Source: https://www.emergency-response-planning.com/blog/topic/deadline-approaching
Timestamp: 2020-04-01 10:44:15
Document Index: 94757062

Matched Legal Cases: ['arts 154', 'art 154', 'art 7', '§80', 'art 194', 'art 154', '§ 154', '§155', '§155', '§155', '§ 155', 'art.\n155', 'art 155', '§155', '§155', '§154', '§ 154', '§ 154', '§154', 'art 154', 'art 300']

Emergency Response Planning Blogs | Deadline Approaching
OSHA's Safety Data Sheets Regulatory Compliance Deadline: June 1, 2015
As of June 1, 2015, the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) will require all Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) to be in the standardized format set forth by 29 CFR 1910.1200(g). A SDS, (formerly known as Material Safety Data Sheet or MSDS) was constructed to conform to the Globally Harmonized System, a globally accepted classification of health, physical and environmental hazards. After the deadline of June 1st, OSHA compliance will require that SDSs be in the designated format.
HCS regulatory compliance mandates chemical manufacturers, distributors, or importers of hazardous materials to provide SDSs (formerly known as Material Safety Data Sheets or MSDSs) to downstream users for each chemical hazard. The format includes 16 standardized sections arranged in a strict order. The information contained within the SDS is similar to its MSDS predecessor. However, SDSs will be required to comply with the standardized visual layout, allowing workers who handle hazardous chemicals to have a comprehensive familiarity and understanding of the required data.
The safety compliance SDS format includes section numbers, headings, and associated information under the headings below:
Section 1, Identification includes product identifier; manufacturer or distributor, address, phone number; emergency phone number; recommended use; restrictions on use.
Section 12, Ecological information* provides information to evaluate the environmental impact of the chemical(s) if it were released to the environment.
Section 13, Disposal considerations* provides guidance on proper disposal practices, recycling or reclamation of the chemical(s) or its container, and safe handling practices. To minimize exposure, this section should also refer the reader to Section 8 (Exposure Controls/Personal Protection) of the SDS.
Section 14, Transport information* provides guidance on classification information for shipping and transporting of hazardous chemical(s) by road, air, rail, or sea.
Section 15, Regulatory information* identifies the safety, health, and environmental regulations specific for the product that is not indicated anywhere else on the SDS. The information may include:
Any national and/or regional regulatory information of the chemical or mixtures (including any OSHA, Department of Transportation, Environmental Protection Agency, or Consumer Product Safety Commission regulations)
Section 16, Other information, includes the date of preparation or last revision. This section may also state where the changes have been made to the previous version. You may wish to contact the supplier for an explanation of the changes. Other useful information also may be included here.
Employers must also ensure that SDSs are readily accessible to employees for all hazardous chemicals in their workplace. Although the requirement does not dictate a specified communication method, employees have immediate access to the information without leaving their work area. In the event of a power outage or other emergency, a backup SDS must be available for rapid access. From an emergency management standpoint, it may be advantageous to house SDSs within a web-based, database driven framework to ensure accessibility from multiple locations in the event a catastrophic event renders paper copies or company servers inaccessible.
*Note: Since other Agencies regulate Sections 12 through 15, OSHA will not be enforcing these sections.
Tags: Regulatory Compliance, Deadline Approaching
Tips for Determining Which Emergency Management Planning Consultant is Right!
Preparedness, response planning, and emergency management within regulated industries or sensitive environments often requires outside expertise. Program managers are often responsible for predicting, preparing, complying, documenting, and possibly, responding to site-specific emergency scenarios. Yet, limited staffing, constrained timeframes, or the need for specialized expertise often hinders an all-inclusive implementation of “best practices” programs and effective emergency response plans. Implementing this level of resilience often requires external expertise or the services of specialized consultants.
In the area of emergency response planning, an external expert, or consultant, should ease the day-to-day challenges associated with developing and maintaining multiple response plans and site-specific regulatory compliance. However, experienced consultants can provide these services while seamlessly integrating and interfacing with established data, company policies, and cultures.
Carelessly choosing a consultant can lead to delayed implementation, costly and conflicting approaches, and unfulfilled expectations. The following three components should be carefully evaluated when seeking assistance for developing emergency response plans.
1. Company/Employee Support: It is often the company or individuals that have difficulty accepting change. The goal of hiring consultants is to implement positive change. Best practices strategies, processes, and advanced technologies cannot deliver results without company and individual support. Those responsible for hiring consultants must accept, adopt, drive, and sustain changes to realize tangible impacts and overall benefits.
2. Communication Compatibility: The working relationship between a client and the consultant is critical. Both entities must be able to communicate effectively in order to attain identified objectives. The consultant must be upfront regarding costs, timelines, capabilities, and obstacles to ensure mutual understanding. The client should clearly identify the approved budget, implementation timeline, specific needs and objectives, and availability. A positive working relationship and unified project management approach establishes common goals which enables goals to be successfully implemented.
3. Consultant Approach: Consultant-specific methods and tools, such as gap analyses, project management frameworks, site evaluations, and specific mediation approaches are important to comprehend. For an approach method to be effective, it has to be tailored to the situation of the client and changed whenever necessary to achieve set objectives.
Consultant must be able to work closely with their clientele to develop customized plans that can improve a company's ability to prevent incidents, respond effectively, and restore operations to pre-incident levels. Plans should be regulatory compliant and site-specific, identifying unambiguous responses for emergency situations such as fires, natural disasters, terrorist activities, pandemics or other events. Consultants should:
Have a proven track record in assisting in developing comprehensive, effective plans and processes
Have hands-on experience in emergency response, security, safety, and disaster preparedness
Understand budget parameters and confirm services for the agreed cost
Demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of local, state, and federal regulatory requirements applicable to a client’s industry, operations, and location
Provide references from current clients and relevant experience of staff
Communicate the information and time required of the company to develop compliant and effective response plans
Be available for meetings and updates, and address questions or concerns regarding the process, approach, and/or objectives
Clarify specific methods, techniques, and approaches used to meet objectives and be open to modifications
Consultants who develops customized emergency response plans should be experienced in:
Maintaining multiple and complex response plans
Addressing plan maintenance issues regarding infrastructure, personnel, and/or regulatory compliance changes
Gathering or verifying site-specific information
Conducting emergency response assessments of personnel, response equipment, plans, and response contractors.
The costs associated with contracting consulting services are always in question. When hiring an external emergency management and preparedness consultant, companies should evaluate the strategic cost of an incident and the tactical cost of safety compliance versus the consultant fee. The cost benefit of hiring a specialized, reputable consultant typically outweighs the financial impacts associated with non-compliance or a catastrophic incident.
Tags: Choosing a Consultant, Response Plans, Training and Exercises, Emergency Management Program, Emergency Response Planning, Deadline Approaching
MTR Facility Response Plan Revisions due March 24, 2011
The U.S. Coast Guard issued a Port Information Bulletin detailing the definition of applicable terms and a reminder of the deadline for response plan updates. Marine transportation-related (MTR) facilities to which 33 CFR 154 Subpart F, “Response Plans for Oil Facilities” applies shall submit response plan updates that include the provisions outlined in the final rule to the Captain of the Port (COTP) by March 24, 2011.
The definition of the term “inland rivers” needed clarification in the final ruling, as this term was not defined within 33 CFR Parts 154 or 155. Because of this confusion the original deadline date of February 22, 2011 was extended to March 24, 2011. After review, the U.S. Coast Guard and the Department of Homeland Security determined that terms “inland rivers” and “inland areas” shall be considered equivalent. Therefore, the maritime industry and the COTP shall use the terms equally as defined in 33 CFR Part 154.
Inland area means the area shoreward of the boundary lines defined in 46 CFR part 7, except in the Gulf of Mexico. In the Gulf of Mexico, it means the area shoreward of the lines of demarcation (COLREG lines) defined in §§80.740 through 80.850 of this chapter. The inland area does not include the Great Lakes.
However, facilities operating exclusively on inland rivers are not required to comply with paragraph (j), the aerial oil tracking portion of 33CFR 154.1045. The rule states as follows:
(j) The owner or operator of a facility handling Groups I through IV petroleum oil as a primary cargo must identify in the response plan, and ensure the availability through contract or other approved means, of response resources necessary to provide aerial oil tracking to support oil spill assessment and cleanup activities. Facilities operating exclusively on inland rivers are not required to comply with this paragraph. Aerial oil tracking resources must:
(1) Be capable of arriving at the site of a discharge in advance of the arrival of response resources identified in the plan for tiers 1, 2, and 3 Worst-Case Discharge response times, and for a distance up to 50 nautical miles from shore (excluding inland rivers);
(2) Be capable of supporting oil spill removal operations continuously for three 10-hour operational periods during the initial 72 hours of the discharge;
(3) Include appropriately located aircraft and personnel capable of meeting the response time requirement for oil tracking from paragraph (j)(1) of this section; and
(4) Include sufficient numbers of aircraft, pilots, and trained observation personnel to support oil spill removal operations, commencing upon initial assessment, and capable of coordinating on-scene cleanup operations, including dispersant and mechanical recovery operations.
All facilities must update their facility response plans to incorporate OSRO and spill management team requirements as outlined in 33 CFR 154.1035 (b)(3), the specific requirements for facilities that could reasonably be expected to cause significant and substantial harm to the environment.
Upon verification of complying updates, the COTP will issue Interim Operating Authorizations (IOAs) to facilities in accordance with 33 CFR 154.1065(e). According to the U.S. Coast Guard, if an applicable MTR facility is found to be handling, storing or transporting oil and there is no proof that an updated response plan has been submitted to the COTP, a Notice of Violation will be issued to the owner or operator with a maximum penalty of $11,000. Additionally, the COTP may prohibit operations for the facility(s) until an updated response plan is submitted.
Tags: Emergency Preparedness, Regulatory Compliance, Deadline Approaching
Facility Response Plan Submittal Requirements for EPA, DOT and USCG
Posted on Fri, Nov 05, 2010
One of the most important aspects of maintaining your facility response plans is ensuring that plan revisions are submitted to regulatory agencies in a timely manner. The EPA, PHSMA, and the USCG have different requirements for when revisions need to be submitted.
EPA : According to 40 CFR 112.20, each time there is a material change at a facility, the response plan must be resubmitted for approval within 60 days.
DOT/PHMSA: According to 49 CFR Part 194.121, each operator shall review its response plan at least every 5 years from the date of submission and modify the plan to address new or different operating conditions or information included in the plan.
U.S. Coast Guard (USCG): According to 33 CFR Part 154.1065, facilities must review their plan annually. Any review should include revisions to the plan, including listings of fish and wildlife and sensitive environments identified in the Area Contingency Plan in effect 6 months prior to plan review. For an MTR facility identified in § 154.1015(b) as a “substantial harm facility” this review must occur within 1 month of the annual anniversary date of submission of the plan to the COTP. The COTP may require a facility owner or operator to revise a response plan at any time as a result of a compliance inspection if the COTP determines that the response plan does not meet the requirements or as a result of inadequacies noted in the response plan during an actual pollution incident at the facility.
For information on how to conduct an effective exercise, download TRP Corp.'s Tips on Conducting an Effective Exercise.
Tags: USCG, DOT, Emergency Preparedness, EPA, Emergency Management Program, Deadline Approaching
USCG Mandates Vessel Response Plan Compliance by Feb 22, 2011.
Posted on Fri, Aug 20, 2010
The U.S. Coast Guard’s new regulations to improve pollution-response preparedness for vessels carrying or handling oil upon the navigable waters of the United States goes into effect February 22, 2011.
This final rule, applicable upon all navigable waters of the U.S. including the exclusive economic zone and adjoining shorelines, updates Coast Guard requirements for oil-spill removal equipment associated with vessel response plans and marine transportation-related facility response plans.
The new rules directly regulate vessels carrying oil in bulk and marine transportation related (MTR) oil facilities that are required to have an oil response plan under the current Vessel Response Plan rules. These regulatory updates add requirements for plan holders to use new response technologies and revise methods and procedures for oil spill response. Vessel Response Plan holders must ensure dispersant service providers meet regulatory response requirements. Instead of detailed equipment lists, plan holders can reference OSROs that provide dispersants if USCG classified and whose availability has been ensured by contract or other approved means.
The following additional American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) are applicable to vessels:
ASTM F1413–07, Standard Guide for Oil Spill Dispersant Application Equipment: Boom and Nozzle Systems, incorporation by reference approved for §155.1050.
ASTM F1737–07, Standard Guide for Use of Oil Spill Dispersant-Application Equipment During Spill Response: Boom and Nozzle Systems, incorporation by reference approved for §155.1050.
ASTM F1779–08, Standard Practice for Reporting Visual Observations of Oil on Water, incorporation by reference approved for §155.1050.
The following are some of the additional updated requirements for vessels. A detailed list of the new requirements can be found at: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-20311.pdf
§ 155.230 Emergency control systems for tank barges- Each operator of the system should wear a safety belt or harness secured by a lanyard to a lifeline, drop line, or fixed structure such as a welded padeye, if the sea or the weather warrants this precaution. Each safety belt, harness, lanyard, lifeline, and drop line must meet the specifications of ANSI A10.14
155.235 Emergency towing capability for oil tankers- An emergency towing arrangement shall be fitted at both ends on board all oil tankers of not less than 20,000 deadweight tons (dwt), constructed on or after September 30, 1997. For oil tankers constructed before September 30, 1997, such an arrangement shall be fitted at the first scheduled dry-docking, but not later than January 1, 1999. The design and construction of the towing arrangement shall be in accordance with IMO resolution MSC.35(63)
155.1035 Response plan requirements for manned vessels carrying oil as a primary cargo-
o The format and content of the ship-to-ship transfer procedures must be consistent with the Ship-to-Ship Transfer Guide (Petroleum) published jointly by the International Chamber of Shipping and the Oil Companies International Marine Forum (OCIMF).
o For vessels that handle, store, or transport Group I through Group V petroleum oils, the appendix must also separately list the resource providers identified to provide the salvage, vessel firefighting, and lightering capabilities.
o For vessels that handle, store, or transport Group II through Group IV petroleum oils, and that operate in waters where dispersant use pre-authorization agreements exist, the appendix must also separately list the resource providers and specific resources, including appropriately trained dispersant-application personnel, necessary to provide, if appropriate, the dispersant capabilities required in this subpart. All resource providers and resources must be available by contract or other approved means.
o The appendix must also separately list the resource providers and specific resources necessary to provide oil-tracking capabilities required in this subpart.
155.1040 Response plan requirements for unmanned vessels carrying oil as a primary cargo-
o The appendix must include a separate listing of the resource providers identified to provide the salvage, vessel firefighting, and lightering capabilities.
o The appendix must include a separate listing of the resource providers and specific resources necessary to provide, if appropriate, the dispersant capabilities.
o The appendix must include a separate listing of the resource providers and specific resources necessary to provide oil-tracking capabilities.
155.1050 Response plan development and evaluation criteria for vessels carrying groups I through IV petroleum oil as a primary cargo.
o The owner or operator of a vessel carrying groups II through IV petroleum oil as a primary cargo that operates in any inland, nearshore, or offshore area with pre-authorization for dispersant use must identify in their response plan, and ensure availability through contract or other approved means, of response resources capable of conducting dispersant operations within those areas.
o The owner or operator of a vessel carrying groups I through IV petroleum oil as a primary cargo must identify in the response plan, and ensure their availability through contract or other approved means, response resources necessary to provide aerial oil tracking to support oil spill assessment, and cleanup activities. Vessels operating on inland rivers are not required to comply with this directive.
o Aerial oil tracking resources must be capable of arriving at the site of a discharge in advance of the arrival of response resources identified in the plan for tiers 1, 2, and 3 Worst Case Discharge response times, and for a distance up to 50 nautical miles from shore (excluding inland rivers).
o The Coast Guard will continue to evaluate the environmental benefits, cost efficiency and practicality of increasing mechanical recovery capability requirements. This continuing evaluation is part of the Coast Guard's long-term commitment to achieving and maintaining an optimum mix of oil spill response capability across the full spectrum of response modes. As best available technology demonstrates a need to evaluate or change mechanical recovery capacities, a review of cap increases and other requirements contained within this subpart may be performed.
Appendix B to part 155 Determining and Evaluating Required Response Resources for vessel Response Plans-
o If the required capacity exceeds the applicable cap, then a vessel owner or operator must contract for at least the quantity of resources required to meet the cap, but must identify sources of additional resources as indicated in §155.1050(p). For a vessel that carries multiple groups of oil, the required effective daily recovery capacity for each group is calculated and summed before applying the cap.
o A vessel owner or operator must plan either for a dispersant capacity to respond to a vessel's worst case discharge (WCD) of oil, or for the amount of the dispersant resource capability as required by §155.1050(k)(3) of this chapter, whichever is the lesser amount. When planning for the cumulative application capacity that is required, the calculations should account for the loss of some oil to the environment due to natural dissipation causes (primarily evaporation).
Affected plan holders should review the final rules and take all necessary measures to ensure that an updated response plans are submitted by February 22, 2011 and in compliance.
For more tips and best practices on designing a crisis management program, download our Free Best Practices Guide.
Tags: USCG, Emergency Preparedness, Deadline Approaching
New USCG Regs for Facility Response Plans - Effective Feb. 22, 2011
Posted on Tue, Aug 17, 2010
The U.S. Coast Guard’s new regulations to improve pollution-response preparedness for facilities carrying or handling oil upon the navigable waters of the United States goes into effect February 22, 2011.
This final rule, applicable for shorelines adjoining navigable waters of the U.S. including the exclusive economic zone, updates Coast Guard requirements for oil-spill removal equipment associated with facility response plans and marine transportation-related facility response plans. These regulatory updates add requirements for plan holders to use new response technologies and revise methods and procedures for oil spill response.
The rule applies to pre-approved areas only, not areas designated for quick approval of dispersant use. If you have an existing approved facility response plan, you must have your plan updated and submitted to the Coast Guard by February 22, 2011.
The new regulations will affect facility response plans, vessel response plans, and dock operations manuals. The new rules directly regulate marine transportation related (MTR) oil facilities that are required to have an oil response plan under the current Facility Response Plan rules.
The new regulations include, but are not limited to the following:
Plan holders to offset their mechanical recovery equipment inventory by as much as 25% in exchange for including dispersants in the response plans.
Pre-authorization agreements indicate that dispersant use may be appropriate and will be approved for use in a spill incident meeting certain predetermined criteria that may occur in the covered area. The regulations will ensure that the dispersant equipment and materials are available, and that the cost of maintaining those resources is shared equitably among all potential private sector users.
Regulations were modified to clarify that plan holders should plan to have aerial tracking capabilities available to support response operations for entire daily operational periods. As operations are not routinely conducted during darkness, these operational periods will be less than 10 hours per day when there is less than 10 hours of daylight, and longer than 10 hours when there is more than 10 hours of daylight. The 10-hour operational period is offered as a planning target. An individual plan holder may choose to plan more precisely, based on actual length of daylight operational periods. Vessels/facilities operating on inland rivers aren’t required to maintain aerial tracking capabilities. Vessels operating on open waters of the Great Lakes will be required to maintain these capabilities.
Some of the new regulations for Facilities transferring Oil or Hazardous Material in Bulk are as follows:
Hose assemblies may also have Flanges that meet ANSI B16.5 or B16.24 (both incorporated by reference; see §154.106
Each mechanical loading arm used for transferring oil or hazardous material and placed into service after June 30, 1973, must meet the design, fabrication, material, inspection, and testing requirements in ANSI B31.3.
All welding or hot work conducted on or at the facility is the responsibility of the facility operator. The COTP may require that the operator of the facility notify the COTP before any welding or hot work operations are conducted. Any welding or hot work operations conducted on or at the facility must be conducted in accordance with NFPA 51B. The facility operator shall ensure that the additional conditions or criteria are met.
Barring exceptions, Tank cleaning or gas freeing operations conducted by the facility on vessels carrying oil residues or mixtures shall be conducted in accordance with sections 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, and 9.5 of the OCIMF International Safety Guide for Oil Tankers and Terminals (ISGOTT)
Vapor collection system piping and fittings must be in accordance with ANSI B31.3 and designed for a maximum allowable working pressure of at least 150 psig. Valves and flanges must be in accordance with ANSI B16.5 or B16.24, 150-pound class.
Flanges must have a bolt hole arrangement complying with the requirements for 150 pound class ANSI B16.5
The additional vessel liquid overfill protection requirements must be met: ANSI/NEMA WD6 and NFPA 70, National Electrical Code, Articles 410–57 and 501–12.
Overfill control panel on the dock capable of powering and receiving an alarm and shutdown signal from the cargo tank level sensor system must have Has a female connecting plug for the tank barge level sensor system with a 5 wire, 16 amp connector body meeting IEC 309–1/309–2.
The vessel vapor overpressure and vacuum protection be tested for relieving capacity in accordance with paragraph 1.5.1.3 of API 2000 with a flame screen fitted.
The inerting, enriching, and diluting systems be installed in accordance with API Recommended Practice 550
Take special note to § 154.1035: Specific requirements for facilities that could reasonably be expected to cause significant and substantial harm to the environment
Take note of § 154.1045: Response plan development and evaluation criteria for facilities that handle, store, or transport Group I through Group IV petroleum oils.
A new or existing facility owner or operator must submit the required dispersant and aerial oil tracking resource revisions to a previously submitted or approved plan, made pursuant to §§154.1035(b)(3) or 154.1045, to the COTP and all other holders of the response plan for information or approval no later than February 22, 2011.
Under Appendix C to Part 154: The guidelines for determining daily application capacities for dispersant response systems, evaluating the high-rate required response methods, and calculating cumulative dispersant application capacity has been updated.
In addition to the equipment and supplies required, a facility owner or operator must identify a source of support to conduct the monitoring and post-use effectiveness evaluation required by applicable regional plans and Area Contingency Plans.
Identification of the resources for dispersant application does not imply that the use of this technique will be authorized. Actual authorization for use during a spill response will be governed by the provisions of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan (40 CFR part 300) and the applicable Local or Area Contingency Plan.
For a full list of regulations, see http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-20311.pdf.
The Coast Guard is also revising the compliance date for updates to vessel response plans required by the Salvage and Marine Firefighting final rule published Dec. 31, 2008 (73 FR 80618). This new compliance date of Feb. 22, 2011, ensures plan holders will not be required to update their Vessel Response Plan’s twice within a 12-month period.
For more tips and best practices on conducting an effective oil spill, download our Free Best Practices for Crisis Management.