It is important that the user understand the purpose and limitation of the "DEQ Chemical Accident Prevention's Questions and Answers" file. The questions and answers are not intended to fully represent or be used in place of the regulations. These questions can be used to explore the application of the regulations in different scenarios or to shed light on complex issues. The answers provided are not rules nor are they binding upon the Department in any context. The DEQ may withdraw, modify, or depart from the answers provided in this file at any time without notice. For an understanding of the actual regulatory requirements in any given situation, the reader must consult the appropriate sections of (LAC 33:III. Chapter 59) and Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), pertinent Federal Registers and EPA guidance documents. Should you have a question about Chemical Accident Prevention that these questions do not address, please feel free to contact the Chemical Accident Prevention staff members as follows:

E-mail Address: kevin.sweeney@LA.GOV

Phone Number: (225)219-3637

RMP Submittal Questions

  • Submittal entry problems (2 questions)

  • Certification

  • Resubmitting your RMP (2 questions)

Propane Questions

  • RMP and Propane Distributors

  • Determining amount of propane in pounds

Endpoint Questions

  • Toxic endpoint for Nitrogen Tetroxide

Applicability of RMP to Mixtures

  • Mixture of H2S and Water

General Duty Questions

  • Requirements

Scenario Questions

  • Offsite Endpoints (3 Questions)

  • LEPC Involvement

Refinery and E&P Facilities

  • Naphtha (2 questions)

  • Natural Gas Processing Plants

Railcar Issues

  • Reporting rail cars on a spur.

  • Propane and Rail Cars (2 Questions)

Populations affected /public receptors questions

  • Wholly Owned Subsidiary Division

  • Neighboring plants

  • Census Data Change

Underground Chemical Storage Caverns

  • Applicability of RMP to Underground Salt Domes in Louisiana

  • Worst-Case Scenarios for Underground Salt Domes

OSHA Related

  • Updating PHA'S

  • Updating RMP's When Updating PHA's

  • 5 year accident history (2 Q&A's)

  • Applicability of OSHA PSM Standard to public facilities

  • OSHA Star or Merit Ranking

Title V Permits & RMP

  • Effect of RMP on Title V Permits


I. RMP Submittal Questions

Q1: "Release Rate" in Section 2 Toxic Worst Case Scenario will not accept "0.1". It will accept "0.2." The problem does not occur in section 3 Toxic Alternative Release Scenario. How should I enter my information?

A1: If you want to enter ".1," enter ".2" instead and explain in your executive summary that the software would not allow you to enter ".1." Do the same if you want to enter a number smaller than ".1" which RMP*Submit also does not allow.

Q2: You could accidentally check the CBI box in Sections 7 or 8. This happens if you DOUBLE click, rather than SINGLE click to get into Section 7 or 8. If this is the case, the CBI warning box will appear, but some people may not know what it means and just hit CLOSE without reading it. The RMP*Submit "CHECK" program will not detect an error in this case. What should the user do? .

A2: Check a printed copy of your RMP before submitting it to EPA to be sure you only checked CBI where you meant to check it. If you accidentally checked it, uncheck it by clicking on the box again.

Q3: Why does the Accident History certification print out in the Registration section? .

A3: The Accident History certification "There were no reportable accidents in the last five years" is printed in the Registration Section when you print out your RMP. There is a complicated technical reason why we couldn't have it print out in Section 6 where it would be more logical.

Q4: If the owner/operator changes, does the new owner/operator have to submit a new RMP? If so, by what date? .

A4: Although the regulation does not address this issue specifically, it does say that an owner/operator must submit an RMP. Therefore, when a new owner/operator takes over, he/she must update their RMP with their new name and address and submit an "updated" RMP with a new certification letter, signed by the new owner/operator. The RMP does not have to be updated in all 9 sections. This would count as an "update" and their 5-year anniversary date would NOT change. The updated RMP should be submitted by the time the new owner/operator takes over.

Q5: What should people do if they need to correct or resubmit BEFORE they receive their notification letter and EPA facility ID number? .

A5: If it is a correction or an update (not based on the mandatory changes in Section 68.190) they should wait until they received their notification letter and ID number so that the RMP Reporting Center will be sure to find and update their first RMP. If the change is required by the regulation, for example, a facility receiving a new chemical that is not on their RMP, then the regulation requires that a new RMP be filed by the time they receive the new chemical. But without an EPA Facility ID number, RMP*Submit will not let them generate a revised RMP. In this case, they should submit a new RMP marked as a "first time submission," but put a big yellow sticky on the certification letter saying "This is not really a first time submission - I just didn't know my EPA facility id yet."

II. Propane Questions

Q1: How does the Risk Management Plan rule apply to my operations as a propane distributor?

A1: This rule applies to anyone who stores at least 10,000 pounds or more of propane or any of the listed flammable substances in a process covered by the rule. Flammable fuels used as a fuel at a facility or flammable fuels held for a sale at retail establishments are no longer covered by the RMP rule (Chemical Safety Information, Site Security and Fuels Regulatory Relief Act signed into law on August 5,1999). A retail facility is a facility at which more than one-half of the income is obtained from direct sales to end users or at which more than one-half of the fuel sold, by volume, is sold through a cylinder exchange program. A process is defined as:

"Any activity involving a regulated substance, including any use, storage, manufacturing, handling or on-site movement of such substances or any combination of these activities. For purposes of this definition, any group of vessels that are interconnected, or separate vessels that are located such that a regulated substance could be involved in a potential release shall be considered a single process".

"Vessel means a reactor, tank, drum, barrel, cylinder, vat, kettle, boiler, pipe, hose, or other container".

Q2: I have recently installed a new tank, which was filled with propane. How do I determine the amount of propane (in pounds) contained in this bulk storage tank?

A2: First, you need to determine the water capacity of the tank. The nominal nameplate capacity (in gallons of water) can be found from your "UIA" certificate for your vessel. You may also read the storage capacity directly from the nominal nameplate permanently attached to the storage tank. Once you get the capacity you will use the EPA suggested method for converting to pounds of propane. The multiplier of 3.696 is used to convert gallons to pounds and is based on the density of "commercial" propane and the maximum permitted liquid volume. The inventory in pounds is rounded to the nearest thousand. For example: 2700 gallon tank capacity of water x 3.696 = 10,000 pounds propane ( 9979.2 rounded to 10,000).

III. Endpoint Questions

Q1: What is the EPRG toxic endpoint for nitrogen tetroxide?

A1: The toxic endpoint for N2O4 chosen by DEQ is .004 mg/L because this level is considered the maximum airborne concentration below which individuals could be exposed for up to an hour without experiencing or developing irreversible or other serious human health effects.

IV. Applicability of RMP to Mixtures

Q1: I have more than 10,000 lbs of H2S contained in a mixture of waste water. The H2S comprises less than 1% of the mixture. Am I required to submit an RMP?

A1: No. You are not required to submit an RMP. 40 CFR 68.115 (b) (1) states that a regulated toxic substance that is present in a mixture is exempt from threshold determination if it comprises less than one percent by weight of the mixture. However, you may be covered under the General Duty Clause (CAA 112 (r) (1)) of the Clean Air Act . ( See Q&A V. A. for further explanation of General Duty Requirements).

See Refinery Questions also for applicability of RMP to flammable mixtures.

V. General Duty Questions

Q1: The Chemical Accident Prevention regulations (LAC 33.III. Chapter 59) include a supplemental list of 65 substances (Table 59.0). Stationary sources that have these substances present on site are subject to the general duty clause at LAC 33:III.5907. What is required of a facility that has one of these substances, but is not otherwise subject to RMP or PSM regulations?

A1: Owners and operators of stationary sources producing, processing, handling or storing any of the specified 65 chemicals (LAC 33.III. Chapter 59, Table 59.0) in quantities greater than their listed threshold levels must perform the following three functions.

A. Identify hazards that may result from accidental releases of such substances using appropriate hazard assessment techniques.

B. To design and maintain a safe facility.

C. To minimize the off-site consequences of accidental releases of such substances that do occur.

Meeting these requirements will satisfy the State of Louisiana's General Duty Clause. However, the Federal RMP General Duty Clause (CAA 112 (r) (1)) mentions no specific chemicals. The term "extremely hazardous substances" is used rather than mentioning specific chemicals and refers to any agent that is released into the air and whose short-term exposure results in death, injury, or property damage due to its toxicity, reactivity, flammability, volatility, or corrosivity. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the owner or operator of a facility to decide if chemicals in the facility are "extremely hazardous substances". If so, the owner or operator must meet the 3 requirements listed above.

VI. Scenario Questions

Q1: According to 40 CFR 68.28, the Alternative Release Scenario must be "more likely to occur than the Worst-Case Release Scenario under 40 CFR 68.25 and must reach an endpoint offsite, unless no such scenario exists". If, after considering the more likely release scenarios, there is no scenario with an endpoint offsite, should the facility alter conditions in the Alternative Release Scenario in order to get an endpoint offsite? In other words, is it more important to present scenarios with offsite endpoints or scenarios that are most likely?

A1: The intent of the rule is to identify and report releases that are more realistic and likely to occur. EPA believes sources should have flexibility to select scenarios that are the most useful for communication with the public and first responders and for emergency response preparedness and planning. Therefore, the rule clarifies that when identifying alternative release scenarios, considerations should include, but are not limited to commonly recognized occurrences such as: transfer hose releases due to splits or hose uncoupling; piping releases from failures at flanges, joints, welds, valve seals and drain bleeds; process vessel or pump releases due to cracks, seal failure or drain bleeds or plug failure; vessel overfilling and spill, or over pressurization and venting through relief valves or rupture disks; and shipping container mishandling and breakage or puncturing leading to a spill. The owner or operator should also consider the five-year accident history of the facility to identify possible alternative scenarios. If after consideration of the above, there is not an alternative release scenario that reaches an endpoint offsite, then the facility should document "no offsite impact" and report this in the Risk Management Plan.

Q2: During a Process Hazard Analysis, a release scenario may be found which would have an endpoint offsite. Usually, the facility will address this problem immediately and apply some form of active or passive mitigation to avoid offsite impacts. When a facility takes a proactive approach such as this, there should be no alternative release scenario (ARS) with offsite endpoints. Can the facility use the scenario that was determined during the Process Hazard Analysis as the alternative release scenario in the Offsite Consequence Analysis even though that scenario has been mitigated ?

A2: The RMP rule states that the alternative release scenario must be "more likely" to occur than the worst-case release scenario. If there is no alternative release scenario that is likely to occur that reaches an endpoint offsite, primarily because the facility has been proactive in identifying and preventing potential releases, then the facility should report the alternative scenario that they consider most likely to occur under current conditions and document in the RMP that it has "no offsite impact". Considerations for identifying alternative scenarios are found in 40 CFR Part 68.25. The RMP rule does require the owner/ operator to document the rationale for the selection of the ARS in 68.39(b).

Q3: If an ARS (Alternative Release Scenario) endpoint distance exceeds the WCS (Worst Case Scenario) endpoint distance, which one should be reported as the WCS?

A3: A: The RMP rule gives specific assumptions for a WCS. If the ARS endpoint distance exceeds the WCS endpoint distance, the ARS endpoint distance should be reported as the WCS, assuming that the scenario meets EPA's prescribed assumptions for analysis of a WCS.

Q4: Does the facility have to involve the LEPC in selecting the ARS's?

A4: The RMP rule does not specifically require a facility to involve the LEPC in the selection of the ARS's. However, EPA states that "sources should have flexibility to select non-worst-case scenarios that are the most useful for communication with the public and first responders and for emergency response preparedness and planning". The rule does require owners/operators to 1) coordinate their emergency plan with the community emergency response plan and 2) promptly provide to the local emergency response officials, upon request, information necessary for developing and implementing the community emergency response plan [68.95 (c)].

VII. Refinery Questions

Q1: I have a refinery that has NAPHTHA. Does this chemical fall under the RMP /CAPP rule?

A1: First, research of the chemical composition for NAPHTHA (CAS #: 8030-30-6) reveals the following chemical data:

1. Properties: Dark, straw colored to colorless liquid.

2. Boiling Point: 149-216 F

3. Flash point: 107 F

4. Density: .862-.892

5. Composition: Naphtha is made from American coal oil and consists chiefly of pentane, hexane and heptane.

6. Synonyms: Aromatic Solvent, Benzin, coal tar naphtha, hi-flash naphthaethylen, naphtha distillate, naphtha solvent, naphtha petroleum, petroleum distillates, petroleum ether, petroleum spirit, skelly-solve-f,VM & P Naphtha.

The mixture rule needs to be considered because pentane, one of the three primary constituents of NAPHTHA is a flammable substance subject to RMP. If pentane comprises > 1% of the mixture, then the entire weight of the mixture must be considered in the threshold determination. Pentane is determined to comprise more than 1% so the next determination must be made on whether the NFPA flammability hazard rating of 4 are met. (i.e. A flash point below 73F and a boiling point below 100F). Since NAPHTHA's boiling point is 149 -216 F > 73F and flash point is 107F > 100F, it does not meet the NFPA 4 criteria. Therefore, NAPHTHA does not need to be considered for RMP. Verification with the National Fire Protection Association revealed that the chemical has a NFPA rating of 3.

Q2: While I am a refinery and fall into SIC code 2911, my processing of the crude oil is limited such that my facility does not fall under the RMP based on the handling two primary chemicals: gasoline for use in internal combustion engines and Naphtha. Could you please verify that my facility is not subject to RMP?

A2: Petroleum refining of crude oil involves fractionation of the crude oil into certain compounds or chemicals. Among these chemicals are butane, gasoline, naphtha, kerosene gas, oil residues and other possible products. Larger refineries are more likely to be subject to RMP, because of the probability of their refining processes to produce one or more listed substances being handled in a covered process (s). Small refineries, although it is rare, may not fall under RMP because the refinery may process the crude oil into the two primary products of naphtha and gasoline (for use in internal combustion engines) with the remaining fractionations of the crude oil being shipped to another facility for further refining. Because Naphtha does not meet the NFPA flammable hazard rating of 4 and the produced gasoline is for use in internal combustion engines, this small refinery is not subject to RMP.

Q3: I have a natural gas processing plant that receives natural gas from natural gas wells and removes CO2 and H2S from the natural gas. After this removal, the natural gas is placed back into a pipeline and carried off site. This process is often referred to as a "gas sweetening" process in which no liquids are removed from the natural gas. If I have greater than 1% concentration of Methane in this natural gas and have greater than 10,000 lb. of natural gas in the plant process at any given time, am I required to submit an RMP or is this natural gas exempted under the exemption for naturally occurring hydrocarbon mixtures?

A3: 40 CFR 68.3 has the following definition for a natural gas processing plant:

Natural gas processing plant (gas plant) means any processing site engaged in the extraction of natural gas liquids from field gas, fractionation of mixed natural gas liquids to natural gas products, or both, classified as North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code 211112 (previously Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code 1321).

(NAICS) code 211112 has the following description:

This U.S. industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in the recovery of liquid hydrocarbons from oil and gas field gases. Establishments primarily engaged in sulfur recovery from natural gas are included in this industry.

40 CFR 68.115 (b) (2) (iii) states that regulated substances in naturally occurring hydrocarbon mixtures are exempted from threshold determination prior to entry into a natural gas processing plant or a petroleum refining process unit. It also states that naturally occurring hydrocarbon mixtures include any combination of the following: condensate, crude oil, field gas, and produced water, each as defined in Sec. 68.3 of this part.

Since this facility does not remove any liquid hydrocarbons from the gas, it does not fulfill the definition of a natural gas processing plant as defined above. Therefore, the hydrocarbon mixture in question has not entered a natural gas processing plant as defined and is still exempt as a naturally occurring hydrocarbon mixture and this facility is not required to submit an RMP.

VIII. Railcar Issues

Q1: I have a covered toxic chemical that is shipped to my facility by railcar. Only one railcar at a time is connected to the process for the purpose of unloading. However, up to ten additional full railcars may be located on a nearby rail spur that is owned by the facility. The ten railcars are delivered by locomotive, unhitched, and left on the company's spur. Using a trackmobile, facility personnel routinely re-position the empty railcars and they move the full railcars into unloading position. The ten railcars of toxic material are separated from the process area. Additionally, the PHA team did not discover a credible scenario in which a railcar located on the holding spur could be involved in a release event (i.e. no initiated event was uncovered that could cause one or more of the railcars located on the holding spur to be included in a specific hazard scenario).

Section 1.17.c.3 requires us to "...estimate the maximum quantity held in the covered process at any one time...". My question is do I have to include the 10 rail cars located on the holding spur with my RMP?

The concern is that if we list all ten railcars, the railcar being unloaded, and the amount of toxic material laid-up in the process it may lead to an exaggerated concern that large amounts of toxic material are actually being "processed". While in actuality only a relatively small amount of the toxic material is being used in the process area (i.e. subjected to increased pressure and temperature).

A1: According to section 1.17.c.3, a facility is required to "...estimate the maximum quantity held in the covered process at any one time...". EPA considers tank cars carrying regulated substances not connected to a locomotive to be stationary sources. Assuming that the ten cars you mentioned are connected to one another and are not connected to a locomotive, they would be considered a separate process under your RMP. The lone rail car and the chemical process it's connected to would be considered another covered process if they are located far enough away from the ten cars that a fire or explosion of one would not affect the other. Therefore, you should have one RMP with two covered processes and list the quantities in each process.

To address your concerns about an accurate perception from the public, you should understand the differences between a chemical process and a covered process as it refers to 40 CFR, Part 68. A covered process can be any process that has a regulated substance present in more than a threshold quantity as determined under §68.115.

Process means any activity involving a regulated substance including any use, storage, manufacturing, handling, or onsite movement of such substances, or combination of these activities. For the purposes of this definition, any group of vessels that are interconnected, or separate vessels that are located such that a regulated substance could be involved in a potential release, shall be considered a single process.

Therefore you must report the 10 cars on the spur in your RMP. In order to explain that they are not involved in the "chemical process" area where temperature and pressure are being altered, you can explain this in your executive summary.

Q2: I have a company that has an off-loading and on-loading dock. Railroad cars enter the property and are filled with a commercial propane or butane mixture. During the filling of the tank cars, the locomotive engine is disconnected until all the cars are full and ready for transport. Will I have to consider these railroad tank cars under the risk management program rule?

A2: The risk management program rule does not apply to mobile sources or sources being actively transported. Because the railroad cars are not in active transport and have been disconnected from the locomotive or truck cab, the tank cars fall under the definition of process (in this case, storage). The railcars will have to be evaluated for applicability (meeting the threshold quantity of > 10,000 pounds of the regulated flammable substance). If it is determined that the railcars meet the applicability requirement, then a risk management plan should be submitted to EPA by June 21, 1999.

Q3: My business loads a commercial grade butane mixture onto railcars for transport to another facility. Since the rail cars being loaded will hold more than 10,000 pounds of mixture and are disconnected from the locomotive engine, I know that they are considered as storage and fall under the risk management program rule. How do I determine the threshold quantity since it is a mixture? Secondly, how do I report this in the data elements of the risk management plan submittal form (RMP*SUBMIT)?

A3: For flammable mixtures, the risk management plan rule (40 CFR 68.115 Threshold Determination) stipulates that " if the concentration of the flammable regulated substance contained in the mixture comprises 1% or greater by weight, then for the purposes of determining whether more than a threshold quantity is present at the stationary source, the entire weight of the mixture shall be treated as the regulated substance unless the owner or operator can demonstrate that the mixture itself does not meet the criteria for flammability of flash point below 73 degrees F and boiling point below 100 degrees F. The owner or operator shall document these flash point and boiling point measurements or estimates." When preparing the risk management plan, the data element ( 1.17.c.1 Name of Chemical) allows you to list it as a "flammable mixture" if you have a NFPA-4 flammable mixture containing regulated flammables. List all of the regulated substances contained in the mixture; however, only report the quantity of the entire mixture, not the individual substances.

IX. Populations affected /public receptors questions:

Q1: Should employees of a wholly owned subsidiary division or company who operates under different site management be considered public receptors in the hazard assessment for program level screening purposes? For example. ABC Refinery shares a fence line with ABC Chemical Division.

A1: No. These two entities are considered the same stationary source because they are under the control of the same corporate owner.

Q2: Why are neighboring plant (for a different, independent company) employees considered to be the public?

A2: Neighboring plant employees are considered to be public receptors because they do not generally receive the same training as your own employees/contractors in the hazards of the process(es) nor are they trained in the proper emergency response actions to take in the event of an accidental release.

Q3: Must the HA (Hazard Assessment) be updated if a school is built nearby?

A3 : The RMP rule does not require a facility to update its census data or to update a hazard assessment if a school is built nearby. The rule does not require the RMP plan to be resubmitted because of a change only in the census data or a change in the public receptors affected. However, if updated census data indicates that the WCS for a Program 1 process would affect a public receptor or resident, the RMP would have to be resubmitted "within 6 months of a change that alters the Program level that applied to any covered process" {68.190 (b)(7)}. In general, census data should not be needed for Program level screening. A facility will use local knowledge to identify the nearest public receptor.

X. Underground Chemical Storage Caverns

Q1: Would an underground salt dome be subject to the Risk Management Program in Louisiana if it held above the Threshold Quantity of a substance regulated under 40 CFR, Part 68?

A1: Underground storage caverns (salt domes) can be subject to RMP if they have a regulated chemical above its threshold quantity and the storage cavern is not considered "exempt transportation". Exempt transportation includes storage fields for natural gas where gas taken from pipelines is stored during non-peak periods, to be returned to the pipelines when needed. Natural gas does not include natural gas liquids that have been extracted from natural gas. Transportation activities subject to regulation or oversight under 49 CFR parts 192, 193, or 195 are exempted from RMP. The definition of Stationary Source states that "storage incident to transportation" is considered exempt transportation. In order for an underground storage cavern to be considered "storage incident to transportation", the cavern must be connected directly to a pipeline regulated by 49 CFR parts 192 or 195 which transports the chemical into the storage cavern and is connected directly to a pipeline regulated by 49 CFR parts 192 or 195 transporting the chemical out of the cavern. This would make the cavern incident to transportation. For example, a chemical held in a storage vessel (including underground storage caverns) at a chemical plant where the chemical is being produced or consumed would not be exempted from RMP.

Q2: How do I determine the worst-case scenario for a salt dome storage release?

A2: Assumptions for the release rate from the salt dome should be treated in a manner similar to that for underground storage tanks. Reservoirs or vessels sufficiently buried underground are passively mitigated or prevented from failing catastrophically. You should evaluate the failure of piping connected to underground storage for the worst-case and alternative scenarios. Any above ground equipment that carries the regulated substance and is connected to the storage cavern must be considered up to the facility's boundary since neither DOT nor DNR Pipeline Safety Section have jurisdiction over a pipeline once it passes into a facility's boundary.

XI. OSHA Related

Q1: The rule states that I have to update my RMP whenever I revise a PHA. What constitutes a revised PHA? Every time I go through management of change procedures I make a notation in the PHA file for the process, but would that constitute a revised PHA if the change did not affect the validity of the PHA?

A1: All changes (except replacement in kind) are subject to the management of change of procedures. When processes undergo minor changes (e.g., minor rerouting of a piping run), information is typically added to a PHA file to reflect the change, even though the validity of the PHA is not affected by the modification. These minor changes and the addition of information about the change to the PHA file are not considered a 'revision' of the PHA under 40 CFR part 68. Major changes that invalidate a PHA, leading you to 'update' or 'revalidate' the PHA so that it accurately reflects the hazards of the process, are considered a revision of the PHA under 40 CFR part 68. You should update or revalidate your PHA whenever there is a new hazard or risk created by changes to your process. Such changes might include introducing a new process, process equipment, or regulated substance; altering process chemistry that results in any change to safe operating limits; or other alteration that introduces a new hazard. You might, for example, introduce a new hazard if you installed a gas pipeline next to a storage tank containing a regulated substance. Other candidates could be making changes in process constituents that increase the possibility of runaway reactions or polymerization. EPA recommends that you consider revalidating your PHA whenever adjoining processes create a hazard. Remember that you have a general duty to prevent accidents and ensure safety at your source, which may require you to take steps beyond those specified in the risk management program rule.

Q2: If I revise my PHA and it does not affect the radius of impact in my worst-case analysis, do I have to revise my RMP?

A2: A Process Hazard Analysis (PHA) is intended to make the owner or operator of a stationary source scrutinize any hazards that could affect the facility's employees or offsite receptors. In order for your RMP to still be valid (i.e. not requiring revision) after updating your PHA, the following three conditions must be met.

A. No new chemicals have been added to your process and the amounts of chemicals present in your process have not changed.

B. The distances to your offsite endpoints in your worst-case and alternative release scenarios have not changed and the program level that applied to the covered process has not changed.

C. The change in your PHA is not significant as discussed in Question 1 of this Section.

Q3: What constitutes an "injury" under the Five Year Accident History?

A3: An injury is any effect that results either from direct exposure to toxic concentrations, radiant heat, or overpressures from the accidental release or from indirect consequences of a vapor cloud explosion from an accidental release (e.g. a window shattering after an explosion) and that requires medical treatment or hospitalization.

Medical treatment means treatment, other than first aid, administered by a physician or registered professional personnel under standing orders from a physician

Your OSHA occupational injury and illness log will help complete the data element 6.9b. Injuries specific to: a) workers and contract employees b) public responders and c) the public (ex. visitors or off-site receptors).

Q4: Under the Five Year Accident History Requirement (40 CFR Part 68), will my company be required to report an accidental release and injury if the listed regulated substance does not exceed the threshold quantity?

A4: No. The five-year accident history must report only those accidents from covered processes that result in death, injury, or significant property damage on site, or known offsite deaths, injuries, evacuations, sheltering in place, property damage or environmental damages (40 CFR 68.42 (a)). "Covered Process" is defined as a process that has a regulated substance present in more than the threshold quantity (40 CFR 68.3). Therefore, an accident resulting from a regulated substance that has less than the threshold quantity in the process would not be covered by this rule.

Q5: To whom does the OSHA PSM standard apply ?

A5: OSHA standards apply to employers and employees. OSHA states that each employer shall comply with occupational safety and health standards promulgated under the OSH Act (Public Law 91-596; Dec. 29, 1970) The act defines an employer as a person engaged in a business affecting commerce who has employees, but does not include the United States or any State or political subdivision of a State. One of these standards is the Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals( the PSM standard 29 CFR 1910). The standard applies to a process containing a threshold quantity or greater amount of a toxic or reactive Highly Hazardous Chemical as specified in 29 CFR Appendix A to §1910.119. Also, it applies to 10,000 pounds or greater amounts of flammable liquids and gases and to the process activity of manufacturing explosives and pyrotechnics. There are several substances and facilities that are exempt to this provision. Hydrocarbon fuels used solely for workplace consumption as a fuel are exempted from this standard if such fuels are not a part of a process containing another Highly Hazardous Chemical covered by the PSM standard. Flammable liquids stored in atmospheric tanks or transferred which are kept below their normal boiling point without benefit of chilling or refrigeration are not covered. Also the PSM standard does not apply to retail facilities, oil or gas well drilling or servicing operations; or normally unoccupied remote facilities.

Q6: Would a Louisiana drinking water treatment facility be subject to the OSHA PSM standard ?

A6: A water treatment facility that fulfills the definition of employer as stated by OSHA is subject to the OSHA PSM standard if they meet the threshold requirement for the PSM list of Highly Hazardous Chemicals (not to be confused with the RMP list of flammable and toxic chemicals). If this facility is owned by the United States or any State or political subdivision of a State and employs its own staff then this act does not apply (OSH Act, sect.4,(5). However, if the facility is permanently staffed by personnel who are not employees of the United States or any State or political subdivision of a State (e.g., contract employees), the facility would be subject to OSHA PSM if it met the PSM threshold requirement.

Q7: If I have a Star or Merit ranking under OSHA's voluntary protection program, am I exempted from being audited for RMP?

A7: A source/ facility with a Star or Merit Status under OSHA is exempted from random audits. If another method for selecting the facility is used (i.e. ranking criteria), then the facility is not exempt from a RMP audit.

XII. Title V Permits and RMP

Q1: Will the RMP requirement affect my Title V permitting process?

A1: All new title 5 permits or any new modification to an existing permit will contain a statement listing coverage by the RMP rule. A compliance schedule for meeting the requirements and a certification statement that the source is in compliance with all requirements will be required for the title 5 permit to be issued.

Title V permits issued prior to the deadline for submitting the RMP and which do not contain language to address the RMP, will have to be revised or reopened if the facility is subject to RMP.

Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality 602 N. Fifth Street Baton Rouge, LA 70802
Call or e-mail a hotline · Office Address/Phone listing · Locate a DEQ employee
Call 1-866-896-LDEQ or e-mail our Customer Service Center with questions or comments