PSM and RMP Citations/Analysis

The Facility consists of the Cowden 47H well, a gas production unit for the 47H well, and four 21 0-barrel storage tanks equipped with Enardo thief hatches. According to information provided by Respondent, three of the tanks stored natural gas condensate and one stored water/brine. Natural gas condensate is a flammable mixture (CAS No. 00-11-11). According…...

Count 1. Violation of 40 C.F.R. § 68.69(c) 40 C.P.R.§ 68.69(c) requires, in relevant part, that owners and operators must annually certify that operating procedures are current and accurate. Respondent requires that operating procedures certifications are complete by May 26 of each calendar year. Respondent failed to certify procedures by this deadline for two processes…...

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…...

Respondent owns and operates a liquefied petroleum gas manufacturing and storage facility. On January 26, 2005 Respondent submitted to U.S. EPA a Risk Management Plan (RMP) for its Facility. On July 5, 2012, U.S. EPA conducted an inspection at Respondent’s Facility to determine its compliance with 40 C.F.R. Part 68. Respondent held 10,000 lbs. or…...

Respondent’s denaturant process contains a mixture with a NFPA rating of 4, and is therefore a flammable mixture as specified in 40 C.F.R. § 68.115(b)(2). On or about May 2-3, 2012, EPA conducted an inspection to determine compliance with RMP 40 C.F.R. Part 68. Respondent’s denaturant process stores approximately 715,000 pounds, with the entire weight…...

EPA Region 10 cited a seafood processing facility located in Alaska for RMP issues around their Anhydrous ammonia and Chlorine processes. Respondent has been subject to the RMP requirements since June 21, 1999, the date on which the facility first used, stored, manufactured, or handled more than the TQ of anhydrous ammonia in a single…...

A worker at a chemical plant was sent to an Indianapolis hospital after being exposed to an open tank of benzene. The incident was reported around 6:15 p.m. Capt. Mike Pruitt said a 1,000-gallon tank had a crack in it and used to hold benzene, though it was now empty. He said paramedics were concerned…...

OSHA has cited a beer brewery for refrigeration system violations and proposes $92,400 in fines. OSHA issued two repeat and eight serious safety violations following an inspection of the brewery’s ammonia refrigeration system. The violations were cited under OSHA’s Process Safety Management (PSM) Standards. The Feb. 4, 2014, inspection found the brewery failed to develop…...

OSHA has cited an industrial explosives manufacturer with 22 serious and one repeat violations by for failing to correct multiple deficiencies in its chemical process safety management and other workplace safety hazards. The proposed penalty totals $178,400. The inspection, which began in February 2014, was initiated under OSHA’s NEP for PSM. In this case, a…...

The primary activity at Respondent’s facility is the processing of com to manufacture starch derivatives. On or about March 5-7,2013, EPA conducted an inspection of Respondent’s facility to determine compliance with Section 112(r) of the CAA and 40 C.F.R. Part 68.  Records collected during the inspection showed that Respondent has exceeded the threshold quantity for…...

Respondent is the owner and/or operator of facilities that use a proprietary fluorination technology to treat plastic containers and other articles. At all times relevant to this action, Respondent processed, handled and stored hydrogen fluoride (HF) at its facilities. HF is a regulated substance pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.3 with a threshold of 1,000…...

EPAannounced a settlement with a synthetic natural gas manufacturer for a total penalty of $155,000 for risk management plan and chemical release reporting violations at its facility.  In January 2012 EPA conducted an inspection of the facility, which included an audit of records going back five years. EPA’s inspection found several violations of the risk management…...