times for use in the
distance calculations.
In today's rule, to clarify the
information presented, EPA reformats
Table 3 of Appendix C. EPA used the
same geographic areas for facility .
location (i.e.. higher volume port area,
Great Lakes, and all other river and
canal, inland, and nearshore areas) as
those specified in the equipment
appendix (Appendix E) to maintain
consistency between different sections
of the regulation and because the facility
location directly impacts the arrival
time of response resources.
The specified time intervals in Table
3 of Appendix C are to be used only to
aid in the determination of whether a
facility is a "substantial harm facility."
Once it is determined that a plan must
be developed for the facility, the owner
or operator would consult Appendix E
to determine appropriate resource levels
and response times. The specified time
intervals in Table 3 of Appendix C are
less than the Tier 1 response times
specified in Appendix E for the
corresponding operating areas, because
EPA assumes that, for purposes of
determining whether a facility is a
"substantial harm facility," no response
planning has been done. This
conservative assumption is only used
for screening purposes and is not used
for other aspects of the rulemaking.
Owners or operators are reminded that
EPA has included at § 112.20(i) of the
final rule an appeals process for, among
other things, the determination of
substantial harm.
EPA believes that these times
accurately estimate the times needed to
respond to spills from EPA-regulated
facilities that have not pre-planned their
response to spills (i.e., a facility owner
or operator who has not pre-planned
response activities would be able to
contact a local spill response company,
coordinate response actions, and deploy
resources within 15 or 27 hours
following discovery of the spill,
depending on facility location). In
general, facilities located in higher
volume port areas have a higher density
of response contractors and resources
nearby. Therefore, EPA estimated a
shorter time interval for these facilities
compared with facilities located in all
other operating areas.
One commenter noted an inaccuracy
in the formula proposed in Attachment
C-m of Appendix C of the proposed
rule. Oil Transport on Still Water.
(which converts an oil discharge volume
into a surface area), when the volume of
the spilled oil is converted to units
other than cubic meters. In Attachment
C-III of Appendix C of today's rule, EPA
incorporates a conversion factor into the
formula to address the inaccuracy by
allowing facility owners and operators
to directly input the worst case
discharge volume in gallons and to
obtain a spill surface area in square feet.
EPA requested comment on the
appropriateness of using specified
distances to environmentally sensitive
areas (fish and wildlife and sensitive
environments) in the substantial harm
criterion. Many commenters suggested
that EPA allow a facility owner or
operator to use alternative methods or
set distances to determine the
appropriate distance from the facility for
screening purposes. In today's rule, the
Agency allows the use of formulas
comparable to the Appendix C formula
to calculate the planning distance to fish
and wildlife and sensitive environments
or public drinking water intakes (see
§ 112.20(a)(3) and § 112.20(f)(i) (B) and
(C)), provided that facility owners and
operators attach documentation to the
response plan cover sheet on the
reliability and analytical soundness of
the comparable formula. EPA believes
that calculating a planning distance
using the formulas in Appendix C is
more appropriate than using set
distances to fish and wildlife and
sensitive environments, because of the
wide variety of site-specific conditions
that may surround a particular facility
and the various flow characteristics of
water bodies.
In § 112.2 of the proposed rule. EPA
defined "injury" as "a measurable
adverse change, either long- or short-
term, in the chemical or physical quality
or the viability of a natural resource
resulting either directly or indirectly
from exposure-ID a discharge of oil. or
exposure to a product of reactions
resulting from a discharge of oil." This
definition is adopted from the Natural
Resource Damage Assessments (NRDA)
rule at 43 CFR 11.14(v) to assist facility
owners and operators and RAs to
determine whether a facility is located
at a distance from fish and wildlife and
sensitive environments such that an oil
spill will cause "injury." The Agency
requested comment on the
appropriateness of defining "injury" in
such a manner.
Several commenters stated that the
definition of "injury" was so broad that
it would include almost every facility
that stores greater than or equal to one
million gallons of oil and would result
in excessive regulation, economic
burden, and unnecessary lawsuits.
Several commenters stated that EPA
should limit the definition of "injury"
so that facility owners and operators
would only have to consider the
potential to cause substantial harm.
rather than the potential to cause any
harm. Some commenters supported
EPA's choice to incorporate a definition
of "injury" .that was already
promulgated under other regulatory
programs.
The Agency carefully considered
comments on the definition of "injury"
and consulted with NOAA and other
Natural Resource Trustees agencies as to
the merits of using an alternative
definition. EPA maintains that the
definition of "injury" is appropriate to
assess substantial harm based on the
extensive experience of Natural
Resource Trustees in conducting
evaluations of oil spill impacts on
natural resources. Federal officials
authorized by the President and the
authorized representatives of Indian
tribes and State and foreign
governments act as public trustees to
recover damages to natural resources
under their trusteeship. Under the NCP,
each trustee has responsibilities for
protection of resources; mitigation and
assessment of damage; and restoration,
rehabilitation, replacement, or
acquisition of resources equivalent to
those affected. Because of the need to
maintain consistency with the NCP, the
Agency believes it is appropriate to use
the definition of injury as established by
the Natural Resource Trustees for this
rule. In the preamble to the NRDA final
rule (51 FR 27706), DOI indicates that
the injury definition does not measure
insignificant changes and that the
definition relies on changes that have
been demonstrated to adversely impact
the resources in question, or services
provided by those resources. EPA notes
that there is nothing in the definition of
"injury" that refers to the term harm (or
-------
34080 Federal Register / Vol. 59. No. 126 / Friday. July 1. 1994 / Rules and Regulations
substantial harm), and that the term
"injury" is not equivalent to these
terms. The potential for a spill to cause
any injury to a fish and wildlife and
sensitive environment coupled with a
total oil storage capacity of greater than
or equal to 1 million gallons forms one
of the substantial harm criteria. The
criterion is designed as an indicator of
the potential for a discharge from a
facility to cause substantial harm to the
environment.
The Agency requested comment on
whether private drinking water supplies
should be included in the criteria for
determination of substantial harm.
Some commenters supported the same
treatment for private water intakes as for
public water supplies if the private
drinking water supplies are surface
water intakes rather than groundwater
wells. One commenter recommended
that the RA consider private drinking
water intakes in the determination of
significant and substantial harm.
Conversely, several commenters
opposed the use of proximity to private
drinking water intakes as a criterion for
the substantial harm determination
because most private drinking water
intakes use groundwater. These
commenters stated that such private
intakes would be difficult to identify
and locate. Two commenters suggested
that EPA should define public drinking
water intakes based on the definition of
"public water systems" at 40 CFR
143.2(c) which excludes private water
intakes.
EPA agrees with the commenters that
most private drinking water intakes are
difficult to identify and that most use
groundwater. In today's rule, EPA does
not include proximity to private
drinking water intakes as a criterion for
use by owners or operators to identify
whether their facility is a "substantial
harm facility." The RA. however, may
consider a facility's proximity to private
drinking water intakes in the
determination of substantial harm or
significant and substantial harm. In
Appendix C to today's rule, EPA
clarifies that public drinking water
intakes are analogous to "public water
systems" as defined at 40 CFR 143.2.
Several commenters opposed the
requirements to calculate a planning
distance to determine substantial harm
if a facility has adequate secondary
containment. Some commenters stated
that the planning distance calculations
should reflect the presence of secondary
and tertiary containment and give credit
for flow reduction measures and
inspection programs. The Conference
Report states that in defining a worst
case discharge as the largest foreseeable
discharge at a facility, Congress
intended to describe a spill that is worse
than either the largest spill to date or the
maximum probable spill for the facility
type. (Conference Report No. 101-653,
p. 147.) EPA interprets this language to
mean that facility response plans should
address cases where prevention
measures could fail. Indeed, as detailed
in the Technical Background
.Document * supporting this rulemaking,
in some cases, containment systems fail
resulting in the discharge of oil to
surface waters. Therefore, EPA
maintains that proximity to fish and
wildlife and sensitive environments and
drinking water intakes must be
considered despite the presence of
secondary containment. This is an
example of EPA's long established
policy set forth in § 112.1(d)(l)(i), that
the determination of proximity "shall be
based solely upon a consideration of the
geographical, locational aspects of the
facility (such as proximity to navigable
waters or adjoining shorelines, land
Contour, drainage, etc.) and shall
exclude consideration of manmade
features such as dikes. . ." It is also
consistent with the statutory definition
of worst case discharge for vessels,
which includes the entire cargo tank
capacity, whether or not the vessel has
a double hull or other spill prevention
measures.
RA Determination
Several commenters indicated their
support for the provision in the
proposed rule that states factors that the
RA may use (§ 112.20(f)(2)) to determine
whether a facility is a "substantial harm
facility" irrespective of the substantial
harm criteria in § 112.20(f)(l). One of
these commenters suggested that this
authority provides a system of checks
and balances that should ensure that all
facilities subject to the regulation will
be required to comply. Other
commenters expressed concern that the
authority granted to the RA in
§ 112.20(b)(l) provides the RA with too
much discretion in determining whether
a facility is a "substantial harm facility."
Some of these commenters suggested
that the criteria used by the RA should
be objective and consistent with the
criteria used by owners or operators,
and expressed confusion about the RA's
authority to use "other site-specific
characteristics or environmental
factors" to select facilities. One
commenter indicated that, as proposed,
the RA would not be required to look at
< The Technical Background Document to
Support the Implementation of the OPA Response
Plan Requirements. U.S. EPA. February 1993.
Available for inspection in the Superfund Docket,
room M2615, at the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. 401 M Street SW.. Washington, DC 20480.
the relationship of. the specified criteria
provided in § 112.20(f)(l) (e.g., the RA
may consider that one criterion is
enough to require a response plan to be
submitted). One commenter felt that
there is insufficient justification in the
proposed rule for allowing the RA to
select facilities that do not meet the
criteria in §112.20(0(1).
EPA recognizes that RAs possess
unique knowledge of Region-specific
considerations that may have a bearing
on whether to identify a facility as a
"substantial harm facility." This RA
authority is necessary, because the OPA
through E.0.12777 directs EPA
ultimately to determine which facilities
are "substantial harm facilities" and
"significant and substantial harm
facilities." As such, EPA retains the RA
determination component of substantial
harm selection in the final rule. In
§ 112.20(b)(l), EPA clarifies that if such
a determination is made, the Regional
Administrator shall notify the facility
owner or operator in writing and shall
provide a basis for the determination. •
Further, EPA notes that an appeals
process is included to allow owners or
operators the opportunity to challenge
the RA's determination.'
EPA is developing a guidance
document to assist the RA with the
identification of "substantial harm
facilities." This guidance would outline
specific screening procedures for use by
RAs and will foster consistency in the
way the substantial harm factors are
applied. Further, RAs may use
"Guidance for Facility and Vessel
Response Plans: Fish and Wildlife and
Sensitive Environments" (see Appendix
E to this part, section 10, for
availability) and information from the
ACPs, when available, to identify fish
and wildlife and sensitive environments
as part of the substantial harm
determination process.
Public Petitions
Section 112.20(f)(2)(ii) allows any
person who believes that a facility may
be a "substantial harm facility" to
provide.information to the RA through
a petition for his or her use in
determining whether the facility should
be required to prepare and submit a
response plan. This petition must
include a discussion of how the
substantial harm factors in
§ 112.20(f)(2)(i) apply to the facility.
Commenters in favor of allowing the
public to have input in the
determination of whether a facility is a
"substantial harm facility" argued that
the public should play a larger role in
the selection and review process.
However, many of these commenters
argued that the proposed procedures are
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 126 / Friday. July 1, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 34081
too burdensome for petitioners and that
the facility owner or operator should
have the responsibility to provide the
necessary information. Commenters
against allowing public petitions felt
that the public petition process would
be burdensome to EPA and the
regulated community. Some
commenters argued that the public does
not have enough information to
participate in the process.
In today's final rule. EPA establishes
a process to allow the public the
opportunity to provide input on a
voluntary basis and welcomes such
involvement. The Agency has decided
to broaden the language in
§ 112.20(f)(2)(ii) from the proposed rule
to clarify that other government
agencies in addition to the public may
provide information to RAs for the
determination of substantial harm and
that the RA shall consider such
petitions and respond in an appropriate
amount of time. The Agency believes
that information provided by the public
and other government agencies will
assist rather than burden the RA.
However, reviewing non-transportation-
related facilities' response plans for
approval is a governmental function
delegated to EPA.
EPA wishes to clarify that it is not
necessary for petitioners to determine
quantitatively whether the facility meets
one of the specific criteria in
§ 112.20(f)(l). but rather to provide a
reasonable basis, from the factors in
§ 112.20(f](2)(i). for asserting that the
facility may pose a risk to the
environment. A petition that fails to
document the reasons why a facility
should be classified as a "substantial
harm facility" (e.g., the facility is near
a drinking water supply or a priority
sensitive environment listed in an ACP,
the facility has a history of frequent
spills or poor maintenance, etc.) may
not be considered by the RA. However,
petitioners would not have to provide
detailed analyses and calculations.
Other avenues of participation for the
public in the response planning process
include involvement in the ACP
development process or participation in
theLEPC.
Determination of Significant and
Substantial Harm
As discussed in Section n. A of this
preamble, RAs will review submitted
plans to identify facilities that are
"significant and substantial harm
facilities" using the substantial harm
factors set out in § 112.20(0(2), and
additional significant and substantial
harm factors in § 112.20(f)(3).
Several commenters supported the
proposed factors to determine
significant and substantial harm,
indicating that EPA's use of risk-based
screening criteria for substantial harm
and significant and substantial harm
determinations would reduce the
prospect of excessive regulation for
those facilities that do not pose a
significant risk. Others indicated that
EPA should define more clearly the
criteria that the RA would use to
determine significant and substantial
harm to help ensure consistent
application of the criteria both within
an EPA Region and across EPA Regions.
Several commenters suggested that EPA
develop a screening mechanism that
would provide the RA with some
concrete guidelines to follow but still
allow some latitude to exercise his or
her expert judgment.
EPA Headquarters has provided
written guidance 5 to Regional personnel
to assist them to determine which
facilities are "significant and substantial
harm facilities." The guidance provides
a series of screens and instructions on
how to evaluate the risk factors
included at § 112.20(f)(3) of today's rule.
In general, the screens provide various
combinations of the risk factors that
indicate increased levels of risk posed
by a particular facility. For example, a
facility that has an oil storage capacity
greater than 1 million gallons and meets
more than one of the risk-based criteria
described in § 112.20(f)(l)(U) (A)
through (D) would be a "significant and
substantial harm facility." The guidance
document will help ensure a greater
degree of consistency in Regional
determinations of "significant and
substantial harm facilities," but
preserves the RA's ability to make case-
by-case determinations based on unique
facility- or location-specific concerns.
One commenter noted that EPA and
the USCG chose different approaches for
separating "substantial harm facilities"
and "significant and substantial harm
facilities." The commenter said that
EPA's case-by-case determination of
significant and substantial harm is more
subjective than the USCG's, and has the
potential for treating facility owners
unequally.
EPA believes that its approach to
determine substantial harm and
significant and substantial harm is
consistent with the OPA and does not
diverge from the USCG's approach. The
agencies' approaches are parallel in that
each accounts for the higher risk of
harm associated with transfers of high
9 "Interim Guidance {or the Determination of
Significant and Substantial Harm." U.S. EPA. June
IS. 1993. Available for inspection in the Superfund
Docket. Room M2615. at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street. SW., Washington.
DC 20460.
volumes of oil over water (i.e., at
locations adjacent to navigable waters).
Because EPA regulates a larger and more
diverse universe of facilities than the
'USCG, it would be difficult to. publish
a few general criteria that include the
majority of high-risk facilities without
also including many low-risk facilities.
Therefore, as discussed previously, EPA
decided to implement a substantial
harm selection process with two
components (i.e.. published criteria and
an RA determination). The OPA
Conference Report explicitly states that
significant and substantial harm criteria
should include, at a minimum, oil
storage capacity, location of fish and
wildlife and sensitive environments,
and location of potable water supplies.
(H.R. Rep. No. 101-653.101st Cong., 2d
Sess. 1991 at p. 150.) These criteria are
among the elements the RAs may
consider, as set forth in §§ 112.20(f) (1)
and (2) in making the significant and
substantial harm determination.
Further, where the Conference Report
states that the criteria should not result
in selection of facilities based solely on
the size or age of storage tanks (See H.R.
Rep. No. 101-653,101st Cong., 2d Sess.
1990 at p. 150). it implies that these may
be among the criteria. EPA does- not
agree that its case-by-case approach to
identify a "significant and substantial
harm facility" is overly subjective. As
previously discussed, EPA has provided
written guidance to Regions on the
determination of. significant and
substantial harm to promote a more
objective and consistent approach
across all EPA Regions.
As the President's designee for
regulating non-transportation-related .
onshore facilities, EPA has decided that
Region-specific and facility-specific
information is relevant in the
determination of significant and
substantial harm, because these
elements may vary materially between
Regions and facilities. For example,
some facilities may be located on karst
or unstable terrain because of the
presence of underground streams or
fault lines while other facilities are
situated on more stable terrain where .
the risk of discharge may be lower.
Some commenters argued that the RA
should review and approve plans
submitted by "substantial harm
facilities." They indicated that without /
such approval, these plans are likely to
vary widely in their capacity to assure
adequate response, and may even ,
propose inappropriate use of
dispersants or other treatment ,
technologies. .
. EPA agrees that a review of plans \
from "substantial harm facilities" may
be desirable. The OPA legislative ''
-------
34082 Federal Register / Vol. 59. No. 126 / Friday. July 1. 1994 / Rules and Regulations
history indicates that criteria should be
developed to select for review and
approval plans for onshore facilities that
could cause both significant and
substantial harm. (See H.R. Rep. No.
101-653.101st Cong.. 2d Sess. 1990 at
p. 150.) Congress expected that only
some proportion of all submitted
onshore facility response plans would
be reviewed and approved. The highest.
priority for EPA's use of limited
resources must be directed to those
facilities on which Congress has ,
focused. The Agency has and will
continue to undertake a limited review
of all plans to identify "significant and
substantial harm facilities."
Submission and Resubmission Process
In §§ 112.20(a)(2)(ii) and (iii) of the
proposed rule, EPA proposed that newly
constructed or modified facilities.
which become subject .to the response
plan requirements, must prepare and
submit a' response plan prior to the start
of operations of the new facility or
modified portions of die facility. For
unplanned changes that result in a
facility meeting the substantial harm
screening criteria, EPA proposed to
allow the facility owner or operator six
months to prepare and submit a
response plan. Several commenten
urged EPA to give owners and operators
time following completion of
construction or modification to prepare
and submit a response plan to EPA
(implying that operations should be
allowed to proceed before submission of
the response plan). Most commenten
felt that the six-month time period was
sufficient for submitting a facility
response plan after unplanned changes*
EPA does not require owners or
operators to prepare and submit a plan
before beginning or completing
construction, but prior to the handling,
storing, or transporting of oil. An owner
or operator can prepare a plan during
the construction phase, and complete
and submit it before the facility is ready
to come on line. EPA recognizes that
changes to a facility's operations are
common during the start-up phase of a
new facility or new component of a
facility. As stated in the proposed rule
preamble (58 FR 8829), adjustments to
the response plan can be made and
submitted to the Agency after an
operational trial period of 60 days. In
today's final rule, the Agency adds this
recommendation as a requirement at
§112.20(a)(2)(ii)and(iii)
(§ 112.20(a)(2)(i)(B) and (Q of the
proposed rule) and clarifies that
adjustments to the plan to reflect
changes that occur at the facility during
the start-up phase must be submitted
after an operational trial period of 60
days. EPA believes that this revision
will ensure that the information
contained in the plan is reflective of the
normal operating conditions at the
facility.
Section 311(j)(5)(C) of the CWA states
that facility response plans must be
updated periodically, and under section
311(j)(5)(D). EPA (as the President's
delegatee) is required to review
periodically, and. if appropriate,
approve each plan for a "significant and
substantial harm facility." In
§ 112.20(g), the proposed rule provided
that owners or operators must review
relevant portions of the NCP and
applicable ACP annually and revise the
response plan to ensure consistency
with these plans. Section 112.20(g) of
the proposed rule also proposed to
require owners or operators to update
their plans periodically when changes at
the facility warrant such updates. In
§ 112.2Q(c). the proposed rule stated that
the RA would review periodically
response plans for "significant and
substantial harm facilities." No other
specific time periods for plan review
were proposed, but in the preamble EPA
solicited comments on how frequently
the RA should review approved
response plans.
Several commenten suggested that
die rule should provide definite time
periods for plan review, and some
supported annual plan review by each
facility. Many commenten had an
inion about the frequency of review
approved plans by the RA. Some
supported a three-year time period, but
the majority preferred five years. A few
fiom^^^n*ftrff ft?cpFBft8ftd ^Tonco^n ux&t
specific reevaluation and reapproval
intervals were not part of the proposed
rule.
As described in the proposed rule, the
owner or operator of a "substantial harm
facility" must review the NCP and the
ACP annually and revise the plan, if
necessary, to be consistent with these
documents. (See $ 112.20(g](2).) To
clarify other review requirements, EPA
has reorganized $ 112.20(g) by removing
the requirement for periodic review and
update of the plan from paragraph (g)(l)
and moving it to new paragraph (g)(3).
In S 112.20(c) of the final rule, EPA
revises paragraph (c)(4) to indicate that
approved plans will be reviewed by the
RA periodically on a schedule
established by the RA provided that the
period between plan reviews does not
exceed five yean. As discussed
previously, RAs may choose to stagger
such reviews to facilitate the review
process. This five-year time period is
consistent with the USCG interim final
rule for MTR facilities. (See 33 CFR part
154.) Within the five-year period. EPA
will undertake a full reevaluation of the
plan and. if necessary, require
amendments. With regard to
commenten' concerns that specific
review intervals were not identified in
the proposal, periodic review is
expressly required by OPA, and EPA
requested comment on what review
interval would be appropriate (See 58
FR8828).
Proposed § 112.20(d) would require
owners or operators of "significant and
substantial harm facilities" to revise and
resubmit the plan for approval within
60 days of each material change at the
facility. EPA revises § 112.20{d)(l) to
indicate that owners or operators of all
facilities for which a response plan is
required ("substantial harm facilities"
and "significant and substantial harm
facilities") must revise the plan (and
resubmit relevant portions to the RA)
when there are facility changes that
materially may affect the response to a
worst qqff^ discharge. This change is
necessary to ensure that EPA receives
the necessary information to determine
if "substantial harm facilities" undergo
changes that could lead to their being
designated as "significant and
substantial harm facilities." The
requirement for the RA to review for
approval changes to plans for .
"significant and «ih«t«nH«l harm
facilities" that was proposed at
$ 112.20(d)(l) has been moved to new
§ 112.20(d)(4). Some commenten
supported the 60-day time period, some
thought it was too short, and others
thought it was too long. One commenter
pointed out that proposed § 112.20(d)(2)
implied that material changes must be
approved prior to being made. A few
commenten requested clarification on
which m»»«T»al changes trigger
resubmisnon, an<^ two commenten
opposed resubmitting the entire plan.
rather *han a plan amendment. EPA
requested comments on the proposal in
§ 112^0(d)(2) that owners and operators
must »ihmit rhenium to the emergency
notification list to die RA as these
changes occur, without resubmitting the
. Ian for approval. Some commenten
supported the proposal and others
opposed it as an unnecessary burden.
As stated in the preamble to the
proposed rule, a material change is one
that could affect the adequacy of a
facility's response capabilities. The
material changes listed in the final rule
are not inclusive, but are similar to
those in the USCG regulations at 33 CFR
154.1065 for revisions that must be
submitted by a MTR facility for
inclusion in an existing plan or for
approval. Because of the scope of
facilities that EPA regulates, it is '
difficult to provide a definitive list of all
-------
Federal Register / VoL 59, No. 126 / Friday. July 1, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
34083
material changes that would be
appropriate for regulated facilities under
all circumstances. EPA's intent in
including those changes listed in
§ 112.20(d)(l)(i) through (iv) is to
describe those types of changes that are
so significant in nature that they should
trigger revision of the response plan and
submission of the new information to
EPA for review.
EPA clarifies in $ 112.20(d) (1) and (2)
that a change in the identity of an
OSRO(a) is a material change requiring
approval only if it results in a material
change in support capabilities.
However, a copy of any such change
must be provided to the RA. Paragraph
(d)(l)(v) specifies that any other changes
that materially affect implementation of
the response plan would trigger
submission. This requirement allows
the RA discretion to determine on a site-
specific basis what changes may require
submission because they materially
affect implementation of the facility's
response plan. The purpose of proposed
§ 112.20(d)(2) was to clarify that certain
changes, such as revised names or
telephone numbers, do not require RA
approval but must be included in
updating the pi"" TO avoid c^nftiT^on,
the word "prior" has been removed in.
the final rule. EPA does not intend
minor changes to facility operations
(e.g., «mail fluctuations in th» number of
product transfers) or response planning
procedures (e.g., changes in the internal
alerting procedures) to trigger
submission.
The 60-day time period for submitting
revised portions of the plan as a result.
of a material change is retained in the
final rule. EPA believes the 60-day time
period is reasonable and is consistent
with the intent of the OPA. while giving
facility owners or operators flexibility to
comply with the response plan
requirements in a timely manner.
Furthermore, to ease the burden on
facility owners or operators. EPA revises
§ I12.20(d)(l) in the final rule to
indicate that the owner or operator must
submit only relevant portions of the'
plan (i.e., those portions that were
revised to reflect the material change)
and not the entire response plan. Thia
change will facilitate the process to
revise and submit required information
within 60 days of the change. RAs will
review submitted information for
approval and notify owners or operators
within a reasonable time if the plan
amendments are unacceptable.
Appeals Process
In the proposed rule, the Agency
requested comment on allowing the
owner or operator to participate in and
appeal the RA's determination of
substantial harm and significant and
substantial harm, and the disapproval of
a facility response plan.
Several commenters were concerned
that lack of an appeals process would
deprive facility owners or operators of
their due process. Many commenters
supported a formal appeals process,
while others stated that an exchange of
information before an appeal would
assist the RA in making a final
determination. Others preferred a
combined appeals process, with the first
stage of an appeal involving an informal
exchange of information followed, if
necessary, by a formal appeals process
(such as described hi $ 112.4(f)) to
ensure due process. Several commenters
requested a process by which a facility
could be removed from the category of
mhatantial harm of significant and
substantial harm because of
improvements at the facility that lead to
reduced risk to the environment.
EPA recognizes the importance of
allowing facility owner or operators to
present relevant information, and
therefore includes in § 112.20(1) of
today's final rule a two-part appeals
process. The first stage allows a facility
owner or operator to submit to the RA
a request for reconsideration that
include*, insinuation anil <"
support the request The RA would
evaluate *h* submitted information and
reach a decision on the facility's risk
classification or *ty» «t«*n« of plan.
approval (including whether changes to
a facility's wont case discharge
planning volume are necessary far
approval) as rapidly as possible. EPA
expects that the request for
reconsideration process will be the
primary ""»»i««ni«m to address disputes.
over EPA darfaiona- However, a follow-
up process will also be available for
appeal of *n* RA's Hfttftrtn^T'a^nn to *h*
Administrator of EPA using procedures
similar to those in § 112.4(f).
The appeals processes described in
the preceding paragraph are also
available to owners or operators of
iM that have bean classified as
and
•ithytantial harm fgg iffjnf Hmn and who
believe that, because of an unplanned
event (e.g., a significant change to the
ACP's list of protection priorities) or
improvements at the facility (e.g..
construction of adequate secondary
pnntaininant or an improved spill
history), the facility now poses a lower
risk of harm to the environment
Certification of Non-Substantial Harm
EPA proposed in $m.20(e) to
* require that owners or operators of those
regulated facilities not submitting
response plans complete and m
at the facility, with the SPCC Plan, a
certification form that indicates that the
facility was determined by the owner or
operator not to be a "substantial harm
facility" as indicated by the flowchart
contained in Appendix C
Several commenters supported EPA's
proposal to allow facilities to self-
certify when they do not meet the
criteria for substantial harm and agreed
that submission of the form to EPA was
unnecessary. However, other
commenters were concerned that there
is no outside review or verification of a
facility owner's or operator's evaluation
of the substantial harm criteria. Those
commenters suggested that the rule be
amended to require officials from EPA
or some other agency (e.g., the State
water pollution control agency, the
SERC, the LEPCs, or the natural .
resource management agencies) review
determinations and calculations made
by facility owners or operators who
have not submitted facility response ...
plans. Others requested that EPA
provide more a«^j«tanr«» to ensure tha^
certification is done properly (e.g., a
hotline or guidance manual). Several
indicated *hv completing
the form was burdensome, especially to
«mall facilities, and questioned the'
benefits Of Completing and maintaining •
the form.
Today. EPA finalizes at § 112.20(e) the
requirement to complete and maintain a
r-BrrtfifaHnn farm dS it WHS proposed itt
the proposed rule. EPA maintains that it
is not necessary to submit the form to
the RA or other government officials.
EPA believes that the certification form
does not involve a major effort to
complete and has value as an
enforcement tool and as a record of
awareness of response planning
requirements. Facility owners or
operators can. if necessary, consult with
appropriate Regional-personnel or the
SPCC Information I .inn (202-260-2342)
for additional information on evaluating
the criteria in $ 112.20(0(1) and
completing accompanying certification
"|f|"- t
Agency agrees that verification of a
facility's determination may sometimes
be appropriate. .EPA anticipates that
during facility inspections. Regional
personnel will review the certification
form "no1 other information for facilities
without a response plan.
Model Response Plan
Today. EPA finalizes the model
response plan in Appendix F (which
has been relabeled from the proposed
rule when it was called Appendix G)
with a series of minor changes. These
changes are to clarify certain provisions.
improve the organization of the model
-------
34084 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 126 / Friday, July 1. 1994 / Rules and Regulations
plan, and ensure greater consistency
with the response plan rules of other
Federal agencies.
In the proposed rule, EPA proposed
that owners or operators identify and
describe the duties of the facility's
"emergency response coordinator" in
the facility response plan. This person
was to be the "qualified individual"
required by section 311(j) of the CWA,
and would have full authority,
including contracting authority, to
implement removal actions. Proposed
§ 112.20(h)(3)(ix) set out the duties of
the emergency response coordinator.
The LJSCG's interim final rule (58 FR
7330, February 5,1993) requires the
owner or operator to name a "qualified
individual" who has the duties of EPA's
"emergency response coordinator."
Several commenters suggested EPA and
the USCG adopt uniform terms in their
final rules for identifying this
individual. One commenter specifically
suggested that EPA replace "emergency
response coordinator" with the USCG's
term, "qualified individual"
EPA agrees, and has changed the term
"emergency response coordinator"
wherever it appears in today's rule to
"qualified individual." Although EPA is
not amending the necessary
qualifications or description of duties
for the qualified individual, the Agency
stresses that the qualified individual
should be able to respond immediately
(i.e., within 2 hours) to a spill at the
facility.
In section 1.1 of Appendix G of the
proposed rule (Appendix F in the-final
rule), the Agency indicated the
Emergency Response Action Plan
(ERAP) shall include a description of
immediate actions, and referenced
section i.7 of the model plan. Several
commenters requested clarification on
what should be described in this
section. To clarify what constitutes a
description of immediate actions. EPA
has changed the reference for immediate
actions to section 1.7.1. which focuses
on the implementation of response
actions. For the purpose of the ERAP,
immediate actions include, at a
minimum- (1) Stopping the flow of
spilled material (e.g., securing pumps.
closing valves); (2) warning personnel;
(3) shutting off ignition sources (e.g..
motors, electrical circuits, open flames);
(4) initiating containment: (5) notifying
the National Response Canter and (6)
notifying appropriate State and local
officials. A sample form for describing
immediate actions in the plan is also
included in Appendix F.
In % 112.20(hJ(3)(vii) of the proposed
rule. EPA proposed to require facility .
owners or operators to include plans for
evacuation of facilities and surrounding
communities to ensure the safety of
individuals that are at high risk in the
event of a spill or other release (this .
information was also to be included in
the emergency response action plan).
Several commenters stated that
requiring facilities to assume primary
responsibility for the development of
evacuation plans for the surrounding .
community is unreasonable. These
commenters stated that Federal, State.
and local agencies, which have
expertise in emergency evacuation, are
responsible for the preparation and
implementation of community
evacuation plans.
EPA does not intend for facilities to
develop community evacuation plans.
but any plans affecting the area
surrounding the facility must be
referenced in the response plan.
Sections 112.20 (h)(l)(vi) and (h)(3)(vii)
are revised to clarify the requirement to
reference community evacuation plans.
Facility owners or operators should
contact the Fire Department and LEPC
to assure coordination with existing
community evacuation plans.
In section 1.4.3 of proposed Appendix
G (Appendix F in this final rule), EPA
recommended that facility owners or
operators complete a quantitative
analysis of spill potential to aid in
developing discharge scenarios and
response techniques, and consider
factors such as tank age. spill history.
horizontal range of a potential spill, and
vulnerability to natural disasters.
Several commenters stated that the
analysis was unnecessary and
burdensome, and requested guidance
about the level of effort the Agency
expecU to be expended-to analyze a
facility's spill potential (e.g., tank by
tank evaluation, general site study).
In response tocommenten' concerns.
EPA has reworded section 1.4.3 of the
appendix by deleting the word
"quantitative" from the description of
the spill probability analysis. This
should decrease the burden on the
regulated community by giving facility
owners and operators the flexibility to
determine what factors to consider and
allowing them to perform a more >
general analysis, including quantitative
and/or qualitative factors, using the
information in section 1.4.3 of the
model plan as a guide.
In section 1.8 of Appendix G of the
proposed rule, EPA proposed to require
facilities tO maintain training and
meeting logs in the response plan to aid
facility owners, operators, and "
employees in spill prevention
awareness and response requirements.
Several commenters stated that
including logs within the response plan
would detract from their effectiveness.
In response to these commenters'
concerns, the Agency indicates in
§ 112.20(h)(8)(iv) and in Appendix F of
the final rule that logs may be included
in the facility response plan or kept as
an annex to the plan.
To facilitate the review of response
plans for complexes, EPA requires in
today's final rule that the owner or
operator of a complex identify, on the
facility diagram submitted with the
response plan, the interface between
portions of the complex that an
regulated by different agencies. (See
section 1.9 of Appendix F.) EPA
requires this interface to be-consistent
with the USCG's interim final rule for
MTR facilities.
Facility Response Plan Certification
In Section m.G of the preamble to the
proposed rule. EPA requested comment
on a requirement for certification by a
Registered Professional Engineer (PE)
for certain portions of the response plan.
such as determination of wont case
discharge. EPA also solicited comment
on which professions may be suitable to
evaluate and certify the contents of the
response plan if EPA determines a
certification requirement is appropriate.
In particular, the Agency requested
comment on the suitability of Certified
Hazardous Materials Managers to
perform the plan certification function.
. The Agency received many comments
on the issue of certification of response
plans. In general, commenters expressed
support for the rulemaking effort and
the certification provision, and sought
EPA's consideration on the suitability of
different professions to review and
approve response plans. Among the
remaining commenten (those not
affiliated with an environmental
professional organization), almost two-
. thirds felt that certification was
unnecessary and cited cost. PE's
unfamiliarity with the facility, and EPA
review as the major reasons for their
opposition. Some commenten indicated
that, at most; certification should be
limited to construction or structural
aspects of the facility described in the
response plan, because oil spill
response training and knowledge is not
widespread among many environmental
professionals. Others said they would.
favor certification only if an in-house
employee could perform the function. In
addition, many commenten who
supported the certification provision
requested that EPA develop uniform
standards for certifying, ranking, and
approving the use of different types of
environmental professionals.
The Agency considered these
comments and has decided not to '
require plan certification by an outside
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 126 / Friday, July 1. 1994 / Rules and Regulations 34085
professional in the final rule. Facility
response plans from "significant and
substantial harm facilities" are already
subject to review and approval by EPA.
In addition, facility owners and
.operators are required to certify (on the
cover sheet in Appendix F) that the
information contained in the plan is
accurate. EPA believes that this
certification will be sufficient to ensure
accurate and comprehensive
implementation of the response plan
requirements and that additional
certification would be unnecessary and
burdensome to the regulated
community. This approach is consistent
with the approaches taken by RSPA and.
the USCG in implementing facility
response plan requirements.
Contract or Other Approved Means
in § 112.2 of the proposed rule. EPA
defined "contracts or other approved
means" to include written contractual
agreements with an OSRO(s). written
certifications, active membership in an
OSRO, and other specific arrangements
approved by the RA. EPA's intent in
including the fourth option was to allow
the RA discretion to accept alternate
arrangements not covered by the first
three m«rfiani«mii th*t would fllgo
satisfy the OPA requirement to ensure
the availability of private personnel and
equipment necessary to respond, to the
maximum extent practicable, to a wont
r-amm discharge.
The comments addressing this issue
were mixed. Commenten, in general.
requested that EPA's definition more
closely mirror the definition used in the
USCG's interim final rule for MTR
facilities. (See 33 CFR 154.1028.) Some
commenters requested *h |