Respondent has a refining process meeting the definition of “process”, as defined by 40 C.F.R. § 68.3. Methane, ethane, propane, pentane, propylene, hydrogen, butane, hydrogen sulfide, and ammonia are each a “regulated substance” pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.3. The threshold quantity for methane, ethane, propane, pentane, propylene, hydrogen, butane, hydrogen · sulfide, and ammonia is 10,000 pounds.
EPA Findings of Violation
Count 1 – Documentation
Respondent failed to provide supporting documentation to its 2018 RMP submittal and updates.
Respondent’s failure to maintain the required records on the offsite consequence analyses pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.39(a)-(e) is a violation of Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA
Count 2 – Five-Year Accident History
Respondent failed to include a June 12, 2020, incident from an air release that injured an operator in its five-year accident history.
Respondent’s failure to include in the five-year accident history all accidental releases from covered processes that resulted in injuries pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.42(a) is a violation of Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA.
Count 3 – Process Safety Information
Respondent failed to identify process equipment within its P&ID diagrams Doc #50724 and Doc#50725.
Respondent’s failure to include accurate piping and instrument diagrams in the information pertaining to the equipment in the process pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.65(d)(1)(ii), as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.12(d)(3), is a violation of Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA.
Count 4 – Process Hazard Analysis
Respondent failed to revalidate 14 PHAs within five years from its previous PHA.
Respondent’s failure to update and revalidate its PHA at least every five years pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.67(f), as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.12( d)(3), is a violation of Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA
Count 5 – Process Hazard Analysis
Respondent failed to track two findings from its 2018 C4 revalidation PHA.
Respondent’s failure to document the resolution of PHA recommendations for the life of the process pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.67(g), as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.12(d)(3), is a violation of Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA.
Count 6 – Hot Work Permit
Respondent failed to identify the object on which hot work was to be performed on three hot work permits.
Respondent’s failure to identify the object on which hot work is to be performed pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.85(b), as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.12(d)(3), is a violation of Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA.
CONSENT AGREEMENT
Respondent agrees that, in settlement of the -claims alleged herein, Respondent shall pay a civil penalty of One Hundred Thirty-Four Thousand Three Hundred Thirty-Nine Dollars ($134,339.00).
CLICK HERE for CAFO