On or about November 2, 2016, representatives of the EPA conducted an inspection (the EPA inspection) of the Facility to determine compliance with Section 112(r) of the CAA and 40 C.F.R. Part 68. Information gathered during the EPA inspection revealed that the Facility had greater than 10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia in a process. From the time the Facility first had onsite greater than 10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia in a process, Respondent was subject to the Program 2 prevention program requirements pursuant to 40 C.F .R. § 68.10(c), because the process does not meet the eligibility requirements of either Program 1 or Program 3, as described in 40 C.F.R. § 68.10(b) and (d), respectively.
As a result of the EPA inspection, Complainant has determined that violations of the Chemical Accident Prevention provisions found in 40 C.F.R. Part 68 occurred.
NOTE: this facility fell under OSHA’s “retail” exemption and thus qualified for a Program 2 Level RMP.
Allegations of Violation:
Count 1
Pursuant to 40 C.F .R. § 68.12(c)(2), the owner or operator of a stationary source with a process subject to Program 2 shall conduct a hazard assessment as provided in 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.20 through 68.42.
Pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.36(a), the owner or operator shall review and update the offsite consequence analyses at least once every five years.
The EPA inspection revealed that Respondent had not reviewed nor updated the offsite consequence analyses for the Facility at least once every five years.
Respondent’s failure to review and update the offsite consequence analyses at least once every five years pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.36(a) is a violation of 40 C.F.R. § 68.12(c)(2).
Respondent, therefore, violated Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7).
Count 2
Pursuant to 40 C.F .R. § 68.12(c)(3), the owner or operator of a stationary source with a process subject to Program 2 shall implement the Program 2 prevention steps provided in 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.48 through 68.60.
The EPA inspection revealed that Respondent had not implemented the following Program 2 prevention steps:
- The owner or operator shall compile and maintain up-to-date safety information related to the maximum intended inventory of equipment in which the regulated substances are stored or processed. 40 C.F.R. § 68.48(a)(2).
- The owner or operator shall compile and maintain up-to-date safety information related to the safe upper and lower temperatures, pressures, flows, and compositions. 40 C.F.R. § 68.48(a)(3).
- The owner or operator shall compile and maintain up-to-date safetyinformation related to the equipment specifications. 40 C.F.R. § 68.48(a)(4).
- The owner or operator shall compile and maintain up-to-date safetyinformation related to the codes and standards used to design, build, and operate the process. 40 C.F.R. § 68.48(a)(5).
- The owner or operator shall ensure that the process is pesigned in compliance with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices. 40 C.F.R. § 68.48(b).
- The owner or operator shall conduct a review of the hazards associated with the regulated substances, process and procedures, document the results of the review and ensure that problems identified are resolved in a timely manner, and update the review at least once every five years. 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.50(a), (c) and (d).
- The owner or operator shall prepare written operating procedures that address each operating phase. 40 C.F.R. § 68.52(b).
- The owner or operator shall ensure that each employee has been trained or tested competent in the operating procedures provided in 40 C.F.R. § 68.52 and shall be provided refresher training at least every 3 years. 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.54(a) and (b); and
- The owner or operator shall certify that they have evaluated compliance with the provisions of subpart C (compliance audit) at least every three years to verify that the procedures and practices developed under the rule are adequate and are being followed. 40 C.F.R. § 68.58.
Respondent’s failure to implement the Program 2 prevention steps as described above provided in 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.48 through 68.60 is a violation of 40 C.F.R. § 68.12(c)(3).
Respondent, therefore, violated Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7).
Count 3
Pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.12(a), the owner or operator of a stationary source subject to this part shall submit a single RMP, as provided in 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.150 through 68.185.
Pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.150(d), RMPs submitted pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.150 shall be updated and corrected in accordance with 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.190 and 68.195.
Pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.190(b)(1), the owner or operator of a stationary source shall revise and update the RMP submitted under 40 C.F .R. § 68.150 at least once every five years from the date of its initial submission or most recent update.
The EPA inspection and information provided by Respondent revealed that Respondent submitted an RMP pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.150 in June of 2010, but failed to submit and updated RMP by June of 2015.
Respondent’s failure to revise and update the RMP submitted under 40 C.F.R. §68.150 within 5 years of June 2010 pursuant to 40 C.F .R. § 68.190(b)(1) is a violation of 40 C.F.R. § 68.12(a). Respondent, therefore, violated Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7).
Penalty
Respondent agrees that, in settlement of the claims alleged herein, Respondent shall pay a civil penalty of Thirty-Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy-Seven Dollars ($37,877).
CLICK HERE for the CAFO