Respondent owns and operates an agricultural chemical manufacturing facility. Respondent has been subject to the RMP requirements since June 21, 1999, as provided in 40 C.F.R. § 68.1O(a)(1), because the facility used, stored, manufactured, or handled more than the TQ of 10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia in a single process as of that date. Respondent became subject to the RMP requirements for aqueous ammonia on July 1, 2010, the date on which the facility first used, stored, manufactured, or bandied more than the TQ of20,000 pounds of aqueous ammonia in a single process.
- Respondent did not analyze and report in its June 16, 2009 RMP additional worstcase release scenarios for the two L8,000-gallon anhydrous ammonia pressure vessels and the two 32,000-gallon aqueous ammonia atmospheric storage tanks at the facility as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.25(a)(2).
- Respondent failed to document and maintain records of the methodology used to determined distance to endpoints as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.39(d) and the data used to estimate population and determined the environmental receptors potentially affected as required by 40 C.F.R. 68.39(e).
- Respondent did not document and maintain the following written process safety information pertaining to the technology of certain covered processes as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.65(c)(1):
- adequate block flow diagrams for anhydrous ammonia storage and for the production and storage of aqueous ammonia; process chemistry for the production and storage of aqueous ammonia;
- maximum intended inventory for the aqueous ammonia and anhydrous ammonia storage tanks;
- safe upper and lower limits for such items as temperatures) pressures, flows, or compositions for the aqueous ammonia process equipment;
- an evaluation of the consequences of deviation for the unloading of ammonia rail tanker cars, the transferring of ammonia from the rail tanker cars to the anhydrous ammonia storage tanks the transferring of anhydrous ammonia from the rail tanker cars to the mobile “T-Reactor” for producing 10-34-0 fertilizer, the transferring of anhydrous ammonia from the storage tanks to a fixed convertor reactor to produce aqueous ammonia, and the loading-‘unloading of the aqueous ammonia storage tanks.
- Respondent did not document and maintain the following written process safety information pertaining to the equipment in certain covered processes as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.65(d)(1) and (d)(2):
- materials of construction on process equipment (e.g., pressure relief valves, pumps, fixed converter reactor, hoses, storage tanks) for the aqueous ammonia process;
- piping and instrumentation diagrams for the aqueous ammonia process and the 0-34-0 fertilizer production process;
- relief system design and design basis for the anhydrous ammonia storage tanks and the aqueous ammonia storage tanks;
- design codes and standards employed for the aqueous ammonia process, the I 0-34-0 fertilizer production process, and the anhydrous ammonia storage tanks;
- material and energy balance for the aqueous ammonia process and the I 0-34-0 fertilizer production process; safety systems (e.g., interlocks, detection or suppression systems) for the aqueous ammonia process;
- documentation that the equipment complies with good and generally accepted good engineering practices for the aqueous ammonia process; and
- documentation that Respondent had determined that the Barnard & Leas reactor is designed, maintained, inspected, tested, and operating in a safe manner
- Respondent did not address the following elements in its initial 2009 Process Hazards Analysis for the loading and unloading of ammonia and aqueous ammonia using hoses as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.67(c):
- hazards of the process;
- identification of any previous incident which had a likely potential for catastrophic consequences;
- engineering and administrative controls applicable to the hazards and their interrelationships
- stationary source siting;
- human factors; and
- an evaluation of a range of the possible safety and health effects of failure of controls
- Respondent did not have written operating procedures that address emergency shutdown or the consequences of deviation and steps required to avoid or correct a deviation for the aqueous ammonia process as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.69(a)(l) and (2) and failed to certify annually that its operating procedures for the aqueous ammonia process, 10-34-0 fertilizer production process, and anhydrous ammonia process are current and accurate as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.69(c).
- Respondent did not maintain documentation that each employee involved in operating the aqueous ammonia process had received and understood required training as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.71(c).
- Respondent did not have written inspection and testing procedures meeting the requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 68.73(d)(2) and (3) for maintaining the ongoing integrity of the aqueous ammonia and anhydrous ammonia storage process equipment, which is equipment identified in 40 C.F.R. § 68. 73(a), or adequate documentation of each inspection and test performed on such equipment as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.73(d)(4).
- Respondent’s written procedures for the aqueous ammonia process and anhydrous ammonia storage process ftor managing changes to process chemicals, technology, equipment, and procedures, and changes to stationary sources that affect a covered process, did not meet the requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 68.75(a) and (b).
- Respondent did not promptly determine and document an appropriate response to each of the findings of the August 24, 2010 compliance audit and that deficiencies had been corrected as required by 40 C.F.R § 68.79(d).
- Respondent did not obtain and evaluate information regarding XXXXXXXX Phosphate Conversion’s safety performance and programs before selecting it as a contractor as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.87(b)(1).
- Respondent did not register each covered process as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.160(a) and (b) because its June 16, 2009 RMP registration form did not include all of the required information for the aqueous ammonia process and the 0-34-0 fertilizer production process.
After considering all factors, EPA has determined and Respondent agrees that an appropriate penalty to settle this action is $101,000.
CLICK HERE for the agreement