On December 14,201 1, EPA conducted a compliance inspection of Respondent’s facility to determine compliance with the Risk Management Plan (RMP) regulations promulgated at 40 C.F.R. part 68 under section 112(r)(7) of the Act. The EPA found that the Respondent had violated regulations implementing
section 112(r)(7) of the Act by failing to comply with the specific requirements outlined in the RMP Program Level 3 Process Checklist-Alleged Violations & Penalty Assessment (Checklist and Penalty Assessment)…
[40 CFR 68.65(d)(1)(i)] process safety information contain materials of construction for the equipment in the process; $600
- facility has not documented materials of construction for its ammonia piping.
[40 CFR 68.65(d)(1)(ii)] process safety information contain electrical classification for the equipment in the process; $600
- facility has not attributed the correct electrical classification to its ammonia system. According to the facility, the electrical classification of its ammonia equipment is “Non-hazardous (Unclassified)”. According to the National Electric Code (NEC) ammonia equipment should be classified as Class l, Group D, Division 2. In order to be classified as “Non-hazardous (Unclassified)”, the facility must take one of two exceptions:
- The first exception is found in the NEC. This exception allows that “For atmospheres containing ammonia, the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) for enforcement of this code shall be permitted to reclassify the location to a less hazardous location or non-hazardous location, if the ammonia room meets the requirements of the applicable code.” In order for the facility to take the NEC exception, the AHJ must reclassify the facility’s electrical system. The AHJ would be the local building department, or a similar agency. (The AHJ would not be the EPA.)
- The second exception is found in ANSI/ASHRAE15-2010. This exception allows that “When ammonia is used, the requirements of Class 1, Division 2, of the NEC shall not apply providing the requirements of Section 8.12(h) are met.” Section 8.12(h) states that the ventilation system must run constantly and be equipped with an alarm that actuates when the ventilation system fails. Alternatively, the machinery room must be equipped with a detector that meets certain requirements. In order to take the ANSI/ASHRAE exception, the facility must run the ventilation system constantly. (The facility was not running the system during the EPA inspection; the facility mentioned, during the EPA inspection, that the facility does not run the ventilation system constantly, especially in the winter.)
- Alternately, the facility could install a detector that complies with the ANSI/ ASHRAE standard.
[40 CFR 68.65(d)(2)] owner or operator documented that equipment complies with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices; $1500
- Discharge from pressure relief devices to the atmosphere is not in accordance with IIAR Equipment & Design, and Installation of Closed-Circuit Ammonia Mechanical Refrigerating Systems Section 11.3.6.4. Discharge above SW corner of engine/machinery room is located less than 15 feet above the adjacent roofline. According to IIAR, the discharge from pressure relief device to the atmosphere shall be not be less than 15 feet above the adjacent grade or roof level or as specified by the jurisdictional authority and shall be arranged to avoid spraying of refrigerant on persons in the vicinity.
- Southwest exit door in engine/machinery room is not in compliance with IIAR Bulletin 112 Ammonia Machinery Room Design Section 4.2.1. The SW exit door is a roll-up door. The SW exit door is difficult to open and close and does not swing outward. The SW exit door is not equipped with panic hardware. The SW exit door is not self-closing. According to IIAR, a minimum of 2 exits must be provided from the machinery room. Exit doors shall swing outward and be equipped with panic-type hardware. Doors shall be self-closing. An unobstructed path to exit is to be clearly marked.
- A drawing showing locations of hand valves has not been posted per IIAR Bulletin 112 Ammonia Machinery Room Design Section 4.3. According to IIAR, the location of critical hand valves shall be shown on a drawing which is posted outside of the machinery room.
- Labeling of refrigeration system piping is not in compliance with IIAR Bulletin 114 Identification of Ammonia Refrigeration Piping and System Components Section 5.0. According to IIAR, “Piping markers shall be located as follows:
- before and after a change in piping direction,
- before and after piping penetrations of walls, ceilings and floors,
- on extended horizontal or vertical runs of pipe, with a maximum spacing of 40 feet between markers, in order to provide positive identification, and
- at least once on the piping in every area through which the refrigeration piping passes.”
- Note: Exterior markers may be of the vinyl “snap-on” type.
Prevention Program-Process Hazard Analysis
[40 CFR 68.67(e)] established a system to promptly address the team’s findings and recommendations; assured that the recommendations are resolved in a timely manner and documented; documented what actions are to be taken; completed actions as soon as possible; developed a written schedule of when these actions are to be completed and communicated the actions to operating, maintenance and other employees whose work assignments are in the process and who may be affected by the recommendations; $750
- Two recommendations from the facility’s 2009 PHA are still open. (These two recommendations are referred to as “Recommendation #15” and “Recommendation #16” .) When the PHA was completed, the two recommendations were tentatively scheduled to be closed out on 12/31/2009 and 6/112010, respectively. It appears that an employee, XXXXXXXXXXXX, was assigned to close out the recommendations. XXXXXXXXX left the company before the close-outs could be completed. It appears that no one was assigned to close out the recommendations after XXXXXXXXX left.
Prevention Program – Compliance Audits
[40 CFR 68.79(a)]certified that the stationary source has evaluated compliance with the provisions of the prevention program at least every three years to verify that the developed procedures and practices are adequate and being followed; $1200
- The facility’s most recent Compliance Audits were completed on October 19, 2007 and on September 1, 2011. Approximately 4 years elapsed between the 2007 Compliance Audit and the 2011 Compliance Audit.
CLICK HERE (pdf) to download the full EPA agreement.