John Burgess
In this two-part article, I am discussing the Meer Corp. court decision, its impact on OSHA's Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals (PSM) standard, and what it means for your business and documentation requirements. To continue the discussion from the April issue (pg. 26) and consider the environment in which we live, precise planning is always a good practice. The Chemical Accident Prevention program from the EPA, commonly referred to as the Risk Management Plan (RMP) rule, adds another level of sophistication. Facilities that process hazardous chemicals that maintain inventories above a threshold limit are required to implement some or all of the same elements as the PSM rule. The challenge with these qualification requirements is their complexity. The first fundamental question one must ask is: What tier of the EPA RMP program fits your facility? Programs 1, 2 and 3 each have progressively more complex requirements. How do you keep track of the details?
The EPA's RMP does not exempt atmospheric storage tanks or utilities. Additionally, whereas PSM focuses on the hazard to employees, the RMP focuses on hazards to the public. If your process has more than the threshold limit of chemicals listed in 49CFR68.115, then you are required to comply. This list includes chemicals commonly considered fuel gas or utilities, but still maintains the retail or fuel source exemptions. So propane used for heat or water heaters is exempt; however, propane used for welding is not. A 2,000-gallon propane tank can hold more than the threshold quantity of 10,000 pounds. If that source has the potential to impact a receptor point outside the fence line within a specified distance, your program level increases.
If a facility is in crude oil refining, intermediate processing or chemical manufacturing, odds are it will qualify for Program 3 of the RMP. If you already qualify for the PSM program, then you will be in Program 3. Table 1 summarizes the program requirements for each level.
Depending on incident history, receptor points and/or expected inventories, a facility can be in a Tier 1 level one year and Tier 2 level the next year, or vice versa. Understanding the complexities of the rule requires special expertise.
What about overfill prevention for tanks? How is that documented? How up-to-date is your plan for compliance with ANSI/API STD 2350, Overfill Protection for Storage Tanks? As you can see, tanks are deceptively complex, and recent incident history shows that large consequences can result. With low-pressure tanks, the margin of error is less than it is for pressure vessels, and the potential inventory of release is exponentially larger.
A Journal of Loss Prevention paper from 2006 by J.I. Chang et al. reviewing storage tank accidents showed that overfilling was the most frequent cause of incidents. Furthermore, 87 percent of these overfilling incidents led to fire and/ or explosions.
While the Meer decision may exempt certain tanks from the requirements under the PSM standard, this could give us a false sense of security. Other regulatory requirements such as the EPA's RMP may still require proper and thorough documentation. Regardless of the preceding requirements, it is still in our best interest to ensure we have properly understood and documented the potential safety and environmental impacts that may result from operational deviations.
EPA RMP Chart
Table 1: EPA Risk Management Plan program tiers and PSM requirements.
For more information, visit www.smithburgess.com or call (713) 802-2647.
