Search Frequent Questions
Filter By:
- Air Emissions Inventories Total results: 34
- Asbestos Total results: 141
- Butte Area/Silver Bow Creek Total results: 17
- Coronavirus (COVID-19) Total results: 33
- East Palestine, Ohio Train Derailment Total results: 148
- Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Total results: 301
- Fuel Program Total results: 693
- Great Lakes Funding Total results: 92
-
Lead
Total results: 401
- Applying for Certification or Accreditation Total results: 22
- EPA/HUD Real Estate Notification & Disclosure Rule Total results: 27
- General Information About Lead Total results: 9
- Lead-Based Paint Program Fees Total results: 9
- Lead Abatement, Risk Assessment and Inspection Total results: 49
- Lead at Superfund Sites Total results: 3
- Lead in Drinking Water Total results: 25
- Lead in Products Total results: 1
-
Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting
Total results: 237
- Authorized State and Tribal Programs Total results: 3
- Enforcement and Inspections Total results: 5
- Firm Certification Total results: 26
- General Information about the Lead Renovation, Repair, and Painting (RRP) Rule Total results: 18
- Information for Do-It-Yourselfers Total results: 1
- Lead-Safe Certified Firm Logo Total results: 8
- Pre-Renovation Education Total results: 26
- Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Total results: 6
-
Renovations Covered by the RRP Rule
Total results: 84
- Opt-Out Provision Total results: 1
- Child-Occupied Facilities Total results: 5
- Definition of "Renovation" Total results: 17
- Emergency Renovations Total results: 5
- In General Total results: 9
- Minor Repair and Maintenance Activities Total results: 14
- Renovations for Compensation Total results: 7
- Target Housing Total results: 18
- Testing Painted Components Total results: 6
- Renovator Certification and Training Total results: 12
- Training Provider Accreditation Total results: 7
- Work Practice Standards Total results: 41
- Testing for Lead Total results: 19
- MOVES Total results: 57
- Norwood Landfill Site Total results: 30
-
Oil Regulations
Total results: 96
- 40 CFR Part 110 Discharge of Oil Regulation Total results: 9
-
40 CFR Part 112 Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Rule
Total results: 65
- 112.6 Qualified Facilities Total results: 4
- 112.1 Applicability Total results: 18
- 112.2 Definitions Total results: 12
- 112.3 Requirement to Prepare an SPCC Plan Total results: 3
- 112.7 General Requirements Total results: 17
- 112.8 Specific Onshore Requirements (Excluding Production) Total results: 3
- Miscellaneous SPCC Total results: 8
- 40 CFR Part 112.20 Facility Response Plans Total results: 19
- 40 CFR Part 300 Subpart J Total results: 1
- Miscellaneous Oil Total results: 2
- Permitting Under the Clean Air Act Total results: 18
- Radiation Total results: 1
-
Risk Management Program (RMP)
Total results: 285
- RMP*Comp Total results: 7
- Applicability/General Duty Clause Total results: 69
- Emergency Response Total results: 6
- Five-Year Accident History Total results: 16
- Offsite Consequence Analysis (OCA) Total results: 57
- Other Risk Management Programs Total results: 35
- Plan Preparation and Submission Total results: 49
- Prevention Program Total results: 30
- Program Levels Total results: 16
- Southeast Minnesota Groundwater Total results: 11
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 results
-
Redoing calculations if RMP*Comp is updated
Will RMP*Comp be updated? If so, would I have to redo calculations I might already have made with an earlier version? No, you do not have to redo your work if you have already completed your consequence analyses. RMP*Comp is based on the EPA's Offsite Consequence Analysis Guidance (OCA Guidance)…
- Last published:
-
Different distances to toxic endpoints with different versions of RMP*Comp
I've noticed that for certain chemicals, RMP*Comp gives substantially different distances to the toxic endpoint than previous versions. Why? In the current version of RMP*Comp, we have incorporated new chemical-specific distance tables for ammonia, chlorine, and sulfur dioxide. The generic tables are still used for other chemicals (you can see…
- Last published:
-
Distance to endpoint calculations used by RMP*Comp
Does RMP*Comp perform some math or modelling in order to arrive at an endpoint distance, or is it simply interpolating from the tables in the EPA's Offsite Consequence Analysis Guidance (OCA Guidance)? RMP*Comp follows the procedures set out in the OCA Guidance . This means that for some scenarios, the…
- Last published:
-
Visit and examination requirements for SPCC self-certification
Pursuant to 40 CFR §112.6, the owner or operator of a facility that meets the criteria in §112.3(g) for either a Tier I or Tier II qualified facility may self-certify the facility's SPCC Plan. As part of the self-certification, the owner or operator must certify that he or she has…
- Last published:
-
Availability of electronic SPCC Plan template
Part 112, Appendix G to prepare an SPCC Plan. Is the Tier I qualified facility SPCC Plan template available in an electronic version? EPA has made available electronic versions of the Tier I qualified facility Plan template to help the owner or operator of a Tier I qualified facility develop…
- Last published:
-
RMP*Comp and emergency response
Can I use RMP*Comp for emergency response? No. It's a planning tool. Many other tools are available for response, including ALOHA . You can learn more by reading CAMEO tools for RMP .
- Last published:
-
Minimum and Maximum Distance to Endpoint
The Chemical Accident Prevention Provisions require the completion of a worst-case release scenario analysis (40 CFR §68.25). This analysis includes estimating the greatest distance to endpoint as defined by the parameters in §68.22. Is there a required minimum or maximum distance for the distance to endpoint in the worst case…
- Last published:
-
Local meteorological data for alternative release scenarios
For alternate release scenarios, RMP*Comp uses set values for meteorological conditions like humidity, wind speed, temperature, stability class, and so on. Is there a way to change those values? I want to use meteorology data from my own location. RMP*Comp indeed uses fixed values for certain atmospheric parameters, and does…
- Last published:
-
Different results using ALOHA and RMP*Comp
I tried running the same scenarios in ALOHA and in RMP*Comp. I got different answers. Why? The results you obtain using RMP*Comp may not closely match the results you obtain running the same release scenario in a more sophisticated air dispersion model such as ALOHA or DEGADIS. That's because of…
- Last published:
-
Tier I qualified facility template use under Part 112
In the 2008 Amendments to the SPCC Rule, EPA provided a template for the owner or operator of a Tier I qualified facility to create an SPCC Plan. Does EPA require a Tier I qualified facility to use the template in 40 CFR Part 112, Appendix G? Does EPA allow…
- Last published:
-
Difference between an SPCC Tier I and Tier II qualified facility
In the SPCC regulations in 40 CFR Part 112, what is the difference between a Tier I and Tier II qualified facility? How did EPA establish the multi-tiered approach for qualified facilities? A Tier II qualified facility is one that has an aggregate aboveground oil storage capacity of 10,000 U.S…
- Last published:
-
What was the “opt-out” provision and when was it revoked?
Answer: On April 22, 2010, EPA issued a final rule revoking the opt-out provision of the 2008 RRP Rule. The rule was published in the Federal Register on May 6, 2010, and took effect on July 6, 2010. As originally published in 2008, the RRP Rule allowed homeowners to "opt…
- Last published: