Risk Management 

Modernization 

Rule 

Small Business Environmental Assistance Program

Technical Subcommittee Meeting

MARCH 15, 2016

OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Risk Management Program 

(RMP) Proposed Rule

•Proposed rule published March 14, 2016 at 

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-03-14/pdf/2016-05191.pdf

•Submit comments on or before May 13, 2016 at 

http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OEM-2015-0725

•Public Hearing on Proposed Rule on March 29, 2016 (9 am – 8 pm) in 

Washington, DC. Register at https://rmp-proposed-rule.eventbrite.com

•Proposed Changes to RMP Rule Q&As https://www.epa.gov/rmp/frequentquestions-proposed-changes-risk-managment-program-rmp-rule

OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE & EMERGENCY RESPONSE

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 2
Background

On August 1, 2013, President Obama issued Executive Order (EO) 

13650: Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security following several 

catastrophic chemical facility incidents in the United States. 

◦ Focus is to reduce risks associated with hazardous chemicals to owners and 

operators, workers, and communities by enhancing the safety and security of 

chemical facilities.

The keys areas of emphasis under the EO are:

◦ Strengthening community planning and preparedness,

◦ Enhancing federal operational coordination,

◦ Improving data management, and

◦ Modernizing policies and regulations.

◦ EPA issued a request for information (RFI) on July 31, 2014, and 

◦ Convened a Small Business Advocacy Review panel on November 4, 2015.

3 OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Risk Management Program rule

◦ Promulgated in 1996 under Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act Amendments

◦ Applies to all stationary sources with processes that contain more than a 

threshold quantity of 140 regulated substances (approx. 12,500 sources)

◦ Includes a wide variety of industry sectors including: refining, chemical manufacturing, energy 

production, ammonia refrigeration, water treatment, bulk storage, chemical distribution, 

agricultural retail, and chemical warehouses 

◦ Regulated substances listed based on toxicity, volatility, and flammability criteria

◦ Requires the source to develop a Risk Management Plan (RMP) 

◦ Addresses elements aimed at preventing accidental releases and reducing the severity of 

releases that occur

◦ Prepare and submit an RMP to EPA at least every 5 years

◦ Covered processes fall within one of three prevention program levels based 

on:

◦ The potential for offsite consequences from a worst-case accidental release;

◦ Accident history; and

◦ Regulation under OSHA Process Safety Management Standard (PSM)

4 OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
OSHA Process Safety 

Management Standard (PSM)

◦ Process safety management program for highly hazardous chemicals aimed 

at preventing and minimizing occupational/onsite exposure

◦ Authorized by Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990

◦ OSHA PSM standard found at 29 CFR part 1910.119

◦ Focuses on protecting workers from chemical accidents 

◦ Promulgated in 1992

◦ OSHA PSM & EPA RMP form the U.S. regulatory framework for prevention 

of catastrophic chemical accidents at fixed facilities

o OSHA also considering revisions of the PSM standard and has initiated a 

Small Business Advocacy Review Panel. For more info, see: 

https://www.osha.gov/dsg/psm/index.html

OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE & EMERGENCY RESPONSE

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 5
RMP Program level comparison

PROGRAM 1 PROGRAM 2 PROGRAM 3

• Worst case analysis

• 5-year accident history

• Document management system

• Worst case analysis

• 5-year accident history

• Document management system

• Worst case analysis

• 5-year accident history

• Document management system

Prevention Program

Certify no additional prevention steps 

needed

• Safety information

• Hazard review

• Operating procedures

• Training

• Maintenance

• Incident investigation

• Compliance audit

• Process safety information

• Process hazard analysis (PHA)

• Operating procedures

• Training

• Maintenance

• Incident investigation

• Compliance audit

• Management of change 

• Pre-startup review 

• Contractors

• Employee participation

• Hot work permits

Emergency Response Program

Coordinate with local responders Develop plan/program and coordinate 

with local responders

Develop plan/program and 

coordinate with local responders

OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 6
RMP Program level applicability

PROGRAM 1

642 Facilities

PROGRAM 2

1,272 Facilities*

Processes not eligible 

for Program 1, not 

subject to Program 3

◦ Mainly water & 

wastewater treatment in 

Federal OSHA states

◦ Additional hazard 

assessment, accident 

prevention, management, 

and emergency response 

requirements

OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

*Analysis reflects OSHA change to PSM retail exemption issued July 2015. See OSHA PSM Retail

Exemption Policy at: https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=29528

7

Processes subject to 

OSHA’s PSM or in one of 

10 specified NAICS 

codes

◦ Larger facilities or those 

with complex processes

◦ Examples include: refining, 

chemical manufacturing, 

energy production, water 

treatment

◦ Covered by OSHA’s PSM 

accident prevention 

program and include 

additional hazard 

assessment,

management, and 

emergency response 

requirements

PROGRAM 3

10,628 Facilities*

Processes that would 

not affect the public in 

the event of a worst- case release & no 

accidents with offsite 

consequences in the last 

five years

◦ Small quantities of 

flammables, less volatile 

toxics

◦ Limited accident 

prevention including 

hazard assessment and 

emergency response 

requirements
Overview of RMP Proposed Revisions

P1 P2 P3

Third-party audits (applies to the next scheduled audit after an 

accident) [Estimated 150 accidents/year]

√ √

Incident Root Cause Analysis (only for facilities with 

accidents/near misses) [Estimated 300 incidents/year]

√ √

Safer Alternatives Analysis (applies to a subset of P3 in certain 

NAICS codes*) [Estimated 1,692 Facilities/4,308 Processes]

√

CoordinatingEmergency Response Program Requirements 

with Local Responders

√ √

Emergency Response Exercises √ √

Information Sharing √ √ √

OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 8

*Applies to paper manufacturing, petroleum and coal products manufacturing, and 

chemical manufacturing facilities 
Third-party compliance audits

Current Requirements: Facility owners/operators must perform compliance 

audits every three years.

Proposed revisions require all P2 and P3 facilities to conduct a third -party 

audit in lieu of a compliance audit following an RMP reportable accident.* 

◦ Must be completed within 12 months of an RMP reportable accident or within 3 

years of completion of the previous compliance audit, whichever is sooner. 

◦ Note that this audit and its schedule are independent of the incident investigation 

requirement and its schedule.

◦ Same scope as the current compliance audit provisions (i.e., audit prevention 

program implementation for all covered processes).

◦ EPA is proposing criteria for auditor independence, impartiality, and competence.

OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 9

* RMP reportable accident means an accidental release meeting the criteria in §68.42(a) from a 

covered process at a stationary source (i.e., includes accident with deaths, injuries, evacuations, 

sheltering in place, property damage, or environmental damage).
Incident investigations and 

root cause analysis

Current Requirements: Facility owners/operators must conduct incident 

investigations following an incident that resulted in or could have resulted 

in a catastrophic release.

Proposed revisions (Applies to P2 and P3): 

◦ Clarify/emphasize current investigation requirements for incidents that could 

reasonably have resulted in a catastrophic release. Add the term “near miss” to 

regulations with examples in preamble. 

◦ Clarify the definition of catastrophic release to be consistent with reportable 

accidental release (i.e., an accident with deaths, injuries, evacuations, sheltering in 

place, property damage, or environmental damage)

◦ Require a root cause investigation and define root cause to mean a fundamental, 

underlying, system-related reason why an incident occurred that identifies 

correctable failure(s) in management systems

◦ Require a report be completed within 12 months (unless extension approved, in 

writing, by implementing agency)

OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 10
OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE & EMERGENCY RESPONSE OFFICE OF 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 11

Safer technology and alternatives analysis (STAA)

Current Requirements: Facility owners/operators must develop a PHA to identify, 

evaluate, and control process hazards involving regulated substances.

Proposed revisions to require the source to conduct a STAA and determine feasibility of inherently 

safer technologies and designs considered:

o Would apply to P3 facilities in: Paper Mfg; Petroleum and Coal Products Mfg.; and Chemical 

Mfg.

o The STAA would consider, in the following order of preference:

o Inherently safer technology (IST) or design, 

Passive measures, 

Active measures, and 

Procedural measures

o ISTs are those measures that reduce or eliminate the hazards and include minimization, 

substitution of less hazardous chemical, moderation of the process, and simplification of the 

process/procedures.

o Owner/operator would not be required to implement any prescribed technology; however 

EPA is requesting comment on whether the rule should require implementation.
Local emergency response coordination

Current Requirements: Facilities must develop an emergency response program except when 

the community emergency response plan addresses toxic substances at the facility, or 

owner/operator has coordinated response actions for flammable substances with local fire 

department. 

Proposed revisions require all P2 and P3 facilities to:

◦ Coordinate annually with the Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs*) 

/emergency responders and ensure response capabilities exist

◦ Document coordination 

◦ LEPCs*/emergency responders can request source to prepare an emergency response 

(ER) program

What are the outcomes of “coordination”?

◦ “Non-responding” source – coordination 

indicates that local public response 

capabilities are adequate to respond, 

appropriate notification mechanisms are in 

place, and local authorities have not 

requested that owner develop ER program

◦ “Responding” source – coordination indicates 

that local public response capabilities are not 

adequate to respond, or local authorities 

request that owner develop ER program 

◦ Facility must develop an emergency 

response program following § 68.95

OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 12

What is “coordination”?

◦ Facility and local responders meet and 

discuss response needs, capabilities, and 

roles:

• Determine resources needed to 

appropriately respond to regulated 

substance releases at facility

• Determine resources available from facility 

and local responders

• Identify capability gaps and develop plans 

to address

• Decide whether facility or local responders 

will respond to releases of regulated 

substances

• Assign response action roles and 

responsibilities

* Applicable to Tribal Emergency

Planning Committees (TEPCs)
Emergency Response Exercises 

Current Requirements: None

Proposed revisions: Require facilities to test their emergency response 

program through notification, tabletop, and field exercises (Applies to all 

P2 and P3)

◦ Require “responding” and “non-responding” facilities to conduct an annual notification exercise

◦ Require “responding” facilities to conduct the field and tabletop exercises and 

invite local responders to participate:

Tabletop exercise

◦ Frequency: Annually except in the year 

of a field exercise

◦ Scope: Same as field exercise without 

actual mobilization of personnel & 

equipment

An exercise evaluation report must be 

completed within 90 days

of each exercise.

13 13

Field exercise

◦ Frequency: Every 5 years and within one 

year following a reportable accident

◦ Scope: Test procedures for notification, 

evacuation, medical treatment, 

communications systems, emergency 

response personnel mobilization 

(including contractors, if appropriate), 

coordination with local responders, 

equipment deployment, and other actions 

identified in ER program as appropriate

OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Current RMP data availability

•Only emergency response and other govt. officials can access the RMP 

data via a non-public EPA database.

•Public access to worst case off-site consequence analysis (OCA) data is 

restricted to viewing only in Federal Reading Rooms.

•Public can access non-OCA RMP data in Federal Reading Rooms or by 

FOIA request.

OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE & EMERGENCY RESPONSE

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 14
Information sharing-LEPC

Proposed revisions: Require summaries of chemical hazard information 

to be provided to LEPC* or local emergency response official, upon 

request:

◦ Information on RMP regulated substances−names and quantities of 

regulated substances held in a process

◦ Five-year accident history information (reported under §68.42)

◦ Compliance audits

◦ Incident investigation reports (with root cause findings) 

◦ IST implemented or planned to be implemented, if applicable

◦ No requirement to implement, but if a source does implement ISTs it is 

useful information for LEPCs*/first responders to have in their local 

emergency planning efforts

◦ Exercises, including schedules and reports

OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 15

* Applicable to TEPCs
Information sharing-public

Proposed Revisions: Require chemical hazard information to be 

provided in an easily accessible manner (i.e., posting on a company 

website, public file sharing website, or social media website, or placing a file 

at a public library or local government office)

◦ Names of RMP regulated substances held in a process

◦ Safety data sheets (SDS) for all RMP regulated substances located at 

the facility

◦ Emergency response program summary information 

◦ Five-year accident history information reported under §68.42

◦ Exercise summary information

◦ Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) contact information

OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 16
Information sharing- public meetings

Proposed revisions would require a public meeting to be held within 30 

days of an RMP reportable accident. The meeting would address:

◦ Information about the accident;

◦ Other relevant chemical hazard information (such as what would be provided 

to the public)

Can be held in concurrence with a regularly scheduled LEPC* meeting 

that is open to the public

Facilities must notify the community about the public meeting and can 

use various methods including: 

◦ Publishing a notice in a local paper, 

◦ Social media, and/or 

◦ Fliers in public places, like the local library

OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 17

* Applicable to TEPCs
Additional resources

RMP proposed rule webpage: http://www.epa.gov/rmp/proposedchanges-risk-management-program-rmp-rule

EO 13650 Improving Chemical Safety and Security: 

https://www.osha.gov/chemicalexecutiveorder/index.html

EO activities under EO 13650: http://www.epa.gov/rmp/executiveorder-improving-chemical-facility-safety-and-security

Report for the President: Actions to Improve Chemical Facility Safety 

and Security–A Shared Commitment: 

https://www.osha.gov/chemicalexecutiveorder/final_chemical_eo_stat

us_report.pdf

18 OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Questions?

OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

19