Respondent is the owner and operator of a frozen foods processing facility that includes anhydrous ammonia storage tanks, valves, piping, compressors, freezer tunnels, and other buildings, structures, equipment, installations, or substance-emitting stationary activities from which an accidental release of anhydrous ammonia may occur; which belong to the same industrial group; which are located on one or more contiguous properties; and which are under the control of Respondent.
The facility has an anhydrous ammonia refrigeration system that has at all relevant times contained more than 10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia and constitutes a single “covered process” under 40 C.F.R. § 68.3. The facility’s Process exceeded the 10,000-pound TQ for anhydrous ammonia on or about June 21, 1999, became a “covered process” within the meaning of 40 C.F.R. § 68.3 at that time, and became subject to the requirements of 40 C.F.R. Part 68 at that time.
On August 2, 2016, EPA conducted an inspection of the Facility.
Violation of Process Safety Information Requirements
- At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had failed to compile complete process safety information regarding safe upper and lower limits for such items as temperatures, pressures, flows or compositions pertaining to the technology of the Process, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.65(c)(1)(iv).
- At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had failed to complete an evaluation of the consequences of deviations from safe upper and lower limits for the process, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.65(c)(1)(v).
- At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had failed to compile complete process safety information pertaining to the electrical classification of the equipment in the process, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.65(d)(1)(iii).
- At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had failed to compile complete process safety information pertaining to the relief system design and design basis of equipment in the process, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.65(d)(1)(iv).
- At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had failed to compile complete process safety information pertaining to the ventilation system design of equipment in the process, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.65(d)(1)(v).
- At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had failed to compile complete process safety information pertaining to the safety systems for equipment in the process, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.65(d)(1)(viii).
- At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had failed to document that equipment in the process complies with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.65(d)(2).
Respondent, therefore, violated 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.65.
Violation of Process Hazard Analysis Requirements
At the time of the 2016 Inspection, the Respondent had not established a system to promptly address findings and recommendations resulting from process hazard analyses performed at the Facility, resolve recommendations from a 2012 process hazard analysis in a timely manner, or document recommendations that were resolved, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.67(e).
Respondent, therefore, violated 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.67.
Violation of Operating Procedure Requirements
At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had failed to develop and implement written operating procedures providing clear instructions for safely operating Compressor BC-14, Compressor BC-34, Freezer Tunnel No. 6 and Freezer Tunnel No. 10, which are part of the process. As a result, operating procedures for this equipment were not readily accessible to employees who work in or maintain the process, and Respondent had not reviewed the operating procedures associated with this equipment as often as necessary nor did Respondent annually certify that they are current and accurate, all of which is required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.69(a)-(c).
In addition, the written operating procedures for all other activities and equipment involved in the Weston Facility Process were partially incomplete at the time of the 2016 Inspection, as they did not address safety systems and their functions, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.69(a)(4).
Respondent, therefore, violated 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.69.
Violation of Training Requirements
At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had failed to provide initial and refresher training to each employee involved in operating the Weston Facility Process and lacked documentation of such initial and refresher training.
Respondent, therefore, violated 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.71.
Violation of Mechanical Integrity Requirements
- At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had failed to establish and implement written procedures to maintain the ongoing integrity of the subject equipment in the process-including pressure vessels and storage tanks, piping systems (including piping components such as valves), relief and vent systems and devices, emergency shutdown systems, controls (including monitoring devices and sensors, alarms, and interlocks), and pumps-and had not trained each of its employees involved in maintaining the equipment’s ongoing integrity.
- At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had not performed inspections and tests on the subject equipment in the process at the required frequency and following recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices, nor did Respondent document inspections and tests performed on such equipment in the process.
- At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had failed to correct all deficiencies in the subject equipment in the Weston Facility Process identified in the report from the 2017 “5-year Mechanical Integrity Inspection” performed for Respondent by a contractor before further equipment use or in a safe and timely manner.
Respondent, therefore, violated 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.73.
Violation of Employee Participation Requirements
At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had failed to consult with its employees and their representatives as required under 40 C.F .R. § 68.83(b) and had not provided access to process hazard analyses and to all other required information pursuant to 40 C.F .R. § 68.83(c).
Respondent, therefore, violated 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.83.
Violation of Contractor Requirements
- At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had hired five (5) contractors to perform maintenance or repair, turnaround, major renovation, or specialty work on or adjacent to Respondent’s ammonia refrigeration process, but failed to obtain and evaluate information regarding each of its contractor’s safety performance and programs, as required under 40 C.F.R. § 68.87.
- At the time of the 2016 Inspection, Respondent had failed to periodically evaluate each contractor’s performance of its responsibilities under 40 C.F.R. § 68.87(c), as is required of Respondent under 40 C.F.R. § 68.87.
Respondent, therefore, violated 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7) and 40 C.F.R. § 68.87.
In determining the amount of penalty to be assessed, EPA has taken into account the factors specified in Section 113(e)(l) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7413(e)(l). After considering these factors, EPA has determined and Respondent agrees that an appropriate penalty for settling this action is $100,000 (the “Assessed Penalty”).
CLICK HERE for the CAFO