SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL, AND
COUNTERMEASURE (SPCC)
INFORMATION GUIDE
AUGUST 1993
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION III, SUPERFUND REMOVAL BRANCH
841 CHESTNUT BUILDING
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
Contents 1
Foreword 3
Key Points of Prevention Regulation 5
The Elements of an SPCC Plan 9
Questions Frequently Asked 13
Appendix A, Example SPCC Plan (7 Pages)
Appendix B, Dike Designs (2 Pages)
Appendix C, 40 CFR Part 109
Criteria for State, Local, and Regional Oil Removal Contingency Plans ... (2 Pages)
Appendix D, 40 CFR Part 110
Discharge of Oil (4 Pages)
Appendix E, 40 CFR Part 112
Oil Pollution Prevention (13 Pages)
Appendix F, 33 CFR Part 153.201
Notice of the Discharge of Oil or a Hazardous Substance (3 Pages)
1
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2
-------
FOREWORD
This document has been prepared by Region III of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency to aid facilities in developing Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure
(SPCC) Plans as required under Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 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. Title 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:
Vince Zenone, SPCC Coordinator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Superfund Removal Branch
Oil and Title III Section (3HW34)
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215) 597-3038
Should the SPCC Coordinator be unavailable to answer questions, please leave a
message on the voice mail system.
3
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
4
-------
KEY POINTS OF PREVENTION REGULATION
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation,
Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 112 (40 CFR Part 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 Part 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.
5
-------
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPCC PLAN
There is no rigid format for an SPCC Plan. The guidelines in 40 CFR Part 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 III 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 Part 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.
6
-------
"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 reportable
under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
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 112.5 of the SPCC regulation.
7
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
8
-------
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 Part 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:
9
-------
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.
9-
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
10
-------
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.
11
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
12
-------
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 Part 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.
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 (Section 112.3 and 112.7).
When did this regulation go into effect?
The regulation was promulgated on December 11,1973, and went into effect on
January 10, 1974.
13
-------
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 Part 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?
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 or from a water transportation vessel,
are considered non-transportation-related facilities.
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. In fact, such facilities
may not operate unless the SPCC Plan has been implemented.
What is a transportation-related facility?
Any facility that transfers and transports oil beyond the boundaries of a facility
is considered a transportation-related facility. Examples of such facilities are
pipeline systems, including related pumps and appurtenances; in-line or break-
out storage tanks needed for the continuous operation of the system; and
highway vehicles and railroad cars that are used for oil transport off of the
facility grounds.
14
-------
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-transportation-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 Part 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.
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
15
-------
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 thfe 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.
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
16
-------
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.
1. If a spill occurs and enters the water, a penalty will be assessed.
2. If a spill occurs and is prevented from entering the water, a penalty may
or may not be assessed.
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.
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;
17
-------
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?
Section 112.6 of 40 CFR Part 112 authorizes the U.S. EPA Regional
Administrator to assess a civil penalty up to $5,000 per day of violation.
The guidance for determining penalties is addressed in 40 CFR Part 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 Part
153, 40 CFR Part 110, 40 CFR Part 112 and the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP).
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 tanks with openings that are not
permanently sealed closed; it also includes smaller containers such as 55-
gallon drums, 5-gallon buckets, etc. The capacity of any empty tanks or
containers that are used to store oil and are not permanently sealed are also
counted in the facility total storage capacity.
Does the term "oil" include vegetable oil, transformer oil, and other non-petroleum
based oil?
Yes. "Oil" is defined in 40 CFR Section 112.2 as oil of anv 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.
18
-------
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 a 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 in 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 as
described in the answer to question 3. then the facility will be exempt from the
SPCC regulations.
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
19
-------
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.
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.
20
-------
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:
Vince Zenone, SPCC Coordinator - 3HW34
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region III
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215) 597-3038
Should the SPCC Coordinator be unavailable to answer questions, please leave
a message on the voice mail system.
21
-------
APPENDIX A
EXAMPLE SPCC PLAN
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
EXAMPLE
SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL, AND COUNTERMEASURE PLAN
TEX'S BULK STORAGE TER
100 Everspill Road
Post Office Box 31;
Oily City, USA 12345
Telephone (123) 222^222 /
SJ Oil C ^ X
P.O. B
Crude Ci'
Stevi
CERTIFICATION: I hereby certifyjhat I h^ex&mined the facility, and, being familiar
with the provisions of 40 CFf^ParTTt2r-attgs£mat this SPCC Plan has been prepared
in accordance with good engxieeqng-practiqes.
ENGINEER: Christophe/^Qolumbl
SIGNATURE:
/
REGISTRATION nJmBLH: 98765"
(seal)
STATE: Of the/fJoibn /N
/ U/ ^
DATE: June<44/t974/
\
-------
1. NAME OF OWNERSHIP
Name:
Manager:
SJ Oil Company - Tex's Bulk Storage Terminal
100 Everspill Road
P.O. Box 311 (K)
Oily City, USA 12345
Telephone: (123) 222-2222
Steve Bob Doe
505 Oil Road
Oily City, USA 12345
Telephone: (123) 222-3333
Owner:
SJ Oil Company
P.O. Box 00002
Crude City, USA 77000
Other Personnel:
Secretary-Bookkeepe
Dispatcher
Transport Driver
Delivery Persoi
Service Area: North-West
DESCRIPTION OF FACILITY,
Tex's Bulk Storage Terminal of the S^Oil Compariy handles, stores, and distributes
petroleum products in the form of motor^Cfa^oiifte, kerosene, and No. 2 fuel oil. The
accompanying drawing showsThe~proped>^o6ndaries and adjacent highway
drainage ditches, buildings br\sifg^aR^ ojMi^hdling facilities.
Fixed Storage:
(2)
(2)
100,000-gallon verticalxtanks (premium gasoline)
100,000-galton vertical tanks (regular gasoline)
(2)
(1)
20,000-gallon vertical tanks (No. 2 fuel oil)
20,000-gallon vertical tank (kerosene)
\ \
Total: 460,000 gallbns/
/ /
Vehicles: <
(1)
(4)
)
V
Transporttruck
Tankwagon delivery trucks
-------
D
5
TEX'S BULK STDRAGE TERMINAL
SJ IDIL CDMPANY
100 EVERSPIEL RE) AD
~ IL CITY, USA 12345
EVERSPILL RDAD
LEGEND
EMERGENCY
SPILL
EQUIPMENT
o
o
m
x
CO
-------
3.
POTENTIAL SPILL VOLUMES AND RATES
Potential Event
Complete failure
of a full tank
Partial failure
of a full tank
Tank overfill
Pipe failure
Leaking pipe or
valve packing
Leak during
truck loading
4. SPILL PREVENTION AND CONTR
A. Storage Tanks
1. Each tank is UL-142 constrl
Volume Released
100,000 gallons
1 to 99,000 gallons
1 to several gallons
Up to 20,000 gallons
Several ounces
to several gallons
1 to several gall;
Spill Rate
Instantaneous
adual to
nsiantaneous
per q^u^T/
4 galteqs/per
seconcj
to 1 gallon
ei/minute
Up to 1 gallon
per minute
boveground use).
2. Each tank is equip|5ed-wjth adj?ect-reading gauge. Venting capacity is
suitable for the fil^nd^tf)drawal rates.
3. A dike surrounds eachtahk installation. Each dike wall has been
constructedxand designed to local, state, and Federal engineering
regulations. The contained volume (height versus area) is computed
based on the single largest tank within (100,000 gallons) and allowance
is made for all additional vertical tank displacement volumes below the
dike heigftt^estimated spill liquid level), and for precipitation. A 2-inch
water drain is located at the lowest point within the dike enclosure, and it
^onrrefct^to a7normally closed gate-valve outside the dike. The gate
vatve is manually operated. Rainwater contained within this dike is
examinfedDripr to release to ensure that harmful quantities of oil are not
dischargea/
4. After a fill pipe is used, a bucket is placed under it to catch any product
that might drip from the pipe.
5.
There are no buried or partially buried tanks at this facility.
-------
7.
Tanks are subject to periodic integrity testing and inspection. Tank
supports, foundations, and piping are included in these inspections, and
proper records are kept. The exterior of the tanks are examined
frequently.
Materials stored on the site for spill countermeasures include bagged
absorbent, sorbent pads, and booms. There is a sand-filled catchment
basin for minor, routine spillage at loading pumpintakes and loading
racks. The catchment basin will contain greater jftan the largest
compartment of the largest tank truck loadec? of'unleaded at this facility.
Sand will be placed as needed, and any oiKcontai^inate4/s^nd is
disposed of properly.
8.
1.
Buried pipes are properly
buried pipe is exposed, it'
Pipelines not in service
capped or blank-fiacre
3.
Failsafe engineering mechanisms are in place.
a. Tanks are equipped with high
b. Tanks are equipped with visual gaugds
FACILITY TRANSFER OPERATIONS/
corrosion. If a section of
eterioration.
ir an extended period are
as to their origin.
All pipe supports^arepropeilykde^jgned to minimize abrasion and
corrosion, and tdaiiovrfoF-ejQareion and contraction.
\ ^ Jw
Aboveground pipeljnev&na valves are examined periodically to assess
their conditibn.
5.
Warning si'
pipelines.
re posea4s needed to prevent vehicles from damaging
"\
Curbings are installed at the vehicle loading racks.
/%/> ^
SPILL'COUNTEFIMEAStJRES
^ /
The front highway drainage ditch on the property's northern boundary crosses
the highway through a culvert headed eastward and eventually leads to Carol
Creek, located approximately one-half mile away. Emergency containment
action will consist of erecting an earthen dam and placing absorbent materials
at the entrance to the culvert. Sorbent boom will be strategically placed on
Carol Creek, upstream of Dead Duck Pond, to contain oil that will be recovered
and disposed of according to generally accepted procedures. Personnel,
materials, equipment, are committed to ensuring that this contingency plan is
-------
implemented in such a manner that no oil reaches Dead Duck Pond, which is
an environmentally sensitive ecosystem.
PAST SPILL EXPERIENCE
None.
SECURITY
/
a. The bulk plant is surrounded by steel security fencipig^and the gate is
locked when the plant is unattended. ^
b. Tank drain valves and all other valves that will ^ecrni^dfr^eft outward flow
of a tank's contents are locked in the closed positibrkyvfoen not in use.
The electrical controls for the pumps/are also lockeckin the closed
position when not in use. / /
c. The loading and unloading conned ^pf pipelines are capped when
not in service. /
/
/
d. Two area lights are located jn sui sition so as to illuminate the
office and storage areas.
PERSONNEL
Facility personnel have beeqin§tR management in the following spill
prevention and countermeasul'
a. No tanks or comparfftients-^re^yDe filled without checking reserves
prior to commer\ciri§^tl^filling^
b. No pump operationSvare
-------
9. EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBERS
A. NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES
1. Steve Bob Doe, Facility Manager
2. National Response Center
3. State Response Mechanism
B. CLEAN-UP CONTRACTORS
1. E-Z Clean Environmental
2. O.K. Engineers, Inc.
C. SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT
1. Oily City Equipment Co.
2. Northwestern Sorbent Co.
10. REVIEW DATES
6/08/77 (signature)
6/01/80 (signature)
6/10/83 (signature)
6/09/86 (signature)
6/06/89 (signature)
(123) 222-3333
(800) 424-8802
(123) 55^-2221
(123) 222-8372
(123) 222-9217
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
APPENDIX B
DIKE DESIGNS
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
1.
SAMPLE DIKE HEIGHT CALCULATION:
PROPOSED DIKE BOUNDARY
10,ODD
GAL HORZ
10,COO
GAL VERT
15,000
GAL VERT
A
i
30 FT
T
45 FT
CNOT TO SCALED
Calculations for this example:
a. Minimum Containment Volume (mCV) must be equal to the single largest
tank volume within the diked area:
mCV = tank gallons x 0.1337 cu. ft./gal
mCV = 15,000 gal. x 0.1337 cu. ft./gal = 2,006 cu. ft.
mCV = 2.006 cu. ft.
b. Available Dike Area (DA) is the length times the width of the proposed
dike boundary:
DA = L x W
DA = 30 ft. x 45 ft. = 1,350 sq. ft.
DA = 1.350 sa. ft.
c. Dike wall height (H) can be calculated from the mCV and DA:
H = mCV
DA
H = 2.006 cu. ft. = 1.486 ft.
1,350 sq. ft.
H = 1.486 ft.
-------
d. Note that the volume of the un-ruptured tanks within the diked area
subtract from the minimum containment volume. Actual calculations
should take this into account so the dike height should be larger to
accommodate this and provide sufficient "freeboard" for precipitation
-------
APPENDIX C
40 CFR PART 109
-------
Environmental Protection Agtney
§ 109.4
PART 109—CRITERIA FOR STATE,
LOCAL AND REGIONAL OIL RE-
MOVAL CONTINGENCY PLANS
Sec.
109.1 Applicability.
109.2 Definitions.
109.3 Purpose and scope.
109.4 Relationship to Federal response ac-
tions.
109.8 Development and implementation
criteria for State, local and regional oil
removal contingency plans.
109.5 Coordination.
Authority: Sec. U(])(1XB). 84 Stat. 96. 33
U.S.C. 116KJK1KB).
Source 36 FR 22485, Nov. 25,1971, unless
otherwise noted.
0109.1 Applicability.
The criteria In this part are provided
to assist 8tate, local and regional agen-
cies in the development of oil removal
contingency plans for the inland navi-
gable waters of the United States and
all areas other than the high seas,
coastal and contiguous zone waters,
coastal and Great Lakes ports and
harbors and such other areas as may
be agreed upon between the Environ-
mental Protection Agency and the De-
partment of Transportation in accord-
ance with section llOXIXB) of the
Federal Act. Executive Order No.
11548 dated July 20. 1970 (35 FR
11677) snd { 306.2 of the National Oil
and Hazardous Materials Pollution
Contingency Plan (35 FR 8511).
fi 109.2 Definitions.
As used in these guidelines, the fol-
lowing terms shall have the meaning
indicated below:
(a) 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.
(b) Discharge includes, but is not
limited to. any spilling, leaking, pump-
ing, pouring, emitting, emptying, or
dumping.
(c) Remove or removal refers to the
removal of the oil from the water and
shorelines or the talcing of such other
actions as may be necessary to mini-
mize or mitigate damage to the public
health or welfare, including, but not
limited to. fish, shellfish, 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 disaster assistance
by the Federal Government to supple-
ment the efforts and available re-
sources of States and local govern-
ments and relief organizations in alle-
viating the damage, loss, hardship, or
suffering caused thereby.
(e) United States means the States,
the District of Columbia, the Com-
monwealth of Puerto Rico, the Canal
Zone. Guam. American Samoa, the
Virgin Islands, and the Trust Terri-
tory of the Pacific Islands.
(f) Federal Act means the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act. as
amended, 33 U.S.C. 1151. et seq.
§ 109.3 Purpose and scope.
The guidelines In this part establish
minimum criteria for the development
and implementation of State, local,
and regional contingency plans by
State and local governments in consul-
tation with private interests to insure
timely, efficient, coordinated and ef-
fective action to minimize damage re-
sulting from oil discharges. Such plans
will be directed toward the protection
of the public health or welfare of the
United-States, including, but not limit-
ed to, fish, shellfish, wildlife, and
public and private property, shore-
lines, and beaches. The development
and implementation of such plans
shall be consistent with the National
Oil and Hazardous Materials Pollution
Contingency Plan. State, local and re-
gional oil removal contingency plans
shall provide for the coordination of
the total response to an oil discharge
so that contingency organizations es-
tablished thereunder can function in-
dependently, in conjunction with each
other, or in conjunction with the Na-
tional and Regional Response Teams
established by the National Oil and
Hazardous Materials Pollution Contin-
gency Plan.
9109.4 Relationship to Federal response
actions.
The National Oil and Hazardous Ma-
terials Pollution Contingency Plan
provides that the Federal on-scene
commander shall investigate all re-
ported spills. If such investigation
shows that appropriate action is being
taken by either the discharger or non-
Federal entities, the Federal on-scene
commander shall monitor and provide
advice or assistance, as required. If ap-
propriate containment or cleanup
action is not being taken by the dis-
-------
§ 109 J
charger or non-Federal entities, the
Federal on-scene commander will take
control of the response activity in ac-
cordance with section 11(c)(1) of the
Federal Act.
S 109.6 Development and implementation
criteria for State, local and regional oil
removal contingency plana.
Criteria lor 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 ot 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 contingency planning
activities and to minimize the poten-
tial for conflict and confusion that
could be generated in an emergency
situation as a result of such duplica-
tions.
(b) Establishment of notification
procedures for the purpose of early de-
tection and timely notification of an
oil discharge
(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 communications sys-
tems established under related oil re-
moval contingency plans, particularly
State and 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 and inventory
of applicable equipment, materials and
supplies which are available locally
and regionally.
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-91 Edition)
(2) An estimate of the equipment,
materials and supplies which would be
required to remove the 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 and 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 and notification of an oil dis-
charge Including:
(1) Specification of an oil discharge
response operating team consisting of
trained, prepared and available operat-
ing personnel.
(2) Predesignation of a properly
qualified oil discharge response coordi-
nator who is charged with the respon-
sibility and delegated commensurate
authority for directing and coordinat-
ing response operations and who
knows how to request assistance from
Federal authorities operating under
existing national and regional contin-
gency plana.
(3) A preplanned location for an oil
discharge response operations center
and a reliable communications system
for directing the coordinated overall
response operations.
(4) Provisions for varying degrees of
response effort depending on the se-
verity of the oil discharge.
(5) Specification of the order of pri-
ority in which the various water uses
are to be protected where more than
one water use may be adversely affect-
ed as a result of an oil discharge and
where response operations may not be
adequate to protect all uses.
(e) Specific and well defined proce-
dures to facilitate recovery of damages
and enforcement measures as provided
for by State and local statutes and or-
dinances.
9109.6 Coordination.
For the purposes of coordination,
the contingency plans of State and
local governments should be developed
nnri implemented in consultation with
private interests. A copy of any oil re-
moval contingency plan developed by
State and local governments should be
forwarded to the Council on Environ-
mental Quality upon request to facili-
tate the coordination of these contin-
gency plans with the National Oil and
Hazardous Materials Pollution Contin-
gency Plan.
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
APPENDIX D
40 CFR PART 110
-------
Environmental Protection Agoney
§ 110.1
PART 110—DISCHARGE OF OIL
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 Dlspersants.
110.9 Demonstration projects.
110.10 Notice.
110.11 Discharge at deepwater ports.
Authority: Sees. 311 (b)(3) and (b)(4) and
501(a). Federal Water Pollution Control
Act. as amended (33 UjS.C. 1321 (b)(3) and
(b)(4) and 1361(a)): sec. I8(m)(3) of the
Deepwater Port Act of 1974 (33 U.S.C.
1517(m)(3)>: E.O. 11735. 38 FR 21243. 3 CFR
Parts 1971-1975 Comp.. p. 793.
Source: 52 FR 10719. Apr. 2. 1987. unless
otherwise noted.
§ 110.1 Definitions.
As used In this part, the following
terms shall have the meaning indicat-
ed below:
Act means the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act, as amended. 33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq., also known as the
Clean Water Act;
Administrator means the Adminis-
trator of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (EPA);
Applicable water quality standards
means State water quality standards
adopted by the State pursuant to sec-
tion 303 of the Act or promulgated by
EPA pursuant to that section;
Contiguous zone means the entire
zone established or to be established
by the United States under article 24
of the Convention on the Territorial
Sea and the Contiguous Zone;
Deepwater port means an offshore
facility as defined in section (3)(10) of
the Deepwater Port Act of 1974 (33
UJS.C. 1502(10));
Discharge, when used in relation to
section 311 of the Act, includes, but is
not limited to, any spilling, leaking,
pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying.,
or dumping, but excludes (A) dis-
charges in compliance with a permit
under section 402 of the Act. (B) dis-
charges resulting from circumstances
identified and reviewed and made a
part of the public record with respect
to a permit issued or modified under
section 402 of the Act. and subject to a
condition in such permit, and (C) con-
tinuous or anticipated intermittent
discharges from a point source, identi-
fied in a permit or permit application
under section 402 of the Act. that are
caused by events occurring within the
scope of relevant operating or treat-
ment systems;
MARPOL 73/78 means the Interna-
tional Convention for the Prevention
of Pollution from Ships. 1973. as modi-
fied by the Protocol of 1978 relating
thereto. Annex 1. which regulates pol-
lution from oil and which entered into
force on October 2,19«3;
Navigable waters means the waters
of the United States, including the ter-
ritorial seas. The term includes:
(a) All waters that are currently
used, were used in the past, or may be
susceptible to use in interstate or for-
eign commerce, including all waters
that are subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide;
(b) Interstate waters, including
interstate wetlands;
(c) All other waters such as intra-
state lakes, rivers, streams (including
intermittent streams), mudflats, sand-
flats, and wetlands, the use. degrada-
tion. or destruction of which would
affect or could affect interstate or for-
eign commerce Including any such
waters:
(1) That are or could be used by
interstate or foreign travelers for rec-
reational or other purposes;
(2) From which fish or shellfish are
or could be taken and sold in inter-
state or foreign commerce:
(3) That are used or could be used
for industrial purposes by industries in
interstate commerce;
(d) All impoundments of waters oth-
erwise defined as navigable waters
under this section;
(e) Tributaries of waters identified
in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this
section. Including adjacent wetlands;
and
(f) Wetlands adjacent to waters iden-
tified in paragraphs (a) through (e) of
this section: Provided, That waste
treatment systems (other than cooling
ponds meeting the criteria of this
paragraph) are not waters of the
United States;
NPDES means National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System;
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;
Oil, when used in relation to section
311 of the Act. means oil of any kind
or in any form, including, but not
limted to, petroleum, fuel oil, sludge,
oil refuse, and oil mixed with wastes
other than dredged spoil. Oil, when
used in relation to section 18(m)(3) of
the Deepwater Port Act of 1974, has
the meaning provided in section 3(14)
of the Deepwater Port Act of 1974;
Onshore facility means any facility
(including, but not limited to, motor
vehicles and rolling stock) of any kind
located in, on, or under any land
within the United States, other than
submerged land;
Person includes an individual, firm,
corporation, association, and a part-
nership;
Public vessel means a vessel owned
or bareboat chartered and operated by
the United States, or by a State or po-
litical subdivision thereof, or by a for-
-------
§ 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 Islands;
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.
6 110J 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 { 110.11 of this part.
6 110.3 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 § 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.
8110.4 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.
9 110.5 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.
§ 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 Dispersanu.
Addition of dispersanls 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 ail 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 S 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 notUy
the NRC or the predeslgnated 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 part 153,
subpart B and in the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Con-
tingency Plan, 40 CFR part 300, sub-
part £. (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
-------
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1.91 Edition)
PART 112—OIL POLLUTION
PREVENTION
Sec.
112.1 General applicability.
112.2 Definitions.
112.3 Requirements for 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.
Appzhsxx—MmoRjuiDUM or Uhmsstahsxhg
Brrwnif the Stain my or Thakstohta-
TXOH AMD THE ABMimSTBATOR Or TBS En-
vxxommrrAL Protection Agency
Authority: Sees. 311(j)(l)(C). 311(J)(2).
501(a). 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 U.S.C. Reorg. Plan of
1970 No. 3 (1970). 35 FR 15623. 3 CFR 1966-
1970 Comp.; E.O. 11735. 38 FR 21243. 3
CFR.
Source: 38 FR 34165. Dec. 11. 1973. unless
otherwise noted.
S 112.1 General applicability.
(a) This part establishes procedures,
methods and equipment and other re-
quirements lor 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 gov-
ernment are subject to these regula-
tions to the same extent as any
person, except for the provisions of
1112.6.
--(d) This part does not apply to:
-(1) Facilities, equipment or oper-
ations which are not subject to the Ju-
risdiction of the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, as follows:
(1) Onshore and offshore facilities,
which, due to their location, could not
reasonably be expected to discharge
oQ Into or upon the navigable waters
of -the . United States or adjoining
shorelines. This determination shall
be based solely upon a consideration
of the geographical, location*) aspects
of the facility (such as proximity to
navigable waters or adjoining shore-
lines, contour, drainage, etc.) and
¦hai) exclude consideration of man-
made leatures such as dikes. 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
FR 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 facility 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
S 112.7. designed to complement exist-
ing laws, regulations, rules, standards,
policies and procedures pertaining to
safety standards, fire prevention and
pollution prevention rules, so as to
form a comprehensive balanced Feder-
al/State spill prevention program to
the potential for oil dis-
charges. Compliance with this part
does not In any way relieve the owner
or operator of an onshore or an off-
shore facility from compliance with
other Federal. State or local laws.
(38 FR 34185. Dec. 11. 1973. as amended at
41 FR 12857, Mar. 26.19761
SUM Definition.
For the purposes of this part:
(a) 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
(b) Discharge Includes but is not lim-
ited to. any spilling, leaking, pumping,
pouring, emitting, emptying or dump-
ing. For purposes of this part, the
term discharge shall not include any
discharge of oil which is authorized by
a permit issued pursuant to section 13
of the River and Harbor Act of 1899
(30 Stat. 1121, 33 UJS.C. 407), orsec-
tlons 402 or 405 of the FWPCA
Amendments of 1972 (86 Stat. 816 et
seq., 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.).
(c) Onshore facility means any faclll*
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§ nu
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-related 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
FR 24080.
u) Spill 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
Zone. Guam, American Samoa, the
Virgin Islands, and the Trust Terri-
tory Of the Pacific Tglawria
(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) Intrastate lakes, rivers, and
streams which are utilized by inter-
state travelers lor recreational or
other purposes; and
(4) -Intrastate lakes, rivers, and
streams from which fish or shellfish
are taken and sold in Interstate com-
merce.
(1) 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.
tllU Requirements for preparation and
implementation of Spill Prevention
Control and Countermeaiure Plan*.
(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 Counter-measure
Plan (hereinafter "SPCC Plan"), in
writing and in accordance with S 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 this part
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 S 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 shall 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 Flan 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 dPCC
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-
tlon) operating mode.
(d) No SPCC Plan shall be effective
to satisfy the requirements of this
part it has been reviewed by a
Registered Professional Engineer and
certified to by such Professional Engi-
neer. By means of this certification
the engineer, having examined the fa-
cility and being familiar with the pro-
visions of this part, shall attest that
the SPCC Plan 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
-------
§112.4
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-91 Edition)
his duty to prepare and fully Imple-
ment such Plan in accordance with
S 112.7, as required by paragraphs (a),
(b) and (c) 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 maintain 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 and lull implementation
of an SPCC "»ian beyond the time per-
mitted for ..ie 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 part 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)(1) of this section may submit
a letter of request to the Regional Ad-
ministrator. Such letter shall include:
(I) A complete copy of the SPCC
Plan, if completed:
(II) A full explanation of the cause
for any such delay and the specific as-
pects of the SPCC Plan affected by
the delay;
(ill) A full discussion of actions being
taken or contemplated to or
mitigate such delay,
(iv) A proposed time schedule for
the implementation of any corrective
actions being or contemplated,
including interim dates for completion
of tests or studies, installation and op-
eration of any necessary equipment or
other preventive measures.
In addition, such owner or operator
may present additional oral or written
statements in support of his letter of
request.
(3) The submission of a letter of re-
quest for extension of time pursuant
to paragraph (f)(2) of this section
«hnii in no way relieve the owner or
operator from his obligation to comply
with the requirements of S 112.3 (a),
(b) or (c). Where an extension of time
is authorized by the Regional Admin-
istrator for particular equipment or
other specific aspects of the SPCC
Plan, such extension shall in no way
affect the owner's or operator's obliga-
tion to comply with the requirements
of S 112.3 (a), (b) or (c) with respect to
other equipment or other specific as-
pects of the SPCC Plan for which an
extension of time has not been ex-
pressly authorized.
(38 FR 34165. Dec. 11. 1973. as amended at
41 FR 12657, Mar. 26. 1976]
S 112.4 Amendment of SPCC Plans by Re-
gional Administrator.
(a) Notwithstanding compliance
with { 112.3. whenever a facility sub-
ject to $ 112.3 (a), (b) or (c) has: Dis-
charged more than 1.000 U.S. gallons
of oil into or upon the navigable
waters of the United States or adjoin-
ing shorelines in a single spill event, or
discharged oil in harmful quantities,
as defined in 40 CFR part 110. into or
upon the navigable waters of the
United States or adjoining shorelines
in two spill events, reportable under
section 311(b)(5) of the FWPCA, oc-
curring within any 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
-------
Environmental Protection Agoncy
§112.4
cllity.
(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 amendment 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 Plan, he shall notify the
facility operator by certified mall ad-
dressed to, or by personal delivery to,
the facility owner or operator, that he
proposes to require an amendment 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^submlt 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
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 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
than six months after the amendment
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 amendment
to an SPCC Plan. 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 amendment. A 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 designee
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 "hail notify the owner or operator
of his decision.
[38 FR 34165. Dec. 11. 1973. as amended at
41 FR 12658. Mar. 26.1976]
9112-5 Amendment of Spill Prevention
Control and Countermeaaure Plans 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 5 112.7 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 amendments shall be
fully implemented as soon as possible,
bet 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 { 112.3 (a), (b) or (c) shall com-
plete a review and evaluation of the
SPCC Plan 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 oi 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
§ 112.3(d).
8112.6 Civil penalties for violation of oil
pollution prevention regulations.
Owners or operators of facilities sub-
ject to S 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 § 112.3, $ 112.4
or {112.5 shall be liable for a civil pen-
alty of not more than $5,000 for each
day such violation continues. Civil
penalties shall be imposed in accord-
ance with procedures set out in part
114 of this subchapter D.
(Sees. 311(1). 501(a). Pub. L. 92-500. 86 Stat.
868. 885 (33 UJS.C. 1321(J). 1361(a)))
[38 FR 31602, Aug. 29.1874]
6 112.7 Guidelines for the preparation and
implementation of a Spill Prevention
Control and Countermeaiure Plan.
The SPCC Flan shall be a carefully
thought-out plan, prepared in accord-
ance with good ecglneerlng practices,
and which has the full approval of
management at a level with authority
to commit the necessary resources. If
the plan calls for additional facilities
-------
§112J
40 CFR Ch. I (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 conformance 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 part 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 minimum:
(1) Onshore facilities;
(1) Dikes, berms or retaining walls
sufficiently impervious to contain
spilled oil:
(11) Curbing;
(ill) Culverting, gutters or other
drainage systems:
(iv) Weirs, booms or other barriers;
(v) Spill diversion ponds;
(vi) Retention ponds;
(vil) Sorbent materials.
(2) Offshore facilities:
(I) Curbing, drip pans;
(II) Sumps and collection systems.
(d) When it is determined that the
installation of structures or equipment
listed in S 112.7(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
part 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
S 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). (i>
Drainage from diked storage areas
should be restrained by valves or ct\er
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.
(il) 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-dosed design. When
plant drainage drains directly into
water courses and not into wastewater
treatment plants, retained storm
water should be inspected as provided
in paragraphs
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§ 112.7
(111) Drainage ol 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 w111
not cause a harmful discharge as de-
fined in 40 CFR part 110.
(C) The bypass valve Is opened, and
resealed following drainage under re-
sponsible supervision.
(D) Adequate records are kept of
such events.
(lv) 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 burled tanks
should at least be subjected to regular
pressure testing.
(v) Partially buried metallic tanks
for the storage of oil should be avoid-
ed. unless the buried section of the
shell is adequately coated, since par-
tial burial In damp earth can cause
rapid corrosion of metallic surfaces,
especially at the earth/air interface.
(vi) Aboveground tanks should be
subject to periodic integrity testing,
taking 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 thickness 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.
(vlil) 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.
(E) 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.
(xi) 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 tank. 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 ion-
shore); (excluding production facili-
ties). (i) Burled 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
-------
§ 112.7
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-91 Edilien)
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 ear and tank truck
loading/unloading rack (onshore), (i)
Tank car and tank truck loading/un-
loading procedures should meet the
requirements and regulation
established by the Department of
Transportation.
(11) Where rack area drainage does
not flow into a catchment basin or
treatment facility designed to handle
spills, a quick drainage system should
be used for tank truck loading and un-
loading areas. The containment
system should be designed to hold at
least capacity of any single
compartment of a tank car or tank
truck loaded or unloaded in the plant.
(ill) An interlocked warning light or
physical barrier system, or warning
signs, should be provided in loading/
nni«aH
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§11X7
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 loffshore). (i) Definition:
"An oil drilling, production or wor-
kover facility (offshore)" may include
all drilling or workover equipment,
wells, flowllnes, 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.
(ii) OH 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, tanks, 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
tjwirs should be equipped with high
liquid level sensing devices or other ac-
ceptable alternatives to prevent oil dis-
charges.
(vl) 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.
(vil) Tanks should be equipped with
suitable corrosion protection.
(viii) A written procedure for 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,
manual 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.
(xll) 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 chc.!s valves on indi-
vidual flowlines.
(xv) If the shut-in well pressure is
greater than the working pressure of
-------
§ 112-r
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.
(xvi) All pipelines appurtenant to
the facility should be protected from
corrosion. Methods used, such as pro-
tective coatings or cathodic protection,
should be discussed.
(xvil) 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-marine pipelines appurte-
nant to the facility should be in good
operating condition at all times and 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 part 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 part of the
SPCC Flan and maintained for a
period of three years.
(9) Security (excluding oil produc-
tion facilities), (i) 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.
(II) 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.
(III) The starter control on all oil
pumps should be locked In the "off"
position or located at a^slte accessible
only to authorized personnel when the
pumps are in a non-operating or non-
standby status.
(lv) The loading/unloading 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 vandalism.
(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.
(II) Each applicable facility should
have a designated person who is ac-
countable for oil spill prevention and
who reports to line management.
(III) 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, malfunctioning
components, and recently developed
precautionary measures.
Append ix—Memorandum or Under-
standing Between the Secretary
or Transportation and the Aj>-
MXNTSTRATOR OP THE ENVIRONMEN-
TAL Protection Agency
sscxxon ii—DsnwmoHg
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 devel-
opment wells, but excluding any terminal
facility, unit or process integrally associated
with the handllng-or transferring of sit 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 explorato-
ry or development wells, but excluding any
terminal facility, unit or process integrally
associated with the 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 facilities used in the pro-
duction 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 pro-
duction 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) OU refining facilities including all
equipment and appurtenances related there-
to as well as ln-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 h-wriHng 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 Including
ln-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.
(I) Loading 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 cars
which are used for the transport of oil ex-
clusively within the confines of a nontrans-
portation-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 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 *"•11'-
ties including transfer hoses, loading arms
and other equipment and appurtenances
used for the purpose of 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 faculties 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 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.
(D) 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 nontransportation-related facility or
terminal facility and which are not Intended
for use in interstate or intrastate commerce.
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-------
APPENDIX F
33 CFR PART 153.201
-------
33 CFR Ch. I (7-1-92 Edition)
Subpart B—Notice of the Discharge
af Oil ar a Hazardous Substance
8 153.201 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.
6151203 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 Cosst
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.
CCGD 84-067. 51 FR 17966, May 16.1986. as
amended by COD 88-052. 53 FR 25121. July
1.1988]
S 153.205 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 Guaro District Offices
and EPA Regional Offices
Address | Telephone
EPA Regional Office®
Region:
I
Jonn F Kennedy Federal Blag .
617-565-3715
Boston. MA 02203.
II
26 Federal Plaza. Mm York. NY
10278.
212-264-2525
III
B41 Chestnut Straw. Philadel-
phia. PA 16107.
215-597-9800
IV....
345 Couniand Street. NE. Atlan-
ta. GA 30365.
404-347-4727
V.
230 s. Oeereorn Street 13th
Floor. Chicago. IL 60604.
312-353-2000
VI
1445 Ross Ave.. 12th Floor.
Suta 1200. Dallas. TX 75202.
214-655-6444
VII
726 Minnesota Avenue. Kansas
City. KS 66101.
913-236-2800
VIII...
999 18th St.. Suite 500, Denver.
CO 80202-2405.
303-293-1603
IX
215 Fremont Street San Fran-
caco. CA 94105.
415-974-8071
x.
1200 6th Avenue. Seattle. WA
98101.
206-442-5810
Coast Gusiti Ontncl Ottices
OiiSiC£
1st_.
408 Atlanae Ave., Boston. MA
02110-2209.
617-223-8444
2nd..
1430 Olive SL. St Louis. MO
63103.
314-425-4655
5th_
Federal Bldg., 431 Crawford SL.
Portsmouth. VA 23705-5004
604-398-6638
7m._
Federal Bldg.. Room 1221. 51
S.W. 1st Ave.. Mam. FL
33130.
30S-536-5651
am~
Hale Boggs Federal Bldg.. 500
504-589-6901
Camp SL. New Orleans. LA
70130-3396.
9th—
1240 East 9tn SL. Claveland.
OH 44199.
216-522-3919
11th.
won Bank Bldg., 400 Ocean-
gate. Lang Beech. CA 90822-
5399.
213-45330
13th.
Federal Bldg.. 915 Second Ave..
Seettle. WA 98174.
206-442-5650
14m.
Pwnco Kalamaneoie Federal
Bldg.. 300 Ala Moana Blvd..
9th Floor. Honolulu. HI 96850
808-541-2114
17th
P.O Bo* 3-5000. Juneau. AK
99802.
907-586-7195
Table 2—Standard Administrative Re-
gions of States ano Corresponding
Coast Guard Districts and EPA Regions
Coast
States and EPA region
Guard
distnet
Reyon 1:
1st
New Hampsrwe ...
1st
All eiceot Northwestern portion.
1st
1st
Maaaacnusetts.
1st
1st
I|l|n4
1st
Regon II
New York:
Cossiai erei end Eastern portion
1st
Great Lakes area and other portions
9tn
New Jersey:
Upper portion
1st
tower portion
Sth
-------
EhyIwb—iitol Protection Aqcmcy
Table 2—Stanoaro Administrative Re-
gions of States and Corresponding
Coast Guard Districts and EPA Re-
gions—Continued
States and EPA region
I Coast
I Guard
i dfstnct
Puerto Rico -
Virgm taiand*
Ml:
Penneyfvama:
Eastern portion....
Great Lanes area
Guuuwesiom
..i 7th
..I 7th
West Vvgrnia..
Vvgmia..
Oistnet ol Commtta..
IV;
Kentucky
Te
.1 5th
.1 9th
I 2nd
| 5th
I Sth
I 2nd
.| 5th
5th
North Careens.....
South Carouna....
Georgia-.
2nd
I 2nd
J 5th
.... I 7ih
I 7th
Fionda:
Atlantic and Gutt coasts.
..I 7th
..| Bth
Southern.
Southern.
Nt
V:
Great Lafcee area.
n
Groat Lafcee area.
Great Lakes i
Greet Lakes «
ONo:
Great usee area -
Testa.
0th
2nd
Bth
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
9th
2nd
Oklahoma.
Colorado.
North Dakota..
South Oasots
IX:
Guam
American Samoa..
Trust Territory 01 the Pacific Islands..
Regen x
waanmgton..
Oregon.
Idaho.
Alaska
9th
2nd
0th
Sth
2nd
2nd
Bth
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
13th
2nd
11th
2nd
2nd
2nd
11th
11th
11th
14th
14th
14th
14tP)
14th
13th
13th
I3tn
17th
[CCD 84-067. 51 FR 17967. May 16. 1986. as
amended by CGD 88-052. 53 FR 25121. July
1. 1988]
-------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLMK
-------
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
S-310999
0001 (00)(21 -OCT-01 -!3-48 47)
F4717.FMT...[16,32]...l-07-88
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
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 2050-AC62
Oil 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.
addresses:
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. 401 M
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(00X21-OCT-91 -13:48:49)
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 1-800-424-9346 (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
metropolitan' area. 1-703-486-3323).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of today's preamble are listed
in the following outline:
I. 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 1113—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, end Countermeasures Plan
General Requirements
H. Section U2A—Spill Prevention.
Control, and Countermeasures Plan
Requirements for Onshore Facilities
(Excluding Production Facilities)
I. Section 112.9—Spill Prevention.
Control, and Countermeasures Plan
Requirements for Onshore Oil Production
Facilities
J. Section 112.10—Spill Prevention.
Control, and Countermeasures Plan
Requirements for Onshore Oil Drilling
and Workover Facilities
K. Section 112.11—Spill Prevention.
Control, and Countermeasures 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 Protection
E. Flood-Related Requirements
F. Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
V. Request for Comments
VI. Regulatory Analyses
A. Economic Analyses
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 et seq., 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-rela ted 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 311(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
4701.FMT...[16,30]...12-28-90
-------
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.
S-310999 0003(00X2 l-OCT-91-13:48:53)
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 Countermeasures
Program Task Force Report." interim Final Report.
May 13.1966. This document is available for
inspection at the Superfund Docket, room M2427.
U.S. EPA. 401 M Street. SW., Washington. DC 20460.
* General Accounting Office "Inland Oil Spills:
Stronger 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 l.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 Incidents ' February 1989 {GAO/
RCED-09-65) This document is available for
inspection at the Superfund Docket, room M2427.
U.S. EPA. 401 M Street. SW.. Washington. DC 20460
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
actions for discharges posing a
substantial threat to the public health or
welfare of the U.S. Also, new
discretionary authority to direct the
spiller's removal actions under other
S-310999 0004(00X2 l-OCT-91-13:48:56)
circumstances has been added to
existing authorities.
OPA section 4202 amends CWA
section 311(j) to require the development
of Area Contingency Plans to help
ensure the removal of a worst-case spill
from a vessel or facility in or near the
area covered by the plan. The President
must designate inland and coastal areas
for which plans are to be prepared; and
for each of these areas, an Area
Committee must be established
consisting of qualified Federal. State,
and local officials. Each Area
Committee in inland areas must prepare
an Area Contingency Plan and submit it
to the President. The President must
then review each plan and either
approve or require amendments to it.
Section 4202 of the OPA also amends
CWA section 311(j) to require that the
President issue regulations for owners or
operators of certain facilities and
vessels to prepare response plans for
worst-case oil and hazardous
substances discharges. Onshore
facilities that can cause "substantial
harm" in the event of a worst-case spill
must submit their plans to the President.
Of these plans, the President must
review and issue determinations on
plans for onshore facilities that can
cause "significant and substantial
harm."
Although the changes to the SPCC
regulation proposed today do not
directly incorporate requirements of the
OPA. the notification requirement
proposed today will assist in the
implementation of many of these OPA
requirements. This requirement will
provide information on the number and
location of facilities, as well as the size
and number of tanks at each one. EPA
expects that implementation of many of
the OPA provisions related to non-
transportation-related facilities will be
delegated to EPA in a forthcoming
Executive Order. As described in
section II.A of this preamble, the facility
data developed as a result of the
notification requirement will assist EPA
in its implementation of the response
planning provisions of OPA section 4202
in Phase Two.
The SPCC Task Force concluded that
aboveground storage tanks without
secondary containment pose a
particularly significant threat to the
environment. The Phase One
modifications would retain the existing
requirement for facility owners or
operators who are unable to provide
certain structures or equipment for oil
spill prevention, including secondary
containment, to prepare facility-specific
oil spill contingency plans in lieu of the
prevention systems, in developing the
Phr:; < Two modifications. EPA will
consider whether facility owners or
operators with aboveground storage
tanks, as well as others, should be
required to prepare facility-specific
contingency plans. Phase Two
modifications will also address the
requirements of a properly designed
contingency plan and. as described
above, will implement additional OPA
requirements for facility response
(contingency) plans, as appropriate.
Section 4301 of the OPA increases
penalties under the CWA for violations
resulting from discharges of oil or
hazardous substances. Section 4301(a)
amends the CWA to provide more
stringent penalties for failure to notify
the appropriate Federal agency of a
discharge. The OPA provides for
imprisonment of up to five years and a
fine not exceeding $250,000 for an
individual, or not more than $500,000 for
an organization. Section 4301(b)
establishes the penalty for failure to
comply with regulations under CWA
section 311(j) at $25,000 per day of
violation. In addition to these civil
penalties. Section 4301(b) establishes
administrative penalties of $10,000 per
violation, not to exceed $25,000 for Class
I penalties, and $10,000 per day per
violation, not to exceed $125,000 for
Class U penalties.
Section 4301(c) provides that
violations of the prohibition on
discharges of oil or hazardous
substances in amounts that may be
harmful are subject to criminal penalties
established under section 309(c) of the
CWA. These penalties are $2,500 to
$25,000 and up to one year imprisonment
for negligent violations. $5,000 to $50,000
and up to three years imprisonment for
knowing violations, and up to $250,000
(or $1 million for organizations) and up
to 15 years imprisonment for knowing
endangerment.
II. General Issues
A. Notification
The SPCC Task Force found in its
review of the SPCC program that
information concerning the numbers,
storage capacities, and locations of
above ground oil storage facilities is
needed to effectively administer the
SPCC program. Therefore. EPA is
proposing to require that all facilities
that are currently subject to the Oil
Pollution Prevention regulation by virtue
of their aboveground oil storage
capacity, or that are otherwise subject
to the CWA and have above ground
storage capacity greater than 1.320
gallons (or greater than 660 gallons in a
single container), notify the Agency of
certain SPCC-related facility
4701 .FMT...|16,30)...12-28-90
-------
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-310W) 0005(00K21 -OCT-91 -13:48:59)
form. EPA also requests comments on
additional information that could be
used in developing Area Plans or in
implementing the community right-to-
know program described in section IV.C
of this preamble.
The Agency proposes that the owner
or operator of the facility would
complete and send the form to the SPCC
program office at EPA Headquarters
within two months of the effective date
of the final rule. The proposed
notification would be a one-time
requirement: a facility would not be
required to notify EPA of changes in
owner(s). operators), or the other
required information elements. Any
owner or operator who fails to notify or
knowingly submits false information in
a notification would be subject to a civil
penalty. The Agency specifically
requests comment on the proposed
notification requirement and the
proposed notification form.
The Agency expects to use data
collected under the proposed
notification requirement to develop a
data base of facility-specific
information. This data base may also
include information on spills (obtained
from spill reports submitted by facilities
or from the Emergency Response
Notification System (ERNS)) and
various other types of information. The
Agency will use the information in the
data base to more effectively allocate
SPCC program resources by prioritizing
inspections and enforcement efforts and
by determining the need for additional
prevention requirements for certain
categories of facilities (such as facilities
with the potential to threaten major
drinking water supplies or sensitive
ecosystems).
The Agency is particularly interested
in comment on alternate methods of
facility notification. In particular. EPA is
aware that facilities may already be
required to submit Material Safety Data
Sheets (MSDSs) and other information
to State Emergency Response
Commissions (SERCs). Local Emergency
Planning Committees (LEPCs). and local
fire departments under sections 311 and
312 of Title III of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986 (SARA Title III). Comments are
solicited concerning ways that these
data submissions may be used to
establish an inventory of facilities
subject to this proposed rule.
B. Contingency Planning
EPA believes that facility-specific
contingency planning in coordination
with local authorities is an important
part of any spill related preparedness
program. The SPCC Task Force
recommended that the Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation be revised to
require the inclusion of contingency
plans in facility SPCC Plans, and that
these plans be coordinated with existing
State and local contingency planning
groups.
EPA believes that, in general, a
facility-specific contingency plan should
contain provisions for discovery of a
spill, emergency notification procedures,
the name of the spill response
coordinator, procedures for identifying
personnel and equipment that may be
needed, available equipment lists,
available personnel lists, an
identification of hazards, a vulnerability
analysis, and an event and fault tree
analysis.
The vulnerability analysis identifies
areas of immediate concern following a
spill event and provides an estimate of
the area most likely to be affected.
Examples of areas to be identified in the
vulnerability analysis include, but are
not limited to. population centers,
wetlands, wellhead protection areas,
and areas that may be inhabited by
endangered species. In addition, the
vulnerability analysis should identify
sensitive ecosystems requiring special
protection and drinking water suppliers
who must be notified if a release occurs.
An event and fault tree analysis will
identify potential spill scenarios. It is
usually based on prior spills at the
facility and can be used to estimate
possible sources of leaks, spill sizes,
pathways, and causes of spills at other
facilities. Case studies of major spills
show that close attention should be paid
to the methods by which equipment and
personnel may be obtained. Finally, the
contingency plan should address
disposal of recovered oil. used sorbents,
and other materials. The Agency's
experience at various spill sites also
demonstrates the importance of
addressing the location of off-site spill
pathways in the contingency plan.
Above all, a contingency plan needs to
be workable and easy to follow in
emergency situations. Facility personnel
should be trained in the contingency
plan procedures to improve their
understanding of the plan and ensure
that it is properly followed in
emergencies.
The Agency is proposing in today's
notice only to require elementary
contingency planning steps that are
currently included in most existing
SPCC Plans, such as the inclusion in a
facility's Plan of a list of contacts (e.g..
the facility response coordinator, the
National Response Center (NRC)). EPA
is also proposing to clarify an existing
requirement that facilities without
4701 .FMT... [16.30]...12-28-90
-------
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 § 112.8(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). II 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
' The change from the use of "pipeline" lo
piping' is to eliminate any possible confusion
between the regulation s use of "pipeline", and
"pipelines' regulated by DOT s Office of Pipeline
Safety.
S-JI0999 0006f00M21-OCT-*M-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
i 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
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 comments
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
!§ 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)(1) 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
Oeepwater 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
4701 .FMT...|16.30}...12-28-90
-------
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].*
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)(1) of the CWA defines "oil" 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."
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 S 112.1(b)(1),
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 2B0). 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 to the CWA made by the OPA in
1990 broaden the concept of quantities that may be
hBrmfui to include not only "the public health or
welfare" but also "the environment."
S-310999 0007(00X2 l-OCT-91-13:49:06)
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 5112.1(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)(1). Therefore, the
Agency is proposing to exempt oil
storage tanks meeting the criteria for
being "permanently closed" in proposed
§ 112.2(o) 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 § 112.1(b)(1). 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
countermeasures practices that are
directed more specifically to the
facilities subject to these requirements.
As described in section ILA of this
preamble. EPA is proposing a new
facility notification requirement as
S 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
S 112.1(e) (redesignated as proposed
S 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
4701 .FMT... 116.301...12-28-9(1
-------
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
-evised 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 any 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 B. 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 (36 FR 24060). 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 J 112.7(e)(5)(i) and
§ I12.7(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 oii 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 } 112.2(a) to
S 112.2(i)J.
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 8 112.3
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 new 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
S 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(00X2 l-OCT-91-13-49:10)
-------
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 1112.5. 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(00X21 -OCT-91 -13:49.14)
attended eight hours per day. Some
owners or operators at facilities
operating one shift per day have
interpreted this requirement as not
applying to a facility that is in operation
only seven and one half hours per day.
deducting a half hour for lunch. The
Agency strongly believes that to be most
useful in preventing and mitigating
discharges, the SPCC Plan must be an
integral part of manned facility
operations. Therefore, the Agency has
chosen a four-hour minimum attendance
requirement in the proposed rule to
ensure that facilities operating one shift
per day are required to maintain SPCC
plans at the facility.
In paragraph (f), the owner or operator-
of new facilities described in paragraph
(b) may in defined circumstances apply
for an extension of time to comply with
the requirements of this part. Existing
facilities described in paragraphs (a)
and (c) have had since 1973 to comply
with the requirement and have their
SPCC Plans in place, and therefore, this
provision does not apply to those
facilities.
D. Section 112.4—Amendment of SPCC
Plans by Regional Administrator
This section describes the review of a
Plan by the Regional Administrator in
the event of certain types of spills and
procedures for requiring an amendment
to the Plan. In proposed paragraph
(a)(4), owners or operators are required
to provide the Regional Administrator
with information on the name and
address of any registered agent, in some
instances, a registered agent of the
owner or operator may have information
needed by the Regional Administrator.
The Regional Administrator may also
need to contact the agent with further
questions or transmit his review of the
Plan back to the agent.
in proposed paragraph (a)(10).
information on the nature and volume of
oil spilled is required, in addition to the
information currently required.
Information on the nature and volume of
oil spilled provides the Agency with
additional information to identify select
problem areas where additional
regulatory emphasis may be needed.
EPA also believes that this information
will assist the Regional Administrator in
determining if amendment of the SPCC
Plan is necessary and in determining
future oil pollution prevention policies.
In proposed paragraph (b). the
references to § 112.3(a). (b). and (c) have
been deleted because the times allowed
in these paragraphs for the preparation
and implementation of the Plan are
proposed for deletion.
Paragraph (c) of the current rule
requires that a complete copy of all
information provided to the Regional
Administrator be provided to the State
agency in charge of water pollution
control activities in which the facility is
located. Proposed paragraph (c) would
require that the information be sent to
the State agency in charge of oil
pollution control activities. The EPA is
proposing this change because it is the
appropriate agency to contact in many
States.
In proposed § 112.4(d). a sentence has
been added that discusses the review by
the Regional Administrator of materials
submitted under proposed § 112.7(d).
Proposed § 112.7(d) requires, among
other things, the owner or operator to
submit to the Regional Administrator
certain materials, such as a contingency
plan, if the installation of structures or
equipment listed in § 112.7(c) is not
practicable.
E. Section 112.S—Amendment of SPCC
Plans by Owners or Operators
EPA is proposing to revise § 112.5(a)
to require that Plans be amended before
any change is made in facility design,
construction, operation, or maintenance
affecting the facility's potential for
discharge of oil into waters of the
United States unless an extension has
been granted by the Regional
Administrator. This provision is
consistent with the provision proposing
that SPCC Plans for new facilities be
prepared and implemented before
facility operations begin. EPA is also
proposing to clarify which changes
require Plan amendments by listing the
following types of changes as examples:
(1) Commission or decommission of
tanks; (2) replacement, reconstruction,
or movement of tanks; (3)
reconstruction, replacement, or
installation of piping systems; (4)
construction or demolition that might
alter secondary containment structures:
or (5) revision of standard operation or
maintenance procedures at a facility.
These examples are not an exclusive list
of changes that require a Plan
amendment.
The owner or operator of a facility
subject to $ 112.3(a). (b). or (c) is
required by the current § 112.5(b) to
review and evaluate the facility SPCC
Plan at least every three years, and to
amend the Plan within six months to
include more effective prevention and
control technology if: (1) Such
technology will significantly reduce the
likelihood of a spill from the facility: and
(2) the technology has been field-proven
at the time of the review.
The current § 112.5(c) states that, to
be effective, all amendments to a
facility's Plan must be certified by a
4701.FMT...(16,30]...12-28-90
-------
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 Oil 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
l.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.
C. Section 112.7—Spill Prevention.
Control, and Countermeasures Plan
General Requirements
The Agency is proposing to separate
existing provisions of 40 CFR 112.7 into
five sections (§§ 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 SS 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 tlie
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 on the part of
some owners or operators who have
interpreted the current rule's use of the
S-310W 0010(00X21 -OCT-91 -13:49:17)
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 proposed $S 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 SS 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 SS 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 proposed revision
continues to provide for deviation from
the requirements of S 112.7 where the
owners or operators cannot meet the
specific requirements set forth in the
rule. A new proposed technical waiver
in S 112.7(a)(2) allows for the owner or
operator to provide equivalent alternate
protection that is not specified in
SS 112.7(c), 1124.112.9,112.10. 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 SS 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
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 SS 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 S 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 SS 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 me -s.
This provision is intended to proviu-j
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
4701 .FMT...[16.30]...12-28-90
-------
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 (a)(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(00X21-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 with 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)(6) 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.*
The oment $ 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
1 Twelve percent of all releases are caused by
pipe ieaki and valve failures "Aboveground
Storage Tank Incident Information Project." API.
Washington. DC. December 20.1988.
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 II revisions
to the SPCC regulation.
Paragraph (d)(1) 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)(1) 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 and other chemicals to
respond to oil spills in navigable waters
would continue to be governed by 40
CFR part 300, subpart ] 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
§§ 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
470l.FMT...Ilfi.3nl ...1 ?.-?.R-on
-------
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(f): Personnel
training, and spill prevention
procedures. Thft 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)(1). 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(00X21-OCT-9I-13:49:24)
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
Actually 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
§§ 112.8.112.9.112.10, and 112.11 and if
more stringent, with State rules,
regulations, and guidelines.
H. Section 112.8: Spill Prevention.
Control, and Countermeasures Plan
Requirements for Onshore Facilities
(Excluding Production Facilities)
This section combines §§ 112.7(e)(1).
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)(1) 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 S 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
S 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
IV.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)(1) 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
4701.FMT...116.301.,.12-2R-»n
-------
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
1112.9(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 § 112.6(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 § 112.8(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(00X21 -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 S 112.8(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
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 an integrity
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
1112.8(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.B(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).
4701.FMT...(16,30)...12-28-90
-------
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 S 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
S 112.0(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 {112.6(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)(1) 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)(1). 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 OOI4
-------
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: Spill Prevention,
Control, and Countermeasures Plan
Requirements for Offshore Oil Drilling.
Production, or Workover Facilities
This section is § 112.7(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)(h) 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 0015(00X2 l-OCT-91 -13:49:35)
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
In) through (r), accordingly.
IV. Relationship to Other Programs
A. Underground Storage Tanks
A number of underground and
aboveground petroleum storage tanks
(as defined by the proposed revisions to
40 CFR part 112) are subject to both the
Oil Pollution Prevention regulation and
the UST regulation (40 CFR part 280)
issued under subtitle 1 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 200) 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
4701.FMT...[16,30]...12-28-90
-------
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 860 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 governments 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(00X21-OCT-91-n.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-Kriow 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 111. 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.
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 SPCC
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 with 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 bordering 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
4701.FMT...I16.30J...12-28-90
-------
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 WHPAs 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 (NFIP) definition of structures
includes aboveground 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-310999 0017(00X21 -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
. dministration
A number of aboveground storage
tanks are subject to OSHA requirements
under 29 CFR 1910.106. 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
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 1II.H.
the Agency has determined that such
equipment is not subject to the
provisions addressing bulk storage
containers. EPA solicits comments on
whether there are examples of other
facilities with similar equipment
containing oil for ancillary purposes thai
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 new
compliance costs.
4701.FMT...(16.30)...12-28-90
-------
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 S9.9 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 HI 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 II.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-lP).
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 1Proposed notification Provision
Benefits >
Coats
Net benefits
Present Value
$26 milbon
$10 miHion
S16 million.
S2.6 million
Annualized
' The monetized benefits as a result of the proposed notification form ware estimated in the supplemental cost/benefit analysis The methodology used to
estimate these benefits b included in appendix 2-A and 2-B of the Supplemental Cost/Benefit Analysis ot the Proposed Revisions to the Oil Pollution Prevention
Regulation. EPA myites comment on both the methodology used and the results obtained, especially information which might indicate that substantial benefits or
costs have been meluded.
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
! Benefits
Costs
' Net benefits
$441 mrtbot
$71.6 miltio
i
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 00l8(01K2l-OCT-9l-U:31:06>
4701.FMT...[16.30l...l2-28-90
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22, 1991 / Proposed Rules 54629
Table 3 —Proposed Discretionary Provisions 1
Benefits
Costs
Net benefits
Upper Bound:
Present value
Annualized
Louver Bound:
Present Value
Annualized
$495 million.
$80.5 million
$248 million.
$40.4 million
$441 million $54 million.
$71.8 million I $8.7 million.
$441 million...
$71.8 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 tot
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.
In summary, the present value of the
cost of the proposed rule based on the
results of the supplemental cost/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.
23. 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 or prices
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 E.O.
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).
S-310999 0019(01X2 l-OCT-91-13:51:09)
4701 .FMT.J16.30]... 12-28-90
-------
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 to 10 hours ennually.
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 3.1891.
William K. ReiUy,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40. chapter 1, 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
Sec.
112.1 General applicability and notification.
112.2 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 Tanks
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321 and 1361; E.O.
11735,38 FR 21243, 3 CFR 1971-1975 Comp.. p.
791.
PART 112—OIL POLLUTION
PREVENTION
} 112.1 Qanrl applicability and
notification.
(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
S 112.2(o).
(3) This part applies to facilities
having "bunkered tanks" and "partially
buried tanks" as defined in § 112.2(c)
and 1112.2(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
S 112.6.
(d) Except as provided in paragraph
(e) of this section and the first sentence
of S 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 8 112.1(b)(1) 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(01X21-OCT-91-13:5I: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
5 112.2(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 afterdate 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(01 K21-OCT-9I-13:51:15)
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.
§ 112J Definition*.
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
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 subject
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)(1) 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)(1)
through (6) of this section.
4701 .FMT...[16,30]...12-28-90
-------
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) OH 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.
(0) Permanently closed is any tank or
facility that has been closed in the
following manner:
(1) All 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(01 K21-OCT-9l-13:51:18)
experience, is one that contains a
concentration of combustible gas. vapor,
or dust greater than 25 percent of the
LEL 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.
(~) 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 S 112.1(b)(1) 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 Riled
with oil or a mixture of oil and other
substances.
(~) Transportation-relcted 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.
(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 and
hnptomant a Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countarmeaaurea 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
1112.1(b)(1) 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 60 days
after date of publication of the final
rule), and could reasonably be expected
to discharge oil as described in
§ 112.1(b)(1) of this part, shall prepare a
facility srcC Plan in accordance with
S 112.7, and in accordance with any of
the following sections that apply to the
facility: §§ 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
4701 .FMT...[16,30]...12-28-90
-------
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 it
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)(1) 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;
S-310999 0023(01)(21 -OCT-91 -13:51:22)
. (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 Countermeasures Plan by
Regional Administrator.
(~) Notwithstanding compliance with
1112.3. whenever a facility subject to
i 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)(1) 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;
(~) 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;
(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
1112.7(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
dfm rvfT fifi ml
-------
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 1112.3 (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)(1) 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-91-13:51 ;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
Oil 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 Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasures 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 countermeasures.
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
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 countermeasures 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.
(5) 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
4701.FMT...116.301...12-2B-90
-------
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:
(1) 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.
(dj 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 oil 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) of the NCP for the
S-310W 0025(01 K21-OCT-91-13:51:29)
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 "off" 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 facilitiesJ. (1) 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 Spilt Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasures Plan requirements tor
onshore facilities (excluding production
(acuities).
(a) In addition to the specific spill
prevention and containment procedures
4701.FMT...(16.30)...12-28-90
-------
54636
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22, 1991 / Proposed Rules
isted under this section, onshore
^alities (excluding production
:acilities) must also address the general
requirements listed under § 112.7 in the
SPCC Plan.
(b) Facility drainage (onshore);
i ncluding production facilities). (1)
drainage from diked storage areas shall
!>e 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
'reatment system, except where facility
systems are designed to handle such
leakage. Diked areas may be emptied by
pumps or ejectors; however, these shall
lie manually activated and the condition
of the accumulation shall be examined
i iefore starting to ensure no oil will be
discharged into the water.
(2) Flapper-type drain valves shall not
ne used to drain diked areas. Valves
used 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
. ourses and not into wastewater
treatment plants, retained storm water
shall be inspected as provided in
paragraphs (c)(3) (ii), (iii), and (iv) of this
section before drainage.
13) Facility drainage systems from
undiked areas with a potential for oil
spill contamination shall flow into
oonds, lagoons, or catchment basins
designed to retain oil or return it to the
• ^cility. It is recommended that
¦:;i 'chment basins not be located in
-ireas subject to periodic flooding.
14) If facility drainage is not
engineered as above, the final discharge
if all in-piant drainage shall be
quipped with a diversion system that
ould. in the event of an uncontrolled
r,pill. retain oil in the facility.
15) Where drainage waters are treated
r. more than one treatment unit, it is
•'commended that natural hydraulic
iov. be used. If pump transfer is needed,
wo "lift" pumps shall be provided, and
i 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
mi that, in the event of equipment failure
human error at the facility, oil will be
prevented from reaching navigable
vaters of the United States, adjoining
horelines. or other waters that would
i>e affected by discharging oil as
described in § 112.1(b)(1) of this part.
(6) For facilities in locations subject to
'moding. it is recommended that the
SPCC Plan address additional
requirements for events that occur
luring a period of flooding.
--3IOW9 0026(01)(21-OCT-91-I3:5I: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
reseated 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.
(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 hoid 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 the
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
4701 .FMT...116.30J...12-28-90
-------
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. Jf 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(01 X2 J -OCT-91-13:51:36)
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
Countermeasures Plan requirements 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 S 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)(1) 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 S 11241(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) Oil production facility (onshore)
bulk storage tanks. (1) 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.
(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)(1). 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:
(1) 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 (oil 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
4701 .FMT...(16,30)...12-28-90
-------
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
Countermeaaurea Plan requirements 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 oi) 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 wall-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
Countermeatures Plan requirements for
offahore 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)(1) 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-310999 0028(01 )(21 -OCT-91-13:51:39)
adequately sized and a spare pump or
equivalent ijiethod shall be available to
remove liquid from the sump and assure
that oil does not escape. A monthly
preventive maintenance inspection and
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
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) AH 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 shal! be documented
and maintained at the facility for a
period of five years.
(s) To prevent misunderstanding of
joint and separate duties and
4701.FMT...[16.30]...12-28-90
-------
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 operate;
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 11546.
the term:
II) 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.
(I) 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 cr from
highway vehicles or railroad cars.
(J] 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-related
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.
(D) 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.
MLUHC COOE (SW-SO-M
S-31099")
0029(01 X21-OCT-91-13:51 43)
4701.FMT...(16,30]...12-28-90
-------
Wednesday
February 17,1993
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 112
Oil Pollution Prevention; Non-
Transportation-Related Onshore Facilities;
Proposed Rule
Friday
April 9,1993
Part VII
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 112
Oil Pollution Prevention;
CORRECTION;
Proposed Rule
Recycled/Recyclable
Printed on paper that contains
\~\C/ at least 50% recycled fiber
-------
Wednesday
February 17, 1993
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 112
Oil Pollution Prevention; Non-
Transportation-Related Onshore Facilities;
Proposed Rule
B S
-------
8824 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 112
[SWH-FRL 4556-2]
RIN2050-AD30
Oil Pollution Prevention; Non-
Tranaportatlon-Related Onshore
Facilities
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: This proposed rule would
revise the Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation, originally promulgated
under the Clean Water Act (OVA). The
proposed revision would incorporate
new requirements added by the Oil
Pollution Act of 1990 that direct 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. Other regulatory changes to
strengthen the existing regulation also
are proposed.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before April 19,1993.
ADDRESSES: Comments: Comments
should be submitted in triplicate to:
Emergency Response Division,
Attention: Superfund Docket Clerk,
Docket Number SPCC-2P, Superfund
Docket, room M2427 (mail code OS-
24S), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M 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-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 page
copied after 100 pages, plus a $25.00
administrative fee.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bobbie Lively-Diebold, Response
Standards and Criteria Branch,
Emergency Response Division (OS-210).
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 80O-
424-9346 (in the Washington, DC
metropolitan area, 703-920-9810). The
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf
(TDD) Hotline number is 800-553-7672
(in the Washington, DC metropolitan
area, 703-486-3323).
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 This Rulemaking
II. Alternative Approaches for Identifying
Facilities Subject to Facility Response
Plan Requirements
A. Option Om
B. Option Two
m. Proposed Approach for the
Implementation of Facility Response
Plan Requirements
A. Procedures and Deadlines—$$ 112.20
(a) Through (e)
B. Selection Criteria—S 112.20(f) and
Appendix C
C Environmentally Sensitive Areas—
Appendix D
O. Definition of Worst Case Discharge
Appendix E
E. Tiered Response Planning
F. The Determination and Demonstration
of Adequate Response Capability-
Appendix F
G. Response Plan Elements—§S 112.20(g}
and (h), and Appendix G
IV. Relationship of Facility Response Plan
Requirements to Other Programs
V. Proposed Revisions to Existing 40 CFR
part 112 Plan Requirements
A. Prevention Training
B. Ensuring Against Brittle Fracture
C SPCC Plan Amendment
D. Authority to Require Preparation of
Plans
E. Submission of Plans That Contain a
Waiver of Technical Requirements
VI. Other Technical Considerations Not
Proposed
VD. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order 12291
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C Paperwork Reduction Act
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 requires the President to issue
regulations that require owners or
operators of tank vessels or offshore
facilities or 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)(C). The President has
delegated the authority to regulate non-
transportation-related onshore facilities
under section 311(j)(l)(C) of the CWA to
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA of the Agency). See
Executive Order 12777, section 2(b)(1),
56 FR 54757 (October 22,1991).
superseding Executive Order 11735,38
FR 21243. By this same Executive
Order, 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) between the
Secretary of Transportation and the EPA
Administrator, dated November 24,
1971 (36 FR 24080), establishes the
definitions of non-transportation-related
facilities and transportation-related
facilities. The definitions from the MOU
are included in appendix A to 40 CFR
part 112.
B, The Oil Pollution Act of J 990
The OPA 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, and
establish an expanded research and
development program. The Act
establishes a new Oil Spill Liability
Trust Fund, administered by the United
States Coast Guard (USCG). As provided
in sections 2002(b). 2003, and 2004 of
the OPA, the new Fund replaces the
fund 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 that provide that owners or
operators of facilities 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 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." Today's
proposed revisions address only plans
for responding to discharges of oil.
Implementation of the OPA provisions
addressing hazardous substance
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8825
response plans will be addressed in a
subsequent rule.
CWA section 311(j)(5)(C) sets forth
certain minimum requirements for
facility response plans. The plans must:
• Be consistent with the requirements
of the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
(NCP) and Area Contingency Plans
(ACPs);
• Identify the qualified individual
having full authority to implement
removal actions, and requite 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 underthe 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 3U(j)(5)(D), additional
review and approval provisions apply to
response plans prepared 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) Pursuant to
authority delegated in Executive Order
12777, EPA is responsible for the
following activities for each of these
response plans at non-transportation-
related onshore facilities:
• Promptly review the response plan;
• Require amendments to any plan
that does not meet the section 311(j)(5)
requirements;
• Approve any plan that meets these
requirements; and
• Review each plan periodically
thereafter.
The OPA requires that owners or
operators of facilities that could cause
"substantial harm" to the environment
by discharging oil must submit their
response plans to EPA (as delegated by
the President in Executive Order 12777)
by February 18,1993, or stop handling,
storing, or transporting oil. In addition,
under CWA 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 oeen approved by EPA; and (2)
the facility is operating in compliance
with the plan. The statute provides that
a facility may be allowed to operate
without an approved response plan for
up to two years after the facility submits
a plan that is to be reviewed, 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, or a substantial threat of such
a discharge.
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 H penalties.
Revisions to the penalty provisions are
applicable to violations occurring alter
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. This Rulemaking
As discussed in section I .A of this
Preamble, the Agency proposes
revisions to the Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation to implement OPA response
plan requirements as well as several
other technical requirements. After
consideration of comments received in
response to this proposed rule, a final
rule will be promulgated. If 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
public hearing in the Federal Register.
Any statements made at such a hearing
would be included in the public record
of the rulemaking. Until the Agency
promulgates a final rule that
implements the provisions of CWA
section 311(j)(5), owners and operators
of onshore, non-transportation-related
facilities that handle oil may use this
proposed rule as guidance to meet the
CWA's requirements for facility
response plans.
D. Alternative Approaches for
Identifying Facilities Subject to
Response Plan Requirements
The Agency investigated two
approaches to identifying facilities
subject to facility response plan
requirements (facilities that could cause
"substantial harm" to the environment)
under this proposed rulemaking. The
major differences between the
approaches are: (1) The extent of the
regulated community affected by the
response plan requirements, and (2) the
process to determine which facilities
could cause "substantial harm" to the
environment, including the selection
method and criteria. The two
alternatives are outlined briefly below
followed by a more detailed discussion
of each option. EPA proposes the first
option but requests comment on the
relative merits of both options.
Under Option 1, EPA would propose
to implement the OPA response plan
requirements as follows:
• Facilities that could cause
"substantial harm" to the environment
by discharging oil into navigable waters
or adjoining shorelines must prepare
and submit a facility response plan to
EPA; and
• The Agency will review for
approval, all plans submitted by
facilities identified as having the
potential to cause "significant and
substantial harm" to the environment
from such discharges.
This option in part would use a
process by which owners or operators
would determine whether their facility
could cause "substantial harm" to the
environment. To complete the self-
selection process, owners or operators
would be required to evaluate their
facility against a set of published criteria
arranged in a flowchart. The criteria
include: Storage capacity, proximity to
sensitive environments and drinking
water supplies, marine transfer
operations, adequacy of secondary
containment, and spill history. EPA is
considering several alternative
threshold levels for the storage capacity
criterion. Facilities meeting one or a
combination of the above criteria would
be determined to have the potential to
cause "substantial harm" and would
have to prepare and submit a response
plan to the appropriate Regional
Administrator (RA). In addition, the RA
would have the authority to determine
that any regulated facility, regardless of
the results of the self-selection screening
-------
8826
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
process, has the potential to cause
"substantial harm" based on similar
criteria and taking into account other
site-specific characteristics and
environmental factors. To determine
whether a facility could cause
"significant and substantial harm" to
the environment, the RA would
consider other criteria in addition to the
factors used in the "substantial harm"
determination.
Under Option 2, EPA would propose
to reauire that:
• All regulated facilities would have
to prepare a response plan;
• Facilities that could cause
"substantial harm" to the environment
by discharging into water bodies or
adjoining shorelines would have to
submit their plans to EPA;
• The Agency would review for
approval plans submitted by facilities
that could cause "significant and
substantial harm" to the environment
from such discharges; and
• Certain small, low-risk facilities
with secondary containment structures
would be allowed to prepare an
abridged version of a response plan.
EPA would select "substantial harm"
and "significant and substantial harm"
facilities using risk-based screening
criteria and Regional knowledge.
A. Option One
Under Option 1, EPA would propose
to implement the CWA section 311(j)(5)
requirements that: (1) The owner or
operator of a facility that could cause
"substantial harm" prepare and submit
a response plan, and (2) facilities that
could cause "significant and substantial
harm" to the environment have their
Elans promptly reviewed for approval
y EPA. This approach is consistent
with the OPA legislative history, which
supports the Agency's position that only
a subset of all submitted onshore facility
response plans would be reviewed and
approved. See H.R. Rep. No. 101-653,
101st Cong. 2d Sess. 1991 at p. 150.
"Substantial Harm" Facility Selection
Process and Criteria
Under this option, several processes
would be used to identify those
facilities required to prepare and submit
response plans. Facility owners and
operators would be required to evaluate
their facilities for the potential to cause
"substantial harm" to the environment
using criteria published in the proposed
rule. Owners and operators would be
aided in this evaluation by a flowchart
designed to determine whether a facility
meets the criteria and has the potential
to cause "substantial harm."
Instructions for the use of the flowchart
would be provided to help owners and
operators apply the criteria. Under this
option, owners or operators of facilities
determined not to have the potential to
cause "substantial harm" would be
required to certify that their facility did
not meet the criteria as contained in the
flowchart.
The criteria that would be used to
help identify the universe of
"substantial harm" facilities would
include facility storage capacity,
proximity to sensitive environments and
drinking water supplies, the existence of
secondary containment, spill history,
and the nature of the facility's marine
transfer operations. As described in
section 1U.B of this preamble, in
addition to oil storage capacity and the
proximity to potable water supplies and
environmentally sensitive areas (which
are elements specifically referenced in
the OPA Conference Report, see H.R.
Rep. No. 101-653,101st Cong. 2d Sess.
1991 at p. 150), EPA has determined
that the remaining criteria are elements
that are closely related to the potential
for a facility to cause "substantial harm"
to the environment as a result of a
discharge of oil. EPA has arranged the
criteria in a flowchart (see appendix C)
that shows the decision tree by which
owners and operators would determine
whether their facility could pose
"substantial harm" to the environment.
As presented in the flowchart, a
facility would be determined to have the
potential to cause "substantial harm" to
the environment if either of the
following two screening criteria are met:
(1) The facility's total oil storage
capacity is greater than or equal to 1
million gallons, and one of the
following is true:
• The facility is located at a distance
(as calculated using the appropriate
formula in appendix C or an alternative
formula considered acceptable by the
Regional Administrator) such that a
discharge from the facility would shut
down operations at a public drinking
water intake;
• The facility is located at a distance
(as calculated using the appropriate
formula in appendix C or an alternative
formula considered acceptable by the
Regional Administrator) such that a
discharge from the facility could cause
injury to an environmentally sensitive
area;
• 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; or
• The facility has had a reportable
spill greater than or equal to 10,000
gallons within the last 5 years.
(2) The facility transfers oil of any
Wnri over water to or from vessels and
has a storage capacity greater than or
equBl to 42,000 gallons.
EPA recognizes that large-capacity
facilities have a greater potential for
causing spills and subsequent
environmental damage. EPA also
considered an alternative storage
capacity cut-off of 200,000 gallons
under the first screen for Option 1. EPA
requests comment on the
appropriateness of the use of the 1
million gallon or 200,000 gallon size
cut-off in the determination of
"substantial harm" and information on
anv data relevant to this factor.
Under this option, the RA would have
the authority to screen facilities using
the same criteria that facility owners or
operators would use under the self-
selection process. This step will serve to
verify that owners or operators are
applying the screening criteria correctly.
To determine substantial harm, the RA
could also evaluate the risk posed by a
facility using, among other things,
general risk factors (i.e., proximity to
sensitive environments and drinking
water intakes) similar to the specific
criteria discussed above. Moreover,
because of the potential variation in
site-specific characteristics and
environmental factors, as well as the
possible relevance of factors not
specified in the criteria provided for
owners and operators to screen their
facilities, the RA would maintain the
ability to consider other risk-based
factors in making his or her
determination. Regional knowledge
about the compliance history of a
particular facility, as well as other site-
specific circumstances that affect the
risk of harm from a discharge, are
examples of such factors. EPA solicits
comment on the appropriateness of
these criteria for use by the facility
owner or operator and the RA to
determine whether a facility could
cause "substantial harm" to the
environment.
"Significant and Substantial Harm"
Facility Selection Process and Criteria
Under Option 1, the RA would further
assess the risks posed by an individual
facility in order to identify the subset of
"substantial harm" facilities that could
cause both "significant and substantial"
harm to the environment. In making this
determination, the RA would use the
"substantial harm" factors as well as
other information, including:
information from submitted plans,
facility compliance history, age of tanks,
proximity of discharge sources to
navigable waters and additional areas of
environmental concern, Regional site
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules 8827
characteristics, and local impacts on
public health. Although based on a set
of national criteria, this prioritization
may differ from Region to Region
depending on the relative importance of
certain factors within a particular area.
In addition to those facilities identified
to meet the OPA's August 18,1993,
deadline, EPA also may in the future
identify additional facilities as having
the potential to cause "significant and
substantial harm." As stated above,
those facilities identified as having the
potential to cause "significant and
substantial harm" to the environment
would be required to have their
response plans reviewed for approval.
EPA solicits comment on the
appropriateness and relative importance
of the selection criteria in the RA's
determination of "significant and
substantial harm." Also, the Agency
requests comment on whether the RA
should consider additional facility
characteristics, such as the complexity
and throughput of a facility's operations
and type of product stored in the
determination of "significant and
substantial harm."
B. Option Two
EPA also is considering a second
approach to the implementation of
response plan requirements, based on
the authority contained in CWA
subsections 311(j) (1) and (5). Under this
option, all regulated facilities 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.
Under this approach, only
"substantial harm" facilities would be
required to submit plans to EPA and
"significant and substantial harm"
facilities would have their plans
reviewed and approved. All other
owners and operators subject to the
regulation would only have to prepare
a facility response plan that would be
kept at the facility.
Facility Selection Process and Criteria
The responsibility to determine
"substantial barm" and "significant and
substantial harm" facilities under this
approach would rest entirely with the
Agency. The RA would determine
which facilities fall within each
category using the risk-based screening
criteria discussed under Option 1. The
remaining aspects of Option 2 are
essentially similar to those presented
under Option 1.
m. Proposed Approach for the
Implementation of Facility Response
Plan Requirements
EPA proposes Option 1 for identifying
facilities subject to response planning
requirements. Only owners or operators
of facilities that could cause
"substantial harm" to the environment
would be required to prepare and
submit plans. EPA would then review
and approve only those plans submitted
by facilities that could cause
"significant and substantial harm" to
the environment. Risk-based criteria for
evaluating the potential to cause
"substantial harm" and "significant and
substantial harm" are published in
§ 112.20(f) of today's proposed rule. The
"substantial harm" determination
would be accomplished, in large part,
through a facility self-determination
process which uses the criteria in
proposed § 112.20(f)(1) in conjunction
with the flowchart proposed in
appendix C to the rule. In addition, each
RA would have the authority to
determine that other facilities could
cause "substantial harm" to the
environment based on the specific
criteria in proposed § 112.20(f)(1) or the
general factors in proposed
§ 112.20(f)(2), including other site-
specific characteristics and
environmental factors that may be
relevant. The "substantial harm" criteria
are discussed in detail in Section m.B
of this preamble. In applying these
factors, the RA may seek input on
specific facilities from other agencies
such as the USCG. The RA also may
consider petitions from the public to
determine whether a facility could
cause "substantial harm" to the
environment. Those facilities submitting
plans would be required to include a
response plan cover sheet (as provided
in appendix G), which indicates that the
information contained in the plan is
accurate and which provides a basic
summary of facility information
including the results of the self-
selection for the "substantial harm"
determination. Under proposed
§ 112.20(e), facilities not required to
submit plans would be required to
maintain on-site a certification form
indicating that the facility was
determined not to pose the threat of
"substantial harm" to the environment.
EPA's formulas for distance were
designed to be simple to use. However,
facilities may calculate planning
distances using more sophisticated
formulas, which take into account
broader scientific or engineering
principles, or local conditions. Such
alternative formulas may result in
different planning distances than those
distances calculated using EPA's
proposed formulas in appendix C. If an
owner or operator chooses to use an
alternative formula and determines that
the facility could not cause substantial
harm, the owner or operator must attach
to the certification form a brief
explanation of the formula and its
reliability, and demonstrate how
calculations were made. In addition, the
owner or operator would be required to
notify the RA in writing that an
alternate formula was used to determine
that the facility does not pose a threat
of substantial harm. Mora information
concerning the use of alternative
formulas is provided in section III.B of
this Preamble and in appendix C of the
proposed rule.
To determine whether a facility could
cause "significant and substantial
harm" to the environment, the RA
would consider the "substantial harm"
criteria in proposed § 112.20(f)(2) as
well as additional factors in proposed
§ 112.20(f)(3), including site-specific
information relating to such things as
local impacts on public health. Section
m.B of this preamble discusses the
criteria to be used by RAs in their
determination of a facility's potential to
cause "significant and substantial
harm" to the environment.
A. Procedures and Deadlines—§§ 112.20
(a) through (e)
1. Preparing, Submitting, and Reviewing
Plans
As discussed above, the Agency
proposed two ways a facility can be
screened as having the potential to
cause "substantial harm"; one involving
a self-effectuating process and the other
involving an Agency determination.
EPA may identify some facilities as
having the potential to cause
"substantial harm" that may not have
been identified in the self-selection
process.
Self-Selection—§ 112.20(a). The
owner or operator of an existing facility
that meets the criteria proposed in
§ 112.20(f)(1) would be required to
prepare and submit a facility response
plan to the appropriate RA by February
18,1993, in order to meet the OPA
deadline for plan submission. EPA
proposes in § 112.20(a)(2) that owners or
operators of all regulated facilities must
determine whether a response plan is
required for their facility based on the
"substantial harm" criteria. Proposed
§ 112.20(f)(1) would require that an
owner or operator use the flowchart in
appendix C to apply these criteria.
Appendix C provides information that is
necessary for the owner or operator to
-------
8828
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
correctly apply certain of the criteria
proposed in $ 112.20(f)(1).
Tab Agency recognizes that self-
selection may occur after February 18,
1993, because of new facilities coming
on-line and existing facilities
subsequently meeting the criteria for
"substantial harm" as a result of a
change in operations or site
characteristics. To ensure consistency
with the overall requirement to prepare
and implement a Spill Prevention,
Control, and Countermeaaure (SPCC)
Plan as proposed in the Phase One
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
(56 FR 54630; October 22,1991), EPA
proposes in $ 112.20(a)(2) that: (1)
Newly constructed facilities be required
to prepare and submit a response plan
Srior to the start of operations
tdjustments to the response plan can be
made and submitted to the Agency 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 be required to
prepare ana submit a response plan
prior to the implementation of changes
at the facility. For example, a facility
located near an environmentally
sensitive area that plans to increase its
maximum oil storage capacity to one
million gallons subsequently would be
determined (according to the flowchart
in appendix C) to have the potential to
cause "substantial harm." A facility
planning such a change would be
required to prepare and submit a
response plan prior to commencing the
new operation. An existing facility,
however, may become subject to the
response plan requirements through one
or a combination of unplanned events,
such as experiencing a reportable spill
or the identification of a sensitive
environment adjacent to the site during
the ACP development process as
described in section m.C of this
preamble. These factors would cause the
facility to meet the criteria for
"substantial harm" as described in the
flowchart. For example, a facility with
a total storage capacity greater than one
million gallons that experiences a
reportable spill exceeding 10,000
gallons would meet the proposed
"substantial harm" criteria as indicated
in the flowchart in appendix C. In the
event of such an unplanned change in
a facility's risk classification, the owner
or operator would be required to
prepare and submit a response plan to
the RA within six months of when the
change occurs (see proposed
$ 112.20(a)(2)(iv)).
Agency Determination/Notification
for Substantial Harm—§ 112.20(b). As
proposed in § 112.20(b), in the event the
Agency determines that a facility may
pose a threat of "substantial harm"
based on the factors in proposed
§ 112.20(f)(2), the RA would notify in
writing the owner or operator of the
facility that he or she is required to
prepare and submit a facility response
plan. To make such a determination, the
RA could apply the factors as specified
in the flowchart for facility self-
selection. Non-notification by the RA
would not exempt facilities from the
requirement to prepare and submit
response plans by February 18,1993, if
they meet the self-selection criteria in
the proposed flowchart in appendix C
Under this approach, facilities
identified by (he RA as having the
potential to cause "substantial harm,"
including new facilities and facilities
undergoing a change in operations or
facility-specific characteristics, would
have six months after notification to
prepare and submit a response plan to
the appropriate RA. In addition to those
facilities identified to meet the OPA's
February 18,1993, deadline, EPA also
may in the future identify additional
facilities as having the potential to cause
"substantial harm" to the environment.
Plans submitted by those facilities
identified by the RA as having the
potential to cause "substantial harm" to
the environment will be reviewed by the
RA to determine if the facility has the
potential to cause "significant and
substantial harm" to the environment.
EPA proposes in $ 112.20(f)(2)(ii) to
allow interested members of the public
or Federal, State, or local agencies an
opportunity to petition the RA to
determine whether a specific facility
could cause "substantial harm" to the
environment. Under this processa, the
petitioner would have the opportunity
to submit in writing a discussion of how
the "substantial harm" criteria proposed
in S 112.20(f)(2)(i) apply to the facility
in question. The RA would evaluate
sucn petitions in making a
determination of whether the facility
could cause "substantial harm" to the
environment. The factors the RA would
consider to determine whether a facility
could cause "substantial harm" are
discussed in section IV.B of this
preamble.
Agency Determination/Notification
for Significant and Substantial Harm—
§ 112.20(c). As proposed in
§ 112.20(c)(1), tne RA would notify in
writing the owner or operator of a
facility deteimined to have the
potential, based on the criteria in
proposed § 112.20(f)(3), to cause
"significant and substantial harm" that
his or her response plan will be
reviewed for approval. This process
would allow facility owners or operators
the opportunity to seek, if necessary,
authorization from the RA to operate
temporarily without an approved
response plan. In addition to those
facilities identified to meet the OPA's
August 18.1993, deadline, EPA in the
future also may identify additional
facilities as having the potential to cause
"significant and substantial harm." As
proposed in $ 112.20(c)(1), RAs would
be required to periodically review
approved response plans from facilities
determined to have the potential to
cause "significant and substantial
harm" to the environment, in addition
to reviewing plans submitted to meet
the OPA deadline. EPA solicits
comment how frequently the RA should
review approved facility response plans,
and, in particular, whether three years
is an appropriate period between plan
review. The following section discusses
additional revisions proposed in
$ 112.20(c).
OPA Deadlines for "Substantial
Harm" and "Significant and Substantial
Harm" Facilities. The OPA sets forth
specific timing requirements for when
facility owners or operators must
prepare and submit response plans to
the RA, and the consequences of not
submitting a plan when required. If the
owner or operator of a facility required
to prepare and submit a plan to tne RA
has not done so by February 18,1993,
that facility must stop handling, storing,
or transporting oil. Further, a facility not
operating in compliance with the
response plan after August 18,1993,
must stop handling, storing, or
transporting oil.
The OPA does not specifically
address events occurring after the
statutory deadlines and leaves
implementation of the facility response
plan requirement with regard to
facilities identified after the statutory
deadline to the discretion of the Agency.
The Agency interprets the statute as not
requiring that a facility determined to
have the potential to cause "substantial
harm" to the environment that has not
submitted a facility response plan by
February 18,1993, must stop handling,
storing, or transporting oil until such a
plan is submitted, if the determination
is made after February 18.1993. The
Agency believes its interpretation of the
OPA, which allows six months from the
time of discovery or notification that a
facility could cause "substantial harm"
to prepare and submit a plan, is
reasonable and consistent with the
objectives of the OPA. EPA requests
comment on the choice of a six-month
time frame versus a shorter period for
development of a plan.
According to the OPA, a facility
required to have its response plan
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17. 1993 / Proposed Rules
8829
reviewed and approved must stop
handling, storing, or transporting oil
unless the plan has been approved by
August 18,1993. However, as indicated
in the OPA Conference Report (H.R.
Rep. No. 101-653,101st Cong., 2d Sees.
1991 at p. 151), the number of plans
requiring review may prevent the RAs
from reviewing all response plans by the
statutory deadline. Thus, CWA section
311(j)(5)(F) allows the owner or operator
of a facility to seek Federal
authorization to operate for up to two
years after the plan has been submitted
for approval if the owner or operator has
certified that he or she has ensured by
contract or other federally-approved
means the availability of private
personnel and equipment necessary to
respond, to the maximum extent
practicable, to a worst case discharge or
substantial threat of such a discharge.
As discussed in section I.B of this
preamble, a related OPA requirement is
that response plans shall identify, and
ensure by contract or other federally-
approved means the availability of
private personnel and equipment
necessary to remove a worst case
discharge. Although the response plan
would already identify such resources,
the requirement to certify their
availability is necessary only when plan
approval is required and cannot take
place before the statutory deadline.
Such a situation could arise if a large
number of plans require approval. The
Agency proposes in § 112.20(c)(2) that if
notified by EPA that a submitted
response plan requires approval and
that approval will not be forthcoming
prior to the August 18,1993, deadline,
the owner or operator of the facility has
30 days to certify and provide a copy of
a signed contract or other approved
means demonstrating the availability of
adequate resources. The RA would
determine whether the response
resources identified in the facility's
response plan were adequate.
Guidelines for the determination and
demonstration of adequate response
capability are discussed in detail in
Sertion ELF of this preamble.
2. Owner or Operator Participation in
RA Determination
EPA considered several options for
allowing the owner or operator to
participate in the RA's determination
process. Under one option, the Agency
would allow an owner or operator to
appeal the RA's determination that a
facility poses a threat of "substantial
harm" or "significant and substantial
hann." Under this option, the Agency
would use the procedures described in
§ 112.4(f) of the existing regulation. The
appeal would have to be made to the
EPA Administrator in writing within 30
days of notification by the RA that the
facility could cause "substantial harm"
or "significant end substantial harm" to
the environment. The appeal would
have to contain a clear and concise
statement of why the facility does not
pose a threat of "substantial harm" or
"significant and substantial harm" and
could contain other information the
owner or operator believes to be
relevant to the determination. The EPA
Administrator or his or her designee
would then render a decision on the
appeal and would notify the owner or
operator of the decision.
Under a second option, EPA would
allow no formal Agency appeals process
for determinations of "substantial
harm" or "significant and substantial
harm." As a third option, EPA would
select an intermediate approach that
would allow the facility owner or
operator to provide information and
data and to consult with the RA about
the determination. Following this
consultation, the RA would make a final
determination on whether the facility
could cause "substantial harm" or
"significant and substantial harm" to
the environment The Agency solicits
comment on an appeals process for
determinations of "substantial harm"
and "significant and substantial harm"
by the RA. Also, the Agency requests
comment on a process to allow an
owner or operator of a facility that could
cause "significant and substantial
harm" to appeal a decision by the RA
not to approve a facility response plan.
3. Plan Resubmittal—Section 112.20(d)
As discussed above, the RA would
periodically review approved facility
response plans from facilities
determined to have the potential to
cause "significant and substantial
harm" to the environment. Proposed
§ 112.20(d)(1) would require the owner
or operator to resubmit the plan for
approval within 60 days of each
material change in the plan. A material
change is one that could affect the
adequacy of a facility's response
capabilities, such as the ability to
respond to a worst case discharge.
Examples of material changes include:
a significant change in facility capacity,
configuration, or type of oil handled;
changes in the capability or availability
of response contractors; and changes in
spill prevention equipment or response
procedures which may affect the
potential for a discharge to cause
"significant and substantial harm" to
the environment. In addition, CWA
section 311(j)(5)(C) requires that a
facility response plan be consistent with
the ACP. Therefore, a review of the ACP
(when it is made available and annually
thereafter) might prompt changes to the
facility response plan tnat could trigger
plan resubmittal (e.g., identification of
sensitive environments that could be
affected by a discharge from the
facility). Plan revisions that affect only
names or phone numbers (e.g., changes
to the emergency notification list)
would not require resubmission for
approval under proposed § 112.20(d)(2).
EPA proposes in § 112.20(d)(2),
however, that owners or operators
submit changes to the notification list to
the appropriate RA, as the revisions
occur. The Agency requests comment on
the proposed requirement to submit
changes in the call-down list to the RA.
4. Facilities Not Posing "Substantial
Hann" to the Environment—Section
112.20(e)
Facilities that are determined not to
have the potential to cause "substantial
harm" would not be required to prepare
and submit a response plan as described
in proposed § 112.20. Such facilities,
however, that have determined that the
installation of structures or equipment
listed in § 112.7(c)(1) is not practicable
are required under the existing
regulation to prepare but not submit "a
strong oil spill contingency plan." As
discussed in section V of this preamble,
EPA proposes to clarify the existing
requirement to provide "a strong oil
spill contingency plan" by referencing
the proposed response plan
requirements contained in $ 112.20.
EPA proposes in § 112.20(e) to require
that owners or operators of those
regulated facilities not submitting
response plans complete and maintain
at the facility with the SPCC Plan b
certification form (see appendix C) that
indicates that the facility is determined
not to have the potential to cause
"substantial harm" to the environment
as indicated by the "substantial harm"
flowchart published in appendix C.
B. Selection Criteria—§ 112.20(f) and
Appendix C
The following paragraphs present a
discussion of the criteria that would be
used to select "substantial harm" and
"significant and substantial harm"
facilities. The criteria proposed in
S 112.20(f) to determine facilities that
could cause "substantial harm" to the
environment include: Type of marine
transfer operation; oil storage capacity;
lack of secondary containment;
proximity to environmentally sensitive
areas; proximity to public drinking
water intakes; and spill history. For self-
selection purposes under § 112.20(a),
the "substantial harm" criteria in
proposed $ 112.20(f)(1) have been
-------
8830 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
arranged in a flowchart (see appendix C
to the rule) to be used by owners and
operators in determining if they must
submit a response plan to the Agency
for their facility. The proposed
flowchart is a decision tree that
indicates the combinations of these
criteria that would lead to the
determination that a facility could cause
"substantial harm" to the environment.
Appendix C also provides additional
information in Attachment C-JH (i.e.,
distance calculations) that is used to
apply the criteria in the flowchart. EPA
recognizes that the owner or operator of
a regulated facility may determine that
a facility has the potential to cause
substantial harm to the environment
without having to assess every criterion
in the flowchart.
RAs would apply general "substantial
harm" factors in § 112.20(f)(2), which
are broader than the sped lie criteria set
forth for owners or operators in making
their determination of a facility's
potential to cause "substantial harm" to
the environment. In addition to the
"substantial harm" factors, RAs would
be able to consider additional factors in
making their determination of a
facility's potential to cause "significant
and substantial harm" to the
environment, including: The age of a
facility's tanks; proximity to navigable
waters and environmental areas of
concern; spill frequency; as well as
other facility-specific and Regional*
specific information (e.g., local impacts
on public health). The Agency requests
comment on the appropriateness and
relative importance of the following
factors in the determination of
"substantial harm" through self-
selection or RA determination.
"Substantial Harm" Criteria
Type of Transfer Operation. Because
of the complex nature of their
operations, marine transfer facilities are
more likely to experience spill events
into navigable waters and adjoining
shorelines than other facilities. Such
facilities are immediately adjacent to
navigable waters and transfer oil on a
regular basis. Moreover, transfers to or
from vessels (e.g., barges) at these
facilities often involve large quantities
of oil. As such, spills that do occur often
enter directly into navigable waters and
may involve significant quantities of oil.
Therefore, EPA proposes in
§ 112.20(f)(l)(i) that any regulated
facility that transfers oil products over
water to or from vessels, and that has a
total oil storage capacity greater than or
equal to 42,000 gallons, has the
potential to cause "substantial harm" to
the environment and must submit a
facility response plan.
Many sites at which oil is transferred
in bulk to or from a vessel are likely to
include both transportation-related
transfer facilities regulated by the USCG
and non-transportation-related oil
storage facilities regulated by EPA. This
combination of transportation-related
and non-transportation-related facilities
will be considered a complex and will
be subject to multi-agency jurisdiction.
EPA and the USCG have coordinated to
ensure that "substantial harm" selection
criteria are similar in nature for both
agencies. This cooperation will lead to
consistency between the agencies in the
determination of "substantial harm" for
facilities that transfer oil products to or
from vessels over water. EPA and the
USCG would use similar criteria,
including transfers over water of oil to
or from a vessel to determine
"substantial harm." Thus certain
facilities regulated by EPA (oil storage
facilities) and the USCG (marine transfer
facilities) would be determined to have
the potential to cause "substantial
harm" to the environment under both
EPA and USCG regulations. EPA
requests comment on the
appropriateness of this substantial harm
criterion as it may apply to facilities that
fuel vessels.
Oil Storage Capacity. The oil storage
capacity of the facility is another factor
that would be considered in evaluating
the potential for "substantial harm"
posed by facilities. The larger the
quantity of oil present, the larger the
potential spill and the resulting
environmental impact. Large discharges
are also more likely to escape secondary
containment and may damage nearby
tanks, as occurred during the Ashland
Oil spill. Weakened tank integrity is of
greater concern for tanks with large
storage capacities where the resulting
forces on the tank (created by large fluid
volumes) are greater. The Agency
proposes in § 112.20(f)(l)(ii) that any
facility with a total oil storage capacity
greater than or equal to one million
gallons in combination with one of the
following four "substantial harm"
criteria would be determined under the
self-selection process to have the
potential to cause "substantial harm" to
the environment: lack of secondary
containment, proximity to
environmentally sensitive areas,
proximity to public drinking water
intakes, or spill history.
Lack of Secondary Containment. The
importance of secondary containment as
a means of preventing spills from
reaching navigable waters is well
documented. In a 1989 incident in Port
Arthur, Texas, nearly 6 million gallons
of crude oil were released from a storage
tank, but none of the oil reached nearby
navigable waters because of the
presence of adequate secondary
containment. Such incidents, where the
entire amount of oil released from the
tank remains within a secondary
containment structure, are not
reportable spills under 40 CFR part 110.
Secondary containment structures,
which meet the standard of good
engineering practice for purposes of 40
CFR part 112, can take many forms
including berms, dikes, retaining walls,
curbing, culverting, gutters, or other
drainage systems. As described in
§ 112.7(e)(2)(ii), secondary containment
at bulk storage facilities must be able to
hold the entire contents of the largest
single tank plus have sufficient
freeboard to allow for precipitation.
The central role of secondary
containment as a preventive mechanism
is underscored by the existing provision
in § 112.7(d) that requires a facility
owner or operator to provide e strong oil
spill contingency plan when it is
determined that the installation of
structures or equipment to prevent
discharged oil from reaching navigable
waters is not practicable. Given the
importance of secondary containment,
the Agency proposes in
S 112.20(f)(l)(ii)(A) that any facility with
an oil storage capacity greater than or
equal to one million gallons, which
lacks secondary containment for all
storage tanks, would be determined to
have the potential to cause "substantial
harm" to the environment.
Proximity to Environmentally
Sensitive Areas. A facility's proximity to
environmentally sensitive areas
increases the potential for a spill to
reach and damage these areas, in the
event secondary containment measures
fail.
Therefore, such proximity is an
important consideration in the
assessment of the existence of a threat
of "substantial harm." The Agency
proposes in § 112.20(f)(l)(ii)(B) that any
facility with an oil storage capacity
greater than or equal to one million
gallons that is located at a distance such
that a discharge could cause injury to
(e.g.. damage or negatively affect
productivity or ability to propagate) an
environmentally sensitive area would be
determined to have the potential to
cause " substantial harm" to the
environment.
EPA proposes in § 112.2 to define
"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 to a discharge of oil, or
exposure to a product of reactions
resulting from a discharge of oil. This
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8831
definition is derived from the definition
of "injury" in the Natural Resources
Damage Assessments Final Rule at 43
CFR part 11 (51 FR 27727. August 1.
1986), which encompasses the phrases
"injury," "destruction," and "loss." The
language proposed at 40 CFR 112.2
differs only in that hazardous
substances are not included in the
definition because today's response plan
rulemaking does not address hazardous
substances. The definition of "injury" is
applied by natural resource trustees to
assess the damage to natural resources
from oil spills. Because natural resource
trustees have extensive experience in
evaluating the impacts of oil spills on
natural resources based on this
definition, the Agency believes that the
definition is an appropriate gauge to
assess the potential to cause substantial
harm to the environment. EPA requests
comment on the appropriateness of
defining "injury" in such a manner.
Appendix D identifies areas that may
be considered environmentally
sensitive. As discussed in section Ql.A
of this preamble, the owner or operator
would be required to apply the
"substantial harm" criteria in
conjunction with the flowchart
contained in appendix C. For purposes
of self-selection. Attachment C—III to
appendix C provides formulas that
owners or operators could use to
determine appropriate distances from
the facility for environmentally
sensitive areas. Owners or operators
may use an alternative formula(s) as
long as it achieves results consistent
with the purposes of this requirement
and is considered acceptable to the RA.
EPA considers an acceptable alternative
formula to be one that is equivalent in
terms of reliability and analytical
soundness. As proposed at
§ 112.20(a)(3), owners or operators that
use an alternative formula would be
required to provide documentation with
the response plan cover sheet on the
reliability and analytical soundness of
the formula. EPA does not anticipate
that extensive documentation will be
necessary to assess the appropriateness
of alternative formulas. Accordingly,
owners or operators need only provide
basic information on the origin and
nature of the formula as well as an
example of how it was used to
determine the appropriate distance for a
particular facility. Owners or operators
that use an alternative formula should
consider the formula acceptable unless
notified otherwise by the appropriate
RA.
Appendix C to this part contains
several different distance calculations
based on oil transport on different types
of media (i.e., fast-moving waters, still
lakes and ponds, and land). EPA expects
that the distance calculation for a fast-
moving water body will apply to most
of the facilities that complete the
substantial harm screen. This
calculation is based on the velocity of
the water body and the time intervals
for the arrival of response resources.
The flow velocity of the water body has
a direct effect on how far the oil will
travel before response actions can be
employed to contain the release. For
moving water bodies, velocity is
determined through the use of an
equation that models the flow of water
in open channels. To calculate the
velocity, owners or operators would
need to obtain information on river
characteristics from the sources listed in
Table 2 of appendix C. Similarly, the
more time it takes for emergency
response personnel and equipment to
arrive on-scene and deploy containment
measures, the farther downstream the
released oil will travel from the origin
of the spill. In highly populated areas,
where a significant volume of marine
traffic is present, response resources
will be able to arrive on-scene more
quickly than in remote areas. The
response times provided in Attachment
C—III of appendix C are consistent with
the response times guidelines of the
USGG for spill response contractors to
arrive on-scene. A three-hour time
period has been added to factor in the
deployment of equipment. Facilities
with oil storage capacities of greater
than or equal to 1 million gallons are
believed to have the potential to
discharge oil in quantities that could
cause injury to a sensitive environment
located within the downstream distance
calculated by the formula. For owners or
operators of facilities that could
discharge into a still water body, EPA
has provided an alternative formula to
determine the relevant distance. In
addition, appendix C provides
information on how owners or operators
should consider overland flow in the
distance calculations. EPA requests data
and comment on the appropriateness of
the distance calculations in appendix C
for inland areas. In addition, the Agency
requests comment on the
appropriateness of using specified
distances from the facility (e.g„ 40 miles
downstream) in the determination of
proximity to these areas.
Proximity to Public Drinking Water
Intakes. A facility's proximity to
drinking water intakes increases the
potential for a spill to reach and
contaminate or render inoperable these
intakes. The OPA Conference Report
states that the criteria developed to
determine "substantial harm" and
"significant and substantial harm"
facilities should include location of
potable water supplies (see H.R. Rep.
No. 101-653,10lst Cong. 2d Sess. 1991
at p. 150). Therefore, EPA has included
proximity to drinking water intakes as a
factor to consider in the determination
of the potential to cause "substantial
harm" to the environment.
An example of a discharge that
affected potable water supplies is the
January 1988 spill in Floreffe,
Pennsylvania, when the rupture of an
aboveground storage tank allowed
750,000 gallons of diesel oil to escape
containment, flow into a storm drain
located in an adjacent parking lot, and
subsequently reach the nearby
Monongahela River. As a result of the
spill, more than 70 communities in
three States stopped drawing water from
the river. Such an interruption of public
drinking water supplies can threaten the
health and safety of affected
communities.
The Agency proposes in
§ 112.20(f)(l)(ii)(C) that any facility with
an oil storage capacity greater than or
equal to one million gallons that is
located such that a discharge would
shut down a public drinking water
intake would be determined to have the
potential to cause "substantial harm" to
the environment. EPA would define
public drinking water intakes as those
covered by the Safe Drinking Water Act.
The Agency solicits comment on
whether private drinking water supplies
should be included in the criteria for the
determination of "substantial harm." As
previously discussed for
environmentally sensitive areas,
Attachment C—III to appendix C
provides formulas that owners or
operators could use in calculating
appropriate distances from the facility
for purposes of the assessment of the
risk of affecting public drinking water
intakes. EPA proposes that an
alternative distance formula(s)
acceptable to the RA could also be used
in this determination. As discussed
above for environmentally sensitive
areas, owners or operators that use an
alternative formula would be required to
provide documentation on the
reliability and analytical soundness of
the formula.
Spill History. Spill history is an
important factor to consider in the
assessment of risk to the environment
posed by a particular facility. Because
larger spills can cause greater damage to
the environment, the size of past spills
may be an indication of the potential for
a facility to cause "substantial harm" to
the environment. EPA proposes in
§ 112.20(f)(l)(ii)(D) that any facility that
bas a total oil storage capacity greater
-------
8832 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
than or equal to one million gallons and
that in the past five years has had a
reportable spill greater than or equal to
10,000 gallons would be determined to
have the potential to cause "substantial
harm" to the environment. The Agency
requests comments as well as data on
the appropriateness of the use of a spill
size of 10,000 gallons for this criterion,
as well as information on alternate spill
sizes.
Additional Criteria for Use by the
Regional Administrator in the
Determination of "Significant and
Substantial Harm"
Discussed below are factors proposed
in § 112.20(f)(3) that may be used by the
RA, in addition to those contained in
§ 112.20(f)(2), to determine whether a
facility could cause "significant and
substantial harm" to the environment.
For purposes of determining
"substantial harm." the RA would
consider whether a facility meets one of
the factors in § 112.20(f)(2). Facilities
that meet one or more of the
"substantial harm" criteria, in
combination with any of the additional
factors discussed below, can present a
greater risk of harm to the environment.
For purposes of making the "significant
and substantial harm" determination,
therefore, the RA would consider
whether a facility meets one or more of
the "substantial harm" factors in
combination with the following factors.
EPA solicits comment on the
appropriateness of the RA's use of the
following factors for the determination
of "significant and substantial harm."
Frequency of Past Spills. In addition
to the size of previous spills (as
discussed under the section on
"substantial harm" criteria), the
frequency of spill events is another
important factor in assessing the
potential for causing harm to the
environment. A facility that has
experienced multiple spills in the last
five years may pose a greater risk of
experiencing a spill event in the future
than those facilities that have not had a
spill. Multiple spills in a relatively short
time period may have a cumulative
effect on the impacted environment.
Moreover, frequency of spills may be an
indication of poor operating practices or
a lack of training or prevention
measures. Examples of facilities that
have had several spills in a single year
include a facility in Baltimore,
Maryland that reported 44 separate spill
incidents from 1989 to 1990 and a
facility in Tupman, California that
reported 14 spills in 1990 ranging in
volume from 504 gallons to 3,780
gallons.
Proximity to Environmental Areas of
Concern. To assist owners or operators,
appendix D identifies areas that may be
environmentally sensitive for purposes
of the substantial harm determination.
Appendix D also identifies additional
areas of concern that the RA may
consider to identify "significant and
substantial harm" facilities.
Proximity to Navigable Waters. The
proximity of a facility to navigable
waters often directly influences the
probability that a discharge, which
escapes secondary containment, will
reach such waters. Often, the most
environmentally damaging spills, such
as the Ashland Oil spill, occur at
facilities whose boundaries border
navigable waters. For example, all 20
worst case spills documented in the
Technical Background Document which
supports the Phase Two rulemaking
occurred at facilities whose closest
opportunity for discharge was located
within one-half mile of navigable
waters.
Tank Age. EPA has identified tank age
as an additional factor that may be
related to the potential for a facility to
cause "significant and substantial
harm" to the environment. Older tanks
tend to have weakened structural
integrity, depending on the maintenance
history of the tank, increasing the risk
of a spill. American Petroleum Institute
(API) Standard 653 requires that the
internal inspection intervals of tanks
must not exceed 20 years. This limit on
the inspection interval reflects the age at
which structurally related failures are
more likely to occur.
Criteria EPA Considered but is not
Proposing. Natural hazards and high-
risk environments may be other
important factors in the assessment of
the risk of a facility posing "substantial
harm" to the environment. Facilities
that are located in areas prone to natural
hazards (i.e., floods, hurricanes, and
earthquakes) may pose a greater threat
to the environment. Case studies from
the Technical Background Document
which support this proposed
rulemaking indicate that facilities
susceptible to such events are more
likely to have multiple tank failures and
may have greater spill volumes than
comparable facilities located outside
these areas. For example, in November
1990, heavy rains and flooding washed
away two aboveground storage tanks at
a facility in Alaska and caused a 16,000
gallon spill into Diomede Harbor.
Examples of large spills that involve
facilities located in hurricane zones ore
well documented. Most recently, on
September 17,1989, Hurricane Hugo
destroyed five 4.2 million gallon oil
storage tanks on the south coast of St.
Croix. U.S. Virgin Islands. Over 420,000
gallons of crude and No. 6 oil were
discharged from the damaged tanks,
with 42,000 gallons of oil reaching the
waters of Limetree Bay.
In addition to risks posed by natural
hazards, proximity to high-risk
environments may be another important
factor to consider in assessing the
potential for a facility to cause harm to
the environment. Karst and unstable
terrains and areas with ground water
concerns (e.g., recharge zones) are
examples of such high-risk
environments that may deserve
consideration. For example, a tank
located on unstable terrain, such as a
sink hole could fail, releasing its
contents to the ground weter, if the
substrate providing a foundation for the
tank were to shift suddenly by a
significant amount. For tanks located
near certain ground water zones that
have a direct connection to surface
waters, discharges that enter the ground
weter have the potential to reach surface
waters.
EPA does not have sufficient data
available in a form that will substantiate
including natural hazards and high-risk
environments among the criteria for
"substantial harm" determination and is
therefore not proposing them in today's
rulemaking. The Agency requests
comment and supporting data on
natural hazard factors and high-risk
environments es indicators for
"substantial harm" determination.
The Agency also considered
proximity to cooling water intakes for
electric utilities (including nuclear
power plants), as a risk factor for use in
the determination of the threat of
"substantial harm." Utilities need
substantial lead time in the event of a
spill to shut down operations or
implement alternative cooling
mechanisms. Failure to shut down
operations prior to contamination could
lead to significant public health risks.
EPA requests comments and supporting
data on whether cooling water intakes
or other intakes, such as those for
commercial process water or irrigation
water should be considered in the
assessment of the potential for a facility
to cause "substantial harm" to the
environment. In addition, EPA solicits
comment on other criteria, such es the
type of product stored, throughput, and
number and size of transfer operations,
that should be included in the self-
selection process or that the RA should
consider in making determinations of
"substantial harm" and "significant and
substantial harm" for specific facilities.
The Agency requests comment on
whether more specific criteria should be
used by the RA to identify those
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8833
facilities that could cause significant
and substantial harm to the
environment.
C. Environmentally Sensitive Areas—
Appendix D
The proposed rule provides that
facilities and RAs must consider
proximity to environmentally sensitive
areas to determine the potential for a
facility to cause "substantial harm" to
the environment. These areas may
include: wetlands, National and State
parks, critical habitat for endangered/
threatened species, wilderness and
natural areas, marine sanctuaries,
conservation areas, preserves, wildlife
areas, scenic and wild rivers, seashore
and lakeshore recreational areas, and
critical biological resources areas. An
interagency "Sensitive Environments
Technical Workgroup" provided input
to ensure that consistent criteria were
applied in identifying areas that may be
of concern for facility-specific plans and
ACPs.
As ACP development proceeds. Area
Committees will identify and prioritize
specific locations within the boundaries
of their areas. These newly-identified
environmentally sensitive areas will
eventually be incorporated into the
ACPs. Many ACPs may not be
established prior to the OPA deadline
for response plan submission. Thus,
EPA proposes in § 112.20(g)(2) that,
upon completion of the ACP (for the
Area in which the facility is located),
facility owners or operators must review
and, as necessary, revise their facility
response plan to incorporate
information, such as additions to the list
of sensitive areas and the designation of
priority areas for protection as reflected
in the ACP.
In addition, the RA would have the
authority to determine, on a case-by-
case basis, additional areas that possess
ecological value (e.g., unique local areas
or habitats). The Agency requests
comment on whether additional areas
should be considered, such as shallow
aquifers used as drinking water supplies
or critical habitats closely hydrological
linked to surface water that are subject
to contamination by discharges of oil.
EPA is particularly interested in
receiving comment on whether the list
should include wellhead protection
areas as defined in section 1428 of the
Safe Drinking Water Act.
The Agency believes that in some
areas of the country there is anecdotal
information indicating problems in
ground water caused by oil spills from
onshore facilities. This could be
especially true for areas with high water
tables. EPA requests that commenters
provide us examples of this type of
ground water contamination. In
addition, EPA would like commenters
to provide comments on what action, if
any, the Agency should take to address
such oil spills.
EPA has compiled information in
appendix D (Attachments D-I, D-II, and
D-HI) to help owners and operators
identify specific geographical areas
which may be among sensitive
environments. Attachment D-I provides
a list of the Federal agencies responsible
for management of the environmentally
sensitive areas. For more information on
the various types of areas listed
(including maps), owners or operators
can contact the responsible agency.
Attachments D-D and D-in would help
owners and operators identify sensitive
environments by providing information
on designated critical habitats for
National Marine Fisheries Service
species and marine sanctuary and
estuarine reserves and also may be
useful to owners and operators in
preparing response plans if they are
required.
In addition. EPA has included in
appendix D other reference information
on sensitive environments that may be
useful to facility owners or operators
during plan preparation. Specifically,
attachments D-IV and D-V are intended
to help owners and operators prioritize
sensitive areas according to their
vulnerability to damage from oil spills
for purposes of planning the
deployment of response resources.
EPA recognizes that those areas
defined as environmentally sensitive
will change as the various Federal and
State agencies responsible for
designating the areas periodically
update their lists. Owners and operators
are expected to ensure that facility
response plans reflect the listings of
sensitive environments published to a
point in time 6 months prior to plan
submission. For example, plans
submitted to meet the February 18,
1993, deadline would need to consider
sensitive environments designated by
the responsible agencies (see
Attachment D-I of appendix D) as of
August 18,1992. A 6-month cutoff point
for considering environmentally
sensitive areas would also apply in
situations where plans are periodically
updated or resubmitted for approval of
a material change. Six months is
believed to be a reasonable period to
incorporate new information on
sensitive environments and is consistent
with other time frames related to the
submission of materials to EPA under
the Oil Pollution Prevention regulation.
The Agency requests comments on the
appropriateness of a 6-month cutoff
point for the consideration of sensitive
environments.
D. Definition of Worst Case Discharge—
Appendix E
OPA section 4202(a) requires that the
President issue regulations providing
that owners and operators of tank
vessels, offshore facilities, and certain
onshore facilities prepare and submit
response plans for responding, to the
maximum extend practicable, to a worst
case discharge of oil or a hazardous
substance. Today's proposal would
identify the onshore, nontranspoitation-
related facilities that would be subject to
this requirement, as described in section
I.B of this preamble.
OPA section 4201(b) defines "worst
case discharge" as: (1) In the case of a
vessel, a discharge in adverse weather
conditions of its entire cargo, and (2) in
the case of an onshore or offshore
facility, the largest foreseeable discharge
in adverse weather conditions. The OPA
Conference Report (H.R Rep. No. 101-
653,101st Cong., 2d Sess. 1991) states
that, in the case of facilities, a more
general definition of worst case is used
because it is difficult to describe the
entire capacity of some fixed facilities,
such as pipelines. According to the
Conference Report, Congress intends
facility owners or operators 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.
Options for Regulatory Definition
In § 112.2, EPA proposes a regulatory
definition of worst case discharge for
onshore facilities. Specifying the
definition is important because to
prepare a response plan for a worst case
discharge, a fadlity owner or operator
must determine a planning quantity that
corresponds to the amount of oil that
could be discharged under worst case
circumstances. The facility's worst case
discharge volume will significantly
affect the resources necessary to
implement the plan.
EPA considered three options for
defining worst case discharge: (1) A
discharge equal in amount to the
aboveground storage capacity of the
entire site or installation; (2) a discharge
equal in amount to 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
-------
8834
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
subdivisions,1 whichever is greater; and
(3) a discharge equal in amount to 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 several parameters, including
the adequacy of secondary containment
and proximity to navigable waters.
EPA proposes Option 3 to determine
a facility's worst case discharge for
response planning. Option 3 would
allow the definition of worst case
discharge to reflect differences among
facilities based on location and the
presence of secondary containment. The
Agency concludes that these factors best
reflect the flexibility represented by the
definition of a worst case discharge for
a facility (i.e., the largest foreseeable
discharge in adverse weather
conditions), and best reconcile the
differences between worst case
discharges for vessels and facilities. The
definition reflects the fact that a facility
with adequate secondaiy containment,
as defined in existing § 112.7(e)(2)(H), is
not likely to discharge its entire capacity
in adverse weather conditions, as
opposed to a vessel which may lose its
entire cargo since there is little to
prevent all of the released oil from a
vessel from directly entering the water.
Finally, this option is consistent with
the intent of the OPA. The legislative
history of the OPA states that the worst
case dischaige for a facility should
describe a discharge "that is worse than
either the largest spill to date or the
maximum probable spill for that facility
type." See H.R. Rep. No. 101-653,101st
Cong. 2d Sess. 1991 at p. 147).
Tne Agency proposes in § 112.2 to
define "adverse weather" as the weather
conditions that make it difficult for
response equipment and personnel to
cleanup or remove spilled oil. These
conditions include significant wave
height, ice. extreme temperatures,
weather-related reduced visibility, and
fast currents. EPA has included
guidelines in appendix F (see Table 1 of
appendix F) to the rule to assist owners
or operators in evaluating the
operability of response equipment (i.e..
' Tanks that art) permanently manifolded together
are defined as tanks that are designed, installed,
and/or operated in such a manner that the multiple
tanks function as one storage unit..As such failure
of a single tank in the system could lead to the
release of the capacity of more than a single
interconnected tank. Tanks permanently
manifolded togehtBr within a common secondary
containment area are considered to be single tanks
lor purposes of this calculation, if each tank is
separated by internal dividing structures.
oil recovery devices and boom) for
various sea states and wave heights.
ACPs also may contain information
concerning other conditions in the area
that are significant factors in evaluating
the operability of equipment.
Although Option 1, which defines a
worst case discharge as a discharge
equal to the total aboveground storage
capacity at the site, is comparable to the
definition of worst case specified in the
OPA for vessels (i.e.. the entire cargo),
there are no documented spills of the
entire capacity of a multi-tank facility
with secondaiy containment into
navigable waters.
For purposes of this determination,
Option 2 would define the worst case
discharge as an amount equal to 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. For many regulated facilities
(those with only one tank), the option is
identical to Options 1 and 3. Evidence
from case studies, however, suggests
that spills caused by flooding,
hurricanes, and earthquakes at multi-
tank sites may involve discharges of oil
greater than the capacity of the single
largest tank; spills caused by natural
disasters often involve releases of oil
from more than one tank. Although the
planning quantity for worst case
discharge could be described by the
combined capacity of a group of
aboveground tanks permanently
manifolded together within a common
secondary containment area lacking
internal subdivisions, EPA recognizes
that a multiple tank failure may involve
tanks from distinct secondaiy
containment systems, and the definition
described above is merely a planning
quantity.
Worst Case Discharge Calculation
Worksheets
Under proposed Option 3, facility
owners or operators would calculate the
worst case discharge volume for their
facilities, using worksheets developed
by EPA. This epproach is consistent
with the concept in the OPA Conference
Report that planning for a worst case
discharge involves a facility-specific
determination. These proposed
worksheets are provided in appendix E
of 40 CFR part 112. Part A of appendix
E contains the worst case discharge
calculation for storage facilities. A
separate worksheet has been developed
for production facilities (part B of
appendix E). because of the added
concerns associated with production
volumes at such facilities. Unlike
storage facilities, which handle a set
amount of oil, production facilities must
consider throughput and the potential
for oil contained in the underground
natural reservoir to escape containment
during extraction operations. EPA
proposes in § 112.20(h)(5)(i)(A) that if
the RA determines that the worst case
discharge volume calculated by a
facility is not appropriate or that the
parameters in the worksheet are not
appropriate for a particular type of
facility, the RA may specify the worst
case dischaige amount to be used for
response planning at that facility. The
RA could make such a case-by-case
determination during the review of
response plans prepared by facilities.
In the event the KA finds it necessary
to determine the worst case discharge
volume, the RA will consider the same
factors addressed by the worksheet (i.e.,
secondary containment and proximity
to navigable waters), in the specific
context of the facility in question as
well as other facility-specific
circumstances that may be relevant to
the calculation. An example of how the
RA might tailor the criteria to the
specific circumstances at a facility
involves a regulated facility with
underground storage tanks. Completely
buried storage tanks, such as those at
service stations, may have the potential
to cause spills to surface waters when
tanks are overfilled. The RA would
consider the quantity of product stored,
as well as the proximity to surface
waters in arriving at a worst case
discharge volume.
For owners and operators of storage
facilities with a single aboveground
tank, the worst case discharge volume
would be the entire storage capacity of
the tank. To assist owners and operators
of other onshore storage facilities and
production facilities in calculating a
worst case discharge volume, the
worksheets integrate the use of
secondary containment and proximity
to navigable waters. For production
facilities, the presence of storage tanks
and the production volume for
exploratory wells and production wells
must also be considered in the
calculation. The worst case scenario is
influenced by the extent of spill
prevention and containment measures
in place. A spill at a facility with
secondary containment structures may
have negligible environmental impact,
while a comparable spill at a facility
without such structures may result in
the entire capacity of the facility
reaching navigable waters. The presence
of secondary containment at a facility,
therefore, influences the final calculated
worst case discharge volume. Proximity
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8835
to navigable waters is also an important
factor in the assessment of the worst
case discharge volume. Based on the
goals of the OPA and the Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation, the definition of
what constitutes a worst case spill is
directly influenced by the potential for
the spill to reach navigable waters.
To complete the worksheets in
appendix E for production facilities and
multiple tank storage facilities, owners
or operators would first determine
whether secondary containment, as
described in § 112.7 of the existing
regulation, is present for each storage
tank or group of tanks at the facility. If
such secondary containment is not
present, a final worst case discharge
volume is calculated based in part on
the total aboveground storage capacity
without secondary containment (for
storage facilities) or total aboveground
storage capacity without secondary
containment plus the production
volume of the well with the highest
output at the facility2 (for production
facilities). If secondary containment is
present for some tanks, the owner or
operator calculates a potential worst
case volume based on whether the
facility is adjacent to navigable waters.
If the facility is not adjacent to navigable
waters, the worst case discharge amount
is 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 for
any tanks without secondary
containment. For purposes of this
calculation, tanks within a common
secondary containment area that have
adequate internal subdivisions are
considered single tanks whose capacity
would not be combined. If the facility is
adjacent to navigable waters the worst
case discharge amount is adjusted
upwards by a factor of 10 percent of the
capacity of tanks with secondary
containment. EPA solicits comment on
the overall approach and specific factors
in the proposed worksheets in appendix
E.
As discussed above, tanks that are
permanently manifolded together are
tanks with common piping that are
designed, installed, and/or operated as a
single storage unit. Because the
potential discharge amount is greater for
a system of tanks permanently
2 As defined, onshore oil production facilities
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 operated
by a single operator.
manifolded together, EPA proposes that
the worst case discharge planning
amount be increased to reflect the
combined capacity of all tanks in the
system. EPA recognizes that certain tank
systems where tanks are connected by
piping may not be operated as a single
unit. Owners or operators of facilities
with tanks that are connected by
common piping or piping systems that
can demonstrate to EPA that the system
does not operate as a single unit would
not have to plan for the combined
capacity of all tanks in the system but
the capacity of the single largest tank.
EPA proposes to require that such
evidence be provided to the RA in the
model response plan under the
discussion of worst case discharge in
the discharge scenarios section.
EPA requests comment on allowing a
reduction in the worst case discharge
planning amount from 100 percent (110
percent for facilities adjacent to
navigable waters) of the capacity of the
largest single tank or group of tanks
down to 50 percent for facilities with
adequate secondary containment in
place for oil storage containers.3 The
Agency also requests comment on the
appropriateness of further ret uctions in
the worst case discharge volume (i.e.. up
to 100 percent) for facilities with
adequate secondary containment for all
storage containers. Under this approach,
the presence of secondary containment
would allow the owner or operator to
reduce the worst case discharge
planning amount and the corresponding
amount of response resources. EPA
specifically solicits comment on the
implication for response capability of a
reduction in the worst case discharge
planning amount and data on the
potential cost savings associated with
any such reductions in planning
quantity.
As proposed in appendix E, the
production volume for each production
well (producing by pumping) would be
determined from the pumping rate of
the well multiplied by 1.5 times the
number of days the facility is
unattended. For each exploratory well
(and production well producing under
pressure) 10,000 feet deep or less, the
production volume refers to the
maximum 30-day forecasted well rate.
For each exploratory well (and
production well producing under
pressure) deeper than 10,000 feet, the
production volume refers to the
maximum 45-day forecasted well rate.
EPA specifically requests comment and
3 Only tanks with secondary containment would
be eligible for this reduction; for tanks without
secondary containment, the entire capacity of the
tanks would be included in the worst case
discharge amount.
data on the appropriateness of using a
30-day forecasted well rate (for wells
less than or equal to 10,000 feet deep)
or 45-day forecasted well rate (for wells
greater than 10,000 feet deep) as
production volumes in the calculation
of the worst case discharge amount at
facilities with exploratory wells and
production wells producing under
pressure.
EPA realizes that under the proposed
self-selection process, smaller facilities,
including many small production
facilities are unlikely to screen as
having the potential to cause
"substantial harm" to the environment.
RAs, however, may determine that any
regulated facility, regardless of its
storage capacity could cause substantial
harm to the environment. Thus, the
worksheets for production facilities may
be necessary under circumstances in
which the RA selects, for example, a
production facility storing relatively
small amounts of oil, a marine transfer
facility with less than 42,000 gallons, or
a facility with a storage capacity of less
than 1 million gallons.
Worst Case Discharge Calculation for
Complexes
As discussed in section m.B of this
preamble, a complex is a facility that
has both transportation-related and non-
transportation-related components and
is therefore subject to the response plan
requirements of more than one
authority. Each component of a complex
would have an associated worst case
discharge amount. The Agency expects,
however, that the likelihood of each
component experiencing a worst case
discharge simultaneously is small. EPA
proposes in § 112.20(h)(5)(i)(C) that a
worst case discharge volume at a
complex be the larger of the amounts
calculated pursuant to the respective
regulations that apply for each
component of the facility. The Agency
requests comment on the
appropriateness of this method in the
determination of a worst case discharge
for a complex.
E. Tiered Response Planning
The Agency proposes in § 112.20(h)(5)
that facility owners and operators
prepare plans for responding to lesser
discharges, as appropriate, in addition
to a worst case discharge as required by
the OPA. This tiered response planning
by facilities that are determined to have
the potential to cause "substantial
harm" to the environment will help
ensure protection of public health and
welfare and the environment by
facilitating effective response to
discharges to navigable waters or
adjoining shorelines. Proposal of a
-------
8836
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
tiered planning approach is consistent
with other agencies' (such as the
USCG's) implementation of OPA
response planning requirements.
EPA considered proposing that
owners or operators prepare response
plans for responding to worst case
discharges only. The Agency concluded
that a plan only for a response to a worst
case discharge would not necessarily be
effective in a response to a lesser
discharge and that lesser discharges may
pose a serious threat to navigable
waters, especially from the cumulative
effects of several discharges. Over 70
percent of all spills reported to the
Federal government in 1989 and 1990
(approximately 48,000 incident reports
were received by the National Response
Center during that time) were less than
100 gallons and over 90 percent were
less than 1,000 gallons. Preparing for an
appropriate response to such smaller
spills could lead to better overall
protection of the nation's navigable
waters. In addition, various sizes of
discharges could require different types
and amounts of equipment, products,
and personnel. Planning for various
levels of spills would allow facility
owners or operators to begin to respond
to any size discharge prior to the arrival
of personnel and resources under
contract with the facility and would
provide insight into the most likely spill
situations and should reveal many
potential problems that could surface
during actual discharges. Planning for
these problems would enable facility or
contractor response personnel to
respond quickly and appropriately to a
ranee of spill events.
Tne Agency recognizes that this tiered
planning approach may not be
appropriate for all facilities, including
those where the range of possible spill
scenarios is small. For example,
responding to a worst case discharge at
a small, one-tank facility (release of
entire capacity of the tank) may be
similar in approach to responding to a
lesser spill (release of a portion of the
capacity of the tank) at that facility.
These responses would not require a
significantly different response strategy
or level of response resources. Owners
and operators of large, multi-tank
storage and production facilities,
however, are among those who would
be required to plan for spill events of
different sizes, because the range of spill
scenarios could vary greatly at such
facilities. For example, although small
spills could be handled by company
response personnel, large spills may
require the resources of outside parties.
The Agency examined several options
for the determination of these additional
planning quantities. One approach
would be to use facility-specific
planning quantities by basing the
amount on actual operations and spill
history at a facility. Although this
option would account for the
tremendous diversity of regulated
facilities, it cannot be applied in a
simple manner by owners and
operators. A second option would be to
establish standard amounts for the
entire regulated community. A third
option, which EPA proposes today in
§ 112.20(h)(5), would establish limited
ranges for alternate discharge amounts.
Although large facilities would still
need to plan for three discharge
amounts under this method, a small
facility may only need to plan for two
scenarios or a single scenario if its worst
case discharge falls within one of the
ranges.
In addition to planning for a worst
case discharge, under proposed
§ 112.20, facility owners and operators
would be required to plan for (1) a small
spill, defined as any spill volume less
than or equal to 2,100 gallons, but not
to exceed the calculated worst case
discharge; 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, but not to
exceed the worst case discharge. For
facilities whose worst case discharge is
a medium spill, the owner or operator
would plan for two amounts, a worst
case spill and a small spill. Similarly,
for facilities whose worst case discharge
is a small spill, the owner or operator
would plan only for a worst case
discharge.
EPA realizes that under the proposed
self-selection process, smaller facilities
are unlikely to qualify as having the
potential to cause "substantial harm" to
the environment. RAs, however, may
determine that any regulated facility,
regardless of its storage capacity and
number of tanks, could cause
"substantial harm" to the environment.
Thus, the collapsing nature of the
proposed tiered planning approach may
be relevant under circumstances in
which the RA selects a facility storing
relatively small amounts of oil (i.e., less
than 36,000 gallons).
For complexes (i.e., facilities
regulated by both EPA and USCG), the
owner or operator would first determine
a medium planning quantity for the
transportation-related and non-
transportation-related components at
the facility. The owner or operator
would then compare the medium
planning amounts for each component
of the facility. Following this
comparison, the owner or operator
would select the larger of the quantities
as the medium tiered planning amount
for the overall facility.
The ranges for these alternate
planning quantities were determined
through a statistical analysis of spills
reported to the Emergency Response
Notification System (ERNS) data base. A
discharge of 1,300 gallons is the average
reported discharge in ERNS. For a small
spill, an amount up to 2,100 gallons is
believed to represent a realistic
planning quantity that will allow
owners or operators to prepare for
operational-type spills that occur
relatively frequently. Selection of 36,000
gallons was based on the 99.5th
quantile. This means that 99.5 percent
of future spills are expected to be less
than approximately 36,000 gallons. To
provide greater flexibility in
establishing a medium planning
amount, EPA proposes in
§ 112.20(h)(5)(i) to allow owners or
operators to plan for 36,000 gallons or
10 percent of the capacity of the largest
tank at the facility, whichever is less.
Planning for a spill of this size
represents a practical and realistic
intermediary planning level. The
Agency solicits comment on the
selection of these standard planning
amounts, including information on
other methods to identify standard
amounts, such as being planning
quantities on the definition of minor,
medium, and major discharges in 40
CFR part 300. Under the NCP a minor
011 discharge means a discharge to the
inland waters of less than 1,000 gallons
or a discharge to coastal waters of less
than 10,000 gallons; a medium oil
discharge means a discharge to the
inland waters of 1.000 to 10,000 gallons
or a discharge to coastal waters of
10,000 to 100,000 gallons; and a major
oil discharge means a discharge to the
inland waters of 10,000 to 100,000
gallons or a discharge to coastal waters
of more than 100,000 gallons. To the
extent that response resources are
currently geared to spills of these sizes,
such ranges may be appropriate for
establishing tiered planning amounts.
Also, EPA requests comments on the
option of using facility-specific
planning quantities as well as
information from other options in the
determination of these alternate
amounts.
F. The Determination and
Demonstration of Adequate Response
Capability
1. The Determination of Response
Resources—Appendix F
To ensure the availability of private
personnel and equipment necessary to
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8837
respond, to the maximum extent
practicable, to a worst case discharge,
contracts or other approved means (as
proposed in § 112.2 of today's proposed
rule) may include:
• A written contractual agreement
with a response contractor. The
agreement must identify and ensure thB
availability of the necessary personnel
or equipment within appropriate
response times;
• Certification that the necessary
personnel and equipment resources,
owned and operated by the facility
owner or operator, are available to
respond to a discharge within
appropriate response times;
• Active membership4 in a local or
regional oil spill removal organization,
which has identified and ensures
adequate access through membership to
necessary personnel and equipment
within appropriate response times in
the specified geographic areas; or
• Other specific arrangements
approved by the RA upon request of the
owner or operator.
In appendix F to the rule, EPA
provides guidelines for the types and
amounts of equipment and response
times that are needed to respond to spill
of a given size. Similar guidelines were
originally developed by the USCG for
vessel response plans and facility
response plans for marine
transportation-related onshore facilities.
EPA has adapted the USCG's proposed
guidelines for use by non-
transportation-related onshore facilities
(i.e., facilities regulated by 40 CFR part
112) in complying with the OPA
requirement to identify and ensure
adequate resources. The guidelines
describe procedures for determining the
"maximum extent practicable" quantity
of resources and response times for
responding to a worst case discharge
and other discharges, as appropriate.
These procedures identify practical and
technical limits on response capabilities
that an individual facility owner or
operator can contract for in advance and
on response times for resources to arrive
on scene. The guidelines are intended to
assist owners or operators of facilities in
preparing response plans and EPA in
reviewing plans. The Agency requests
comment on the procedures contained
in appendix F of the rule for the
determination and evaluation of
required response resources. In
addition, EPA solicits comment on
whether the guidelines are appropriate
for planning for inland spills by
4 Membership in a spill response cooperation
must ensure ready access to the organization's
response resources for the arrangement to be
acceptable to the RA for the purposes of this
regulation.
facilities regulated by the Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation.
EPA proposes at § 112.2 a definition
of "maximum extent practicable" to
mean 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. EPA interprets the
phrase "to the maximum extent
practicable" to include considerations
such as the technological limitations
associated with oil discharge removal
(e.g., boom effectiveness and equipment
recovery rates in adverse weather], and
the practical and technical limits of
response capabilities of individual
owners or operators. This interpretation
is consistent with the OPA Conference
Report (H.R Rep. No. 101-653,101st
Cong., 2d Sess. 1991 at p. ISO). To
address these limitations, the guidelines
in appendix F establish operability
criteria for oil recovery devices and
boom as well as caps on response
resources that facility owners or
operators should identify and ensure as
being available, through contract or
other approved means. The caps reflect
an estimate of the response capability at
a given facility that is considered a
practical nationwide target to be met by
1993. Recognizing that the OPA
Conference Report suggests a significant
increase in commercial removal
resources may be needed in most areas
of the country to comply with the
national planning ana response system,
EPA is soliciting comment on the
anticipated effects this provision may
have on the oil spill response industry.
2. Verification of Response Capability
As previously discussed, plan drafters
would need to identify and verify
response resources when preparing
plans. EPA would evaluate such
arrangements during the plan review
stage, to ensure the contractual
availability of equipment and personnel
from contractors identified in response
plans to provide response resources.
This process would require that
evidence of contracts or agreements
with response contractors be included
in the response plan so that the
availability of resources can be verified
during plan review. Agency reviewing
officials may need to take additional
steps to determine that contractors or
cooperatives do possess, and maintain
in a ready condition, the necessary
response inventory to handle the size of
spills for which they contract.
One option to provide review officials
with more information would be to
establish a contractor certification or
approval program. The State of
Washington has instituted a contractor
certification program and the USCG is
considering the development of
contractor approval procedures for spill
response contractors under a separate
rulemaking. Among the relevant factors
in the assessment of contractor
arrangements might be proximity to the
facility as it affects response times, the
adequacy of equipment and personnel
resources, the contractor's past
performance and safety record, and the
number of additional facilities the
contractor has agreed to support. The
Agency requests comment on the
criteria for evaluating contractor
agreements, a mechanism for approving
response contractors, and the
advisability of establishing a response
contractor approval process.
G. Response Plan Elements—
§§ 112.20(g) and (h), and Appendix G
The elements for response planning
proposed in § 112.20 of this rule are
designed to guide a facility owner or
operator in gathering the information
needed to write a response plan for the
facility's worst case discharge and, as
described in section m.E of this
preamble, for discharges smaller than a
worst case discharge. The proposed
response plan elements address
requirements under CWA section
311(j)(5) (as amended by the OPA), as
well as additional elements that EPA
has determined are necessary to ensure
the integrity of the response plan. The
OPA Conference Report suggests that
facility response plans should be
consistent with but not duplicative of
plans prepared under other Federal
programs, and EPA encourages owners
or operators to incorporate into the
response plan information required by
other Federal programs. Some of these
programs are discussed in Section IV of
this preamble. Owners or operators need
not prepare a separate plan to comply
with the Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation if they hove already prepared
a plan for the State in which the facility
is located, provided that the State plan
addresses the requirements and
includes all the elements described in
§ 112.20(h) and is cross-referenced
appropriately. Proposed § 112.20(h)
would require that response plans
contain an emergency response action
plan to be kept at the front of the
response plan binder or under a
separate cover that accompanies the
overall plan.
EPA considered a requirement for
certification by a Registered Professional
Engineer for certain portions of the
response plan, such as determination of
worst case discharge, and solicits
-------
8838
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
comment on this option. The contents of
a response plan would be subject to
review during routine inspections by
On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs) or during
State inspections. In addition, the RA
would review the contents of response
plans from facilities identified as posing
a threat of "significant and substantial
harm," before granting approval. EPA
solicits comment on which professions
may be suitable for evaluating and
certifying the contents of the response
plan if EPA determines a certification
requirement is appropriate. In
particular, the Agency requests
comment on the suitability of Certified
Hazardous Materials Managers to
perform the plan certification function.
In accordance with CWA section
311(jj)(5), proposed § 112.20(g) would
require that a facility response plan be
consistent with the NCP and with ACPs
described in section IV of this preamble.
For example, the OPA requires
amendments to the NCP that establish
procedures and standards for removing
a worst case discharge of oil and for
mitigating or preventing a substantial
threat of such a discharge. Also, the
OPA requires the preparation of ACPs
designed to augment the capabilities for
responding to worst case discharges
when implemented in conjunction with
the NCP. The discussion of worst case
discharge in a facility response plan
should be consistent with the
procedures and standards laid out under
these broader plans. To ensure such
consistency, EPA proposes in
§ 112.20(g)(2) to require that owners or
operators, review on an annual basis
appropriate parts of the NCP (e.g.,
subparts A through D) and, when
available, the applicable ACP and revise
the response plan as necessary. As
discussed in section III.C of this
preamble, ACPs may not be available in
time for owners or operators to review
them before initial response plan
preparation. Owners or operators are
encouraged to obtain from local or
Regional sources (e.g., Regional
Response Teams (RRTs) or OSCs) the
details of the ACP for the area in which
their facility is located, and develop
their facility response plans
accordingly. Proposed § 112.20(g) also
states that facility owners or operators
should coordinate with the local
emergency planning committee (LEPC)
and State emergency response
commission (SERC) when developing
their facility response plans to ensure
consistency with the local emergency
response plan required under section
303 of title III of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986 (SARA Title III).
Model Response Plans
Today. EPA includes in appendix G to
the rule a model response plan to assist
owners and operators in addressing the
required elements outlined in proposed
§ 112.20(h). The organization of the
model plan and the information to be
contained in it are representative of the
format and level of detail needed to
address the required response plan
elements in an acceptable manner. A
response plan, as shown in appendix G,
would be required for facilities that are
determined to have the potential to
cause "substantial harm" to the
environment. EPA recognizes that, in
certain cases, information required in
the model response plan is similar to
information currently maintained in the
facility's SPCC Plan. In these cases,
owners or operators can simply
reproduce the information and include
a copy in the response plan.
As discussed in section m.A of this
preamble, EPA proposes in
§ 112.20(a)(2)(iMiv) to require that all
facilities submitting a response plan
must complete and return to EPA a
Response Plan Cover Sheet with the
response plan. The cover sheet is
intended to provide the Agency with
basic information concerning the facility
and would be used by Regions to check
the "substantial harm" self-
determination process. A copy of the
cover sheet is included as Attachment
G-II of appendix G along with
instructions for completion of the form.
The cover sheet provides space for:
Basic facility information, responses to
the "substantial harm" flowchart
contained in appendix C, worst case
discharge amount, additional facility
characteristics (i.e., latitude and
longitude, and proximity to navigable
waters), and certification.
A blank copy of a model response
plan is included as appendix G of 40
CFR part 112. Affected facilities (those
that could cause "substantial harm")
would prepare (1) a response plan that
meets the requirements of §§ 112.20(g)
and (h) as reflected in the model
response plan provided in appendix G;
or (2) a comparable State or other
Federal agency response plan that is
appropriately cross-referenced and
meets the requirements of §§ 112.20(g)
and (h). A facility response plan would
include a discussion of the following
elements:
Emergency Response Action Plan—
§ 112.20(h)(1). In order to facilitate
response actions, EPA proposes that
facility owners or operators be required
to compile key sections of the overall
response plan into an emergency
response action plan that is maintained
in an accessible location. The sections
of the action plan may be photocopies
or condensed versions of the forms
included in the associated sections of
the overall response plan. EPA proposes
that the following information be
included in the action plan in format
specified in proposed § 112.20(h)(1):
• Emergency Response Coordinator
Information—from the Facility
Information Section;
• Emergency Notification Phone
List—from the Emergency Response
Section;
• Spill Response Notification Form—
from the Emergency Response Section;
• Equipment List and Location—from
the Emereency Response Section;
• Facility Response Team—from the
Emergency Response Section;
• Evacuation Plan—from the
Emergency Response Section;
• Immediate Action—from the Plan
Implementation Section; and
• Facility Diagram—from the
Diagrams Section.
The action plan is designed to provide
the facility owner or operator with
information on critical steps to stabilize
the source of the spill, notify the
appropriate people, and prevent the
spread of spilled oil. The action plan
would be kept in the front of the overall
facility response plan or in a separate
binder that accompanies the overall
plan.
Facility Information—§ 112.20(h)(2).
The requirement in CWA section
311({)(5) to designate a facility
emergency response coordinator is
addressed in proposed § 112.20(h)(2).
The facility information section of the
model response plan provides space to
identify a qualified individual having
full authority, including contracting
authority, to implement removal
actions. The Agency requests comment
on whether facility owners and
operators should be required to
designate an alternate emergency
response coordinator. This section also
provides space to include additional
facility information, much of which may
be obtained from the facility's existing
SPCC Plan. Other items include general
facility information such as the facility
name, address, telephone number,
owner and operator, and longitude and
latitude in minutes and degrees.
Emergency Response—§ 112.20(h)(3).
The model plan contains space in the
emergency response section to address
the CWA section 311(j)(5) requirement
that the emergency response coordinator
be able to immediately communicate
with the appropriate Federal official and
the persons providing personnel and
equipment (e.g., a spill response
contractor). To facilitate compliance
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8839
with this requirement, the section
contains space for a telephone list of
people or organizations to contact in the
event of a discharge, including the
National Response Center, the facility's
own and/or contracted response teams,
local response teams, local hospitals,
and local radio stations (if evacuation is
necessary). Notification of the National
Response Center is required under
regulations implementing CWA section
311(b). (See 33 CFR part 153, 40 CFR
part 300, and 40 CFR 117.21.) The
contact list should be accessible to all
facility employees to ensure that, in case
of a discharge, any employee on site
could immediately notify the
appropriate parties. A notification
checklist also is included in this section
of the model plan. The checklist
outlines the information to relay to
response officials, such as information
on the spill amount, material, impact of
the spill, and response actions.
The CWA requires that a facility
response plan describe the response
actions of persons at the facility. This
requirement is addressed in the
emergency response section of the
model plan, which provides space to
include a detailed description of the
duties of the emergency response
coordinator and other response
personnel during a response to a
discharge.
Pursuant to CWA section 311(j)(5),
owners or operators must identify and
ensure by contract or other means
acceptable to EPA (e.g., participation in
a spill response cooperative in lieu of an
individual contract) the availability of
private personnel and equipment
necessary to respond, to the maximum
extent practicable, to a worst case
discharge. The OPA Conference Report
indicates Congress contemplated
creating a system in which private
parties supply the bulk of equipment
and personnel needed for response to
large oil spills. See OPA Conference
Report, H.R. Rep. No. 101-653,101st
Cong., 2d Sess. 1991 at p. 148. The
model response plan provides space to
identify companies that will provide
such personnel and equipment.
Evidence of contracts or agreements
with response contractors must be
included in this section so that the
availability of resources can be
identified. As discussed in Section III.F
of this preamble, the contract or
response agreement will be subject to
review by the appropriate EPA Regional
office to ensure that the agreement
provides adequately for response,
mitigation, and prevention.
Response capability may also be
provided through the use of internal
response personnel and equipment
resources. The model plan provides
space for a list of the facility's response
personnel and response equipment,
including its location and operational
status and the date the equipment was
last tested.
Also included in the emergency
response section of the model plan are
guidelines for preparing evacuation
plans for the facility and surrounding
community. Additional information on
the guidelines that may be helpful in the
preparation of an evacuation plan can
be obtained from the Handbook of
Chemical Hazard Analysis Procedures
prepared by EPA. DOT, and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA). Evacuation routes must be
shown on a diagram of the facility.
Hazard Evaluation—§ 112.20(h)(4). A
hazard evaluation section is included in
the model response plan. Hazard
evaluation is a widely used industry
practice that allows owners or operators
to develop a complete understanding of
potential hazards and the response
actions necessary to address these
hazards. The Handbook of Chemical
Hazard Analysis Procedures, prepared
by EPA, DOT, and FEMA and the
Hazardous Materials Emergency
Planning Guide (NRT-1), prepared by
the National Response Team are good
references for conducting a hazard
analysis. The hazard evaluation will
provide information for developing
discharge scenarios for a worst case
discharge and medium and small
discharges. This section of the response
plan provides space for a hazard
identification, a vulnerability analysis,
and an analysis of the potential for a
discharge. This information allows the
facility owner or operator to evaluate
day-to-day operations for potential
discharges and to change standard
operating procedures if a potential for a
discharge is discovered.
As part of the hazard evaluation, EPA
proposes that owners or operators
identify what the potential effects of the
discharges would be on the affected
environment. To assess the range of
areas potentially affected, owners or
operators shall consider the distances
calculated in the substantial harm
determination process discussed in
section III.B of this preamble. Those
owners or operators that have made a
substantial harm determination without
performing the distance calculation
should use the appropriate formula in
appendix C or an alternative method to
quantitatively evaluate the appropriate
range of potentially affected areas.
Also in the hazard evaluation section
of the model response plan, the owner
or operator would provide information
on the facility's discharge history (if any
have occurred) including dates, causes,
amounts discharged, and response
actions. Information collected for
purposes of meeting the existing
§ 112.4(a) requirements may be used to
document spill history in the response
plan.
Discussion of Tiered Planning
Scenarios—§ 112.20(h)(5). The
discharge scenario section provides for
discussions of specific discharge
scenarios. As discussed in section III.E
of this preamble, EPA proposes a tiered
approach to response planning that
considers smaller, more probable
discharge quantities in addition to the
worst case discharge specified in the
OPA. Therefore, in addition to the
development of a scenario which uses
the "worst case discharge" amount
calculated from the worksheet in
Appendix E, the owner or operator of a
facility must plan and prepare for small
and medium discharge quantities, as
appropriate. When describing each
discharge scenario, the owner or
operator would consider facility
operations and factors that effect the
response effort, such as the potential
direction of the discharge and impact on
the surrounding area.
As discussed in section III.E of this
preamble, owners or operators of
complexes would determine planning
quantities for the transportation-related
and non-transportation-related
components of the facility. The owner
or operator would then compare the
corresponding worst case discharge and
medium planning amounts, as
appropriate, for each component of the
facility. In each case, the owner or
operator would select the larger of the
two amounts as the appropriate
planning quantity.
Discharge Detection—§ 112.20(h)(6).
The prompt discovery of a discharge
and the initiation of effective response
actions are critical to minimize the
damage caused by a discharge. The
discharge detection section provides
space for describing the discharge
detection systems, human or automated,
in use at the facility. Often, the choice
of a human or automated system
depends on the size and complexity of
facility operations.
Plan Implementation—§ 112.20(h)(7).
The CWA requirement that facility
owners or operators describe response
actions to ensure the safety of the
facility and to mitigate or prevent
discharges, or substantial threats of
discharges, is proposed in
§ 112.20(h)(7). The plan implementation
section of the model response plan
contains space for describing such
response actions, including the steps
facility personnel would follow to
-------
8840
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
mitigate and respond to each discharge
described in § 112.20(h)(5); the amount
of personnel and equipment that will be
needed to respond to the specific
discharge under consideration; plans to
dispose of contaminated materials,
debris, and recovered product; required
Federal or State permits (e.g.. Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
permits for disposal of contaminated
materials); and measures to provide for
containment and drainage.
As discussed in section III.F of this
preamble, EPA has provided guidelines
in appendix F of the rule to establish
appropriate personnel and equipment
levels and response times for given spill
sizes. Owners and operators are
encouraged to use these guidelines to
determine the quantity of resources that
must be identified and available,
through contract or other approved
means, for responding to a worst case
discharge and other discharges.
Facility Self-Inspection, Training, and
Meeting Logs—§ 112.20(h)(8). In the
model plan, the facility self-inspection,
training, and meeting logs section
provides space to include inspection
checklists for tanks, secondary
containment, and response equipment
and logs for discharge prevention
meetings. Much of the recordkeeping
information contained in this section is
required by the existing Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation. Therefore,
portions of the self-inspection, training,
and meeting logs section may be
completed by compiling information
from other parts of existing SPCC Plan.
Moreover, information collected for
purposes of meeting § 112.4(a)
requirements may be used to document
spill history in the response plan.
The CWA also requires owners or
operators to describe training and
periodic unannounced drills to be
carried out under the response plan. In
the model plan, the training section
provides space to include a series of
logs for recording unannounced or
"mock alert" drills and staff training
related to emergency response. The
model response plan in appendix G
provides recommendations for planning
mock alert drills. The Agency requests
comment on how frequently such
unannounced drills should be
conducted.
Diagrams—S 112.20(h)(9). This
section of the model response plan
describes diagrams for the site plan and
the drainage plan. Such diagrams help
facility personnel identify the nearest
opportunity for a discharge to reach
navigable waters and help responders
visualize location and layout
information so they can act promptly
during time critical situations.
Security—§ 112.20(h)(10). A security
section is included in the model
response plan and provides space to
address existing Oil Pollution
Prevention provisions contained in 40
CFR 112.7, as well as several additional
items being proposed in the Phase One
rule. This section provides for a
description of the facility's security and
should, as appropriate, include items
such as emergency cut off locations,
fencing, guards, lighting, valve and
pump locks, and pipeline connection
caps.
The Agency requests public comment
on the appropriateness and level of
detail of the information required in the
model response plan as well as other
information that may be necessary for
an effective response plan. For more
information on the organization of the
model response plan and specific
information to be included in the plan,
see the "Technical Background
Document to Support the Phase Two Oil
Pollution Prevention Rulemaking,"
available for inspection in room M2427
at the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 401M Street. SW., Washington,
DC 20460 (Docket Number SPCC-2P).
IV. Relationship of Facility Response
Plan Requirements to Other Programs
1. USCC, Minerals Management Service
(MMS), and Other Federal Agencies
In developing this proposed rule, EPA
has coordinated with the DOT
(including the USCG) and the Minerals
Management Service (MMS) throughout
this rulemaking process to ensure that
the response plans for transportation-
related facilities and non-tranaportation-
related offshore facilities are consistent,
to the degree possible, with the plans for
non-transportation-related onshore
facilities required under this regulation.
This coordination should help avoid
any duplication of effort on the part of
the regulated community in complying
with these regulations. For example, a
complex described in section m.B of
this preamble as an onshore site or
installation that has both transportation-
related and non-transportation-related
components (e.g., a marine transfer
facility with above ground storage
tanks), need prepare only one response
plan with separate sections addressing
each component. Separate sections may
be needed in the plan to address
different regulatory provisions or
various definitions that may apply to
the different components.
EPA would allow USCG OSCs the
opportunity to review response plans of
non-transportation-related onshore
facilities subject to 40 CFR part 112.
Specifically, a USCG OSC would be
given an opportunity to review and
comment on any submitted facility
response plan (whether transportation-
related or non-transportation-related) for
a facility geographically located within
the USCG's area of responsibility, as the
predesignated OSC. For response
purposes, the NCP divides the United
States into inland and coastal zones.
The USCG and EPA are assigned
responsibility for predesignating OSCs
for the coastal and inland zones,
respectively. Final approval of the
response plan would remain with EPA
for facilities subject to 40 CFR part 112.
Any objection to the response plan
raised by a USCG OSC would be
considered by the RA for final approval
of the plan and any issues would oe
quickly resolved through interagency
discussions.
The Agency also has worked with
members of DOI, NOAA, the Fish and
Wildlife Service, and the National Park
Service to define sensitive
environments. Coordination with other
departments and agencies in this area is
critical given the anticipated changes to
the NCP and the relationship of those
proposed changes to facility response
planning requirements.
2. 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
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 m); 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.
ACPs, mandated under CWA section
311(j)(4) and prepared by Area
Committees comprised of qualified
personnel of Federal. State, and local
agencies, are required to ensure, when
implemented in conjunction with other
elements of the NCP, the removal of a
worst case discharge from a facility
operating in or near the area covered by
the plan. ACPs will cover discharges
affecting all U.S. waters and adjoining
shorelines. EPA and the USCG are
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8841
responsible for developing ACPs for the
inland and coastal zones, respectively.
Until ACPs have been developed,
facility response plans should be
consistent with existing OSC
contingency plans in the coastal zone
and Federal RCPs in the inland zone.
3. RCRA
EPA regulations in 40 CFR part 264
(Subpart D) promulgated under RCRA
establish requirements for owners and
operators of hazardous waste facilities
to use in developing facility-specific
contingency plans. The plans must
include response procedures; a list of all
persons 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
re-processing and refining facilities. To
avoid duplication of effort, owners or
operators of facilities subject to the
regulations in 40 CFR parts 264 and 279
may incorporate these RCRA provisions
and the response-planning requirements
of other applicable Federal regulations,
into their facility-response plans.
4. BPCRA or SARA Title III
EPCRA requires LEPCs to develop
local emergency response plans for their
community and review them at least
annually. Under EPCRA, facilities are
required to notify the SERC and LEPC
if they have "extremely hazardous
substances" present above threshold
planning quantities. In addition, upon
request of the SERC or LEPC, the facility
is required to provide the LEPC with
any information necessary to develop
and implement the LEPC plan. Because
of this requirement that certain facilities
participate in emergency planning
under EPCRA, it is likely that some
overlap may exist with response plan
requirements outlined in today's
proposal.
Tne OP A Conference report stated
that owners or operators of facilities
subject to this regulation should ensure
that facility response plans are
consistent with plans required by other
programs. See OPA Conference Report,
H.R. Rep. No. 101-653,101st Cong.. 2d
Sess. 1991 at p. 151. Therefore, a facility
response plan should be consistent with
the LEPC plan for the community in
which the facility is located. To ensure
such coordination, facility owners or
operators should review the appropriate
LEPC plan. In addition, upon request of
the LEPC or SERC, the facility should
provide a copy of the response plan to
the LEPC.
5. Clean Air Act
Under section 112(r) of the Clean Air
Act (CAA), as amended, owners and
operators of facilities with "regulated
substances" above a specified threshold
quantities will be required to prepare
risk management plans (RMPs), which
must include a hazard assessment
(including, among other things, an
evaluation of worst-case accidental
releases), a prevention program, and a
response program. Owners and
operators are to provide a copy of the
RMPs to the State, local planning and
response authorities, ana the Chemical
Safety and Hazard Investigation Board.
Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA requires
that the hazard assessment evaluate
worst case accidental releases, estimate
potential release quantities, and
determine downwind effects including
potential exposures to affected
populations. Owners or operators must
also develop an emergency response
program that includes specific actions to
be taken in response to a release
including procedures for notifying the
public and response agencies,
emergency health care, and employee
training measures. EPA is currently
developing regulations to implement the
new CAA requirements, including a list
of regulated substances and threshold
quantities.
EPA anticipates that facilities affected
by both regulations can prepare one
response plan that meets the Oil
Pollution Prevention regulation
requirements for oil and the Clean Air
Act requirements for chemicals. EPA
plans to develop guidance to assist
facilities in this respect and requests
comment from facilities affected by both
regulations on whether the planning
requirements can be met in a single
plan.
V. Proposed Revisions to Existing 40
CFR Part 112 Plan Requirements
EPA proposes to clarify the
requirement at § 112.7(d) for a facility
owner or operator to provide a strong oil
spill contingency plan when the
installation of appropriate containment
or diversionary structures or equipment
to prevent discharged oil from reaching
U.S. waters is determined to be
impracticable. As proposed in
§ 112.7(d)(1), reference to a strong oil
spill contingency plan is replaced with
reference to the facility response plan as
described in proposed § 112.20. A
response plan prepared under such
circumstances need not be submitted to
the RA unless otherwise required by the
rest of today's proposed rule, but, would
be maintained at the facility with the
SPCC Plan. No change is proposed to
the circumstances that trigger the
requirement to provide such a plan.
The Agency proposes several
additional regulatory changes
recommended in the May 13,1988,
Teport by the interagency SPCC Task
Force formed in response to the
Ashland Oil spill and a subsequent
report by the General Accounting Office
(GAO) entitled "Inland Oil Spills"
(GAO/RCED-89-65). These proposed
changes include requiring the SPCC
Plan to address training and methods of
ensuring against brittle fracture. In
addition, the Agency proposes revisions
to: (1) Give RAs authority to require
amendment, modification, and
submission of a Plan when it does not
meet the requirements of 40 CFR part
112; (2) give RAs authority to require
preparation of Plans by owners or
operators of previously exempted
facilities when necessary to achieve the
goals of the CWA; and (3) require
submission of the Plan when an owner
or operator invokes a waiver to certain
technical requirements of this
regulation. The proposed revisions
would apply to all regulated facilities
unless otherwise noted, not just those
facilities that are subject to the proposed
response plan requirements under new
CWA section 311(j)(5) (i.e., "substantial
harm" facilities).
For more information on the basis for
the proposed regulatory changes
discussed below, see the "Technical
Background Document to Support the
Phase Two Oil Pollution Prevention
Rulemaking," available for inspection in
room M2427 at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460 (Docket Number
SPCC-2P).
A. Prevention Training
Data from ERNS indicate that a
significant number of oil discharges are
caused by operator error. In 1989, ERNS
spill report data show that human error
was the cause of 12.3 percent of all
spills at fixed facilities. Operator error
can take many forms. One of the most
common operating errors is failure to
close valves, which can lead to large
spills when oil products are
subsequently transferred in bulk. For
example, in 1988, over 336,000 gallons
of oil were released as a result of a valve
that was left open by a facility worker
at an Ashland Chemical Company
facility in Arkansas Pass, Texas.
-------
8842
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
Overfilling due to operator error during
transfers is another common cause of
spills. The overfilling of a tank at the
Colonial Pipeline facility in Greensboro,
GA in 1989 resulted in an oil release of
210,000 gallons.
EPA believes that operator error is
more likely to be a factor in causing
spills where operations regularly
involve transfers of oil products (e.g.,
filling of tanks and related equipment,
and loading and unloading of vehicles,
tank cars, and vessels to or from tanks).
Incidents that involve operator error
where large quantities of oil products
are transferred can lead to greater
amounts of oil being released to
navigable waters.
Proper training of employees involved
with transfer operations at oil storage
and handling facilities can reduce the
occurrence of operator-related spills and
reduce the severity of impacts from
spills that do occur. Training, therefore,
is important for the safe and proper
functioning of a facility and encourages
up-to-date planning for spill control and
response. Training courses help sharpen
operating and response sills, introduce
the latest ideas and techniques, and
promote interaction with the emergency
response organization and familiarity
with the SPCC Plan. Furthermore,
sections 311(f)(5) and 311(j)(7) of the
CWA, added by the OPA, reinforce the
importance of training. EPA recognizes
that the amount of facility-specific
training should vary depending on the
complexity of operations (e.g., number
of tanks and transfer points, throughput,
presence of sophisticated pumping or
switching equipment, etc.) at regulated
facilities. For certain types of regulated
facilities, characterized by small-scale,
relatively simple operations involving
aboveground storage tanks, the need for
extensive facility-specific training is less
critical.
The current Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation provides that 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
and regulations. The Phase One NPRM
proposes requiring all personnel to
participate in yearly training exercises.
It also proposes to require that training
be administered to new personnel
within one week of beginning work.
Additionally, the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA)
requires that personnel who are
expected to respond to and control
hazardous materials discharges undergo
formal worker health and safety training
before starting work and receive
refresher training at regular intervals.
OSHA considers petroleum products
and gases to be hazardous materials.
EPA proposes in § 112.7(f) to require
that owners or operators of facilities that
transfer or receive greater than or equal
to 10,000 gallons of oil in a single
operation more than twice per month on
average or greater than or equal to
50,000 gallons in a single operation
more than once per month on average
would be required to initiate a training
program as follows:
• All employees who are involved in
oil-handling activities, such as the
operation or maintenance of oil storage
tanks or the operation of equipment
related to storage tanks, would be
required to receive 8 hours of facility-
specific training within one year of the
effective date of this regulation or the
date that the facility becomes subject to
this requirement.
• In subsequent years, employees
would be required to undergo 4 hours
of refresher training.
• Employees hired after the training
program has been initiated, however,
would be required to receive 8 hours of
facility-specific training within one
week of starting work and 4 hours each
subsequent year.
The proposed facility-specific training
includes, but is not limited to, the
following areas: training in correct
equipment operation and maintenance,
general facility operations, discharge
prevention laws and regulations, and
the contents of the facility's SPCC Plan.
Such facility training would be
documented in the facility response
plan.
These proposed training requirements
are in addition to any health and safety
training requirements that regulated
facilities may be subject to under OSHA
regulations at 29 CFR 1910.120 and
under identical worker protection
standards at 40 CFR part 311 that apply
to employees in States without OSHA-
approved State plans.
EPA regards 8 hours of facility-
specific training as a minimum training
requirement for facilities characterized
by complex operations involving the
transfer and storage of oil. For these
facilities, additional facility-specific
training may be necessary to ensure that
employees are adequately prepared to
respond to spills.
EPA recognizes that many facilities
already have spill prevention training
programs that meet or exceed the levels
proposed in § 112.7(f). Such facilities
would not be required to implement
additional training measures.
As proposed, the training
requirements would apply only to
facilities that transfer large quantities of
oil on a regular basis and not to smaller
or less active transfer facilities, where
the risk of the discharge of significant
quantities of oil to navigable waters may
be less. EPA requests comment on the
appropriateness of the transfer
frequency and amount criteria for a
facility to be subject to the proposed
training requirements. EPA also requests
comment on the appropriateness of
restricting the training requirements to
those facilities determined to have the
potential to cause "substantial harm" to
the environment as discussed in Section
m.A of this preamble. The Agency
solicits information on the current
practices at various types of regulated
facilities and comment about the
amount of facility-specific training that
is appropriate for personnel at different
types and sizes of facilities. In addition,
EPA requests comment on whether the
8-hour minimum requirement for new
employees is too high for certain types
of facilities, such as service stations.
Also, EPA requests comment on the
appropriate level of annual refresher
training at small facilities that
experience little or no employee
turnover from year to year.
EPA considered allowing facilities to
maintain current training practices, with
no mandatory minimum training hour
requirements. However, this option may
not be sufficient to alleviate the problem
of spills related to human error.
In addition, employees are required to
participate in unannounced drills,
which tests the facility response plan,
on an annual basis. Drill organizers
should limit the number of people who
know about the exercise. Drills should
be carefully planned out and response
teams notified in advance of sounding
appropriate alarms. The actions taken
by the response team during the drill
should be noted and addressed in a
debriefing session to follow the exercise.
EPA proposes that such unannounced
drills shall be recorded in the facility
response plan.
B. Ensuring Against Brittle Fracture
The failure of Ashland Oil Company's
four million gallon aboveground storage
tank in January 1988 was the result of
brittle fracture. As illustrated by the
collapse of this tank, brittle fracture may
cause sudden and catastrophic tank
failure, resulting in potentially serious
damage to the environment and loss of
oil. In the aftermath of the Ashland Oil
spill, EPA and industry representatives
identified a basic set of conditions that
seek to identify risk of brittle fracture,
including shell temperature, the level of
tank contents, and the presence of
existing surface flaw. Reported cases of
tank failure due to brittle fracture have
occurred after tank erection, during the
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8843
performance of a hydrostatic test (such
as the failure of a storage tank at ESSO's
refinery in Fawley, U.K., in 1952),
during the first filling in cold weather,
after a change to lower temperature
service, such as was the case in the
Ashland Oil spill, or after a repair or
alteration, (see p. 5—28 the "Technical
Background Document to Support the
Phase Two Oil Pollution Prevention
Rulemaking," available for inspection in
room M2427 at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460 [Docket Number
SPCC-2P].
Consequently, EPA proposes in
§ 112.7(i) to require facility owners or
operators to evaluate their field-
constructed tanks for the risk of failure
due to brittle fracture, by adhering to
appropriate industry standards
contained in API Standard 653 entitled
Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and
Reconstruction. Section 112.7(i)
incorporates by reference section 3
(Brittle Fracture Consideration) of API
Standard 653. This incornoration by
reference will be submitted for approval
to the Director of the Federal Register in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1
CFR part 51. Copies of API Standard 653
may be inspected at the Superfund
Docket, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M Street, SW„ room
M2427, Washington, DC. Also, EPA
proposes in § 112.7(j) a conforming
change to reflect the addition of the
proposed brittle fracture requirements
in § 112.7(i).
The evaluation for the risk of failure
due to brittle fracture would be triggered
by a repair or alteration to the tank, or
a change in service. As defined in
§ 112.2 of the proposed rule, "repair"
means any work necessary to maintain
or restore a tank or related equipment to
a condition suitable for safe operation.
Typical examples include the removal
and replacement of material (such as
roof, shell, or bottom material, including
weld metal) to maintain tank integrity;
the re-leveling or jacking of a tank shell,
bottom, or roof; the addition of
reinforcing plates to existing shell
penetrations; and the repair of flaws,
such as tears or gouges, by grinding or
gouging followed by welding. As
defined in § 112.2 of the proposed rule,
"alteration" means any work on a tank
or related equipment involving cutting,
burning, welding, or heating operations
that changes the physical dimensions or
configuration of a tank. Typical
examples include the addition of
manways and nozzles greater than 12-
inch nominal pipe size and an increase
or decrease in tank shell height.
Under API standard 653, evaluation of
the potential hazard for brittle fracture
involves a review of a tank's
construction materials, operational
history, repairs, material stored, and
other factors identified as useful in
predicting a tank's performance. The
evaluation also could result in more
extensive testing (such as a hydrostatic
test). A flowchart of brittle fracture
considerations contained in API
Standard 653 is shown in Appendix H
to the rule. In accordance witn API
Standard 653 and good engineering
practice, if the evaluation indicates that
the tank is at risk of failure due to brittle
fracture, the owner or operator would be
required to re rate the tank or modify the
tank's operation to prevent failure. The
Agency proposes the approach
described above because it is consistent
with current industry standards and
will apply to a greater range of industry
tanks at risk.
EPA does not propose to require that
shop-fabricated tanks be evaluated for
brittle fracture. Such tanks are generally
not as susceptible to brittle fracture
failure after a change in service because
design criteria are tailored to meet the
needs of many operating conditions
including variances in pressures,
material stored, and temperature. In
addition, shop-fabricated tanks are
generally much smaller ranging in
capacity from 3,000 to 31,500 gallons,
and therefore are less prone to suffer
catastrophic failure due to brittle
fracture. Field-constructed tanks are
usually designed and built to meet a
specific type of operating condition and
can be much larger in size. Shop-
fabricated tanks may present a lower
risk of causing substantial harm to the
environment as a result of discharges to
U.S. waters or adjoining shorelines than
larger, field-constructed tanks. The
Agency requests comments and data on
the proposed requirement to evaluate
field-constructed tanks for the risk of
failure due to brittle fracture under
certain circumstances.
As an alternative, the Agency
considered requiring all tanks to
undergo a full hydrostatic test to
determine their potential for brittle
fracture. Under this option, a
hydrostatic test would have to be
performed even on tanks that are not
considered prone to brittle fracture by
industry standards. Moreover, existing
tanks would have to be taken out of
service during testing, causing potential
disruption to facility operations. Also,
EPA considered not requiring facilities
to perform any additional evaluations or
tests beyond those required for other
regulations. No other regulations were
identified, however, that require tests to
specifically evaluate the potential for
brittle fracture.
C. SPCC Plan Amendment
Section 112.4 of the current Oil
Pollution Prevention regulation requires
the owner or operator of a facility to
submit the facility's SPCC Plan to the
RA when the facility has experienced
either a discharge of more than 1,000
gallons or two reportable spill events
within a twelve month period. The RA
can then review the Plan and may
require that the Plan be amended. Under
current § 112.3(e), a facility owner or
operator must make the Plan available
to the Agency for on-site review, but the
rule does not provide explicit authority
for the RA to require Plan amendment
except under the circumstances
described in § 112.4. Because Plan
amendment may be necessary to protect
navigable waters and adjoining
shorelines even before spill events
occur, EPA proposes to give the RA
specific authority to require Plan
submission and amendment at any time.
Proposed § 112.4(d) amends the existing
language to incorporate this provision
and states that the RA may require Plan
amendment whenever the Plan doe6 not
meet the requirements of 40 CFR part
112 or when Plan amendment is
necessary to prevent and control
discharges, litis broader authority
would include the right of the RA to
require amendment following plan
review; the rule would clarify the RA's
authority to require amendments in
other situations not specified under the
existing regulation.
D. Authority To Require Preparation of
Plans
Although the CWA provides EPA
broad authority to regulate non-
transportation-related onshore facilities,
current § 112.1(d) exempts certain
facilities. Under the proposed Phase
One rule, the § 112.1(d) exemptions
would be broadened to include totally
buried underground storage tanks
subject to the requirements of EPA's
underground storage tank regulation at
40 CFR part 280. Under today's
proposal, § 112.1(g) would be added to
allow the RA to require otherwise
exempted facilities, on a case-by-case
basis, to prepare and implement SPCC
Plans where needed to protect navigable
waters and adjoining shorelines. Thus, a
facility that would be exempted from
the Oil Pollution Prevention regulation
on the basis of its underground storage
tanks being subject to 40 CFR part 280
may nevertheless have to comply with
the requirements of the Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation at the discretion
of the RA. The RA would exercise this
discretionary authority when necessary
to carry out the purposes of the CWA.
-------
8844
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
The determination would be based on
the presence of environmental concerns
not adequately addressed under the
UST regulation.
Based on the requirements in the UST
regulation, EPA expects that it will be
necessary for the RA to exercise this
authority in very few cases. Moreover,
some of the SPCC Plan requirements
that apply to aboveground tank systems
would not represent good engineering
practice for certain underground tanks.
For example, the requirement for
secondary containment as described in
current § 112.7(c) is not considered good
engineering practice for completely
buried underground tanks.
Following a preliminary
determination, the RA will provide a
written notice to the facility owner or
operator stating the reasons why the
facility needs to prepare a SPCC Plan.
The owner or operator would have the
opportunity to provide information and
data and to consult with the Agency
about the need to prepare and submit a
plan. Following this consultation, the
RA will make a final determination on
whether the facility is required to
prepare and implement a SPCC Plan. If
the RA makes a final determination that
a SPCC Plan is necessary to carry out
the purposes of the CWA, the owner or
operator must prepare the plan within
six months of the RA's decision and
implement the Plan as soon as possible,
but not later than one year after the final
determination has been made.
E. Submission of Plans That Contain a
Waiver of Technical Requirements
Under the proposed Phase One
regulation, a facility's SPCC Plan need
not conform to certain technical
requirements of 40 CFR part 112 if
equivalent protection is provided. No
provision was made in the Phase One
proposal, however, for notification to
EPA when a facility owner or operator
invokes this waiver. Proposed
§ 112.7(a)(2) of today's proposed rule
would require the owner or operator to
submit the Plan to the RA in this
circumstance. Thus, EPA staff will have
the opportunity to review the Plan and
determine whether the measures
described in the Plan do indeed provide
equivalent protection. The Agency
solicits comment on whether
submission of the entire plan for the RA
to make this determination is necessary.
VI. Other Technical Considerations Not
Proposed
EPA is examining several additional
recommendations made in the SPCC
Task Force Report and the GAO report
on inland oil spills, including
provisions relating to: Plant security;
corrosion protection; lightning strike
protection; leak detection; and
certification of tank installation plans.
EPA is not proposing regulatory changes
at this time but is soliciting comment
and cost information on these
considerations.
Improvement of plant security can
reduce the number of discharges that
occur as a result of vandalism. Section
112.7(e)(9) of the current Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation contains a
number of requirements concerning
plant security, including provisions on
fencing and lighting. The Agency
requests comment on the need for
additional measures to mitigate
potential environmental harm posed by
discharges from different types of
facilities, and whether certain
provisions should be discretionary for
any or all facilities.
Metallic aboveground storage tanks
are susceptible to corrosion, which may
lead to leakage or the discharge of a
tank's entire contents. For metallic
aboveground tanks, the primary
corrosive concern involves tank bottoms
and the types of foundations
constructed for them. The UST
regulation at 40 CFR 280.20 requires
owners or operators of underground
storage tanks to ensure that releases due
to corrosion are prevented for as long as
the tank system is used to store
regulated substances, such as petroleum
products. Cathodic protection is a
common method used to protect USTs
from coiTOsion (40 CFR 280.31). The
Agency solicits comment and cost data
on the use of cathodic protection to
prevent corrosion on aboveground
storage tanks. EPA also requests
comment and cost effectiveness data on
other methods of preventing leaks due
to corrosion.
Lightning strikes on aboveground
storage tanks and fires resulting from
the strikes can contribute to discharges
of oil. Although various industry groups
have published recommended practices
and precautionary measures for owners
or operators to follow to avoid lighting
strikes, there are currently no Federal
regulations in effect concerning
lightning strike protection for
aboveground storage tanks. EPA
requests comment on the costs and
benefits of installing lightning
protection systems, such as an air
terminal system, overhead ground wire
system, the Faraday Cage system, or
combinations of these systems on
aboveground storage tanks.
Early detection of small oil leaks from
above ground storage tanks may alert
owners or operators to needed repairs or
other spill prevention or mitigation
measures and thus prevent substantial
environmental damage and save the
expense of cleaning up larger quantities
of oil that may subsequently leak from
the tanks. Section 112.7(e)(2)(vi) of the
current Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation requires operating personnel
to frequently observe the outside of a
tank for signs of deterioration, leaks, or
accumulation of oil inside diked areas.
Small leaks near the bottom of a tank,
however, often are hard to detect
visually. The Agency is therefore
requesting comment and cost
effectiveness information on other leak
detection methods for aboveground
tanks, such as ultrasonic testing and
inventory reconciliation. Also, the
Agency requests comment on the
appropriateness of testing underground
piping for leaks and data on
methodologies.
The current Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation requires facility owners or
operators to have a Professional
Engineer review and certify that their
SPCC Plans have been prepared in
accordance with good engineering
practices. This requirement, however,
does not address specific facility
procedures such as tank installation.
UST regulations at 40 CFR 280.20(e), on
the other hand, require certification of
compliance with proper installation
practices and of the qualifications of
tank installers. The Agency requests
comment on appropriate methods to
ensure that aboveground tanks are
properly installed, such as certification
of installation plans and/or installation
monitoring by a professional engineer or
other qualified individual.
VII. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order 12291
Executive Order (E.O.) 12291 requires
that regulations be classified as major or
non-ma)or for purposes of review by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). According to E.0.12291, 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 or prices
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.
An economic analysis performed by
the Agency, available for inspection in
room M2427 at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW..
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules 8845
Washington, DC 20460, shows that this
proposed rule is major because it would
result in estimated costs to affected
facilities of approximately $140.6
million during the first year that the rule
is in effect and approximately S60.9
million in each subsequent year. At a
10-percent interest rate over 10 years,
the annualized costs are $73.2 million.
Of the total estimated costs. $93.7
million of the first-year costs and $54.0
million of the subsequent-year costs
result from the facility response plan
requirements proposed in § 112.20.
Approximately $12.6 million of the
first-year costs and $6.3 million of the
subsequent-year cost are attributable to
the other technical requirements. The
proposed revisions pertaining to
enforcement of the Oil Pollution
Prevention regulation (i.e., amendments
to the SPCC Plan, notification of a
waiver of technical reauirements, and
preparation of SPCC Plans by previously
exempted facilities) are estimated to
result in costs of $2.3 million in the first
year and $0.5 million in subsequent
years. In addition, it is estimated that
facilities will expend $32.0 million in
the first year to read and understand the
proposed revisions. This economic
analysis estimates costs and benefits for
facilities currently subject to the Oil
Pollution Prevention regulation. The
first-year, subsequent-year, and
annualized costs of the proposed
revisions to affected facilities are
presented in Table 1. The estimates
presented assume that facility response
plans reduce the costs and damages
caused by oil spills by 30 percent,
which is one of the key assumptions in
the analysis.
Table 1.—Total Cost to Affected Facilities of the Proposed Rulemaking
Proposed revision
First-year oosts
SuOeequent-year costs
Annualized vahi
ol total coeu
Rule familiarization
Faculty response plan
Training
Brittle fracture
Amendments to SPCC plan
Notification ot waiver ol technical requirements
Preparation ol SPCC plane by previously ex-
empted facilities.
Total
$32.0 million .....
$93.7 million ....
$11.0 million
$1.6 million
$12,900
$l.5mNlon
$0.8 million
$140.6 mWon ..
$0
$54.0 million
$4.7 million .
$1.6 million .
$12,900
$147,250
$0 J million .
S60.9 mlllon
$5.2 mNUan.
$59.9 mutton.
$5.7 minion.
$l.6mNion.
$12,900.
$0.3 irtmon.
$0.4 mttion.
$73.2 mutton.
EPA also is estimated to incur costs to
process, review, and approve facility
response plans and to process and
review SPCC Plans and other
information submitted as a result of the
three proposed revisions related to
enforcing the regulation. EPA estimates
that it will process approximately 6,500
response plans and review and approve
approximately 2,000 response plans in
the first two years after the revisions
take effect at a cost of $1.2 million in the
first year and $1.1 million in the second
year. EPA also will incur costs of $3.1
million in the first year and $0.5 million
each year thereafter to implement the
other proposed revisions. At a 10-
percent interest rate over 10 years, the
annualized costs to EPA are $1.2
million.
The Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA)
prepared in support of this rule also
includes an assessment of the
environmental benefits associated with
the proposed revisions. This benefit
estimate includes only the benefits of
avoided clean-up costs, value of lost
product, and avoided natural resource
damages as a result of the prevention of
oil spills or the mitigation of the
severity of spills that do occur. Other
damages caused by oil spills, such as
damage to private property, lost profit
by business, public health risks, and
foregone existence/option value have
not been quantified. EPA recognizes that
the methodologies to value certain
benefits of avoiding oil spills or
mitigating their effects are contentious
and new or revised methodologies
currently are under study by other
government agencies. For illustrative
purposes, the Agency has presented
monetary estimates of these benefits of
the proposed rule in the Regulatory
Impact Analysis based on currently
available data. The cost effectiveness of
the proposed revisions also are
presented in terms of the total estimated
cost to society per unit volume of
spilled oil addressed by the proposed
revisions. This measure of cost
effectiveness is calculated by dividing
the total estimated costs to affected
facilities and the government by the
total number of barrels (or gallons) of oil
that is estimated not to be spilled as a
result of the proposed revisions or, if
spilled, is addressed more effectively as
a result of the proposed revisions. Table
2 presents the cost effectiveness of the
proposed revisions based on the
assumption that facility response plans
reduce the costs and damages caused by
oil spills by 30 percent.
Table 2.—Comparison of Estimated Total Annualized Costs and Benefits
Propoeed revision
Estimated costs per avoided volume of spilled
oil at X percent level of effectiveness for re-
sponse plans
Estimated costs
per avoided berrel
ot spilled on at 57
percent level of el-
fecttvenees tor re-
Rule familiarization
Facility response plan
Training $8l/gallon ,
$3,401/barrel ,
Brittle fracture*
Amendments of SPCC plan
Not Estimated
$30/gaUon
$l.27l/ban»l.
$8l/gaHon
$3,415ftaml.
$31/gaiton
$1,297/barrel.
Not Estimated
Not Estimated.
$l6/gaton.
$66ttbarral.
$3l/ga0on.
$1.303rt*rrsl.
Not Eattnated.
-------
8846 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
Table 2.—Comparison of Estimated Total Annualized Costs and Benefits—Continued
Prapoeed revision
Estimated ooats per avoided volume of spilled
oil at 30 percent level ot effectiveness tor re-
sponse plans
EaOflWad costs
par avoided barrel
ot apwed oil at 57
percent level o» et-
lectiveneaa tor re-
sponse plans
Notification of waiver of technical requirements
Not EaUmatad.
Not Estimated.
Preparation of SPCC plans by previously exempted Inrilltlm
Alternative assumptions about the
effectiveness of facility response plans
yield different estimates of the net
benefits. For example, estimated costs of
facility response plans equal estimated
benefits at a 57 percent effectiveness
level. At levels of effectiveness less than
57 percent, estimated costs of the
response plan requirement exceed
estimated benefits. Conversely, at
effectiveness levels greater than 57
percent, estimated benefits of the
response plan requirement exceed the
estimated costs. The cost effectiveness
of the proposed revisions also is
presented in Table 2 at an assumed
effectiveness level of 57 percent. This
proposed rule has been submitted to
OMB for review as required by E.O.
12291.
B. 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 the preliminary analysis
indicate that this proposed rule will not
have significant adverse impacts on
small businesses because small
businesses are unlikely to be affected by
the facility response planning, training,
or brittle fracture requirements, which
account for the majority of the total
costs of the proposed rulemaking (see
the "Regulatory Impact Analysis of the
Proposed Phase Two Revisions of the
Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation,"
Chapter 8, September 1992, available for
inspection in room M2427 at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401
M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460).
Therefore, EPA certifies that this
proposed rule is not expected to have a
significant impact on small entities, and
therefore that no Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis is necessary.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to OMB
under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An Information
Collection Request (ICR) has been
prepared by EPA (ICR No. 1630.01) and
a copy may be obtained from Sandy
Fanner, Information Policy Branch
(PM-223Y); U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460, or by calling
(202) 260-2740.
The collection of information required
to prepare facility response plans is
estimated to have a public reporting
burden varying from 1 to 256 hours per
response in the first year, with an
average of 5 hours per response, and to
require an average of 0.65 hours per
recordkeeper annually. This includes
time to review instructions and
guidance, search existing data sources,
gather and maintain the data needed,
and complete and review the collection
of information. In subsequent years, the
facility response plan requirement is
estimated to have a public reporting
burden that varies from 0-69 hours per
response, with an average of 1 hour per
response, and to require an average of
0.6 hours per recordkeeper annually.
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-
223Y), 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, Oil spill response, Petroleum.
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Tanks. Water pollution
control. Water resources.
Dated: January 19.1993.
William K. Reilly,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, part 112, title 40. chapter I of
the Code of Federal Regulations, as
proposed to be revised at 56 FR 54630,
October 22,1991, is proposed to be
amended as follows:
PART 112—OIL POLLUTION
PREVENTION
1. The authority citation for part 112
is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321 and 1361; EO.
12777 (3 CFR. 1991 Comp., p. 351).
2. Section 112.1, as proposed at 56 FR
54630, is amended by revising
paragraphs (d) introductory text and
(d)(4), and by adding paragraph (g) to
read as follows:
f 112.1 General applicability and
notification.
*****
(d) Except as provided in paragraphs
(e) and (g) of this section and the first
sentence of § 112.7(a)(3), this part does
not apply to:
ft * * * *
(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, except that such tanks shall be
marked on the facility diagram as
provided in § 112.7(a)(3).
ft * * * *
(g) Notwithstanding paragraph (d) of
this section, the Regional Administrator
may require any facility subject to the
jurisdiction of EPA under section 311(j)
of the CWA to prepare and implement
an SPCC Plan or applicable parts
thereof.
(1) Following a preliminary
determination, the Regional
Administrator will provide a written
notice to the facility owner or operator
stating the reasons why the facility
owner or operator needs to prepare an
SPCC Plan.
(2) The owner or operator may
provide information and data and may
consult with the Agency about the need
to prepare and submit a Plan.
(3) Following this consultation, the
Regional Administrator will make a
final determination regarding whether
the facility is required to prepare and
implement an SPCC Plan.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8847
(4) If the Regional Administrator
makes a final determination that an
SPCC Plan is necessary to carry out the
purposes of the CWA, the owner or
operator must prepare the Plan within
six months of that determination and
implement the Plan as soon as possible,
but not later than one year after the final
determination has been made.
3. Section 112.2, as proposed at 56 FR
54630, is amended by removing the
paragraph designations (a) through (y),
and inserting the following new
definitions in alphabetical order, to read
as follows:
S11&2 Definitions.
• ft ft ft •
Adverse weather means the weather
conditions that make it difficult for
response equipment and personnel to
cleanup or remove spilled oil.
Alteration means any work on a tank
or related equipment involving cutting,
burning, welding, or heating operations
that changes the physical dimensions or
configuration of a tank.
• ft ft ft •
Complex means 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 311(j) of the CWA.
ft ft ft ft ft
Contracts or other approved means
include:
(1) A written contractual agreement
with a response contractor that
identifies and ensures the availability of
the necessary personnel or equipment
within appropriate response times;
(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;
(3) Active membership in a local or
regional oil spill removal organization
that has identified and ensures adequate
access through such membership to
necessary personnel and equipment to
respond to a discharge within
appropriate response times in the
specified geographic areas; or
(4) Other specific arrangements
approved by the Regional Administrator
upon request of the owner or operator.
ft ft ft ft ft
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.
Maximum extent practicable means
the limitations used to determine oil
spill planning resources and response
times for on-water recovery, 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.
ft ft ft ft •
Repair means any work necessary to
maintain or restore a tank or related
equipment to a condition suitable for
safe operation.
ft ft ft • ft
Worst case discharge for an onshore
non-transportation-related facility
means the largest foreseeable discharge
in adverse weather conditions, based on
the factors described in appendix E to
this part.
4. Section 112.4, as proposed at 56 FR
54633, is amended by redesignating
paragraph (d) as paragraph (d)(1), by
revising newly designated paragraph
(d)(1), and by adding a new paragraph
(d)(2) to read as follows:
9112.4 Amendment of Spill Prevention,
Control and Countermsasuraa Plan by
Regional Administrator.
ft ft ft ft ft
(d) (1) The Regional Administrator
may require the owner or operator of
any facility subject to this part to submit
the information listed in paragraphs
(a)(1) through (a)(8) of this section and
such other information as the Regional
Administrator may request. After review
of the information submitted, or after
on-site review of a facility's Plan, the
Regional Administrator may require the
owner or operator of such facility to
amend the Plan if the Plan does not
meet the requirements of this part or if
amendment of the Plan is necessary to
prevent or control discharges of oil from
such facility into or upon the waters
described in § 112.1(a) of this part.
(2) After review of the materials
submitted by the owner or operator of
a facility as required in § 112.7(d) of this
part, the Regional Administrator may
approve the Plan or require amendment
of the Plan.
ft ft ft ft ft
5. Section 112.7, as proposed at 56 FR
54634, is amended by revising
paragraphs (a)(2), the introductory text
of paragraph (d), and paragraphs (d)(1),
(f)(1), and (i) and by adding a new
paragraph (j) to read as follows:
§112.7 Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeesures Plan general
requirements.
(a) * " * ^ l
(2) The Plan may deviate from the
requirements in paragraph (c) of this
section and §§ 112.8,112.6.112.10, and
112.11. where applicable to a specific
facility, provided equivalent protection
is provided by some other means of spill
prevention, control, or countermeasures.
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 nonconformance and
describe in detail alternate methods and
how equivalent protection will be
achieved. The owner or operator of the
facility shall submit the Plan to the
Regional Administrator together with a
transmittal letter describing how the
Plan contains equivalent protection
measures in lieu of certain requirements
in 40 CFR part 112. If the Regional
Administrator determines that the
measures described in the Plan do not
provide equivalent protection, the
Regional Administrator may require
amendment of the Plan, following the
procedures in § 112.4 (e) and (f).
ft ft * * ft
(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 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 providing the following:
(1) The facility response plan
described in § 112.20.
ft ft ft ft ft
(f) Personnel, training, and spill
prevention procedures. (1) Owners or
operators of facilities, which transfer or
receive greater than or equal to 10,000
gallons of oil in a single operation more
than twice peT month on average, or
greater than or equal to 50,000 gallons
in a single operation more than once per
month on average, shall be responsible
for the proper instruction of their
personnel in the operation and
maintenance of equipment to prevent
discharges of oil and in applicable
pollution control laws, rules, and
regulations.
(i) All personnel who are involved in
oil-handling activities shall receive at
least 8 hours of training by [insert date
one year after the effective date of the
final rule], and at least 4 hours in
subsequent years. Such training
-------
8848
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday. February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
includes, but is not limited to, subjects
such as correct equipment operation
and maintenance, general facility
operations, discharge prevention laws
and regulations, and the contents of the
facility's SPCC Plan.
(ii) In the case of new employees, 8
hours of training shall be given to such
personnel within the first week of their
employment.
(lii) All such personnel shall also
participate in unannounced drills, to be
conducted at least annually.
• » • • •
(1) If a field-constructed aboveground
tank undergoes a repair, alteration, or a
change in service, the facility owner or
operator shall evaluate the tank for risk
of failure due to brittle fracture, and, as
necessary, take appropriate action in
accordance with Section 3 of Tank
Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and
Reconstruction. January 1991, American
Petroleum Institute, API Standard 653.
This incorporation by reference will be
submitted for approval to the Director of
the Federal Register in accordance with
5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
Copies may be obtained from the
American Petroleum Institute, 1220 L
Street NW., Washington DC 20005.
Copies may be inspected at the
Superfund Docket, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401M Street. SW„
room M2427, Washington, DC. A
flowchart of brittle fracture
considerations contained in API
Standard 653 is contained in appendix
H to this part.
(j) In addition to the minimal
prevention standards listed under
§ 112.7 (c). (e). (f). (g). (h), and (i).
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).
6. Section 112.20 is added to read as
follows:
f 11&20 Facility response plans.
(a) (1) The owner or operator of any
non-transportation-related onshore
facility that, because of its location,
could reasonably be expected to cause
substantial harm to the environment by
discharging oil into or on the navigable
waters or adjoining shorelines shall
prepare a facility response plan and
shall submit a response plain that
satisfies the requirements of this section
to the Regional Administrator.
(2) A facility shall be subject to the
requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this
section if it satisfies the criteria in
paragraph (f)(1) of this section or if the
Regional Administrator makes a
determination pursuant to paragraph (b)
of this section.
(i) For a facility that is in operation on
or before February 18,1993, and is
required to prepare and submit a
response plan based on the criteria in
paragraph (f)(1) of this section, the
owner or operator shall submit the
response plan, along with a completed
version of the response plan cover sheet
contained in appendix G to this part, to
the Regional Administrator on or before
February 18.1993.
(ii) For a newly constructed facility
that commences operation after
February 18,1993, and is required to
prepare and submit a response plan
based on the criteria in paragraph (f)(1)
of this section, the owner or operator
shall submit the response plan, along
with a completed version of the
response plan cover sheet contained in
appendix G to this part, to the Regional
Administrator prior to the start of
operations.
(iii) For a facility required to prepare
and submit a response plan after
February 18,1993, as a result of a
plumed change in design, construction,
operation, or maintenance that renders
the facility subject to the criteria in
paragraph (f)(1) of this section, the
owner or operator shall submit the
response plan, along with a completed
version of the response plan cover sheet
contained in appendix G to this part, to
the Regional Administrator before the
portion of the facility undergoing
change commences operations.
(ivj For a facility required to prepare
and submit a response plan after
February 18,1993, as a result of an
unplanned event or change in facility
characteristics that renders the facility
subject to the criteria in paragraph (f)(1)
of this section, the owner or operator
shall submit the response plan, along
with a completed version of the
response plan cover sheet contained in
appendix G to this part, to the Regional
Administrator within six months of the
unplanned event or change.
(3) In the event the owner or operator
of a facility that is required to prepare
and submit a response plan uses an
alternative formula to one contained in
appendix C to this part to evaluate the
criterion in paragraph (f)(l)(ii)(B) or
(f)(l)(ii)(C) of this section, the owner or
operator shall attach documentation to
the response plan cover sheet contained
in appendix G to this part that
demonstrates the reliability and
analytical soundness of the alternative
formula.
(b)(1) The Regional Administrator
may at any time require the owner or
operator of any non-transportation-
related onshore facility to prepare and
submit a facility response plan under
this section based on the factors in
paragraph (f)(2) of this section. If the
Regional Administrator notifies in
writing the owner or operator of the
requirement to prepare and submit a
response plan under this section, the
owner or operator of the facility shall
submit the response plan to the
Regional Administrator within six
months after such written notification.
(2) The Regional Administrator shall
review plans submitted by such
facilities to determine whether the
facility could cause significant and
substantial harm to the environment by
the discharge of oil.
(c)(1) The Regional Administrator
shall determine whether a facility,
because of its location, could reasonably
be expected to cause significant end
substantial harm to the environment by
discharging into or on the navigable
waters or adjoining shorelines, based on
the factors in paragraph (f)(3) of this
section. If a facility is determined to
have the potential to cause significant
and substantial harm to the
environment, the Regional
Administrator shall notify in writing the
owner or operator of the facility and:
(1) Promptly review the facility
response plan;
(ii) Require amendments to any
response plan that does not meet the
requirements of this section;
Uii) Approve any response plan that
meets the requirements of this section;
and
(iv) Review each response plan
periodically thereafter.
(2) A facility owner or operator who
is notified in writing that the facility's
response plan will require review and
approval by the Regional Administrator
and that such approval will not be
forthcoming by August 18,1993, may
operate the facility without an approved
response plan for up to two years from
the date of plan submission in
compliance with statutory requirements,
provided that:
(i) The facility owner or operator
certifies in writing within 30 days of
such notification to the Regional
Administrator that the owner or
operator 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 or the substantial threat of
such a discharge from the facility; and
(ii) The contracts or agreements cited
in the facility's certification are valid
and enforceable by the parties.
(d)(1) The owner or operator of a
facility determined to have the potential
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 199f j^p>posed Rules 8849
to cause significant and substantial
harm to the environment pursuant to
paragraph (f)(3) of this section shall
revise and resubmit the response plan
for approval within 60 days of each
facility change that materially may
affect the potential for a discharge to
cause significant and substantial harm
to the environment, including:
(1) A change in the facility's
configuration that materially alters the
information included in the response
plan;
(ii) A change in the type of oil
handled, stored, or transferred that
materially alters the required response
resources;
(iii) A change in the oil spill removal
organizations that provide equipment
and personnel to respond to spills
described in paragraph (h)(5) of this
section and/or a material change in their
capabilities;
(iv) A material change in the facility's
spill prevention and response
equipment or emergency response
procedures;
(v) Any other changes that materially
affect the implementation of the
response plan.
(2) Except as provided in paragraph
(d)(1) of this section, amendments to
personnel and telephone number lists
included in the response plan do not
require prior approval by the Regional
Administrator. Facility owners or
operators shall provide a copy of such
changes to the appropriate Regional
Administrator as the revisions occur.
(e) If the owner or operator of a
facility determines pursuant to
paragraph (a)(2) of uiis section that its
facility does not have the potential to
cause substantial barm to the
environment, the owner or operator
shall complete and maintain at the
facility the certification form contained
in appendix C to this part and, in the
event an alternative formula to one
contained in appendix C to this part is
used to evaluate the criterion in
paragraph (f)(l)(ii)(B) or (f)(l)(ii)(C) of
this section, the owner or operator shall
attach documentation to the
certification form that demonstrates the
reliability and analytical soundness of
the alternative formula and shall notify
the Regional Administrator in writing
that an alternative formula was used.
(f) (1) A facility shall be deemed to
have the potential to cause substantial
harm to the environment pursuant to
paragraph (a) of this section, if it meets
any of the following criteria applied in
accordance with the flowchart
contained in appendix C to this part:
(i) The facility transfers oil over water
to or from vessels and has a total storage
capacity greater than or equal to 42,000
gallons; or
(ii) The facility's total oil storage
capacity is greater than or eoual to 1
million gallons, and one of the
following is true:
(A) 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;
(B) The facility is located at a distance
(as calculated using the appropriate
formula in appendix C to this part or an
alternative formula considered
acceptable by the Regional
Administrator) such that a discharge
from the facility could cause injury to
an environmentally sensitive area as
described in appendix D to this part;
(C) The facility is located at a distance
(as calculated using the appropriate
formula in appendix C to this part or an
alternative formula considered
acceptable by the Regional
Administrator) such that a discharge
from the facility would shut down a
public drinking water intake; or
(D) The facility has had a reportable
spill in an amount greater than or equal
to 10,000 gallons within the last 5 years.
(2)(i) To determine whether a facility
could cause substantial harm to the
environment pursuant to paragraph (b)
of this section, the Regional
Administrator may consider the
following:
(A) Type of transfer operation;
(B) Oil storage capacity;
(C) Lack of secondary containment;
(D) Proximity to "environmentally
sensitive areas" defined in Appendix D
to this part and other areas determined
by the Regional Administrator to
possess ecological value;
(£) Proximity to drinking water
intakes;
(F) Spill history; and
(G) Other site-spedfic characteristics
and environmental factors that the
Regional Administrator determines to be
relevant to protecting the environment
from harm by discharges of oil into
navigable waters or adjoining
shorelines.
(ii) Any person who believes a facility
subject to this section may cause
substantial harm to the environment
from a discharge of oil may petition the
Regional Administrator to determine
whether the facility meets the criteria in
paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section. Such
Eetition shall include a discussion of
ow the criteria in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of
this section apply to the facility in
question.
(3) To determine whether a facility
could cause significant and substantial
harm to the environment, the Regional
Administrator may consider the factors
in paragraph (f)(2) of this section as well
as the following:
(1) Proximity to environmental areas
of concern defined in Appendix D to
this part;
(ii) Frequency of past spills;
(iii) Proximity to navigable waters:
(iv) Age of oil storage tanks; and
(v) Other facility-specific and Region-
specific information, including local
impacts on public health.
(g)(1) All facility response plans shall
be consistent with the requirements of
the National Oil and Hazardous
Substance Pollution Contingency Plan
(40 CFR part 300) and applicable Area
Contingency Plans, and snail be
updated periodically. The facility
response plan should be coordinated
with the local emergency response plan
developed by the local emergency
planning committee under section 303
of Title m of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986. Upon request, the owner or
operator should provide a copy of the
facility response plan to the local
emergency planning committee or State
emergency response commission.
(2) The owner or operator shall review
relevant portions of the National Oil and
Hazardous Substance Pollution
Contingency Plan and applicable Area
Contingency Plan annually and revise
the facility response plan to ensure
consistency with these plans.
(h) A response plan snail follow the
format of the model facility-specific
response plan included in appendix G
to this part, unless an equivalent
response plan has been prepared to
meet State or other Federal
requirements. A response plan that does
not follow the specific format in
appendix G to this part shall have an
emergency response action plan as
specified in paragraph (h)(1) to this part
and be supplemented with a cross-
reference section to identify the location
of the elements listed in paragraphs
(h)(2) through (h)(10) of this section. In
order to meet the requirements of this
part, a response plan shall address the
following elements, as reflected in
appendix G to this part:
(1) Emergency Response Action Plan.
The response plan shall include an
emergency response action plan in the
format specified below that is
maintained in the front of the response
plan, or as a separate document
accompanying the response plan, and
that includes the following information:
(i) The identity and telephone number
of an emergency response coordinator
who is the qualified individual having
full authority, including contracting
-------
8850
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
authority, to implement removal
actions;
(ii) The identity of individuals or
organizations to be contacted in the
event of a discharge so that immediate
communications between the
emergency response coordinator and the
appropriate Federal official and the
persons providing response personnel
and equipment can be ensured;
(iii) A description of information to
pass to response personnel in the event
of a reportable spill;
(iv) A description of the facility's
response equipment and its location;
(v) A description of response
personnel capabilities, including the
duties of persons at the facility during
a response action and their response
times and qualifications;
(vi) Plans for evacuation of the facility
and surrounding communities;
(vii) A description of immediate
measures to provide adequate
containment and drainage of spilled oil;
and
(viii) A diagram of the facility.
(2) Facility information. The response
plan shall identify and discuss the
location of the facility, the identity and
tenure of the present owner and
operator, and the identity of an
emergency response coordinator.
(3) Information about emergency
response. The response plan shall
include:
(i) The identity of private personnel
and equipment necessary to remove to
the maximum extent practicable a worst
case discharge and other discharges of
oil described in paragraph (h)(5) of this
section, and to mitigate or prevent a
substantial threat of a worst case
discharge;
(ii) Evidence of contracts or other
approved means for ensuring the
availability of such personnel and
equipment;
(iii) The identity and the telephone
number of individuals or organizations
to be contacted in the event of a
discharge so that immediate
communications between the
emergency response coordinator and the
appropriate Federal official and the
persons providing response personnel
and equipment can be ensured;
(iv) A description of information to
pass to response personnel in the event
of a reportable spill;
(v) A description of response
personnel capabilities, including the
duties of persons at the facility during
a response action and their response
times and qualifications;
(vi) A description of the facility's
response equipment, the location of the
equipment, and equipment testing;
(vii) Plans for evacuation of the
facility and surrounding communities;
(viii) A diagram of evacuation routes;
and
(ix) A description of the duties of the
emergency response coordinator
identified in paragraph (h)(1) of this
section, that include;
(A) Activate internal alarms and
hazard communication systems to notify
all facility personnel;
(B) Notify all response personnel, as
needed;
(C) Identify the character, exact
source, amount, and extent of the
release, as well as the other items
needed for notification;
(D) Notify and provide necessary
information to the appropriate Federal,
State, and local authorities with
designated response roles, including the
National Response Center, State
Emergency Response Commission, and
Local Emergency Planning Committee;
(E) Assess the interaction of the
spilled substance with water and/or
other substances stored at the facility
and notify response personnel at the
scene of that assessment;
(F) Assess the possible hazards to
human health and the environment due
to the release. This assessment must
consider both the direct and indirect
effects of the release (i.e., the effects of
any toxic, irritating, or asphyxiating
gases that may be generated, or the
effects of any hazardous surface water
runoffs from water or chemical agents
used to control fire and heat-induced
explosion);
(G) Assess and implement prompt
removal actions to contain and remove
the substance released;
(H) Coordinate rescue and response
actions as previously arranged with all
response personnel;
(I) Obtain authority to immediately
access company funding to initiate
cleanup activities; and
(}) Direct cleanup activities until
properly relieved of this responsibility;
(x) Guidelines that describe
procedures to identify response
resources to meet the facility response
plan requirements of this section are
provided in appendix F to this part.
(4) Hazard evaluation. The response
plan shall discuss the facility's known
or reasonably identifiable history of
discharges reportable under 40 CFR part
110 for the entire life of the facility and
shall identify areas within the facility
where discharges could occur and what
the potential effects of the discharges
would be on the affected environment.
To assess the range of areas potentially
affected, owners or operators shall,
where appropriate, consider the
distance calculated in paragraph
(f)(l)(ii) of this section to determine
whether a facility is located such that a
discharge could cause substantial harm
to the environment.
(5) Tiered planning scenarios. The
response plan shall include discussion
of specific scenarios for;
(i) A worst case discharge, as
calculated using the appropriate
worksheet in appendix E to this part. In
cases where the Regional Administrator
determines that the worst case discharge
volume calculated by the facility is not
appropriate, the Regional Administrator
may specify the worst case discharge
amount to be used for response
planning at the facility. For complexes,
the worst case planning quantity shall
be the larger of the amounts calculated
for each component of the facility;
(ii) A discharge of 2,100 gallons or
less, provided that this amount is less
than the worst case discharge amount;
and
(iii) A discharge 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 complexes, this
planning quantity shall be the larger of
the amounts calculated for each
component of the facility.
(6) Discharge detection systems. The
response plan shall describe the
procedures and equipment used to
detect discharges.
(7) Plan implementation. The
response plan shall describe;
(i) Response actions to be carried out
by facility personnel or contracted
personnel under the response plan to
ensure the safety of the facility and to
mitigate or prevent discharges described
in paragraph (h)(5) of this section or the
substantial threat of such discharges;
(ii) A description of the equipment to
be used for each scenario;
(iii) Plans to dispose of contaminated
cleanup materials; and
(iv) Measures to provide adequate
containment and drainage of spilled oil.
(8) Self-inspection, training, and
meeting logs. The response plan shall
include:
(i) A checklist and record of
inspection for tanks, secondary
containment, and response equipment;
(ii) A description and record of
training exercises and periodic
unannounced drills to be carried out
under the response plan; and
(iii) Logs o( discharge prevention
meetings.
(9) Diagrams. The response plan shall
include site plan and drainage plan
diagrams.
(10) Security systems. The response
plan shall include a description of
facility security systems.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules 8851
7. Part 112, as proposed to be revised
at 56 FR 54630, is amended by adding
Appendices C through G to read as
follows:
Appendix C to Part 112—Determination
of Substantial Harm
1.0 Introduction
The flowchart provided in Attachment C-
I shows the decision tree by which owners
and operators will decide whether their
facility "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." In addition, the Regional
Administrator (RA) has the discretion to
identify facilities that must prepare and
submit facility-specific response plans to
EPA regardless of the self-determination
results. The owner or operator or a regulated
facility may determine that a facility has the
potential to cause substantial harm to the
environment without having to assess every
criteria in the flowchart.
2.0 Flowchart for the Determination of
Substantia1 Harm
Facilities that meet one or both of the
following two criteria are identified as posing
a potential risk of substantial harm to the
environment in the event of a discharge and
must prepare and submit a facility-specific
response plan to EPA in accordance with
appendix G of this part:
(1) The facility transfers oil over water to
or from vessels and has a total storage
capacity greater than or equal to 42,000
gallons.
(2) The facility's total oil storage capacity
is greater than or equal to one million
gallons, and one 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;
• The facility is located at a distance (as
calculated using the appropriate formula in
Attachment C—III or an alternative formula
considered acceptable by the RA) such that
a discharge from the facility could cause
injury to an environmentally sensitive area,
as defined in appendix D of this part;
• The facility is located at a distance (as
calculated using the appropriate formula in
Attachment C-ffi or an alternative formula
considered accpetable by the RA) such that
a discharge from the facility would shut
down a public drinking water Intake; or,
• The facility has had a reportable spill in
an amount greater than or equal to 10,000
gallons within the last five years.
2.1 Description of Screening Criteria for the
Substantial Harm Flowchart
(1) Transportation-Related Facilities
Greater Than or Equal to 42,000 Gallons
Where Operations Include Over-Water
Transfer of Oil—A transportation-related
facility with a total storage capacity greater
than 42,000 gallons that transfers oil over
water to or from vessels must submit a
response plan to EPA. Daily oil transfer
operations at these types of facilities occur
between barges and vessels and onshore bulk
storage tanks over open water.
(2) Lack of Secondary Containment at
Facilities With a Total Storage Capacity
Greater Than or Equal to One Million
Gallons—Any facility with a total storage
capacity greater than or equal to one million
gallons without secondary containment
sufficiently large to contain the capacity of
the largest tank within each storage tank area
must submit a response plan to EPA. A
secondary containment area that is
"sufficiently large" must contain the
maximum capacity of the largest tank within
a single containment area plus an allowance
for precipitation. Secondary containment
structures, which meet the standard of good
engineering practice for the purposes of this
part, include berms, dikes, retaining walls,
curbing, culverting, gutters, or other drainage
systems.
(3) Proximity to Environmentally Sensitive
Areas at Facilities With a Total Storage
Capacity Greater Than or Equal to One
Million Gallons—A facility with a total
storage capacity greater than or equal to one
million gallons must submit its response plan
if it is located at a distance such that a
discharge from the facility could cause injury
to an environmentally sensitive area, as
defined in appendix D of this part. "Injury"
is defined in § 112.2 of this part. This
definition of "injury" is derived from the
Natural Resource Damage Assessments rule
at43CFRpart 11.
Owners or operators may determine the
distance at which an oil spill could cause
injury to an environmentally sensitive area
using the appropriate formula presented In
Attachment C—III of this appendix or an
alternative formula considered acceptable by
the RA.
(4) Proximity to Public Drinking Water
Intakes at Facilities With a Total Storage
Capacity Greater Than or Equal to One
Million Gallons—A facility with a total
storage capacity greater than or equal to one
million gallons must submit its response plan
if it is located at a distance such that a
discharge from the facility would shut down
a drinking water intake. The distance at
which an oil spill from an SPOC-regulated
facility would shut down a drinking water
intake may also be calculated using the
appropriate formula presented in Attachment
G-III or an alternative formula considered
acceptable by the RA.
(5) Facilities That Have Experienced
Reportable Spills in an Amount Greater Than
or Equal to 10,000 Gallons Within the Past
Five Years and That Have a Total Storxige
Capacity Greater Than or Equal to One
Million Gallons—A facility's spill history
within the past five years shall be considered
in the evaluation for substantial harm. Any
facility with a total storage capacity greater
than or equal to one million gallons that has
experienced a reportable spill in an amount
greater than or equal to 10,000 gallons within
the past five years must submit a response
plan to EPA.
3.0 Certification Form for Facilities That Do
Not Pose Substantial Harm
Facilities that do not meet the substantial
harm criteria listed in Attachment C-I must
complete a certification of substantial harm
determination form and maintain the form as
part of their SPCC Plan. The certification of
substantial harm determination form is
provided in Attachment C—II. The owner or
operator is required to notify the RA in
writing that an alternative formula was used
to determine that the facility does not pose
a threat of substantial harm. The
documentation that demonstrates the
reliability and analytical soundness of the
alternative formula must be maintained at the
facility.
Attachment C-I
BILiINO CODE SSSO 60 P
-------
8852
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday. February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
Flowchart for the Determination of Substantial Harm
BILUNQ COW
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8853
Attachment C-II.—Certification of
Substantial Harm Determination Form
Facility name:
Facility address:
1. Does the facility have a maximum storage
capacity greater than or equal to 42,000
gallons and do the opeiations include
over water transfers of oil to or from
vessels?
Yes No
2. Does the facility have a maximum storage
capacity greater than or equal to one
million (1,000,000) gallons and is the
facility without secondary containment
for each aboveground storage area
sufficiently large to contain the capacity
of the largest aboveground storage tank
within the storage ana?
Yes No
3. Does the facility have a maximum storage
capacity greater than or equal to one
million (1,000,000) gallons and is the
facility located at a distance (as
calculated using the appropriate formula
in Attachment O—III or an alternative
formula1 considered acceptable by the
RA) such that a discharge from the
facility could cause injury to an
environmentally sensitive area as
defined in Appendix D?
Yes No
4. Does the facility have a maximum storage
capacity greater than or equal to one
million (1,000,000) gallons ar.d is the
facility located at a distance (as
calculated using the appropriate formula
in Attachment C—III or an alternative
formula1 considered acceptable by the
RA) such that a discharge from the
facility would shut down a public
drinking water intake?
Yes No
5. Does the facility have a maximum storage
capacity greater than or equal to one
million 11.000.000) gallons and within
the past S years, has the facility
experienced a reportable spill in an
amount greater than or equal to 10,000
gallons?
Yes No
CERTIFICATION
I certify under penalty of law that 1 have
personally examined and am familiar with
the information submitted in this document,
and that based on my inquiry of those
individuals responsible for obtaining this
information, I believe that the submitted
information is true, accurate, and complete.
Signature
Name (please type or print)
Title
Date
¦If an alternative formula is used, documentation
of the reliability and analytical soundness of the
alternative formula must be attached to this form.
Attachment C-III.—Calculation of the
Planning Distance
As part of the substantial harm
determination, the facility owner or operator
must evaluate whether the facility is located
at a distance which could cause injury to an
environmentally sensitive area or disrupt
operations at a drinking water intake. To
quantify that distance, EPA considered oil
transport mechanisms over land and on still
and moving navigable waters. After assessing
oil transport over land, the primary concern
for calculation of a planning distance is the
transport of oil in navigable waters.
Therefore, two formulas have been developed
to determine distances for planning purposes
from the point of discharge at the facility to
the potential site of impact an moving and
still waters, respectively. The formula for oil
transport on moving navigable water is based
on the velocity of the water body and the
time interval for arrival of response
resources. The still water formula accounts
for the spread of discharged oil over the
surface of the water.
EPA's formulas were designed to be simple
to use. However, facilities may calculate
planning distances using more sophisticated
formulas, which take into account broader
scientific or engineering principles, or local
conditions. Such alternative formulas may
result in different planning distances than
EPA's formulas. If an alternative formula is
used to establish the appropriate distance to
sensitive environments or drinking water
intakes and it is determined that the facility
does not pose substantial harm, the owner or
operator is required to notify the RA in
writing. Documentation must be maintained
at the facility to demonstrate the reliability
and analytical soundness of the alternative
formula. Those facilities that meet the
substantial harm criteria and use an
alternative formula to determine the planning
distance must attach the documentation that
demonstrates the reliability and analytical
soundness of the alternative formula to the
response plan cover sheet in appendix G of
this part The owner or operator of a
regulated facility may determine that a
facility has the potential to cause substantial
harm to the environment without having to
perform a planning distance calculation. For
facilities that meet the substantial harm
determination because of inadequate
secondary containment or spill history, as
listed in the flowchart in Attachment C-I,
calculation of the planning distance is
unnecessary. For facilities that do not meet
the substantial harm criteria for secondary
containment and spill history listed in the
flowchart, calculation of a planning distance
for proximity to sensitive environments and
drinking water intakes is required, unless it
is clear that these areas would be impacted
without performing the calculation.
Alternative formulas are subject to review
by the RA. However, such formulas shall be
deemed adequate unless the RA notifies the
owner or operator in writing of specific
technical objections.
The planning distance formula for
transport on moving waterways contains
three variables: The velocity of the navigable
water (v), the response time interval (t) and
a conversion factor (c). The velocity, v, is
determined by using the Chezy-Manning
equation, which models the flow of water in
open channels. The Chezy-Manning equation
contains three variables which must be
determined by facility owners and operators.
Manning's Roughness Coefficient, n, can be
determined from Table 1. The hydraulic
radius, r, can be evaluated using the average
mid-channel depth from charts provided by
the sources listed in Table 2. The average
slope of the river, s, can be determined using
topographic maps that can be ordered from
the U.S. Geological Survey, as listed in Table
2. For further information on fluid flow, refer
to Open Channel Hydraulics by V.T. Chow,
published by McGraw Hill in 19SB.
Table 3 contains specified time intervals
for arrival of response resources at the scene
of a discharge. The response times listed in
Table 3 are consistent with the U.S. Coast
Guard's (USCG) proposed rulemaking for
response plans. Response resources should
be propositioned to arrive at the discharge
site within 12 hours of the discovery of an
oil discharge in Higher Volume Port Areas
and Great Lakes; and 24 hours in all other
river, inland and nearshore areas as defined
in this attachment. The specified time
intervals have been adjusted upward to
include a three hour time period for
deployment of booms and other response
equipment. The designated Higher Volume
Port Areas listed in the definitions section
are example areas covered in the proposed
USCG tank vessel response plan regulation.
The RA may identify additional areas as
appropriate.
Oil Transport on Moving Navigable Waters
The facility owner or operator should use
the following formula to calculate the
planning distance:
d=vxtxc; where
d: the distance downstream from a facility
within which an environmentally
sensitive area could be injured or
drinking water intake would be shut
down in the event of an oil discharge (in
miles);
v: the velocity of the river/navigable water of
concern (in ft/sec) as determined by
Chezy-Manning's equation (see below
and Tables 1 and 2);
t: the time interval specified in Table 3 based
upon the type of water body and location
(in hours); and
c: constant conversion factor 0.68 sec*mile/
hr*ft (3600 sec/hr»5280 ft/mile).
Chezy-Manning's equation is used to
determine velocity:
vslj/nw^xs"1
where:
v=the velocity of the river of concern (in ft/
sec);
nsManning's Roughness Coefficient from
Table 1
r«the hydraulic radius; the hydraulic radius
can be approximated for parabolic
channels by multiplying the average
mid-channel depth of the river (in feet)
by .667 (sources for obtaining the mid-
channel depth are listed in Table 2)
-------
8854
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
s=the average slope of the river (unities*)
obtained from topographic maps
supplied by the U.S. Geological Survey
listed in Table 2
Table 1.—Manning's Roughness
Coefficient for Natural Streams
Stream description
Roughness co-
efficient (n)
Minor streams (Top Width <100 ft.)
Clean:
Straight
0.03
Winding
0.04
Sluggish (Weedy, deep pools):
No trees or brush
0.06
Trees and/or brush
0.10
Major streams (Top Width >100 ft.)
Regular Section (no bouUen/
brush)
0.035
Irregular Section (brush)
0.05
Note: Coefficients are presented tor high flow rales
al or near flood stage.
Table 2.—Sources of r and s for
the Chezy-Manning Equation
All of the charts and related publications (or
navigational waters may be ordered from:
Distribution Branch
(N/CG33)
National Ocean Service
Riverdale, Maryland 20737-1199
Phone: (301) 436-6990
There will be a charge for materials or-
dered and a VISA or Mastercard will
be accepted.
The mid-channel depth to be used In the cal-
culation ol the hydraulic radius (r) can be
obtained directly from the following
sources:
Charts of Canadian Coastal and Great
Lakes Waters:
Canadian Hydrographic Service
Department of Fisheries and Oceans In-
stitute
P.O. Box 8060
1675 Russell Road
Ottawa, Ontario KIG 3H6
Canada
Phone: (613) 998-4931
Charts and Maps of Lower Mississippi
River
(Gulf of Mexico to Ohio River and St.
Francis, White, Big Sunflower,
Atehafalaya, and other rivers):
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Vicksburg District
P.O. Box 60
Vicksburg, Mississippi 39180
Phone: (601) 634-5000
Charts of Upper Mississippi River and Il-
linois Waterway to Lake Michigan:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Rock Island District
P.O. Box 2004
Rock Island, Illinois 61204
Phone: (309) 780-6412
Charts of Missouri River.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Omaha District
Table 2.—Sources of r and s for
the Chezy-Manning Equation—-Con-
tinued
6014 U.S. Post Office and Courthouse
Omaha, Nebraska 68102
Phone: (402) 221-3900
Charts of Ohio River
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Ohio River Division
P.O. Box 1159
Cincinnati, Ohio 45201
Phone: (513) 684-3002
Charts of Tennessee Valley Authority
Reservoirs, Tennessee River and Trib-
utaries:
Tennessee Valley Authority
Maps end Engineering Section
416 Union Avenue
Knoxville, Tennessee 37902
Phone: (615) 632-2921
Charts of Black Warrior River, Alabama
River, Tombigbee River,
Apalachicola River and Pea/1 River
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Mobile District
P.O. Box 2288
Mobile. Alabama 3662&-0001
Phone:(205)690-2511
The average slope of the river (s) may be ob-
tained from topographic maps:
U.S. Geological Survey
Map Distribution
Federal Center
Bldg. 41
Box 25286
Denver, Colorado 80225
Additional information can be obtained
from the following sources:
(1) The State Department of Naval Re-
sources (DNR) or the State Aids to
Navigation office;
(2) A knowledgeable local marina opera-
tor; or
(3) A knowledgeable local water author-
ity (i.e., State water commission)
The average slope of the river(s) can
be determined from the topographic
maps using the following steps:
• Locate the facility on the map.
• Find the Normal Pool ElevaUon at
the point of release from the facility into
the water (A).
• Find the Normal Pool Elevation of
the drinking water intake or
environmentally sensitive area located
downstream (B) (Note: The owner or
operator should use a minimum of 20
miles downstream as a cutoff to obtain
the average slope if the location of a
specific drinking water intake or
environmentally sensitive area is
unknown).
• If the Normal Pool Elevation is not
available, the elevation contours can be
used to find the slope. Determine
elevation of the water at the point of
release from the facility (A). Determine
the elevation of the water at the
appropriate distance downstream (B).
The formula presented below can be
used to calculate the slope.
• Determine the distance (in miles)
between the facility and the drinking
water intake or environmentally
sensitive area (C).
• Use the following formula to find
the slope, which will be a unitless
value:
Average Slope=l(A-B) (ft)/C (miles)]x
[1 mile/5280 feet]
If it is not feasible to determine the
slope and mid-channel depth as
required by the Chezy-Manning
equation, the river velocity can be
approximated on-site. A specific length,
such as 100 feet, can be marked off
along the shoreline. A float can be
dropped into the stream above the mark,
and the time required for the float to
travel the distance can be used to
determine the velocity in feet per
second. However, this method will not
yield an average velocity for the length
of the stream, but a velocity only for the
specific location of measurement. In
addition, the flow rate will vary
depending on weather conditions such
as wind and rainfall. It is recommended
that owners and operators repeat the
measurement under a variety of
conditions to obtain the most accurate
estimate of the surface water velocity.
The planning distance calculations for
moving and still navigable waters are
based on discharges of persistent oils
released in worst case discharge
volumes. Persistent oils are of concern
because they can remain in the water for
significant periods of time and can
potentially exist in large quantities
downstream. Owners and operators of
facilities that store persistent as well as
non-persistent oils may use an
alternative formula provided it is
acceptable to the RA. The volume of oil
discharged is not included as part of the
planning distance calculation for
moving navigable waters. Facility
owners and operators that will complete
this part of the substantial harm
determination are those with facility
capacities greater than or equal to one
million gallons. It is assumed that these
facilities are capable of having an oil
discharge of sufficient quantity to cause
injury to a sensitive environment or
shut down a drinking water intake.
While owners and operators of transfer
facilities that store greater than or equal
to 42,000 gallons are not required to use
a planning distance formula for
purposes of the substantial harm
determination, they should use a
planning distance calculation in the
development of facility-specific
response plans.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8855
Table 3.—Specified Time Interval
Higher volume port araas and Great Lakes
Olhar areas
Shoreline and Inland.
Rivers
12 hour arrival + 3 hour deployment - 15 hour* ,
12 hours + 3 hour deployment • 15 hours
24 hours ~ 3 hour deployment« 27 hours.
24 hours ~ 3 hour deployment « 27 hours.
Definitions
Great Lakes: includes the Great Lakes
(Superior, Michigan, Huron, Erie and
Ontario) plus their connecting and tributary
waters including the Calumet River as far as
Thomas ]. O'Brien Lock and Controlling
Works (between mile 326 and 327), the
Chicago River as far as the east side of the
Ashland Avenue Bridge (between mile 321
and 322), and the Saint Lawrence River as far
east as the lower exit of the Saint Lambert
Lock.
Higher Volume Port Area: includes
(1) Boston, MA
(2) New York, NY
(3) Delware Bay and River, PA
(4) St. Croix, VI
(5) Pascagoula, MS
(6) Mississippi River from Southwest Pass,
LA to Baton Rouge, LA
(7) Louisiana Offshore Oil Port (LOOP)
(8) Lake Charles, LA
(9) Sabine-Neches River, TX
(10) Galveston Bay and Houston Ship
Channel, TX
(11) Corpus Christi. TX
(12) Los Angeles/Long Beach Harbor, CA
(13) San Francisco Bay and Sacramento
River, CA
(14) Straits of )uan de Fuca and Puget Sound,
WA
(15) Prince William Sound, AK
(16) others as specified by RA
Inland Area: the area shoreward of the
boundary lines defined in 46 CFR Part 7,
except in the Gulf of Mexico. In the Gulf of
Mexico, inland areas include the area
shoreward of the lines of demarcation
(COLREG lines as defined in 33 CFR sections
80.740-80.850). The inland area does not
include the Great Lakes or rivers and canals.
River and Canals: bodies of water confined
within the inland area that have a controlled
navigable depth of 12 feet or less, including
the lntracoastal Waterway.
Example of the Planning Distance
Calculation
The following example provides a sample
calculation using the planning distance
formula for a facility discharging into the
Monongahela River:
(1) Solve for v by evaluating n, r, and s for
the Chezy-Manning equation:
ns0.035 From Table 1 for a regular section
of a major stream with a top width
greater than 100 feet. The top width of
the river can be found from the
topographic map.
8=1.3 x 10~4 where A = 727 feet. B = 710 feet,
and C s 25 miles.
Solving:
1(727 ft-710 ft)/25 milesMl mile/5280
feetl=1.3xl0~4
r=13.33 feet. The average mid-channel depth
is found by averaging the mid-channel
depth for each mile along the length of
the river between the facility and the
drinking water intake or the
environmentally sensitive area (or 20
miles downstream if applicable). This
value is multiplied by 0.667 to obtain the
hydraulic radius. The mid-channel depth
is found on the chart of the Monongahela
River.
Solving:
r=0.667x20 feet=13.33 feet
Solve for v using
VBl.S/nxr^xs"2:
v*|1.5/0.035)x(13.33)Mx(1.3xl0~4)",
v-2.73 feet/second
(2) Find t from Table 3. For the
Monongahela River, the resource response
time is 27 hours.
(3) Solve for planning distance, d:
d~vxtxc
d«(2.73 ft/sec)x(27 hours)x(0.68 sec«mile/
hroft)
d=50 miles
Therefore, 50 miles downstream is the
appropriate planning distance for this
facility.
OU Transport on Still Water
For bodies of water including lakes or
ponds which do not have a measurable
velocity, the spreading of the oil over the
surface must be considered. Owners and
operators of facilities located next to still
water bodies may use an alternative means of
calculating the planning distance if it is
acceptable to the RA. If an alternative
formula is used, documentation of the
reliability and analytical soundness of the
alternative calculation must be attached to
the response plan cover sheet. To assist those
facilities which could potentially discharge
into a still body of water, the following
analysis was performed to provide an
example of the type of formula that may be
used to calculate the planning distance. For
this example, a worst case discharge of
2,000,000 gallons is used.
The surface area covered by a spill on still
water. Ai, can be determined by the
following formula1, where V is the volume of
the spill in gallons:
A,=105VJ"
Vs2.000.000 gallonsxO.13368 ft1/
gallon=267,360 ft1
1 Huang. J.C. and Monastero, F.C.. 1982. Review
of the Statfrof-tbe-the Art of Oil Pollution Models.
Final report submitted to the American Petroleum
Institute by Raytheon Ocean Systems. Co.. East
Providence. Rhode Island.
Ai*105x(267,360)V4
Ai«1.18x10' ft2
The spreading formula is based on the
theoretical condition that the oil will spread
uniformly in all directions forming a circle.
In reality, the outfall of the discharge will
direct the oil to the surface of the water
where it intersects the shoreline. Although
the oil will not spread uniformly in all
directions, it is assumed that the discharge
will spread from the shoreline into a semi-
circle (this assumption does not account for
winds or wave action).
The area of a circlesicr3
To account for the assumption that oil will
spread in a semi-circular shape, the area of
a circle is divided by 2 and is designated as
Aj.
AJo(itrI)/2
Solving for the radius, r, using the
relationship Ai=Aj:
1.18x10®=(iorJ)/2
.-. r=27,404 ft
27,404 ft~5,270 ft/mile=5.2 miles
Assuming a 20 knot wind under storm
conditions:
1 knotei.is miles/hour
20 knotsxl.15 miles/hour/knot=23 m/hr
Assuming that the oil slick moves at 3%
of the wind's speed *:
23 miles/hourx0.03~.69 miles/hour
To estimate the distance that the oil will
travel, the time required for response
resources to arrive at different geographic
locations according to Table 3 is used:
For Higher Volume Port Areas and Great
Lakes: 15 hrsx0.69 m/hr=10.4 miles
For other areas: 27 hrsx0.69 m/hr=lB.6 miles
The total distance that the oil will travel from
the point of release:
Higher Volume Port Areas and Great Lakes:
10.4+5.2 miles or approximately 16
miles
Other areas: 18.6+5.2 miles or
approximately 24 miles
Oil Transport Over Land
Facility owners or operators must evaluate
the potential for oil to be transported over
land to waters of the United States. The
owner or operator should evaluate the
likelihood that portions of a worst case
discharge would reach navigable waters via
open channel flow or from sheet flow across
the land, or be prevented from reaching
navigable waters when trapped in natural or
man-made depressions.
As discharged on travels over land, it may
enter a storm drain or open concrete channel
intended for drainage. An evaluation of the
flow of oil in concrete pipes and channels
' Oil Prevention a Control. National Spill Control
School. Corpus Christi State University. Thirteenth
Edition. May 1990.
-------
8856
Federal Register / Vol. 58. No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
reveals that the travel time through the length
of the drain is virtually instantaneous.3 For
this reason, it is assumed that once oil
reaches such an inlet, it will flow into the
navigable water. During a storm event, it is
highly probable that the oil will either flow
into the drainage structures or follow the
natural contours of the land and flow into the
navigable water. Expected minimum and
maximum velocities are provided as
examples of open channel and pipe flow. The
ranges listed below reflect minimum and
maximum velocities used as design criteria.
It is shown that the time required for oil to
travel through a storm drain or open channel
to navigable water is negligible and can be
considered instantaneous. The velocities are:
For open channels:
maximum velocity*25 feet per second
minimum velocity=3 feet per second
For storm drains:
maximum velocity=25 feet per second
minimum velocity=2 feet per second
Assuming a length of mile from the
point of discharge through a open concrete
channel or concrete storm drain to a
navigable water, the travel times (distance/
velocity) are:
'The design velocities were obtained from
Howard County, Maryland Department of Public
Work»' Storm Drainage Design Manual.
1.8 minutes at a velocity of 25 feet per
second
14.7 minutes at a velocity of 3 feet per
second
22.0 minutes at a velocity of 2 feet per
second
The distances that should be considered to
determine the planning distance are
illustrated in Figure 1. The relevant distances
can be described as follows:
DlsDistance from the nearest opportunity for
release, Xi. to storm drain or open
channel leading to navigable water
D2=Distance through storm drain or open
channel to navigable water
D3sDistance downstream from outfall within
which an environmentally sensitive area
could be injured or a drinking water
intake would be shut down as
determined by the planning distance
formula
D4<=Distance from the nearest opportunity for
release, Xj, to an environmentally
sensitive area not associated with
navigable water
Facility owners and operators whose
nearest opportunity for discharge is located
within vs mile of a navigable water should
complete the planning distance calculation
or an alternative formula acceptable to the
RA. Facilities that are located at a distance
greater than 'A mile from a navigable water
should also calculate a planning distance if
they are in close proximity to storm drains
or environmentally sensitive areas.
Storm drains or concrete drainage channels
that are located in close proximity to the
facility provide a direct pathway to navigable
waters. Figure 1 depicts the configuration of
a facility and denotes the storm drain as Dl.
If D1 is less than or equal to mile, a
discharge from the facility could pose
substantial hann since the travel time
through the storm drain to the navigable
water (D2) is instantaneous. Even if the
facility is located at a distance greater than
Vi mile from the navigable water, the stonn
drain provides direct access to the water,
regardless of the length of the drainage pipe.
In this case, the owner or operator should
calculate a planning distance.
A facility's proximity to an
environmentally sensitive area, as depicted
in D4 of Figure 1 should also be considered,
regardless of the distance from the facility to
navigable waters. Factors to be considered in
assessing oil transport over land to sensitive
environments and storm drains should
include the topography of the surrounding
area, drainage patterns, man-made barriers
(excluding secondary containment
structures), and soil distribution and
porosity.
billing code saee so p
-------
- Figure 1 -
Top View
I
I
<
o-
cn
Z
o
GO
©
B-
9
OB
e-
5*
MUJMO COM WHK
«»
Not to scale
CO
CO
i
a.
E
9
0»
OB
CM
N1
-------
8858 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
Appendix D to Part 112.—
Environmentally Sensitive Areas
Proximity to environmentally sensitive
areas has been identified as a factor in the
substantial harm evaluation. To assist owners
and operators in identifying these areas,
environmentally sensitive areas may include
a variety of areas, such as: Wetlands,
National and State parks, critical habitats for
endangered/threatened species, wilderness
and natural areas, marine sanctuaries,
conservation areas, preserves, wildlife areas,
scenic and wild rivers, seashore and
lakeshore recreational areas, and critical
biological resource areas.
Other environmental areas that may be
considered by the Regional Administrator
(RA) to determine whether a facility poses
significant and substantial harm to the
environment include: Federal and State lands
that are research natural areas, heritage
program areas, land trust areas, and historical
and archeological sites and parks. These
areas may also include unique habitats, such
as: aquaculture sites, bird nesting areas,
designated migratory routes, and designated
seasonal habitats. The RA may determine, on
a case-by-case basis, that additional areas that
possess ecological significance are
considered to be environmentally sensitive
for the purposes of this regulation.
Attachment C—III of appendix C of this part
provides a method for owners and operators
to determine if the facility is located at a
distance such that a discharge from the
facility could cause injury to an
environmentally sensitive area. The distance
calculation is based on oil transport on fast
moving and still waters and over land.
"Injury" is defined in $ 112.2 of this part.
This definition of "injury" is derived from
the Natural Resource Damage Assessments
rule at 43 CFR part 11.
The attachments to this appendix provide
environmental information to facility owners
and operators for the development of
response plans. The attachments also provide
information regarding the boundaries of
environmentally sensitive areas located near
the facility and prioritize vulnerable areas for
protection in the event of a discharge.
Attachment D-I provides a list of responsible
Federal agencies for specific environmental
resources. Critical habitats for designated
endangered/threatened species have been
designated as environmentally sensitive
areas. Further information to assist owners
and operators to delineate boundaries on
critical habitats for endangered/threatened
species identified by the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) is provided in
Attachment D-II. National Marine
Sanctuaries (NMS) and National Estuarine
Research Reserves (NERR) are listed in
Attachment D-lll. The sanctuaries and
reserves are protected by various Federal
regulations, in order to prioritize and allocate
sufficient resources for oil containment and
recovery in the event of a discharge,
Attachments D-IV and D-V present a
comparison of the vulnerability of certain
aquatic ecosystems to oil discharges.
Attachment D-IV presents a list of aquatic
habitats, their importance, and vulnerability
to oil discharges. Attachment D-V ranks
several aquatic habitats on their relative
vulnerability to oil. This prioritized list will
help owners and operators to direct their
initial spill response to the most critical
areas.
Areas considered as environmentally
sensitive will change as the various Federal
and State agencies responsible for
designating the areas periodically update
their lists. Owners and operators are
expected to ensure that facility response
plans reflect the listing of sensitive
environments published to a point in time 6
months prior to plan submission. For
example, plans submitted to meet the
February 18,1B93, deadline would only need
to consider sensitive environments
designated by responsible agencies in
Attachment D-I as of August IB, 1992. A 6-
month cutoff point for considering
environmentally sensitive areas would also
apply in situations where plans are
periodically updated or resubmitted for
approval of a material change.
Attachment D-I.—Responsible Federal
Agencies for Specific Environmental
Resources
For more information on the following
areas, owners and operators should contact
the responsible agency listed below. These
agencies will provide assistance, including
maps, for the areas under their jurisdiction.
Areas
Responsible
tederal agency
Wetlands, as defined in 40 CFR
EPA'
230.3.
Critical haMat tor designated or
NOAA/FWS
proposed endangeredffiveet-
anari imHm
HaMat used by designated or pro-
NOAA/FWS
posed endengeredrthreetened
spades or marine mammals de-
nned as depleted.
Marine sanctuaries
NOAA
National partis
DOI/NPS
Federal wtldemeea areas
USDA
Coast Zone Management Act des-
NOAA
ignated areas.
National estuary program
NOAA
Near coastal waters program
EPA1
VMS.
Clean lakes program critical areas
EPA'
National monuments
DOT
National aeashore recreational
DOI/NPS
National lakeshore recreational
DOI
SIMS.
National preserves
DOI
National wildlife refuges
NOAA/FWS
Coastal Darner resource system
FWS
(units, undeveloped, partially de-
veloped).
National river reach designated as
EPA'
recreational.
Federal or stale dealgneted scenic
DOI
or wild rtver.
National conservation areas
DOI/BLM
Hatcheries
FWS
Weterlowl menegement areas
FWS
'Where EPA Is designated as the responsible
agency, the Information will be provided by the
appropriate Regional office.
NOTE: Please contact Slate or local agendas tor
Information on resources they manage.
Acronyms
BLM—Bureau of Land Management
DOI—Department of Interior
EPA—Environmental Protection Agency
FWS—Fish and Wildlife Service
NOAA—National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
NPS—National Park Service
USDA—United States Department of
Agriculture
Attachment D-II.—Critical Habitats and
Endangered/Threatened Species
1. Designated Critical Habitat for National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Species
The following locations have been
designated as critical habitats for NMFS
species. These habitats are considered
environmentally sensitive areas and are
preserved by the government. Habitat
boundaries for the NMFS species listed
below are identified in the 50 CFR parts 226
and 227. This list is not all-inclusive. Facility
owners and operators should contact the
appropriate NMFS region listed in Section 3
of this attachment for further information.
NMFSspedes
Location
Hawaiian monk seal
NW Hawaiian Islands.
Laatheitieck eee turtle ....
Sandy Pt„ St. Croix.
USVI.
35 SteDer sea lion rook-
Alaska/N. Pacific Coast.
ery sites.
Winter-run Chinook salm-
Sacramento River, CA.
on.
2. Seasonal Critical Habitats
Primary seasonal habitat areas for
endangered species as identified in recovery
plans and other technical documents are
listed below. Facility owners and operators
should contact the appropriate NMFS region
listed in Section 3 of this attachment for
further information.
Northern Right Whale (Final Recovery Plan,
December 1991)
Florida—Georgia coast from 28°N to 32°N
during the months of December through
March. Calving and nursery area.
Cape Cod—Massachusetts Bay during the
months of March-September. Primary
feeding areas.
Great South Channel on the western edge
of Georges Bank and Jeffrey's Ledge during
the months of March-September. Primary
feeding area.
Humpback Whale—East Coast Population
(Final Recovery Plan, November 1991)
Gulf of Maine, Great South Channel.
Stellwagen Bank, and Jeffrey's Ledge during
the period from mid-April through mid-
November. Primary feeding area.
Silver Bank and Navidad Bank off the coast
of Puerto Rico, coastal areas off the northwest
coast of Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin
Islands from mid-December through early
April. Calving and nursery area.
Humpback Whale—West Coast Population
(Final Recovery Plan, November 1991)
Hawaiian Islands (Central North Pacific
stock) and Guam (Western North Pacific
stock) from December-April. Calving and
nursery area.
Central and western Gulf of Alaska,
including Prince William Sound. Shelikof
Straight. Barren Islands and the southern
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8859
coastline of the Alaska peninsula during the
months of May-November. Primary feeding
area.
Inside Passage and coastal waters of the
southeast Alaska panhandle from Yakutat
Bay south to Queen Charlotte Sound during
the months May-November. This area
includes Glacier Bay. Ioy Straight, Stephens
Passage/Frederick Sound. Seymour Canal,
Sitka Sound, Cape Fairweather, Lynn Canal,
Sumner Straight, Dixon Entrance, the west
coast of Prince Wales Islands, and the
Fairweather grounds which is an offshore
bank. Primary feeding area.
Shortnose Sturgeon (NOAA Technical Report
NMFS 14 and FAO Fisheries Synopais No.
140]
The following east coast rivers and bays
should be included: Kennebec River,
Andrescoggin River, Montsweag Bay,
Merrimack River, Connecticut River, Hudson
River. Delaware River, Wacoamaw River
(including Winyah Bay), Lake Marion-
Wateree River, lower Savannah River,
Altamaha River, Ocumulgee River, and St.
Johns River.
Gray Whale (S Year Status Review)
Northern Bering and southern Chukchi
Seas. Primary feeding areas.
Unlike other whale species, the gray whale
is particularly vulnerable during its
migration period because it migrates very
close to shore. In areas such as Monterey and
Point Conception it migrates within two
miles of shore. The entire west coast from
Alaska to the Mexican border should be
listed during the migration periods.
Southbound migration is during the months
of October-December, and northbound
migration is from mid-February to April.
Sacramento River Winter-nin Chinook
Salman should be revised to reflect the
revised critical habitat proposal, 57 FR
3662&-36632, August 14,1992.
(1) Sacramento River from Keswick Dam
(River Mile 302) to Chipps Island (River Mile
Oj at the westward margin of Sacramento-San
joaquin Deita;
(2) all waters from Chipps Island westward
to Carquinez Bridge, including Honker Bay,
Grizzly Bay, Suisan Bay, and Carquinez
Straight;
(3) all waters of San Pablo bay from San
Pablo Bay to the Golden Gate bridge.
3. NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service
Regional Offices
NMFS Northeast Region, Richard B. Roe,
Director, One Blackburn Drive. Gloucester,
MA 01930, Tel: (508) 281-9250
NMFS Southeast Region. Andrew Kemmerer,
Director. 9450 Koger Blvd., St. Petersburg.
FL 33702. Tel: (813) 893-3141
NMFS Northwest Region, Rolland Schmitten.
Director. 7600 Sand Point Way NE. Seattle.
WA 98115-0070, Tel: (206) 526-6150
NMFS Southwest Region, Gary Matlock,
Acting Director, 501 West Ocean Blvd.,
Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213,
Tel: (310) 980-1001
NMFS Alaska Region. Steven Pennoyer,
Director, Post Office Box 21668, Juneau,
AK 99802, Tel: (907) 586-7221.
Attachment D-III.—Marine Sanctuary and
Estuarine Reserves
The following sanctuaries and reserves are
protected by Federal regulations:
Division, 1825 Connecticut Avenue, NW.,
room 714, Washington, DC 20235.
Attachment D-IV.—Vulnerability of Aquatic
Ecosystems
National ma-
rine sanc-
tuaries
(NMS)
Location
Regulation
Monitor
North Caro-
15 CFR part 924.
NMS.
lina.
Key Largo
Florida
15 CFR part 929.
NMS.
Channel Is-
California ....
15 CFR part 935.
lands
NMS.
Point Reyes/
California ....
15 CFR part 936.
FaraDon
Island
NMS.
Looe Key
Florida . ...
15 CFR part 937.
NMS.
Gray's Reef
Georgia
15 CFR part 938.
NMS.
Fagatele
American
15 CFR part 941.
Bay NMS.
Samoa.
Cordell Bank
California ....
15 CFR part 942.
NMS.
Florida Keys
Florida
pending.'
NMS.
Flower Gar-
Texas
15 CFR pan 943.
den Banks
NMS.
National estuarine re-
search reserve (NERR)
Area ol concern
Wels NERR
Rachel Carson Refuge,
ME.
Great Bay NERR
Durham, NH.
Waquott Bay NERR ...
Massachusetts.
Nanagansett Bay NERR
Rhode Island.
Hudson River NERR
New York.
Old Woman Creek NERR
Huron, OH.
Chesapeake Bay NERR,
Annapolis, MD.
MD.
Chesapeake Bay NERR,
Gloucester Pt„ VA.
VA.
North Carolina NERR
WHmlngton, NC.
Sapeio Island NERR ...
Georgia.
Jobos Bay NERR
Guayama, PR.
Apalachicola River NERR
Florida.
Rookery Bay NERR
Naples. FL
Weeks Bay NERR
Falrhope. AL.
Tijuana River NERR ...
Imperial Beach. CA.
Elkhom Slough NERR ....
WatsonvWe. CA.
South Slough NERR
Charleston, OR.
Padilla Bay NERR . ..
Mt. Vernon. WA.
Waimanu Valley NERR ..
Oahu, HI.
information on these sanctuaries and reserves can
be found In the regulations:
—National Marine Sanctuary Program (15 CFR
part 922)
—National Estuartne Research Reserve Pro-
gram (15 CFR part 921)
1 Currently designated a National Marine Sanctuary
by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management. Sanctuaries and Reserves Division.
Publication in Federal Register is pending.
For additional information on area
boundaries for all sites, and proposed
Sanctuaries and Estuarine Reserves contact:
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management, Sanctuaries and Reserves
Habitat
Importance
Vulnerability
to oil dis-
charges
Interttdal shore:
Sandy Beach
Moderate.
Rocky Shore
High.
Tidal Flat
Bird nesting and
High.
feeding.
lands:
Marshes
Breeding for
Low-high.
nursery
grounds for fish
and wildlife.
erosion control,
and nutrient
trap.
Mangroves ..
High.
Subtldal systems:
Seagrass
Fish feeding and
High.
nursery: sedi-
ment contain-
ment and sta-
bilization.
Coral Reef...
High.
Soft Bottom .
High.
Moderate.
Fisheries:
Offshore
Commercial fish-
Low (except
eries.
spawning)
Nearshore ...
Moderate-
High.
Coral Reef...
High.
Freshwater.
Fast Flowing
Fisheries
Moderate
Large River .
Fisheries
Moderate
Ponds
Aquaculture
High.
Lakes
Fisheries
Low.
High.
Tundra/Taiga
SOURCE: United States Department of the Interior.
Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands
Research Center.
Attachment D-V,—Vulnerability Scale of
Aquatic Habitats Impacted by Oil Spills
This attachment ranks aquatic habitats by
their relative degree of vulnerability to oil
spills. The most vulnerable habitats are those
with the lowest number corresponding to the
order of importance. Facility owners and
operators should use the scale to direct initial
recovery efforts to the most critical areas.
Order of Im-
portance
i ...
' 1 ...
i 2 ...
i
| 3 ...
! 3-4
! 4 ...
! 5 ...
!
i
Habitat
Subttdal soft bottoms, seagrass com-
munities and freshwater systems
which once impacted may incur
long-term damage.
Sheltered marshes and mangrove
coasts: difficult to dean.
Sheltered estuarine tidal flats: natural
cleansing may take years.
Sheltered rocky coasts: oil may not
be washed off for months: residual
toxicity low but may alter habitat
and slow recovery process.
Coral Reefs.
Gravel beaches: oil penetrates up to
60 centimeters and peisists as a
mousse for long penods.
Mixed sand and gravel beaches: pen-
etration of oil and repM burial; oil
may persist tor year; mechanical
cleanup may cause significant ero-
sion
-------
8860
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
Older of Im-
portance
Habitat
6
Exposed, compacted tidal flat; oil
penetrates deeply.
Medlum-ooarse grained sand beach-
es; oil penetration Ukety.
Flat, tine-grained sand beeches: com-
paction prohibits oil penetration.
Eroding wave-cut platforms; good
wave action.
Exposed or cUtted reck headlands;
good wave action.
7
8
9
10
Source: United States Department of the interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland*
Research Center.
Appendix E to Part 112—Determiantion ofa
Wont Case Discharge
Instructions
Owners and operators are required to
complete this worksheet if it is determined
(from appendix C of this part) that the facility
could cause substantial harm to the
environment by self-selection or RA
determination. The calculation of a worst
case discharge is use for emergency planning
purposes, and is required in § 112.20 for
facility owners and operators who must
prepare a response plan. When planning for
the amount of resources and equipment
necessary to respond to the worst case
discharge planning volume, adverse weather
conditions should be taken into
consideration. Owners and operators would
be required to determine the facility's wont
case discharge from either part A for onshore
storage facilities, or part B for onshore
production facilities. The worksheet
integrates a facility's use of secondary
containment and its proximity to navigable
waters.
For onshore storage facilities and
production facilities, permanently
manifolded tanks are defined as tanks that
are designed, installed, and/or operated in
such a manner that the multiple tanks
function as one storage unit. In a worst case
discharge scenario, a single failure could
cause the release of the contents of more than
one tank. The owner or operator must
provide evidence in the response plan that
tanks with common piping or piping systems
are not operated as one unit. If such evidence
is provided and is acceptable to the RA, the
worst case discharge volume would be based
on the capacity of the largest tank within a
common secondary containment ana or the
largest tank within a single secondary
containment area, whichever is greater.
For permanently manifolded tanks that
function as one storage unit, the worst case
discharge would be based on the combined
storage capacity of all manifolded tanks or
the capacity of the largest single tank within
a secondary containment area, whichever is
greater. For purposes of this determination,
permanently manifolded tanks that are
separated by internal divisions for each tank
are considered to be single tanks and
individual manifolded tank volumes are not
combined.
For production facilities, the presence of
exploratory wells, production wells, and
storage must be considered in the
calculation. Part B takes these additional
factors into consideration and provides steps
for their inclusion in the total worst case
volume. Onshore oil production facilities
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. Although a potential worst
case volume is calculated within each section
of the worksheet, the final worst case amount
is dependent on the risk parameter that
results in the greatest volume.
Marine transportation-related transfer
facilities that contain fixed aboveground
onshore structures used for bulk oil storage
are jointly regulated by EPA and the U.S.
Coast Guard (USCG), and are termed
"complexes." Because the USCG also
requires response plans from transportation-
related facilities to address a worst case
discharge of oil, a separate calculation for the
worst case discharge volume for USCG-
related facilities is included in the interim
final rule which amends 33 CFR part 154 (SB
FR 7330; February S, 1993). All "complexes"
must compare both calculations for worst
case discharge derived by EPA and USCG
and plan for whichever volume is greater.
Part A. Worst Case Discharge Calculation for
Onshore Storage Facilities1
Part A of this worksheet is to be completed
by owners or operators of SPCC-regulated
facilities (excluding oil production facilities)
if it is determined that the facility could
cause substantial hann to the environment by
self-selection or RA determination, as
presented in Appendix C of this part.
If you are the owner or operator of a
production facility, please proceed to Part B.
Al. Single-Tank Facilities
For facilities containing only one
aboveground storage tank, the wont case
volume equals the capacity of the storage
tank.
—Final Worst Case Volume:
Gal.
—Do not proceed further.
A2. Secondary Containment—Multiple Tank
Facilities
Are all aboveground storage tanks or
groups of aboveground storage tanks at the
facility without adequate secondary
containment72 fY/Nl
a. If the answer is yes. the final worst case
volume equals the total aboveground oil
storage capacity at the facility.
—Final Wont Case Volume:
Gal.
—Do not proceed further.
b. If the answer is no, calculate the total
aboveground capacity of tanks without
adequate secondary containment. If all
aboveground storage tanks or groups of
aboveground storage tanks at the facility have
adequate secondary containment, ENTER "0"
(zero) Gel.
1 "Storage fadiiUes" represent ell facilities
subject to (his pert, excluding oil production
facilities.
2 Secondary containment Is defined in
$ 112.7(e)(2) of 40 CFR Part 112, revised as of July
1.1992. Acceptable methods end structures for
containment an given in $ 112.7(c)(1) of 40 CFR
Part 112, reviied as of July 1,1992.
—Proceed to question A3.
A3. Distance to Navigable Waten
a. Is the nearest opportunity for discharge
(i.e., storage tank, piping, or flowline)
adjacent to a navigable water?3
(Y/N)
b. If the answer is yes. calculate 110% of
the capacity of the largest single aboveground
storage tank within a secondary containment
area or 110% of the combined capacity of a
group of aboveground storage tanks
permanently manifolded together,4
whichever is greater, PLUS THE VOLUME
DETERMINED IN QUESTION A2(b).5
—Final Wont Case Volume:
Gal.
—Do not proceed further.
c. If the answer is no. calculate the capacity
of the largest single aboveground storage tank
within a secondary containment area or the
combined capacity of a group of aboveground
storage tanks permanently manifolded
together, whichever is greater, PLUS THE
VOLUME FROM QUESTION A2(b).
—Final Wont Case Volume:6
Gal.
Part B. Wont Case Discharge Calculation for
Onshore Production Facilities
Part B of this worksheet is to be completed
by owners or operators of SPCC-regulated oil
production facilities that are determined by
the RA to have the potential to cause
substantial harm and are required to prepare
and submit a response plan. A production
facility consists of all wells (producing and
exploratory) and related equipment in a
single geographical oil or gas field operated
by a single operator.
Bl. Single-Tank Facility
For facilities containing only one
aboveground storage tank, the worst case
1 Navigable waters are defined In 40 CFR Part
110.
* For one or more independent aboveground
storage tanks within a secondary containment ana.
this amount is simply 110% of the capacity of the
largest tank. Permanently manifolded tanks are
defined as tanks that an designed, installed, and/
or operated in such a manner that the multiple
tanks function as one storage unit. The owner or
operator must provide evidence in the response
plan that tanks with common piping or piping
systems an not operated as one unit If such
evidence is provided and is acceptable to the RA,
the wont case discharge volume would be based on
the capacity of 110% of the largest tank within a
common secondary containment area or 110% of
the largest tank in a single containment area,
whichever is greater. For permanently manifolded
tanks that function as one storage unit, the worst
case discharge volume would be based on 110% of
the combined storage capacity of all manifolded
tanks or 110% of the largest single tank within a
secondary containment area, whichever is greater.
For purposes of this detenninaUon, permanently
manifolded tanks that an separated Dy internal
divisions for each tank an considered to be single
tanks and individual manifolded lank volumes ere
not combined.
*U the volume determined in Question A3(b) U
greater than the total aboveground storage capacity
of the facility, fill in the lesser of these two volumes
in the spece provided.
'All "complexes" jointly regulated by EPA and
USCG must also calculate the worst case discharge
for the transportation-related portions of the facility
and plan for whichever volume is greater
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17. 1993 / Proposed Rules 8861
volume equals the capacity of the
aboveground storage tank plus the
production volume of the well with the
highest output (forecasted output for
exploratory wells and production wells
producing under pressure) at the facility.7
—Final Worst Case Volume:
Gal.
—Do not proceed further.
B2. Secondary Containment—Multiple Tank
Facilities
Are all aboveground storage tanks or
groups of aboveground storage tanks at the
facility without adequate secondary
containment? (Y/N)
a. If the answer is yes, the final worst case
volume equals the total aboveground oil
storage capacity without adequate secondary
containment plus the production volume of
the well with the highest output (forecasted
output for exploratory wells and production
wells producing under pressure) at the
facility? 7
—Final Worst Case Volume:
Gal.
—Do not proceed further.
b. If the answer is no, calculate the total
aboveground capacity of tanks without
adequate secondary containment If all
aboveground storage tanks or groups of
aboveground storage tanks at the facility have
adequate secondary containment, ENTER "0"
(zero). Gal.
—Proceed to question B3.
B3. Distance to Navigable Waters
a. Is the nearest opportunity for discharge
(i.e., storage tank, piping, or fiowline)
adjacent to a navigable water?
(Y/N)
b. If the answer to the above question is
yes, calculate 110% of the capacity of the
largest single aboveground storage tank
within a secondary containment area or
110% of the combined capacity of a group of
aboveground storage tanks permanently
manifolded together,* whichever is greater,
'The production volume (or each production
well (producing by pumping) is determined from
the pumping rate of the welt multiplied by 1.5
times the number of days the facility is unattended.
For each exploratory well (and production well
producing under pressure) 10.000 feet deep or lass,
the production volume refers to the maximum 30-
day forecasted well rate for the exploratory well or
production well producing under pressure.
For each exploratory well (and production well
producing under pressure) deeper than 10,000 feet,
the production volume refers to the maximum 45-
day forecasted well rate for the exploratory well or
production well producing under pressure.
* For one or more independent aboveground
storage tanks within a secondary containment area,
this amount is simply 110% of the capacity of the
largest tank. Permanently manifolded tanks are
defined as tanks that are designed, installed, and/
or operated in such a manner that the multiple
tanks function as one storage unit The owner or
operator must provide evidence in the response
plan that tanks with common piping or piping
systems are not operated as one unit If such
evidence is provided and is acceptable to the RA,
the worst case discharge volume would be based on
the capacity of 110% of the largest tank within a
common secondary containment area or 110% of
the largest tank in a single containment area,
plus the production volume of the well with
the highest output (forecasted output for
exploratory wells producing under pressure),
PLUS THE VOLUME FROM QUESTION
B2(b).'
—Final Worst Case Volume:
Gal.
—Do not proceed further.
c. If the answer to the above question is no.
calculate the capacity of the largest single
aboveground storage tank within a secondary
containment area or the combined capacity of
a group of aboveground storage tanks
permanently manifolded together, whichever
is greater, plus the production volume7 of
the well with the highest output (forecasted
output for exploratory wells producing under
preaaure), PLUS THE VOLUME FROM
QUESTION B2(b).
—Final Wont Caw Volume:10
Gal.
Appendix F to Part 112—Guidelines for
Determining and Evaluating Required
Response Resources for Facility
Response Plans
1. Purpose
1.1 The purpose of this appendix is to
assist in the identification of response
resources necessary to meet the requirements
of $ 112.20. These guidelines should be used
by the facility owner or operator in preparing
the response plan and by the Regional
Administrator (RA) in reviewing facility
response plans.
2. Equipment Operability and Readiness
2.1 All equipment identified in the
response plan should be designed to operate
in conditions based on location and season.
As a result, it is difficult to identify a single
catalogue of response equipment that will
function effectively in each geographic
location.
2.2 If applicable, facilities handling or
storing oil in more than one operating
environment, as indicated in Table 1, should
identify equipment capable of successfully
functioning in each operating environment.
2.3 When identifying equipment in the
response plan, a facility owner or operator
should consider the inherent limitations of
the operability of equipment components and
response systems. The criteria in Table 1
should be used for evaluating the operability
whichever is greater. For permanently manifolded
tanks that function as one storage unit, the worst
case discharge volume would be based on 110% of
the combined storage capacity of all manifolded
tanks or 110% of the largest single tank within a
secondary containment area, whichever is greater.
For purposes of this determination, permanently
manifolded tanks that are separated by internal
divisions for each tank are considered to be single
tanks and individual manifolded tank volumes are
not combined.
•If the volume determined in Question B3(b) is
greater than the total aboveground storage capacity
of the facility, fill in the lesser of these two volumes
in the space provided.
10 All "complexes" jointly regulated by EPA and
USCG must also calculate the worst case discharge
for the transportation-related portions of the facility
and plan for whichever volume is greater.
in a given environment. These criteria reflect
the general conditions in certain operating
areas.
2.4 Table 1 lists criteria for oil recovery
devices and boom. All other equipment
necessary to sustain or support response
operations in a geographic area should be
designed to function in the same conditions.
For example, boats which deploy or support
skimmers or boom should be capable of being
safely operated in the significant wave
heights listed for the applicable operating
environment.
2.5 Facility owners or operators should
refer to the applicable Area Contingency Plan
(ACP). when available, to determine if ice,
debris, and/or weather-related visibility are
significant factors in evaluating the
operability of equipment. The ACP may also
identify the average temperature ranges
expected in the facility's geographic area. All
equipment identified in a response plan
should be designed to operate within the
specified conditions or ranges.
2.6 This appendix provides guidance on
response resource mobilization and response
tiroes. The distance to the facility from the
storage location of the response resources
should be used in determining whether the
resources can arrive on-scene within the time
required. A facility owner or operator should
include the time for notification,
mobilization, and travel time of resources
identified to meet the small, medium, and
worst case discharge requirements in the
response plan. An on-water speed of 10 knots
and a land speed of 35 miles per hour should
be assumed for calculating the travel time to
the site of the discharge, unless the facility
owner or operator can demonstrate
otherwise.
2.7 In identifying equipment, the facility
owner or operator should list the storage
location, quantity, and manufacturer's make
and model as required in appendix G of this
part. For oil recovery devices, the effective
daily recovery rate, as determined using
section 6 of this appendix, should be
included. A facility owner or operator is
responsible for ensuring that the identified
boom has compatible connectors.
3. Determining Response Resources Required
for Small Discharges
3.1 A facility owner or operator should
ensure that sufficient response resources are
available for responding to a small discharge.
A small spill is defined as any spill volume
less than or equal to 2,100 gallons, but not
to exceed the calculated worst case
discharge.
3.2 "Complexes." which are facilities
regulated by EPA and U.S. Coast Guard
(USCG), must also consider planning
quantities for the transportation-related
transfer portion of the facility. The USOG
planning level synonymous with the small
discharge is termed the average most
probable discharge. The USOG interim final
rule which amends 33 CFR part 154 (58 FR
7330; February 5,1993) defines the average
most probable discharge as a discharge of 50
barrels (2,100 gallons). Because "complexes"
must compare spill volumes for a small
discharge (2,100 gallons) and an average most
probable discharge (2,100 gallons), and the
-------
8862
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
two planning quantities an identical,
complex facilities must plan for small spills
less than or equal to 2,100 gallons.
3.3 Where applicable, the following
resources should be available in the event of
this type of discharge:
3.3.1 1,000 feet of containment boom and
a means of immediate deployment.
3.3.2 Oil recovery devices with an
effective daily recovery rate equal to the
amount of oil discharged in a small spill,
within two hours of the detection of an oil
discharge.
3.3.3 Oil storage capacity for recovered
oily material as indicated in section B.2 of
this appendix.
4. Determining Response Resources Required
for Medium Discharges
4.1 A facility owner or operator should
ensure that sufficient response resources are
available for responding to a medium
discharge of oil from a facility. This response
will require resources capable of containing
and collecting up to 36,000 gallons of oil or
10 percent of the capacity of the largest
aboveground storage tank, whichever is less.
4.2 "Complexes" regulated by EPA and
USGG must also consider planning quantities
for the transportation-related transfer portion
of the facility. The USGG planning level
synonymous with the medium discharge is
termed the maximum most probable
discharge. The USGG interim final rule
which amends 33 CFR part 154 (58 FR 7330;
February 5.1993) defines the maximum most
probable as a discharge of 1.200 barrets
(50,400 gallons) or 10 percent of the worst
case discharge, whichever is less. Owners
and operators of "complexes" must compare
spill volumes for a medium discharge and a
maximum most probable discharge and plan
for whichever quantity is greater.
4.3 Oil recovery devices identified to
meet the applicable medium discharge
volume planning criteria, should be able to
arrive on-scene within 6 hours in higher
volume port areas and the Great Lakes, and
within 12 hours in all other areas. Higher
volume port areas and Great Lakes areas are
defined in Attachment C-III of appendix C of
this part.
4.4 Because rapid control, containment,
and removal of oil is critical in reducing spill
impact, the effective daily recovery rate for
011 recovery devices should equal 50 percent
of the planning volume applicable to the
facility as determined in section 4.1 of this
appendix. The effective daily recovery rate
for oil recovery devices identified in the plan
should be determined using the criteria in
section 6 of this appendix.
4.5 In addition to oil recovery capacity,
the plan should identify and ensure the
availability of, through contract or other
approved means, sufficient quantity of boom
available within the recommended response
times for oil collection and containment and
protection of shoreline areas. The response
plan should identify and ensure the
availability of the quantity of boom available
through contract or other approved means.
4.6 The plan should indicate the
availability of temporary storage capacity to
meet the requirements of section 8.2 of this
appendix. If available storage capacity is
insufficient to meet this requirement, then
the effective daily recovery rate should be
derated to the limits of the available storage
capacity.
4.7 The following is an example of a
medium discharge volume planning
calculation for equipment identification in a
higher volume port areas: The facility's
largest aboveground storage tank volume is
840,000 gallons. Ten percent of this capacity
is 84,000 gallons. Since 10 percent of the
facility's largest tank, or 84,000 gallons, is
greater than 36,000 gallons, 36,000 gallons is
used as the planning volume. The effective
daily recovery rate should be 50 percent of
the planning volume, or 18,000 gallons per
day. The ability of oil recovery devices to
meet this capacity should be calculated using
the procedures in section 6 of this appendix.
Temporary storage capacity available on-
scene should equal twice the daily recovery
rate as indicated in section 8.2 of this
appendix, or 36,000 gallons per day. The
facility owner or operator would use this
information to identify and ensure the
availability of, through contract or other
approved means, the required response
resources. The facility owner should also
need to identify how much boom is available
for use.
5. Determining Response Resources Required
for the Worst Case Discharge to the
Maximum Extent Practicable
5.1 A facility owner or operator should
specify the availability of sufficient response
resources to respond to the wont case
discharge as calculated using appendix E of
this part. Section 7 describes the method
used In determining adequate response
resources for a worst case discharge. A
worksheet is provided as Attachment F-l at
the end of this appendix to simplify the
procedures involved in calculating the
planning volume for response resources lor
the worst case discharge.
5.2 "Complexes" regulated by EPA and
USCG must also consider planning for the
wont case discharge at the transportation-
related portion of the facility. Because the
USGG also requires response plans from
transportation-related facilities to address a
worst case discharge of oil in the interim
final rule which amends 33 CFR part 154 (58
FR 7330; February 5.19B3), a separate
calculation for the worst case discharge
volume has been developed for USCG-related
facilities. All complex facilities must
compare both calculations of worst case
discharge derived by EPA and USGG and
plan for whichever volume is greater.
5.3 Oil spill recovery devices (i.e.,
equipment and resources) identified to meet
the applicable worst case discharge planning
volume should be able to arrive on the scene
of a discharge within the time specified for
the applicable response tier listed below:
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
(his)
(hrs)
(his)
Higher volume pott
area
6
30
54
Great Lakes
6
30
54
AD other Over, inland.
and nearshore areas
12
36
60
The three levels of response tiers apply to
the amount of time in which response
equipment and resources should arrive at the
scene of a spill to respond to the worst case
discharge planning volume. For example, at
a worst case discharge in an inland area, the
first tier of response resources should arrive
at the scene of the spill within 12 hours: the
second tier of response resources should
arrive within 36 hours; and the third tier of
response resources should arrive within 60
hours.
5.4 The effective daily recovery rate for
oil recovery devices identified in the
response plan should be determined using
the criteria in section 6 of this appendix. The
storage locations of all equipment used to
fulfill the requirements for each tier should
be identified. The owner or operator of a
facility whoae required daily recovery
capacity exceeds the applicable contracting
caps in Table 5 should identify sources of
additional equipment, its location, and the
arrangements made to obtain this equipment
during a response. While general listings of
available response equipment may be used to
identify additional sources, the response plan
should identify the specific sources and
quantities of equipment that a facility owner
or operator has considered in their planning.
5.5 In addition to oil spill recovery
devices, a facility owner or operator should
identify and ensure the availability of,
through contract or other approved means,
sufficient quantities of boom that can arrive
on-scene within the required response times
for oil containment and collection and
protection of shorelines areas.
5.6 A facility owner or operator should
identify the availability of temporary storage
capacity to meet the requirements of section
8.2 of this appendix. If available storage
capacity is insufficient to meet this
recommendation, then the effective daily
recovery rate should be derated to the limits
of the available storage capacity.
6. Determining Effective Daily Recovery Rate
for Oil Recovery Devices
6.1 Oil recovery devices identified by a
facility owner or operator should include
information on the manufacturer, model, and
effective daily recovery rate. These rates
should be used to determine whether there
is sufficient capacity to meet, to the
maximum extent practicable, the applicable
planning criteria for a small discharge;
medium discharge; and worst case discharge.
6.2 For the purposes of determining the
effective daily recovery rate of oil recovery
devices, the following method should be
used. This method considers potential
limitations due to available daylight,
weather, sea state, and percentage of
emulsified oil in the recovered material.
6.2.1 The following formula should be
used to calculate the effective daily recovery
rate:
R=Tx24 hoursxE
R—Effective daily recovery rate
T—Throughput rate in barrels per hour
(nameplate capacity)
E—20% Efficiency factor (or lower factor
as determined by RA)
6.2.2 For those devices in which the
pump limits the throughput of liquid,
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8863
throughput rate should be calculated using
the pump capacity.
6.2.3 For belt- or mop-type devices, the
throughput rate should be calculated using
the speed of the belt or mop; surface area of
the belt or mop in contact with the water
surface; and the oil encounter rate. For
purposes of this calculation, the assumed
thickness of oil should be V« inch.
6.3 As an alternative to 6.2. a facility
owner or operator may provide adequate
evidence that a different effective daily
recovery rate should be applied for a specific
oil recovery device. Adequate evidence is
actual verified performance data in spill
conditions or tests using American Society of
Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard
F631-80, F808-83 (1988).
6.3.1 The following formula should be
used to calculate the effective daily recovery
rate under this alternative:
R=DxU
R—Effective daily recovery rate
D—Average oil recovery rate in barrels per
hour (Item 26 in FB08-83; Item 13.1.15
in F631-80; or actual performance data)
U—Hours per day that a facility owner or
operator can document capability to
operate equipment under spill
conditions. Ten hours per day should be
used unless a facility owner or operator
can demonstrate that the recovery
operation can be sustained for longer
periods.
6.4 A facility owner or operator
submitting a response plan should provide
data that supports the effective daily recovery
rates for the oil recovery devices listed. The
following is an example of these calculations;
A weir skimmer identified in a response
plan has a manufacturer's rated throughput at
the pump of 267 gallons per minute (gpm).
T=267 gpm=381 barrels per hour
R=381x24x.2=l,829 barrels per day
After testing using ASTM procedures, the
skimmer's oil recovery rate is determined to
be 220 gpm. The facility owner or operator
identifies sufficient resources available to
support operations for 12 hours per day.
220 gpm = 314 barrels per hour
R = 314 x 12 = 3,768 banels per day
The facility owner or operator will be able
to use the higher rate if sufficient temporary
oil storage capacity is available.
7. Calculating Planning Volumes for a Worst
Case Discharge
7.1 A facility owner or operator shall plan
for a response to the facility's worst case
discharge volume of oil. The worst case
discharge calculation worksheet appears in
appendix E of this part. Planning foron-
water recovery should take into account a
loss of some oil to the environment due to
evaporative and natural dissipation, potential
increases in volume due to emulsification,
and the potential for deposit of oil on the
shoreline.
7.2 The procedures discussed in sections
7.2.1-7.2.4 should be used to calculate the
planning volume for response resources used
by a facility owner or operator in determining
the required on-water recovery capacity:
7.2.1 The following should be
determined: the worst case discharge volume
of oil in the facility, the appropriate group(s)
for the type of oil handled or stored at the
facility (persistent (Croups 2,3,4) or non-
persistent (Group 1)], and the geographic
location of the facility. See Attachment F-2
for definitions of persistent and non-
persistent oils. Facilities that handle or store
oil from different oil groups should calculate
each group separately. This information
should be used with Table 2 to determine the
percentages of the total volume required for
removal capacity planning. Table 2 divides
the volume into three categories: Oil lost to
the environment; oil deposited on the
shoreline; and oil available for on-water
recovery.
7.2.2 The on-water oil recovery volume
for response resources should be adjusted
using the appropriate emulsification factor
found in Table 3.
7.2.3 The adjusted volume is multiplied
by the on-water oil recovery resource
mobilization factor found in Table 4,
resulting in total on-water oil recovery
capacity in barrels per day that should be
identified or contracted to arrive on-scene
within the applicable time for each response
tier. The on-water resource recovery
mobilization factor depends on the operating
area and the three response tiers. For higher
volume part areas and the Great Lakes, as
defined in Attachment C—HI of appendix C,
of this part, the contracted tiers of resources
should be located so that they can arrive on-
scene within 6 hours for tier 1,30 hours for
tier 2, and 54 hours for tier 3 of the discovery
of an oil discharge. For all other river, inland,
and near shore areas, response resources
should arrive within 12,36, and 60 hours for
tiers 1,2, and 3, respectively.
7.2.4 The resulting on-water recovery
capacity in barrels per day for each tier is
used to identify response resources necessary
to sustain operations in the applicable
geographic area. The equipment should be
capable of sustaining operations for the time
period specified in Table 2. A facility owner
or operator should identify and ensure the
availability of. through contract or other
approved means, sufficient oil spill recovery
devices to provide the effective daily oil
recovery capacity required. If the required
capacity exceeds the applicable cap specified
in Table 5, then a facility owner or operator
should contract only for the quantity of
resources required to meet the cap, but
should identify sources of additional
resources as indicated in section 5.4 of this
appendix. The owner or operator of a facility
whose planning volume exceeds the cap in
1993 should make arrangements for
additional capacity to be under contract by
1998. The process should be repeated in 1998
and 2003. For a facility that carries multiple
groups of oil. the required effective daily
recovery capacity for each group should be
calculated before applying the cap.
7.3 The procedures discussed in sections
7.3.1-7.3.3 should be used to calculate the
planning volume for response resources for
identifying shoreline cleanup capacity:
7.3.1 The following should bis
determined: The worst case discharge
volume of oil for the facility; the appropriate
group(s) for the type of oil bandied or stored
at the facility [persistent (Groups 2,3.4) or
non-persistent (Group 1)1; and the geographic
area(s) in which the facility operates. For a
facility storing oil from different groups, each
group should be calculated separately. Using
this information, Table 2 should be used to
determine the percentages of the total volume
of oil required for shoreline cleanup resource
planning.
7.3.2 The shoreline cleanup planning
volume for resource planning should be
adjusted to reflect an emulsification factor
using the same procedure as described in
section 7.2.2.
7.3.3 The resulting volume should be
used to identify response resources necessary
for shoreline cleanup.
7.4 The following is an example of the
procedure described above: A facility with a
270,000 barrel (11.3 million gallons) capacity
for *6 oil (specific gravity .96) is located in
a higher volume port area. The facility is on
a peninsula and has docks on both the ocean
and bay side. The facility has four
aboveground storage tanks with a combined
total capacity of 80,000 barrels (3.36 million
gallons) and no secondary containment. The
remaining facility tanks are inside secondary
containment structures. The largest
aboveground storage tank (90,000 barrels or
3.78 million gallons) has its own secondary
containment. Two 50,000 barrel (2.1 million
gallon) tanks (that are not connected by a
manifold) are within a common secondary
containment tank area, which is capable of
holding 100,000 barrels (4.2 million gallons)
plus sufficient freeboard.
The worst case discharge for the facility is
calculated by adding the capacity of all
aboveground storage tanks without secondary
containment (80,000 barrels) plus 110% of
the capacity of the largest aboveground tank
inside secondary containment (110%x90,000
barrels=99,000 banels). The additional 10
percent is added to the capacity of the tanks
because the facility is located adjacent to
navigable water. The resulting worst case
discharge volume is 179,000 barrels or 7.52
million gallons.
Since the guidelines for tiers 1, 2, and 3 for
inland and nearshore exceed the caps
identified in Table 5, the facility owner
should contract for 10,000 barrels per day
(bpd) for tier 1. 20,000 bpd for tier 2, and
40.000 bpd for tier 3. Resources for the
remaining 8,795 bpd for tier 1,11,325 bpd for
tier 2, and 10,120 bpd for tier 3 should be
identified but not contracted for in advance.
The facility owner or operator should also
identify or contact for quantities of boom
identified in their response plan for the
environmentally sensitive areas within the
area potentially impacted by a worst case
discharge from the facility. Appendix D
presents a listing of environmentally
sensitive areas and Attachment C—III of
appendix C provides a method for calculating
a planning distance to sensitive areas and
drinking water intakes which may be
impacted in the event of a worst case
discharge.
8. Additional Equipment Necessary to
Sustain Response Operations
8.1 A facility owner or operator should
ensure that sufficient numbers of trained
personnel and boats, aerial spotting aircraft,
-------
8864
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
containment boom, sorbent materials, boom
anchoring materials, and other supplies are
available to sustain response operations to
completion. A facility owner or operator is
not required to list these resources, but
should certify their availability.
8.2 A facility owner or operator should
evaluate the availability of adequate
temporary storage capacity necessary to meet
the affective daily recovery rates from
equipment identified in the plan. Because of
the inefficiencies of oil spill recovery
devices, response plans should identify daily
storage capacity equivalent to twice the
effective daily recovery rate required on
scene. This capacity may be reduced if a
facility owner or operator can demonstrate
that the efficiencies of the oil recovery
devices will reduce the overall volume of
oily material that requires storage.
8.3 A facility owner or operator should
ensure that their oil spill removal
organization has the capability to arrange for
disposal of recovered oil products. Specific
disposal procedures will be addressed in the
applicable ACT.
Table 1.—Response Resource Operating Criteria Oil Recovery devices
Opening mMnntnt
Significant
wave
height'
Sea state
Great Lakes
Boom Use:
Boom property
Significant wave height'
Sea state
si loot
53 teet
54 test
Boom height—in. (draft phi* freeboard).
Reserve buoyancy to weight ratio
Totai tensile strangm—ns
SWrt fabric tens*® strength—«w
SMtl fabric tsar strength U
River
S1
6-18
2:1
4.500
200
100
Inland
S3
2
18-42
2:1
15-20,000 ..
300
100
1.
2.
2-3.
Great Lakes
S4.
2-3.
18-42.
2:1.
15-20,000.
300.
100.
' Oil recovery devices and boom should be at least capable of operating In wave heights up to and Including the values listed In Table 1 tor each operating
environment.
Table 2.—Removal Capacity Planning Table
SpH location
NeaishoraMand Great Lakes
Rivers and canals
SuatamaMWy rt on water oil recovery
4 days
3 days
0* group
Percent nat-
ural diastpa-
tlon
Percent re*
covered
floating oil
Percent oil
onshore
Percent nat-
ural dissipa-
tion
Percent re-
covered
floating oil
Percent oil
onshore
80
50
30
10
20
50
SO
so
10
30
50
70
80
40
20
5
10
15
15
20
10
45
65
75
2—Ught crudes
3 Medium crudes and fuels
4*—Heavy crudes and fuels
* For planning purposes, non-petroleum oil must be considered a Group 4 persistent oil.
TABLE 3.—EMULSIFICATION FACTORS FOR PETROLEUM OIL GROUPS1
Norvpersistent oil:
Group 1
Persistent oil:
GflMp 2
Group 3
Group 4
1.0
1.8
2.0
1.4
1 See Attachment F-2 lor group designations for non-persistent and peisistent oils.
Table 4.—On-Water Oil Recovery Resource Mobilization Factors
Area
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
.30
.15
.40
.25
.60
.40
Note: These tnobllixation factors are for total i
t mobilized, not incremental response i
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
Table 5.—Response Capability Caps by geographic area
8865
fieri
Tier 2
Tiers
February 18,1993:
All except rivers end cartels, Greet Lakes .
Greet Lakes
Rivers end canals
February IB, 199B:
All except rtvers and canals, Great Lakes .
Greet Lakes
Rivers
February 18, 2003:
All except rtvers and canals, Greet Lakes .
Great Lakes
Rivers and canals
10K Ma/day ...
5K bbts/day
1,500 bbts/day.
12.5K bbts/day
6.35K bbls/day
1.875 btettay.
TBD
TBD
TBD
20K bbts/day ..
10K bbls/day ..
3,000 bbls/day
2SK bbts/day ..
12.3K bbts/day
3,750 bbls/day
TBD
TBD
TBD
40Kbtxa/day.
20K bbls/day.
6,000 bbls/dey.
SOK bbls/day.
25K bbia/day.
7,500 bbls/day.
TDB
TDB
TDB
Note: The caps show cumulative overall effective dally recovery rate, not Incremental Increases.
TBD»To Be Determined.
Attachment F-l—Worksheet to Plan
Volume of Response Resources for
Wont Case Discharge
Part I Background Information
Step (A) Calculate Worst Case Discharge
in barrels (Appendix E of this part)
Step (B) Oil Group1 (Table 3 and
Attachment F-2)
Step (C) Geographic Area (choose one)
~Nearshore/Inland Great Lakes
~ or River and Canals
Step (D) Percentages of Oil (Table 2)
Percent Lost to Natural Dissipation
(Dl)
Percent Recovered Floating Oil
(D2)
Percent Oil Onshore (D3)
Step (El) On-Water Recovery
Step (D2) x Step (A)
100
Step (E2) On-Shore Recovery
Step (D3) x Step (A)
100
Step (F) Emulsification Factor (Table 3)
Step (G) On-Water Oil Recovery
Resource Mobilization Factor (Table
4)
Tier 1 (Gl)
Tier 2 (G2)
Tier 3 (G3)
Attachment F-l continued—Worksheet
to Plan Volume of Response Resources
for Worst Case Discharge (continued)
Part II On-Water Recovery Capacity
(barrels/day)
Tier 1 Step (El) x Step (F)
x Step (Gl)
Tier 2 Step (El) x Step (F)
x Step (G2)
Tier 3 Step (El) x Step (F)
x Step (G3)
Part m Shoreline Cleanup Volume
(barrels/day) Step (E2) x
Step (F)
Part IV Response Capacity By
Geographic Area (Table 5) (Amount
needed to be contracted for, barrels/day)
Tier 1 (Jl)
Tier 2 (J2)
Tier 3 (J3)
Part V Amount Needed to be Identified,
but not Contacted for in Advance
(barrels/day)
Tier 1 Part II Tier 1—Step
(Jl)
Tier 2 Part II Tier 2—Step
(J2)
Tier 3 Part ~ Tier 3—x
Step (J3)
Note: To convert to gallons/day,
multiply the quantities in Part ~—Part
Vby42
Example to Attachment F-l—
Worksheet to Plan Volume of Response
Resources for Worst Case Discharge
Part I Background Information
Step (A) Calculate Worst Case Discharge
in barrels (Appendix E of this part);
179,000
Step (B) Oil Group1 (Table 3 and
Attachment F-2); 4
Step (C) Geographic Area (choose one)
X—Nearshore/Inland Great Lakes
or River and Canals
Step (D) Percentages of Oil (Table 2)
Percent Lost to Natural Dissipation;
10 (Dl)
Percent Recovered Floating Oil; 50
(D2)
Percent Oil Onshore; 70 (D3)
Step (El) On-Water Recovery
Step (02) x Step (A)
89,500
100
Step (E2) On-Shore Recovery
Step (D3) x Step (A)
125,300
100
Step (F) Emulsification Factor (Table 3);
1.4
Step (G) On-Water Oil Recovery
Resource Mobilization Factor (Table
4)
Tier 1; 0.15 (Gl)
Tier 2; 0.25 (G2)
Tier 3; 0.40 (G3)
Part II On-Water Recovery Capacity
(barrels/day)
Tier 1; IB,795
Step (El) x Step (F) x Step (Gl)
Tier 2; 31,325
Step (El) x Step (F) x Step (G2)
Tier 3; 50,120
Step (El) x Step (F) x Step (G3)
Part III Shoreline Cleanup Volume
(barrels/day); 175,420
Step (E2) x Step (F)
Part TV Response Capacity By
Geographic Area (Table 5)
(Amount needed to be contracted for in
barrels/day)
Tier 1; 10,000 OD
Tier 2; 20,000 (J2)
Tier 3; 40.000 03)
Part V Amount Needed to be Identified,
but not Contacted for in Advance
(barrels/day)
Tier 1; 8,785
Part II Tier 1—Step (Jl) Step (J3)
Tier 2; 11,325
Part II Tier 2—Step (J2)
Tier 3; 10,120
Part II Tier 3—x
Note: To convert to gallons/day, multiply
the quantities in Part II—Part V by 42.
Attachment F-2
1 Facilities storing multiple groups of oil should
prepare a separate worksheet for each group.
1 Facilities storing multiple groups of oil should
prepare a separate worksheet for each group.
Attachment F-2—Definitions of Nob-
Persistent and Persistent Oil*
-------
8866 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
Non-persistent or Group I oil includes:
(1) a petroleum-based oil that, at the time of
shipment, consists of hydrocarbon
fractions:
(i) at least 50% of which by volume, distill
at a temperature of 340 degrees C (645
degrees F), and
(ii) at least 95% of which by volume, distill
at a temperature of 370 degrees C (700
degrees F);
(2) a non-petroleum oil with a specific
gravity less than 0.8.
Non-petroleum oil-^>il of any kind that is
not petroleum-based. It includes, but is not
limited to, animal and vegetable oils.
Persistent oil includes:
(1) a petroleum-based oil that does not meet
the distillation criteria for a non-
persistent oil. Persistent oils are further
classified based on specific gravity as
follows:
(i) Group II—specific gravity less than 0.85.
(ii) Group III—specific gravity between
0.85 and less than 0.95.
(iii) Croup IV—specific gravity 0.95 or
greater.
(2) a non-petroleum oil with a specific
gravity of 0.8 or greater. These oils are
further classified based on specific
gravity as follows:
(i) Group II—specific gravity between 0.8
and less than 0.85.
(ii) Group III—specific gravity between
0.85 and less than 0.95.
(iii) Croup IV—specific gravity of 0.95 or
greater.
Appendix G—Facility-Specific
Response Plan
Table of Contents
1.0 Standard Facility-Specific Response
Plan
1.1 Emergency Response Action Plan
1.2 Facility Information
1.3 Emergency Response Information
1.3.1 Notification
1.3.2 Equipment
1.3.3 Personnel
1.3.4 Evacuation Plans
1.3.5 Coordinator's Duties
1.4 Hazard Evaluation
1.4.1 Hazard Identification
1.4.2 Vulnerability Analysis
1.4.3 Analysis of the Potential for a Spill
1.4.4 Facility Spill History
1.5 Discharge Scenarios
1.5.1 Small and Medium Discharges
1.5.2 Worst Case Discharge
1.6 Discharge Detection Systems
1.6.1 Discharge Detection By Personnel
1.6.2 Automated Discharge Detection
1.7 Plan Implementation
1.7.1 Response Resources for Small,
Medium, and Worst Case Spills
1.7.2 Disposal Plans
1.7.3 Containment and Drainage Planning
1.8 Self Inspection. Training, and
Meeting Logs
1.8.1 Facility Self Inspection
1.8.1.1 Tank Inspection
1.8.1.2 Response Equipment Inspection
1.8.1.3 Secondary Containment
Inspection
1.8.2 Mock Alert Drills
1.8.2.1 Mock Alert Drill Logs
1.8.3 Training and Meetings Logs
1.8.3.1 Personnel Training Logs
1.8.3.2 Discharge Prevention Meeting
Logs
1.9 Diagrams
1.10 Security
2.0 Response Plan Cover Sheet
3.0 Definitions
4.0 Acronyms
5.0 References
1.0 Standard Facility-Specific Response
Plan
Introduction
Owners or operators of facilities regulated
under this part, which pose a threat of
substantial harm to the environment by
discharging oil into water bodies or adjoining
shorelines, are required to prepare and
submit facility-specific response plans to
EPA in accordance with the provisions in
this Appendix. Facility owners or operators
shall determine whether their facility poses
substantial harm by using the flowchart
presented in Attachment G-I of Appendix C
to the proposed rule. Response plans must be
sent to the appropriate EPA Regional office.
The attached Figure G-l lists each EPA
Regional office and the EPA section and
address where owners and operators should
submit their response plans. Those facilities
deemed by the Regional Administrator (RA)
to pose a threat of significant and substantial
harm to the environment will have their
plans reviewed and approved by EPA. In
certain cases, information required in the
model response plan is similar to information
currently maintained in the facility's SPCC
Plan. In these cases, owners and operators
may reproduce the information and include
a photocopy in the response plan.
BILUNQ COOE
-------
FIGURE G - 1
EPA REGIONAL OFFICES FOR
RESPONSE PLAN SUBMITTAL
Region I
ATTN: Response Plan Coordinator
Emergency Response Section
60 Westview Street
Lexington, MA 02173
Region X
SR1S (HW093)
1200 Sixth Avenue, 9th Floor
Seattle. WA 98101
Region VIII
Preparedness Section (HWM-ER)
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, Co 80202-2405
Region II
RBP Removal and Emergency
Preparedness Programs
2890 Woodbridge Avenue (MS-211)
Edison, NJ 08837
Region V
EERB (HSE-5J)
77 W. Jackson Blvd., 5th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604
J
Region IX
ERS (H83)
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Y
Region VII
EPPB (ENSV)
25 Funston Road, 2nd Floor]
Kansas City, KS 66115
Y^r°
Region III
Oil and Tide III Section (3HW34)
841 Chestnut Building. 9th Floor
Philadelphia. PA 19107
Region VI
Contingency Planning Section (62-EP)
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas. TX 75202 2733
o
Region IV
Emergency Response and Removal Branch
345 Courtland Street, N.E., 1st Floor
Atlanta, GA 30365
hluno cooe MM-ao-c
T1
cL
<
o
Ul
w
z
o
b>
o
I
s
e-
•*1
a"
CO
<0
?
•a
s
ffl
o.
I
8
05
vl
-------
8868 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
1.1 Emergency Response Action Plan.
Several sections of the response plan will
be co-located and tabbed for easy access by
response personnel during an actual
emergency or oil spill. This collection of
sections will be called the Emergency
Response Action Plan. The Agency intends
that the Action Plan contain only as much
information as is necessary to combat the
spill and be arranged so response actions are
not delayed. The Action Plan may be
arranged in a number of ways. For example,
the sections of the Emergency Response
Action Plan may be photocopies or
condensed versions of the forms included in
the associated sections of the response plan.
Each Emergency Response Action Plan
section should be tabbed for quick reference.
The Action Plan may be maintained in the
front of the same binder that contains the
complete response plan or it may be
contained in a separate binder. In the latter
case, both binders should be kept together so
that the entire plan can be accessed by the
Emergency Response Coordinator and
appropriate spill response personnel. The
Emergency Response Action Plan shall be
made up of the following sections:
1. Emergency Response Coordinator
Information—(Section 1.2) partial
2. Emergency Notification Phone List—
(Section 1.3.1) complete
3. Spill Response Notification Form—
(Section 1.3.1) complete
4. Equipment List and Location—(Section
1.3.2) complete
5. Facility Response Team—(Section 1.3.3)
partial
6. Evacuation Plan—(Section 1.3.4)
condensed
7. Immediate Actions—(Section 1.7)
condensed
8. Facility Diagram—(Section 1.9) complete
Collectively, the actions described in the
sections listed above represent those which
should be taken to stop the source of the
spill, notify the appropriate people, and
initiate procedures to prevent or minimise
the spreading of oil.
1.2 Facility Information
The facility information form is designed
to provide an overview of the site and a
description of past activities at the facility.
Much of the information required by this
section may be obtained from the facility's
existing SHX Plan.
Facility name and location: Enter facility
name and street address of the facility. Enter
the address of corporate headquarters only if
corporate headquarters are physically located
at the facility. Include city, county, state, zip
code, and phone number.
Latitude and Longitude: Enter the latitude
and longitude of the facility. Include degrees,
minutes, and seconds of the main entrance of
the facility.
Wellhead Protection Area: Indicate if the
facility is located in or drains into a wellhead
protection area as defined by the Safe
Drinking Water Act of 1986 (SDWA). The
response plan requirements in the Wellhead
Protection Program are outlined by the State
in which the facility resides.1
Owner/operator: Write the name of the
company or person operating the facility and
the name of the person or company that owns
the facility, if the two are different. List the
address of the owner, if the two are different.
Emergency Response Coordinator: Write
the name of the emergency response
coordinator for the entire facility. If more
than one person is listed, each individual
indicated in this section shall have full
authority to implement the facility response
plan. For each individual, list: name,
position, address, emergency phone number,
and specific training experience.
Date of Oil Storage Start-up: Enter the year
which the present facility first started storing
oil.
Current Operation: Briefly describe the
facilities mentions and include Standard
Industry Classification (SIC) code.
Dates and Type of Substantial Expansion:
Include information on expansions that have
occurred at the facility. Examples of such
expansions include, but are not limited to:
Throughput expansion, addition of a product
line, change of a product line, and
installation of additional storage capacity.
The data provided should include all facility
historical information and detail the
expansion of the facility. An example of
substantial expansion is any material
alteration of the facility which causes the
owner or operator of the facility to re-
evaluate and increase the response
equipment necessary to adequately respond
to a worst case discharge from the facility.
Date of Last Update:
Facility Information Form
Facility Name:
Location (Street Address):
City
State
Zip ¦
County
Phone Number ( )
Latitude: ——————
Degree
Minutes
Seconds
Longitude:
Degree ——————————
Minutes
Seconds
Wellhead Protection Area:
Owner:
Owner Address (if different from Facility Ad-
dress)
Location (Street Address):
City
State
Zip
County
Phone Number ( )
Operator (if not Owner):
Emergency Response Coordinator^):
1 States with EPA approved WaUhaad Protection
programs an: Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware.
Illinois, Louisiana. Maine, Maryland.
Massachusetts. Nevada, New Hampshire. New
Mexico, New York. Oklahoma. Puerto Rico, Rhode
Island. Texas and Vermont (as of August. 1992).
Name: —
Position:
Address: ————
Emergency Phone Number:
Date of Oil Storage Start-up
Current Operation
q
Date(s) and Type(s) of Substantial
Expansion(s) (Attach additional sheets if
necessary)
Q
1.3 Emergency Response Information
The information provided in this section
should describe what will be needed in an
actual emergency Involving the discharge of
oil or e combination of hazardous substances
and oil discharge. The Emergency Response
Information section of the plan must include
the following components:
1. The information provided in the
Emergency Notification Phone List in section
1.3.1 identifies and prioritises the names and
phone numbers of the organisations and
personnel that need to be notified
immediately in the event of an emergency.
This section should include all the
appropriate phone numbers for the facility.
These numbers should be verified each time
the plan is updated. The contact list should
be accessible to all facility employees to
ensure that, in case of a discharge, any
employee on site could immediately notify
the appropriate parties.
2. The Spill Response Notification Form in
section 1.3.1 creates a checklist of
information that should be provided to the
National Response Center (NRC) and other
response personnel. All information on this
checklist should be known at the time of
notification, or be in the process of being
collected. This notification form is based on
a similar form used by the NRC Note: Do not
delay notification to collect the information
on the list.
3. Section 1.3.2 provides a description of
the facility's list of emergency response
equipment, equipment testing, and location
of the equipment. When appropriate, the
amount of release that emergency response
equipment can handle and any limitations
(e.g. launching sites) should be described.
4. Section 1.3.3 lists the facility response
personnel, including those employed by the
facility and those under contract to the
facility for response activities, the amount of
time needed for personnel to respond, their
responsibility in the case of an emergency,
and their level of training. Three different
forms are included in this section. First, the
Emergency Response Personnel List is to be
composed of personnel employed by the
facility whose duties involve responding to
emergencies, including oil spills even when
they are not physically present at the site. An
example of this type of person may be the
Building Engineer-in-Charge or Plant Fire
Chief. Second, the Facility Response Team
List is to be composed of personnel
(referenced by job title/position) and
contractors that will respond immediately
upon discovery of an oil spill or other
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17
, 1993 / Proposed Rules 8869
emergency. These are to be persons normally
on the facility premises or primary response
contractors (i.e., the first people to respond).
Examples of these personnel would be the
Facility Hazardous Materials (HAZMAT)
Spill Team 1, Facility Fire Engine Company
1. Production Supervisor, or Transfer
Supervisor. The last form is a list of the
Emergency Response Contractors (both
primary and secondary) retained by the
facility. These should be listed also on the
second form described above. Any changes in
contractor status should be reflected in
updates to the response plan. Evidence of
contracts with response contractors should
be included so that availability of resources
can be verified. Company personnel must be
able to respond immediately and adequately
if contractor support it not available.
5. Section 1.3.4 lists factors that should be
considered when preparing an evacuation
plan.
6. Section 1.3.5 references the facility
response coordinators' responsibilities in the
event of an emergency.
This information should aid in the
assessment of the facility's ability to respond
to a worst case discharge and identify
additional assistance that may be needed. In
addition, it is recommended that the facility
produce a wallet-size card containing a
checklist of the immediate response and
notification steps to be taken in the event of
an oil discharge.
Date of Last Update:
1.3.} Notification
Emergency Notification Phone List, Whom
To Notify
Reporter's Name
Date
Facility Name
Owner Name
Facility Identification Number
Date and Time of Each NRC Notification
Organization
National Re-
sponse Center
(NRC).
Facility Re-
sponse Coordi-
nator.
Evening Phone ..
Company Re-
sponse Team.
Evening Phone ..
On-Scene Coor-
dinator (OSC).
Evening Phone ..
Area Committee
Evening Phone ..
Local Response
Team (Fire
Dept./Coopera-
tives).
Fire Marshall
Evening Phone ..
State Emergency
Response
Commission
(SERC).
Evening Phone ..
State Police
Phone number
1-800-424-8802
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Organization
Local Emergency
Planning Com-
mittee (LBPC).
Local Water Sup-
ply System.
Evening Phone ..
Weather Report .
Local Television/
Radio Station
for Evacuation
Notification.
Hospitals
Phone number
Spill Response Notification Form
Reporter's Last Name First
_M.I..
Phone Numbers: ( )
( )
Company
Organization Type '
Position ——¦
Address
City
State
Zip
Were Materials Released (Y/N)?
Confidential (Y/N)?
Meeting Federal Obligations to Report
(Y/N)?
Date Called
Calling for Responsible Party
Time Called
JY/N)?
Incident Description
Source and/or Cause of Incident
Date -
Time of Incident AM/PM
Incident Address/Location
Nearest City <
State
County
Zip •
Distance from City
Units
Direction from City
Section
Township
Range
Container Type —
Tank Capacity
Units
Facility Capacity
Units
Facility Latitude Degrees Minutes
Seconds
Facility Longitude Degrees Minutes
Seconds
Material
CHRIS Code •
Released Quantity
Unit of Measure
Material Released in Water
Quantity
Unit/Measure
Response Action
Actions Taken To Correct, Control or
Mitigate Incident
Impact
Number of Injuries ¦
Number of Deaths ¦
Were there Evacuations (Y/N)?
Number Evacuated
Was there any Damage (Y/N)?
Damage in Dollars (approximate)
Medium Affected
Description
More Information about Medium
Additional Information
Any information about the incident not
recorded elsewhere in the report?
Caller Notifications
EPA (Y/N)?
USCG (Y/N)?
State (Y/N)?
Other (Y/N)?
Describe
1.3.2 Equipment
Date of Last Update:
Equipment List
Last Inspection or Equipment Test Date
Inspection Frequency
Regional Response Team (RRT) approval:
1. Skimmers/Pumps—Operational Status
Type, Model, and Year (Type)
(Year)
Number
.(Model)
Capacity gal./min.
Daily Effective Recovery Rate
Storage Location
-------
8870 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
Date Fuel Last Changed
2. Booms—Operational Status
Type. Model, and Year (Type)
(Year)
Number ——————
Sire
.(Model)
Containment Area.
Storage Location •
_sq. ft.
3. Chemicals Stored (Dispersants listed on
EPA's NCP Product Schedule)
Type
Amount
Date Purchased
Treatment Capacity
Storage Location <
Has facility applied for permit to use above
listed dispersants:
State (Y/N) ; Federal (Y/N)
Name and State of On-Scene Coordinator
(OSC) authorizing use
Date Authorized
4. Dispersant Dispensing Equipment—-Oper-
ational Status
Type and Year
Capacity
Storage Location ¦
Response Time (Minutes) -
5. Sorbents—Operational Status •
Type and Year Purchased
Amount
-gal-
Absorption Capacity
Storage Location
6. Hand Tools—Operational Status
Type and Year
Quantity
Storage Location ¦
7. Communication Equipment (include oper-
ating frequency and channel and/or cellular
phone numbers)—Operational Status
Type and Year
Quantity
Storage Location/Number
8. Fire Fighting and Personnel Protective
Equipment—Operational Status
Type and Year
Quantity
Storage Location ¦
S. Other (e.g.. Heavy Equipment, Boats and
Motors)—Operational Status
Type and Year ¦
Quantity
Storage Location ¦
1.3.3 Personnel
Date of last update:.
EMERGENCY RESPONSE PERSONNEL
Company personnel
Name
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Re-
aponse
Respon-
stottty
during
re-
sponse
Training
site.
•Phone number to be used when person Is not on-
Date of last update:.
FACILITY RESPONSE TEAM
Coordinator
Response time
(minutes)
Phone (day/
evening)
If the facility uses contracted help in an
emergency response situation, the owner/
operator must provide the contractors' names
and review the contractors' capacity to
provide adequate personnel and equipment.
Date of last update:
Emergency Response Contractors
Contractor
Response
Contract
rwporv
•Mty*
'Note: include evidence of contracts agreements
with response contractors to ensure Die availability ol
personnel and equipment.
1.3.4 Evacuation Plans
Based on the analysis of the facility, as
discussed elsewhere in the plan, a facility-
wide evacuation plan should be developed.
In addition, plans to evacuate parts of the
facility or surrounding communities that are
at a high risk of exposure in the event of a
spill or other release must be developed.
Evacuation routes must be shown on a
diagram of the facility (see section 1.9). When
developing evacuation plans, consideration
should be given to the following:
1. Location of stored materials;
2. Hazard imposed by spilled material;
3. Spill flow direction;
4. Prevailing wind direction and speed;
5. Water currents, tides, or wave conditions
(if applicable);
6. Arrival route of emergency response
personnel and equipment;
7. Evacuation routes;
8. Alternative routes of evacuation;
9. Transportation of injured personnel to
nearest emergency medical facility;
10. Location of alarm/notification systems:
11. The need for a centralized check-in
area for evacuation validation (roll call);
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules 8871
12. Selection of a mitigation command
center; and
13. Location of shelter at the facility as an
option to evacuation.
When preparing this section of the
response plan, the Handbook of ChemicoJ
Hazard Analysis Procedures by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA),
Department of Transportation (DOT), and
EPA should be referenced. The Handbook of
Chemical Hazard Analysis Procedures is
available from: FEMA, Publication Office.
500 C Street. SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202) 646-3484.
1.3.5 Coordinator's Duties
Duties of the Emergency Response
Coordinator
The duties of the designated emergency
response coordinator or an adequately
trained and qualified person appointed by
the coordinator are specified by the rule in
§ 112.20(h)(3)(ix). The coordinator's duties
must be described and be consistent with the
minimum requirements in the rule. In
addition, the emergency response
coordinator and any qualified appointee
must be identified with the Facility
Information in section 1.2.
1.4 Hazard Evaluation
This section asks the facility owner/
operator to examine the facility's operations
closely and to predict where releases could
occur. Hazard evaluation is a widely used
industry practice that allows owners and
operators to develop a complete
understanding of potential hazards and the
response actions necessary to address these
hazards. The Handbook of Chemical Hazard
Analysis Procedures, prepared by the EPA,
DOT, and the Federal Emergency
Management Agency and the Hazardous
Materials Emergency Planning Guide (NRT-
1), prepared by the National Response Team
are good references for conducting a hazard
analysis.
Hazard identification and evaluation will
assist facility owners and operators in
planning for potential releases, thereby
reducing the severity of discharge impacts
that may occur in the future. The evaluation
also may help the operator identify and
correct potential sources of releases. In
addition, special hazards to workers and
emergency response personnel's health and
safety should be evaluated, as well as the
facility's spill history.
J.4.1 Hazard Identification
The following directions should be used
for completing the Tank and Surface
Impoundment (SI) forms that are part of this
section. Similar worksheets should be
developed for any other type of storage
containers.
1. List each tank at the facility with a
separate and distinct identifier. Begin
aboveground tank identifiers with an "A"
and below ground tanks identifiers with a
"B", or submit multiple sheets with the
aboveground tanks and below ground tanks
on separate sheets.
2. Use gallons for the maximum capacity
of a tank; and use square feet for the area.
3. Using the appropriate identifiers and the
following instructions, fill in the appropriate
forms:
• Tank or SI number—Using the
aforementioned identifiers (A or B) or
multiple reporting sheets, identify each tank
or SI at the facility that stores oil or
hazardous materials.
• Substance Stored—For each tank or SI
identified, record the material that is stored
therein. If the tank or SI is used to store more
than one material, list all the stored
materials.
¦ Quantity Stored—For each material
stored in each tank or SI, report the average
volume of material stored on any given day.
• Tank Type or Surface Area/Year—For
each tank, report the type of tank (e.g.
floating top), and the year the tank was
originally Installed. If the tank has been
refabricated, the year that the latest
refabrication was completed should be
recorded in parentheses next to the year
installed. For each SI, record the surface area
of the impoundment and the year it went into
service.
• Maximum Capacity—Record the
operational wi«rinmm capacity for each tank
and SI. If the maximum capacity varies with
the season, record the upper and lower
limits.
• Failure/Cause—Record the cause and
date of any tank or SI failure which has
resulted in a loss of tank or SI contents.
4. Using the numbers torn the tank and SI
forms, label a schematic drawing of the
facility. This drawing should be identical to
any schematic drawings included in the
SPCCPlan.
5. Using knowledge of the facility and its
operations, describe the following in writing:
A. The loading and unloading of
transportation vehicles that risk the release of
oil or hazardous substances during transport
processes. These operations may include
loading and unloading of trucks, railroad
cars, or vessels. The volume of material
involved in transfer operations should be
estimated.
B. Day to day operations that may present
a risk of releasing oil or a hazardous
substance. These activities include scheduled
venting, piping repair or replacement, valve
maintenance, transfer of tank contents from
one tank to another, etc. (not including
transportation-related activities). The volume
of material involved In these operations
should be estimated.
C. The secondary containment volume
associated with each tank and/or transfer
point at the facility. The numbering scheme
developed on the tables should be used to
identify each containment area. Capacities
should be listed for each individual unit
(tanks, slumps, drainage traps, and ponds), as
well as the facility total.
D. Normal daily throughput for the facility
and any effect on potential release volumes
that a negative or positive change in that
throughput may cause.
Date of last update:
Hazard Identification Tanks*
Tank
no.
Sub-
stance
stored
(oil A
hazard-
ous
sub-
stance)
Quan-
tity
stored
8S
Tank
typ*
year
Maxi-
mum
capac-
(gal)
Fail-
urtf
cau»e
—
—
* (Tankaany container that (tor** oil).
Attach as many sheets as neceaaaiy.
Date of last update:
Hazard Identification Surface
impoundments (SI)
St No.
Sub*
stance
stored
Quan-
tity
stored
(gal)
Sur-
face
area/
year
Maxi-
mum
V
(001)
FaH-
un/
cause
Attach as many sheets as neceaaaiy.
1.4.2 Vulnerability Analysis
The vulnerability analysis should address
the potential effects (i.e., to human health,
property, or the environment) of a spill.
Attachment C-m to appendix C of this part
provides a method that owners or operators
could use to determine appropriate distances
from the facility to environmentally sensitive
areas and drinking water intakes. Owners
and operators could use an alternative
formula that is considered acceptable by the
RA. If an alternative formula is used,
documentation of the reliability and
analytical soundness of the formula must be
attached to the response plan cover sheet.
This analysis should be prepared for each
facility, and should include discussion of the
vulnerability of:
1. Water intakes (drinking, cooling, or
other);
2. Schools;
3. Medical facilities;
4. Residential areas;
5. Businesses;
6. Wetlands or other environmentally
sensitive areas;2
7. Fish and wildlife;
B. Lakes and streams;
9. Endangered flora and fauna;
10. Recreational areas;
11. Transportation routes (air, land, and
water);
12. Utilities; and
13. Other areas of economic importance
including terrestrially sensitive
2 Refer to Appendix D of the proposed rule for the
lifting of environmentally wnsltlve areas.
-------
8872 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
environments, aquatic environments, and
unique habitats.
1.4.3 Analysis of the Potential for a Spill
Each owner or operator should analyze the
probability of a spill occurring at the facility.
This analysis should be Quantitative,
incorporating {acton such as tank age, spill
history, horizontal range of a potential spill,
and vulnerability to natural disaster. This
analysis will provide information for
developing discharge scenarios for a worst
case discharge and small and medium
discharges and aid in the development of
techniques to reduce the size and frequency
of spills. The owner or operator may need to
research the age of the tanks and the spill
history at the facility.
1.4.4 Spill History
Briefly describe the facility's reportable
spill1 history for the entire life of the facility,
including:
1. Date of discharged);
2. List of discharge causes;
3. Material(s) discharged;
4. Amount discharged in gallons;
5. Amount of discharge that reached
navigable waters, if applicable;
6. Effectiveness and capacity of secondary
containment;
7. Clean-up actions taken;
8. Steps taken to reduce possibility of
recurrence;
B. Total storage capacity of the tank(s) or
impoundment(s) from which the material
discharged;
10. Enforcement actions;
11. Effectiveness of monitoring equipment;
and
12. Description of how each spill was
detected.
The information solicited in this section
may be similar to requirements in 8112.4(a)
of the October 22,1BB1 proposed revisions to
the Oil Pollution Prevention rule (56 PR
54612). Any duplicate information in
§ 112.4(a) may be photocopied and inserted.
1.5 Discharge Scenarios
In this section, the owner or operator is
asked to provide a description of the facility's
worst case discharge, as well as a small and
medium spill, as appropriate. A tiered
planning approach has been chosen because
the response actions to a spill (i.e., necessary
equipment, products, and personnel) are
dependent on the magnitude of the spill.
Planning for lesser discharges is necessary
because the nature of the response may be
qualitatively different depending on the
quantity of the discharge. In this discussion,
the owner or operator should discuss the
potential direction of the spill pathway.
1.5.1 Small and Medium Discharge
To address tiered planning requirements,
the owner or operator must consider types of
facility-specific spill scenarios that may
' As described in 40 CFR part 110, reportable
spills are those 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 beneeth the surface of the water or
upon adjoining shorelines.
contribute to a small or medium spill. The
scenarios should account for all the
operations that take place at the facility,
including but not limited to:
1. Loading and unloading of surface
transportation;
2. Facility maintenance;
3. Facility piping;
4. Pumping stations and slumps;
5. Storage tanks;
6. Vehicle refueling; and
7. Age and condition of facility and
components.
The scenarios should also consider factors
that affect the response efforts required by
the facility. These include but are not limited
to:
1. Size of the spill;
2. Proximity to downgradient wells,
waterways, and drinking water intakes;
3. Proximity to environmentally sensitive
areas;
4. Likelihood that the discharge will travel
ofisite (i.e., topography, drainage);
5. Location of the material spilled (on a
concrete pad or directly on the soil);
6. Material discharged;
7. Weather or aquatic conditions (i.e., river
flow);
6. Available remediation equipment;
9. Probability of a chain reaction of
failures; and
10. Direction of spill pathway.
1.5 J Wont Case Discharge
In this section, the owner or operator must
identify the worst case discharge volume at
the facility. Worksheets for production and
non-production facility owners and operators
to use when calculating worst case discharge
are preeented in Appendix E to 40 CFR part
112. Whan planning for the worst case
discharge response, all of the aforementioned
factors listed in the small and medium
discharge section of the response plan should
be addressed. Depending on the adequacy of
secondary containment and the proximity to
navigable waters, the worst case discharge
may be: (1) The total abovaground oil storage
capacity (plus production capacity if
applicable) for facilities without adequate
secondary containment; (2) the capacity of
the largest single tank within a common
secondary containment area or the combined
capacity of a group of abovaground tanks
permanently manifolded together within a
common secondary containment area,
whichever is greater, plus an additional
quantity for any tanks without secondary
containment (plus production volume if
applicable); (3) 110% of the capacity of the
largest single tank within a secondary
containment area or 110% of the combined
capacity of a group of tanks within a common
secondary containment area, whichever is
greater (plus production volume if
applicable); or (4) a combination of the
above.
For onshore storage facilities and
production facilities, permanently
manifolded tanks are defined as tanks that
are designed, installed, and/or operated in
such a manner that the multiple tanks
function as one storage unit. In this section
of the response plan, owners and operators
must provide evidence that tanks with
common piping or piping systems are not
operated as one unit. If such evidence is
provided and is acceptable to the RA, the
worst case discharge volume would be based
on the combined storage capacity of all
manifold tanks or the capacity of the largest
single tank within the secondary
containment area, whichever is greater. For
permanently manifolded tanks that function
as one storage unit, the worst case discharge
would be based on the combined storage
capacity of all manifolded tanks or the
capacity of the largest single tank within a
secondary containment area, whichever is
greater. For purposes of the worst case
discharge calculation, permanently
manifolded tanks that are separated by
internal divisions for each tank are
considered to be single tanks and individual
manifolded tank volumes are not combined.
1.6 Discharge Detection Systems
In this section, the owner or operator
should provide a detailed description of the
procedures and equipment used to detect
discharges. A section on spill detection by
personnel and a discussion of automated
spill detection, if applicable, should be
included for both during regular operations
and after hours. In addition, the owner or
operator should discuss how the reliability of
any automated system will be checked and
how frequently the system will be inspected.
1.5.1 Discharge Detection by Personnel
In this section, owners and operators
should describe the procedures and
personnel that will detect any spill or
uncontrolled release of oil or hazardous
material. A thorough discussion of facility
inspections should be included. In addition,
a description of initial response actions
should be addressed. See section 1.3.1 of the
response plan for emergency response
information.
1.6.2 Automated Discharge Detection
In this section, facility owners and
operators must describe any automated spill
detection equipment that the facility has in
place. This section should include a
discussion of overfill alarms, secondary
containment sensors, etc. A discussion of the
plans to verify an automated alarm and the
actions to be taken once verified must also
be included.
1.7 Plan Implementation
In this section, facility owners and
operators must explain in detail how to
implement the facility's emergency response
plan by describing response actions to be
carried out under the plan to ensure the
safety of the facility and to mitigate or
prevent discharges described in section 1.5.
This section includes the identification of
response resources for small, medium, and
worst case spills; disposal plans; and
containment and drainage planning. A
distinct list of those personnel who would be
involved in the cleanup should be identified.
Procedures that the facility will use, where
appropriate or necessary, to update their plan
after a spill event and the time frame to
update the plan must be described.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8873
1.7.2 Response Resources for Small,
Medium, and Worst Case Spills
Once the spill scenarios have been
identified in section 1.5 of the model
response plan, the owner or operator should
identify and describe implementation of the
response actions. The facility should
demonstrate accessibility to the proper
response personnel and equipment to
effectively respond to all of the identified
spill scenarios. Guidelines for the
determination and demonstration of adequate
response capability are presented in
Appendix F to 40 GFR part 112. In addition,
steps to expedite the cleanup of spills must
be discussed. At a minimum, the following
items should be addressed:
1. Emergency plans for (pill response;
2. Additional training;
3. Additional contracted help;
4. Access to additional equipment/experts;
5. Ability to implement plan including
training and practice drills;
1.7 J Disposal Plans
Facility owners and operators must
describe how and where the facility intends
to recover, reuse, decontaminate, or dispose
of materials after a discharge has taken place.
The appropriate permits required to transport
or dispose of recovered materials according
to local. State, and Federal requirements
must be addressed. Materials that should be
accounted for in the disposal plan include:
1. Recovered product;
2. Contaminated soil;
3. Contaminated equipment and materials,
including drums, tank parts, valves, and
shovels;
4. Personnel protective equipment;
5. Decontamination solutions;
6. Adsorbents; and
7. Spent Chemicals.
These plans must be prepared in
accordance with Federal (e.g., the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act IRCRA)),
State, and local regulations, where
applicable. A copy of the disposal plans from
the facility's SPCC Plan may be inserted with
this section including any diagrams of those
plans.
Material
Disposal
facility
Location
RCRA per-
mit/mart-
test
1
2.
3.
4.
1.7.3 Containment and Drainage Planning
A proper plan to contain and control a spill
through drainage may limit the threat of
harm to human health and the environment.
This section should describe how to contain
and control a spill through drainage,
including:
1. The available volume of containment
(use the information presented in section
1.4.1 of this document);
2. The route of drainage from storage and
transfer areas;
3. The construction materials used in
drainage troughs;
4. The type and number of valves and
separators used in the drainage system;
5. Sump pump capacities;
6. The containment capacity of weirs and
booms that might be used and their location
(see Section 1.3.2); and
7. Other cleanup materials.
In addition, facility owners and operators
must meet the inspection and monitoring
requirements for drainage contained in the
SPCC regulation.
A copy of the containment and drainage
plans from the facility's SPCC Plan may be
inserted in this section, including any
diagrams of those plans. (Note: A proposed
general permit for stormwater drainage may
contain additional requirements.]
1.8 Self-Inspection, Training, and Meeting
Logs
Training and meeting logs shall be
included in the response plan to aid facility
owners, operators, and employees in spill
prevention awareness and response
requirements. Logs must be kept for facility
mock alert drills, personnel training, and
spill prevention meetings. Much of the
recordkeeping information contained in this
section is required by the existing SPCC
regulation.
1.8.1 Facility Self-Inspection
Pursuant to § 112.7(e)(8) of the rule in 40
CFR part 112, revised as of )uly 1,1992, each
facility should conduct self-inspections and
include the written procedures and records
of inspections in the SPCC Plan. The
inspection should include the tanks,
secondary containment, and response
equipment at the facility. The inspection of
tanks and secondary containment required by
the SPCC regulation and records of those
inspections should be cross-referenced in the
response plan. The inspection of response
equipment is a new requirement in this plan.
Facility self-inspection requires two steps; (1)
A checklist of things to inspect; and (2) a
method of recording the actual inspection
and its findings. The date of each inspection
shall be noted. These records are required to
be maintained for five years.
1.8.1.1 Tank Inspection
Tank Inspection Checklist
The tank inspection checklist presented
below has been included as part of SPCC
guidance for inspections and monitoring. If
information in this section duplicates
information required in $ 112.7(e) of the
October 22,1991 proposed revisions to the
Oil Pollution Prevention regulation (56 FR
54612) it may be photocopied and inserted.
1. Check tanks for leaks, specifically
looking for:
A. Drip marks;
B. Discoloration of tanks;
C. Puddles containing stored material;
D. Corrosion;
E. Cracks; and
F. Localized dead vegetation.
2. Check foundation for
A. Cracks;
B. Discoloration;
C Puddles containing stored material;
D. Settling;
E. Caps between tank and foundation; and
F. Damage caused by vegetation roots.
3. Check piping for:
A. Droplets of stored material;
B. Discoloration;
C Corrosion;
D. Bowing of pipe between supports;
E. Evidence of stored material seepage on
valves or seals; and
F. Localized dead vegetation.
Tank/Surface impoundment Inspection
LOO
Inspector
Tank or SI
No.
Date
Comments
1.8.1.2 Response Equipment Inspection
Response Equipment Checklist
Using the Emergency Response Equipment
List provided in section 1.3.2 of the response
plan, describe each type of equipment,
checking for the following:
1. Inventory (item and quantity)
2. Storage location
3. Accessibility (time to access and
respond)
4. Operational status/condition
5. Actual use/testing (last test date and
frequency of testing)
6. Shelf life (present age, expected
replacement date)
Please note any discrepancies between the
list and the actual equipment available.
Response Equipment inspection log
|Um MCtkyi 1.3.2 as checklist)
inspector
Date
Comments
-------
8874
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday. February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
1.8.1.3 Secondary Containment Inspection
Secondary Containment Checklist
Inspect the secondary containment (as
described in sections 1.4.1 and 1.7.2 of the
plan), checking the following:
1. Dike or berm system.
A. Level of precipitation in dike/available
capacity
B. Operational status of drainage valves
C. Dike or berm permeability
C. Debris
E. Erosion
F. Permeability of the earthen floor of
diked area
C. Location/status of pipes, inlets, drainage
beneath tanks, etc.
2. Secondary containment
A. Cracks
B. Discoloration
C. Presence of stored material (standing
liquid)
D. Corrosion
E. Valve conditions
3. Retention and drainage ponds
A. Erosion
B. Available capacity
C. Presence of stored material
D. Debris
E. Stressed vegetation
During inspection, make note of
discrepancies in any of the above mentioned
items, and report them immediately to the
proper facility personnel. Additionally,
duplicate information from § 112.7(c) of the
October 22,1991 proposed revisions to the
Oil Pollution Prevention rule (56 FR 54612)
may be photocopied and inserted here.
1.8.2 Mock Alert Drills
Mock alert drills, as required by CWA
section 3ll(j)(5). are part of the response plan
and should be detailed below. During the
drills, actions taken by the response team,
both predicted and unpredicted. should be
noted, and any problems that arise should be
resolved as soon as possible.
1.8.2.1 Mock Alert Drill Logs
Mock Alert Drill Log
Date:
Company:
Response Coordinator ———
Emergency Scenario: ——————
Local Response Team's Response Time: —
Contracted Personnel Response Time:
Facility Personnel Response Time:
Notes: ————————-
Changes to be Implemented:
Time Table for Implementation:
1.8.3 Training and Meeting Logs
Owners and operators are required by
§ 112.20(e)(8) to keep a personnel training log
that should include a record of all formal
response training received by each employee.
Personnel training logs and discharge
prevention meeting logs are included in
sections 1.8.3.1 and 1.8.3.2 respectively.
1.8.3.1 Personnel Training Logs
Personnel Training
Name
Response traln-
Ingtoateand
number of
hours
Prevention
training/date
and number of
houn
1.8.3.2 Discharge Prevention Meetings Log
Discharge Prevention Meeting
Date:
Attendees:
Subject/issue Required ac- Implementa-
identified tion tion date
1.9 Diagrams
The facility-specific response plan should
include the following diagrams. Additional
diagrams that would aid in the development
of response plan sections may also be
included.
1. The Site Plan Diagram should include
and identify:
A. The entire facility to stale;
B. Above and below ground bulk storage
tanks;
C. The contents and capacities of bulk
storage tanks;
D. The contents and capacity of drum
storage areas;
E. the contents and capacities of surface
impoundments;
F. Process buildings;
G. Transfer areas;
H. Secondary containment systems
(location and capacity);
I. Structures where hazardous materials are
stored or handled, including materials stored
and capacity of storage;
J. Location of communication and
emergency response equipment; and
K. Location of electrical equipment which
contains oil.
2. The Site Drainage Plan Diagram should
include:
A. Major sanitary and storm sewers,
manholes, and drains;
B. Weirs and shut-off valves;
C. Surface water receiving streams;
D. Fire fighting water sources;
E. Other utilities;
F. Response personnel ingress and egress;
C. Equipment transportation routes; and
H. Direction of spill flow from release
points.
3. The Site Evacuation Plan Diagram
should include:
A. Site plan diagram with evacuation
route(s); and
B. Location of evacuation regrouping areas.
1.10 Security
Section 112.7(e)(9) of 40 CFR part 112,
revised as of July 1,1992, requires facilities
to maintain a certain level of security, as
appropriate. In this section, a description of
the facility security should be provided
including:
I. Emergency cut-off locations (automatic
or manual valves);
2. Enclosures (e.g., fencing, etc.);
3. Guards and their duties, day and night;
4. Lighting;
5. Valve and pump locks; and
6. Pipeline connection caps.
Section 112.7(g) of the October 22,1991
proposed revisions to the Oil Pollution
Prevention rule (56 FR 54612) contains
similar requirements. Duplicate information
may be photocopied and inserted in this
section.
2.0 Response Plan Caver Sheet
A three page, computer-readable form has
been developed to be completed and
submitted to the RA by owners and operators
who are required to prepare and submit a
facility-specific response plan. The cover
sheet (Attachment G-l) is intended to
accompany the response plan and provide
the Agency with basic information
concerning the facility. This section will
describe the Response Plan Cover Sheet and
provide instructions for its completion.
Page One—Facility Information
Owner/Operator of Facility: Enter the name
of the owner of the facility (if the owner is
the operator). Enter the operator of the
facility if otherwise. If the owner/operator of
the facility is a corporation, enter the name
of the facility's principle corporate executive.
Enter as much of the name as will fit in each
section.
Facility Name: Enter the proper name of
the facility.
Largest Tank Capacity: Enter the capacity
in GALLONS of the largest aboveground
storage tank at the facility.
Maximum Storage Capacity: Enter the total
maximum capacity in GALLONS of all
aboveground storage tanks at the facility.
Number of Tanks: Enter the number of all
aboveground storage tanks at the facility.
Page Two—Facility Information
Enter the street address, city. State, zip
code, and phone number of the facility in the
appropriate boxes.
Dun and Bradstreet Number: Enter the
facility's Dun and Bradstreet number if
available.
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
Code: Enter the facility's SIC code as
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules
8875
determined by the Office of Management and
Budget.
Worst Case Discharge Amount: Using
information from the worksheets in appendix
E, enter the amount of the worst case
discharge in GALLONS.
Page Three—Determination of Substantial
Harm
Using the flowchart provided in
Attachment C-l of appendix C, blacken the
appropriate circle to each question.
Explanations to referenced terms can be
found in appendix C. If an alternative
formula to the ones described in Attachment
C-QI Is used to calculate the planning
distance, documentation of the reliability and
analytical soundness of the formula must be
attached to the response plan cover sheet
Additional Information
Latitude and Longitude: Enter the facility
latitude and longitude in degrees, minutes,
and seconds.
Facility Distance to Navigable Waters:
Enter the nearest distance between an
opportunity for discharge (i.e., storage tank,
piping, or flowline) and a navigable water.
Certification
Complete this block after all other
questions have been answered.
BtUJHO code w«o-eo-o
-------
Attachment G-2 -
Page 1 of 3
RESPONSE PLAN COYER SHEET «
AITROYAl. fATIKKS IHATi:]
IMPORTANT
This form is intended to
be computer readable.
To complete this form,
entirely fill in the desired
circle with blade or blue
ink. Please do not fold,
staple, or mutilate this
form. Return this form
in a 9" * 12" envelope.
Please print requested
information In BOXES for
eadi Individual question.
CORRECT MARK
INCORRECT MARKS
EXAMPLE:
OWNER / OPERATOR OF FACILITY
FACILITY NAME
NAME
A
LAST NAME - First IS letter* I I FIRST NAME - First 12 letters
INSTRUCTIONS
This form is designed to
accompany a submitted
Response Pba
Explanations and detailed
Instructions can be found in
Appendix G.
Facility information contained
here will be returned with die
Response Flan.
MAXIMUM
STORAGE CAPACTIY
(GALLONS)
oooooo
NUMBER
OF TANKS
TT
pp
PMP<
PMP<
SOT
yyy
GENERAL INFORMATION
ftblc raporttoj burden tar the
cotecllon oI If* Information k
esltnulod to vary from or* hour
to 270 haua par response In lha
flnt yaw, wlh an ovataga at S
houri par mporaa. Thb asflmota
tidudas Hma tor ravtowho
xichkiq axhmg
data lourcei. gathering lha data
hrtiuctlonr sead
needed. and oompblitg and
reviewing lha ejection of
Intun nation. Sand commeriti
reoorclnq lha burden etflmate
of fhb Information. hdudng
uggesllora tor leduchg It*
buaan to : Chief. Information
Poicy Branch. PM-223. U.S.
Envkormantel Protection Agency.
401 M Stiaat. SW. Wortngton.
D.C. 20400: aid to lha OfAca of
^formation aid Regulatory Affaks.
Offloa of Management and Budget.
Vfaltigteft. D.C. 20603.
-------
• REMEMBER
USE BLACK OR BLUE INK
DO NOT FOLD, STAPLE, OR MUTILATE THIS FORM
FACILITY ADDRESS (Street address, route or box)
Indicate a tpaoe h the address by flfflng
in the blank circle rt the top of the corn
column.
559
Irate
tin
HI
HSm
H'H'j
UU
R?W ft?
C
<§
lil
AwKi
ooomescoiq
KbIWVjM
p iiti
$ s $ p & $ $ s m $ & & & &
O N K® ® P © ®< N ®, 8 V® P< >®< P
t«l J>1 l»J 10 (0 (') (0 A") (0 If) CO i') (?) (')
£?1? t? £?fc?1? ($ ti? Ef fcf
flSflfiBBfiSBSBSBBB
(I) j$ t® (!• (I) .©, m aB .©. SB. .0. .©. .© ffi.
DUN & BRADSTREET
NUMBER
STANDARD INDUSTRIAL
CLASSIFICATION (SIC)
ip
iiB
m
ordo
M
%mU
mUU
U.S. ZIP CODE
uuunu
08088
w««ww
gggeg
00053
8888
8888
aaoo
M Mi M M
Ouuu
FACILITY PHONE NUMBER
cafe
888888
Mis
8§§8§fl
SBB88B
WORST CASE
DISCHARGE AMOUNT
(GALLONS)
-------
Attachment G-2 (Continued)
Page 3 of 3
DETERMINATION OF SUBSTANTIAL HARM
Does die facility operation include over water transfers* of oil
to or from vessels and does the facility have a maximum
capacity greater than or equal to 42JOOO gallons?
Does the facility lack adequate secondary containment* for
each aboveground storage area sufficiently large to contain
the capacity of the largest at
that storage area and is the ti
or equal to one million gallons?
nd storage tank within
storage capacity greater than
Is die fadlihr located at a distance* that would shut down a
public drinking water intake and is the total storage capacity
greater than or equal to one million gallons?
Is die facility located at a distance* that could cause
injury to an environmentally sensitive area as
referenced in Appendix D and is the total storage
capacity greater than or equal to one mi Dion gallons?
Within the past five years, has the facility experienced a
reportable spill* exceeding 10,000 gallons and is the total
storage capacity greater tnan or equal to one million gallons?
o o
yei no
o
O
ye*
no
o o
yet no
o o
yq no
o
O
ye*
no
* Explanations of the above referenced' terms can be found in Appendix C. If an
alternative formula to the ones contained in Attachment C-DI is used to establish
the appropriate distance to sensitive environments or drinking water intakes,
documentation of the reliability and analytical soundness of tne formula must be
attached to this form.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
LATITUDE
(DEGREES: NORTH)!
LONGITUDE
(DEGREES: WEST)
min.
I mile
o
o
o
o
• REMEMBER
USE BLUE OR BLACK INK
DO NOT FOLD. STAPLE. OR MUTILATE THIS FORM
CI-:R I IFICATION
I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the Information
submitted In this document, and that based on my Inquiry of those Individuals responsible for
obtaining; Information, I believe that the submitted Information is true, accurate, and complete.
Signature
Name (please type or print)
Title
Date
MXMQ COM WO SO C
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 17, 1993 / Proposed Rules 8879
3.0 Definitions
Navigable Waters: Navigable waters
include all water* that are used in interstate
or foreign commerce, all interstate waters
including wetlands, and all intrastate waters
(e.g., lakes, rivers, streams, intermittent
streams, mudflats, sandflats, wetlands
sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows,
playa lakes, or natural ponds).
Oil: Oil in 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.
Production Facility: Onshore oil
production facilities may include all wells,
flowlines. separation equipment, storage
facilities, gathering lines, and auxiliary non-
txansportation-related equipment and
facilities in a single geographical oil or gas
field operated by a single operator.
Worst Case Discharge: See section
112.2(m). Worksheets to calculate wont case
discharge volume are included in appendix
E.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas: See
appendix D.
Wellhead Protection Area: The surface and
subsurface area surrounding a water well or
wellfield, supplying a public water system,
through which contaminants are reasonably
likely to move toward and teach such water
well or wellfield.
4.0 Acronyms
A CP: Area Contingency Plan
CHRIS: Chemical Hazards Response
Information System
CWA: Clean Water Act
DOT: Department of Transportation
EPA: Environmental Protection Agency
FEMA: Federal Emergency Management
Agency
gal: Gallons
HAZMAT: Hazardous Materials
LEPC: Local Emergency Planning Committee
NCP: National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Pollution Contingency Plan
NRC: National Response Center
NRT: National Response Team
OPA: Oil Pollution Act of 1990
OSG On-Scene Coordinator
RA: Regional Administrator
RCRA: Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act
RRT: Regional Response Team
SARA: Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act
SERC: State Emergency Response
SDWA; Safe Drinking Water Act of 1086
SI: Surface impoundment
SIC: Standard Industry Codes
SPCC: Spill Prevention, Control and
Countenneasures
USGG: United States Coast Guard
5.0 References
Concawe. 1982. Methodologies for Hazard
Analysis and Risk Assessment in the
Petroleum Refining and Storage Industry.
Prepared by Concawe's Risk Assessment Ad-
hoc Group.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development. 1987. Siting of HUD-Assisted
Projects Near Hazardous Facilities:
Acceptable Separation Distances from
Explosive and Flammable Hazards. Prepared
by the Office of Environment and Energy,
Environmental Planning Division,
Department of Housing and Urban
Development. Washington, DC
U.S. DOT, FEMA and U.S. EPA. Handbook
of Chemical Hazard Analysis Procedures.
U.S. DOT. FEMA and U.S. EPA. Technical
Guidance for Hazards Analysis: Emergency
Planning for Extremely Hazardous
Substances.
The National Response Team. 1987.
Hazardous Materials Emergency Planning
Guide. Washington, DC.
The National Response Team. 1990. OiJ
Spill Contingency Planning. National Status:
A Report to the President. Washington, DC
U.S. Government Printing Office.
Offshore Inspection and Enforcement
Division. 1988. Minerals Management
Service, Offshore Inspection Program:
National Potential Incident of
Noncompliance (P1NC) List. Reston, VA.
[FR Doc. 93-3396 Filed 2-16-93; 8:45 ami
hjjhb eooe ssso so r
-------
Friday
April 9, 1993
Part VII
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 112
Oil Pollution Prevention; Correction;
Proposed Rule
-------
19030
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 67 / Friday, April 9, 1993 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 112
[SWH-FHL 4612-7]
RIN 2050-AD 30
Oil Pollution Prevention; Non-
T ranaportatlon-Related Onahore
Facllltiea; Corraetlon
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; corrections.
SUMMARY: To ensure consistency with
the regulatory text, EPA is correcting
errors in the technical appendices to the
proposed rule for facility response plans
required by the Oil Pollution Act (OPA)
of 1990, which appeared in the Federal
Register on February 17,1993.
DATES: Comments on the February 17,
1993, proposed rule (58 FR 8824), as
corrected by this notice, must be
submitted on or before April 19,1993.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bobbie Uvely-Diebold, Response
Standards and Criteria Branch,
Emergency Response Division (S202G),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
401M Street, SW., Washington, DC
20460 at 703-356-8774; the ERNS/
SPCC Information line ait 202-260-2342;
or the RCRA/Superfund Hotline at 800-
424-9346 (in the Washington, DC
metropolitan area, 703-920-9810). The
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf
(TDD) Hotline number is 800-553-7672
(in the Washington, DC metropolitan
area, 703-186-3323).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
EPA published a proposed rule in the
Federal Register on February 17,1993
(58 FR 8824), that would revise the Oil
Pollution Prevention regulation, 40 CFR
part 112, originally promulgated under
the authority of section 311(j) of the
Clean Water Act. The proposed revision
would incorporate new requirements
added by section 4202(a) of the OPA,
Public Law 101-380.104 Stat. 484,
subtitle B that directs 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. The proposed rule would
affect owners and operators of non-
transportation-related onshore facilities.
Need for Correction
The proposed rule contained minor
errors that may be misleading and
should be corrected. In addition,
although referenced in the preamble and
regulatory text and available in the
public docket, appendix H was
inadvertently omitted from the
proposed rule.
Correction of Publication
Accordingly, the proposed rule is
corrected as follows:
1. On page 8851, in the first column,
Amendment 7 which reads, "7. Part
112, as proposed to be revised at 56 FR
54630, is amended by adding
appendices C through G to read as
follows:" is corrected to read as follows:
"7. Part 112, as proposed to be revised
at 56 FR 54630, is amended by adding
appendices C through H to read as
follows:"
2. On page 8851, in the second
column, in the first full paragraph under
section 2.1, the text which reads, "(1)
Transportation-Related Facilities
Greater Than or Equal to 42,000 Gallons
Where Operations Include Over-Water
Transfer of Oil—A transportation-
related facility with a total storage
capacity greater than 42,000 gallons that
transfers oil over water to or from
vessels must submit a response plan to
EPA." is corrected to read as follows:
"(1) Facilities Greater Than or Equal
to 42,000 Gallons Where Operations
Include Over-Water Transfers of Oil—A
facility with a total storage capacity
greater than 42,000 gallons that transfers
oil over water to or from vessels must
submit a response plan to EPA."
3. On page 8851, in the second
column, in the second full paragraph
under section 2.1, in line 8. "each" is
corrected to read "any".
4. On page 8852, within the second
box down on the right side of the page
that contains the substantial harm
criterion for secondary containment,
"each" is corrected to read "any".
5. On page 8853, in the first column,
in paragraph number "2", in line 5,
"each" is corrected to read "any".
6. On page 8854, in the second
column, in Table 2, under item (1),'
"State Department of Naval Resources"
is corrected to read "State Department
of Natural Resources".
7. On page 8858, in the second
column, in Attachment D-I, the entry in
the first column "Areas" which reads
"Habitat used by designated or
proposed endangered/threatened
species or marine mammals defined as
depleted" is corrected to read "Habitat
used by designated or proposed
endangered/threatened species or
marine mammals".
8. On page 8878, within the second
question on the left side of the page that
addresses the substantial harm criterion
for secondary containment, "each" is
corrected to read "any".
9. On page 8879, following appendix
G, appendix H is added as follows:
MLXJNO COM BMP 00 II
-------
19032
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 67 / Friday, April 9, 1993 / Proposed Rules
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321 and 1361: E.O.
12777 (3 CFR. 1991 Comp.. p. 351).
Dated: March 31,1993.
Walter W. Kmlkk, Jr.,
Acting Assistant Administrator.
|FR Doc. 93-8393 Filed 4-4-93; 8:45 am)
MLUNQ CMH HIMM
-------
APPENDIX H TO PART 112 --
BRITTLE FRACTURE CONSIDERATIONS IN API STANDARD 653
-------
jv F. WESTON
*
TEL : 609-461-4916
Oct 08'93
9:52 No .004 P.02
Wednesday
November 4, 1992
Part V
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 112, at al.
Ctvll Penalty Provisions for the Oil
Pollution Prevention Regulations, Clean
Water Act Notification Provision anci
Prohibition Against Unauthorized
Discharges of Oil and Hazardous
Substances; Interim Final Rule
-------
F. WESTON TEL: 609-461-4916 Oct 08*93 9:52 No .004 P.03
S27Q4 Federal Register / Vol. 37. No.' 214 / Wednesday, November 4. 1992 / Roles and Regulations
ENVIftONIICMTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY ¦ *
40 Cffl Part* lift, ,114 and tl7
CHril Penalty Provisions for th# Oil
Pollution Prevention Regulation*,
Clean Water Aot Notification Provision
and Prohibition Against Unautfiortood
Discharge* of OH and Hazardous
Substance*
AOCNCr; Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTIO* interim final rule.
summary: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) today publishes en
interim final rule which Unite the
applicability of the adminietrative
penalty assessment provisions of the
Agency's regulations on oil pollution
prevention and reportable quantities for
hazardous substances. Thau provisions
are being amended in light of new
authorities for the aasassment of civil
administrative and judicial penalties
under the Oil Pollution Act (OPA).
OAT**; EQectiv* data; The interim final
rule shall be effective November 4.1992.
Comments: EPA will accept poet-
publication comments until December 4,
1902.
ADORlsau: Persons may mail two
copies of all comments on this interim
final rule to Cecilia L Smith. Office of '
Waste Programs Enforcement. (OS-BM),
Envfronnuiotai Protection Agency, 401M
Street SW, Washington DC 2MecLTb«
administrative record of this rulemaking
is avallabls and persona may inspect
comments at the above address.
Cecilia I_SaUUu.Of8ea of Wast* . . .
PrognmrEnfofeamenti ssnc. - ¦ • ~
Environmental Ptotorilnr Agency. 401M
8treet SW., Washington, DC ZM60, (7031
00S-3943.
aumjEMiKTAPV mpomsjmon.
I. Preamble
Oil Pollution Pnvgntlon Regulation*
The civil penalty provision of the oil
pollution prevention regulations (40 CFR
112.6). and the related civil penalty
provisions and procedures at 40 CFR
part 114 were promulgated in 1974
pursuant to section 3ll(J) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act. 33 U.S.C.
1321, also known as the Clean Water
Act (CWA) (39 FR 31002. August 29.
1974), Part 112 sets out, for onshore and
offshore non-trensportation-reUted
facilities, requirements designed to
prevent discharges of oil into "navigable
waters and adjoining shorelines." 40
CFR 111 9 ami ma each provide that »
violation* oi thaoU pollution prevaBtftfT
regulations may result in the assacasssnt
of an administrative penalty of net more!-:
than 98,000 per day of violation. 49 CFR
112.6 and 114,1 are based on authority in'
CWA section 31l(j)(2). which, before ita .
amendment by the Oil Pollution Act of -
1900 (OPA). limited civil penalties
assessed for violations of regulation* . .
issued under section 3ii(j) to "not more r
than 95,000 for each such violation." i
The OPA repealed CWA section
3l1(i)(2) and amended CWA section
311(b)(0) to provide that violator* of '
CWA section 311(1) may be asaeeeed a
Class I penalty of up to 110,000 par /
violation (up to a maximum assessment
of 82S.00Q), or a Class a penalty of up to
$10,000 per day of violation (up to a
maximum assessment of 9125,000).'..
Further, section 311(b)(0) now provide* '
for different administrative proceedings
for these two classes of pens I Ha*
Respondents in Class I cases axe given a.
reasonable Opportunity to be beard 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. 554). ¦
Qass Q hearings, however, are aa the
record and subject to 5 U.S.C. 584.
At a sesuit or the savings pro vision fat
section 6001 of the OPA. if ill# and
114.1 continue in effect until repealed,
amended or superseded. Today's
regulation amends 40 CFR 1124 aod
1142 by making them applicable only to
violations occurring prior to August it <
1900. the date of enactment of the OIL
¦ » -* Aa*
rOUUU9v /VSis
Tha OPA alaa amended CWA section
311(b) to provide for the Judicial
assess Blent of civil penalties of np to
"3254)0&petday of violation."
. Notifica6aa*fPisd>arg9(t)
«D CFR 117 generally establishes tha
reportable quantities for hazardous '
"sobstenoeodesignated under 40CFR tie.
for purpoe** of CWA section 31L 40
CFR U7.21 sets out the notification
reqidiwuent for discharges of design a isit
hasardous substances pursuant to CWA
section 811(b)(6). 40 CFR 11722(a)
provides that violation(s) of the
notification requirement may rasdkln a
fine of not more than S10.000 or ,
imprisonment for not more thanoao
year, or both. 40 CFR 117.22(a) is based
on language in former CWA section
311(b)(6). which was later amended by-
the OPA. Section 4301 of the OPA
amended CWA section 311(b)(5) to
provide that any criminal penalty for •
violetion of the notification requirement
in CWA section 311(b)(5) be "in
accordance with title IB. United States
Code, or imprisoned for not mora than 5
s years. or both." Aa a result of the
untilgs provision in section 6001 of the
OPA. 40 CFR 117.22(a) continues in
..effect until repealed, amended, or
aoperseded. Today'e regulation amends
- ( 117.22(a) by making it applicable only
to violations occurring prior to August
.18.. 1990, the date of enactment of the Oil
' Pb&stion Act
\Prolabfticn Against Unauthorized
DitdmgM
'40 CFR 117.22(b) provides thet an
; owner, operator or a person in charge of
a veesel or facility that has discharged a
designated hasardous substance
• exceedtag the reportable quantity may
be eubfect to a civil administrative
penalty assessment of up to S3.000 per
. violation. The regulation also states that
tha Agency may pureue a judicial civil
penalty action, seeking up to 850.000 per
violation: where tha discharge resulted
from willful negligence or willful
mieconduct the maximum Judicial civil
penalty is 1250.000.40 CFR 117.22(b) is
band on language in former CWA
eaetion 311(b)(6)(A). which was
aaianded by the OPA.
Section 4301 of OPA repealed CWA
. eeetion 911(b)(6) and replaced it with a
new penalty assessment framework. *
CWA section 311(b)(6) now provides
that violators of the prohibition against
unauthorized discharges in section
311(b)(3) may be assessed a Class I
penalty of up to giaooo per violation (up
to a maximum assessment of 525,000) or
a Class II penalty of up to 910.000 per
day of violation (up to a maximum
assessment of 9125.000).
As a result of ths savings provision in
section QOOl of the OPA. 40 CFR 117.22
csatlnuat in effect until repealed,
amended or superceded. Today's
regalation amends 40 CFR 117.22 by
making it applicable only to violations
, occurring prior to Auguat 16.1990. the
data of enactment of the Oil Pollution
Act
Section 4301 of OPA also added CWA
JC6t»D 311(b)(7), which provides for the
judicial assessment of civil penalties for
violation* of CWA section 311(b)(3) of
up to "323,000 per day of violation" or
vp to "91.000 per barrel of oil or unit of
reportable quantity of hasardous
substances." For violations of section
311(b)(3) that are a result of gross
negligence or willful misconduct, the
violator now is subject to a dvil penalty
of "not lees than 9100.000 and not more
than 93.000 per barrel or oil or unit of
reportable quantity or hasardous
discharged"
-------
utiTON TEL:609-461-4916 Oct 08*93 9=53 No.004 P.04
Federal. Regifltar / Vd. 57. No. 214 / Wednesday. November 4. 1992 / Rulea and Regulations 52705
Today 'g. htieriatFmal,Regulation
Qawpnae cWitty intended that
violation d dwell polbstion prevention
regnbufenavVtaAattass d the section
miiihUuis imjuirwaent. and
violation* of thai pohibftftm against
unauthorised dbdieqp* ta section
3tUbQ9).0GBari89attB the OPAt
pu«p shoeid to subject to a morr
riUuiiiugpnaHy frameworkthan •
previous*? was tfaa case. Funiiararh.
the OPA establishes procedure* that
differ from those set forth la 40 CFR114.
The Agency'aiaUot under 40 CFR parts
112,114 and. 117 has always been to
allot* civil peaalty assessment* up to
the maximum amount allowed under the
8 labile. In light, of the recent statalory
change to toe maximum amount of cMl
penaltta* provided tor violation* of
CWA section 3T1(J} regulations. CWA
section ttl(b)W ®»d CWA section
311(b)(3)1, the Agency's existing
regulation* on thfr matter need to be
changed to conform to the statutory
amendments. The Agency believes that
such a conforming change reflecting,
explicit Congressional intent does net
warrant notice and opportunity for
comment under the Administrative
Procedure Act and that there it good
cause for publishing thfo rate In interim
final form. For the same reason, tha
Agency believes there is good cause for
malting the rule effective immediately.
Consequently, this rule is published as
an interim final rule amending 40 CFR
112.6.114.1 and 117.22 with regard to
any violations occurring after the date of
the OPA's enactment (August 18.1900).
40 CFR 112.6.114.1 and 117.22 still apply,
however, to violations that occurred
prior to August 18.1990.
Interim Procedures
Ad a result of today's interim final
rule, there will be no promulgated niies
containing procedures for assessing
administrative penalties for CWA
Section 311 regulatory violations or
violations of section 311(b)(3) occurring
after August 18,1990. The Agency,
however, will use two existing sets of
procedures as 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
Penalties (58 FR 29998. July 1.1901).
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 U penalties, the
Agency intends to use as guidance the
Consolidated Rules of Practice
Governing the Administrative
Aaaeaaneiu ef Civil PenalUea and tha
Revocetioivor Suepeaaioa of Permits at
40 CFR 22.40 CFR 22 satisfies the
requirement* of the APA for
adfodloiteqi hearings on the record. Tha
Agaaey intends in sear future to
ameodttCFftStoincorpontathe
OPA Amendments to the CWA.
IL Procedural Requirements
A. Review Under Executive Order tSSdl
Executive Order No. 12281 requires
that all Proposed and final regulation*
be classified a* major or mwmajer
rales. The Agency has determined that
thie final rule ta note major rule tinder
Executive Order 12291 because it will
not result in may of the impacts
delineated in the Executive Order.
A Review Under tha Regulatory
Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of I960.
5 U.S.C 601 etseq. require* that a
Regdatory Flexibility Analysis be
performed for all rules that are likely to
have "significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entitles."
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, as required by
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, EPA
hereby certifies that this final rule will
not have a significant impact en small
entities.
C. Review Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act
This rule does not contein any
Information collection requirements
subject to OMB review under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980-(44
U.8.C. 3501 el seq.).
If!. Additional Opportunity for Public
Comment
EPA has issued today's rule as an
Interim final rule in order to provide a
limited opportunity until December 4,
1992 for public comment. After
evaluating any comments which are
received, EPA will decide whether a
response is warranted.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Pert 112
Oil pollution. Penalties. Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements-
40CFRPateil4
Admiirietrelfv* practice- and
procedure. Oil peflutton. Penalties.
40 CFR Port 117
Hazardw* substances* Penalties.
Reporting and recordkeeping
requicenenta. Water pollution. enniroL
Dete& October 2ftlM£
William 1C Ratty,
Admiw'ttratOr.
For theieeaoneeai out in. tha
preamble* parts. 112. 114 and 117 of
chapter I of Utla 40 of the Coda of
Federal Regulations* ara. amended, aa sec
forth below.
PART 11»-<)IL»OLUmO*
PREVEWTTOK
1. The authority citation for pert 112 is
revised to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 311. S01(s). Federal Water
Pollution Cbntrol Act (mc 2. Pub. L 92-600.
BS Stat. Mil sea. (» U*C. 1251 st seq.))!
seb 4(bk tab, Ltt-ttO. as Stat aan s LAC
Reof* Planet No. 3119701.35 FR.lsa23.
2 CFR lSaa-1970 Comp.; E.O.11735. 38 FR
31243.3 CFR. superseded by E.O.12777. 56 FR
54757.
2. Section 112.6 is revised to read as
follows:
9112.6 Ctvfl penalties 'or violation o' oil
pollution prevention raguiationa.
(a) Applicability of section. 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
subject to § 112.3 (a), (b) or (c) who
violate the requirements of this part U2
by failing or refusing to comply with any
of the provisions ofi 112.3.1 112.4 or
i 112.6 shall be liable for a civil penalty
of not more than 66.000 for each day
such violation continues. Civil penalties
shall be imposed in accordance with
procedures set out in part 114 of this
subchapter D.
PART 114—CIVIL PENALTIES FOR
VIOLATION OP OIL POLLUTION
PREVENTION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part in i»
revised to read as follows:
Authority: Sees. 311.501|«), Pub L- 92-500.
8S Slat. 888. BBS (33 U.S.C. 1321. 1381(4)1
2. Section 114.1 is revised to read as
follows:
1114.1 General applicability.
(a) Applicability of section. This
section shall apply to violations
specified in paragraph (b) of this section
which occurred prior to August IB. 1990-
-------
9:54 No .004 P.Uo
r. ujESTQn TEL:609-461-4916 Oct 08'93
S2706 Federal Regiitor / Vol. 67, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 4, 1992 / Rules end Regulations
(b) Owners or operators of facilities
, subject to S1113 (a), (b) or (c) of this
subdiapter who violate the
requirement* of part-112 of thia-
subchapter D by falling or fefasing to -
comply with any of the provisions of
|| 1124,11X4, or 1134 of this :
subchapter shall be liable for a civil
penalty of sot more than f&OOO for eaeh
day such violation eonttaues. Civil
penalties shall be assessed and
compromised in accordance with thia
pert No penalty shall be essessed until
the owner or operator shall have been
given notice and as opportunity for
hearing in accordance with thia part
PART 117—OCTCRIIIMATION OP
REPORTABLE QUANTITIES FOR
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
1. The authority citation for part 117 is
revised to read aa follows:
Authority: Sacs. 311 and 801(a). Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (93 U.&C. 1291 et
teq.). ("the Act") and Executive Order 11799,
superceded by Bxecotive Order 12777.86 PR
947S7.
2. Section 117.22 la revised to read as
follows:
1117.22
(a) Applicability of section. This
section snail apply to violationa
specified in paragraphs (b) and (c) of' '•
this section whhah occurred prior to '
August 18.1900. •
(o) Any parson in charge of a veasel or
an onshore or offshore facility who fails
to notify the United States Government"
of e prohibited discharge pursuant to •
111721 (except in the ease of a.
dischain beyond the contiguous sone,
where the person in charge of a vessel is
not otherwise subject to the jurisdiction.
of the United States) shall be subfect to
a Hne of not more than $10,000 or
Imprisonment for not more than one
year, or both: pursuant to section
311(b)(5).
(c) The owner, operator or person in
charge of a vessel or en onshore or
oflbhore facility from which is
discharged a hazardous substance
designated in 40 CFR part 118 in a
quantity equal to or exceeding in any 24-
hour period, the reportable quantity
established in this part (except in the
case of a discharge beyond the
contiguous zone, where the person in
charge of a vessel is not otherwise
subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States, shall be assessed a civil penalty
of. up to $5,000 par violation under
section 911(b)(6)(A). Alternatively, upon
a determination by the Administrator, a
civil action will be commensedunder .
section 311(b)(6)(B) to impooe a penalty _
not to exceed $804)00 unless such ¦
discharge is the result of willful
negligence or willful mieconduct. within
the privity and knowledge of'the owner,
operator, or person in charge, in which ..
case'the penalty shall not exceed
Notes The Admlnlitretor will take into
account the gravity of the oKenee end the
standard of care manifest by the owner,
open tor. or person tat charge in determining -
whether a civil action will be commenced
under lectiea 311(bHSj(BV The gravity of the
offense will be interpreted to Include the ilse
of the discharge, the degree of danger or harm
to the public health, safety, or the
environment, including consideration of
toxicity, degradabillty, and dispersal
chsrecteristics of the substance, previous
spill history, and previous violation of any
tpill prevention regulations' Particular. .
emphasis will be placed an the standard of
care end the extent of mitigation efforts
manifest by the owner, operator, or person in
charge.
[FRDoCi 03-9M81 Filed ll-a-es &49 am|
-------
SPCC OUTREACH: SPILL PREVENTION CONTROL
AND COUNTERMEASURE
WHO CAN YOU CALL?
SPCC/OPA Hotline
202-260-2342
National Response Center
800-484-8802
U.S. EPA Region III
800-392-1973 (+Extension) or
215-59 (+Extension)
Region HI SPCC Personnel, Their Title and Phone Extension:
Dave Wright, Chief, Oil and Title III Section-75998
Vince Zenone, OSC/SPCC Coordinator--73i38- *9 3-i ¥
Linda Ziegler, Oil Program Coordinator
and FRP Coordinator--? 1395
Regina Starkey, Oil Enforcement Coordinator
and FRP Co-Lead Coordinator-71395
Paula Curtin, Oil Enforcement Specialist--304-234-0256
Bernie Stepanski, Investigator—73152
Frank Cosgrove, Oil Inspector-71357
-------
SPCC
COMMONLY USED CWA-OPA-SPCC ACRONYMS
ACP Area Contigency Plan
AST Aboveground Storage Tank
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
& Liability Act of 1980
CWA Clean Water Act
DOJ Department of Justice
DOT Department of Transportation
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
ERNS Emergency Response Notification System
FRP Facility Response Plan
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
NCP National Contingency Plan
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRC National Response Center
NRT National Response Team
OPA Oil Pollution Act
PE Professional Engineer
RA Regional Administrator
-------
RCP Regional Contingency Plan
RCRA Resource Conservation & Recovery Act
RQ Reportable Quantity
SIC Standard Industrial Classification (Code)
SPCC Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (Plan)
USCG United States Coast Guard
UST Underground Storage Tank
WHPA 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 IFWPCA)
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.
Sourcs: 40 CFR Part 112 (7-1-90)
-------
I\IU /ra
Breakdown of Oil Spill Reports
Region III - Fiscal Year 1992
Souroa: Regional Response Center (Six Year Trends)
Sources Of Oil Spills
Transportation
159-T
Non-Transportation
09 r
Inland Spill Classification
< 1,000 gallons —> MINOR
1,000 -10,000 gallons—> MEDIUM
> 10,000 gallons —> MAJOR
-------
SPCC HISTORY
Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation
£
nun
¦ Spill Prevention, Control and Counter-
measures (SPCC), became effective January
10, 1974.
~ Derives authority from Section
311 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA).
SPCC Mi»©fy
SPCC HISTORY
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
¦ Developed between the EPA and DOT to
clarify the meanings of "Transportation and
Non-Transportation-Related Facilities".
SPCC Httery
SPCC HISTORY
Amendments to SPCC Regulation
¦ August 29, 1974:
> Set forth EPA's policy on civil penalties
for violating Section 311 of CWA.
¦ March 26, 1976:
*¦ Clarified SPCC applicability criteria.
~ Specified that SPCC plans must be written.
» Outlined procedures for developing an
SPCC plan for mobile facilities.
* SPCC
-------
¦
SPCC HISTORY
9 ¦ Major Oil Spill - January 2, 1988
¦ - 4tmillion 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.
HI91S
SPCCHiaocy
SPCC HISTORY
SPCCTask Force Report
¦ Focused on prevention of large catastrophic
spills.
¦ Made recommendations regarding the
Federal SPCC program.
SPCC Htiery
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.
SPCC Hitsry
-------
SPCC HISTORY
OPA-1990
r Signed into law on August 18, 1990.
d Made significant modifications to Section
311 of CWA.
SPCC Httvry
OPA KEY PROVISIONS
b Expands Federal Role In Response
¦i Establishes Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund
¦ Requires Contingency Planning (FRP)
« Requires Double Hulls
¦ Provides For Research And Development
¦ Increases Liabilty For Spills
OPA-1990
Liability Limitations
¦ Tank vessels > 3,000GT's; $1,200/GT or $10M,
whichever is greater
¦ Tank vessels s; 3,000GTs; S1.200/GT or S2M,
whichever is greater.
¦ Any other vessel, S600/GT or $500,000, whichever is
greater.
¦ For offshore facilities, except deepwater ports, the
total of the removal costs plus $75M.
¦ For onshore facilities and deepwater ports,
$350M/spill.
"" STCC Hitsiy
¦4*
-------
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 1he
CWA or the Intervention on the High Seas Act.
SPCC Hitery
Section 112.2
Important Definitions
¦ Oil
¦ Discharge; Spill Event
¦ Harmful Quantity; Applicable Water Quality
Standards
¦ Navigable Waters; Adjoining Shorelines
¦ Owner a Operator
¦ Non-Transportation Related Facility
¦ Onshore and Offshore Facility
sec 2-1
Section 112.1
SPCC applies to:
b 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 under-ground storage capacity
> 42,000 gallons, or
+ Have a total above-ground storage capacity
> 1,320 gallons, or
» Have a single, above-ground storage tank
with a capacity > 660 gallons.
112J. Qanerej Aopicaolny
-------
The SPCC regulation
Section 112.1
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,
State, and Local laws.
OIL
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
(AS ME)
• American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
• Underwriters Laboratory (UL)
ttC-10
112.1 Apeiieability
Section 112.3
Time Requirements ©
¦ Facilities are required to:
• develop a plan within 6 months of
starting operations.
• fully implement the plan within
1 year of starting operations.
IHU
C
-------
I\IU I CS
Section 112.3
Mobile Facilities
1 n Must have an SPCC plan prepared in
¦ accordance with 40 CFR Part 112.7
1 ¦ No mobile facility can legally operate without
1 having an SPCC plan implemented.
icoi
Section 112.3
Other Requirements
n The SPCC plan must be reviewed and ^
certified by a PE, and g
d Must be available to the RA for review during
normal working hours.
tec*
•a
Section 112.3
Extensions of Time ©
¦ Can be granted by the RA because of the
non-availability of qualified personnel or
delays in construction or equipment delivery,
beyond the control of the owner/operator.
*
-------
Submitting Plans to EPA
Section 112.4
¦ 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.
SCC*1
112.4 RA Plan Amendments
Section 112.4
Written Reports Include:
¦
Copy of SPCC plan.
¦
Facility name
¦
Owner/operator name.
¦
Location of facility.
¦
Date of initial operation.
¦
Maximum oil storage capacity and average daily
throughput.
112.4 AA Plan Amerdnwrm
Section 112.4
Written Reports (cont.)
¦ Facility description
¦ Cause(s) of the spill(s).
¦ Corrective measures taken.
¦ Additional preventative measures.
¦ Other information requested by the RA.
112.4 M Pljp MMIWH
-------
Section 112.4
If the RA Proposes Amendment(s)
¦ The owner/operator will be notified via
certified mail, and must
• make the amendment(s) part of the
plan within 30 days.
• implementthe amendment(s) within
6 months.
HtW
112.4 RA Plan Ameromens
o Informal appeal to RA:
• Written statements or views opposing
the amendment
n Formal appeal to the EPA Administrator:
• Clear, concise statement of the issues.
• Additional information from any other
person.
T12.4 RA Pttn Anwtimerte
Section 112.5
Owner/Operator Amendments
¦ The owner or operator must review the
facility's SPCC plan every 3 years.
¦ 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.
ms Ownvffepefasr ftan Aiwflmm
-------
NOTES
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 oii.
¦ The amendments) must be fully
implemented within 6 months.
112-3 Owner/opeiast ?lan nana mens
Section 112.5
Examples of changes:
¦
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.
«C4
EPA's Goal:
^jSOMPUANCEj
-------
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 incidentfrom 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.
112.6 Civil Penaiic
Section 112.5
Civil Penalties
» 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.
¦ 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.
11Z5 Crvit Peranea
Section 112.6
Types of Civil Penalties
1.
Class I Penalties:
*¦ Can not exceed 310,000 per violation.
~ Maximum penalty of S25.000. -affVi
2.
Class II Penalties:
~ Can not exceed $10,000 per day for each
day the violation continues.
~ Maximum penalty of $125,000.
3.
OOJ referrals:
IttACtmt P*i
-------
Section 112.7
General Information
¦ SPCC plans should be prepared using good
engineering practices, and
¦ Have the full approval of management with „
the authority to commit the necessary |8j
resources. «
•
1127 Plan
net
Section 112.7
General Information (cont.)
1 ¦ An SPCC plan includes:
1 *¦ Predictions of equipment failure.
1 »- Appropriate containment or
1 diversionary structures.
llttM
112.7 Plan Pooaruon
Outfatne*
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.
mr ran r>«uon auaw
-------
Section 112.7
Containment or Diversionary Structures
For offshore facilities:
»• Curbing, drip pans.
»• Sumps and collection systems.
1127 Ptan PieoawenGuiieim
Section 112.7
Containment or Diversionary Structures
If installing structures or equipment is not
practicable, you must:
»• Maintain a written spill contingency plan
(40 CFR 109), and
»• Have a written commitment of equipment
and materials to contain and abate a
spill.
1127 Ptan Psoanfioft Guajatm
Section 112.7
Guidelines
1.
Facility drainage, onshore. "
2.
Bulk storage tanks, onshore. *
3.
Facility transfer operations, pumping, and
in-plant processes. *
4.
Facility tank car and tank truck loading/
unloading, onshore.
5.
Inspection and records.
* Excludes production facilities
1127 Ptoft Nomoor Qua*i
-------
Guidelines (cont.)
Section 112.7
6.
Security.*
7.
Personnel training and spill prevention
procedures.
0.
Oil production facilities, onshore.
!5.
Oil drilling and workover facilities, onshore.
10.
Oil drilling, production, or workover facilities,
offshore.
" Excludes production facilities
1127 Pbfl P«oa
-------
*
Section 112.7
Bulk Storage Tanks - Onshore (cont.)
¦ 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 resealed under
proper supervision.
Proper records are kept.
112.7 Plan Peoa/anon Guoeicw
Section 112.7
* Bulk Storage Tanks - Onshore (cont)
¦ Buried metallic tanks
~ Protect from corrosion
»¦ Pressure test regularly
¦ Partially buried metallic tanks
~ Should be avoided unless the buried
portion is protected from corrosion.
112.7 Plan PvoaiawnGudtttm
Section 112.7
* Bulk Storage Tanks - Onshore (cont.)
¦ Aboveground tanks
»¦ Periodic integrity testing.
* Frequent visual inspections.
a Internal healing coils
~ Exhaust should be monitored or treated.
112.7 Ptoft P»0MBOn Qui
daliw
-------
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.
112.7 Ptar *«pamuonQuKiotnef
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
regularly.
• Warnings must be posted to warn traffic of
aboveground piping.
lltMl
112? Plan PepanuenQudeiinei
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.
• Ail 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.
UCIi*
**2.7 Ptan ."
-------
Section 112.7
Oil Production Facilities - Onshore
¦ Drainage:
y Dikes must be sealed closed except when
being drained.
*¦ Drainage ditches should be checked regularly
for accumulation of oil.
¦ Bulk storage tanks:
*¦ Must be compatible with the oil to be stored.
*¦ Must have secondary containment.
» Undiked areas should flow to a catchment
basin or holding pond.
~ Must be visually inspected on a regular
basis.
lltNl
112? Han Peoa/aMonGiMoetne*
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
1127 Ptan PeoamtonQurteivw*
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.
¦ The facility must maintain a program of
flowline maintenance.
112.7 Ptort PaoMiBAQuidai"
-------
Section 112.7
Drilling and Work over Facilities - Onshore
¦¦¦¦—— ¦
¦ Mobile equipment must be positioned so as
to prevent a spill into the water.
¦ Blowout prevention assemblies and well
controls should be used.
>1(141
I
112.7 Pian PeoajaoonGuciftifin
Section 112.7
Drilling, Production, or Workover Facilities -
Offshore
¦ Surface and sub-surface shut-in valves should be
easily identifiable.
¦ Prior to drilling, a blowout prevention assembly and
well control system should be installed.
¦ Extra-ordinary well control measures should be in
place in case of emergencies.
¦ Sub-marine pipelines should be protected from
environmental stress and other activities.
112J Nan PeeaiaoonQudeiffn
PROPOSED RULE
Revision of Section 112.7 ]
• Section 772.7 - SPCC plan 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 772.77 - SPCC plan requirements for
offshore oil drilling, production, or workover
facilities.
" ltt.0 Civil Pans
tm
-------
Evaluation of the Plan/Program
¦
Is your plan current and effective?
¦
Do your people know what to do when a
spill occurs?
¦
Does the equipment work?
B
Can your people use the equipment
safely and effectively?
¦
Do they know who to call for help?
-------
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.
l
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION III
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND RECORD OF 8PCC INSPECTION/PLAN REVIEW
SPCC CASE NUMBER: DATE:
TO: Vincent E. Zenone, OSC/SPCC Coordinator (3HW34)
FROM:
Name of Facility:
Address:
City:
County: State:
Facility Contact/Title:
Telephone Number:
Name of Owner/operator:
Address:
City: State:
Telephone Number:
Synopsis of business operations:
Acknowledgement:
I acknowledge that an SPCC inspection of this facility
was conducted on the day of , 19 .
Facility Signature:
(printed name):
Inspector's Signature:
(printed name):
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 to SPCC Coordinator, copy to facility representative]
-------
40 CFR Part 112.20
Facility Response Plans
-------
United States Office of Publication 9360.8-01FS
Environmental Protection Solid Waste and
Agency Emergency Response December 1991
x>EPA 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. Tlte 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 $1-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 31 l(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
-------
destroy a vessel discharging, or threatening to
discharge. It" 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,
OPA 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 etseq.y, (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 S250,000 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 1 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
-------
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.
04. 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 OI'A
• 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 re
revisions to the NCP required by the OPA. A
subworkgroup has been established to focus on
revising Subpart J to establish procedures tor
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 .
-------
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 31 l(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 isee Question # in
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 thai uses the
best technology economically feasible and is
consistent with the safe operation of the 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
-------
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.
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 parlies 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 Sl.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)(1) of the OPA,
however, provides the Federal government with the
authority to adjust, by regulation, the $350-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 discharge, of oil.
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 m
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
-------
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 IS
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?
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 Slate 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.
A. Section 7001 of the OPA requires that an
interagency committee be established to coordinate
-------
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-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. Reflations addressing facility response plans
are required to be pK;mulgated 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 musi 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 Response I'lnns
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 thai 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.
-------
&ERA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency (OS-120)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty tor Private Use
$300
First-Class Mail
Postage and Fees Paid
EPA
Permit No. G-35
-------
In 1990, Congress passed the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) in part 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 Part 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.
OPA HOTLINE (202) 260-2342
United States Office of
Environmental Protection Solid Waste and
Agency 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
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, §112.20(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 to an 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.
1 Navigable water? are defined in CWA §502(7) and at 40 CFR 110.1 a* waters of the United Slates, including the temtonal
seas. This definition includes, among other things, lakes, riven, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, and wetlands.
-------
Highlight 1
SELF-SELECTION CRITERIA
Under the proposed rule, a facility would fall
under the "substantial harm" 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 had, 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. As set forth in § 112.20(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 does not 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 an 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 §11220(f)(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 §112.20(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:
-------
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
"repare and implement an SPCC Plan. SPCC Plans
locus 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
1,320 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 2
(908) 321-6656
EPA Region 3
(215) 597-5998/1357
EPA Region 4
(404) 347-3931
EPA Region 5
(312) 886-6236
EPA Region 6
(214) 655-2270
EPA Region 7
(913) 551-5000
EPA Region 8
(303) 293-1788
EPA Region 9
(415) 744-1500
EPA Region 10
(206) 553-1090
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 States
Environmental Protection
Agancy (OS-120)
Washington, OC 20460
Official Bualnaaa
Penalty tor Private Um
$300
Flrat-Claas Mall
Poataga and Faaa Paid
EPA
Permit No. G-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
-------
• 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 G 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.)
1 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
Countermeasuie (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.
-------
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 311 (j) of the CWA.
Contract or other approved means
(1) A written contractual agreement with a response contrator that identifies and
ensures the availability of the necessary personnel or equipment within
appropriate response times;
(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;
(3) Active membership in a local or regional oil spill removal organization that has
identified and ensures adequate access through such membership to necessary
personnel and equipment to respond to a discharge within appropriate response
times in the specified geographic areas; or
(4) Other specified 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.
Permanent!tv 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
(A) For an onshore non-transportation-related facility:
(1) Single-tank facilities, the greater of:
(a) the volume of the single tank (plus 10% if adjacent to navigable
waters); or
(b) the combined capacity of a group of aboveground storage tanks
permanently manifolded together (plus 10% if adjacent to navigable
waters).
(2) Multiple-tank facilities, the greater of:
(a) the capacity of the largest tank within a common secondary
containmemnt area or the largest tank within a single secondary
containment area, whichever is greater. Plus the total aboveground
capacity of tanks without adequate secondary containment; or
(b) for permanently manifolded tanks that function as one storage unit; the
combined storage capacity of all manifolded tanks or the capacity of the
largest single tank within a secondary containment area, whichever is
greater. Plus the total aboveground capacity of tanks without adequate
secondary containment. (Permanently manifolded tanks that are
separated by internal divisions for each tank are considered to be single
tanks and individual manifolded tank volumes are not combined).
-------
(3) Onshore production facilities, the greater of:
(a) the capacity of the largest tank within a common secondary
containmemnt area or the largest tank within a single secondary
containment area, whichever is greater. Plus the total aboveground
capacity of tanks without adequate secondary containment and the
production volume of the well with the highest output (forecasted
output for exploratory wells producing under pressure); or
(b) for permanently manifolded tanks that function as one storage unit; the
combined storage capacity of all manifolded tanks or the capacity of the
largest single tank within a secondary containment area, whichever is
greater. Plus the total aboveground capacity of tanks without adequate
secondary containment and the production volume of the well with the
highest output (forecasted output for exploratory wells producing under
pressure); (Permanently manifolded tanks that are separated by internal
divisions for each tank are considered to be single tanks and individual
manifolded tank volumes iare not combined).
Adverse weather conditions - the weather conditions that make it difficult for response
equipment and personnel to cleanup or remove spilled oil, such as ice, extreme temperatures
and weather-related reduced visibilty
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.
Iniurv - is defined as having a measurable adverse change, either long or short term, in the
physical or chemical quality or the viability of a natural resource. The change can result from
direct or indirect exposure to a discharge of oil.
Source: 40 CFR Part 112.20 (2-17-931
-------
Facility Response Plans
SIG & SUB
SIG & SUB Harm facilities are determined
using a 3-tiered screening process, and;
Will be notified by mail of the determination.
Facility Response Plans
Screens 1 & 2
¦ Screen 1:
- The facility transfers oil over water and has a
total storage capacity of greater than or equal
to 42,000 gallons.
¦ Screen 2:
- The facility meets any 2 of the 4 substantial
harm criteria for facilities with a total oil
storage capacity greater than or equal to
1,000,000 gallons.
•«
-------
Facility Response Plans
Screen 3
¦ Screen 3:
- An evaluation of the following:
• Lack of secondary containment
• Proximity to navigable waters
• Proximity to ESA's
• Type of transfer operation
• Total oil capacity
• Proximity to drinking water intakes
• Proximity to other EAC
• Spill history
• Tank age
• Other site-specific characteristics
as determined by the RA
Facility Response Plans
Operation Extensions
¦ SIG & SUB Harm facilities may operate up to 2 years
after their plan has been submitted, provided the
owner or operator has ensured, by contract or
other approved means, the availability ot
• A written contractual agreement with a
response contractor; or
• A written certification by the owner/operator
that the necessary personnel and equipment,
owned by the owner/operator, are available.
• Active membership in a local or regional
oil spill removal organization; or
• Other specific arrangements approved
by RA.
Facility Response Plans
Elements of a Model Plan
¦
Emergency response action plan
¦
Facility-specific information
¦
Emergency response information
¦
Hazard evaluation
¦
Discharge scenarios
¦
Worst case discharge scenario
¦
Discharge detection systems
-------
Facility Response Plans
Important Definitions
Complex
Contract or other approved means
Maximum extent practicable
Permanently manifolded tanks
Worst case discharge
Adverse weather conditions
Facility Response Plans
» Authority comes from Section 4202 of OPA.
b Requires facilities that have the POTENTIAL
to cause SUBSTANTIAL HARM to the
environment to prepare and implement a
plan for responding to a WORST CASE
discharge.
-------
Facility Response Plans
SUB Harm Determination
Substantial Harm facilities are determined by:
- Self-selection process
- RA determination -
Facility Response Plans
¦ The RA has the authority to designate a facility as
SUB Harm regardless of the results of the self-
selection process.
¦ If a facility is not considered to be SUB Harm, the
certification form in Appendix C of the proposed
rule must be completed, signed and maintained
at the facility as an attachment to the facility
SPCC Ran.
-------
Facility Response Plans
Other FRP Facts:
¦ Facilities with existing response plans, generally
do not need to prepare a separate plan provided
that the existing plan:
- Satisfies the appropriate requirements
and is equally as stringent;
Includes all elements in the model plan;
- Is cross referenced appropriately; and
- .Contains an action plan for use during
a discharge
p»i
Facility Response Plans
Elements of a Model Plan (cont.)
¦ Plan Implementation
¦ Self-inspection, training, & meeting logs
¦ Facility diagrams
• Security systems
NOTES
Facility Response Plans
Critical Elements of a Plan
¦
Is consistent with the NCP, RCP, and ACP.
¦
Lists qualified individual with necessary authority.
¦
Identifies available resources.
¦
Provides for training, testing, drills and response
actions.
¦
Updated when necessary.
¦
Resubmitted for approval when significant changes
are made.
•r
-------
I
Deadlines
Facility Response Plans
¦ 2/18/93 - Facility Response Plans due.
¦ 8/18/93 - 2 year operating extensions required
for facilities with proper certifications.
¦ 2/18/95 • Final approval required for all SIG &
SUB facilities.
-------
OPS
OFFICE
MAI NT.
USCG
Example of a
Complax
X = Vatvas
-------
Flowchart for the Determination of Substantial Harm
Is the facility without adequate
smwiiiary wilaiiuueut for each
aboregnnmd storage area snfficendy
large to contain the capacity of
the largest aboveground storage
tank within that storage area?
Is the facility located at a distance*
such that a discharge from the facility
injnry to an aiTiiuumentally
as ikfiiwi in Appendix D?
Is the facility located a a distance* snch
that a discharge from the facility
would shut down a public
drinking water intake?
Within the past fire years, has the
facflftr experienced a reportable
cpiii in nr» miimiiiI [ji «ml« (J]j{Q
or equal to 10,000 gallons?
No Submittal of Response Plan
Except at RA Discretion
ya
-------
CERTIFICATION OP SUBSTANTIAL HARM DETERMINATION FORM
FACILITY NAME: __ _____
FACILITY ADDRESS:
1. Does the facility have a maximum storage capacity greater than or equal to
42,000 gallons and do the operations include over water transfers of oil
co or from vessels?
YES NO
2. Does the facility have a maximum storage capacity greater Chan or equal to
one million (1,000,000) gallons and is the facility without secondary
containment for each aboveground storage area sufficiently large to
contain the capacity of the largest aboveground storage tank within the
storage area?
YES NO
3. Does the facility have a maximum storage capacity greater Chan or equal to
one million (1,000,000) gallons and is Che facility locaCed at a discance
(as calculaced using che appropriate formula in Accachaenc C-III or an
alternative formula* considered acceptable by che RA) such that a discharge
from the facilicy could cause injury co an environaencally sensitive area
as defined in Appendix 0?
YES NO
U. Does che facility have a maximum storage capacity greater than or equal co
one million (1,000,000) gallons and is the facility located ac a discance
(as calculated using che appropriate formula in Attachment C-III or an
alternative formula* considered acceptable by the RA) such that a discharge
from the facility would shut down a public drinking water intake?
YES NO
5. Does the facility have a maximum storage capacity greater than or equal co
one million (1,000,000) gallons and within the past 5 years, has che
facilicy experienced a reportable spill in an amount greater than or equal
to 10,000 gallons?
YES NO
* If an alternative formula is used, documentacion of the reliability and
analytical soundness of che alternative formula must be attached to chis
form.
CERTIFICATION
I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar
with che information submitted in this document, and that based on my inquiry of
chose individuals responsible for obtaining this information, I believe that che
submitted information is true, accurate, and complete.
Signature Title
Name (please type or print)
Date
-------
FLOWCHART OF THE SIGNIFICANT AND SUBSTANTIAL
HARM SCREENING PROCESS
-------
Screens 1 & 2
Facility Response Plans
¦ Screen 1:
- The facility transfers oil over water and has a
total storage capacity of greater than or equal
to 42,000 gallons.
¦ Screen 2:
- The facility meets any 2 of the 4 substantial
harm criteria for facilities with a total oil
storage capacity greater than or equal to
1,000,000 gallons.
FRP-9
-------
Screen 3
Facility Response Plans
¦ Screen 3:
- An evaluation of the following:
• Lack of secondary containment
• Proximity to navigable waters
• Proximity to ESA's
• Type of transfer operation
• Total oil capacity
• Proximity to drinking water intakes
• Proximity to other EAC
• Spill history
• Tank age
• Other site-specific characteristics
as determined by the RA
FRP-10
-------
APPENDIX G
FACILITY-SPECIFIC RESPONSE PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Standard Facility-Specific Response Plan
1.1 Emergency Response Action Plan
1.2 Facility Information
1.3 Emergency Response Information
1.3.1 Notification
1.3.2 Equipment
1.3.3 Personnel
1.3.4 Evacuation Plans
1.3.5 Coordinator's Duties
1.4 Hazard Evaluation
1.4.1 Hazard Identification
1.4.2 Vulnerability Analysis
1.4.3 Analysis of the Potential for a Spill
1.4.4 Facility Spill History
1.5 Discharge Scenarios
1.5.1 Small and Medium Discharges
1.5.2 Worst Case Discharge
1.6 Discharge Detection Systems
1.6.1 Discharge Detection By Personnel
1.6.2 Automated Discharge Detection
1.7 Plan Implementation
1.7.1 Response Resources for Small, Medium, and Worst Case
Spills
1.7.2 Disposal Plans
1.7.3 Containment and Drainage Planning
1.8 Self Inspection, Training, and Meeting Logs
1.8.1 Facility Self Inspection
1.8.1.1 Tank Inspections
1.8.1.2 Response Equipment Inspection
1.8.1.3 Secondary Containment Inspection
1.8.2 Mock Alert Drills
1.8.2.1 Mock Alert Drill Logs
1.8.3 Training and Meeting Logs
1.8.3.1 Personnel Training Logs
1.8.3.2 Discharge Prevention Meeting Logs
1.9 Diagrams
1.10 Security
2.0 Response Plan Cover Sheet
3.0 Definitions
4.0 Acronyms
5.0 References
-------
SPCC OUTREACH WORKSHOP
EVALUATION
Your reactions to this outreach session are very important in planning and improving
future sessions. Please feel free to offer any additional comments that you think will
bo helpful in enhancing the presentation.
CONTENT:
1. Which topics in this presentation were most valuable to you? Please
explain.
2. Which topics were least valuable to you? Please explain.
3. To what extent did the presentation live up to your expectations?
very much to some extent not at all
4. Indicate the degree to which you feel the topics covered in this program
helped meet your needs for information on the SPCC Program.
very much to some extent not at all
5. Would you recommend this presentation to others?
very much to some extent not at all
-------
PROCESS:
1. Indicate the degree to which you feel the presentation was well organized
(circle the appropriate number).
Very well 5 4 3 2 1 Not at all
Please explain,
2. Did the presentation provide ideas you can apply to your company to help
attain SPCC compliance?
usually sometimes never
Please explain.
ATTOTTTONAI, COMMENTS
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency (OS-120)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Duainaaa
Penalty tor Private Use
$300
EPA Region 3
Oil & Title III Section
Mail Code: 3HW34
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia. PA 19107
Flrst^Claaa Mall
Postage and Fees Paid
EPA
Permit No. Q-35
NOTE: REGION III FACILITY RESPONSE PLAN INFORMATION LINE (215) 597-9562
------- |