EPA RMP Citations @ Gas Plant (Flammables & $196K w/ $111K SEP)

Respondent owns and operates a Gas Plant. On or about July 11 and 12, 2023, representatives of the EPA inspected the Respondent’s Facility to determine compliance with Section 112(r) of the CAA and 40 C.F.R. Part 68. Information gathered during the EPA inspection revealed that Respondent had greater than 10,000 pounds of propane and greater than 10,000 pounds of flammable mixture (Butane, Ethane, Isobutane [Propane, 2-methyl], Pentane, Isopentane [Butane, 2-methyl-], Propane, and Methane) in a process at its facility. Information gathered during the EPA inspection revealed that Respondent stores propane and flammable mixtures of hydrocarbon gases throughout the processing units and piping, including methane, propane, ethane, butane, isobutane, pentane, and isopentane at its facility, and therefore is engaged in a process at its facility.

Allegations of Violation

Count 1

The EPA inspection revealed that the Respondent failed to implement the Program 3 hazard assessment requirements of 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.20 through 68.42. Specifically:

a. Respondent failed to maintain documentation of the rationale for selection of parameters used in worst- and alternative case scenario offsite consequence analyses, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.39(a) and (b), and

b. Respondent failed to maintain documentation of the data used to estimate population and environmental receptors potentialJy affected by worst- and alternative case release, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.39(e).

Respondent’s failures to comply with the hazard assessment requirements of 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.20 through 68.42, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.12(d)(2), violate Section l 12(r)(7) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7).

Count 2

The EPA inspection revealed that the Respondent failed to implement the Program 3 prevention requirements of 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.65 through 68.87. Specifically:

a. Respondent failed to update and revalidate the process hazard analysis every five (5) years after the completion of the initial process hazard analysis, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.67(f). Respondent’s two most recent Process Hazard Analysis (PHAs) were dated January 23, 2015, and December 21, 202 I . The timespan between 2015 and 2021 revalidations are 6 years, 1O months, and 28 days, resulting in the PHA that is 1 year, 1O months, and 28 days late, and

b. Respondent failed to establish and implement written procedures to maintain the on-going integrity of the process equipment, as required by 40 C.F.R. 68.73(b), as evidenced by numerous process units/equipment with past due inspection and/or retirement dates, excessive ice accumulation observed in several process locations, orphaned equipment in need of repair or replacement that appeared to be locked out or tagged out and taped off for an extended period of time, and a pump leaking lubricant onto the equipment base and onto the gravel.

Respondent’s failures to comply with Program 3 prevention requirements of 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.65 through 68.87, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.12(d)(3), violate Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7).

Count 3

The EPA inspection revealed that the Respondent failed to implement the emergency response requirements of 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.90 through 68.96. Specifically, Respondent failed to annually coordinate with the local emergency planning and response organizations, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.93. Respondent produced only one record of any coordination with local authorities that occurred on January 26, 2023, but had no records of coordination, if it occurred, prior to 2023. Respondent did not have any records of coordination with the local fire department.

Respondent’s failures to comply with the emergency response requirements of 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.90 through 68.93, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.12(d)(5), violate Section l 12(r)(7) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(7).

Penalty Payment

Respondent agrees that, in settlement of the claims alleged herein, Respondent shall pay a civil penalty of One Hundred Ninety-Six Thousand, Eight Hundred Five Dollars ($196,805.00) as set forth below.

Supplemental Environmental Project

Respondent shall complete the following SEP:

Purchase equipment for purposes of emergency response preparedness and then donate the equipment to the Grant County Kansas LEPC, Grant County Emergency Medical Services, and Grant County Fire Department, respectively, as detailed in Appendix A, attached to this Consent Agreement and Final Order.

Respondent shall spend no less than One Hundred Eleven Thousand, Six Hundred Ninety-Three Dollars ($111,693.00) on implementing the SEP (SEP Cost).

Respondent shall complete the SEP within 180 days of the Effective Date of this Consent Agreement and Final Order.

Appendix A

Quantity Item
1 Pentheon Series Cutter
1 Pentheon Series Spreader
1 Pentheon Tele Ram
1 Pentheon Combi 2.0
1 Pentheon Truck Charger
1 Battery Charger
8 Pentheon Battery
1 HLB16 Lifting Bag 16 ton
1 Control Unit HTC 12
I HLB 12 Bar Package
4 Sensit G2 EX/CO/O2/TOX
I Calibration Kit 4 Gas Quad
2 Altair 5X Gas Detector
1 Calibration Kit Altair
1 Altair Calibration Cap Kit
3 Zytron 500 NFPA Class 2 Suit Total Enca psulatin g 2x/3x
4 Zytron 500 NFPA Class 2 Suit Total Encapsulating L/XL
2 Zvtron 500 NFPA Class 2 Suit Total Encapsulating
2 Dupont Tychem 4000 Coverall Large
1 Dupont Tychem 4000 Coverall Medium
4 Dupont Tychem 5000 Level B Suit Encapsulated Large
4 Dupont Tychem 5000 Level B Suit Encapsulated XL
1 Dupont Tychem 5000 Level B Suit Encapsulated 2XL
1 3M D9093C Secure Click Hard Case Pl 00 Particulate Filter Case of 60
1 3M D9093B Secure Click Hard Case Pl00 Particulate Filter, Case of 144
1 3M D701 Secure Click Filter Retaine r, Case of I 00
1 3M D7Nl 1 Secure Click Particulate Filter N95, Case of 200
3 3M FF-401 Ultimate FX Full Facepiece Reusable Respirator , Small
9 3M FF-402 Ultimate FX Full Facepiece Reusable Respirator, Medium
3 3M FF-403 Ultimate FX Full Facepiece Reusable Respirator , Large
2 3M D80921 Secure Click Organic Vapor Cartridge/Filter Pl00, Medium
20 3M HF-802SD Secure Click Half Facepiece Reusable Respirator, Medium
3 3M HF-801SD Secure Click Half Face piece Reusable Respirator, Small
3 3M HF-803SD Secure Click Half Facepiece Reusable Respirator, Small


Source: https://yosemite.epa.gov/oa/rhc/epaadmin.nsf/Filings/3B51D7C92790817685258C91006221BB/$File/Scout%20Energy%20Consent%20Agreement%20and%20Final%20Order.pdf

Scroll to Top