EPA RMP Citations @ Fertilizer Facility (NH3 & $0; however, has to upgrade to CGA 2.1-2014)

This is an interesting outcome, of which I have no knowledge as to how this deal was struck.  But there was no monetary penalty and the facility has 60 days to make some seriously big changes/improvements.  The biggest thing I noticed is that EPA is requiring the facility to make changes to comply with the latest version of CGA 2.1 – 2014 rather than the RAGAGEP the process was most likely built to: ANSI K61.  Here are the facts as we know them…

EPA inspected the Iowa facility on September 10, 2015, to determine compliance with Section 112(r) of the CAA and 40 C.F.R. Part 68. Information collected as a result of this inspection revealed the facility had failed to properly implement the risk management program at the facility. At the time of the inspection, the facility had more than 10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia in a process.

Finding of Violation

The facility failed to comply with the requirements of 40 C.F.R. Part 68, as follows, in violation of Section 112(r) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r):

1. Failure to revise and update the RMP at least once every five years from the date of its initial submission or most recent update (40 C.F.R. § 68.190).
2. Failure to correct the emergency contact information required at 68.160(b)(6) within thirty days of the change (40 C.F.R. § 68.195(b)).
3. Failure to estimate in the RMP the population within a circle with its center at the point of the release and a radius determined by the distance to the endpoint (40 C.F.R. § 68.30(a)).
4. Failure to review and update the off-site consequence analyses at least once every five years (40 C.F.R. § 68.36(a).
5. Failure in the worst case scenario to describe the vessel or pipeline and substance selected, assumptions and parameters used, the rationale for selection, and anticipated effect of the administrative control and passive mitigation on the release quantity and rate (40 C.F.R. § 68.39(a)). 
6. Failure to compile and maintain codes and standards used to design, build, and operate the process. (40 C.F.R. § 68.48(a)(5)).
7. Failure to ensure the process is designed in compliance with recognized and generally accepted and good engineering practices (40 C.F.R. § 68.48(b)).
8. Failure to review and update the hazard review at least once every five years or whenever a major change in the process occurs (40 C.F.R. § 68.50(d)).
9. Failure to perform or cause to be perform inspections and tests on process equipment that follow recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices (40 C.F.R. § 68.56(d)).
10. Failure to certify it has evaluated compliance with the provisions of 40 C.F.R. 68 Subpart C – Program 2 Prevention Program at least every three years to verify that the procedures and practices developed under the rule are adequate and are being followed (40 C.F.R. § 68.58(a)).

Order for Compliance

Based on the Factual Background and Finding of Violation set forth above, the facility is hereby ORDERED to take the actions described below.

1. develop a Risk Management Program for the facility, which complies with the appropriate Program level, as set out in the eligibility requirements in 40 C.F.R. § 68.10
2. maintain records supporting the implementation of the Risk Management Program in accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 68.200
3. submit a Risk Management Plan that includes the information required by 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.155 through 68.185
4. develop a narrative description of the actions to be taken to comply with the following industry standards, as well as a schedule for their implementation:
   1. CGA G-2.1 (2014), Section 6.4.2, states that if supports of the saddle type are employed, the baring afforded by the saddles shall extend over at least one-third of the circumference of the shell;
   2. CGA G-2.1 (2014), Section 5.4.3.3, states that tanks missing dataplates shall be inspected and tested to determine the information in 5.4.1.5, 5.4.1.6 and 5.4.1.7. One 12,000 gallon vessel had no nameplate;
   3. CGA G-2.1-2014, Section 5.6.8, states that underground piping shall be evaluated at a minimum of every 5 years to ensure leak-tightness;
   4. CGA G-2.1-2014, Section 5.8.16, states that a pressure relief valve shall be replaced no later than 5 years following the date of its manufacture or last repair unless it has first been disassembled, inspected, repaired, and tested by the manufacturer, or by a qualified repair organization so that the valve’s condition and performance is certified as being equivalent to the standards for the original valve.
   5. CGA G-2.1-2014, Section 5.7.8.8, states hoses shall be permanently removed from service that have been installed and used over a period of time which exceeds the service life recommended by the manufacturer of the hose. A flexible hose on the nurse tank loadout station adjacent to the storage tank had indicated a “remove no later than: date of 2004”.

All such actions/work shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, but no later than 60 days of the effective date of this order. EPA will review and may provide comments on the actions and schedule to comply with industry standards.

The facility must provide documentation of completion of these tasks to EPA within 90 days of the effective date of this Order.

CLICK HERE for the CAFO