I should point out that this facility was found to be OVER the threshold for 180 days over a three (3) year period. EPA went through paper work to find times the facility had over 10,000 pounds of a NFPA “4” flammable mixture in their process. The process involves dissolving acetylene in acetone in order to suspend the acetylene in a stable condition for transport and use. The mixture of acetylene and acetone contains greater than one percent of acetylene AND has a NFPA rating of 4, and is therefore a flammable mixture as specified in 40 C.F .R. § 68.115(b)(2). As a result, the entire weight of the mixture is treated as a regulated substance for purposes of determining whether the threshold quantity of the regulated substance is present. On or about November 5-6, 2014, EPA conducted an inspection of Respondent’s facility to determine compliance with Section 112(r) of the CAA and 40 C.F.R. Part 68. Information collected as a result of the inspection and information request revealed that on at least 180 days between January 1, 2012, and January 30, 2015, Respondent had greater than 10,000 pounds of the flammable mixture of acetylene and acetone in a process at the facility. On February 9, 2015, EPA requested additional information from Respondent regarding its compliance with Section 112(r) of the CAA. On or about March 10, 2015, Respondent submitted information including, inter alia, the quantities of acetylene manufactured and dissolved in acetone for each daily order for specific dates. EPA alleges that Respondent has violated the CAA and federal regulations promulgated pursuant to the CAA, as follows:
- Respondent is subject to the requirements of Section 112(r) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r), and 40 C.F.R. Part 68 because it is an owner and operator of stationary sources that had more than a threshold quantity of a regulated substance in a process.
- Respondent is subject to Program 3 of the risk management program requirements because, pursuant to 40 C.F .R. § 68.10(d), the covered process at its facility did not meet the requirements of Program 3 and the process is subject to the OSHA process safety management standard.
- Respondent was required under Section 112(r) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r), and 40 C.F.R. 68.12, to develop and implement a risk management program for its facility that includes a management system, a hazard assessment, a prevention program and an emergency response program, and to submit an RMP.
- Information collected during the inspection of Respondent’s facility and in response to EPA’s information request revealed that Respondent failed to submit an RMP for its facility, as required by 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.12(a) and 68.150(a).
Respondent’s failure to comply with these regulations is a violation of Section 112(r) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r).
Respondent agrees that, in settlement of the claims alleged in this Complaint and Consent Agreement/Final Order, Respondent shall pay a civil penalty of Fifty-Five Thousand Dollars ($55,000).
CLICK HERE for the CAFO