Respondent operated a cold storage warehouse and distribution facility located in RI (the “Facility”). The Facility is located immediately adjacent to a Bay, approximately one-third of a mile from several marinas, just under 1 mile from a few homes, and less than 1.5 miles from an elementary school, a residential neighborhood, and a small airport. At all times relevant to the violations alleged herein, the Facility’s anm1onia refrigeration system (“System”) used approximately 8,700 pounds of anhydrous ammonia. Accordingly, Respondent “stored” and “handled” anhydrous ammonia, which is subject to the General Duty Clause.
EPA and the U.S. Department of Justice jointly determined that this matter, although it involves alleged violations that occurred more than one year before the initiation of this proceeding, is appropriate for administrative penalty assessment.
As discussed below, the CAFO resolves the following violations that Complainant alleges occurred in connection with Respondent’s storage and handling of anhydrous ammonia at its fish processing and cold storage facility in RI:
a. Failure to design and maintain a safe facility, taking such steps as are necessary to prevent such releases, in violation of Section 112(r)(1) of the CAA; and
b. Failure to minimize the consequences of a release should one occur, in violation of Section 112(r)(1) of the CAA.
The intent of Section 112(r)(1) of the CAA is for facility owners and operators to implement all feasible means to reduce the threat of death, serious injury, or substantial property damage to satisfy the requirements of the General Duty Clause.
EPA routinely consults codes, standards, and guidance issued by chemical manufacturers, trade associations, and fire prevention associations (collectively, “industry standards”) to understand the hazards posed by using various extremely hazardous substances. The industry standards also are evidence of the standard of care that industry itself has recognized to be appropriate for managing those hazards. These industry standards are consistently relied upon by industry safety and fire prevention experts and are sometimes incorporated into state building, fire, and mechanical codes.
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
Due to the dangers associated with anhydrous ammonia, the ammonia refrigeration industry has developed industry standards to control the risks associated with the use of ammonia, specified in Appendix A. These standards are consistently relied upon by refrigeration experts and are sometimes incorporated by reference into state building and mechanical codes.
- On November 22, 2020, approximately 16 pounds of anhydrous ammonia were released from a cracked nipple on a compressor at the Facility.
- On January 6, 2021, less than one pound of anhydrous ammonia was released from a leaking seal on a compressor oil pump at the Facility.
- On June 29, 2021, approximately nine pounds of anhydrous ammonia were released from a leak on the Facility’s auto purger, resulting in an injury to an employee.
On July 8, 2021, two duly authorized EPA inspectors and an Eastern Research Group, Inc. (“ERG”) contract inspector (collectively, the “EPA Inspectors”) conducted an inspection at the Facility (the “Inspection”) alongside representatives of the Department of Homeland Security, OSHA, the local Fire Department, the Rhode Island Department of Enviromnental Management, and the Rhode Island State Fire Marshal’s Office. The purpose of EPA’s Inspection was to determine whether Respondent was complying with Section 112(r) of the CAA, EPCRA, and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act’s (“CERCLA”) release notification procedures.
The inspectors toured the Facility’s perimeter, storage building, roof, ammonia machinery room (“AMR”), maintenance shop area, freezer and freezer dock area rooms, and forklift maintenance and auxiliary storage rooms. During the Inspection, EPA observed numerous potentially dangerous conditions relating to the anhydrous ammonia refrigeration system at the Facility; additional potentially dangerous conditions were identified based on a review of documents provided by Respondent.
The potentially dangerous conditions identified by EPA are listed in the chart attached to and made a part of this CAFO as Appendix A. Appendix A also explains how each of the conditions could lead to a release or inhibit the Facility’s ability to minimize the consequences of any release that might occur and includes examples of recognized industry standards of care that could feasibly reduce or eliminate the hazard.
VIOLATIONS