On June 23, 1999, Respondent submitted a Risk Management Plan (“RMP”) for the Facility for the storage of acrolein. Respondent de-registered the RMP from EPA’s national database on July 15, 2010. EPA conducted an inspection of the Facility on August 11, 2010, to assess Respondent’s compliance with Section 112(r)(l) and (7) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(1) and (7). Subsequent to the inspection, Respondent submitted to EPA an inventory of chemicals present in the warehouse during the inspection and their respective flammability classes. According to the chemical inventory, 4,675 gallons of Class lA liquids and 4,125 gallons of Class IC liquids were stored at the Facility in 55-gallon drums. Class lA and IC liquids are flammable liquids.
EPA determined that, based on the inspection and the review of information obtained from Respondent, Respondent failed to address the hazards posed by the storage and handling of certain flammable liquids and failed to minimize the consequences of accidental releases which do occur, as required by the General Duty Clause, as follows:
- Respondent failed to provide proper storage of flammable liquids consistent with applicable industry standards, which may include but are not limited to National Fire Protection Association 30, Flammable and Combustible Liquid Code Handbook, 8th ed. (2008) and the International Fire Code (2006). Quantities of certain flammable liquids were stored at the Facility in excess of quantitative limits and in a configuration exceeding the maximum storage height for flammable liquids stored in drums in unprotected storage areas.
- Respondent failed to provide fire protection for the drum storage area consistent with applicable industry standards, e.g., there were no automatic sprinklers installed in the drum storage area of the warehouse; and
- Respondent failed to provide appropriate containment, drainage and spill control consistent with applicable industry standards.
EPA determined that the storage deficiencies identified above constituted violations of the General Duty Clause. On April19, 2011, EPA issued Administrative Order, Docket No. CAA-03-2011-0155DA (“Order”), to Respondent and to David Walters, the owner of the Facility property, to correct the identified alleged violations of the General Duty Clause. Respondent elected to move its operations to a different leased location. Respondent moved its operations on May 1, 2012. While reserving the right to dispute the applicability of the cited industry standards, Respondent, by moving to the Custer Facility, satisfied its obligations under the Order and on July 26,2012, EPA issued a Notice of Termination of the Order. In full and final settlement and resolution of all allegations referenced in the foregoing EPA’s Findings of Fact and EPA’s 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 violation of Section 112(r)(1) ofthe CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(1), as set forth above, in the amount of $22,642.
CLICK HERE for the agreement