The Respondent manufactures adsorbent synthetic magnesium silicate, ammonium chloride, and lignosulfonate. The facility contains hydrochloric acid and ammonia. Tank T-5C is a Hydrochloric Acid storage tank thats used to feed raw materials to the blending reactor to make NH4CL solution. At approximately 10:15 pm on October 24, 2012, there was a tank failure of the T-5C tank. The man way flange or side of the tank blew off with the manway cover still
attached. Upon tank failure there was a liquid release of hydrochloric acid which immediately began vaporizing. The Texas City Fire Department responded with a hazmat team and issued a shelter-in-place order for the 45,000 residents of Texas City from approximately midnight until 5:00am on October 25, 2012. Nine people were transported to a local emergency room for medical evaluation following the incident, including, without limitation, a facility worker and Texas City emergency responders. All nine were evaluated and released without reported injury or illness.
Pursuant to section 11 2(r)(l) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(l), an owner/operator of a stationary source producing, processing, handling or storing
substances listed pursuant to section 11 2(r)(3) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(3), or any other extremely hazardous substance, has a general duty to:
1) identify hazards which may result from accidental releases of such substances using appropriate hazard assessment techniques;
2) design and maintain a safe facility, taking such steps as are necessary to prevent releases; and
3) minimize the consequences of accidental releases that do occur.
The release of Hydrochloric Acid at the Facility on October 24, 2012, constituted an “accidental release” as that term is defined by section 11 2(r)(2)(A) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 74 12(r)(2)(A).
Respondent failed to design and maintain a safe facility and did not take such necessary steps to prevent accidental releases by not fully utilizing commonly available and accepted practices to ensure safety. Respondent’s failure constitutes a violation of the general duty clause in section ll 2(r)(l) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 741 2(r)(1).
The EPA and Respondent agree to settle this enforcement action for $37,500.