EPA RMP Citations @ frozen poultry storage facility (NH3 & $159K)

The Respondent operates a frozen poultry storage facility. The Facility is located within several hundred feet of residences.  Respondent uses 15,900 pounds of anhydrous ammonia in a refrigeration “process,” as defined by 40 C.F.R. § 68.3, in a system of pipes and vessels at the facility (the “Process”).    On June 6, 2019, EPA inspectors visited the facility to assess Respondent’s compliance with Section 112(r) of the CAA, Part 68, and with Sections 302-312 of EPCRA.

Count 1: Failure to Comply with Process Safety Information Requirements

As further described in Attachment A, which is incorporated by reference into this CAFO, EPA alleges that Respondent failed to document that the Processes complied with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices (“RAGAGEP”) and that equipment designed according to outdated standards was designed, maintained, inspected, tested, and operated in a safe manner.

Accordingly, by failing to document that the Process complied with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices and that any equipment that was designed according to outdated standards is designed, maintained, inspected, tested, and operated in a safe manner, Respondent violated 40 C.F.R. § 68.65.

 

Count 2: Failure to Comply with Program 3 Mechanical Integrity Requirements

As further described in Attachment A, Respondent had not maintained the mechanical integrity of the Process equipment by correcting deficiencies that are outside of acceptable limits (as defined by the process safety information in 40 C.F.R. § 68.65) before continuing to use the equipment, or in a safe and timely manner when necessary means are taken to ensure safe operation.

By failing to comply with the Program 3 mechanical integrity requirements, Respondent violated 40 C.F.R. § 68.73.

 

Count 3: Failure to Adequately Identify. Evaluate, and Control Hazards

Respondent performed updated PHAs in 2015 and 2020 and identified recommended action items. However , Respondent’s PHAs were inadequate. Deficiencies included, but are not limited to the following:

(a) the 2015 PHA included findings that were not addressed by the time of the Inspection, including issues with pipe labelling on the roof the Facility;

(b) the 2020 PHA did not adequately address issues identified by EPA in the 2019 Inspection, including the location of eye-wash stations.

Specifically, the PHA did not analyze the hazards presented by not having unobstructed eyewash stations located in areas immediately accessible outside the ammonia machinery room. Eyewash stations should be installed in accessible locations that require no more than 10 seconds to reach and must be located on the same level as the hazard, and the path of travel shall be free of obstructions that may inhibit immediate use. See, e.g., ANSI/ISEA 23581.1-2014, §§ 4.5.2, 5.4.2, and B5.

Accordingly, Respondent violated the PHA requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 68.67.

 

EPA-Alleged Condition:

Examples of RAGAGEP:

The main shutoff value (“king valve”) located behind the high-pressure receiver was not clearly labeled.

It is standard industry practice for the emergency shut-off valve be clearly and uniquely identified at the valve itself and in schematic drawings. See e.g.,

IIAR 9-2020, § 7.2.9.3;_and HAR Bull. 109, § 4.10.3

Ammonia alarms were not present in some required areas, including, but not limited to, outside the ammonia machinery room entry door leading to the refrigerated loading dock.

It is standard industry practice to have ammonia leak

detection, with audible and visible alarms located both inside the ammonia machinery room and outside of each entrance to the machinery room. See e.g., IIAR2-2014 § 6.13, HAR 9-2020, § 7.3.12.1,

ASHRAE 15-2019. § 8.13.10.l; andNFPA 12012,

§ 53.2.3.1.2. It is also industry practice to have Level 1 detection and alarm in areas outside the machinery room where an ammonia refrigeration

equipment is installed. IIAR 2-2014 § 6.13

Ammonia piping on the roof the Facility had damaged labels or lacked appropriate labeling.

The standard industry practice is for piping mains, headers, and branches to be identified as containing ammonia and as to the physical state of the refrigerant (that is, vapor or liquid, etc.), the relative pressure level of the refrigerant, and the direction of flow. See e.g., IIAR 9-2020 § 7.2.9.4; IIAR 2-2014,

§ 5.14.5, HAR Bull. 109, § 4.7.6, HAR Bull. 114,

§ 4.2.1.

The Facility’s ammonia machinery room did not have unobstructed eyewash stations or safety showers located outside the room.

Specifically, (1) the exit from the ammonia machinery room to the interior warehouse lacked an eyewash station outside the exit door in the warehouse, and (2) outside the second exit from the ammonia machinery room which leads to the exterior, the eyewash station was not located on the same level as the ammonia machinery room and was instead located down a set of stairs which would obstruct immediate access to the eyewash station for a person suffering from ammonia exposure.

The standard industry practice is to maintain a minimum of two eyewash stations/shower units, one located inside the machinery room and one located outside of the machinery room. Additional eyewash/safety shower units shall be installed such that the path of travel in the machinery room is no more than 55 feet to an eyewash/safety shower. See e.g., IIAR 9-2020, § 7.3.7.l; IIAR2-2014, § 6.7;

IIAR Bull. 109, § 4.10.10. The emergency eyewash/safety shower unit installations are to comply with ANSI/ISEA 2358.1 standards, which specify that eyewash stations must be installed in accessible locations that require no more than 10 seconds to reach and must be located on the same level as the hazard and the path of travel shall be free of obstructions that may inhibit immediate use. See e.g., ANSI/ISEA 23581.1-2014, §§ 4.5.2, 5.4.2, and BS.

The ammonia machinery room at the Facility lacked required signage to display important information about the Process.

It is standard industry practice for the person in charge of a facility with an ammonia refrigeration system to provide directions for emergency shutdown of the system in a location that is readily accessible to trained refrigeration system staff and trained emergency responders. The schematic drawings or signage shall include several types of information including: (1) Instructions with details and steps for shutting down the system in an emergency; (2) The name and telephone numbers of the refrigeration operating, maintenance, and

management staff, emergency responders, and safety personnel; (3) The names and telephone numbers of all corporate, local, state, and federal agencies to be contacted as required in the event of a reportable incident; (4) Quantity of ammonia in the system; (5) Type and quantity of refrigerant oil in the system; and, (6) Field test pressures applied. See e.g., IIAR 2-2014, § 5.15; ASHRAE 15-2013, § 11.2.1; and

HAR 9-2020, § 7.2.10.

The drainage system for the Facility’s ammonia machinery room lacked a means to limit the spread of liquid ammonia into the drainage system, such as a cover for floor drains.

It is standard industry practice to provide a means for limiting the spread of a liquid ammonia spill into the machinery room drainage system. See, e.g., IIAR 9-2020, §§ 7.3.8.2 and 7.3.8.3; IIAR2-2014 § 6.9.3.

There were problems with the insulation of ammonia piping at the Facility, including insulation that was missing, frosted or corroded, indicating that the insulation was failing.

The standard industry practice is for piping and equipment surfaces not intended for heat exchange to be insulated, treated, or otherwise protected to mitigate condensation and excessive frost buildup where the surface temperature is below the dew point of the surrounding air during normal operation and in an area where condensation and frost could develop and become a hazard to occupants or cause damage to the structure, electrical equipment, or refrigeration system. See, e.g., HAR 9-2020, § 7.2.6.1; IIAR 2-2014, § 5.10.1. In addition, the standard industry practice is to check piping for signs of corrosion and to treat corroded piping with rust-preventative paint, and to replace the badly corroded pipe. See e.,g., IIAR Bull. 109, && 4.7.4 and 4.7.5.

During the Inspection, ammonia sensors and alarms in the ammonia machinery room were not functioning properly.

It is standard industry practice to test ammonia detectors in accordance with the manufacturers’ specifications. See e.g., ASHRAE 15-2013, § 11.6.3, and IIAR 2-2014, § 5.12.3. The minimum machinery room alarm response is further described in HAR 9-2020, § 7.3.12.2.

 

 

EPA has determined that assessing a civil penalty of $149,000 for the violations is fair and proper.

 

CLICK HERE for the CAFO

 

Scroll to Top