Respondent operated a facility (the “Facility”) that stores and distributes anhydrous ammonia. The Facility receives anhydrous ammonia from oceangoing vessels and stores it in two interconnected insulated tanks. The Facility includes three pressure tanks storing fertilizer-grade ammonia (Fl through F3) and four pressure tanks storing refrigeration-grade ammonia (R1 through R4). Respondent produces, stores, and distributes aqueous ammonia (with a concentration
of 20 percent or greater) at the Facility, which is stored in a single aboveground storage tank.
At all times relevant to this CAFO, Respondent produced, used, or stored more than 10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia at the Facility and was subject to the requirements of CAA§ 112(r)(7). At all times relevant to this CAFO, Respondent produced, used, or stored more than 20,000 pounds of aqueous ammonia (with a concentration of 20 percent or greater) at the Facility and was subject to the requirements of CAA§ 112(r)(7).
At all times relevant to this CAFO, the anhydrous ammonia process at the Facility was subject to Program 3 requirements because it was subject to the OSHA process safety management standard set forth in 29 C.F.R. § 1910.119.
At all times relevant to this CAFO, the aqueous ammonia process at the Facility was subject to Program 2 requirements.
During March 14-18, 2022, EPA’s National Enforcement Investigation Center performed an inspection at the Facility to assess Respondent’s compliance with Section 112(r) of CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r), and Part 68 requirements (the “Inspection”) and documented its observations in an inspection report dated May 13, 2022.
Based upon the information gathered during the Inspection and follow-up investigation (collectively the “Investigation”), EPA determined that Respondent violated certain provisions of the CAA.
ALLEGED VIOLATIONS
Count 1 – Failure to Comply with the Public Meeting Requirement
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that Respondent failed to comply with the public meeting requirement in 40 C.F.R. § 68.210(b) within 90 days of the RMP reportable accident at the Facility that occurred on December 16, 2023, when an accidental release of anhydrous ammonia resulted in the sheltering in place of five people offsite.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated the public meeting requirement set forth at CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.1O(e) in or about March 2024.
Count 2 – Failure to Comply with the Management System Requirements
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that Respondent failed to develop a management system to oversee the implementation of the risk management program elements and to document the names of multiple persons responsible for the development, implementation, and integration of the risk management program
elements at the Facility and appropriately define the lines of authority in an organization chart or similar document from March 2022 to September 2022.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated the management system requirements set forth at CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.15(a) and (c) from March 2022 to September 2022.
Count 3 – Failure to Comply with the Worst-Case Release Scenario Analysis Requirements;
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that the Respondent used an inaccurate worst-release quantity in analyzing and reporting the worst-case release scenario in the RMP for the Facility during 2022-2023.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated the worst-case release scenario analysis requirements set forth at CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.25(b) by using an inaccurate worst-release quantity in analyzing and reporting the worst-case release scenario in the RMP during 2022-2023.
Count 4 – Failure to Adequately Document the Off-Site Consequence Analyses
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that Respondent failed to maintain documentation for the worst-case and alternative release scenarios and data used to estimate population and environmental receptors potentlally affected at the Facility in 2022.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated the- documentation requirements for the off-site consequence analyses set forth at CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F .R. § 68.39 in or about 2022.
VIOLATIONS OF PROGRAM 2 REQUIREMENTS (AQUEOUS AMMONIA)
Count 5 – Failure to Comply with the Safety Information Requirements
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that Respondent failed to compile and maintain up-to -date safety information related to the aqueous ammonia process at the Facility including safe upper and lower temperatures, pressures, flows, and compositions; and codes and standards used to design, build, and operate the aqueous ammonia process from or about 2020 to 2023.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated the safety information requirements set forth at CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.48(a) from 2020 to 2023.
Count6 – Failure to Comply with the Hazard Review Requirements
Based upon the Investigation , EPA determined that Respondent failed to conduct a review of the aqueous ammonia process at the Facility that identified the hazards associated with the process; opportunities for equipment malfunctions or human errors that could cause an accidental release; and the safeguards used or needed to control the hazards or prevent equipment malfunction or human error from 2020 to 2023.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated the hazard review requirements set forth at CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.50(a) from 2020 to 2023.
Count 7 – Failure to Comply with the Refresher Training Requirements
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that Respondent failed to provide refresher training at least every three years to each employee operating the aqueous ammonia process at the Facility from 2020 to 2023.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated the refresher training requirements set forth at CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.54(b) from 2020 to 2023.
Count8 – Failure to Comply with the Maintenance Requirements
Based upon the Investigation , EPA determined that Respondent failed to prepare and implement procedures to maintain the ongoing mechanical integrity of the aqueous ammonia process equipment and also failed to perform or cause to be performed inspections and tests on the aqueous ammonia process equipment that followed RAGAGEP from 2020 to 2023.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated the mechanical integrity requirements set forth at CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.56 from 2020 to 2023.
VIOLATIONS OF PROGRAM 3 REQUIREMENTS(ANHYDROUS AMMONIA)
Count 9 – Failure to Comply with the Process Safety Information (“PSI”) Requirements
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that Respondent failed to update its PSI prior to conducting a PHA; failed to compile adequate information pertaining to process chemistry, safe upper and lower limits, materials of construction, P&IDs, relief system design and design basis, and safety systems for the anhydrous ammonia process at the Facility; and failed to document that the process was designed and maintained in compliance with RAGAGEPfr om 2020 to 2023.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated the PSI requirements set forth at CAA § 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.65(a), (c), and (d) from 2020to 2023.
Count 10 – Failure to Comply with the Process Hazard Analysis Requirements
Based upon the Investigat ion, EPA determined that Respondent failed to select an appropriate PHA methodology and failed to perform a PHA for the anhydrous ammonia process at the Facility that adequately addressed the hazards of the process, engineering and administrative controls applicable to the hazards, stat ionary source siting, human factor s, and rankings of potentia l risks from 2020 to 2023.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violat ed CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.67(b) and (c} by failing to perform a PHA for the anhydrous ammonia process at the Facility that adequately addressed the hazards of the process, engineering and administrative controls applicable to the hazards, stationary source siting, and rankings of potential risks from 2020 to 2023.
Count 11 – Failure to Develop and Implement Adequate Operating Procedures
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that the written operating procedures for the Facility failed to adequately address temporary operations, shutdowns, operating limits, safety and health considerations, and safety systems and was not readily accessible to the employees in the control room from 2022 to 2023 .
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.69(a)(b), by failing to adequately develop and implement written operating procedures that provide clear instructions for safely conducting activities involved in each covered process consistent with the process safety info rmation and making such procedures available to employees who work in or maintain a covered process from 2022 to 2023.
Count 12 – Failure to Document Refresher Training
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that Respondent failed to adequately document refresher training of employees who work on or near covered processes at the Facility at least every three years from 2020 to 2023.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.71(b), by failing to adequately document refresher training of employees who work on or near covered processes at least every three years from 2020 to 2023.
Count 13 – Failure to Comply with the Mechanical Integrity Requirements
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that Respondent failed to conduct adequate inspection and tests consistent with RAGAGEP related to pressure vessels and storage tanks, piping systems, relief and vent systems, emergency shutdown systems, controls, and pumps and correct deficiencies in such equipment at the Facility from 2020 to 2023.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated CAA § 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.73(d) and (e), by failing to perform inspections and tests on process equipment consistent with RAGAGEP and correct deficiencies in such equipment from 2020 to 2023.
Count 14 – Failure to Comply with the Management of Change Requirements
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that Respondent failed to document the technical basis for and impact on safety and health associated with changes to certain process equipment at the Facility during 2020-2022, including upgrading of the electrical system and installation of a new compressor, and failed to update its PSI.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.75(a), (b), and (d) by failing to document the technical basis for and impact on safety and health associated with changes to certain process equipment during 2020-2022.
Count 15 – Failure to Comply with the Pre-Startup Safety Review Requirements
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that Respondent failed to complete the PSSR for the installation of a new compressor and upgrades to control and electrical system at the Facility in 2022.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.77(a), by failing to complete the PSSR for the installation of a new compressor and upgrades to control and electrical system at the Facility in 2022.
Count 16 – Failure to Comply with the Compliance Audit Requirements
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that Respondent failed to determine and document responses to each finding of the 2017 and 2020 compliance audits of the Facility and document that deficiencies identified in the 2017 and 2020 compliance audits were corrected.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.79(d), by failing to determine and document responses to the findings of the 2017 and 2020 compliance audits of the Facility and document that deficiencies identified in the 2017 and 2020 compliance audits were corrected.
Count 17 – Failure to Comply with the Employee Participation Requirements
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that Respondent failed to develop a written plan regarding employee participation in the RMP process at the Facility from 2020 to 2023.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated the employee participation requirements set forth at CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.83(a) from 2020 to 2023.
Count 18 – Failure to Comply with the Contractor Requirements
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that Respondent failed to fulfill owner or operator responsibilities related to safety performance evaluation and periodic performance review for two contractors working on or around the covered processes at the Facility in 2022 and 2023.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.87(b), by failing to fulfill owner or operator responsibilities regarding contractors performing maintenance or repair, turnaround, major renovation, or specialty work on or adjacent to a covered process in 2022 and 2023.
Count 19 – Failure to Correct the RMP
Based upon the Investigation, EPA determined that the Respondent failed to submit until June 21, 2024, information regarding an accidental release at the Facility on December 16, 2023, that triggered the five-year accident history reporting criteria of 40 C.F.R. § 68.42.
Accordingly, EPA alleges that Respondent violated CAA§ 112(r) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.195(a), by failing to timely submit information regarding an accidental release triggering the five-year accident history reporting criteria of 40 C.F.R. § 68.42 within six months of the release or by the time the RMP is updated, whichever is earlier.
Respondent agrees to the assessment of a civil penalty of FOUR HUNDRED SIXTY THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED SIXTY-FIVE DOLLARS ($460,465)
CLICK HERE for the CAFO