|OSHA requirements are set by statute, standards and regulations. Our interpretation letters explain these requirements and how they apply to particular circumstances, but they cannot create additional employer obligations. This letter constitutes OSHA's interpretation of the requirements discussed. Note that our enforcement guidance may be affected by changes to OSHA rules. Also, from time to time we update our guidance in response to new information. To keep apprised of such developments, you can consult OSHA's website at http://www.osha.gov.|
October 6, 1992
||JAMES J. CONCANNON, DIRECTOR|
OFFICE OF VARIANCE DETERMINATION
||ROGER A. CLARK, ACTING DIRECTOR|
[DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT PROGRAMS]
||Application by Clark Processing, Inc. for a variance concerning 29 CFR 1910.106(e)(3)(iv)|
We have completed our review of the subject application. We are in agreement with the Office of Safety Standards Programs that a variance is not necessary. OSHA's standard at 29 CFR 1910.106(e)(3)(iv) and EPA's standard at 40 CFR 264.56(e) have the same objective, that is, to remove flammable and combustible liquid releases from fire and other ignition sources by channelling and containing the releases. Emergency draining and containment requirements include stopping any processes that may generate and direct the releases to fire or to non-contaminated areas.
OSHA's 1910.106(e)(3)(iv) and EPA's 264.56(e) standards do not contradict, but complement each other. Since employee safety is OSHA's principal concern, the Agency recommends that Clark Processing, Inc. implement its proposal to comply with [29 CFR 1910.38, Employee emergency plans and 1910.39 Fire prevention plans,] not as a substitute for meeting the EPA requirement, but as an auxiliary response to it.
If the company follows the recommendations outlined above, then it will meet the intent of both our 1910.106(e)(3)(iv) and EPA's 264.56(e) standards.