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

Biomonitoring assumes growing significance

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

07/25/2005

EPA pushes material-management challenges

The agency is striving to increase cooperative projects with industry to conserve resources.

08/25/2005

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

NIOSH makes big effort on small particles

Many federal and international bodies are striving to identify and conduct research to fill data needs in connection with the health and safety implications of nanotechnology.

06/20/2006

Small sensors promise big impact

Because many environmental applications of nanotechnology will almost certainly revolutionize the science, law, and regulation of water pollution, readers are urged to keep abreast of this fast-changing area.

06/28/2006

The impact of the European Union's directives on the U.S.

The Restrictions of the Use of Certain Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment (the RoHS Directive) is part of a growing wave of European Union product-based regulations that will profoundly impact global and United States product standards — and thus the chemical industry.

08/17/2006

Biomonitoring gets a going-over

The current state of biomonitoring is detailed in the much anticipated report issued July 24 by the Committee on Human Biomonitoring for Environmental Toxicants of the National Academies, Washington, D.C.

09/11/2006

Expect tighter particulate matter standards

Tighter particulate matter standards are in our future, according to Regulatory Editor Lynn Bergeson in this month's Compliance Advisor column on ChemicalProcessing.com

09/21/2006

Get answers to your biomonitoring questions

Guidance for chemical manufacturers, processors, and distributors about Section 8(e) of the Toxic Substances control act was issued on September 14, by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Chemical Processing's Regulatory Editor Lynn Bergeson discusses the new regulation.

10/24/2006

Wal-Mart applies clout

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., previously committed to reduce by 5% the packaging used by its 60,000 suppliers by 2013. Now, a new initiative uses a scorecard to tackle wasteful packaging.

12/05/2006

Exporters get reporting relief

EPA eases annual reporting requirements and thresholds, and exporters are feeling relief, according to Lynn Bergeson in her monthly Compliance Advisor column.

01/08/2007

Chemical security rules edge forward

Advance rulemaking was recently issued on anti-terrorism standards. Lynn Bergeson provides a summary in monthly Compliance Advisor column.

02/12/2007

Chemicals transport faces worldly issues

Global classification and labeling system aims to boost safety, Lynn Bergeson says in this month's Compliance Advisor column.

03/01/2007