Respondent owned, leased, operated, controlled or supervised a facility for ethanol fuel production. Respondent conducted activity involving anhydrous ammonia at the Facility, including using, storing, handling or moving on-site anhydrous ammonia ( anhydrous ammonia process). Respondent conducted activity involving a flammable mixture that included natural gas condensates (flammable mixture) at the Facility, including using, storing, handling or moving on-site the flammable mixture (flammable mixture process).
The anhydrous ammonia process process at the Facility was any activity involving anhydrous ammonia including any use, storage, manufacturing, handling, or on-site movement of such a substance, or combination of these activities. The total quantity of anhydrous ammonia contained in the anhydrous ammonia process at the Facility exceeded 10,000 pounds. Anhydrous ammonia was first present in a Facility process in more than a threshold quantity in or before November 2006.
The flammable mixture process was any activity involving the flammable mixture including any use, storage, manufacturing, handling, or on-site movement of such a substance, or combination of these activities. The flammable mixture was a flammable mixture of regulated substances including one or more of butane, isopentane, pentane, and propane. At all times relevant to this Complaint, one or more of butane, isopentane, pentane, and propane was present in the flammable mixture with a concentration of one percent or greater by weight of the mixture. The total quantity of flammable mixture contained in the flammable mixture process at the Facility exceeded 10,000 pounds. One or more of butane, isopentane, pentane, and propane was first present in a Facility process in more than a threshold quantity prior to 1990.
EPA has identified the following alleged violations of the Act and Risk Management Program regulations by Respondent:
- For the flammable mixture process, failure to include that process in a risk management plan, as required under 40 C.F.R. § 68.12(a).
- For both processes, failure to promptly address a process hazard analysis team’s findings and recommendations; assure that the recommendations are resolved in a timely manner and that the resolution is documented; complete actions as soon as possible; and communicate the actions to operating, maintenance and other employees whose work assignments are in the process and who may be affected by the recommendations or actions, as required under 40 C.F.R. § 68.67(e).
- For the anhydrous ammonia process, failure to develop and implement written operating procedures, including I) operating limits; and 2) the properties of, and hazards presented by, ammonia, as required under 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.69(a), 68.69(a)(2)(i), 68.69(a)(2)(ii), 68.69(a)(3)(i).
- For the flammable mixture process, failure to develop and implement written operating procedures, including
- procedures for emergency shutdown;
- operating limits; and
- the properties of, and hazards presented by, the flammable mixture, as required under 40 C.F.R. §§68.69(a), 68.69(a)(1)(iv), 68.69(a)(2)(i), 68.69(a)(2)(ii), 68.69(a)(3)(i).
- For both processes, failure to certify annually that the operating procedures are current and accurate, as required under 40 C.F .R. § 68.69(c).
- For both processes, failure to establish and implement written procedures to maintain the on-going integrity of process equipment, as required under 40 C.F.R. § 68.73(b).
- For the anhydrous ammonia process, failure to:
- perform inspections and tests of process equipment;
- use inspection and testing procedures that follow recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices;
- conduct inspections and tests of process equipment with a frequency consistent with applicable manufacturers’ recommendations and good engineering practices, and more frequently if determined to be necessary by prior operating experience; and
- document each inspection and test that has been performed on process equipment, as required under 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.73(d)(1), 68.73(d)(2), 68.73(d)(3), 68.73(d)(4).
- For the flammable mixture process, failure to
- perform inspections and tests of process equipment;
- use inspection and testing procedures that follow recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices; and
- document each inspection and test that has been performed on process equipment, as required under 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.73(d)(1), 68.73(d)(2),68.73(d)(4).
- For both processes, failure to timely perform an audit of the prevention program, as required under 40 C.F.R. § 68.79(a).
- For both processes, failure to promptly determine and document an appropriate response to each of the findings of the compliance audit, and document that deficiencies have been corrected, as required under 40 C.F.R. § 68.79(d).
Civil Penalty
Based on analysis of the factors specified in Section 113(e) of the Act, the facts of this case, and other factors such as cooperation and prompt compliance, Complainant has determined that an appropriate civil penalty to settle this action is $73,747.00.
Supplemental Environmental Projects
Respondent must complete three supplemental environmental projects (collectively, the “SEPs”). The SEPs are designed to protect the environment and public health, by reducing the risks associated with the anhydrous ammonia and flammable mixture processes.
The first SEP is installing, operating and maintaining a centralized, wireless system for monitoring all of the fire alarms, fire suppression systems and fire sprinklers at the following Facility locations: Main Fire Pump House; Foam Pump House (North); Foam Pump House (South); Dry Mill; Warehouse (Building 43)- North/South; Shipping & Receiving (Building 66); Building #7; Yeast Plant; Logistics (Main Control Panel- Location); and the automatic fire protection system that is the subject of the second SEP. Respondent shall monitor this centralized monitoring system from a central location (security and logistics office) that is manned 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This centralized monitoring system shall be UL864 listed; meet NFP A 72 requirements (2010-2016 edition); be FM approved; and meet the requirements of the FCC Part 15. Respondent has chosen and EPA has accepted Tyco Integrated Security as the contractor for this SEP.
The second SEP is installing, operating and maintaining an automatic fire protection system including a deluge water spray, at the Facility’s “wet mill” area for loading and unloading rail cars. This system shall cover four rail car loading arms and two rail car unloading pumps, across two canopy-covered loading/unloading platforms and one open loading/unloading platform. The deluge water spray system shall be designed and installed in accordance with FM Global Data Sheet OS 4-1 N “Fixed Water Spray System for Fire Protection” and shall be based on NFPA 15, Water Spray Fixed Systems – Exposure Protection for Vessels. Respondent has chosen and EPA has accepted F.E. Moran, Inc. Fire Protection as the contractor for this SEP.
The third SEP is paying for a Pekin Fire Department firefighter to attend specialized training for foam firefighting relevant to the Facility. This training shall include expertise in foam firefighting equipment and materials currently available at the Facility. Respondent has chosen and EPA has accepted ICL’s Hellfighter U and Phos-Chek combined training as the provider of this training.
Respondent will complete the SEPs as follows:
- By May 31, 2018, Respondent must (1) complete the installation of the centralized wireless system for fire alarm monitoring and (2) begin operating that system.
- Respondent alleges that it has already (1) completed the installation of the rail loading/unloading area fire suppression system (2) begun operating that system.
- Respondent alleges that a Pekin Fire Department firefighter has already completed the firefighter foam training.
With regard to the SEPs, Respondent certifies the truth and accuracy of each of the following:
- That all cost information provided to EPA in connection with EPA’s approval of the SEPs is complete and accurate and that Respondent in good faith estimates or for completed SEPs estimated that the cost to implement the SEPs is $69,686.00 for the centralized fire alarm monitoring SEP; $135,850.00 for the rail loading/unloading area fire suppression system SEP; and $3,880.00 for the firefighter foam training SEP.
CLICK HERE for the CAFO