Perspectives: Compliance Advisor

Spotlight Shines on Plant Safety

Efforts underway could significantly revamp process safety policies, regulations and standards

By Lynn Bergeson, regulatory editor

Chemical plant safety is once again in the limelight due to some high profile and very public catastrophes. On January 3, 2014, a federal working group created by the Obama administration’s Executive Order (EO) 13650 issued a set of preliminary options intended to improve chemical plant safety and security. This is a priority topic commanding considerable attention and readers should be aware of and engaged in these developments. This column explains why.

Call for Improved Safety
A little over a year ago, the world was riveted by a major explosion at a West, Texas, fertilizer warehouse. Fifteen people were killed and 160 injured in one of the worst chemical facility disasters in history.

In response to the blast, President Obama signed EO 13650, Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security. The EO established the Chemical Facility Safety and Security Working Group. The EO tasks the working group with considering options to improve and modernize key policies, regulations and standards to enhance the safety and security of chemical facilities. The group includes representatives from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Justice, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and other federal agencies. Each of these bodies has had significant regulatory engagement in chemical safety management.

Preliminary Options
The working group developed a preliminary list of options for improving chemical facility safety and security for further discussion and comment. According to OSHA, the recommendations will serve as a starting point for additional stakeholder discussion. The group offered nine sets of options across several categories and requested comment on each, including mandatory new safeguards. These options comprise “clusters” of issues; actions to address these will have broad and enduring implications for many businesses in the chemical community. The options are:
•    Improving the safe and secure storage, handling, and sale of ammonium nitrate;
•    Process safety improvement and modernization;
•    Coverage of additional hazardous chemicals or categories of chemicals under process safety and security regulations;
•    Chemical reactivity hazards;
•    Explosive chemical hazards;
•    Oil and gas facilities;
•    Coverage of bulk storage of flammable liquids under process safety and security regulations;
•    Process and hazardous chemical security; and
•    Identifying facilities covered under existing process safety and security regulations.

Request for Comment
The working group requested comment on examples of where implementation of the same or similar options have succeeded; information or data that would characterize the positive impacts the options might have, including additional benefits; potential limitations or unintended consequences of the options described; methods for implementing the options, including methods for potentially increasing benefits or reducing costs; and alternatives to the options that could achieve substantially the same result.

It’s apparent from the list of options that the agencies comprising the working group are considering additional and new regulations. For example, the working group states that “[t]he agencies are considering whether to initiate rulemakings for updating the PSM [Process Safety Management] standard and RMP [Risk Management Program] rule.  The EPA and OSHA have collaborated on implementation of these programs, and are considering a number of options for modernizing regulations, policy and guidance that would maintain parallel requirements and ensure harmony between the regulations.” The agencies also are considering expanding the scope of chemicals regulated under the PSM standard and RMP rule.

The workings of the interagency taskforce are critically important to the chemical community and the industries it serves. This type of regulatory “gap analysis” will require significant engagement from regulated sectors to ensure the working group is fully informed and able to make prudent decisions.

Although the comment period closed in March, the solicitation for public comment document is a must read as it provides a useful summary of the federal regulation of chemical facilities and offers significant insight into where new regulatory authority may be directed.


bergeson-color.jpgLYNN BERGESON is Chemical Processing's Regulatory Editor. You can e-mail her at lbergeson@putman.net

Lynn is managing director of Bergeson & Campbell, P.C., a Washington, D.C.-based law firm that concentrates on conventional, biobased, and nanoscale chemical industry issues. She served as chair of the American Bar Association Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources (2005-2006).

More from this perspective...

Title

Ultrafine Particles Come Under the Microscope

07/01/2004

The essentiality of process-safety management

The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) says revision of the Process Safety Management standard is necessary, but OSHA disagrees.

05/25/2005

Nanotechnology readies for a wastewater role

The federal government strongly backs development of nanotechnology, seeking to ensure that the United States leads the way in developing and commercializing appropriate applications.

06/27/2005

Compliance Advisor: Think Small for Water Management

EPA hosts conference on decentralized wastewater treatment systems.

08/05/2009

OSHA Releases Final HCS Rule

Chemical manufacturers and importers have until 2016 to comply.

06/14/2012

California Cracks Down On Chemicals

Final regulations evaluate the safety of chemicals in consumer products.

09/16/2013

Chemical Pollutants in Water Emerge

High profile contaminants make for murky regulatory waters.

04/12/2010

Biomonitoring assumes growing significance

Greater emphasis on chemicals uptake is raising the role of this safety tool.

07/25/2005

Product stewardship grows globally

Product stewardship is more essential today than ever before. Globally, stewardship initiatives, whether mandatory or voluntary, are emerging with regularity, and their significance should neither be ignored nor underestimated. Here’s why.

01/07/2008

Get the lead out

EPA rethinks air quality standards, seeks comments.

02/05/2008

Disclosure Protection May Narrow

EPA targets confidential business information claims.

02/09/2010

EPA Launches Online Discussion

It’s your chance to impact National Enforcement Program priorities.

09/08/2009

OSHA Aims to Harmonize Standards

Aligning chemicals labeling with global rules involves major efforts.

03/10/2010

Expect More Water Regulation Everywhere

EPA gets tough on arsenic levels in drinking water

11/18/2008

EPA/Corps Try to Clear Muddied Waters

EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issue joint guidance about Clean Water Act jurisdiction.

12/11/2008

Wade in on water pollutant detection

An EPA initiative provides a mechanism for helping to shape pending actions.

09/27/2005

EPA seeks to reduce TRI reporting burden

The EPA has proposed a new act in regards to reducing Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). Read here to get the details on how it might affect your plant.

11/27/2005

The importance of waste minimization

It makes good environmental, economic, and business sense.

12/21/2005

What does EPA have in store?

Don’t expect any major changes in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations during 2006. Here’s a summary of trends and developments anticipated this year.

02/17/2006

Develop an air-tight defense

Chemical processors face significant challenges in controlling fugitive emissions. The emissions escape from valves, compressors, pumps, piping components, etc. It is a difficult task, but necessary to avoid penalties and other liability.

04/24/2006