California Oil Regulations: HAZOP Requirements (Inland and Marine)
John K. Carroll III
Associate Managing Director at Witt O'Brien's, LLC, Part of the Ambipar Group
(This article was written without AI tools, i.e., ChatGPT.)
?
There has been an interesting change in California over the past 18 months concerning its approach to managing oil contingency and response plan programs for both inland and marine operators. California’s Office of Spill Prevention and Response (OSPR) has started reviewing and providing feedback on plans submitted under these two planning requirements. This change is frustrating for some, but from a planner's perspective, I appreciate it.
One of the most frustrating parts of being a consultant who provides assistance to the industry is the lack of guidance from regulators on how they want to see plans and documents under their rules. Without their feedback or substantial guidance documents, it can be hard to gauge whether what you produce hits the mark.
In speaking with Cal OSPR recently, they noted that new management has put a focus on clearing their backlogs of unreviewed plans and being more proactive with their rules. This was good to hear, as I’ve been writing and submitting plans in California for over a decade, and until 18 months ago, I had never heard anything back on any of them.
Here is a simplified explanation of the requirements: If you are an oil company operating in California, two potential rules apply under Title 14. California Code of Regulations Division 1. Fish and Game Commission - Department of Fish and Game Subdivision 4. Office of Oil Spill Prevention and Response. One set of rules is for those that operate near coastal water bodies (Marine Facilities) and the others that operate inland (Inland Facilities). (These rules can be found here.) These two rules are similar to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA90) Facility Response Plan (FRP) regulations. Like the EPA’s FRP requirements, they require developing a response plan, training, drills, securing an Oil Spill Removal Organization (OSRO), and other planning elements. As with any state-specific rule, these two rules contain additional nuances specific to the state.
There is one particular area of Cal OSPR’s regulations, where many companies do miss the mark, the Risk and Hazard Analysis requirements. Many companies either overlook this requirement altogether, have done one in the past and assumed it is accessible but are unable to locate it when requested by Cal OSPR, or try to leverage the response plan’s planning elements to meet the intent of the Risk and Hazard Analysis. I’ve seen a lot of companies get dinged recently for this in Cal OSPR’s more aggressive plan reviews. Meeting this requirement isn’t hard, but there is a lot of planning and moving parts involved to get it done correctly, so it is not something that can just be thrown together.
?
______________________________________________________________________________________
RSVP for our April 17th FREE USCG In-Person/Webinar
?
The workshop will cover compliance with the USCG's FSP, FRP, and DOM regulations.
Presenters include two former Coasties, now #wittobriens compliance consultants: Joe Graun and Eric Pugh.
______________________________________________________________________________________
The Risk and Hazard Analysis requirement for these two rules is virtually identical, though worded differently in their respective parts. The requirement has essentially three main components.
Component one is developing a spill trajectory model. I have pasted the two rules below so you can read how to do this in its entirety. Paraphrasing, you must run a spill trajectory model based on a 72-hour window for what the rule defines as the “reasonable worst-case oil spill.” There are several publicly available software tools for this. In many cases, companies have a GIS group manage this. One important note: if you’re a pipeline operator, this trajectory just must be done for the largest release potential in the system, not each response zone.
Component two is developing an “off-site consequence analysis.” This is like the EPA’s FRP requirement to research and identify areas that may be impacted based on component one. Read below for further information on what is required here. Again, if you are a pipeline operator, this is just for the trajectory modeling area, not the entire system.
Component three, which is the more time-intensive one, is conducting an actual HAZOP. The rules provide for different approaches to managing this; but most companies follow the “What-if Analysis” approach. This requires putting together a team to review all your facility operations and going through all the possible areas where there could be an issue: security breaches, weather-driven, civil unrest, operator error, equipment failure, etc. There are set standards for this, so ensure that you adhere to the standard’s protocols in whichever approach you choose to follow.
Once these three components are done, you have completed your Risk and Hazard Analysis. Done correctly, these analyses can be over 100 pages, so if yours is only ten pages long, you’ve likely missed some essential requirements. The completed Risk and Hazard Analysis package is then added to your core response plan, and the entire document is submitted to the state in PDF format. (Plan submission requirements can be found here.)
Do you need assistance with this? Witt O’Brien has completed and gained approval on these for fixed operations and pipelines for inland and marine facilities.
?
Marine requirements:
(1) Risk and Hazard Analysis
(A) Each marine facility shall conduct a Risk and Hazard Analysis to identify the hazards associated with the operation of the facility, including: operator error, the use of the facility by various types of vessels, equipment failure, and external events likely to cause an oil spill.
The owner/operator may use one or more of the hazard evaluation methods identified by the American Institute of Chemical Engineers, or an equivalent method, including, but not limited to:
1. What-if analysis;
2. Checklist analysis;
3. Preliminary hazard analysis;
4. Hazard and operability study;
5. Failure mode and effect analysis; or
6. Fault tree analysis.
(B) The chosen hazard evaluation method must be conducted in accordance with the guidelines established by the American Institute of Chemical Engineers as published in the “Guidelines for Hazard Evaluation Procedures”, second edition, copyright 1992, prepared for The Center For Chemical Process Safety.
1. The plan must include information regarding the expertise of the working group that develops the analysis.
2. The plan must include information that demonstrates to the Administrator that the analysis is appropriate to the marine facility and adequate according to the published procedures referenced in (B) above.
3. An owner/operator may be found in violation of this section if the Risk and Hazard Analysis does not adequately address the risks posed by the marine facility.
4. The Administrator may require that an analysis be updated if there are significant changes made to the marine facility. A significant change, as used in this paragraph, is one that would have an impact on the outcome of the Risk and Hazard Analysis.
5. Additional information regarding the analysis method used or the working group that conducted the analysis shall be made available to the Administrator upon request.
(C) Each plan shall include a summary of the results of the risk and hazard analysis. The summary shall include the following:
1. the hazard analysis method used, and a statement that the analysis is specific to the marine facility. If the analysis relies on a risk assessment at a similar facility, the summary shall specify how the two facilities are comparable;
2. an inventory of the hazards identified, including the hazards that resulted in the historical spills;
3. an analysis of the potential oil discharges, including the size, frequency, cause, duration and location of all significant spills from the marine facility as a result of each major type of hazard identified;
4. the control measures that will be used to mitigate or eliminate the hazards identified. The plan shall include timeframes for implementing any control measures that cannot be functional immediately; and
5. a prediction of the potential oil spills that might still be expected to occur after any mitigating controls have been implemented.
(D) All supporting documentation used to develop the Risk and Hazard Analysis summary shall be made available to the Administrator upon request.
(2) Off-Site Consequence Analysis
领英推荐
For the significant hazards identified in the Risk and Hazard Analysis required under this section, the marine facility shall conduct a trajectory analysis to determine the Off-Site Consequences of an oil spill. This analysis shall assume pessimistic water and air dispersion and other adverse environmental conditions such that the worst possible dispersion of the oil into the air or onto the water will be considered. This analysis is intended to be used as the basis for determining the areas and shoreline types for which response strategies must be developed. Some of the information required in this subsection may be drawn from the appropriate Area Contingency Plans, completed by the U.S. Coast Guard, State Agencies, and Local Governments pursuant to the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. (Note: where maps/diagrams are required they may be submitted on electronic media, in Portable Document Format (PDF)). The analysis, which shall be summarized in the plan, shall include at least the following:
(A) a trajectory, or series of trajectories (for pipelines, etc.), to determine the potential direction, rate of flow and time of travel of the reasonable worst case oil spill from the facility to marine waters and to the shorelines, including shallow-water environments, that may be impacted. For purposes of this requirement, a trajectory or trajectories (projected for a minimum of 72 hours) that determine the outer perimeter of a spill, based on regional extremes of climate, tides, currents and wind with consideration to seasonal differences, shall be sufficient;
(B) for each probable shoreline that may be impacted, a discussion of the general toxicity effects and persistence of the discharge based on type of product; the effect of seasonal conditions on sensitivity of these areas; and an identification of which areas will be given priority attention if a spill occurs.
(3) Resources at Risk from Oil Spills
Based on the trajectory of the spilled oil as determined in the Off-Site Consequence Analysis, each plan shall identify the environmentally, economically and culturally sensitive sites that may be impacted. Each plan shall identify and provide a map of the locations of these areas. Some of the information required in this subsection may be drawn from the appropriate Area Contingency Plans, completed by the U.S. Coast Guard, State Agencies, and Local Governments pursuant to the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. (Note: where maps/diagrams are required they may be submitted on electronic media, in Portable Document Format (PDF)).
(A) The map of environmentally sensitive sites shall include:
1. shoreline types and associated marine resources;
2. the presence of migratory and resident marine bird and mammal migration routes, and breeding, nursery, stopover, haul-out, and population concentration areas by season;
3. the presence of aquatic resources including marine fish, invertebrates, and plants including important spawning, migratory, nursery and foraging areas;
4. the presence of natural terrestrial animal and plant resources in marine-associated environments;
5. the presence of state or federally-listed rare, threatened or endangered species;
6. the presence of commercial and recreational fisheries including aquaculture sites, kelp leases and other harvest areas.
(B) The map of the locations of economically and culturally sensitive sites shall include:
1. public beaches, parks, marinas, boat ramps and diving areas;
2. industrial and drinking water intakes, power plants, salt pond intakes, and other similarly situated underwater structures;
3. off-shore oil and gas leases and associated drilling/production platforms;
4. known historical and archaeological sites. If a plan holder has access to any confidential archaeological information, it must be submitted as a separate item and will be handled as confidential information as described in section 790.3 of chapter 1.
5. areas of cultural or economic significance to Native Americans; and
6. the major waterways and vessel traffic patterns that are likely to be impacted.
In-land requirements:
(k) Risk and Hazard Analysis Oil Spill Consequence Analysis
(1) Each inland facility owner or operator shall conduct a risk and hazard analysis that identifies the hazards associated with the operation of the inland facility likely to cause an oil spill, including: operator error, equipment failure, and external events. This subsection shall not require railroads subject to the jurisdiction of the federal Surface Transportation Board to disclose the confidential contents of any safety or security plan required by federal law; however railroads must otherwise comply with the provisions of this subsection.
(2) For hazards identified with the ability to cause an oil spill into waters of the state, the owner or operator shall conduct an offsite consequence analysis for a reasonable worst case spill. The offsite consequence analysis must include a trajectory identifying the potential direction, rate of flow, and time of travel of the reasonable worst case spill from the facility to waters of the state and downstream, accounting for natural and manmade pathways and barriers. The analysis shall assume reasonably foreseeable adverse weather conditions, pessimistic water and air dispersion (including produced water), and other adverse environmental conditions. For risks to inland waters designated as perennial in the National Hydrography Dataset, as described in subsection (b), the analysis must consider the highest flow or current in the waterway for six hours.
3) Based on the analysis, the contingency plan must:
(A) Identify the types of resources at risk in (i) through (v) below that may be impacted based on the trajectories, including depicting the resources at risk locations on maps.
(i) Habitat and shoreline types, as identified in Table 1 and in Appendix C of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Shoreline Assessment Manual (Aug. 2013), or as identified in the American Petroleum Institute’s Options for Minimizing Environmental Impacts of Inland Spill Response (Oct. 2016), each incorporated by reference herein.
(ii) The presence of state or federally-listed rare, fully protected, or threatened or endangered species, or state species of special concern, which includes aquatic and terrestrial animal, fish and plant resources.
(iii) The presence of aquatic resources including state fish, amphibians, invertebrates, and plants including important spawning, migratory, nursery and foraging areas.
(iv) The presence of terrestrial animal and plant resources.
(v) The presence of migratory and resident bird and mammal, including relevant migration routes, breeding, stopover, nursery, haul-out, and population concentration areas by season.
(B) Identify the following, and include appropriate contacts, as applicable to emergency response:
(i) Commercial and recreational fisheries areas, aquaculture sites, public beaches, parks, marinas, boat ramps, and recreational use areas;
(ii) Industrial, irrigation, and drinking water intakes, dams, power plants, salt pond intakes, and important underwater structures; and
(iii) Known historical and archaeological sites, and areas of cultural or economic significance to Native Americans.
(C) Identify and map the on-water collection locations and strategies for the identified sites and resources at risk, including access locations.
(4) The owner or operator may rely on and cite area contingency plans, geographic response plans, and other sources to identify the information required by subsections (k)(3)(A), (B), and (C) above. Having a contract with a rated oil spill response organization does not alleviate the requirement for this analysis.
(5) If the information provided is insufficient regarding trajectories, resources at risk, strategies, sites, or contacts, then upon request of the Administrator, the owner or operator shall provide or include additional relevant information.
For a complete listing of archived articles and compliance insights, click here. Past articles cover training requirements, clarification of additional unclear elements within the above rules, and more.
We are here to help solve your compliance questions and challenges. If you need compliance assistance or have questions, please email John K. Carroll III ([email protected]), Associate Managing Director – Compliance Services, or call +1 954-625-9373.
Witt O’Brien’s:
______________________________________________________________________________________?
Personal Note: Struggling with suicidal thoughts or know someone who is displaying worrisome characteristics? If yes, the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP) has excellent resources to help: a crisis hotline (simply call/text 988), a counselor directory, resources to navigate, etc. Click here to go to their website.
?