This case is significant as it involved a facility that used the detatched “transport trailer” as their storage tank. The trailer was a 8-tube “tube trailer” which was parked at the site, the tractor detached, and connected to the “process”. EPA conducted an inspection on December 17, 2012, to determine compliance with Section 112(r) of the CAA, and the Chemical Accident Prevention Provisions at 40 C.F.R. Part 68. The facility handled and/or stored fluorine, Chemical Abstracts Service (“CAS”) Number 7782-41-4. Fluorine is a listed toxic substance at 40 C.F.R. § 68.130. The facility produced blow-molded, in-line fluorinated, high density polyethylene containers using concentrated fluorine. A mixture of 20% fluorine and 80% nitrogen is diluted further, and then delivered to mold machines to create a barrier on the bottle surface to minimize permeation through the plastic. The fluorine-nitrogen mixture is stored in eight tubes on a tube trailer, with each tube containing 1,800 pounds. The entire weight of the fluorine-nitrogen mixture in each of the tubes, 1,800 pounds, constitutes a regulated substance under Part 68, pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 68.115(b). The inspection and documents received after the inspection revealed a number of concerns at the facility:
- The process hazard analysis did not document either the assignment of tasks or the resolution of tasks. On January 18, 2013, Respondent provided EPA with an updated process hazard analysis that included task completion dates and assigned personnel.
- The facility had no written procedures for mechanical integrity or maintenance for some of the fluorine process equipment, including the fluorine transfer hose and the blender piping. After the inspection, Respondent provided EPA with a new maintenance schedule, which included applicable inspections codes, frequencies, and the change-out period for all of the equipment in the fluorine process.
- Respondent had failed to update emergency contact information in March 2012, when responsibilities for the RMP and for emergency response changed. Respondent submitted corrections on December 27, 2012, after the inspection.
- Respondent did not submit an RMP in February 2010, when the Facility was acquired by Respondent. Respondent submitted an RMP to EPA on November 4, 2010.
EPA’ s investigation indicates that Respondent failed to satisfy the requirements of 40 C.F.R. Part 68 to fully implement a Program 3 Risk Management Program for the Facility. Respondent failed to comply with the following requirements of Subpart D and Subpart G of 40 C.F.R. Part 68:
- Failure to assure that assignment of recommendations from a process hazard analysis are documented, or that resolution of tasks are documented, in accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 68.67(e)
- Failure to establish and/or implement written procedures to maintain the on-going mechanical integrity of the process equipment, in accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 68.73(b)
- Failure to update emergency ‘contact information~ in accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 68.195(b)
- Failure to timely submit an RMP, in accordance With 40 C.F.R. § 68.150(b)(3).
In full and final settlement and resolution of all allegations referenced in the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and in full satisfaction of all civil penalty claims pursuant thereto, for the purpose of this proceeding, Respondent consents to the assessment of a civil penalty for the violations of Section 112(r) of the CAA,.42 U.S.C. § 7412(r), at two Facilities, as set forth above, in the amount of $75,860.
CLICK HERE to see the full agreement.
NOTE: Here is EPA’s RMP Q&A on covering “tube trailers”…
Are “tube” trailers considered a single process?
Tube trailers carry bulk liquids that are stacked in a rack type arrangement on the back of a truck trailer. This arrangement often is used to carry highly hazardous materials such as anhydrous hydrogen chloride. The tubes are manifolded together, but usually only one tube at a time is connected to a process for loading and unloading. Are “tube” trailers considered a single process?
If the “tube” trailers remain in transportation, the contents of the trailers are exempt from threshold determination. If the tubes no longer are in transportation, the entire grouping of tubes must generally be considered a single process, since they are co-located such that they could be involved in the same accident.