Search Frequent Questions
Filter By:
-
Risk Management Program (RMP)
Total results: 285
- Applicability/General Duty Clause Total results: 69
- Emergency Response Total results: 6
- Five-Year Accident History Total results: 16
- Offsite Consequence Analysis (OCA) Total results: 57
- Other Risk Management Programs Total results: 35
- Plan Preparation and Submission Total results: 49
- Prevention Program Total results: 30
- Program Levels Total results: 16
- RMP*Comp Total results: 7
- Southeast Minnesota Groundwater Total results: 11
- Air Emissions Inventories Total results: 34
- Asbestos Total results: 141
- Butte Area/Silver Bow Creek Total results: 17
- Coronavirus (COVID-19) Total results: 33
- East Palestine, Ohio Train Derailment Total results: 148
- Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Total results: 301
- Fuel Program Total results: 693
- Great Lakes Funding Total results: 92
-
Lead
Total results: 398
- EPA/HUD Real Estate Notification & Disclosure Rule Total results: 24
- Applying for Certification or Accreditation Total results: 22
- General Information About Lead Total results: 9
- Lead-Based Paint Program Fees Total results: 9
- Lead Abatement, Risk Assessment and Inspection Total results: 49
- Lead at Superfund Sites Total results: 3
- Lead in Drinking Water Total results: 25
- Lead in Products Total results: 1
- Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting Total results: 237
- Testing for Lead Total results: 19
- MOVES Total results: 57
- Norwood Landfill Site Total results: 30
- Oil Regulations Total results: 96
- Permitting Under the Clean Air Act Total results: 19
- Radiation Total results: 1
Active filters:
- Risk Management Program (RMP)
- Southeast Minnesota Groundwater
- EPA/HUD Real Estate Notification & Disclosure Rule
Displaying 1 - 15 of 320 results
-
Criteria for selecting alternative release scenarios
As part of the hazard assessment, owners and operators of Program 2 and Program 3 covered processes must identify and analyze alternative release scenarios (40 CFR §68.28). What criteria should be used when selecting an alternative release scenario? The owner or operator of a stationary source subject to the risk…
- Last published:
-
Obtaining an RMP ID Number
How can a facility subject to the Risk Management Plan (RMP) requirements obtain its RMP ID number? The owner or operator of a regulated RMP facility that has already submitted an RMP, may obtain the facility's identification number (RMP ID Number) by contacting the RMP Reporting Center (703-227-7650). An RMP-covered…
- Last published:
-
Does the distance to endpoint start at the process or stationary source boundary?
When selecting the worst-case release scenario for Program 2 and 3 processes as required by 40 CFR §68.25, a stationary source owner or operator must analyze the release scenario that results in the greatest distance to an endpoint. Does the "greatest distance to an endpoint" refer to the greatest total…
- Last published:
-
Using meteorological station data for off-site consequence analyses
For the purpose of the offsite consequence analyses required under 40 CFR Part 68, Subpart B, there are several instances in which data gathered at a local meteorological station may be used to establish the modeling parameters of wind speed, atmospheric stability, temperature, and humidity for the stationary source. How…
- Last published:
-
Underground storage tank off-site impacts to groundwater, drinking water, or soil
For the worst-case and alternative release scenarios of an underground storage tank, should I consider any impact on groundwater, drinking water, or soil? No. As part of the worst-case and alternative release scenarios, you need to define the offsite impacts to the environment (40 CFR §68.33) by listing the environmental…
- Last published:
-
Accidental releases from non-covered processes
Should the owner or operator include accidental releases from processes containing listed substances below the threshold quantity in the five-year accident history required under the hazard assessment provisions of 40 CFR Part 68, Subpart B, and in the incident investigation requirements under 40 CFR Part 68, Subparts C and D…
- Last published:
-
Why are industries exempt under OSHA's PSM subject to RMP?
The Program 3 prevention program requirements under 40 CFR Part 68 are almost identical to the requirements of OSHA's process safety management (PSM) standard. OSHA exempts certain industries from the PSM standard. Why does EPA not exempt those same industries from the CAA §112(r) risk management program requirements? EPA and…
- Last published:
-
Redoing calculations if RMP*Comp is updated
Will RMP*Comp be updated? If so, would I have to redo calculations I might already have made with an earlier version? No, you do not have to redo your work if you have already completed your consequence analyses. RMP*Comp is based on the EPA's Offsite Consequence Analysis Guidance (OCA Guidance)…
- Last published:
-
Different distances to toxic endpoints with different versions of RMP*Comp
I've noticed that for certain chemicals, RMP*Comp gives substantially different distances to the toxic endpoint than previous versions. Why? In the current version of RMP*Comp, we have incorporated new chemical-specific distance tables for ammonia, chlorine, and sulfur dioxide. The generic tables are still used for other chemicals (you can see…
- Last published:
-
Distance to endpoint calculations used by RMP*Comp
Does RMP*Comp perform some math or modelling in order to arrive at an endpoint distance, or is it simply interpolating from the tables in the EPA's Offsite Consequence Analysis Guidance (OCA Guidance)? RMP*Comp follows the procedures set out in the OCA Guidance . This means that for some scenarios, the…
- Last published:
-
What if the quantity in the process fluctuates?
What if the quantity in the process fluctuates? I may not have a threshold quantity now, but I will intermittently exceed the threshold quantity. You do not need to comply with the rule and file an RMP unless you have more than threshold quantity in a process; however, once you…
- Last published:
-
Administrative controls considered when determining worst-case release quantity
For the purpose of analyzing the worst-case release scenario required as part of the hazard assessment at 40 CFR Part 68, Subpart B, the worst-case release quantity is identified as the greatest amount held in a single vessel or pipe, taking into account administrative controls that limit the maximum quantity…
- Last published:
-
Are Mechanical Controls Considered Administrative Controls?
For the purpose of analyzing the worst-case release scenario required as part of the hazard assessment at 40 CFR Part 68, Subpart B, the worst-case release quantity is identified as the greatest amount held in a single vessel or pipe, taking into account administrative controls that limit the maximum quantity…
- Last published:
-
Worst-case release from smaller process with larger distance to endpoint
The owner or operator of a stationary source covered by the risk management program regulations must conduct a worst-case release scenario analysis as part of the required hazard assessment (40 CFR §68.25). The worst-case release is defined as the release of the largest quantity of a regulated substance from a…
- Last published:
-
Does EPA have enforcement authority for the risk management program regulations?
Yes. Under §113 of the CAA, the Agency has the authority to bring administrative and judicial actions against violators. Judicial actions can be civil and criminal in nature. Section 113(a)(3) authorizes the Agency to order violators to comply with the risk management program regulations. Under section 113(b), the Agency may…
- Last published: