This is a long time coming. OSHA referenced the use of EPCRA’s Tier II’s in this section; something that has been in place since 1986! For those of you who have stressed over my lengthy and detailed PSM/RMP audit findings regarding emergency planning and response – you’re welcome. Closing out those findings means you are well on your way to being compliant with these proposed regulations. For those questioning the need for PIPs, this has been a requirement in the existing HAZWOPER standard but is only explained in detail in OSHA’s CPL – 73 (starts on page 17).
Here is a breakdown of the proposed Pre-Incident Planning (PIP) requirements for both Workplace Emergency Response Employers (WERE) and Emergency Services Organizations (ESO).
Workplace Emergency Response Employers (WERE) Pre-Incident Planning
Pre-incident plans (PIPs) help team members effectively manage incidents and maximize the protection of team members as well as facility employees and the facility PIPs provide critical information to team members that can guide their response to an emergency incident. PIPs typically include maps of the facility and diagrams and drawings, along with the designation of predetermined locations for emergency vehicle positioning during an incident. An accurate, up-to-date PIP is a valuable tool for assisting team members with safe and effective mitigation of incidents.
Under paragraph (m)(1) of the proposed rule, the WERE would be required to develop PIPs for locations within the facility where team members may be called to provide service.
The PIPS are based on the facility vulnerability assessment and the type(s) and level(s) of service(s) established in paragraph (c) of this section. The facility and vulnerability assessment would identify the locations and processes in the facility where WERT services are likely to be needed.
Proposed paragraph (m)(2) would require the WERE to include in the PIP(s) the locations of unusual hazards that team members may encounter, such as
- storage and use of flammable liquids and gases, explosives, toxic and biological agents, radioactive sources, water-reactive substances,
- permit-required confined spaces, and
- hazardous processes.
Unusual hazards are those hazards that are particularly dangerous to the health and safety of team members when carrying out their activities on the WERT. Including them in the PIP provides team members with notice of their presence and thus allows team members to prepare for them and to take appropriate action during emergency situations.
Proposed paragraph (m)(3) would require that the WERE include in the PIPs the locations of fire pumps, fire hose valves, control valves, control panels, and other equipment for fire suppression systems, fire detection and alarm systems, and smoke control and evacuations systems.
During an emergency, team members need quick access to built-in protective systems, equipment, and components. Including their locations in the PIPs makes it easier for team members to find these items when needed. PIPs may also be used in training situations for familiarizing team members with the facility layout and locations of the important items specified in the proposed provision.
Under paragraph (m)(4) of the proposed rule, the WERE would ensure that the most recent versions of PIPs are provided to the WERT and are accessible and available to team members operating at emergency incidents.
To be useful, PIPs must be accessible to responding team members, especially the incident commander. PIPs should also be made available as a training tool.
Proposed paragraph (m)(5) would require the WERE, to the extent feasible, to include in PIPs the actions to be taken by team members if the scope of the incident is beyond the capability of the WERT.
For example, a PIP that includes the location of an unusual hazard that the WERT is not trained for might indicate that
- team members must remain a safe distance from the area,
- ensure facility workers are being evacuated, and
- summon mutual aid to mitigate the incident
Including these procedures in the PIP ensures that team members know the steps to take when faced with unusual hazards that are beyond their capability. It also helps to ensure team members do not expose themselves to hazards they are unequipped to handle by articulating the expectation in the event of such a hazard.
Paragraph (m)(6) would require that WEREs review PIPs annually and when conditions or hazards change at the facility.
They shall be updated as needed. To be useful, PIPs must be up to date. OSHA believes that requiring the WERE to review PIPs when condition or hazards change and at least annually is sufficient to ensure the WERE identifies deficiencies in the PIP and keeps it up to date. The requirement ensures the WERE addresses known changes that might affect the WERT in a timely manner while the annual review allows the WERE to identify small changes that may have been overlooked since the past review. For example, the WERE would know when significant changes are made to the facility, such as building renovations and additions. This knowledge would prompt an update of the PIP as soon as reasonably possible. A smaller change, such as the relocation of bottled gas storage from one room to another, is something that might be identified during an annual review of the PIPs and appropriate updates would then be made.
Emergency Services Organization (ESO) Pre-Incident Planning
Pre-incident plans (PIPs) help responders effectively manage incidents and maximize the protection of responders by planning in advance. Also, PIPs provide critical information to responders that can guide their response to an emergency incident. PIPs typically include maps of the subject facility, and diagrams and drawings, along with designation of predetermined locations for emergency vehicle positioning during an incident. The provisions in proposed paragraph (n) are based on the pre-incident planning paragraphs in NFPA 1660, Standard for Emergency, Continuity, and Crisis Management: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery, 2024 ed. While not required by the proposed rule, ESOs would benefit from using a standard form and format for PIPs for ease of use by incident commanders (IC) and other responders during an incident.
Under paragraphs (n)(1) and (2) of the proposed rule, the ESO would be required to determine the locations and facilities where responders may be called to provide services that need a PIP, based on the community or facility vulnerability assessment and the type(s) and level(s) of service(s) established in paragraph (d), and develop PIPs for facilities, locations, and infrastructure where emergency incidents may occur.
The proposed rule does NOT require a PIP for every incident imaginable. Rather, through the community or facility vulnerability assessment, the ESO must identify structures, facilities, and other locations where a PIP would help the ESO prepare for an incident, and then assist the IC with the development of the Incident Action Plan (IAP). ESOs should prioritize PIP development according to the:
- type and
- magnitude
of the potential incident.
Hazards to life and health are of the utmost importance and would have the highest priority in creating PIPs. Likewise, the larger or more complex a structure or facility is, the greater the risk of mitigating an emergency incident at these places, and therefore, the need for a PIP would also be greater.
Proposed paragraph (n)(3) would require the ESO to prepare a PIP for each facility within the ESO’s primary response area that is subject to reporting requirements under 40 CFR part 355 pursuant to the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) (also referred to as the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA).
These types of facilities are particularly hazardous because they involve hazardous chemicals, and PIPs are necessary to ensure ESOs are sufficiently prepared to respond to incidents at these facilities. Additionally, these facilities may not have a WERT organized to mitigate emergencies, or the size and scope of the emergency may be beyond the WERT’s capabilities.
Under proposed paragraph (n)(4), the ESO would need to ensure that, when preparing a PIP for a facility, the facility personnel the ESO consults are knowledgeable about the facility’s use, contents, processes, hazards, and occupants. It is important that all potential hazards are identified to responders preparing PIPs, so it is important that the facility personnel assisting with the PIP development have a thorough knowledge of the facility. It may be necessary to consult with more than one facility representative to ensure that all the necessary information needed for the PIP is accurately conveyed.
While preparing the PIP, the responder may be provided access to information, materials, or processes that are considered proprietary business information. A note to proposed paragraph (n)(4) recommends that the ESO develop a policy for protecting this information.
Paragraph (n)(5) of the proposed rule would require that the ESO ensure that the responders responsible for PIP preparation know how to identify the information to be collected and included in the PIP.
The PIP is only as good as the information contained in it. For instance, all necessary facility information must be recorded, items of concern must be noted, and accurate sketches or diagrams must be prepared.
Proposed paragraph (n)(6) would require the ESO to ensure that PIPs have a level of detail commensurate with the facility’s complexity and hazards.
PIPs for facilities which are not complex can be developed with minimal amounts of data. However, additional data are required for more complex facilities with more hazards. For example, the PIP for a multi-story high school would be expected to be more complex than the PIP for a fast-food restaurant. Regardless of facility complexity, the PIP details should be presented as concisely as possible to make them easily understandable to the appropriate responders.
Paragraph (n)(7) of the proposed rule would require the ESO to ensure that PIPs include actions to be taken by responders if the scope of an incident is beyond the capacity of the ESO.
The PIP would be developed with an understanding of the ESO’s response capability based on the type(s) and level(s) of service established in paragraph (d), and this provision would require planning for what to do if the ESO encounters an incident that exceeds that response capability. For example, the PIP might include what mutual aid ESO or skilled support resources would be needed. The PIP would also describe action(s) the ESO would take, such as establishing defensive firefighting positions, establishing no-entry zones, ensuring surrounding areas are evacuated, etc. In some situations, the appropriate action might be simply to pull back all responders to a safe distance away from the hazard.
Under proposed paragraph (n)(8), the ESO must ensure that the most recent PIPs are disseminated as needed and are accessible and available to responders operating at emergency incidents.
OSHA is aware that some ESOs use electronic versions of PIPs in a database, while others use hardcopies kept in binders in response vehicles. Any method that ensures the PIPs are accessible and available would comply with the provision. PIPs can only be useful if they are available at the incident site and accessible to responders operating at emergency incidents. Also, they should be easy for responders to understand.
PIPs are particularly important for the IC’s use during an incident.
Paragraph (n)(9) of the proposed rule would require the ESO to ensure that PIPs be reviewed annually and updated as needed. For example, during the course of their daily routines, responders might observe facilities being renovated, additions being built, or a change of occupancy. Observations such as these might prompt a PIP update. Other information on PIPs might not be easily observed, such as names and phone numbers for responsible parties, access codes for doors and gates, etc. This type of information would be gathered during an annual review.