The respondent produces, processes, stores, and/or handles extremely hazardous substances, including hydrochloric acid (36%), due to its toxic and corrosive characteristics and propensity to volatilize in ambient air. On July 25, 2014, there was a release of hydrochloric acid (36%) at the Facility. An operator while on his normal rounds gauging the Boiler I house Sump, noticed an abnormal vapor cloud coining fro1n behind Warehouse #2. The operator immediately notified a Shift Leader, who identified the vapor cloud as hydrochloric acid (36%), and immediately shut down the pumping of hydrochloric acid (36%) from Line 3 through the pipe rack behind the warehouse. Facility later determined that the release was caused by a breach of a flange connection on a 2″ pipe. The pipe consists of two components: a carbon steel outer structure that bears pressure and a teflon liner that protects the carbon steel outer pipe fro1n the hydrochloric acid traveling through the pipe. The carbon steel pipe had been severely corroded by hydrochloric acid that had permeated the teflon inner liner. Once the outer carbon steel pipe lost its structural integrity the teflon inner shell was unable to contain the pressure and failed at the flange connection. 3,280 pounds of hydrochloric acid (36%) were released during the incident.
Pursuant to section 112(r)(1) of the CAA, an Owner/operator of a stationary source producing, processing, handling or storing substances listed pursuant to section 112(r)(3) of the CAA, or any other extremely hazardous substance, has a general duty to:
- identify hazards which may result from accidental releases of such substances using appropriate hazard assessment techniques;
- design and maintain a safe facility, taking such steps as are necessary to prevent releases; and
- minimize the consequences of accidental release that do occur.
The release of hydrochloric acid (36%) at the Facility on July 25, 2014, constituted an “accidental release” as that term is defined by section 112(r)(2)(A) of the CAA.
Respondent failed to design and maintain a safe facility and did not take such necessary steps to prevent accidental releases by not ensuring the piping was maintained sufficiently to prevent releases.
Respondent’s failure constitutes a violation of the general duty clause in section 112(r)(1) of the CAA and is therefore subject to the assessment of penalties for at least one day of violation of the general duty clause of section 112(r)(1) of the CAA.
Upon consideration of the entire record herein and upon consideration of the size of the business, the economic impact of the penalty on the business, the violator’s full compliance history and good faith efforts to comply, the duration of the violation, payment by the violator of penalties previously assessed for the same violation, the economic benefit of noncompliance, the seriousness of the violation, specific facts and equities, litigation risks, and other factors as justice may require, the parties agree that $30,000 is an appropriate penalty to resolve this matter.
CLICK HERE for the CAFO