Source: NATIONAL ASSOC. OF STATE DEPTS. OF AGRICULTURE, 9/12/16
Below is a letter from the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture requesting OSHA provide an extension of the pending PSM enforcement deadline set for October 1, 2016
September 12, 2016
Dr. David Michaels
Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Labor 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20210
RE: Extension Request regarding PSM Retail Exemption Enforcement
Dear Dr. Michaels,
The National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) requests an extension of the enforcement date of the Process Safety Management Program’s PSM Level II application to agricultural retail facilities on October 1, 2016. Due to limited opportunity for formal public input, incomplete economic analysis, lacking formal guidance and insufficient resources, NASDA requests an extension through July 2018.
NASDA represents the Commissioners, Secretaries, and Directors of the state departments of agriculture in all fifty states and four U.S. territories. State departments of agriculture are responsible for a wide range of programs including food safety, combating the spread of disease and fertilizer regulation. In forty-five states, the state department of agriculture is responsible for regulating the labeling, sale, and use of fertilizer products.
NASDA is concerned the changes resulting from the July 22, 2015 OSHA memo titled “Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals and Application of the Retail Exemption” will dramatically impact agricultural producers. NASDA has met with OSHA to explain the impact of this rule and NASDA members across the country have met with producers and retailers to discuss the impact. To our knowledge, OSHA officials attended only one of these sessions. Unfortunately, the agency has conducted little outreach to assist with implementation. This policy change was issued without sufficient public notice, without sufficient analysis and sidestepped the formal rulemaking process.
During a time of low commodity prices and increased input costs, this policy could increase the price of anhydrous ammonia and decrease its availability, without improving safety. Industry estimates implementation costs will range from $20,000 to $100,000. Further, OSHA links the need to make this change to the West, Texas explosion. However, anhydrous ammonia did not cause that explosion.
Despite OSHA’s claims to the contrary, this proposal will not result in actual safety improvements.
Finally, there are insufficient resources to implement this rule. OSHA has a limited number of inspectors across the country and states do not have the financial resources to expand their inspection programs. Moreover, due to the stringent standards and technical nature of PSM Level II, companies need specialists on staff to come into compliance, specialists who are widely unavailable. Additionally, OSHA has failed to answer specific implementation questions from industry stakeholders and has not developed any guidance documents, increasing uncertainty surrounding implementation.
Safety is a top concern for retailers and producers. As OSHA pursues a rulemaking, we encourage the agency to reach out to retailers, producers and state agencies to discuss implementation and ensure sufficient resources are available for implementation. Please contact Britt Aasmundstad (britt@nasda.org) if you have any questions or would like any additional information at this time.
Sincerely,
Nathan Bowen
Director, Public Policy
NASDA
|
