Fact Sheet for Regulated Facilities: Safer Communities by Chemical Accident Prevention - Risk Management Program Final Rule

EPA is strengthening its Risk Management Program regulations (40 CFR Part 68) following a review of the existing RMP requirements and after considering comments on the 2022 Proposed Safer Communities by Chemical Accident Prevention (SCCAP) rule. The revisions further protect vulnerable communities from chemical accidents, especially those living near facilities in industrial sectors with high accident rates. The amendments include several revisions and amplifications to the accident prevention program requirements, enhancements to the emergency preparedness requirements, increased public availability of chemical hazard information, several changes to regulatory definitions and points of clarification. These amendments will help improve chemical process safety; assist in planning, preparedness, and response to chemical accidents; and improve public awareness of chemical hazards at regulated sources.

What are the final changes in the SCCAP Rule?

Prevention Program (Subparts C and D)

Natural hazards and power loss*: (1) Adding amplifying regulatory text to emphasize that natural hazards and loss of power are among the hazards that must be addressed in Program 2 hazard reviews and Program 3 process hazard analyses. (2) Requiring back-up power for release monitoring equipment. (3) Requiring a justification in the Risk Management Plan when hazard evaluation recommendations are not adopted.*
Facility siting: (1) Emphasizing that facility siting should be addressed in hazard reviews and explicitly defining the facility siting requirement for Program 2 hazard reviews and Program 3 process hazard analyses. (2) Requiring a justification in the Risk Management Plan when facility siting hazard recommendations are not adopted.*
Safer technologies and alternatives analysis: Requiring (1) A STAA evaluation for all Program 3 NAICS 324 and 325 processes; (2) A Practicability assessment of inherently safer technologies and designs (IST/ISD) considered for processes (a) in Program 3 NAICS code 324 and 325 within one mile of another Program 3 NAICS code 324 or 325 process, (b) with hydrofluoric acid alkylation processes classified under NAICS 324, (c) having one RMP accident since the facility’s most recent process hazard analysis; (3) Implementation of at least one passive measure at the facility, or IST/ISD, or a combination of active and procedural measures equivalent to or greater than the risk reduction of a passive measure for the same facilities required to conduct the practicability assessment and (4) A justification in the Risk Management Plan when STAA recommendations are not adopted.*
Root cause analysis: Requiring a formal root cause analysis incident investigation when facilities have had an RMP-reportable accident.
Third-party compliance audits: (1) Requiring the next scheduled compliance audit be a third-party audit when facilities have had an RMP-reportable accident. (2) Requiring a justification in the Risk Management Plan when third-party compliance audit recommendations are not adopted.*
Employee participation*: (1) Requiring employee participation in resolving process hazard analyses, compliance audit and incident investigation recommendations and findings. (2) Outlining stop work procedures in Program 3 employee participation plans. (3) Requiring Program 2 and Program 3 employee participation plans to include opportunities for employees to anonymously report RMP-reportable accidents or other related RMP non-compliance issues. (4) Requiring training on employee participation plans.

*Indicates provisions that have not been addressed in prior RMP rules.

Emergency Response (Subpart E)

Community notification of RMP accidents*: (1) Requiring non-responding RMP facilities to develop procedures for informing the public about accidental releases. (2) Requiring release notification data be provided to local responders. (3) Partnering with local responders to ensure a community notification system is in place for notification of RMP-reportable accidents.
Emergency response exercises: (1) Requiring a 10-year frequency for field exercises unless local responders indicate that frequency is infeasible. (2) Requiring mandatory scope and reporting requirements for emergency response exercises.

Information Availability (Subpart H, § 68.210)

Enhanced Information Availability*: New requirements for the facility to provide chemical hazard information upon request to the public living, working or spending significant time within six miles of the facility, in at least two most common languages in the community. Under the previous regulation, facilities were not required to provide this information.

Other Areas of Technical Clarification (Subparts A, C, D)

Minor regulatory edits to clarify:

Program 3 process safety information should be kept up to date,
Program 2 and Program 3 requirements consistent for recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices (RAGAGEP),
Hot work permits should be retained for three years,
Fiscal or calendar prior year sales should be used to qualify for the retail facility exemption,
RAGAGEP should be reviewed in process hazard analyses to determine gaps in safety.

What are the final compliance dates for the changes?

EPA is requiring regulated sources to comply with:

New STAA, incident investigation root cause analysis, third-party compliance audit, employee participation, emergency response public notification, exercise evaluation reports, and information availability provisions, three years after the effective date of the final rule.
Revised emergency response field exercise frequency provision by March 15, 2027, or within 10 years of the date of an emergency response field exercise conducted between March 15, 2017, and August 31, 2022.
Updates and resubmission of risk management plans with new and revised data elements, four years after the effective date of the final rule.