This is another in a series of posts addressing the recent request
for information (RFI) from the EO 13650 Working Group. That RFI addressed
requirements in §6(a) of the Improving Chemical Safety and Security Executive
Order (EO
13650) for the Working Group to “develop options for improved chemical
facility safety and security that identify improvements to existing risk
management practices through agency programs, private sector initiatives,
Government guidance, outreach, standards, and regulations”. Earlier posts in
the series include:
OSHA Accomplishments
OSHA standards are designed to protect workers from hazards
in the workplace. There are a number of chemical related standards that are
listed in the EO. They include:
• PSM
standard (29 CFR 1910.119);
• Flammable
and Combustible Liquids standard (29 CFR 1910.106);
• Spray
Finishing Using Flammable and Combustible Materials standard (29 CFR 1910.107);
• Explosive
and Blasting Agents standard (29 CFR 1910.109)
OSHA claims (with some justification in my opinion) that
these standards have generally made chemical workplaces safer. They do note,
however, that some of these standards date to the 60’s and 70’s and do not
reflect current knowledge and technology.
Surprisingly missing from the discussion of OSHA chemical
related coverage are the Sub-part
Z coverage of safety requirements for specific chemicals and the laboratory
safety requirements of 1910.1450.
Suggested Areas for
Improvement
The Working Group has identified eleven areas where the
chemical safety rules could be improved. They include:
• Modernizing the PSM standard;
• Updating the PSM Appendix A list
of coverage substances;
• Clarifying the retail and
atmospheric storage tank exemptions in PSM;
• Updating and clarifying covered
concentrations of the Appendix A list of PSM regulated chemicals;
• Exploring options for improving
coverage of reactive substances, reactivity hazards, and explosive chemical
hazards;
• Exploring a reporting requirement
for PSM covered facilities;
• Updating the Flammable and
Combustible Liquids standard;
• Updating the Spray Finishing
Using Flammable and Combustible Materials standard;
• Evaluating the implementation of
best practices and lessons learned such as the “safety case” regulatory model
to reduce risk in complex industrial processes;
• Assessing safer alternatives as
mechanisms to reduce chemical risk; and
• Evaluating opportunities for
increasing worker involvement and labor-management cooperation in hazard
investigations.
There is a certain amount of overlap between the suggestions
listed above and the areas identified in the PSM
update RFI published last month. The areas covered in this Working Group
RFI extend beyond the Process Safety Management (PSM) program, but there are a
few PSM related options listed here that were not covered in the earlier RFI.
They include:
• Updating and clarifying covered
concentrations of the Appendix A list of PSM regulated chemicals;
• Exploring a reporting requirement
for PSM covered facilities; and
• Assessing safer alternatives as
mechanisms to reduce chemical risk
As with the EPA
suggestions, there is nothing in the OSHA standards that specifically
addresses the issue of insider actions to deliberately sabotage a chemical
process. Actions of disgruntled employees are much more likely to be a cause of
chemical related incidents than would be a terrorist attack on a facility.
Given the importance of automated control systems throughout
the chemical manufacturing and distribution process it is becoming increasingly
important that those systems are adequately addressed in the chemical safety
standards. That is not currently being addressed by OSHA.
Suggestions
One glaring omission from the PSM standards is a reference to
emergency response. While the EPA does address emergency response activities,
that coverage is focused on the emergency response activities required to deal
with off-site consequences. OSHA should address on-site consequence response
and mitigation activities.
While the PSM program is of obvious importance due to the
extreme hazards associated with those covered processes there is a wide range
of chemical processes that are potentially hazardous to employees that are not
addressed in that standard. For example chemicals with an acute toxic hazard
are addressed in the PSM program but those that have a long term chronic hazard
(with the exception of some chemicals specifically listed in Subpart Z) are
not. OSHA should look at expanding the PSM standard to include chronically
hazardous chemical substances. Unfortunately, this may require legislative
activity.
Lacking an expansion of the OSHA inspection force (at both
the federal and State levels), the most effective way for expanding the
effectiveness of the current programs will probably be requiring employers to
submit more information to OSHA about their regulated programs. OSHA should
look at developing reporting tools similar to those used by DHS in their CFATS
program. Properly designed, such submissions could provide a useful tool for analyzing
the effectiveness of existing programs and prioritizing inspection efforts.
Public Comments
This is a reminder that the whole purpose of this RFI is to
get public feedback on these proposed ideas. The RFI requests the public to
respond to these specific proposals for areas of improvement. That response
should address the following (pg 9):
• Examples of where implementation
of the same or similar options has been successful;
• 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; or
• Alternatives to the options that
could achieve substantially the same result.
Comments need to be submitted by March 31st,
2014. They may be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal (www.Regulatons.gov; Docket
#OSHA-2013-0026).
No comments:
Post a Comment