Document N5gEbbw3V68XN30d4vQjQkkw

ABDOO103449 Who Is Covered Tab 200 ) Appendix B: Questions & Answers: OSHA Interpretations of PSM Issues* Editor's note: Thefollowing is a question and answer section that presents U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) interpretations of various process safety management (PSM) standard requirements. Some questions and answers were taken from the agency's Compliance Directive (CPL 2-2.45) for the PSM standard, which was issued Sept. 13,1994. The other questions comefrom inquiries submitted by interested parties to OSHA's Directorate ofCompliance Programs. OSHA's responses are "letters of interpretation," issued through April 29,1997. Please note, not every letter of interpretation issued has been included in this section to avoid redundancy and issues not geared toward the chemical industry. The following interpretations apply to the specific circumstances described in the question(s). All letters of interpretation issued by OSHA on the PSM standard through April 1997 have been reviezued and any corrections issued by OSHA have been added. As a result of this review, a number of letters of interpretation from previous years, which may be of interest to subscribers, have been added. The categories in this section appear in thefollowing order: Application; Exemptions; Inventory management/ storage separation; Definitions; Employee participation; Process safety information; Process hazard analyses; Written operating procedures; Training; Contractors; Mechanical integrity; Management of change; incident investigation, and Compliance audits. 1. Application Flammable liquids and gases ^ Q. How does the PSM standard apply to various processes involvingflammable liquid stored at atmospheric pressure at or above the threshold quantity of10,000 pounds? A. The method of storage of flammable liquids is but one consideration which must be evaluated to determine whether or not a flammable liquid at or above the threshold quantity is subject to the PSM standard. Storing a flammable liquid in tanks at atmospheric pressure is not in itself sufficient reason to remove a facility from coverage. Although the standard provides a conditional exception for such storage, such substances are covered if, for example, they are part of a "process/' as defined in the standard, or if they are sited in near proximity to a hazardous process and thus might become involved in a catastrophic event. (Aug. 21,1992)** Q. Does the PSM standard apply to typical processes in a paint manufacturingfacility, ivhich include the mixing and blending offlammable liquids with other raw materials, and which typically involvefew or no chemical reactions? Theflammable products are processed below their normal boiling points and several large batch vessels are located near each other, with an aggregate weight above the threshold quantity of 10,000 pounds. A. The requirements of the PSM standard would apply to such operations. The exemption provided in the standard at 29 CFR 1910.119(a)(l)(ii)(B) for situations involving flammable liquids applies only when such liquids are being stored in atmospheric tanks (where the tank pressure does not exceed 0.5 pounds per square inch gauge [psig]) or transferred and the liquids are kept below their normal boiling point without benefit of chilling or refrigeration. This exemption does not apply to a mixing and blending operation related to paint manufacturing. (Dec. 1,1992) J * Updated. 7/97. *' Date issued by OSHA. Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 65 ABDOO103450 Tab 200 Who Is Covered Q. When are steam boilers fired byflammable liquids or natural gas subject to compliance with the PSM standard with respect to facilities which use hydrocarbon fuels delivered via pipelinefrom outside sources? A. The PSM standard applies to flammable liquids and gases in quantities of 10,000 pounds (4535.9 kg) or more. There are two exceptions. First, a hydrocarbon fuel of any quantity used solely for workplace consumption as a fuel, if such a fuel is not a part of a process containing a threshold quantity or greater amount of another highly hazardous chemical, is not covered by the PSM standard. Secondly, flammable liquids stored in atmospheric tanks or transferred (for storage) which are kept below their boiling point without benefit of chilling or refrigeration are not covered by the PSM standard. However, flammable liquids or gases used in a (boiler) system which is part of a process containing a threshold quantity or greater amount of another highly hazardous chemical are covered by the PSM standard. (Jan. 18,1993) Q. Are normal industrial spray painting operations usingflammable paint covered by the PSM standard? A. Spray painting operations involving a threshold quantity of flammable liquid paints are covered by the PSM standard. In order to comply with the standard one must first carefully apply the definition of "process" to facility operations and equipment in the workplace, and then proceed to determine further applicability of the PSM standard in situations where flammable liquids (and gases) are stored in tanks or containers at a work site. (May 6,1993) Q. Are 6,000 pounds offlammable paint, 3,000 pounds offlammable adhesive and 1,000 pounds offlammable maintenance materials, all located in onefire division and all liquids, covered by the PSM standard? Also, does the storage ofany of these materials in storage cabinets constitute a separate location? A. Whether there is a threshold quantity of flammable liquids is determined by the aggregate amount of flammable liquids in one location. Stored flammable liquids in containers, including cans, barrels and drums are exempt from coverage by the PSM standard unless they are located such that they could be involved in a potential release. In the situation described, storage cabinets are not considered separate storage areas for purposes of the PSM standard. (May 6,1993) Q. What is intended by the terminology "on site in one location" as it applies toflammable liquid in 1910.119(a)(1)(H)? A. "Onsite in one location" is intended to cover a process or area from the standpoint of whether there could be a catastrophic release of a threshold or greater amount of flammable liquid(s) from a process or area at any one time. A building, fire division or storage room may be "one location." Storage areas would be considered separate locations when an incident involving the release of flammable liquid in one of the storage areas would not involve the release of flammable liquids stored in another area. When storage tanks are located inside storage rooms and are interconnected by piping to the spray painting operation, the process which includes these storage tanks would be covered by the PSM standard (if the aggregate quantity of flammable liquids in the total system is 10,000 pounds [4535.9 kgs) or greater). (May 6,1993) Q. Liquefied petroleum gas (LPC) is stored in an outside tank within a tankfarm in a quantity ofgreater than 10,000 pounds. It is transferred approximately 75feet to a separate gassing building where it is used tofill pressurized containers with small amounts ofpropellant gas (5 grams). The other parts of the operation are all located inside an adjacentfacility. The operation is designed and operated in accordance with the Chemical Specialties Manufacturers Association guidance documentfor the handling ofaerosol propellants and the flammable and combustible liquids standard (29 CFR 1910.106). Tab 200 Page 66 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABDOO103451 Who Is Covered Tab 200 Located approximately 25feet awayfrom the LPG tank described above are atmospheric storage tanks of flammable liquids. None of the tanks are interconnected. The tanks contain more than 10,000 pounds of flammable liquids. Would theflammable liquid storage tanks be considered to be part of the covered LPG operations? A. If an incident in the covered LPG process could involve nearby atmospheric tanks in which threshold amounts (10,000 pounds or greater) of flammable liquid are stored, this flammable liquid storage would be considered part of the covered LPG process. See the definition of process at 1910.119(b). (Sept. 9,1993) Q. In the example in the question above, if engineering and administrative controls were in place to the extent that a process hazard analysis determined that there was no reasonable potential that a releasefrom the covered LPG tank would involve the adjacent atmospheric storage tanks, would the adjacent tanks still be covered? A. For the purposes of the "process" definition in 1910.119(b), "any group of vessels which are interconnected and separate vessels which are located such that a highly hazardous chemical could be involved in a potential release shall be considered a single process." The boundaries of the covered process which includes the LPG storage tank would extend to quantities of flammable liquids stored in separate atmospheric tanks located such that there is a reasonable probability that an event such as an explosion in the LPG process would affect the nearby atmospheric tanks and provide a potential for catastrophic release of the flammable liquids stored inside. This interpreta tion is predicated on the assumption that an event such as an explosion will take place in the covered LPG process notwithstanding engineering and administrative controls required by the PSM standard to prevent catastrophic releases of highly hazardous chemicals. (Sept. 9,1993) Q. Quantities offlammable liquids greater than 10,000 pounds, that are not listed in Appendix A, are mixed, blended, transferred and stored as part ofan operation that is done entirely under atmospheric conditions. The materials are not heated or part ofan exothermic reaction. All of these operations are conducted in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.106. Would this operation be covered under the standard? A. The flammable liquid process described in this question is covered by the PSM standard. Since this process involves activities, that is, onsite movement and handling in addition to storage and associated transfer, the atmospheric storage and transfer of flammable liquid exemption at 1910.119 (a)(ii)(b) would not apply. (Sept. 9,1993) Q. For the purpose of the PSM standard, does OSHA consider Department of Transportation (DOT) containers to be atmospheric tanks? A. Containers such as 55 gallon drums are considered to be atmospheric tanks. Therefore, storage of flammable liquids in such containers, even if the quantity exceeds 10,000 pounds, would not be covered by the PSM standard. However, such storage would have to meet the requirements contained in 29 CFR 1910.106. (Sept. 9,1993) *Q. A linefills and packages small containers (one gallon or less) offlammable liquid product that are suppliedfrom a stationary tank that contains more than 10,000 pounds and is located approximately 25 feet away. The operation is conducted at both ambient temperature and pressure and in accordance zoith the requirements of29 CFR 1910.106. Would the tank be covered under the requirements of the PSM standard? A. The described process would not be a covered process since it involves only the activities of storage and associated transfer to storage into containers that are considered equivalent to atmospheric storage tanks, which are exempted under 1910.119(a)(ii)(B). (Sept. 9,1993; corrected by OSHA, March 16,1994)* * Revised to reflect OSHA's correction, 7/97. Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 67 ABDOO103452 Tab 200 Who Is Covered Q. For processes involvingflammable gas mixtures, are the non-flammable components in a flammable gas mixture included when determining the threshold quantity? A. Non-flammable components contribute to the determination of the threshold quantity. (Sept. 13,1993) Q. Does an employer have to maintain records or documentation establishing the boiling points (or the 10 percent points of distillation identified in the definition of boiling point in the PSM standard) offlammable liquids stored in atmospheric tanks or transferred? A. Please note that the exception at 29 CFR 1910.119(a)(l)(ii)(B) does not apply to all flammable liquids stored in atmospheric tanks or transferred which are kept below their normal boiling point without benefit of chilling or refrigeration. This exception is limited to flammable liquids in atmospheric tanks, containers and pipes used only for storage and transfer to storage and not connected to a process or process vessel. If intending to invoke the exception, an employer must be prepared to demonstrate (through documentation including records which are maintained and otherwise) to OSHA that flammable liquids stored and transferred on a work site meet this exception. In this context, an employer must disclose the boiling points of the flammable liquids intended to be excepted from PSM coverage and how the boiling points were determined. (Sept. 20,1993) Q. May an employer use the 10 percent point ofa distillation (performed in accordance with the Standard Method of Testfor Distillation of Petroleum ASTM D-86-62) to establish the boiling point ofa flammable liquid instead ofmaking an exhaustive attempt to establish and document an "accurate boiling point?" A. Yes, the 10 percent point of a distillation may be used as noted in the 1910.119(b) definition of boiling point. (Sept 20,1993) *Q. Are the quantities offlammable liquids andflammable gases stored in close proximity considered aggregatefor the purpose ofdetermining threshold quantities? A. Flammable liquids are treated separately from flammable gases for aggregation purposes. Threshold quantity is determined by the aggregate amount of flammable liquids or flammable gases in a process or in more than one process in close proximity. (Feb. 15,1994) *Q. Would the PSM standard apply to thefollowing scenario? A storage area involves a flammable gas located a remote distancefrom another storage area involving aflammable gas and each area contains less than the threshold quantity. Each storage area is a storage tank which has independent plumbing and which is used for repackaging into containers in other areas. In one location, the plumbing of each of the two totally independent systems comes into close proximity to each other. A. The two processes described may be considered a single process. When these two processes are considered a single process and collectively contain 10,000 pounds or greater amounts of flammable gases, the PSM standard applies. (Feb. 15,1994) Q. Are processes involvingflammable liquids (e.g., ethyl alcohol) covered by the standard? A. Processes involving flammable liquids (e.g., in a distillation process) in quantities at or above 10,000 pounds are covered. Quantities of flammable liquids in storage are considered part of the process if the storage tanks are interconnected with the process, or if they are sufficiently near the process that an explosion, fire or release could reasonably involve the storage area. (Sept. 13,1994)* * Added, 7/97. Tab 200 Page 68 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABD00103453 Who Is Covered Tab 200 Q. Would thefollowing scenario be covered under the PSM standard? Scenario: Less than 9,000 pounds offlammable liquid is stored in a storage tank. The liquid is hard piped to a valve station. As the batches of the mixture are made, a temporary hose is attached to the valve station and approximately 4,200 pounds offlammable liquid are transferred to a mix tank and mixed with 6,000 pounds of inert solids. The resulting liquid-solid mixture has the sameflashpoint of theflammable liquid, and the combined weight of the liquid-solid is greater than 20,000 pounds. However, the entire operation from storage to the mix tank has less than 20,000 pounds offlammable liquids in it. A. The process described falls outside the scope of the PSM standard. The standard applies to processes that involve flammable liquids or gases in quantities of 10,000 pounds or'more. The process described does not meet the specified threshold quantities in Appendix A of the standard. Gan. 16,1996) Chemicals listed in Appendix A of the PSM Standard Q. Why are hydrogen chloride and hydrochloric acid, anhydrous listed separately in Appendix A when both have the same CAS number (CAS H7647-01-0)? A. The Appendix A list is referring to hydrogen chloride gas and its liquid form. If hydrogen chloride gas is liquefied, it is sometimes referred to as hydrogen chloride, anhydrous or hydro chloric acid, anhydrous. However, it is still the same substance. Consequently, the Agency listed the substance both ways, but with the same CAS number, to indicate that they are both the same substance. Qune 24,1992) Q. Does the PSM standard apply to an employer who uses cellulose nitrate in a concentration greater than 12.6 percent nitrogen to which water is added, producing a mixture containing greater than 23 percent water, which will not bum? A. Appendix A of the standard lists cellulose nitrate in concentrations greater than 12.6 percent nitrogen as a chemical that presents a potential for a catastrophic event at or above the threshold quantity of 2,500 pounds. The standard does not distinguish between "wet" or "dry" cellulose nitrate. Therefore, if an employer's process involves cellulose nitrate in a concentration greater than 12.6 percent nitrogen, with the total quantity of the mixture or solution at or above the threshold quantity--no matter what percentage of water may be used in treatment--the process is covered by the PSM standard. Guly 20,1992) Q. With respect to the chemical listed in Appendix A as "Ammonia solutions (>44 percent ammonia by weight)": Does this listing include solutions ofammonium compounds such as ammonium chloride or ammonium bisulfite solutions, or does it refer only to ammonia water solutions? A. The referenced listing includes only ammonia-water solutions and does not apply to ammonium chloride or ammonium bisulfite solutions. (Sept. 5,1992) Q. How high must the percentage ofa chemical (listed in Appendix A of 1910.119) be to require compliance with the PSM standard? A. The threshold quantities listed in Appendix A of the standard apply only to pure (or "chemical grade") chemicals unless otherwise specified, for example, hydrogen peroxide, 52 percent by weight or greater. (Dec. 21,1992) Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 69 ABDOO103454 Tab 200 Who Is Covered Q. Does the PSM standard apply to solutions ofhydrogen chloride in water,for example, a 37 percent concentration ofhydrochloric acid? A. The chemical names "hydrogen chloride" and "anhydrous hydrochloric acid" are included in the highly hazardous chemicals listing in Appendix A of the PSM standard. Solutions of hydrogen chloride gas in water are not listed in Appendix A and therefore, are not considered to be highly hazardous chemicals subject to the PSM standard. (Jan. 21,1993) Q. Does Appmdix A apply to compounds of the listed chemicals? If so, does the same percentage of solution apply to a compound? A. Chemical compounds not listed as compounds in Appendix A are not covered by the PSM standard. (April 14,1993) Q. Ifhighly hazardous chemicals (HHCs) which are listed without specified concentration limits in Appendix A of the PSM standard are at commercial grades less than 99 percent purity, is the PSM standard applicable? A. The substances listed in Appendix A without specified concentration limits are intended to be covered by the PSM standard at commercial grade percentages of purity because the commercial grade of most of the HHCs is approximately 99 percent purity. Many of the HHCs, if not actually at 99 percent purity, are only one to two percent less than 99 percent pure. For example, the commercial grades of acrolein and allyl chloride are 97 percent purity. Some HHCs are considerably less than 99 percent pure. For example, the commercial grade of hydrogen fluoride is 70 percent. (June 22,1993) Q. Does the PSM standard apply to dimethylamine? A. Anhydrous dimethylamine, identified by CAS #124-40-3, is listed in Appendix A of the PSM standard as a highly hazardous chemical. Dimethylamine in aqueous solutions, which is not listed in Appendix A, is not considered to be a highly hazardous chemical covered by the PSM standard except when the solution qualifies as a flammable liquid. (July 9, 1993) *Q. Are the quantities ofdifferent Appendix A listed HHCs, when stored in close proximity, considered aggregatefor the purpose ofdetermining threshold quantity? A. No, threshold quantity is determined by the amount of an individual, listed toxic or reactive HHC in a process, or in more than one process if they are in close proximity. (Feb. 15,1994) Q. Is (1) an aqueous solution containing less than 37 percent formaldehyde by weight, (2) aqueous solutions containing hydrochloric acid, and (3) aqueous solutions containing hydrofluoric acid covered by the PSM standard? A. As described, these chemicals, which are not listed specifically in Appendix A, are not covered by the PSM standard. (March 21,1994) *Q. Is 35 percent hydrochloric acid covered by the PSM standard? A. No. Aqueous solutions of hydrogen chloride, that is, hydrochloric acid, are not covered by the PSM standard. (March 21,1994) *Q. How do you determine whether an acid solution is covered by the PSM standard? A. The PSM standard covers a workplace process containing threshold quantities (TQ) or greater amount of a highly hazardous (toxic, reactive, flammable or explosive) chemical. Some of the covered materials listed in Appendix A of the standard are acids with concentration thresholds listed. For example, a TQ or greater amount of perchloric acid (concentration greater than 60 percent by weight) is covered under the PSM standard. On the other hand, any amount of perchloric acid at 60 percent or less concentration by weight would not be covered by the PSM standard. Acids or* * Added, 7/97. Tab 200 Page 70 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABDOO103455 Who Is Covered Tab 200 other materials listed in Appendix A without TQs are covered at "commercial grade" concentration and higher. OSHA defines "commercial grade" as a typical maximum concentration of the chemical that is commercially available and shipped. The term also includes reagent grades. If the commer cial and reagent grades are different, the lower of the two grades is intended to be covered by the PSM standard. In addition, a TQ, that is 10,000 pounds, of a flammable liquid (including mixtures consisting of acids or otherwise) is covered under the PSM standard. Also, the manufacture of any amount of an explosive, as defined in 29 CFR 1910.109, including mixtures consisting of acids or otherwise, is covered by the PSM standard. (March 21, 1994) **Q. Is a 70 percent tertiary-butyl hydroperoxide (TBHP) and SO percent water, by weight, solution or an 83 percent cumene hydroperoxide and 17 percent organic solvents, by weight, solution covered by the PSM standard? A. The preceding concentrations are not covered by the PSM standard. Except for the mixtures specifically listed in Appendix A, toxic or reactive chemical mixtures which are not explosive and which are not flammable liquids or gases are not covered by the PSM standard. (Jan. 31,1994; corrected by OSHA March 31,1994) *Q. Ifa company has a tank that is capable ofholding 20,000 pounds ofanhydrous ammonia (NH3), but only maintains an inventory of5,000 pounds to avoid coverage under the PSM standard, will OSHA require assurance that the inventory is not allowed to reach the TQ of 10,000 pounds? Ifso, in what form should the assurance be maintained? A. If the worksite intends to limit the quantity of HHC in a process to avoid being subject to the PSM standard, the employer must have an effective control program and be prepared to demonstrate to OSHA that the process is at all times not covered. How the demonstration is formatted and main tained is considered a performance-oriented requirement for the employer. Employer demonstration, including documentation related to current and past operations, is anticipated. (June 1,1994) *Q. Why is anhydrous ammonia (NHJ listed in Appendix A when its material safety data sheet does not list it as a "toxic, reactive,flammable or explosive" chemical? A. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Extremely Hazardous Substance list, which includes NH3, was a reference source for determining the HHCs and associated TQs covered by the PSM standard. The National Fire Protection Association rates NH3 as a 3 (on a scale of 4)--a most severe toxic health hazard, and as a 1 (on a scale of 4)--a flammable gas. There is an extensive history of catastrophic releases of NH3 resulting in injury and death. Although NH3 would not be a flammable as defined under 1910.1200(c), it is flammable or explosive when subject to a flame. With these considerations, OSHA elected to cover NH3 under the PSM standard. (June 2,1994) *Q. Appendix A of the PSM standard does not list hydrogen and sodium hydroxide. Will chemicals such as these be added to the list in thefuture? A. With exceptions (see 1910.119(a)(l)(ii)), a process containing a threshold quantity or greater of flammable gases, including hydrogen, is covered under the PSM standard. OSHA intends to add highly hazardous toxic and reactive chemicals to Appendix A in the future as the need arises. (July 11,1994) Q. What is meant by "Formaldehyde (Formalin)" listed in Appendix A of the PSM standard? A. This highly hazardous chemical should be listed to read: formaldehyde (37 percent by weight or greater). The PSM standard will be revised to reflect this change. Any amount of mixture of Formaldehyde, less than 37 percent by weight, in solution would not be covered by the PSM standard. (Sept. 13,1994)* ** * Added, 7/97. ** Revised to reflect OSHA's correction, 7/97. Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 71 ABDOO103456 Tab 200 Who Is Covered Q. Is waste burning ofa covered solvent considered a process? A. Yes. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. Would a 50 percent solution ofhydroxymine (CAS #7803-49-8) be subject to the PSM standard? A. The substances listed in Appendix A of the standard without specified concentration limits, such as hydroxymine, are intended to be covered by the PSM standard at commercial grade percentages. OSHA defines "commercial grade" as a typical maximum concentration of the chemical that is commercially available and shipped. Assuming the commercial grade of the liquid form of hydroxymine is near 99 percent, a 50 percent solution would not be covered by the standard. However, if the company receives a commercial grade concentration and dilutes the chemical onsite, the undiluted quantity would be subject to the PSM standard should the 2,500 pound threshold quantity be met. (Sept. 11,1995) *Q. In Appendix A, "sulfur dioxide, liquid" is listed as a covered chemical. Is gaseous sulfur dioxide covered? A. If you refer to page 6365 of the Federal Register notice, OSHA states its intention to eliminate the word "liquid" because sulfur dioxide could also be a gas and the health hazards are the same regardless of its state. This correction did not appear in the final rule's Appendix A, but OSHA is planning to correct this entry in the near future. (April 29,1997) Atmospheric storage tanks interconnected with a process* Editor's note: Thefollowing letters ofinterpretation may be affected by a May 5,1997, U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC) decision in Secretary of Labor v. Meer Corp. (OSHRC Docket No. 95-0341). The case questioned whether the use of temporary hoses used to transfer theflammable liquids methanol and ethanolfrom atmospheric storage tanks to a process established that the tanks were interconnected to the process, and thereby covered under the PSM standard. The administrative law judge (ALJ) ruled that OSHA failed to show that the storage tanks were connected to the process within the meaning of the PSM standard. In addition, the ALJ ruled that the exemptive language and the definition ofprocess in the PSM standard are so vague and uncertain as to be insufficient to warn Meer that it was required to comply zoith the standard. As a result of the decision, OSHA issued a May 12,1997, memorandum to its regional administrators stating, "OSHA will abide by the Meer decision, and will not cite 1910.119 under circumstances when coverage of the process would be based partly or solely on the quantity offlammable liquid in connected atmospheric storage tanks, that would otherwise qualifyfor the 1910.119(a)(l)(ii)(B) exemption." John Miles, OSHA's Director of Compliance Programs, said OSHA will not reissue the following letters of interpretation, but instead will revise language in the standard to cover the interconnec tion of tanks to a process. However, OSHA has not set a datefor issuing proposed revisions. Q. Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is stored in an outside tank within a tankfarm in a quantity ofgreater than 10,000 pounds. It is transferred approximately 75feet to a separate gassing building where it is used to fill pressurized containers with small amounts ofpropellant gas (5 grams). The other parts of the operation are all located inside an adjacentfacility. The operation is designed and operated in accordance with the Chemical Specialties Manufacturers Association guidance document for the handling ofaerosol propellants and the flammable and combustible liquids standard (29 CFR 1910.106). Would the tank and aerosolfilling building be covered under the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.119? A. Yes, flammable gases used onsite in quantities of 10,000 pounds or more as described in this question are covered. (Sept. 9,1993)* * Added, 7/97. Tab 200 Page 72 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABDOO103457 Who is Covered Tab 200 Q. In the question above, the same atmospheric storage tanks are connected to adjacent, indoor operations conducted at both ambient temperature and pressure that mix, blend and transfer more than 10,000 pounds of theflammable materials. The transfer pipingfrom the outside to the inside is equipped with a series offusible linkfire valves. Would the entire indoor operation which involves the handling of theflammable materials also be covered under the requirements of the standard due to the proximity of the atmospheric storage tanks to the LPG tank? A. This would be a covered process, independent of any other process. Atmospheric tanks containing flammable liquids that have feeder connections to processes are covered by the standard. Atmospheric tanks containing flammable liquids not having such feeder connections, such as bulk transfer terminals, are not covered. The described process is an atmospheric tank with a feeder connection to a process and it is covered. Also, fusible link fire valves may function in a fire to prevent a catastrophic release of flammable liquid from a storage tank. However, these fusible link fire valves would not prevent a catastrophic release from a process due to containment failures including those caused by explosions. (Sept. 9,1993) Q. An operation involves steam stripping less than 10,000 pounds offlammable solventfrom a carbon absorber. Is this operation covered by the standard? If the condensate linefrom this operation were connected to a storage tank which held greater than 20,000 pounds of aflammable liquid, would the operation be covered? A process hazard analysis has determined that there is no reasonable potential that a catastrophic eventfrom the stripping operation would involve the storage tank. Would the operation be covered? A. The answer to the first question is "no." The answer to the second question is "yes." (Sept. 9,1993) Q. Does the PSM standard apply to the process described in thefollowing scenario? An aluminum rolling mill contains an aluminum sheet coating line. Aluminum sheet is passed through a piece of equipment that puts a film offlammable liquid paint on the sheet. The entire system holds less than 200 gallons (757 liters) of paint well below the 20,000 pounds (4535.4 kg) threshold quantity. The coating line is connected by a pipeline to a storage room whereflammable coatings are mixed and stored in atmospheric tanks. A. The storage room, the coating equipment and the connecting piping are considered a single process. Please refer to the definition of process at 1910.119(b). When collectively containing threshold quantities or greater amounts of flammable liquids, this coating process is covered by the PSM standard. (Sept. 20,1993) *Q. Can mitigating devices, such as excess flow valves, etc., be used to isolate a portion ofan interconnected covered process containing less than a threshold quantity of a HHC in order to avoid coverage by the PSM standard? A. No. The interconnected process would be considered part of the process. (July 11,1994) . *Q. A parts cleaning station (PCS) is connected by pipeline to tzoo outdoor atmospheric storage tanks zvhich contain a maximum of 35,600 pounds offlammable solvent. The pipingfrom both tanks meets at an outside electric ball valve which directs deliveryfrom only one tank at a time. The PCS system also contains a pneumatic ball valve system to control the filling and emptying of the PCS-wash tank. The waste solvent is pumped directly to an outdoor zuaste solvent tank, zvhich holds a maximum of57,760 pounds of the zuaste solvent, and has an in-line reverse check valve that prevents backflozv in the line. Is this zoorkplace scenario covered under the PSM standard? A. Yes. By definition of a "process," the two flammable liquid storage tanks, the wash tank, the waste solvent storage tank and interconnecting piping are considered a single process which contains a threshold quantity or greater of flammable liquid at any one time. (July 15,1994) ' Added, 7/97. Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 73 ABDOO103458 Tab 200 Who Is Covered Q. Does the PSM standard apply to the transfer offlammable liquid adhesivefrom six bulk storage tanks, each of which has an 8,000 gallon capacity, through interconnecting pipes to afire-protective dispensing room/ booth where an operator pumps the adhesive into 55-gallon drums, which is then either transferred to the mixing area or dispensed in thefire-protective booth? A. By the definition of "process," the flammable liquid adhesive storage tanks in the interior tank room, the 55-gallon drums and coating machines are considered to be a single process. The tanks and containers are connected by piping or unconnected in close proximity to each other such that collectively, the flammable liquid adhesive in these tanks could be involved in a potential release. And the term "interconnected" includes onsite movement of flammable liquid adhesives from the storage tanks by way of piping that is not directly connected to but dispenses by way of a control valve directly into 55-gallon drums. The described process includes onsite movement, handling, blending and manufacturing activities, which does not allow classification as an exception under 1910.119(a)(l)(ii)(B)--which allows only storage arvd associated transfer as excepted activities. (Feb. 22,1995) Q. Does the presence ofa closed double block in a pipeline (a pipeline containing two closed valves, between which is a vent open to the air) break the connection such that vessels on either side are not "interconnected"? Note that a "block" is considered an "energy isolating device" under the lockout/tagout standard (29 CFR 1910.147(b)). A. Vessels connected by a pipeline with a closed double block and vent containing two closed valves, between which is a vent open to the air, are considered to be interconnected as this term is used in the definition of "process" at 1910.119(b). This interpretation is predicated on the assump tion that there is a reasonable probability that an event, such as an explosion, would affect interconnected vessels, notwithstanding engineering (including valves) and administrative controls required by the PSM standard to prevent release of highly hazardous chemicals. (Sept. 27,1995) Q. Would the storage/supply tanks in a system having a supply line disconnect, such as a removable section of pipe that creates a non-connection to a process during process operation, be subject to the PSM standard? A. According to the definition of a "process" (any activity involving a highly hazardous chemical including any use, storage, manufacturing, handling or the onsite movement), any time the threshold quantities listed in Appendix A are exceeded, 29 CFR 1910.119 would be applicable. (Oct. 25,1995) Q. Would the PSM standard apply to thefollowing scenario? Scenario: Two atmospheric tanks contain flammable liquid, which is heavier than and immiscible with water, in quantities greater than 10,000 pounds. The tanks are located on piers above a water-filled moat that has a capacity greater than the contents of the two storage tanks. Asflammable liquid is pumpedfrom the tanks, it is replaced by water; thus, the tanks are maintained in full condition with a water blanket above theflammable liquid at all times. Theflammable liquid is pumpedfrom the tanks to a building approximately 60feet away into a 55-gallon "measuring pot." The pump will not run xvithout an operator physically actuating the electrical contact. The measuring pot is in an intrinsically safe reactor room, completely sealed with a standpipe that determines the correct measurement. The measuring pot is then piped to the reactors. The entire contents of the potfioxv by gravity to the reactor when the valve is activated by the operator, who then closes the valve once theflow is complete. A. The scenario described would not be excepted from coverage by the PSM standard. The exception under paragraph 1910.119(a)(l)(ii)(B) is applicable to a process that only includes the activities of storage and associated transfer of flammable liquids. This exception would not be applicable to a process that includes any one, or combination, of the following flammable liquid Tab 200 Page 74 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABDOO103459 Who is Covered Tab 200 ) activities: use, storage, manufacturing, handling, or onsite movement and also storage in atmo spheric tanks and associated transfer that are kept below their normal boiling point without the benefit of chilling or refrigeration. See the definition of process under paragraph 1910.119(b). For the purposes of this definition, any group of vessels that is interconnected and separate vessels that are located such that a highly hazardous chemical, including a flammable liquid, could be involved in a potential release are considered a single process. (Dec. 12,1995) Q. Is a tankfarm containing less than threshold quantities ofchemicals listed in the PSM standard, which is interconnected via pipeline to an adjacent refinery or chemicalfacility that has a different owner than the tank farm, considered to be part of the "process" and consequently covered under the PSM standard? A. The applicability of the PSM standard with respect to adjacent work sites is determined on an employer basis, not work site basis. If one employer has adjacent work sites, these work sites are considered one work site because they are under the control of one employer. Therefore, any group of vessels that is interconnected and any separate vessels that are located such that a highly hazardous chemical could be involved in a potential release on either or both work sites are considered a single process and would be covered under the PSM standard. However, if two different employers have adjacent work sites and groups of vessels are interconnected between the two work sites, they are considered to be separate and, depending on the separate activities, one employer may be covered by the PSM standard and one employer may not because each site is under the control of a different employer. (Feb. 7,1996) *Q. Would a dock connected to a refinery tankage, which is connected to other covered processes, be covered under the PSM standard? And would a dock connected to tankage in a bulk petroleum products storage > terminal be covered under PSM? ) A. The dock connected to a refinery tankage, which is connected to other covered processes, would be covered under the PSM standard. A dock connected to tankage in a bulk petroleum products storage terminal would not be covered under the PSM standard, assuming that the flammable liquids are stored in atmospheric storage tanks and the dock is connected to storage tanks only to conduct storage and transfer operations--not mixing or blending. (Oct. 31,1996) Explosives Q. How does the PSM standard apply to workplace explosives? A. As published in Volume 57, Number 26 of the Federal Register on Feb. 24,1992, 29 CFR 1910.109 Explosives and Blasting Agents - was amended to cover the manufacture of explosives under the PSM standard. In 1910.109(a)(3), an explosive is defined as any chemical compound, mixture, or device, the primary or common purpose of which is to function by explosion, that is, with substantially instantaneous release of gas and heat. Additionally, OSHA considers the manufacture of explosives to mean: mixing, blending, extruding, synthesizing, assembling, disassembling, and other activities involved in the making of a product or device which is intended to explode. The PSM standard covers manufacturing processes when the resulting finished products or devices are intended to explode. For example, in a case where an employer obtains an explosive device manufactured by another employer, the explosive device is a subassembly for a weapon which is manufactured by the employer purchasing the explosives. Both employers must comply with the PSM standard since the explosive device and the weapon are finished products or devices which are intended to explode. ) * Added. 7/97. Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 75 ABDOO103460 Tab 200 Who Is Covered The PSM standard would not apply to the highly hazardous chemical(s) (1) intended to propel the weapon, (2) manufactured elsewhere and delivered to the weapon manufacturing work site, and (3) not otherwise covered as a flammable liquid or gas, or toxic or reactive highly hazardous chemical as specified by threshold quantities and concentrations (when applicable) in the PSM standard. In these cases, 1910.109 would apply. Any amount of explosive chemicals made, for example, by synthesizing or blending chemical compounds is considered to be explosives manufacturing which is covered by the PSM standard. Use of these explosive chemicals in research and test evaluation for verification of various manufacturing mixes is covered by the explosives standard at 1910.109, but not the PSM standard at 1910.119. These interpretations are predicated on the intent of the PSM standard to eliminate or mitigate catastrophic releases of highly hazardous chemicals and resulting employee exposure to explosion, fire and toxic hazards in the workplace. (Dec. 30,1993) *Q. In thefollowing scenario, what types of hardware that come in contact with explosives are covered by the PSM standard? Scenario: A company manufactures an explosive device that consists ofa shocktube containing an explosive core and a blasting cap. These components, which are manufactured elsewhere, are delivered to the worksite where they are used to manufacture the explosive device, the primary or common purpose of which is tofunction by explosion. The shocktube undergoes cutting, coiling and sealing and then a blast cap is crimped onto the shocktube. The hazard of shocktube detonation alone is none and the shocktube is not destroyed. Associated mechanical equipment does not have pressure vessels, storage tanks, piping systems, reliefor vent systems, devices or pumps. A. The employer is required to determine the extent of the process used to manufacture the explosive device described above. A covered process may include equipment within the facility which may or may not contact the explosive, or explosive device components, during the manufac turing activity. Note that the process hazard analysis required by the PSM standard would verify the scope of process coverage within the facility, including manufacturing hardware and associated equipment. (May 25,1994) *Q. If there is no threshold quantityfor explosives, what about explosives used for research and development? A. Only the manufacture of explosives is covered by the PSM standard. (May 25,1994) Q. What is the role of the U.S. Bureau ofAlcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) vis-a-vis the PSM standard andfireworks manufacture? A. By 27 CFR 55 Subpart K, BATF regulates the storage, including minimum distances, of explosive materials in the workplace. As such, BATF limits the amount of pyrotechnic composition and explosive materials used to assemble fireworks in processing buildings to no more than 500 pounds. Also, the maximum quantity of flash powder permitted by BATF in any fireworks-processing building is ten pounds. These BATF limitations should not be confused with the applicability of the PSM standard to any amount of fireworks being manufactured. (Sept. 13,1994) * Added. 7/97. Tab 200 Page 76 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABDOO103461 Who Is Covered Tab 200 Transportation/transfer Q. Does the PSM standard apply to delivery ofhydrogen peroxide, 52 percent by weight or greater delivered by cargo tank motor vehicles (CTMV'S) which carry 7500 pound (3401.2kg) or greater amounts? In this case the CTMV driver, with no involvement of work site employees, dilutes the hydrogen peroxide downstream of the delivery hose, by water mixingfrom work site interconnected piping or by prefilling the storage tank with waterfrom work site interconnected piping prior to delivery of the hydrogen peroxide. A. The amount of hydrogen peroxide in the CTMV is not included for the purpose of determining whether there is a threshold quantity or greater amount in a work site process. As such, CTMV delivery to a process which has a capacity less than 7,500 pounds would not be covered by the PSM standard. The Department of Transportation (DOT) has jurisdiction over CTMV unloading which must be attended by a qualified person who may be the CTMV driver in compliance with the Hazardous Material Regulations, 49 CFR Subchapter C. DOT'S jurisdiction ends and OSHA's jurisdiction begins at the connection between the hose from the CTMV and the process when unloading hazardous materials as described above. Any use of the facility or operation of a process by the CTMV driver to dilute the subject hydrogen peroxide is deemed to be under OSHA's jurisdiction. When a CTMV containing threshold or greater amounts of hydrogen peroxide, is connected to a work site process which has the capacity to contain these amounts, the process may be subject to the PSM standard. The work site employer will be held responsible by OSHA for this determination. If the work site employer intends to operate the aforementioned process to avoid being subject to the PSM standard, he or she must have an effective dilution program (and be prepared to demon strate this to OSHA) that precludes an otherwise covered concentration and amount of hydrogen peroxide from being in the process at any particular time. This dilution program must address contractor employees, for example, the CTMV driver, when applicable. (Sept. 9,1993) Q. Does the PSM standard apply to the mixing of liquified butane, transferred by CTMV, with gasoline stored in atmospheric tanks at terminals in thefollowing scenario? Scenario: The normal butane is delivered to the terminal in a DOT approved CTMV. Typically, the gasoline is pumped from an atmospheric storage tank through a pipeline where the liquified butane is mixed ivith gasoline and returned to the atmospheric storage tank. When unloaded and disconnected, the CTMV leaves the terminal operator's property. A. Unless additional, unaddressed circumstances require coverage, mixing of CTMV delivered butane with gasoline stored in atmospheric tanks as described is considered a process excepted by paragraph 1910.119(a)(l)(ii)(B) from coverage by the PSM standard. This interpretation is based on the following factors: butane liquified gas is delivered in compliance with DOT regulations and the process only involves atmospheric tanks and associated transfer. (May 17,1995) Specific applications Q. Does the PSM standard apply to laboratory and research operations? A. The PSM standard does not specifically exclude laboratory or research operations. Therefore, should a laboratory or research operation have a threshold quantity of a covered highly hazardous chemical as described in the rule, the laboratory or research operation is covered by the PSM standard. (June 24,1992) Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 77 ABDOO103462 Tab 200 Who Is Covered Q. Dot's the PSM standard apply to ceramic manufacturingfacilities utilizing propane in amounts exceeding 10,000 pounds as thefuelforfiring ceramic xoare in a process which does not involve any other highly hazardous chemicals? A. The PSM standard would not apply to such a situation. (Aug. 28,1992) Q. Does the PSM standard apply to the EPA regulated and permitted RCRA hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal (TSD) facilities, when such facilities keep onsite in one location a hazardous waste chemical in a concentration and quantity which exceeds the applicable threshold quantity ofAppendix A. If so, why? If not, why not? A. Employers of worksites with TSD facilities which contain covered processes must comply with the PSM standard. The requirements of the PSM standard are intended to eliminate or mitigate workplace catastrophic releases of highly hazardous chemicals and resulting employee exposure to explosion, fire and toxic hazards. (Dec. 21,1992) Q. Are black liquor-recovery boilers and/or associated oil- or gas-fired auxiliaryfuel burner systems subject to the PSM standard? A. Black liquor-recovery boilers involving a PSM-covered chemical at or above threshold quantity are covered by the PSM standard. Gas-fired auxiliary fuel burner systems are covered by the PSM standard when used to fire black liquor-recovery boilers involving threshold or greater quantities of another covered chemical. Gas-fired auxiliary fuel burner systems would not be covered by the PSM Standard when used to fire black liquor-recovery boilers involving less than threshold quantities of another covered chemical. Also, threshold and greater quantities of stored flammable liquids or gases are covered if they could be involved in a release in another covered process, for example, a black liquor-recovery boiler, sited nearby. (June 9,1993) *Q. Would an ethylene oxide storage tank, containing less than 5,000 pounds, which is separatedfrom the PSM-covered ethylene oxide process by a 100 pounds-per-square-foot (psfl blast resistant wall and 20 psf blast-relieving panels that comply with the Factory Mutual standard, FM 792, be covered under the PSM standard? A. No. However, the employer must be prepared to demonstrate to OSHA that the barrier built between the two areas is effective in preventing the transfer of toxic gas and the effects of fire/ explosion. (Dec. 30,1993) Q. Would the PSM standard apply to a chlorine storagefacility where there is a lack of a "reasonably foreseeable probability" ofa chlorine release causing a total release in excess of the threshold quantity because thefacility is designed so the containers are "elevated sufficiently to prevent them from standing in water or any liquid chlorine that may be released"? A. According to the description and drawings provided, the facility's vessels are interconnected, even though the chlorine is being pumped from one vessel at a time. Further, the total quantity of stored chlorine onsite is estimated to be 14,400 pounds, which exceeds the threshold quantity. The threshold quantity is the cutoff point for the PSM standard, not the quantity for the total amount released in case of mishaps. The facility would be subject to the provisions of the PSM standard. (Aug. 15,1995) Added, 7/97. Tab 200 Page 78 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABDOO103463 Who ts Covered Tab 200 ) Registration Q. Do covered establishments have to register with OSHA? A. No. There is no requirement that establishments covered by the standard register or otherwise notify OSHA. (Sept. 13,1994) 2. Exemptions Oil or gas well drilling Q. Are single zvell processingfacilities with equipment including separators, heat-treater and storage tanks used in gas production operations exemptfrom employer compliance with the PSM standard within the context of 1910.119(a)(2)(H), which excludes oil and gas zvell drilling and servicing operations? A. The 1910.119(a)(2)(ii) exemption of oil or gas well drilling or servicing operations is intended to cover all drilling operations and any well servicing operation, including acidizing. Additionally, water separation facilities adjacent to or near the well (including tanks used primarily for water separation in conjunction with oil or gas well production) are not covered by the PSM standard. The following processes, when they involve at least threshold quantities of oil or gas, are covered by the PSM standard. Oil or gas well production fluids from several wells are processed by heating the fluids and physically separating the water from the gas or oil. The water is returned to the ground via a "down hole well" for disposal return to the strata from which it came. But if these oil or gas well drilling operations take place at "normally unoccupied remote facilities," then according to 1910.119(a)(2)(iii) they are exempt from PSM standard coverage. (Aug. 26,1992) I Q. Are oil and gas production operations located offshore within state jurisdictions covered by their PSM rules? A. Oil and gas well drilling and servicing operations are exempt from the process safety management standard (see 1910.119(a)(2)(h)). Beyond the extraction of water, any processing involving 10,000 pounds (4535.9 kgs) or greater amounts of flammable liquids or gases at an offshore facility is covered. Hither the federal PSM standard or a state-plan-state's PSM standard would be enforced when applicable at these offshore production facilities. (Sept. 13,1994) Workplace consumption of hydrocarbon fuels Q. Coke oven gas and blast furnace gas are generated in steel industry processes and used asfuel at steel mills. Do these gases qualifyfor the exclusion setforth in 29 CFR 1910.119(a)(l)(ii)(A)? A. The fuels described would be part of the exclusion as long as they were not used in a process involving another highly hazardous chemical covered by the standard. (June 19,1992) . Q. Does the PSM standard apply to a plant that has more than 10,000 pounds of hydrocarbon fuel onsite that is used solely as a fuelfor a furnace used to melt glass? A. The requirements of 1910.119 do not apply to this situation because 1910.119(a)(l)(ii)(A) of the standard specifically excludes from coverage hydrocarbon fuels used solely for workplace consumption as a fuel if it is not part of a process containing another highly hazardous chemical covered by the standard. They are, however, covered under 1910.106. (Oct. 22,1992) Q. If two or morefuels, each ofzvhich zvould qualify individuallyfor the exclusion setforth in 29 CFR 1910.119(a)(l)(ii)(A), are blendedfor zuorkplace consumption as a fuel, does the resultingfuel mixture qualify for the exclusion as zvell? t A. Yes, so long as the fuel mixture is not being used as part of a process containing another highly hazardous chemical covered by the standard. (April 7,1994) Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 79 ABDOO103464 Tab 200 Who Is Covered Q. Would a powerhouse boiler, an onsite portion of the gas pipeline and a production unitfurnace be considered otic process, due to interconnection? If so, would the process not be a covered process because of the fuel exemption? A. Hydrocarbon fuels used solely for workplace consumption as fuels, and not part of a process containing another highly hazardous (covered) chemical, are not covered by the PSM standard. The natural gas system described would not be the trigger chemical for PSM applicability. If the unit furnace contained other covered chemicals, then the furnace, pipeline and boiler could be part of the covered process if they could be affected by a release of the covered material. For example, if the natural gas were used as a feedstock rather than a fuel in the unit furnace, the unit furnace and interconnecting pipe onsite would be a single process. The powerhouse boiler would be included if it were connected to the same onsite piping as the unit furnace. In any event, the boiler would have to be reviewed in any hazard analysis with respect to loss of this utility function and its impacts on the process. (Sept. 14,1995) Atmospheric storage of flammable liquids Q. Does the rule (at 29 CFR 2910.119(a)(l)(ii)(B)) exempt allflammable liquids stored or transferred which are kept below their normal boiling point without the benefit of chilling or refrigeration, including, but not limited to, flammable liquids in atmospheric tanks? A. No, the exemption is limited to flammable liquids stored in atmospheric tanks or transferred which are kept below their normal boiling point without benefit of chilling or refrigeration. This exemption is applicable to flammable liquids in tanks, containers and pipes used only for storage and transfer (to storage), and not connected to a process or a process vessel. Similarly, stored flammable liquids in containers, including cans, barrels and drums, would be exempt from coverage by the PSM standard. (Jan. 8, 1993) Q. Would the PSM standard apply to afacility that stored greater than 10,000 pounds ofalcohol in a storage container not designedfor pressures other than atmospheric operations, and stored at room temperature? A. Note that 1910.119(b) defines an atmospheric tank as a storage tank that has been designed to operate at pressures from atmospheric through 0.5 psig. Using the Antoine equation to calculate vapor pressures of ethyl alcohol at various room temperatures of 70, 80, 90,100 and 110 degrees F, the corresponding pressures were estimated to be 0.92,1.27,1.73, 2.33, and 2.93 psig, respectively, which means the storage containers used at the facility are designed to operate at pressures higher than 0.5 psig during the lowest summer temperatures of 70 degrees F. Therefore, based on the information provided, whenever the volume of the flammables exceeds the threshold quantity of 10,000 pounds, the facility would be subject to the PSM standard. (Sept. 7,1995) Q. Would elected, rather than required, refrigeration offlammable liquids in storage negate the exception of 1910.119(a)(l)(ii)(B)? A. The chemicals described do not require refrigeration to stay below their normal boiling points. The fact that the employer elects to refrigerate the chemical does not negate the exception. However, many cooling systems use ammonia as the cooling medium. The PSM standard applies to ammonia in refrigeration systems containing 10,000 pounds or more. Whereas the chemicals may be excepted by the storage and transfer exception, they may be covered as part of a covered refrigeration process using ammonia in excess of threshold quantities. (Sept. 11,1995) Tab 200 Page 80 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABDOO103465 Who Is Covered Tab 200 Q. A fundamental part ofa storage/transfer process includes commingling batches offinished products, such as gasoline, and providing additives to products prior to and, in some cases, during the actual transfer. Does this "blending" offinished productsfall within the storage and transfer exception (19l0.119(a)(l)(ii)(B))? A. The atmospheric tank exception is applicable to a process that includes only the activities of storage and associated transfer. When a process includes handling, onsite movement, or use of manufacturing activities, this exception would not apply. A process that, at any one point, contains a threshold quantity or greater amount of a highly hazardous chemical, as specified by the PSM standard, and that includes blending and additive operations in addition to atmospheric tank storage and associated transfer would be covered by the PSM standard. (Feb. 7,1996) Q. Is vapor recovery and incineration equipment used in conjunction with the storage and transfer of flammable liquids (previous question's scenario) exceptedfrom the PSM standard? A. Vapor recovery and incineration equipment interconnected with an atmospheric tank is considered a single process. Since this process involves onsite movement and handling in addition to atmospheric tank storage and transfer of flammable liquids, the process would not be an exception under 1910.119(a)(l){ii)(B). (Feb. 7,1996) Q.lfa tank was "designedfor" storage above atmospheric pressure but is being used at atmospheric pressure, does this meet the definition for excepted under the atmospheric storage provision of the regulation ? A. Under paragraph 1910.106(b)(l)(iii)(C), low pressure tanks and pressure vessels may be used as atmospheric tanks for storage of flammable liquids. (Feb. 7,1996) Normally unoccupied remote facilities Q. Can an offshorefacility otherwise covered by the PSM standard be exempted as a normally unoccupied remotefacility? A. Yes, to be exempted under 1910.119(a)(2)(iii), a facility must be a normally unoccupied remote facility as defined in 1910.119(b). Such a facility is operated, maintained or serviced by employees who visit the facility only periodically to check its operation and to perform necessary operating and maintenance tasks. No employees are permanently stationed at the facility. (May 5,1993) Q. What is a "normally unoccupied remotefacility"? A. Normally unoccupied remote facility means that employees are not permanently stationed at the remote location. This includes those sites for which periodic visits by employees may be made on a scheduled basis. Examples could include pump stations located miles from the main establishment. Employees may be assigned to check on the station as needed. The intent behind "remote" is that due to the isolation of the process from employees by distance, such employees would not be affected by the consequences of a catastrophic release. Therefore, the remote location must be geographically separated from other facilities and employees such that employees would not be affected by an explosion, vapor cloud of toxic gas, or other consequence of an uncontrolled release at a remote site. (Dec. 14,1993) Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 81 ABDOO103466 Tab 200 Who Is Covered Retail facilities Q. Are retailfacilities at whichfertilizer is stored or at whichfertilizer is blendedfor direct sale to end users excludedfrom employer compliance with the PSM standard? A. These facilities sell directly to end users or consumers, for example, farmers. These facilities must comply with applicable OSHA standards at 29 CFR 1910.111, for the storage and handling of anhydrous ammonia. With respect to enforcement of the PSM standard, a retail facility means a site specific establishment, which would otherwise be subject to the PSM standard, at which more than half of the income is obtained from direct sales to end users. Fertilizer establishments meeting this criterion would be exempt from the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.119. (June 19,1992) Q. Arefacilities thatfill propane tanks for "will call" type customers exemptfrom the PSM standard? Most of thesefacilities are under the aggregate quantity of 10,000 pounds (4535.9 kilograms). The majority of the business is transferring propanefrom the supply tank to small containersfor barbecues and "RV" units. A. These facilities appear to be exempt from coverage by the PSM standard because they are retail facilities or because they do not involve processes with threshold (or greater) quantities of propane. (Oct. 9,1992) Q. Ifan employer that would otherwise be covered by the PSM standard operates at several locations and the majority of its income comesfrom sales to end users, is the employer exempt as a retailfacility? A. If such an employer operates at multiple locations, the question becomes whether this constitutes a single establishment, for the purposes of the standard. The term "establishment" when used to define retail facility, means a company at a specific site. Thus, if an employer operates at several locations, some might be covered by the standard and others not affected. (Oct. 23,1992) Q. Would the retail exception under the PSM standard apply to the manufacturing and assembly of explosive devices (perforation guns) at locations other tlum well sites where such devices are pieced together, placed in the well and detonated? A. The "retail facilities" exception is intended to apply to an establishment in the retail trade as delineated in the Standard Industrial Classification Code Manual. With exceptions, retail trade establishments sell merchandise to the general public for personal or household consumption. On the other hand, wholesale trade establishments may sell similar merchandise for exclusive use by industry. A work site where perforation guns are manufactured and from which they are sold primarily for use by the oil and gas well-drilling, servicing and production industry would be considered a wholesale trade establishment. Income derived from selling perforation guns to the oil and gas well-drilling, servicing and production industry may not be counted as "income obtained from direct sales to end users" for the purpose of qualifying for the "retail facilities" exception under paragraph 1910.119(a)(2)(i). (Nov. 8,1995) 3. Inventory management/storage separation Q. Would more than 10,000 pounds ofa flammable liquid stored together in 55-gallon drums be covered under the PSM standard? A. For the purposes of the PSM standard, this would be considered exempt as storage in atmo spheric storage tanks (notwithstanding the definitions of "containers" and "tanks" in 29 CFR 1910.106) unless the drums are near a covered process. (June 24,1992) Tab 200 Page 82 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABDOO103467 Who Is Covered Tab 200 Q. The PSM standard's non-mandatory Appendix C suggests that, if reduced inventory of highly hazardous chemicals is not feasible, an employer might consider dispersing inventory to several locations onsite. When are such materials to be considered part ofa single process? A. Under the definition of "process" provided at 29 CFR 1910.119(b), any group of vessels which are interconnected and separate vessels which are located such that a highly hazardous chemical could be involved in a potential release shall be considered a single process. Inventories of highly hazardous chemicals would not be considered adequately dispersed if the storage vessels are connected with or in proximity to a covered process such that they could be involved in a release. (Dec. 12,1992) *Q. Would a storage tank, which is not related to the covered process but is downwindfrom the process and could be affected by a failure in the process, be considered pari of the covered process? A. Yes. A permanently independent storage tank nearby would be considered part of the covered process when it could be affected by an incident in the covered process. (April 28,1994) Q. Can an employer, who keeps threshold quantities ofhighly hazardous chemicals listed in Appendix A to 1910.119, such as ammonia, separated into smaller lots and used and stored in separate systems or locations, be exemptfrom the requirements of the PSM standard? A. From a storage standpoint, the PSM standard would not apply to an employer who segregates his inventory by dispersing storage of highly hazardous chemicals, such as ammonia, in amounts which do not exceed the threshold quantity so that a release from one storage area would not cause a release from others around the workplace. Additionally, an employer could reduce his onsite inventory of highly hazardous chemicals by ordering more frequent, smaller shipments so that they do not exceed the threshold quantities set forth in the PSM standard. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. What evaluation techniques have been developed to determine appropriate separation distances? A. OSHA has not developed, nor is it aware of, any standard evaluation technique to determine adequate distances to separate chemical inventories. If an employer chooses to disperse highly hazardous chemicals onsite, the separation distances would have to be determined on a case-by case basis, considering such factors as the nature of the chemicals and the covered processes, total inventories, threshold quantities of pertinent chemicals and facility layout. (Sept. 13,1994) 4. Definitions *Q. What criteria are used to establish a "remote distance" between processes that potentially may be covered by the PSM standard? A. When processes are in close proximity to each other such that an incident in one process could involve the potential release of a highly hazardous chemical in another process, these processes are considered to be a single process. Processes which are not in close proximity are considered to be at a remote distance. Federal regulations, or national consensus standards and other criteria acceptable to OSHA that provide at least equal safety and health to employees in the workplace, may be used to determine whether one process is at a remote distance from another process. (Feb. 15,1994) * Added, 7/97. Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 83 ABDOO103468 Tab 200 Who Is Covered Q. What are "aggregate threshold quantities"? A. In accordance with the second sentence of the definition of "process," quantities of a particular hazardous chemical contained in vessels that are interconnected--and in unconnected vessels that may be adversely affected due to an incident at a nearby process--must be combined to determine whether the threshold level of a hazardous chemical has been reached. If the threshold level is exceeded by the combination of the amount in separate tanks and interconnected vessels, then all of these may be considered one process. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. What are "sparkproducing operations"? A. Spark producing operations include operations which use flame- or spark-producing equip ment--such as grinders, welding, burning or brazing--that are capable of igniting flammable vapors or gases. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. How is the point determined where changes to an existingfacility have become so extensive that it should be considered a "new" facility rather than modified? For example, would the addition ofa spare pump, piped in parallel with an existing pump, be considered a nezofacility or a modification ? Would the installation ofan additional storage tank in afacility that currently handles and stores crude oil be considered a newfacility or a modification? A. "Facility" means buildings, containers and equipment that contain a process. A facility con structed on a work site where there are no other facilities is considered a new facility. A facility subsequently constructed on the work site such that it is physically separated from and otherwise independent from existing facilities is considered a new facility. A facility, subsequently constructed on the work site such that the facility or the processes it contains is connected to or otherwise dependent on an existing facility, including the processes it contains, is considered collectively to be a modified facility. Under 1910.119(i)(l), the pre-start-up safety review standard would be applicable to "new facilities and to modified facilities that contain a covered process," that is, a process in which there is a threshold quantity or greater amount of a highly hazardous chemical specified as being covered by the PSM standard. Under 1910.119(i)(2)(ii), a PHA must be performed and recommendations resolved before start-up of a new facility. But for a modified facility, the employer must comply with the management of change standard. (Jan. 11,1996) 5. Employee participation Q. What did OSHA intend asfar as employer compliance with 1920.139(c) on employee participation in process safety managemerit? A. The employee participation standard at 1910.119(c) is intended to provide for a cooperative participatory environment and necessary flow of information between management and employees on process safety to eliminate or mitigate the consequences of catastrophic releases of highly hazardous chemicals in the workplace. Paragraph 1910.119(c)(2) contains language taken from the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990. As prescribed by the CAAA, the standard at 1910.119 (c)(3) requires that PSM information developed by the employer be made available to employees and their representatives. By OSHA interpretation, CAAA requirements also demand that an employer carefully consider and structure the plant's approach to employee involvement in the PSM program. The plan-of-action standard at 1910.119(c)(1) is intended to address this issue to ensure that the employer actively considers the appropriate method of employee participation in the implementa tion of the PSM program in the workplace. (Jan. 8,1993) Tab 200 Page 84 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABDOO103469 Who Is Covered Tab 200 Q. Wltat does consult mean ? Can the employer simply inform the employees? A. Consultation refers to a two-way dialogue between the employer and employees and their representatives (where they exist), in which the employer elicits, and responds to, employees' concerns and suggestions bearing upon the elements of process safety management required under the standard. Consultation is therefore more than a way to inform employees about aspects of process safety; it is a process of seeking advice, criticisms, and suggestions from employees and their representatives. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. What does "access" mean in paragraph (c)(3) of the standard? Does this mean information must be made available at a central location? Does the employer have to make copiesfor employees if requested? A. The intent of "access" under the standard is for the information to be made available for employees and their representatives in a reasonable manner. Reasonable access may require providing copies or loaning documents. The trade secret provision of the standard permits the employer to require confidentiality agreements before providing the information. The employer is required to provide access to all information developed under this standard to employees of covered contractors, to the same extent that it must provide access to direct hire employees, if similarly situated. Contract employers share the responsibility for assuring that their employees are provided with requested information. (Sept. 13,1994) 6. Process safety information Q. What type of information is needed concerning computerized process control systems and safety interlock system software used in the petrochemical, refining and pulp and paper industries? Can simplified loop diagrams or narrative descriptions be used to describe the logic ofsoftware and the relationship between the equipment and computerized process control systems, to meet the requirementsfor written operating procedures at 1910.119(f)(1)? Are system logicflow charts or narrative descriptions of the computerized safety interlock systems used to meet these same requirements? A. It is anticipated that employers would include loop diagrams, flow charts and narrative descriptions of control and interlock systems in their compilations of written process safety information required by 1910.119(d) before they conduct any process hazard analyses (PHAs) required by 1910.119(e). After the PHAs are completed, written operating procedures must be developed to provide clear instructions for safely conducting activities involved in each covered process, consistent with the process safety information and with the associated PHA. Simplified diagrams, flow charts and narratives could be used in conjunction with instructions to meet the requirements for written operating procedures at 1910.119(f)(1). Flexibility such as this is provided to employers to comply with the performance oriented PSM standard. (Sept. 21,1992) Q. How long must the employer maintain process safety information? A. In order to demonstrate compliance with this paragraph, and to meet the purpose of the standard, the process safety information is to be kept for the lifetime of the process. Information must be updated whenever changes other than replacement in kind are made. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. Ifprocess safety information on the original technology does not exist, what must employers do? A. The employer must obtain or generate the missing information. If the information on the original technology does not exist, the employer may delay the development of this information until the PHA is initiated. In no case can information on the original technology be developed later than the applicable dates specified at 1910.119(e)(1). Information on the technology must be gathered as the PHAs are conducted in accordance with the priority schedule established by the employer. (Sept. 13,1994) Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 85 ABDOO103470 Tab 200 Who Is Covered Q. For equipment based on old design codes, the employer must determine and document that the equipment is designed and operated safely. When must the employer determine adequacy ofdesign based on old codes? A. Generally speaking, the time frames which apply to implementation of PHAs also apply to paragraph (d)(3)(iii) of the standard. Such documentation must be completed either before, or in conjunction with the development of the PHA, except where a pre-startup safety review is required, in which case, the documentation must be completed before startup. For older equipment, this may require verification that the design and construction are safe for the intended application. Where corrective action is required as a result of the PHA, it must be completed as soon as possible pursuant to paragraph (e)(5). Corrective actions required by a pre-startup safety review must be implemented prior to the startup if the correction is critical to safety. (Sept. 13,1994) 7. Process hazard analyses (PHAs) Q. Ifa natural gas company has five sites with facilities performing the same process, does a separate PHA need to be performedfor each site,for each facility at these sites orfor each process at eachfacility? A. The PSM standard is applicable, on a site by site basis, to each work site which has one or more facilities containing one or more processes involving one or more of the covered highly hazardous chemicals. A worksite may be simply one facility containing a single process. (See the definition of "facility" in subsection (b) of 1910.119). On the other hand, a worksite may be a complex of facilities, each containing one or more processes. Under paragraph 1910.119(e)(1), employers are required to perform initial PHAs on processes involving highly hazardous chemicals covered by the PSM standard. An employer may use a generic hazard analysis approach for the same (or nearly the same) covered process at an individual worksite. The employer must account for variations (differences in siting, incident histories, technology, equipment, operations, etc.) for each process covered by this generic approach. Generic process hazard analysis is addressed in section 4 of nonmandatory Appendix C, Compliance Guidelines and Recommendation for Process Safety Management, to 29 CFR 1910.119. (Oct. 28, 1992) Q. Does the percentage requirement for PHAs pertain even ifone or two processes are present at a work site? Also, should 100 percent of the PHA be completed by May 26,1994, if one process is present? A. Normally, if only one process (covered by the PSM standard) is present, the PHA for the covered process must be completed in its entirety as soon as possible, but no later than May 26,1994. If there are only two covered processes, then a PHA on the higher priority process must be completed in its entirety as soon as possible, but not later than May 26,1994, and a PHA on the second process must be completed in its entirety as soon as possible, but no later than May 26,1995. (June 3,1993) Q. Does the scheduling and prioritizing on a "worst-first" basis of PHAs of covered processes comply with the PSM standard in thefollowing scenario? Scenario: A site has six process units in it. All six process units use raw materials and manufacture products covered by 1910.119. Each of the six process units has subunits such as storagefor raw materials, reactors, distillers, separators and end product storage. PHAs are conducted on the subunits per a schedule by which no less than 25 percent of the subunits for each process will be completed by 5/26/94, 50 percent by 5/26/95, 75 percent by 5/26/96 and 100 percent by 5/26/97. The PHAs on all subunits xvill be completed by 5/26/97, tohich is the PHA completion deadline specified in the PSM standard. The PHA schedule is based on a prioritization of the subunits within a process unit. The most hazardous process subunits in each process unit will have PHAs completedfirst. This approach will accelerate hazard identification and correction on a "worst-first" basis. Tab 200 Page 86 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABDOO103471 Who Is Covered Tab 200 A. The preceding PHA scenario would be acceptable to OSHA for the purpose of meeting the completion schedule requirements of 1910.119(e). Employer determination and documentation of the priority order for conducting PHAs at a worksite is required by 1910.119(e)(1). The basis for determining this priority order is a rationale which includes such considerations as the extent of the process hazard, number of potentially affected employees, age of the process, and operating history of the process. The "worst-first" basis must incorporate this rationale. PHAs must be "conducted as soon as possible" but not later than the schedule addressed in the scenario. An employer must be prepared to demonstrate (through documentation including records which are maintained and otherwise) to OSHA that PHAs could not be completed before the percentage completion deadlines specified in 1910.119(e)(1). Initial PHAs must be updated and revalidated at least every five years thereafter (see paragraph 1910.119(e)(6)). When employers update and revalidate a PHA before the five year deadline, the subsequent update and revalidation must be completed within the next five year period. (Sept. 29, 1993) Q. What rationale must employers use to determine the priorityfor conducting PHAs? May the rationale include age, history, extent ofemployee exposure, etc. ? A. The appropriate priority for conducting PHAs is to be determined by using all the criteria identified in paragraph (e)(1) (e.g., extent of the process hazards [catastrophic potential), age of the process, number of potentially exposed employees and operating history). Other factors may also be considered in establishing the priority. Documentation required by this paragraph shall demon strate the underlying rationale for the prioritization. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. Does the term "as soon as possible" mean companies are expected to be ahead of the PHA schedule established in paragraph (e)(1)? A. Paragraph (e) contains a five-year phased-in compliance schedule for completing PHAs. The provision mandates that employers first "determine and document the priority order for conducting PHAs" and then complete 25 percent or more of the analyses each year after the second year the standard is in effect. However, plants with a limited number of processes, or those that have completed a number of PHAs, will need less time to meet the deadline. Therefore OSHA included a specific provision requiring that analyses be completed as soon as possible. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. What type of methodology must employers use in the PHA in order to be sure it is "appropriate"? A. Employers are expected to use sound judgment, on a case-by-case basis, to determine an appropriate methodology for the PHA for each covered process. It is the intent of the standard to require a PHA methodology that will have the capability to identify all hazards, defects, failure possibilities, etc., for the process being analyzed. The PHA methodology also must have the capability to address all factors in paragraph (e)(3). (Sept. 13,1994) Q. The regulations require that PHAs address the "control" of the hazards. What is meant by identification, evaluation and control ofprocess hazards? A. The PHA is intended to identify and evaluate acceptable controls for process hazards. The evaluation of the hazards must include all the steps in section (e)(3)(i) through (vii), using a methodology consistent with section (e)(2). Through timely resolution of the PHA findings and recommendations, the PHA is intended to control process hazards. (Sept. 13,1994) Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 87 ABDOO103472 Tab 200 Who Is Covered Q. Musi the employer make a quantitative determination of the consequences offailure of the controls? A. The intent of paragraph (e)(3)(iv) is to require the employer to identify each type of control and the possible effects of failure. OSHA believes employers can determine the consequences of a failure of these controls and establish a reasonable estimate of the safety and health effects on employees without conducting a specialized quantitative evaluation. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. What doesfacility sitmg mean? A. With respect to existing plants, siting refers to the location of various components within the establishment. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. Employers must "promptly" address the problems identified in the PHA in a "timely manner," and complete actions "as soon as possible." What timeframe did OSHA intend here? A. The standard's intent is for the employer to take corrective action as soon as possible. This means that the employer shall proceed with all due speed, considering the complexity of the recommenda tion and the difficulty of implementation. OSHA expects employers to develop a schedule for completion of corrective actions, to document what actions are to be taken, and to document the completion of those actions as they occur. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. What do employers have to do to address PHA team's findings and recommendations? A. Paragraph (e) of the standard requires that a team with expertise in engineering and process operations conduct a PHA containing specific findings and recommendations for each covered process. The employer is then required to promptly "address" and "resolve" the team's findings, document the actions taken, and communicate these actions to the affected employees. OSHA considers an employee to have "resolved" the team's findings and recommendations when the employer either has adopted the recommendations, or has justifiably declined to do so. An employer can justifiably decline to adopt a recommendation where he or she can document, in writing and based upon adequate evidence, that one or more of the following conditions is true: the analysis upon which the recommendation is based contains material factual errors; the recommendation is not necessary to protect the health and safety of the employer's own employees, or the employees of contractors; an alternative measure would provide a sufficient level of protection; or the recommendation is infeasible. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. Hoxo long must the process hazard analyses, updates, and revalidations be retained? A. For the life of the process. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. Is Zurich Hazard Analysis an appropriate methodfor conducting process hazard analysis as required by 1910.119(e)(2)? A. Section 1910.119(e)(2) gives the employer the choice of using one or more of the listed methodolo gies for evaluating the hazards of the process. It is the employer's responsibility to assess and eval uate the "equivalent methodology." As long as the "equivalent methodology" permits and achieves compliance with the remaining provisions of the standard, and accomplishes the objective and the intended goal of the standard, the employer would be regarded as in compliance. (July 26,1995) Tab 200 Page 88 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABDOO103473 Who Is Covered Tab 200 *Q. Would OSHA find thefollowing method to conduct a PHA acceptable? The PHA team leader performs the PHA by himself/herself or with the help ofother technically knowledgeable people, but not as a team effort. The PHA xuorksheets are completelyfilled in except for the recommendation's column. The team leader then brings the results of that effort to a PHA team representing the unit/process under consideration, the team then reviews the completed worksheets, and makes the appropriate recommendations. A. Section 1910.119(e)(4) states that the PHA shall be performed by a team with expertise in engineering and process operations, and the team shall include at least one employee who has experience and knowledge specific to the process being evaluated. Also, one member of the team must be knowledgeable in the specific PHA methodology being used. The scenario described is not consistent with the requirements of the standard because there is no PHA team. (Oct. 31,1996) 8. Written operating procedures *Q. May an employer, who has developed and reviewed an initially accurate set of operating procedures and who has effective management of change procedures in place, certify on an annual basis thereafter that the operating procedures are current and accurate without actually performing a review of the procedures each year after the initial review? A. Yes. The standard states that the operating procedures must be reviewed as often as necessary to ensure that they reflect current operating practice. If an employer determines that modifications resulting from management of change are incorporated into operating procedures and determines that no other changes occur, then the employer could certify that the procedures are current and accurate and have been reviewed as often as necessary. (March 9,1994) Q. Many employers have computerized process control systems and safety interlock systems software. Can simplified loop diagrams or narrative descriptions be used to describe the logic ofsoftware and the relationship between the equipment and computerized process control systems, to meet the requirementsfor written operating procedures at 1910.119(f)(1)? Can system logicflow charts or narrative descriptions of the computerized safety-interlock systems be used to meet these same requirements? A. It is anticipated that employers would include loop diagrams, flow charts, and narrative descriptions of control and interlock systems in their compilations of written process safety information required by 1910.119(d) before conducting any PHAs required by 1910.119(e). Written operating procedures must be developed to provide clear instructions for safely conducting activities involved in each covered process. Operating procedures must be consistent with the process safety information and with the associated PHA. Simplified diagrams, flow charts, and narratives could be used in conjunction with instructions to meet the requirements for written operating procedures at 1910.119(f)(1). (Sept. 13,1994) 9. Training Q. Is it the intent of the standard that persons receiving "refresher training" be subject to termination based wholly or partly on the results of tests administered after the training? A. The refresher training requirements at 1910.119(g)(2) were developed to ensure that employees understand and adhere to the current operating procedures of the processes involving threshold or greater quantities of highly hazardous chemicals. OSHA believes that, due to wide variations in complexity of operations, and to the differences in experience and skill levels of employees, employers need to use appropriate methods, such as written tests, oral examinations, simulation exercises, etc., to ensure that employees understand the training they have received. OSHA is not authorized to intervene in labor-management relations that could affect employee job retention in relation to the employer's effort to assure compliance with the standard. * Added, 7/97. Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 89 ABDOO103474 Tab 200 Who Is Covered While we find it regrettable that anyone would lose his or her job as a result of failing a single test, we believe that it is essential that only those who have demonstrated the ability to do their jobs safely be allowed to work in jobs affecting hazardous processes. This requirement puts an equal burden of diligence on both employers and employees. (May 28,1993) Q. When must initial training be completed? A. Training in an overview of the process, and in safety and health hazards, emergency operations, and safe work practices, must have been completed by May 26,1992. In situations where operating procedures were already in place, training in those existing procedures was required by May 26, 1992. Initial training shall have been provided by that date, based on existing procedures and available process information. As new information and procedures are developed, refresher training must be provided in accordance with paragraph (g)(2). (Sept. 13,1994) Q. What is required in the employer's written certification regarding employees whose initial training is "grandfathered"7 A. Where employees involved in operating the process have not received the initial training required under (g)(l)(i), but have been involved in operating the process safely for a period of time prior to May 26,1992, the employer may waive the initial training requirement by certifying in writing that the employee has the required knowledge, skills, and abilities to safely carry out the duties and responsibilities as specified in the operating procedures. Such certification may be based on on-the-job evaluation or other equivalent determination methods. When new operating procedures--which must be written--are subsequently developed, the employer must give training to operating employees prior to their implementation. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. Under what circumstances must refresher training be provided more often than every 3 years? A. Employers, in consultation with employees, shall determine the appropriate frequency. More frequent refresher training may be needed because of deviations from standard operating proce dures, recent incidents, or apparent deficiencies in training. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. Is training under "management of change" considered to be refresher training? A. No. It is an independent training requirement, in addition to other training requirements of the standard. (Sept. 13, 1994) Q. Paragraph (g)(3) requires the employer to make sure that operators "understand" the training provided to them under this section. Is some method of testing required? A. There must be some positive means taken by the employer to determine if employees have understood their training and are capable of adhering to the current operating procedures of the process. This could include the administration of a written test, although the standard does not require that a formal written test be used. Other means of ascertaining comprehension of the training, such as on-the-job demonstrations, etc., are acceptable, as long as they are adequately documented. (Sept. 13,1994) 10. Contractors Q. What is the scope of contractor activities? A. The list of covered and exempted activities in paragraph (h) is meant to be illustrative of potential contractor activities. The standard covers all contractor activities that have the potential for affecting process safety. Therefore, paragraph (h) applies to all contractor activities on or adjacent to a covered process, except those incidental activities that do not influence process safety, such as Tab 200 Page 90 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABDOO103475 Who Is Covered Tab 200 janitorial work, food and drink services, laundry, delivery or other supply services. Consequently, contractors performing construction, demolition, equipment installation and other work that may affect the safety of a covered process must comply with the requirements of this paragraph. Furthermore, paragraph (h) is not the only part of the PSM standard that applies to contractors. In appropriate circumstances, other provisions of the standard apply. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. Do contractors performing construction work at a site covered by the PSM standard also have to comply with 29 CFR 1926 standards? A. Contractors performing construction work at a site covered by the PSM standard must comply with all applicable standards under 29 CFR 1926, including Part 1926, Subpart C requirements. See the regulation at 29 CFR 1910.12(b), which defines the term "construction work," and the regulation at 29 CFR 1926.13, which discusses the terms "construction," "alteration," and "repair." (Sept. 13, 1994) Q. How does the PSM standard address subcontractors? A. Paragraph (h) applies to all subcontractors whose work falls within the scope of covered work as established in (h)(1). The host employer and the general contractors are both responsible for ensuring that the duties contained in (h)(2) are performed. This applies to inquiring into the safety records of their subcontractors, informing the subcontractor as to the known potential hazards, the emergency action plan, and safe work practices, and ensuring the subcontractor's compliance with the standard. Furthermore, under (h)(2)(v), the host employer has the obligation to assure that the contract employer and the subcontractor are properly performing their obligations under (h)(2) with respect to their subcontractors' compliance with the standard. The intention is that host employers and contractors exercise responsible oversight of their respective contractors' and subcontractors' performance of safety and health requirements under the standard. (Sept. 13, 1994) Q. How much of the burden of training contractor employees is placed on the employer? A. The burden of training contractor employees is on the contractor employer. However, under 1910.119(h)(2)(v), the host employer shall periodically evaluate the contract employer's performance with respect to the (contract) employee instruction and training requirements at 1910.119(h)(3). NOTE: The employer must inform a contract employer of the hazards related to the contractor's work and the process as noted at 1910.119(h)(2)(ii) and (iii). Although the standard places the primary responsibility for providing training to its employees on the contract employer itself, the host employer must "periodically evaluate the performance of contract employers in fulfilling their obligations" as specified in paragraph (h)(3). Such "obliga tions" clearly include training obligations. If contract employees are involved in operating a process or maintaining the ongoing integrity of process equipment, they must receive training in accordance with requirements in paragraphs (g) and (j), respectively. In order to satisfy its obligations under (h)(2)(v), the host employer must ensure, through periodic evaluations, that the training provided to these contract employees is in fact equivalent to the training that the standard requires for direct hire employees. Such training need not be identical in format, content or context to training given to the host's employees. The critical element is that information required by the standard must be conveyed to contract employees as well as direct hire employees. The obligation may be satisfied by joint or separate training. Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 91 ABDOO103476 Tab 200 Who Is Covered Moreover, paragraph (h) requires that every employee of a covered contractor be trained in the work practices necessary to perform safely his or her job. The contract employee must be able to perform his or her own job tasks safely and should receive: (a) training prior to beginning work on or near a covered process, which should encompass (i) instruction regarding known process hazards related to his or her job, including training in the applicable provisions of the emergency action plan; and (ii) training in the safe work practices adopted by the host employer and the contract employer; and (b) additional training as necessary (i) to prepare the employee for changes in the operations or work practices at the facility and (ii) to ensure that the employee's understanding of the applicable safe work practices and other rules remains current. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. When selecting a contractor, an employer has to evaluate the potential contractor's safety performance and programs. Must the employer document this? If so, to what extent? A. The standard does not require the employer to document evaluation of the information obtained regarding contractor safety performance and programs. However, OSHA compliance officers are directed to review records about these aspects of the selection process and to determine if the employer has met the intent of this provision. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. What type of injury and illness log does an employer have to maintain regarding contract employees? A. If the contract employer is willing to share the OSHA 300 log and OSHA 101 first reports of injury (or equivalent) with the employer, and if those logs and reports specifically indicate which injuries and illnesses are related to process areas, then such records would be acceptable to OSHA. Acceptable alternatives would be for the employer to develop a contract employee injury and illness log separately for each contractor, or a combined log for all contractors if the combined log distinguishes among contractors. (Sept. 13,1994) *Q. Do the contractor employers' responsibilitiesfor the contractor safety element of the PSM standard apply to engineering contractors or safety consultants, including those performing PSM consulting work? A. 1910.119(h)(1) by its terms applies to "contractors performing maintenance or repair, turnaround, major renovation, or specialty work on or adjacent to covered processes." The preamble to the PSM standard (57 FR 6386) further explains that OSHA intended to cover contractors "whose work brings them into direct contact with, or whose work could affect the hazards of processes covered by the standard." Therefore, PSM coverage of engineering contractors and safety consultants depends not on the job classification of the contractor, but on the precise nature of their onsite activities. (Oct. 31,1996) 11. Mechanical integrity *Q. Does the PSM standard specify the limit ofprocess equipment that must be included in a mechanical integrity program? A. No. OSHA believes that certain equipment is critical to process safety. At least the equipment specified in paragraph (j)(l) must be subject to the requirements of 1910.119(j). However, if an employer deems additional equipment to be critical to the safety of a particular process, that employer should consider that equipment to be covered under the mechanical integrity require ments. (May 25,1994) * Added, 7/97. Tab 200 Page 92 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABDOO103477 Who Is Covered Tab 200 *Q. If it is determined during the process hazards analysis that there is no risk ofa release of the covered chemicals, does itfollow that the specific equipment in question still has to be included under mechanical integrity merely because it was previously considered under PHA? A. The equipment defined to be covered by the PSM standard prior to the PHA is still considered to be covered by the standard, including under the mechanical integrity requirements, regardless of the findings of the PHA. (July 11,1994) Q. What is the purpose of the written procedures provision? A. The purpose of this provision is to require written procedures in adequate detail to ensure that the specific process equipment receives regularly scheduled maintenance. A "breakdown" maintenance program (i.e., a program wherein action is taken only when something breaks down) does not meet the requirements of this paragraph. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. Do written procedures need to be specific to each vessel, each type ofvessel, or each group ofequipment types listed? A. The procedures need to be specific to the type of vessel or equipment. Identical or very similar vessels and items of equipment in similar service need not have individualized maintenance procedures. Each procedure must clearly identify the equipment to which it applies. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. What type of training is requiredfor process maintenance activities? A. As OSHA indicated in the preamble, paragraph (j)(3) requires that employers provide mainte nance employees with "on-going" or "continual" training adequate "to assure that they can perform their jobs in a safe manner" (see 57 FR 6390). In this regard, the paragraph clearly contemplates that new maintenance employees be trained before beginning work at the site. All maintenance employees must receive additional training appropriate to changing job tasks. Moreover, although "maintenance employees need not be trained in process operating procedures to the same extent as those employees who are actually involved in operating the process" (57 FR 6390), they must be trained in all "procedures applicable to the employee's job tasks to assure that the employee can perform the job tasks in a safe manner." Thus, a maintenance worker sent to work on a process breakdown must be trained in operating procedures that are relevant to the repair or installation on which he or she is working. Finally, OSHA intends that employers incorporate all safety related topics applicable to mainte nance tasks into the ongoing training program required by paragraph (j). Thus, in order to train maintenance workers in "procedures applicable" to their job tasks under paragraph (j) an employer must, in appropriate circumstances, train them in the safe work practices required under paragraph (f)(4), in the written procedures to manage change under paragraph (1), and in the appropriate provisions of the emergency action plan under paragraph (n) of the standard. These provisions, in turn, may implicate other OSHA general industry requirements, such as, for instance, the training requirements of the lockout/tagout standard (see 29 CFR 1910.147(c)(7)). (Sept. 13,1994) Q. If equipment is found to be operating outside acceptable limits, must the process be shut down and the equipment deficiencies corrected beforefurther use? A. To ensure the ongoing mechanical integrity of the covered process, equipment deficiencies must be corrected promptly if the equipment is outside the acceptable limits specified in the process safety information. When necessary means (e.g., protective measures and continuous monitoring) are taken to ensure safe operation, it may not be necessary that the deficiencies be corrected before further use. In such cases, deficiencies must be corrected in a safe and timely manner. * Added, 7/97. Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 93 ABDOO103478 Tab 200 Who Is Covered NOTE: Operating equipment outside acceptable limits is considered to be a deficiency. (Sept 13,1994) Q. Ifan installation is being done by contractor, does this require the employer to implement a quality assurance program to monitor the activities of these contractors? A. The employer is responsible for ensuring that equipment is installed consistent with design specifications and manufacturer's instructions. This may require the employer to be involved in the review, inspection, certification, and quality assurance of work performed by contractors. (Sept. 13,1994) *Q. Would the use ofan Instrument Society ofAmerica (ISA) standard (S91.01) be appropriatefor determining which controls are covered by the mechanical integrity paragraph? A. 1910.119(j)(l) is intended to cover only that equipment associated with a covered process. Equipment covered in this list is considered critical to process safety because of its potential for significant impact on the safety of a process involving highly hazardous chemicals if an employer did not maintain its mechanical integrity. If an employer deems additional equipment to be critical, it too should be considered to be covered by 1910.119(j) and should be treated accordingly. The ISA standard referenced only addresses two categories of process safety equipment. However, if you find that the ISA standard helps you understand how to apply mechanical integrity requirements for those types of equipment, such guidance would be appropriate. Please note that there are other sources for mechanical integrity guidance, such as the Chemical Manufacturers Association document "Mechanical Integrity Supplement to the Maintenance Excellence Guide." (Dec. 7,1995) *Q. A company hasfour components in the inspection and testing portions of its mechanical integrity program, including routine inspection, external visual inspection, internal visual inspection and condition and/orfunctional testing. Documenting thefindings of the routine and external visual inspections, which are conducted over large groups ofequipment during a short time and with high frequency, cannot be managed realistically. Would it be allowable, under the PSM mechanical integrity inspection and testing documenta tion requirements, to document routine and external visual inspections by noting only conditions needing attention, rather than marking everyfield in extensive checklists? A. Documentation of both negative and positive results was intended for reference in determining the ongoing mechanical integrity of the process. For example, both negative and positive results are used to determine the frequency of inspections and tests based on operating experience vis-a-vis manufacturers' recommendations and good engineering practices of the industry. Therefore, as long as the inspection procedures make clear that the absence of a finding in the inspection report indicates a positive finding, this would meet the intent of the standard. (Sept. 16,1996) *Q. In the previous scenario, would it be allowable, under the PSM mechanical integrity inspection and testing documentation requirements, to document inspections by process unit, rather than by individual items of equipment, with only deficiencies noted by individual items of equipment? A. Yes. The provisions of the PSM standard, including the mechanical integrity requirements, are performance-oriented. As such, an employer has the option of formatting the required documenta tion of process equipment inspections and tests by process unit. (Sept. 16,1996) *Q. In the previous scenario, would it be allowable, under the PSM mechanical integrity inspection and testing documentation requirements, to maintain inspection records in computer databases rather than on paper and, ifso, would a paperfile be needed also? A. Computers may be used to maintain 1910.119(j)(4)(iv) required documentation as long as the information is readily retrievable and accessible as reference information. (Sept. 16,1996) * Added. 7/97. Tab 200 Page 94 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997 ABDOO103479 Who Is Covered Tab 200 *Q. How long must inspection records be kept? Is only the most recent inspection record, supplemented by a history ofprior inspections andfindings, sufficient? A. In order to demonstrate compliance with 1910.119(1), and to meet the purpose of ongoing mechanical integrity, the documentation must be kept for the lifetime of the process. (Sept. 16,1996) 12. Management of change Q. What does "change" encompass? A. Any change that may affect a covered process triggers the management of change (MOC) provisions. The only exception to this is when there is a replacement in kind. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. Do the management ofchange procedures apply to items such as gaskets? A. Replacements in kind are not covered. If a new gasket is to be installed that is of different material, composition, shape, size, or design, then management of change would be required. (Sept. 13,1994) *Q. Do the MOC provisions of the PSM standard apply when maintenance procedures are changed, or when changes are made to equipment test and inspectionfrequencies? A. According to 1910.119(1)(1), except for replacements in kind, the MOC provisions [1(1) through 1(5)] would apply to changes in maintenance procedures and changes made to equipment test and inspection frequencies. OSHA believes that it is necessary to thoroughly evaluate any contemplated changes to a process to assess the potential impact on the safety and health of employees and to determine what modifications to operating procedures may be necessary. (Oct. 31,1996) 13. Incident investigation Q. What must an employer do to adequately address a team'sfindings? A. Paragraph (m) requires that a team of knowledgeable individuals investigate every catastrophic incident and "near-miss," and likewise requires that the employer promptly "address and resolve" the team's recommendations and document corrective action (see 1910.119(m)(5)). This provision was designed to require the employer to respond to the team's findings and recommendations, and to allow the employer the flexibility to reject proposals that are erroneous or infeasible. An employer also may modify a recommendation that may not be as protective as possible or may be no more protective than a less complex or expensive measure (see 57 FR 6395). OSHA considers an employer to have "resolved" the team's findings and recommendations when the employer either has adopted the recommendations, or has justifiably declined to do so. Where a recommendation is rejected, the employer must communicate this to the team. An employer can justifiably decline to adopt a recommendation where he or she can document, in writing and based upon adequate evidence, that one or more of the following conditions is true: the analysis upon which the recommendation is based contains material factual errors; the recommendation is not necessary to protect the health and safety of the employer's own employees, or the employees of contractors; an alternative measure would provide a sufficient level of protection; or the recommendation is infeasible. (Sept. 13,1994) * Added, 7/97. Chemical Process Safety Report July 1997 Tab 200 Page 95 ABDOO103480 Tab 200 Who Is Covered 14. Compliance audits Q. What is the requiredfrequency of compliance audits? A. Employers must certify at least every 3 years that they have evaluated compliance with 29 CFR 1910.119. Under 1910.119(o)(l), employers must conduct compliance audits in a timely manner to meet this certification requirement. The first certification is required no later than May 26,1995. When employers conduct compliance audits and certify compliance with 1910.119 before May 26, 1995, the subsequent audit must be within 3 years from the first certification date. NOTE: It may be necessary for employers to conduct compliance audits and certify that they have evaluated compliance more frequently than every 3 years, because of significant or numerous deficiencies disclosed by the previous audit, or for other reasons. (Sept. 13,1994) Q. When must employers document corrective actions? A. The purpose of paragraph (o)(4) is twofold. First, it must ensure that employers determine an appropriate response to each of the report findings. Second, if employers identify a deficiency that needs to be corrected, they must document the correction of the deficiency. Appropriate responses to each of the report findings must be promptly documented. The correction of any identified deficiency also must be documented as soon as possible after the corrective action is taken. (Sept. 13,1994) *Q. If a company has been up and running since June 1994, would a written compliance audit be needed now or in three yearsfrom June 1994? A. A new facility will not need to have a written compliance audit initially. Under the pre-startup safety review requirements of the PSM standard, the employer is required to perform a pre-startup safety review for new facilities and for modified facilities when the modification is significant enough to require a change in the process safety information. Therefore, a written compliance audit is not necessary at this time. However, you may need a written compliance audit before three years if your facility, for any reason, would need to hire contractors to perform specialty work on a covered process. Then paragraph (h) would become applicable to your facility and a written compliance audit would have to be completed. (Jan. 5,1995) Q. Should deficiencies identified in a compliance audit be corrected within the three-year timeframe, or promptly after the audit is conducted? A. If deficiencies are discovered, it is imperative that corrective actions be initiated immediately so that corrective measures can be implemented as soon as possible. (Feb. 24,1995) *Q. Can OSHA provide any guidance to produce confident audit results on sampling sizefor documents in elements, such as process safety information, which are specific to one covered process? A. Concerning sampling guidance, this is a matter which must be determined by persons knowl edgeable of the processes and who are responsible for the audit. They should be able to explain their sampling strategies in terms of statistical validity and common sense results (see Appendix C of 1910.119). (Oct. 31,1996) * Added, 7/97. Tab 200 Page 96 July 1997 Thompson Publishing Group Inc. 1997