How does your 194-OSRP fair in today’s regulatory space? PHMSA-OPA90 Discussion

When I first started writing my Monday articles every week back in 2016, one of the first articles was on the new leadership at the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). It addressed how PHMSA was more actively reviewing 49 CFR 194 Oil Spill Response Plans (OSRP) and industry needed to take notice. Along these same lines, I attended the virtual American Petroleum Institute (API) Spill Committee’s work group last week, and one of the presenters was Eddie Murphy from PHMSA. During his presentation he highlighted that PHMSA was currently paying extra attention to see if OSRPs had proper Oil Spill Removal Organization (OSRO) coverage, if their contracts were current, and could they properly respond to an oil spill.

With the current oil dilemmas our nation is facing, such plans may be tested sooner rather than later, so it is important to keep current – available storage is dwindling, and some traders are trying to utilize pipelines as holding vessels (though not good).

He also noted that their office was shut down and they wanted industry to send all OSRPs to [email protected]. As OSRPs can get very large, it was asked that companies send an email to this address noting this was the case, and they’d set up an FTP system.

Another important announcement was: PHMSA is soliciting public comment on proposed amendments to the Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations for the safety of hazardous liquid pipelines that would revise the requirements for facility response plans, revise the definition for accidents, and consider repealing, replacing, or modifying other specific regulations. The intent of these changes is to reduce regulatory burdens and improve regulatory clarity without compromising safety and environmental protection.

Click here to learn more.

There were other items discussed; however, the last relevant topic towards today’s conversation was PHMSA COVID-19 guidance for exercises. 1) PHMSA supports the postponement of exercises or participation “virtually” for tabletop exercise if objectives can be met. 2) If plan holders are unable to complete exercises in 2020 it is important, they document their issues and notify PHMSA.

2016 Flashback Article

Has your 49 CFR 194 Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) under the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) had its 5-Year-Review? Or perhaps you’ve recently received a PHMSA Letter of Correction? Either way, I’d like to offer a heads up.

For better or for worse, David K. Lehman, Director of the Emergency Support and Security Division at the Office of Pipeline Safety, runs a much tighter ship these days. Gone are the days of Facility Response Plan Review checklists, sometimes referred to as the Melanie Barber Checklist, that were used to gain approvals on OSRPs from PHMSA. In today’s world, OSRPs are reviewed in their entirety against the actual CFRs.

At first glance, tougher reviews and standards may appear daunting, however, it also means consistency – that’s a good thing! I’d rather know from the onslaught of a project I have to answer 50 questions, rather than think I have to answer 10 only to later have to spend weeks going back and forth on a document with agency reviewers to answer the “unknowns.” More importantly though, plans are now required to be more user-friendly, and mindful of their true purpose as response plans.  

As we in industry begin our new journey with today’s leadership, many will initially be annoyed and frustrated, however, whether in CA or VA, eventually we’ll be speaking and reading the same language as the expectations are the same.  In case you’re still not convinced - this is a good thing! It makes complying easier, and transferable between companies. Let’s not forget that ultimately, these evolving requirements are meant to prevent or enable a better response to oil release incidents. Consistency builds industry “muscle memory”, providing for quicker, cheaper, and safer compliance, while also reducing the risk of “newsworthy” events.

So, what’s new? Over the course of the past 18 months, the following “Needed Action” items have been very common on Letters of Correction we’ve seen from PHMSA:

• Maximum historic discharge omitted from plan; historically left off if not applicable.
• Calculation for pipeline worst case discharge cannot be verified with information in plan; no math shown, just volume.
• Deductions for breakout tanks not properly applied / Maximum breakout discharge omitted from plan; historically left off if not applicable.
• Contracted resources not-up-to-date or are not properly qualified.
• Qualified individual information outdated or missing required details.

Available resources such as compliance consultants and staff subject-matter experts can help with keeping ahead of these findings, however, PHMSA is often overlooked as a viable resource. Industry professionals can find release reporting forms, regulatory interpretations, response tools, and more on the PHMSA website.

Jurisdiction Questions:

• EPA or PHMSA: Who gains jurisdiction when a Complex Facility falls under both?
• Am I EPA, USCG, or PHMSA Regulated (OPA90 Jurisdictional Conversation)
• Who regulates my MTR facility tank: PHMSA, EPA or USCG?
• Drag Reducing Agent Tanks and Oil-Filled Equipment at PHMSA Sites, Part of SPCC too?

Compliance Activities:

• What is a PHMSA OSRP 5-Year Review?
• Fact vs. Myth – PHMSA OSRP Training Requirements – An OPA90 Discussion
• What Triggers an FRP Resubmittal (PHMSA)?
• A Refresher in what Really is a QI under OPA90?
• What really is a QI under OPA90: EPA; USCG; PHMSA?
• What OSRO Should I Use Under OPA90?
• SPCC Plans, FRPs, OSRPs, EAPs, and SWP3s – Are annual plan reviews required for all?
• What Is a GIUE and What Do I Do? – OPA90 Discussion

OSRP General Compliance:

• New PHMSA Leadership, how does your 194-OSRP fair in today’s regulatory space?
• “I just bought an oil terminal, now what?” ICP Timelines - EPA, USCG, PHMSA Requirements
• I have a submitted FRP, it is vetted and approved, right? EPA-FRP, USCG-FRP, PHMSA-OSRP
• Pipelines are going in the ground – OSRP? What are we talking about?
• Non-USCG Classified OSRO vs. Classified-USCG OSRO (OPA90 Discussion)

For a complete listing of archived blogs and compliance insights, click here. Past blogs cover training requirements, clarification on additional confusing elements within the above rules, and much more.

We are here to help solve your compliance questions and challenges. Need some compliance assistance, or just have a question? Please email John K. Carroll III ([email protected]) Associate Managing Director - Compliance Services or call at +1 281-320-9796.

Witt O’Brien’s:

• Missed our April 18th, 2019 Workshop? No problem. See how it went here.
• To learn more about Witt O'Brien's and all that we do, please visit us on our website.
• To follow Witt O’Brien’s and stay informed on important updates, follow us on LinkedIn.