This case is significant as EPA used the International Fire Code as their basis for several General Duty Clause findings. They also used NFPA standards in their inspection.
Respondent owns and operates a facility that manufactures consumer and industrial products in liquid form and for pressurized containers that use aerosol propellants. Respondent’s manufacturing process uses and stores flammable gases and liquids. On February 9, 2019 and November 19, 2021, EPA conducted inspections at the Facility to determine whether Respondent was in compliance with Section 112(r)(1) and (7) of the Clean Air Act (“CAA”)and the RMP Regulations, the Chemical Accident Prevention Provisions, at 40 C.F.R. Part 68 (“Inspections”).
Based on its observations during the Inspections and its review of documents received from Respondent during the investigation, EPA determined that Respondent had the following chemicals present at its Facility, among other chemicals, in amounts exceeding 10,000 pounds each, from 2019 through the effective date of this Order: methyl ether, propane, difluoroethane, a mixture of propane/isobutane, and diethyl ether.
EPA has determined that more than a threshold quantity of regulated substances methyl ether, propane, difluoroethane, propane/isobutane mixture, and diethyl ether are present in a process at the Facility.
Based on information collected by EPA, EPA has determined that Respondent did not comply with Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA and the RMP Regulations by failing to comply with hazard assessment, process safety information, mechanical integrity, and compliance audit requirements, as set forth in more detail below.