Document

Report
OSHA Chemical Safety Initiatives
SOCMA
Washington, DC
December 5, 2007
Fatality/Catastrophe PSM
Incidents
24
25
19
FAT-CATS
20
18
17
17
18
13
15
12
11
10
10
7
5
5
4
3
0
1992
1994
1996
From DEP Fatality Study
1998
2000
2002
2004
What’s Up with OSHA
• Refinery National Emphasis Program
(NEP)
• Pilot “Chemical Plant” CPL
• “MOTIVA” Interpretation
– Federal Register Notice
• Combustible Dust NEP
• Guidance
• HAZ Comm/GHS ANPR
‘Motiva” Interpretation
• 2 Business Units
Refinery Complex
7 Propane Bullets >>> TQ
Interconnected to Distribution Terminal
– Refinery
– Distribution Terminal
• Interconnection of
>>> TQ flammable
gas
• Fire During Loading
Truck Distribution Rack
Distribution Terminal
– Driver burned
Motiva Background
• Issue of interconnection of flammable materials is key
to the enforcement of the PSM standard
• Motiva appealed OSHA PSM citations
– Motiva only argued scope/application of standard
– OSHA won the case at the ALJ level.
• OSHA then lost case at the OSH Review Commission Motiva Enterprises, 21 BNA OSHC 1696 (OSHRC No.
02-2160, 2006).
• The Review Commission questioned whether the
regulatory text was meant to limit the coverage of the
PSM standard to a HHC process, that was both “onsite” and “in one location” as per scope/application of
1910.119.
Motiva Background
• Review Commission decided
– Could not determine that the cited activities were "on site" and "in one
location”
– Absence of an authoritative interpretation
– Vacated the citations.
• The Review Commission recognized
– OSHA is the agency responsible for policymaking under the OSH Act
– Commission left it to OSHA to decide
• "in the first instance . . . the meaning of these terms and offer an 'authoritative
interpretation.'"
• "[a]ny such subsequent interpretation" would be reviewed in a future case "under
'standard deference principles.'"
• FR Notice addresses OSHA’s interpretation of the term “on site in one
location” in the scope and application section of the PSM standard
• Bottom Line
– Interpretation and application of scope provisions of PSM stays the same
– NOTHING has changed
– FR Notice reiterated OSHA’s current interpretation
Refinery National Emphasis
Program
• OSHA national PSM enforcement program
– Program (NEP) for inspecting petroleum refineries
– SIC 2911 and NAICS 324110
• Contains policies and procedures to verify employers’
compliance with OSHA’s PSM standard
• Primary Purpose: Tool for OSHA CSHOs to determine
compliance w/PSM
Why Refinery NEP
• Need for OSHA to conduct
programmed inspections at high
risk facilities
• FAT/CAT data indicates
refineries are good place to start
– SIC 2911 experienced 36
FAT/CATS since 1992
– Top 4 SICs account for 40% of all
PSM FAT/CATS
– Refineries account for 20% of Total
– Refinery FAT/CATs > other 3 top
SICs combined
• Recent Refinery Incidents
– BP TCR
Refinery FAT/CATS
by Most Frequent SIC
178 Total PSM FAT/CAT
Incidents
11
12
36
12
SIC 2911
SIC 2869
SIC 2899
SIC 2892
Breakdown of 152 U.S.
Refineries
Federal vs. State-Plan
Refineries
101 "Federal NEP"
Refineries
20
51
101
81
Feds
States
To Be Inspected
From EPA RMP Submittals
VPP Sites
Distribution of U.S. Refineries
by Region
69
Number of Region Refineries
70
60
50
40
30
18
16
20
6
10
8
17
7
7
3
0
0
R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
R6
Regions
R7
R8
R9
R10
NEP Focus Areas
• Prioritize on Implementation versus the existence of
documentation
– Ensure that employers do what they have committed to do
• RAGAGEP
– 119(d)(3)(ii) – “…shall comply with RAGAGEP”
– Mostly Equipment
• Vessels, Piping, Relief Systems, Blowdown Systems
• PHA
– 119(e)(1) - “…shall identify, evaluate, and control hazards of
process”
• Equipment Deficiencies
– 119(j)(5) – fix deficient equipment before further use or take
necessary means to assure safe operation until deficiency can be
fixed at next opportunity
• Others
New Inspection Strategy
• Evaluate PSM compliance using Inspection Priority
Items (IPI)
– Gap Analysis (Yes, No, N/A Questions)
– Questions developed in-house
• will work in questions provided by anybody
• List Based IPI
– Static List
• 95 Questions
• Like all OSHA CPLs, posted on public website
– Dynamic List
• 8 to 15 questions/list
• Changes every 2 to 6 weeks
• “Secret List” for inspection integrity
– Not posted on OSHA’s public website
So Far….
• NEP launched June 7, 2007
• 16 NEP inspections started/on-going
– No inspections have been completed
– Therefore, no citations issued to-date
• Early inspections finding many deficiencies
– CSHOs going “off-script”
• Many deficiencies found that are not related to IPI
• Resulting in longer inspections than originally planned
Some Findings…
• Findings are varied
• Some specific deficiencies found
– PHA recommendations not resolved
– No car seals for isolation valves on relief discharge lines
• Low hanging fruit
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Piping well below retirement thickness
Facility siting – control room
Facility siting – emergency isolation valves
Relief study recommendations as part of PHA not resolved
Factors contributing to the incident not listed in report
Contractors not included in investigation team when required
MOC documentation not complete for vessel rerate
Design basis for relief system does not exist
LOTO failure to verify deenerization
Contractors hot work practices
“Chemical Plant” Compliance
Directive
• Need for programmed inspections at high
risk chemical facilities
• PSM inspection resources fully deployed
conducting NEP
• Pilot Program for Chemical Facilities
– Regions with few NEP inspections
– 1 year in duration
• Decision near end of NEP to fully deploy Chem
CPL
Pilot Chem CPL
• Details TBD
• Thoughts
– Targeting Sites to be Inspected
• Use RMP Program 3 facilities as main target for
selecting sites for inspection
• Add SICs typically covered by PSM which are
not covered by RMP
– Inspection Strategy
• Many inspections, shorter duration
• Use Dynamic List IPI concept
Combustible Dust NEP
• 280 dust fires and explosions in U.S. industrial
facilities
– past 25 years
– 119 fatalities and over 700 injuries
– Per CSB
• National Emphasis Program
• Policies and procedures for inspecting
workplaces that create or handle combustible
dusts.
Combustible Dust CPL
• CPL 03-00-006
– http://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/Directive_pdf/C
PL_03-00-006.pdf
• Issued October 18, 2007
Hazard Communication
• Considering adoption of the Globally
Harmonized System of Classification
and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS)
• Published an advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPR) 9/12/2006
• Accepted comments until 11/13/2006
Hazard Communication
• Other OSHA standards may be affected
• Will likely need to change hazard
communication provisions in OSHA’s
substance-specific standards to be
consistent.
• May also need to address parts of other
standards that have criteria for hazard
definitions, such as flammable liquids.
Completed Guidance
Projects
•
•
•
•
•
•
Motor vehicle safety
Combustible dust (SHIB)
Indoor air (mold)
Pandemic flu preparedness
Glutaraldehyde
Perchloroethylene
Completed Guidance
Projects
• Guidance for Hazard Determination
(HazCom)
• Motor vehicle safety at marine terminals
• Slings
• Marine terminal crane radio
communication
Guidance Projects in
Development
•
•
•
•
•
Hazard communication/GHS
PPE for emergency response
Reactive chemicals
Combustible dust poster
Lockout/tagout checklist
Questions
Mike Marshall
202-693-2179
[email protected]

similar documents