Want to Delay? You'll Pay
Many oil product users, shippers,
transloaders, and chemical
companies have been influenced
— as a result of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency’s (EPA) indecisiveness
and bureaucratic vagueness in
their regulations — into thinking that
the agency will not focus on their compliance
with Spill Prevention, Containment,
and Countermeasures (SPCC)
requirements for many years to come.
Part of this lax attitude relates to the fact
that the latest rewrite of the SPCC regulations
(40 Code of Federal Regulations
112) has been pulled while EPA regulators
enhance that version. Now that the
new implementation date of the revised
SPCC regulation is on the horizon for
July 1, 2009, many corporate managers,
are thinking, “Why prepare SPCC plans
when EPA is sadly understaffed, overworked,
and probably doesn’t even know
we exist. We could sure use the capital
funds better to improve production or
develop that next product.”
This prevalent attitude of many petrochemical
shipping and receiving companies’
top managements is similar to that
of a surprised deer frozen in the headlights
of an oncoming car. The deer recognizes
that something dangerous is
coming, but their “what to do process”
has become the analysis paralysis that
soon makes the deer become road kill.
Since EPA’s enforcement headlights may
take months to eventually reach the
contact point, many companies prefer
to analyze, “How soon do we have to
comply?” or “How long can we put
them off before we actually have to do
something?”
Many corporations appoint committees
to develop the strategy for compliance
or delay in meeting the SPCC
requirements. Unfortunately, these
groups get caught up in the dangerous
mindset of waiting just a little longer so
some new equipment can be reviewed,
or some idea seen in a trade magazine
can be fathomed by local managers.
These end-to-end delays soon add up
to months and months of indecisive
discussion and inaction.
Considerations in Implementing
An SPCC Plan
There are many internal corporate
political angles that have to be bridged,
but the following are some of the SPCC
value items that should be examined:
1. Don’t just look at the initial cost of
the spill containment equipment.
What will be the recurring costs over
the life of the operation? Purchasing
cheap, open railroad track spill containment
pans may save a bundle
initially but how much is the additional
oil-water filter equipment
going to cost? Additionally, there is
the annual labor to pump out the
oily, tainted rainwater after each
storm and then its disposal. How much snow shoveling, sand and
debris removal will be needed? Experience
shows that often the overhead
costs more than the purchase.
2.Will this procedure or equipment
become obsolete in a matter of
months after we purchase it? Can it
be used in a different way at another
plant or relocated on the facility site?
A large, open concrete slab for containment
of tanker truck loading or
unloading is expensive. This loading
rack slab will likely last 50 years.
However, to avoid collection of rainwater
24/7 year-round, you’ll need
to consider building a canopy over it,
which costs approximately $50,000.
Next, the local fire marshal advises
you that you cannot do that unless
you add a deluge fire suppression
system to the canopied loading area.
If your master plan changes, or
other new products alter the plant’s
mission, what do you do with this
expensive containment that now
may be on the wrong side of the
facility?
3.Will this same equipment be more
expensive in the immediate future or
will it be cheaper? Companies that
chose not to purchase steel track
pans back in 2003 thought they
were saving money. They figured
that the thousands of dollars that
they would have to spend on these
items would have been better spent
enhancing production or just holding
the funds so that they could
draw interest. In 2004, due to international
plate steel prices soaring,
the cost of these containments nearly
doubled. Putting off the inevitable
for a year cost them dearly. The
prices for milled steel have leveled off some, but with the steel demands
from China and India, the price of
good-quality steel containment is
not going to go down. As the price of
oil keeps rising, fiberglass and poly
pan prices are going higher too.
4.How long will it take to get our
employees trained in spill control?
Review your key employee list and
then figure out how long you can
spare a certain person to attend
training and get certified as an
instructor. By delaying the expenditure
on training, what have you
saved? Will a last-minute rush to get
persons trained cost a whole lot
more than just working it into the
schedule now?
5. What would be the cost to your company
if a major spill occurred at your
facility and contaminated the local
area and the local press reported your
negligence about not having proper
spill containment? Would the bad
public image perhaps influence your
customers not to do business with
you? What would be the cost to
employee morale if they went home
and their neighbors and associates
chided them for being part of a careless
company? Would this negative
press coverage just draw even more
“extreme greenies” into the fray
when you attempted to implement
future building plans or needed community
support for your operations?
What would be the associated costs of
delaying compliance with the revised
SPCC requirements until they are
enacted in 2009?
While your “best way” analysis is
being conducted, what is happening in
the meantime at the facility? Are small
releases on your concrete slabs being
washed off with hundreds of gallons
of water into a holding tank? Are
empty tote tanks or drums being left
out on an uncovered storage slab or
loading dock? What happens to the
rainwater that lands on these used
containers? Do minor releases of soluble,
bulk powders get cleaned up
immediately or do your work floor
shifts each wait for the other shift to
sweep it up?
Yes, there is a cost to doing nothing.
What risk are you willing to take? How
long will your management stand in
the middle of the road hoping that
maybe the SPCC regulation will be
postponed yet again? The tainted rainwater
runoff from your plant will still
be migrating your chemicals off-site
and down the local drainage ditch. Do
you wait until EPA just happens to
analyze a water sample down gradient
from your plant and correlates the
chemicals to those you reported to EPA
under SARA Title III requirements?
By then you’re road kill.
Update on SPCC
Rule’s Status
On May 10, 2007, EPA Administrator
Steve Johnson signed
a rule extending the compliance dates
for owners and operators of facilities
preparing or amending and implementing
SPCC plans. This final rule
extends the dates by which a facility
must prepare or amend and implement
its SPCC Plan until July 1,
2009. EPA expects to propose further
revisions to the SPCC rule in 2007.
Earlier in December 2006, Johnson
signed a final rule to amend the SPCC
rule at 40 CFR Part 112. EPA amended
the SPCC rule to address a number
of issues raised by its 2002 final
rule, including those pertaining to
facilities with smaller oil storage
capacities, qualified oil field operational
equipment, motive power containers,
and mobile refuelers.
EPA also removed sections of the
rule that are not appropriate for facilities
with animal fats and vegetable
oils, and extended the compliance
dates for farms.
EPA has prepared references to help
the regulated community understand
and comply with the rule. EPA will
also revise the SPCC Guidance for
regional inspectors, as appropriate,
to reflect the amendments to the rule
and will post any changes on the
Web site. For more information about
the rule, go to www.epa.gov/oilspill. |
This article originally appeared in the 09/01/2007 issue of Environmental Protection.
About the Author
Louis F. Centofanti, PhD, chairman, president and chief executive officer of Perma-Fix Environmental Services Inc., is a former Regional Administrator for the U.S. Department of Energy.