New Mexico Operator Training Conceptual Proposal

1
New Mexico Operator TrainingConceptual Proposal
2
Federal Energy Policy Act Requirements

• Act signed by President Bush August 8, 2005
• Section 9010(a) of the Act requires operator
  training, and that EPAs Guidelines take into
  account
• State training programs in existence
• Training programs being used by tank owners and
  operators
• The high turnover rate of tank operators and
  other personnel
• The frequency of improvement in UST equipment
  technology
• The nature of businesses in which tank operators
  are engaged
• Substantial differences in the scope and length
  of training needed for different classes of
  operators and
• Other factors EPA determines are necessary to
  carry out the Act.

3
Federal Energy Policy Act Requirements (2)

• Final Grant Guidelines to States for Implementing
  the Operator Training Provision of the Energy
  Policy Act of 2005 were issued August 2007
• EPA webpage link provides both the text of the
  law and the Grant Guidelines at
• www.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws

4
Requirements of Grants Guidelines

• States must implement the Guidelines for Operator
  Training by
• Requiring operator training for all operators in
  each class
• Developing state-specific operator training
  requirements consistent with the Guidelines by
  August 8, 2009. These requirements must
• Be developed in cooperation with tank owners and
  operators
• Take into consideration training programs already
  in place
• Be appropriately communicated to tank owners and
  operators
• Establishing a procedure to identify individuals
  that must be trained and
• Ensuring all operators are trained in accordance
  with the Guidelines.

5
Requirements of Grants Guidelines (2)

• Guidelines identify 3 classes of operators to be
  trained
• Class A Operator
• Has primary responsibility of operating and
  maintaining the tank system, including management
  of resources and personnel
• Focuses on broader aspects of statutory and
  regulatory requirements, and operating standards
• Typically ensures that the appropriate person
• Properly operates and maintains the tank system
• Maintains appropriate records required
• Properly responds to emergencies caused by
  releases
• Makes financial responsibility documents
  available as requested.

6
Class A Operator

• At a minimum, Class A operators must be trained
  in the following
• General knowledge of tank system requirements to
  make informed decisions regarding compliance with
  all federal and state regulatory requirements,
  including
• Spill prevention
• Overfill prevention
• Release detection
• Corrosion protection
• Emergency response
• Product compatibility
• Financial responsibility documentation
  requirements
• Notification requirements
• Release and suspected release reporting
• Temporary and permanent closure requirements
• Operator training requirements.

7
Class B Operator

• Implements applicable tank system regulatory
  requirements and standards in the field.
• Has responsibility for day-to-day operation,
  maintenance and recordkeeping, such as
• Release detection method, recordkeeping, and
  reporting requirements
• Release prevention equipment, recordkeeping, and
  reporting requirements
• Appropriate individuals are trained to properly
  respond to emergencies caused by releases or
  spills.
• Compared to Class A, Class B operator has more
  in-depth understanding of OM aspects, but may
  have a more narrow breadth of applicable
  regulatory requirements.

8
Class B Operator (2)

• At a minimum, training for Class B operators
  should include
• Components of tank systems
• Materials of tank system components
• Methods of release detection and release
  prevention applied to tank system components
• Operation and maintenance requirements that
  include
• Spill prevention
• Overfill prevention
• Release detection
• Corrosion protection
• Emergency response
• Product compatibility
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements and
• Class C operator training requirements.

9
Class C Operator

• Class C operator is an employee
• Generally is the first line of response to events
  indicating emergency conditions
• Responsible for responding to alarms or other
  indications of emergencies caused by spills or
  releases
• Notifies Class B or Class A operator and
  appropriate emergency responders when necessary
• Typically
• Controls or monitors the dispensing or sale of
  regulated substances or
• Is responsible for initial response to alarms or
  releases.
• At a minimum, Class C operator must be trained to
  take action in response to emergencies or alarms

10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
Training Deadlines

• Guidelines require that Class A, B and C
  operators are trained by August 8, 2012
• States may establish a schedule for phasing in
  training before this deadline
• After August 8, 2012 initial training
• Class A and B operators must be trained within 30
  days (or another state-specific reasonable time
  period) of assuming operation and maintenance
  responsibilities
• Class C operators must be trained prior to
  assuming responsibility for responding to
  emergencies
• If a tank system is found out of compliance,
  appropriate operators must be retrained
• At a minimum, retraining is required for
  violation of EPAs Significant Operational
  Compliance requirements for release prevention
  and release detection or for state-specified
  requirements
• Retraining must occur within a reasonable period
  of time
• States requiring at least annual operator
  training would meet the retraining requirements

13
Acceptable Approaches to Operator Training

• Operator training program conducted or developed
  by the state or by a third-party with prior state
  approval. State should develop criteria for
  approving third-party training providers and
  programs.
• Appropriately administered and evaluated
  verification of operator knowledge (an exam),
  accomplished either through the state or a third
  party. Exam must measure operator knowledge
  required in EPA Guidelines.
• Training for a Class C may be conducted by a
  Class A or B.
• States may develop reciprocity standards for
  training approved by other states.
• A state may use any combination of the above
  approaches.

14
Verification of Training

• States must implement a system to ensure all
  operators are trained in accordance with the
  requirements of the Guidelines
• Two methods suggested
• Require owners and operators to maintain training
  records at the facility (or readily available)
  for verification during inspection
• Require owners and operators to report Class A, B
  and C operator compliance

15
New Mexicos Approach

• Include ASTs in all requirements for operator
  training, although federal Energy Policy Act only
  covers USTs
• Above ground tanks present the same or greater
  potential risk to human health and for
  environmental emergencies
• Level the playing field for tank owners and
  operators by having equal requirements for ASTs
  and USTs wherever possible
• AST systems tend to be less mechanized and
  automatic, and many require more hands-on
  attention from operators

16
Why Is Operator Training So Important?

• Public health emergencies people exposed to
  hazardous and carcinogenic vapors, substances and
  potentially to fires
• Environmental emergencies releases and spills
  that can contaminate drinking water supplies,
  explosive hazards
• Provide response to alarms on release prevention
  and detection systems, and corrosion protection
  equipment
• Improve compliance so that errors are corrected

17
(No Transcript)
18
NM Three Classes of Operators

• Adopt the 3 classes in the Guidelines, or
  consider combining Class A and B?
• NM would allow one person to have multiple
  classifications (if he receives training for
  multiple classifications).
• Is 30 days a reasonable time period for Class A
  and B to be trained? Would another period of
  time be more reasonable?
• Ideas for phasing in the training deadline of
  August 8, 2012? By owner name or id number in
  each quarter of 2012?
• Should there be special requirements for
  un-manned facilities? Should an operator be
  required within a specified distance or response
  time? Should automatic alarm or notification be
  required for release detection equipment?

19
NM Class A and B Options

• Private training conducted by third party
  contractor
• Trainers must be approved by PSTB, based on
  standards and application process in rules
• Courses must be offered around the state, at
  least quarterly
• Focus on each individual system, its components
  and requirements, so operators know exactly what
  to do with their system
• Cost of 300-350 for 8-hour course for each
  operator, paid by class attendee

20
NM Class A and B Options (2)

• Possible online training options
• Difficult to obtain verification of proficiency,
  such as a test
• Lower cost likely than classroom training, but
  less individually tailored to each system and
  little opportunity for questions
• No national test option, unless test meets all
  requirements and standards for training
• Similar concerns to those for online training
• Rarely tailored to state-specific regulations

21
Class A and B Discussion Items

• Retraining is required by Guidelines for SOC
  violations
• Should any other violations trigger retraining?
• Should retraining include the entire 8-hour
  class?
• What targeted retraining options are
  reasonable? Online or video options for
  particular topics or violations? How to
  determine if these are effective
• How often should A and B operators re-certify?
  NM proposes every 5 years, to cover changes in
  regulations and technology

22
Class A and B Discussion Items (2)

• No reciprocity for New Mexico Class A or B
  operators
• Other state training programs wont include NM
  regulations
• Some state programs only include USTs
• Owners may hire professional operators if they
  prefer not to be trained themselves
• Should there be limits on the number of
  facilities a Class A or B operator may service?
  Limit Class B to 25 facilities, so can visit at
  least once a month?
• How to ensure professional operators are trained
  for the particular equipment and regulatory
  requirements for each facility?
• Transferability of training to another facility?
• Should Class A and B re-take training if they
  switch to another facility?
• Should training be generic enough to cover all
  types of facilities?

23
(No Transcript)
24
Class A and B Discussion Items (3)

• Possible deferral or exemptions
• Federal Guidelines do not provide any deferral or
  hardship exemption
• Marginal owners who cannot afford training may
  not be able to afford compliance either
• Oregon hardship exemption was never used and is
  now being deleted from regulations
• Possible one-time deferral of re-training for 1
  facility operators who have no violations? (Or,
  deferral only if no SOC violations?)

25
Class C Options

• Will be trained by Class A or B on-site, usually
  with brief hand-out materials (that should be
  provided in A/B training)
• Federal Guidelines require Class C operator to be
  trained before assuming responsibility for
  responding to emergencies. Train the Class C
  when learning how to run cash register and
  dispense fuel.
• No retraining or re-certification required for
  Class C. Turnover is very high in these
  positions, which will take care of time-limited
  training.
• Must be trained every time they change to a
  different facility, to ensure they learn the
  appropriate response protocols and contact
  information for each tank system.

26
(No Transcript)
27
(No Transcript)
28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
Tracking Certified Operators

• PSTB does not have budget or staff to track in
  database
• Owners will provide operator names and proof of
  training at inspections (like Financial
  Responsibility and tank testing records)
• Trainers must provide certificate of successful
  completion and track names of operators trained
  (in case of Bureau verification)
• Would owners prefer to send in certified operator
  information with annual fees? Or as operators
  change?

31
What Are Other States Doing?

• Oklahoma
• Prepared a Rule Impact Statement on the
  purpose, applicability and reasons for rules on
  operator training
• Did not receive any public comments
• Planning to use third party trainers or testers,
  so no cost to agency
• Wyoming
• Planning to use an ICC test for training
• No regulations yet
• Montana
• Uses Montana Tankhelper online training with test
• Works with details of each facility but little
  verification of knowledge and few regulatory
  references

32
What Are Other States Doing? (2)

• Colorado
• In the process of developing rules
• Heading toward ICC-style certification with
  Colorado-specific additions
• Are considering allowing in-house company
  training, if approved by state agency
• Texas
• Had planned training program to be implemented by
  Texas Petroleum Marketers, Petroleum Equipment
  Institute and Petroleum Training Solutions,
  requiring classroom training for 150-300 per
  operator
• In March or April 2008, PEI pulled out
• Texas is starting over, evaluating options for
  operator training
• Regulates both ASTs and USTs

33
What Are Other States Doing? (3)

• California
• Has required operator training since 2005
• Requires ICC test (California UST System Operator
  exam) with re-certification (and re-testing)
  every 2 years
• Allows third party companies to contract with
  owners to be certified operators for a variety of
  facilities
• Arizona
• Just passed statute to gain authority to develop
  operator training will be effective 9/08 only
  covers USTs
• No draft rules or training program yet
• Will make owners responsible for developing and
  implementing a training program
• Kansas
• Currently requires training from Petroleum
  Training Solutions (private third-party trainer)
  exploring other training options
• 3 levels of operator required, like Guidelines,
  that must be trained within 90 days of hire only
  applies to USTs

34
What Are Other States Doing? (4)

• Oregon
• Required operator training since 6/03 for USTs
  only note no self-service facilities in Oregon
  are allowed
• One-time only requirement training provided
  through Petroleum Marketers and approved vendors
  minimal standards to approve vendors (now being
  upgraded)
• Only active vendor is Petroleum Training
  Solutions, providing 8-hour course for 350
  addressing specific equipment and regulatory
  requirements for each facility

35
What Are Other States Doing? (5)

• Oregon (continued)
• In process of revising program to comply with
  Guidelines, especially classes of operators
• Deleting hardship exemption, as no one has ever
  applied to use it
• Provides statistics that operator training has
  improved compliance rate
• In 2001, 66 of facilities did not meet
  operational requirements for leak detection.
• By late 2007, SOC compliance rate had risen to
  88

36
Summary of NM Approach

• Develop a meaningful program that will improve
  compliance, prevent harm
• Include both ASTs and USTs in operator training
  to create a level playing field
• Allow owners some flexibility in training and
  re-training options
• Comply with federal Guidelines
• Place minimal cost, training and tracking burdens
  on PSTB

37

• Suggestions and Comments
• from Stakeholders

38
(No Transcript)