Respondent is the owner and/or operator of five (5) cold storage facilities. Two of the facilities are both in the same industrial group, are located across a road from each other and are therefore located on one or more contiguous properties. Both are under the control of Respondent and are buildings that contain equipment that uses, stores, manufactures, or handles anhydrous ammonia and from which an accidental release of anhydrous ammonia may occur. Therefore these two (2) facilities constitute a single “stationary source” as defined in 40 C.F.R. § 68.3. One facility has one machine room with interconnected ammonia refrigeration equipment that has at all relevant times contained more than 10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia, and constitutes a single “covered process” under 40 C.F.R. § 68.3. The covered process exceeded the 10,000 pound TQ for anhydrous ammonia on or about August 26, 2010, became a “covered process” within the meaning of 40 C.F.R. § 68.3 at that time, and became subject to the requirements of 40 C.F.R. Part 68 at that time. The other facility has three (3) machine rooms: Machine Room 1, constructed prior to 2012, that has at all relevant times contained approximately 8,507 pounds or anhydrous ammonia; Machine Room 2, constructed in approximately Jul} 2015, that has at all relevant times contained approximately 13.045 pounds of anhydrous ammonia; and Machine Room 3, constructed prior to or in 2016, that has at all relevant times contained approximately 13,335 pounds of anhydrous ammonia.
The ammonia refrigeration equipment in Machine Rooms 1, 2, and 3 in the Cold Storage facility are either interconnected by piping or located such that a regulated substance could be involved in a potential release and thus constitutes a single “process” as defined in 40 C.F.R. § 68.3. The Covered Process exceeded the 10.000 pound TQ for anhydrous ammonia no later than July 31, 2015, with the construction and startup of Machine Room 2, became a covered process within the meaning of 40 C.F.R. § 68.3 at that time and became subject to the requirements of 40 C.F .R. Part 68 at that time.
Both Cold Storage Covered Processes are each a “Program 3” covered process because each such process is subject to the OSHA Process Safety Management requirements in 29 C.F.R. § 1910.119 and does not meet all of the Program 1 eligibility requirements in 40 C.F.R. § 68.10(b).
On January 19, 2018. EPA issued an Administrative Compliance Order on Consent (“COC”) under which Respondent is required to address two remaining areas of noncompliance with 40 C.F.R. Part 68 for the covered process and the Cold Storage Covered Process no later than September 1, 2018.
Failure to Submit and Update its RMP
Respondent did not prepare and submit an RMP for the Covered Process on or before August 26, 2010. Although Respondent prepared an RMP for the Covered Process and completed the first step for submitting the RMP to the EPA RMP Reporting Center on or about June 25, 2013, Respondent did not complete the process of uploading to the EPA Reporting Center an RMP for the Covered Process until May 10, 2017.
Respondent did not submit an RMP addressing the Covered Process (which became subject to Part 68 with the construction of Machine Room 2 at the Facility) until May 10, 2017.
Respondent updated its RMP filings on August 23, 2017, to combine the plans into a single filing for the Covered Processes as required by 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.150(a) and 68.190(b)(4).
Respondent, therefore, violated 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.12(a) and (d). 68.150, and 68.190(b)(4).
Violation of Management System Requirements
Respondent did not develop a management system for the Covered Process meeting the requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 68.15 until July 14. 2016.
Respondent, therefore, violated 40 C.F.R. § 68.15.
Violation of Hazard Assessment Requirements
Respondent did not prepare a hazard assessment meeting the requirements of 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.20 through 68.39 for the Covered Process until May 30, 2013.
Respondent, therefore, violated 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.20 through 68.39.
Violation of Process Safety Information Requirements
Respondent did not timely complete a compilation of all specified written process safety information required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.65 for the Covered Processes before completing the process hazard analysis for each such covered process.
Respondent, therefore, violated 40 C.F.R. § 68.65.
Violation of Process Hazard Analysis Requirements
Respondent did not perform an initial process hazard analysis, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.67(a) to (d), for the covered process until April 2, 2013.
Respondent, therefore, violated 40 C.F.R. § 68.67.
Violation of Operating Procedure Requirements
Respondent had some of the required operating procedures in place for one of the Covered Process in August 2014 and revised these procedures to cover the other Covered Process in May and July 2016.
Respondent did not develop and implement written operating procedures for the Covered Processes that address quality control of hazardous chemical inventory levels and any specialized or unique hazards in the process, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.69(a)(3)(iv) and (v), until approximately October 30, 2017.
Respondent, therefore, violated 40 C.F.R. § 68.69.
Violation of Training Requirements
Respondent did not have training procedures for the Covered Process until July 24, 2017.
Respondent did not timely meet the training requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 68.71 for each employee involved in operating the Covered Processes
Respondent, therefore, violated 40 C.F.R. § 68.71.
Violation of Mechanical Integrity Requirements
Respondent did not timely establish and implement written procedures to maintain the ongoing integrity of all pumps that are part of the Covered Processes as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.73(a)(2) and (b).
Respondent did not timely establish and implement written procedures to maintain the ongoing integrity of process equipment identified in 40 C.F.R. § 68.73(a) (other than pumps) in the Covered Process as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.73(a) and (b).
Respondent did not timely train each employee involved in maintaining the on-going integrity of process equipment in an overview of the process and its hazards and in the procedures applicable to the employee’s job tasks to assure that the employee can safely perform the job tasks, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.73(c).
Respondent, therefore, violated 40 C.F.R. § 68.73.
Violation of Management of Change Requirements
Respondent did not establish and implement until May 9, 2016, written procedures to manage changes for process chemicals. Technology, equipment, and procedures, and changes to stationary sources that affect the Covered Process, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.75(a) and (b).
Construction and operation of Machine Room 3 was significant enough to require a change in the process safety information for the Covered Process, but Respondent did not perform a pre-startup safety review meeting the requirements of 40 C.f.R. § 68.77(b) prior to the startup of Machine Room 3 as part of the Covered Process, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.77.
Respondent, therefore, violated 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.75 and 68.77.
Violation of Employee Participation Requirements
Respondent did not develop until at least May 9, 2016, a written plan of action for the Covered Process regarding the implementation of the employee participation requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 68.83, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.83(a).
Respondent did not complete consultation with its employees and their representatives on the conduct and development of process hazard analyses and other elements of process safety management in 40 C.F.R. Part 68 as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.83(b) at the Covered Processes until August 5, 2017.
Respondent, therefore, violated 40 C.F.R. § 68.83.
Violation of Emergency Action Plan Requirements
Respondent did not timely develop and implement an emergency response program that meets the requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 68.95.
Respondent does not have trained emergency response personnel that have training sufficient to respond to a massive, uncontrolled ammonia release.
The Facility was not included in the community emergency response plan developed under 42 U .S.C. § 11003 until September 20, 2017, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.90(b)(1).
Respondent did not have appropriate mechanisms in place to notify emergency responders when there is a need for emergency response for the Facility, as required by 40 C.F R. § 68.90(b)(3), until April 14, 2016.
Respondent, therefore, violated 40 C.F.R. §§ 68.90 and 68.95.
Violation of Compliance Audit Requirements
Respondent, as the owner and operator of the Covered Process, did not timely certify the most recent Compliance Audit conducted for the Covered Process, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.79(a).
Respondent did not promptly determine and document an appropriate response to each of the findings of the most recent compliance audit for the Covered Process or document that deficiencies had been corrected, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 68.79(d).
Respondent, therefore, violated 40 C.F.R. § 68.79.
EPCRA SECTION 312 CHEMICAL INVENTORY REPORTING REOUIREMENTS
Section 312(a) of EPCRA and its implementing regulations at 40 C.F.R. Part 370. require the owner or operator of a facility which is required by OSHA to prepare or have available a safety data sheet (SDS) for a hazardous chemical, to prepare and submit an Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory Form (Tier I or Tier II as described in 40 C.F.R. Part 370) to the State Emergency Response Commission (“SEPC”), the Local Emergency Response Commission (LEPC), and the fire department with jurisdiction over the facility (Fire Department) by March 1, 1988, and annually thereafter on March 1. The form must contain the information required by Section 312(d) of EPCRA, covering all hazardous chemicals required by OSHA to have an MSDS that are present at the facility at any one time during the preceding year in amounts equal to or exceeding 10,000 pounds or the case of an Extremely Hazardous Substance, in amounts equal to or exceeding 500 pounds or the Threshold Planning Quantity designated by EPA at 40 C.F.R. Part 355. Appendices A and B, whichever is lower.
Ammonia is listed in Appendices A and B of 40 C.F.R. Part 355 and is, therefore, an Extremely Hazardous Substance under 40 C.F.R. § 370.66.
Ammonia has a Threshold Planning Quantity of 500 pounds as specified in 40 C.F.R. Part 355, Appendices A and B.
Under Section 329(4) of EPCRA, 42 U.S.C. § 11049(4), facility means all buildings, equipment, structures, and other stationary items that are located on a single site or on contiguous or adjacent sites and which are owned or operated by the same person (or by any person which controls. is controlled. or under common control with, such person).
During the calendar year 2014, more than 500 pounds of ammonia was present at each of the facilities.
Respondent did not file an Emergency, and Hazardous Chemical Inventory Form for the extremely hazardous chemical ammonia for the Facilities with the SERC, the LEPC, or the Fire Department for the calendar year 2014 until October 2015.
Respondent, therefore, violated 40 C.F.R. § 370.45 concerning these Facilities for the calendar year 2014.
Violations of Chemical Inventory Reporting Requirements
Respondent did not file an Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory Form for the extremely hazardous chemical ammonia for the calendar year 2014 until October 2015.
Respondent, therefore, violated 40 C.F.R. § 370.45 for the calendar year 2014.
TERMS OF SETTLEMENT
After considering the penalty assessment factors in the applicable statutes, EPA has determined, and Respondents agree that an appropriate penalty to settle this action is $420,826. Of this amount, $329,828 is for CAA violations at the two Storage Facilities; $84,959 is for EPCRA violations at the other facilities, and $6,039 is for EPCRA violations at the other facility.
ATTACHMENT A
List of Bare Minimum Safety Measures
Identifying Hazards
- Hazard Addressed: Releases or safety deficiencies that stem from a failure to identify hazards in design/operation of a system
- The facility has completed a process hazard analysis or review.
Operating Activities:
- Hazard Addressed: High risk of a release from operating or maintenance activity
- The system has self-closing/quick closing valves on oil pots.
- The facility has written procedures for maintenance and operation activities.
- Only authorized persons ha~e access to machinery room and the ability to alter safety settings on equipment.
Maintenance/Mechanical Integrity
- Hazard Addressed: Leaks/releases from maintenance neglect
- A preventative maintenance program is in place to, among other things, detect and control corrosion, deteriorated vapor barriers, ice buildup, and pipe hammering, and to inspect the integrity of equipment/pipe supports.
- All piping system openings except the relief header are plugged or capped, or valve is locked.
- Equipment, piping, and emergency shutdown valves are labeled for easy identification, and pressure vessels have legible, accessible nameplates.
- All atmospheric pressure relief valves have been replaced in the last live years with visible confirmation of accessible pressure relief valves [note -replacement every five years is the general rule, but there are two other options in IIAR Bulletin 110. 6.6.3].
Machinery Room and System Design
- Hazard Addressed: Inability to isolate and adequately vent releases
- The System(s) has/have emergency shut-off and ventilation Switches outside each machinery room.
- The machinery room(s) has/have functional, tested ventilation. Air inlets are positioned to avoid recirculation of exhaust air and ensure sufficient in let air to replace exhausted air.
- Documentation exists to show that pressure relief valves that have a common discharge header have adequately sized piping to prevent excessive back pressure on relief valves, or if built before 2000, have sufficient diameter based on the sum of the relief valve cross-sectional areas.
Emergency Actions
- Hazard Addressed: Inability to regain control and reduce release impact
- Critical shutoff valves are accessible, and a schematic is in place to show responders where to access them.
- EPCRA Tier II reporting is up to date.
CLICK HERE for the CAFO