U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                   Office of Inspector General

                   At   a   Glance
                                                             09-P-0092
                                                       February 10, 2009
                                                                  Catalyst for Improving the Environment
Why We Did This Review

The purpose of the Risk
Management Program under
Section 112(r) of the Clean Air
Act is to reduce the likelihood
of airborne chemical releases
that could harm the public, and
mitigate the consequences of
releases that do occur. We
conducted this review to assess
I U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) implementation
and oversight of this program.

Background

Under the Risk Management
Program, stationary sources
that have more than the
threshold quantity of regulated
substances on-site in any one
process must implement a risk
management program. All
covered facilities must submit
a Risk Management Plan
(RMP) to EPA that describes
and documents the facility's
hazard assessment, and its
prevention and response
programs.  Facilities must
update and re-submit these
plans at least every 5 years
and when changes occur.

For further information,
contact our Office of
Congressional,  Public Affairs
and Management at
(202)566-2391.

To view the full report,
I click on the following link:
www.epa.qov/oiq/reports/2009/
20090210-09-P-0092.pdf
EPA Can Improve Implementation of the Risk
Management Program for Airborne Chemical Releases
 What We Found
EPA can improve its program management and oversight to better assure that
facilities covered by the Clean Air Act's Risk Management Program submit or
re-submit an RMP. EPA had not established national procedures for identifying
covered facilities that had not submitted RMPs. For the 5 States reviewed, we
identified 48 facilities in 3 States that reported large amounts of covered chemicals
stored on-site that had not filed RMPs.  These facilities are potential RMP non-
filers. For example, 10 such facilities reported having over 100,000 pounds of
ammonia on-site at one time, which is 10 times greater than the regulatory
threshold. Further, the status of nearly one-third (452 of 1,516) of the facilities
EPA identified in 2005 as being past their due date for re-submitting an RMP had
not been resolved and updated in the RMP National Database as of March 2008.
Also, State permitting agencies did not properly include program requirements as
a condition of facilities' Title V operating permits. When properly administered,
the Title V process can help ensure that covered facilities submit RMPs to EPA
and comply with program requirements.

EPA can also strengthen its inspection process to provide greater assurance that
facilities comply with Risk Management Program requirements. EPA had not
inspected or audited over half (296 of 493) of the high-risk facilities identified by
EPA's Office of Emergency Management (OEM). Since most States have not
accepted delegation of the program, EPA is responsible for ensuring compliance for
over 84 percent of facilities nationwide. Of the 296 uninspected high-risk facilities
managed by EPA, 151 could each impact  100,000 people or more in a worst-case
accident.  Accident data suggest uninspected high-risk facilities are more than five
times as likely to have an accident than uninspected lower-risk facilities.

EPA has made efforts to improve the program. OEM funded studies to assess
facility accident rates and used  this information to develop and distribute a list of
high-risk facilities to help regions better prioritize inspection efforts.
 What We Recommend
We recommend that EPA implement additional management controls to identify
facilities with regulated chemicals that have not filed RMPs. We also recommend
that EPA develop inspection requirements to target higher-priority facilities for
inspection and track its progress in completing inspections of these facilities.
The Agency concurred with all of our recommendations.

-------