On November 6, 2024, authorized EPA representatives conducted a compliance inspection of Respondent’s facility to determine its compliance with the Risk Management Plan (“RMP”) regulations promulgated at 40 C.F.R. Part 68 under Section 112(r) of the Act. EPA found that Respondent had violated regulations implementing Section 112(r) of the Act as noted on the attached “Risk Management Program Inspection Findings, Alleged Violations, and Proposed Penalty Form” (“Form”), which is hereby incorporated by reference.
REGULATED SUBSTANCE: Formaldehyde solution 37%
MAX. QUANTITY IN PROCESS: 47,047 pounds per EPCRA Tier II, but RMP lists 190,000 lbs.
Program Level 3 Alleged Violations and Unadjusted Penalties
Section C — Prevention Program — Process safety information [68.65]
68.65(d)(3)
At the time of the inspection, the formaldehyde piping near the resin reactor was not properly labeled to show the content and direction of flow. See, e.g., ASME A 13.1 (2015) 3.1-3.5
$1,500
At the time of inspection, there was formaldehyde piping on the roof was not properly labeled to show content and direction of flow. See, e.g., ASME A 13.1 (2015) 3.1-3.5
$1,500
68.65(d)(2) or 68.65(d)(3)
At the time of the inspection, the hoses at the chemical unloading pad and resin reactor area were not affixed with unique, individual identifiers to ensure proper maintenance and documentation of inspection results. See, e.g., NAHAD Industrial Hose Assembly Specification Guidelines (2005), Section 7.2; and NAHAD Handbook for the Design and Specification ofHose Assemblies (2015), Sections 5.78 and 12.5.
$1,500
68.65(d)(2)] or 68.65(d)(3)
At the time of the inspection, alarms near the formaldehyde unloading pad were not labeled. See, e.g., OSHA’s Standard for Employee Alarm Systems at 29 C.F.R 1910.165(b)(3); and NFPA 72 National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code (2022), Sections 17.4.7.4 and 17.2. Also, the gas detector in the resin reactor area was not labeled as to what chemical it was detecting for.
$1,500
68.65(d)(2) or 68.65(d)(3)
At the time of inspection, the inspectors noted a lack of NFPA signs near the formaldehyde tank farm or at the formaldehyde unloading pad. see, e.g., NFPA 704-2017 4.3; NFPA 704-2017 Chapter 9; NFPA 1-2021 60.5.1.8.2.1•, NFPA 400-2017, 6.1.8.2.1.
$1,500
Section C — Prevention Program — Mechanical integrity [68.731
68.73(e)
At the time of the inspection, there was formaldehyde piping on the roof with damaged insulation. See, e.g., OSHA’s Flammable Liquid Standard at 29 C.F.R.
Protection against corrosion: All piping for flammable liquids both above-ground and underground, where subject to external corrosion, shall be painted or otherwise protected; API Recommended Practice 574, Inspection Practices for Piping System Components, Section 10.1.1.5 (in 1998 ver.) and Section 10.1.6 (2024 and 2025 versions) (explaining that defects in protective coatings and insulation will permit moisture to come into contact with the piping and that when such defects are found, either enough insulation should be removed or the affected area should be radiographed to determine the extent and severity of corrosion).
$900
68.73(e)
At the time of the inspection, insulation on formaldehyde piping in the tank farm had been cut to perform mechanical integrity testing, but had subsequently not been repaired. See, e.g., 29 C.F.R. Protection against corrosion: All piping for flammable liquids both above-ground and underground, where subject to external corrosion, shall be painted or otherwise protected; API Recommended Practice 574, Inspection Practices for Piping System Components, Section 10.1.1.5 (in 1998 ver.) and Section 10.1.6 (2024 and 2025 versions) (explaining that defects in protective coatings and insulation will permit moisture to come into contact with the piping and that when such defects are found, either enough insulation should be removed or the affected area should be radiographed to determine the extent and severity of corrosion).
$900
68.73(e)
At the time of the inspection, the hoses at the unloading pad were not properly stored. The hoses were in direct sunlight, on the ground, not stored straight, and were not capped. See, e.g., NAHAD Handbook for the Design and Specification ofHose Assemblies (2015), Section 10.5.
$900
Total unadjusted penalty: $10,200.
CLICK HERE for ESA