A plastics plant experienced a release of approximately 15,825 pounds of styrene vapor from a railcar on 9/1/2020. The railcar had been on the property since May 2020 (4 months). The styrene began its reaction inside the railcar once the inhibitor had been consumed, leading to the release and evacuations ensued for those located around […]
Respondent is a plastics material and resin manufacturing plant that produces polyvinyl alcohol from the vinyl acetate process. EPA conducted an inspection of the Facility on May 15 through 17, 20 I8, to determine Respondent’s compliance with 40 C.F.R. Part 68 (the Inspection).
Respondent is the owner and/or operator of a candy manufacturing facility, which has registered an RMPlan with the EPA for its Facility and has developed an RMProgram accidental release prevention program for the Facility. At its Facility: a. Respondent produces food products b. Respondent has on-site for storage, 18,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia c. Respondent
It’s never a good sign when the EPA inspector is in the process and the operator’s personnel detector goes into alarm and the worried inspector is told… it was typical for the alarm to sound during sampling. This led the inspector to inquire about this level of exposure for a repeated task such as sampling
Respondent operates a “stationary source” and has registered an RMPlan with the EPA for its Facility and has developed an RMProgram accidental release prevention program for the stationary source. Respondent operates an ammonia refrigeration process that has on-site storage of 15,416 pounds of anhydrous ammonia. On December 11, 2018, the EPA conducted an on-site inspection
Respondent owns and operates an adhesive and sealant manufacturing facility, which employs about 30 persons, is one of several plants that Respondent operates nationwide with about 45,000 employees worldwide. In the Facility’s manufacturing processes, the facility uses various highly flammable and/or toxic chemicals that are stored in outdoor tanks ranging in size from about 5,000
Respondent owned and operated the petroleum refining facility which produces, processes, stores, or handles more than the threshold quantities of flammable substances. Respondent’s hydrocracker unit (HCU) is a covered process under Program 3 of the RMP regulations. On April 10, 2020, there was an incident at the facility. One of the facility’s covered processes was
Respondent owns a wastewater treatment plant. Chlorine, propane, and sulfur dioxide (anhydrous) are each a ” regulated substance”, as set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 68.130. The Respondent has a wastewater chlorination process at the stationary source. The Respondent’s facility has propane in excess of the 10,000-pound threshold, however, such propane is not used in
Respondent’s facilities are located in Missouri. On or about March 30-April 1, 2010, EPA conducted an inspection of the Carthage, Missouri facility to determine compliance with 40 C.F.R. Part 68. On or about September 27-29, 2010, EPA conducted an inspection of the Louisiana, Missouri facility to determine compliance with 40 C.F.R. Part 68. Information collected
Respondent is the owner and/or operator of operates a pulp bleaching mill. Respondent has registered an RMPlan with the EPA for its Facility and has developed an RMProgram accidental release prevention program for the Facility. Respondent has on-site 19,022 pounds of chlorine dioxide in one RMProgram level 3 covered process, which stores or otherwise uses
Respondent owns and operates a facility with the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code of 311230 Breakfast Cereal Manufacturing. The manufacturing facility produces cereal products and snack bars. A refrigeration system is used for the operation of chillers, compressors, and condensers that support manufacturing activities, including the cereal processing area. The refrigeration system uses
You have to be really special to get EPA’s Criminal Investigation Division involved in your RMP inspection – DONT BE SPECIAL! But once again we have a NH3 refrigeration facility just not “getting it”… The case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Terrence P. Donnelly, with the assistance of Dianne Chabot, EPA Regional Criminal Enforcement
