On February 24, 2026, EPA published proposed updates to the Risk Management Program (RMP) Rule following notice that the rule was under reconsideration on March 12, 2025. This reconsideration was determined based on Biden era EPA updates to the rule increasing compliance requirements for many facilities across the United States. Those updates were made on May 11, 2024, and were referred to as the Safer Communities by Chemical Accident Prevention (SCCAP) rule.
With the proposed rule now published, it opens a public comment period which will be open until April 10, 2026. Additionally, a public hearing will be conducted on March 10, 2026. Following the comment period, EPA will review all comments and revise the rule if appropriate based on the comments received. EPA is targeting full completion of this rule update prior to the May 10, 2027 compliance dates that are currently in place for the previous additions.
Hazard Reviews and Process Hazard Analysis (PHA)
2024 Requirement Additions
Program 2 process’ Hazard Reviews and Program 3 process’ PHA’s must evaluate and propose recommendations to address the potential loss of containment or impact to safety systems due to natural hazards such as extreme temperatures, high winds, floods, earthquakes, and wildfires. Additionally, these analyses must expand the current evaluation of safeguards to include standby or emergency power systems and facilities must ensure that any monitoring equipment that is associated with preventing or detecting releases of regulated substances has standby or backup power so that it can be continuously monitored.
Program 2 processes must now evaluate Facility Siting impacts. This is defined as the placement of processes, equipment, and buildings within the facility, and hazards posed by proximate stationary sources, and accidental release consequences posed by proximity to the public and public receptors. This is a new requirement for Program 2 processes and adds additional clarification to the Facility Siting review requirements which were previously in place for Program 3 processes.
Program 3 processes must now evaluate the most recently promulgated RAGAGEP to identify gaps between the existing design, maintenance, and operation and the most current version of RAGAGEP. Any recommendations from these evaluations which are declined will require documented justification which may have to be included in the Risk Management Plans.
2026 Requirement Changes
The EPA is proposing removing the regulatory wording for natural hazards and power loss to be considered during hazard review and PHA’s. They have indicated, however, that this does not change the long-standing understanding that external hazards, including natural hazards and power loss, need to be evaluated in these studies. Additionally, the EPA is proposing to completely rescind that any monitoring equipment that is associated with preventing or detecting releases of regulated substances has standby or backup power.
The EPA is proposing rescinding the facility siting clarification wording of “including the placement of processes, equipment, and buildings within the facility, and hazards posed by proximate stationary sources, and accidental release consequences posed by proximity to the public and public receptors” to both Program 2 and Program 3 Hazard Review and PHA requirements. The addition of facility siting to the evaluation for Program 2 processes will remain in place.
The EPA is proposing fully rescinding the Program 3 PHA requirement to evaluate the most recently promulgated RAGAGEP and to identify gaps between the existing design, maintenance, and operation and the most current version of RAGAGEP.
Safer Technologies and Alternatives Analysis (STAA)
2024 Requirement Additions
Program 3 processes at facilities that EPA has determined are higher risk of community impacts will be required to perform Safer Technologies and Alternatives Analysis (STAA).
- Petroleum and coal products manufacturing (NAICS 324) and chemical manufacturing (NAICS 325) facilities will be required to consider and document options in the following order of preference:
- Inherently Safer Technology or Design (IST/ISD) – measures that minimize the use of regulated substances, substitute less hazardous substances, moderate the use of hazardous substances, or simplify covered processes to reduce likelihood and/or the impact of accidental releases.
- Passive measures – design features that reduce risk without requiring human, mechanical, or other energy input.
- Active measures – design features or engineering controls that rely on mechanical or other input to detect and respond to process deviations.
- Procedural measures – measures such as policies, operating procedures, training, administrative controls, and emergency response actions to prevent or minimize incidents.
The desired risk reduction can be achieved through a combination of the evaluated options.
The desired risk reduction can be achieved through a combination of the evaluated options.
A subset of these facilities will also be required to evaluate and document the practicability and feasibility of the inherently safe technology and design options. These facilities must implement at least one passive measure, IST/ISD, or a combination of active and procedural measures that provide equal or greater risk reduction than the passive measure. If no passive measures or IST/ISD are identified or all are not practicable, the facility must implement at least one active measure. If no active measures are identified or all are not practicable, the facility must implement at least one procedural measure. If passive and active measures were determined not practicable, the facility must document that justification based on environmental, legal, social, technological, or economic factors but may not be based solely on economic factors. This requirement will be applicable to:
- Petroleum and coal products manufacturing (NAICS 324) and chemical manufacturing (NAICS 325) facilities located within 1 mile of another RMP-regulated 324 or 325 facility.
- Petroleum and coal products manufacturing (NAICS 324) using hydrofluoric acid (HF) in an alkylation unit.
- Petroleum and coal products manufacturing (NAICS 324) and chemical manufacturing (NAICS 325) facilities which have had at least one RMP reportable incident since the last PHA.
2026 Requirement Changes
The 2026 rule proposes that the STAA requirements be removed for all existing processes but that STAA will be required for any new Program 3 process and/or facility regardless of NAICS code. As listed in the 2024 updates, those new Program 3 processes and facilities must consider and document options in the following order of preference:
- Inherently Safer Technology or Design (IST/ISD) – measures that minimize the use of regulated substances, substitute less hazardous substances, moderate the use of hazardous substances, or simplify covered processes to reduce likelihood and/or the impact of accidental releases.
- Passive measures – design features that reduce risk without requiring human, mechanical, or other energy input.
- Active measures – design features or engineering controls that rely on mechanical or other input to detect and respond to process deviations.
- Procedural measures – measures such as policies, operating procedures, training, administrative controls, and emergency response actions to prevent or minimize incidents.
The desired risk reduction can be achieved through a combination of the evaluated options. The EPA has removed specific requirements related to practicability assessments and installation of safeguards.
The EPA is requesting comments related to alternate options for the approach on selecting what processes or facilities should be subject to STAA requirements as well as comments regarding the practicability requirements for those STAAs.
Incident Investigations
2024 Requirement Additions
The EPA is clarifying that Program 2 and 3 processes must use a recognized investigation method and will require that investigations are completed within 12 months for RMP reportable incidents.
2026 Requirement Changes
No changes to the 2024 rule updates. These are still expected to go into effect as currently planned.
Third Party Compliance Auditing
2024 Requirement Additions
Facilities that EPA has determined are higher risk of community impacts will be required to perform third-party compliance auditing. This requirement will be applicable to:
- RMP facilities with a reportable accidental release since the most recent compliance audit.
- Any facility, in which the agency determines and notifies the facility that a third-party audit is required due to conditions that could lead to an accidental release of a regulated substance.
2026 Requirement Changes
The EPA is considering two options in the 2026 proposed rule.
Proposal 1 includes complete removal of the requirements to conduct a third party audit.
Proposal 2 includes adjusting the applicability for third party audits to only the 10 years following the rule publication (to collect data during that window) and reduces the required facilities to:
- RMP facilities with two reportable accidental releases in the last 5 years.
Additionally, the third-party auditor independence criteria have been adjusted to be more inclusive of available auditors.
Hot Work
2024 Requirement Additions
Program 3 processes must extend retention of hot work permits to three (3) years.
2026 Requirement Changes
The EPA is tentatively considering removing the required retention of hot work permits to three (3) years and realigning with OSHA PSM requirements to maintain the hot work permit on file until the hot work is completed.
Employee Participation
2024 Requirement Additions
Program 2 and Program 3 facilities must develop a written Employee Participation plan and provide annual notification to employees and their representatives that the plan is available and how to access it. Facilities will also be required to train as often as necessary to ensure employees, their representatives, and management are informed of the details of the plan. Employees and their representatives must be provided access to all information in the Prevention Program for Program 2 and Program 3 processes. Facility employee participation plans will also be required to include information for anonymously reporting unaddressed hazards that could lead to a catastrophic release, unreported RMP-reportable accidents, or any other issue of non-compliance with RMP requirements. These are new requirements for Program 2 and clarified or updated requirements for Program 3 processes.
Program 3 facilities must also consult with employees on development of implementation plans to address recommendations from PHAs, compliance audits, and incident investigations.
Program 3 processes must also include effective stop work authority for employees knowledgeable in the process and their representatives to:
- Recommend a process be partially or completely shut down based on the potential for a catastrophic release.
- Allow a qualified operator in charge of a unit to partially or completely shut down an operation or process based on the potential for a catastrophic release.
2026 Requirement Changes
The EPA is proposing rescinding the requirements regarding:
- Training regarding the employee participation plan
- Reporting processes to the EPA and/or the facility management about unaddressed hazards
- For Program 3 facilities, consultation with employees regarding development and implementation of certain corrective actions
- For Program 3 facilities, the stop work authority provisions
Program 2 facilities will still be required to develop an Employee Participation Plan but it will be limited to the plan of action for implementation of prevention program elements, annual notification that the plan is readily available and how to access the information, as well as providing access to the hazard review and other prevention program elements.
Emergency Preparedness
2024 Requirement Additions
Notification – Both responding and non-responding sites must develop procedures for informing the public and the appropriate federal, state, and local emergency response agencies about accidental releases of RMP-regulated substances including providing timely data and information detailing the current understanding and best estimates of the nature of the release.
Emergency Response Exercises – All Program 2 and Program 3 facilities which are responding sites must conduct a field exercise at least once every 10 years which should involve simulating an accidental release of a regulated substance. A report following the field exercise will also be mandatory to complete within 90 days and must include a scenario description, names and organizations of participants, an evaluation of the results and lessons learned, improvement recommendations including a schedule to implement the improvements.
2026 Requirement Changes
The EPA is proposing additional clarifications on the roles and responsibilities of the facility and of local responders regarding community notification of emergencies. The EPA has indicated that they plan to require the facility to provide the type of community notification system and whether the local responder or the owner or operator will send the notification to the community.
Information Availability
2024 Requirement Additions
Facilities will be required to compile chemical hazard summaries and make them available to the public within 45 days upon request if they reside within 6 miles of a facility. This may include names of regulated substances, Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) for all regulated substances located at the facility, RMP accident history information, and certain pieces of emergency response program information.
2026 Requirement Changes
The EPA is now proposing codifying that certain information for all facilities will be available on an RMP Public Data Tool reducing the burden on facilities to manage requests from the public. This information may include names of regulated substances, Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) for all regulated substances located at the facility, RMP accident history information, and certain pieces of emergency response program information such as responding status, LEPC name and phone number, notification procedures, and scheduled exercises.
While the 2024 rule included requirements for information availability regarding certain declined recommendations, the 2026 proposed rule has removed these requirements. The 2026 rule has also removed any requirements related to providing information in multiple languages.
Additional Clarifications
2024 Requirement Additions
Process Safety Information: The rule clarifies that PSI is required to be current for Program 3 processes (previously only regulatory required for Program 2 processes).
Retail Facility Exemption: The definition has been modified to be one in which more than one-half of the annual income in the previous calendar or fiscal year is from direct sales to end users, or at which more than one-half of the fuel sold over that period, by volume, is sold through a cylinder exchange program.
2026 Requirement Changes
No major impact to the PSI requirements.
The EPA is seeking comments to determine if an update is needed to the Retail Facility definition to clarify exemption situations.
