The document provides an overview of the Process Safety Management (PSM) standard and recent related regulatory and legal developments. It summarizes key incidents that led to strengthened regulations, OSHA enforcement initiatives, and a 2013 Executive Order that prompted interagency reviews aimed at improving chemical facility safety. It also describes two recent OSHA memorandums that interpret the PSM standard and are now under legal challenge. OSHA plans to conduct rulemaking to potentially expand PSM coverage of reactive hazards like ammonium nitrate and strengthen other requirements based on lessons learned from incidents.
Presentation delivered by James Prothro, CATS Manager, Southwest Region, PHMSA at the marcus evans Energy Pipeline Management Summit 2016 held in Houston, TX
Presentation delivered by Stephanie Weidman, PHMSA Program Director, Railroad Commission of Texas at the marcus evans Energy Pipeline Management Summit 2016 held in Houston, TX
Regulating Ammonia Emissions from Agriculture: Potential Pitfalls and Limitat...LPE Learning Center
The full proceedings paper is at: www.extension.org/72876
Currently, there is limited regulation of ammonia (NH3) emissions as a matter of federal policy. The Clean Air Act (CAA) provides the federal authority for regulation of these emissions. Although there are reporting requirements for NH3 under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act and Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act, these statutes do not provide authority to regulate emissions of NH3. There is increasing pressure to change NH3 policy primarily due to concerns about nutrient enrichment of large water bodies, such as the Chesapeake Bay and the Gulf of Mexico. Recently, the EPA has been petitioned to list NH3 as a criteria pollutant; and this request is somewhat supported by the report from the EPA’s Integrated Nitrogen Panel to the Science Advisory Board. There is also the immediate concern of EPA’s treatment of NH3 as a precursor to fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Regulation of NH3 as a precursor to PM2.5 will make it a regulated pollutant under the CAA. It will be difficult to regulate only the ‘excess’ portion of reactive N, particularly since ‘excess’ cannot be defined as a constant. Roughly 60- 85% of NH3 emissions in the U.S. are estimated to come from agricultural sources, a sector that varies considerably from the traditional industrial sources addressed by the environmental statutes. In fact, in most of these statutes, there is recognition that agricultural sources are different; and some regulatory exemptions are provided. Most likely, Congress did not anticipate the application of the CAA to agricultural sources or it would have included some exemptions in it as well. Nevertheless, regulation of NH3 emissions under the CAA will make it extremely difficult for EPA to consider the positive value and need for fertilizer NH3, which could have huge implications for the viability of the domestic and global food supply.
Clean Air Act Compliance, Risk Management Plans, and Preparing for the July 1...Triumvirate Environmental
The Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401) of 1963 controls air pollution on a national level. The 1990 amendments to the act created regulations aimed at protecting the ozone layer, reducing acid rain and toxic pollutants, and improving air quality through the Risk Management Plan Rule and the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Program. With the TRI deadline rapidly approaching, it is important to carefully review chemical release activities from the past year as you prepare to file your 2019 report.
Presentation delivered by Bill Lowry, CATS Manager, Southwest Region, PHMSA at the marcus evans Energy Pipeline Management Summit 2016 held in Houston, TX
Presentation delivered by James Prothro, CATS Manager, Southwest Region, PHMSA at the marcus evans Energy Pipeline Management Summit 2016 held in Houston, TX
Presentation delivered by Stephanie Weidman, PHMSA Program Director, Railroad Commission of Texas at the marcus evans Energy Pipeline Management Summit 2016 held in Houston, TX
Regulating Ammonia Emissions from Agriculture: Potential Pitfalls and Limitat...LPE Learning Center
The full proceedings paper is at: www.extension.org/72876
Currently, there is limited regulation of ammonia (NH3) emissions as a matter of federal policy. The Clean Air Act (CAA) provides the federal authority for regulation of these emissions. Although there are reporting requirements for NH3 under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act and Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act, these statutes do not provide authority to regulate emissions of NH3. There is increasing pressure to change NH3 policy primarily due to concerns about nutrient enrichment of large water bodies, such as the Chesapeake Bay and the Gulf of Mexico. Recently, the EPA has been petitioned to list NH3 as a criteria pollutant; and this request is somewhat supported by the report from the EPA’s Integrated Nitrogen Panel to the Science Advisory Board. There is also the immediate concern of EPA’s treatment of NH3 as a precursor to fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Regulation of NH3 as a precursor to PM2.5 will make it a regulated pollutant under the CAA. It will be difficult to regulate only the ‘excess’ portion of reactive N, particularly since ‘excess’ cannot be defined as a constant. Roughly 60- 85% of NH3 emissions in the U.S. are estimated to come from agricultural sources, a sector that varies considerably from the traditional industrial sources addressed by the environmental statutes. In fact, in most of these statutes, there is recognition that agricultural sources are different; and some regulatory exemptions are provided. Most likely, Congress did not anticipate the application of the CAA to agricultural sources or it would have included some exemptions in it as well. Nevertheless, regulation of NH3 emissions under the CAA will make it extremely difficult for EPA to consider the positive value and need for fertilizer NH3, which could have huge implications for the viability of the domestic and global food supply.
Clean Air Act Compliance, Risk Management Plans, and Preparing for the July 1...Triumvirate Environmental
The Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401) of 1963 controls air pollution on a national level. The 1990 amendments to the act created regulations aimed at protecting the ozone layer, reducing acid rain and toxic pollutants, and improving air quality through the Risk Management Plan Rule and the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Program. With the TRI deadline rapidly approaching, it is important to carefully review chemical release activities from the past year as you prepare to file your 2019 report.
Presentation delivered by Bill Lowry, CATS Manager, Southwest Region, PHMSA at the marcus evans Energy Pipeline Management Summit 2016 held in Houston, TX
Improper management of highly hazardous chemicals, including toxic, reactive or flammable liquids, can cause accidental releases and emergency responses. OSHA’s Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals standard (29 CFR 1910.119) regulates the management of highly hazardous chemicals. Violations can carry fines of up to $126,000. Do you have a PSM program in place?
BlueScape & StilesPomeroy LLP New Proposition 65 Warning Requirements are He...BlueScape
This webinar by James Westbrook and Chuck Pomeroy of StilesPomeroy LLP Law Firm, a refresher of a webinar in January 2017, provides an overview of California Proposition 65 (Prop 65) regulation requirements, how to conduct a Prop 65 exposure evaluation to determine whether to provide safe harbor warnings, and discusses the challenges to meeting the new warning requirements provided in Article 6.
James Westbrook can be reached at training@bluescapeinc.com or +1 877-486-9257. Chuck Pomeroy at StilesPomeroy LLP can be reached at cpomeroy@stilespomeroy.com or +1 626-243-5599. Please contact us for questions and support for conducting Prop 65 exposure evaluations, and for the procedures to develop or change Prop 65 warning labels.
Training Slides of Safety Precautions & Emergency Response Plan discussing the importance of Safety.
For further information regarding the course, please contact:
info@asia-masters.com
www.asia-masters.com
https://nimonik.com
Tips and tricks for finding regulations, rules and other documents you need to comply with. This presentation has a video that can be found on the Nimonik website (link above)
Improper management of highly hazardous chemicals, including toxic, reactive or flammable liquids, can cause accidental releases and emergency responses. OSHA’s Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals standard (29 CFR 1910.119) regulates the management of highly hazardous chemicals. Violations can carry fines of up to $126,000. Do you have a PSM program in place?
BlueScape & StilesPomeroy LLP New Proposition 65 Warning Requirements are He...BlueScape
This webinar by James Westbrook and Chuck Pomeroy of StilesPomeroy LLP Law Firm, a refresher of a webinar in January 2017, provides an overview of California Proposition 65 (Prop 65) regulation requirements, how to conduct a Prop 65 exposure evaluation to determine whether to provide safe harbor warnings, and discusses the challenges to meeting the new warning requirements provided in Article 6.
James Westbrook can be reached at training@bluescapeinc.com or +1 877-486-9257. Chuck Pomeroy at StilesPomeroy LLP can be reached at cpomeroy@stilespomeroy.com or +1 626-243-5599. Please contact us for questions and support for conducting Prop 65 exposure evaluations, and for the procedures to develop or change Prop 65 warning labels.
Training Slides of Safety Precautions & Emergency Response Plan discussing the importance of Safety.
For further information regarding the course, please contact:
info@asia-masters.com
www.asia-masters.com
https://nimonik.com
Tips and tricks for finding regulations, rules and other documents you need to comply with. This presentation has a video that can be found on the Nimonik website (link above)
1. www.connellfoley.com
Alliance of Hazardous Materials Professionals
New Jersey Chapter and American Society of
Safety Engineers New Jersey Chapter
October 27, 2015 Joint Meeting
Process Safety Management (PSM) Legal and Regulatory Update
Speaker: Steve Barnett, P.E., CIH, MSPH, Esq.; Partner, Law
Offices of Connell Foley LLP
2. PSM Standard, 29 CFR 1910.119
• Bhopal, India chemical release 1984
• Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 required
OSHA to issue chemical process safety
standard
• Standard issued 1992
3. PSM Standard, 29 CFR 1910.119
• October 23, 1989, Phillips Petroleum, Pasadena, Texas
• July 19, 1990, BASF, Cincinnati, Ohio
• May 1, 1991, IMC, Sterlington, Louisiana
• March 23, 2005, BP Refinery, Texas City, Texas
• April 2, 2010, Tesoro Refinery, Anacortes, Washington
• April 20, 2010, Deepwater Horizon
• April 17, 2013, West Fertilizer, West, Texas
• June 13, 2013, Williams Olefins, Geismar, Louisiana
• November 15, 2014, DuPont, LaPorte, Texas
4. PSM Standard, 29 CFR 1910.119
• 2007 OSHA Petroleum Refinery PSM National
Emphasis Program
• 2011 OSHA PSM-Covered Chemical Facility
National Emphasis Program
• 645 inspections, 3,100 violations
• August 1, 2013 Executive Order 13650
Improving Chemical Facility Safety and
Security
5. PSM Standard, 29 CFR 1910.119
• PSM Applicability
• Process which involves threshold quantities
listed in Appendix A, or
• Process which involves 10,000 pounds of
Category 1 flammable gas or flammable liquid
with flashpoint below 100°F on site in one
location
6. PSM Standard, 29 CFR 1910.119
• PSM Applicability (cont’d)
• Process means any activity involving a highly
hazardous chemical including any use, storage,
manufacturing, handling, or the on-site
movement of such chemicals, or combination of
these activities. For purposes of this definition,
any group of vessels which are interconnected
and separate vessels which are located such that
a highly hazardous chemical could be involved in
a potential release shall be considered a single
process.
7. PSM Standard, 29 CFR 1910.119
• PSM Applicability (cont’d)
• Not applicable to:
Retail facilities
Oil or gas well drilling or servicing
Normally unoccupied remote facilities
8. PSM Standard, 29 CFR 1910.119
• PSM Requirements
• Process Hazard Analysis
• Written operating procedures
• Employee training and participation
• Pre-startup safety reviews
• Evaluation of mechanical integrity of equipment
• Contractor requirements
• Written procedures for management of change
• Permit system for hot work
• Investigation of incidents involving releases or near misses
• Emergency actions plans
• Compliance audits at least every 3 years
• Trade secret protection
10. West Fertilizer Company, West, Texas
• April 17, 2013 fire and explosion
• PHSMA
– September 23, 2011 PHMSA inspection
– January 13, 2012 Notice of Probable Violation
• $5,600 offering for transportation anhydrous ammonia with ASME plate
illegible and missing NH3 and UN1005 placards
• $4,500 no security plan as per 172.800 for > 3000 kg in one packaging or
poisonous by inhalation
– June 12, 2012 Compromise Order and Agreement. Penalties reduced
to $5,000 and $250
11. West Fertilizer Company, West, Texas
• Chemical Safety Board investigation ongoing
• Reportedly last inspected by OSHA in 1985
• 2006 EPA fine of $2,300 for failure to timely file Risk
Management Plan (RMP) pursuant to EPA Clean Air Act
rules
• Current RMP listed anhydrous but not nitrate because not
required
• 400 lbs ammonium nitrate CFATS screening threshold not
reported to DHS
• Facility held certificate to handle ammonium nitrate from
Texas State Feed and Fertilizer Control Service
• Discussions of state and local fire codes, emergency plans,
communication of information between agencies
• August 1, 2013 Executive Order
12. West Fertilizer Company, West, Texas
• August 20, 2013 video safety message by CSB Chair
• “CSB has determined that ammonium nitrate storage
falls under a patchwork of U.S. standards and guidance,
which does not prohibit many of the conditions found
at the West facility. These include the use of
combustible wooden storage bins and buildings and a
lack of sprinkler systems in case of fire.”
• "The CSB believes it's past time for OSHA and EPA to
regulate reactive hazards – including ammonium
nitrate – under their process safety rules."
13. Executive Order 13650 – Improving Chemical
Facility Safety and Security, August 1, 2013
• Interagency working group and required reports within 90, 180,
270 days (DHS, OSHA, EPA, DOJ, ATF, DOT, USDA)
• Review regulations and enhance coordination of federal, state and
local agencies.
• EPA review Risk Management Program (RMP) regulations
• OSHA review Process Safety Management (PSM) regulations
• DHS review Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standard regulations
• ATF review explosives license and permit requirements
• Listening sessions, rulemaking, guidance, interpretations,
enforcement
14. OSHA Enforcement Memorandum, PSM
Recognized and Generally Accepted Good
Engineering Practices (RAGAGEP), June 5, 2015
• PSM-covered processes to comply with RAGAGEP and appropriate
internal standards (equipment design, installation, operation, and
maintenance; inspection and test practices and frequencies)
• PSM regulation does not define RAGAGEP
• June 5 memo requires that internal standards must meet or exceed
published RAGAGEP (published and widely adopted codes,
published consensus documents, published non-consensus
documents)
• June 5 memo discusses use of shall, must, should, shall not,
prohibited, may in published RAGAGEP
15. OSHA Memorandum, PSM Covered
Concentrations of Listed Appendix A
Chemicals, June 5, 2015
• 126 of 137 Appendix A chemicals are listed without reference
to concentration
• To date, applicability concentration threshold has been
“commercial grade” or higher
• June 5 memo requires employer to determine weight of
substance at 1% concentration and higher
• In determining weight, only weight of substance, exclusive of
any solvent, solution or carrier, is counted
16. OSHA Memorandum, PSM and
Application of the Retail Exemption, 29
CFR 1910.119(a)(2)(i), July 22, 2015
• Exemption for retail facilities but regulation
does not define “retail facility”
• “50 percent test” has applied. 50% of income
from direct sales to end user
• July 22 memo limits exemption to facilities in
North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) Manual Sector 44-45 - Retail Trade
17. American Petroleum Institute v. OSHA,
and American Chemistry Council v. OSHA
• Filed August 3, 2015 in United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia, Case No.
15-1252 and 15-1253
• Requesting judicial review of OSHA RAGAGEP
memo & OSHA covered concentration memo
• Cases consolidated August 6
18. American Petroleum Institute v. OSHA,
and American Chemistry Council v. OSHA
• Violate Occupational Safety & Health Act
• Promulgated without notice, comment and
publication requirements of the
Administrative Procedure Act
• Arbitrary and capricious
• Unsupported by substantial evidence
• Inconsistent with reasoned decision-making
19. American Petroleum Institute v. OSHA,
and American Chemistry Council v. OSHA
• Court’s October 19, 2015 briefing schedule
– Petitioners’ Brief December 16, 2015
– Intervenor for Petitioners’ Brief January 4, 2016
– Respondents’ Brief February 3, 2016
– Intervenor for Petitioners’ Reply Brief February 17,
2016
– Petitioners’ Reply Brief February 17, 2016
– Deferred Appendix February 24, 2016
– Final Briefs March 9, 2016
20. OSHA Review of PSM regulation
• EPA RMP and OSHA PSM listening sessions,
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA) panels,
advanced notice of proposed rulemaking,
notice of proposed rulemaking, final
rulemaking
• OSHA will wait until January 2016 to convene
SBREFA panel, after EPA convenes its SBREFA
panel on RMP
21. OSHA Review of PSM regulation
• Incorporate lessons learned from enforcement, incident investigation, and
advancements in industry practices, root cause analysis, process safety metrics,
enhanced employee involvement, third-party audits, and emergency response
practices.
• Addressing ammonium nitrate hazards through one or both of the following
options: 1) covering reactive chemical hazards under the PSM 2) adding
ammonium nitrate specifically to the PSM Appendix A highly hazardous chemicals
list
• Adding substances or classes of substances to the PSM Appendix A List of Highly
Hazardous Chemicals and providing more expedient methods for future updates.
• Expanding coverage and requirements for reactive chemical hazards, which have
resulted in many incidents.
• Covering oil and gas drilling and servicing operations that currently are exempt
from PSM coverage.
• Continuing harmonization with EPA’s RMP regulation.
• Requiring analysis of safer technology and alternatives.
• Requiring coordination between chemical facilities and emergency responders to
ensure that emergency responders know how to use chemical information to
safely respond to accidental releases, possibly including exercises and drills.