The Respondent, at its stationary source, has one RMProgram covered process which stores or otherwise uses ammonia in amounts exceeding its applicable threshold of 10,000 pounds. Respondent has submitted and registered an RMPlan to the EPA for the stationary source. Respondent has developed an RMProgram accidental release prevention program for the stationary source. Based on an RMProgram compliance monitoring investigation initiated on February 14, 2012, the EPA alleges that the Respondent violated the codified rules governing the CAA Chemical Accident Prevention Provisions, because Respondent did not adequately implement provisions of 40 CFR Part 68 when it:
- Failed to document persons responsible for implementing individual requirements of the risk management program, and define lines of authority through an organization chart or similar document as required by 40 CFR § 68.15(c);
- Failed to document a description of the vessel or pipeline and substance selected as worst case, assumptions and parameters used, and the rationale for selection as required by 40 CFR § 68.39(a);
- Failed to document a description of the alternative release scenario identified, assumptions and parameters used, and the rationale for selection of the specific scenario as required by 40 CFR § 68.39(b);
- Failed to retain documented resolution of process hazard analyses recommendations for the life of the process as required by 40 CFR § 68.67(g);
- Failed to develop written operating procedures that address safety systems and their functions as required by 40 CFR § 68.69(a)(4); Failed to prepare a record which contains the means used to verify that employees understood training for safety and health hazards as required by 40 CFR § 68 .7 l(c);
- Failure to certify evaluation of compliance audits at least every three years to verify that procedures and practices are adequate and are being followed as required by 40 CFR § 68.79(a);
- Failed to complete a single registration form which includes the maximum quantity of each regulated substance or mixture in the process as required by 40 CFR § 68. l 60(a)(7);
- Failed to revise and update the RMP within six months of a change that requires a revised process hazard analysis or hazard review as required by 40 CFR § 68.190(b)(5); Failed to correct the RMP within six months of new accident history information as required by 40 CFR § 68.l 95(a).
Respondent agrees to pay a civil penalty of NINETEEN THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED NINETY SEVEN DOLLARS ($19,397), to be paid within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this CAPO.
Supplemental Environmental Project
Respondent shall undertake and complete the following Emergency Planning and Preparedness project no later than 45 days after the effective date of this CAPO. Respondent shall expend no less than $38,754 for the SEP. EPA’s approval of the SEP proposed by Respondent shall not be construed to constitute an endorsement by EPA of any of the equipment or technology to be purchased in connection with the SEP undertaken pursuant to this CAFO.
Training
Emergency Responder Refresher 8 hour training for 42 emergency response personnel who will respond to leaks or spills of ammonia for the purpose of stopping the leak or spill. The scope of the training shall include
- procedures for handling emergency responses,
- written emergency response plans,
- hazards confronting responders,
- material safety data sheets and terms,
- health effects of ammonia and other chemicals,
- how to prepare for emergencies,
- how to decontaminate responders and clean up ammonia spills,
- protective clothing, self contained breathing apparatuses (SCBAs) and respirators, and
- conducting mock scenarios with SCBAs and encapsulating suits.
Training course shall include manuals and supplies for each trainee.
Incident Commander 8 hour training for 8 emergency response personnel who will respond to leaks or spills of ammonia for the purpose of stopping the leak or spill. The scope of the training shall include development of HAZWOPER, impact of a chemical release, roles and responsibilities, hazard and risk assessment, equipment organization, information resources and organization, working with the media, all OSHA regulations relating to Incident Commanders, and on site surveys. Training course shall include manuals and supplies for each trainee.
Equipment
The Respondent shall donate the following to the XXXXXXXXXXXXX County Fire Department.
50′ of 1/2″ NFPA Kemmantle Lifeline Rope
100′ of 1/2″ NFPA Kemmantle Lifeline Rope
200′ of 112″ NFPA Kemmantle Lifeline Rope
Large Steel Locking Carabiners
XL Steel Locking Carabiners
8mm Prusik Cord 50′ Long
Class 3 Rescue Harness for Confined Space Rescue
2″ Single Pulleys
2″ PM Single Pulleys
2″ Double Pulleys
2.5″ PM Double Pulleys
Rescue Helmets
SKED EV AC
Rescue Tripod for Confined Space
MSA Altair 4X Gas Detector (02, LEL, H2S, CO Sensors)
Rope Rescue 4 to 1 System
Super Vac NANOPAC
Confined Space Ventilator w/ 25′ duct
Additional 25′ of Duct for NANOPAC
SKED Stretcher
Quick Don and Set Wristlets
Victim Chest Sling
15 Min Escape Breathing Apparatus, SafeEscape CBRN Respirator Intrinsically Safe Flashlights (Vulcan/Streamlight) – Rechargeable
10′ of 1” Webbing, Tubular
20′ of 1” Webbing, Tubular
30′ of 1″ Webbing, Tubular
Rope Rescue Grade Gloves
Anchor Plates
Gibbs Rescue Ascenders
Cable Winch, 120′
Stokes Basket, Rigid
Miller Fall Harness for Victims
Full Length Backboard
Oregon Spine Splint, 1/2 Back 2 RQ3 Rescue Figure
Descender w/ears
PremAire Air-Line Respirator w/Portable Air Supply Assembly
Rope Rescue 4 to 1 System
SKED EV AC Recue Tripod for Confined Space
Cable Winch
Knee Pads
540 Belay Devices
Adjustable Anchor Straps
Multi Loop Anchor Straps
Victim Harness
Reeves Device, Reinforced
Headlamps
In the event that Respondent’s actual purchase of training and equipment deviates from the descriptions specified above, Respondent shall provide information to EPA explaining the reason(s) for any such deviation. So long as the amount that Respondent spends equals or exceeds $3 8,754, and the explanation for the deviation is acceptable to EPA, this provision shall be deemed to be satisfied. This Consent Agreement and Final Order shall not be construed to constitute EPA endorsement of the equipment or technology to be purchased by Respondent in connection with the SEP undertaken pursuant to this Agreement.
Here is the link to the full agreement: http://yosemite.epa.gov/oa/rhc/epaadmin.nsf/Filings/E15D686090CE681F85257CBC001BC04A/$File/scan0682.pdf