BILL ANALYSIS �
Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations
Ted W. Lieu, Chair
Date of Hearing: April 24, 2013 2013-2014 Regular
Session
Consultant: Deanna D. Ping Fiscal:Yes
Urgency: No
Bill No: SB 438
Author: Hancock
As Amended: April 4, 2013
SUBJECT
Refineries: turnarounds
KEY ISSUE
Should the legislature require oil refineries to annually report
their schedule for "turnarounds" to the Division of Occupational
Safety and Health (OSHA) and provide documentation on refinery
safety and infrastructure?
ANALYSIS
Existing law, under the California Refinery and Chemical Plant
Worker Safety Act of 1990 :
1) Defines "process safety management" as the application
of management programs, which are not limited to
engineering guidelines, when dealing with the risks
associated with handling or working near hazardous
chemicals and requires :
a. The Occupational Safety and Health Standards
Board to adopt process safety management standards for
refineries, chemical plants, and other manufacturing
facilities.
b. An employer to develop and maintain a
compilation of written safety information to enable
the employee and employees operating the process to
identify and understand the hazards posed by processes
involving acutely hazardous and flammable material.
c. An employer to perform a hazard analysis for
identifying, evaluation, and controlling hazards
involved in the process.
d. An employer to develop and implement written
operating procedures that provide clear instructions
for safely conducting activities involved in each
process consistent with the process safety
information.
e. Each employee whose primary duties includes
the operating or maintenance of a process shall be
trained in an overview of the process with an emphasis
on the specific safety and health hazards, procedures,
and safe practices applicable to the employee's job
tasks as well as refresher and supplemental training
documented by the employer's certification record.
(Labor Code �7850 - 7870)
This Bill would require refinery employers to annually report
their schedule for "turnarounds" to OSHA by September 15, as
well as require refinery employers to provide OSHA with
documentation on refinery safety and infrastructure.
Specifically this bill would:
1) Define "turnaround" as any instance of an industrial
plant or unit being partially or totally taken offstream or
offline for the purposes of maintenance, overhaul, repair,
inspection, testing, or replacement of materials or
equipment.
2) Requires a refinery employer to annually submit to the
division a full schedule of planned turnarounds on
September 15 of each year.
3) Requires a refinery employer to submit various
documentation at the request of the division at least 60
days prior to the planned turnaround, such as corrosion
reports, risk-based inspection reports, and unfulfilled
work orders since the last turnaround.
4) Requires the refinery employer to submit notification of
any changes and supporting documents at least 30 days prior
to a planned turnaround.
Hearing Date: April 24, 2013 SB 438
Consultant: Deanna D. Ping Page 2
Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations
COMMENTS
1. Overview of Refinery Turnarounds
According to the American Petroleum Institute (API), a
refinery turnaround is a planned, periodic shut down (total or
partial) of a refinery process unit or plant to perform
maintenance, overhaul and repair operations and to inspect,
test and replace process materials and equipment. Turnarounds
are scheduled at least 1-2 years in advance and allow for
necessary maintenance and upkeep of operating units to ensure
safe and efficient operations. Depending on the process unit
and the amount of maintenance needed, the length of the
turnaround can vary from 1 week to 4 weeks or more. API also
stated that the less often units are started up and taken
down, the safer it is since refinery incidents are more likely
to occur during turnarounds.
2. Details of the Chevron Richmond Refinery Fire
According to an Interim Investigation Report from the U.S.
Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board on the Chevron
Richmond Refinery Fire:
On August 6, 2012, the Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Refinery in
Richmond, California experienced a catastrophic pipe
failure in the #4 Crude Unit. The pipe ruptured, releasing
flammable, hydrocarbon process fluid that partially
vaporized into a large vapor cloud that engulfed nineteen
Chevron employees. All of the employees escaped, narrowly
avoiding serious injury. The ignition and subsequent
continued burning of the hydrocarbon process fluid resulted
in a large plume of unknown and unquantified particulates
and vapor traveling across the Richmond, California, area.
In the weeks following the incident, approximately 15,000
people from the surrounding area sought medical treatment
due to the release.
In its findings, the Interim Report also stated that in the
ten years prior to the incident, a small number of Chevron
personnel made at least six recommendations to increase
inspection or upgrade the 4-sidecut piping - where the
Hearing Date: April 24, 2013 SB 438
Consultant: Deanna D. Ping Page 3
Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations
Richmond incident occurred from. The report details that
findings obtained from a 2002 crude unit turnaround at Chevron
revealed that the 52-inch 4-sidecut component involved in the
August 6th incident had lost one-third of its wall thickness
due to corrosion. Despite recommendations to upgrade the
piping, it was determined that the pipe has sufficient
thickness to last to the next turnaround schedule for Fall
2011. The report states that the piping was not replaced
during the Fall 2011 turnaround either.
The Division of Occupational Safety and Health issued a
citation and notification of penalty to Chevron for this
reason stating:
"The Employer failed to replace the 4 Sidecut line located
within the 4 Crude Unit, in accordance with recommendations
received from its Reliability Department as early as 2002."
3. Need for this bill?
According to the author's office, the fact that oil refineries
have no obligation under state law to report their
"turnaround" schedule or disclose important information such
as corrosion reports prevents the OSHA from preparing for a
possible incident during a scheduled refinery "turnaround."
The author's office contends that given the importance of
"turnarounds," both to the refinery itself as well as the
public safety risk they pose, allowing the Division of
Occupational Health and Safety to know this information may
allow it to conduct targeted inspections of refinery
facilities.
Additionally, the Interim Investigation Report from the U.S.
Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board on the Chevron
Richmond Refinery Fire also stated that "had Chevron followed
its own internal recommendations, or been required by local,
state, or federal regulation to implement inherently safer
systems during repairs, it would have years ago upgraded" the
piping on the unit and "could have prevented the accident."
4. Proponent Arguments :
Hearing Date: April 24, 2013 SB 438
Consultant: Deanna D. Ping Page 4
Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations
According to the author's office, under existing law there are
no requirements for an oil refinery to inform the state or
local government about scheduled "turnarounds." They contend
that because refinery incidents are more likely to occur
during turnaround than during normal operations, it is
important to require refineries to annually report their
schedules for "turnarounds" to OSHA and provide documentation
on refinery safety and infrastructure. The author's office
also argues that the Chevron incident in Richmond illustrates
the importance of SB 438 as it could help prevent another such
incident that threatens the environment as well as public
health and safety.
5. Opponent Arguments :
None on file.
6. Prior Legislation :
AB 3672 (Elder), Chapter 1632, Statutes of 1990 - established
the California Refinery and Chemical Plant Worker Safety Act
of 1990 including process safety management standards to
prevent or minimize the consequences of catastrophic releases
of toxic, flammable or explosive chemicals.
SUPPORT
None received.
OPPOSITION
None received.
Hearing Date: April 24, 2013 SB 438
Consultant: Deanna D. Ping Page 5
Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations