Respondent is the owner and/or operator of a facility which operates as an aluminum chloride manufacturing Facility. On December 3, 2013, EPA conducted an inspection at the Facility to determine, among other things, Respondent’s compliance with Section 112(r) of the CAA. The Inspection included discussions with Facility representatives concerning the Facility’s covered process and risk management program. The inspectors also toured the Facility in the presence of Respondent’s representatives. As part of EPA’s Inspection, EPA requested and reviewed documentation regarding Respondent’s risk management program and covered process at the Facility, including but not limited to, hazard assessment documentation, process safety information, and process hazard analysis documentation.
The January 2012 RMP submitted by Respondent listed one covered process, a chlorine (CAS# 7782-50-5) process, and identified that process as subject to Program 3 requirements. Chlorine is a regulated substance pursuant to Section 112(r)(2) and (3) of the CAA and 40 C.F.R. § 68.3. The threshold quantity for chlorine pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.130 is 2,500 pounds. Respondent handles and stores, and has handled and stored, chlorine in its process at its Facility in quantities exceeding the threshold quantity for chlorine.
At the time of EPA’s Inspection, EPA identified violations of the applicable requirements at 40 C.F.R. Part 68, including the following:
- Facility representatives did not provide documentation that the chlorine process equipment complies with recognized and general accepted good engineering practices (e.g. Chlorine Institute codes and standards), as required by 40 CFR § 68.65(d)(2);
- a process hazard analysis was performed in 2012, but many action items noted in the 2012 PHA did not result in any recommendations; the Facility does not have a system to track the status of PHA recommendations and action items, as required by 40 CFR § 68.67(e);
- there was no annual certification that the operating procedures were correct and accurate, as required by 40 CFR § 68.69(c);
- there was no documented formal training program for aluminum chloride process operators, as required by 40 CFR § 68.71; and
- Facility representatives did not provide selection and approval documentation for specific contractors, as required by 40 CFR § 68.87(b)(1).
Respondent’s failure to fully comply with the requirements of 40 C.F.R. Part 68 regarding the Facility constitutes violations of Section 112(r) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r). Respondent is therefore subject to the assessment of penalties under Section 113(d) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 74 13(d).
Respondent hereby certifies that it is now in compliance with all applicable requirements of Section 112(r) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r), and the regulations at 40 C.F.R. Part 68, at the Facility. Respondent agrees to pay a civil penalty in the total amount of $33,150.00.
CLICK HERE for the CAFO