Respondent owns and operates a manufacturing facility, which produced, used, or stored more than 10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia. During an October and December 2011 inspection EPA found the following issues, settling for $146,000…
Late Submitting
Facility had more than a TQ of anhydrous ammonia when the Facility started operation in December 2007 and at all subsequent relevant times. Respondent was required to submit the RMP for the Ontario Facility by December 2007, pursuant to Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA and 40 CFR § 68.150(b)(3). Respondent did not submit an RMP for the Ontario Facility to EPA until on or about March 26, 2009. Therefore, EPA alleges that Respondent failed to timely submit an RMP for the Facility, in violation of Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7), and 40 CFR § 68.150(b)(3).
Labeling
An October 7, 2011 site inspection by the manufacturer’s representative for the votators (a type of heat exchanger) in use at the Ontario Facility indicated that the votator seals were not maintained in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. Recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices specify that component parts of ammonia refrigeration system are to be labeled identifying the ammonia’s phase, pressure, temperature, and direction of flow. An EPA inspection on December 8, 2011 showed that ammonia refrigeration system labels were missing from numerous votator components.
Electrical
An EPA inspection on December 8, 2011 showed that an electrical junction box, located in a wet environment on top of the enclosure below the surge tank, had been left open. Recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices specify that electrical junction boxes used in wet environments be specially rated for such use and are to be kept tightly sealed. Therefore, EPA alleges that Respondent failed to document that equipment complies with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices, in violation of Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA, 42 U.S. C.§ 7412(r)(7), and 40 CFR § 68.65(d)(2).
Updating ER Contact within 30 days
Respondent changed its emergency contact for the Ontario Facility in early October 2011, and the facility failed to update its emergency contact information in EPA’s RMP registration system until December 8, 2011. Respondent was required to update its emergency contact information pursuant to 40 CFR §68.195(b) within one month of any change. Therefore, EPA alleges that Respondent failed to timely update its emergency contact information for the Ontario Facility, in violation of Section ll2(r)(7) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7), and 40 CFR § 68. 195(b).
MOC and not unpdating PSI, specifcially P&IDs
Respondent has replaced the following pieces of votator equipment at the Facility in the indicated month: a) “Line 44 No. 1” in approximately January 2010; b) “Line 46 pre-chill” in approximately June 2010; and c) “Line 44 No. lA Left & Right” in approximately June 2011. Management of Change regulations at 40 CFR 68.75(d) require that changes covered by that paragraph resulting in a change in the process safety information required by 40 C.F.R. 68.65, including Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs) as set forth at 40 C.F.R. 68.65(d)(ii), shall be updated accordingly. As of EPA inspection on December 8, 2011, the P&IDs had not been updated to reflect the above-referenced new pieces of votator equipment. Therefore, EPA alleges that Respondent failed to appropriately update the applicable Process Safety Information, in particular the P&IDs, after replacing certain votator units at the Facility in violation of Section 112(r)(7) ofthe CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7), and 40 CFR § 68.75(d).
Respondent agrees to pay $140,600 as the civil penalty for the violations alleged herein. The proposed penalty was calculated in accordance with the CEP.
CLICK HERE to see the agreement.