The facility includes a Crude/Vacuum Unit (“CVU”). The CVU stores, handles, treats or otherwise processes a mixture of flammable substances, including methane, ethane, isopentane, propane, butane, isobutene and pentane. The CVU had an 8 inch piping elbow that failed, leading to the release of hot Vacuum Tower bottoms. The piping elbow used in the CVU was constructed of carbon steel, in a service that required chrome alloy construction. The use of carbon steel resulted in material failure leading to the release and fire. An additional factor leading to the release and fire was a thinned wall due to high- temperature sulfidation corrosion. Measurements taken after the fire revealed thickness readings near the failure point as low as 0.07, well below allowable levels. The refinery’s post fire investigation concluded that poor quality practices and procedures were utilized when the elbow was installed in 1990 by the previous owner. Another carbon steel elbow was identified in the same piping circuit following the incident.
Pursuant to section 112(r)(l) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(1), an owner/operator of a stationary source producing, processing, handling or storing substances listed pursuant to section 112(r)(3) of the CAA, 42 U.S. C.§ 7412(r)(3), or any other extremely hazardous substance, has a general duty to: (I) identify hazards which may result from accidental releases of such substances using appropriate hazard assessment techniques; (2) design and maintain a safe facility, taking such steps as are necessary to prevent releases; and (3) minimize the consequences of accidental releases that do occur. At the Facility, Respondent produces, processes, handles, or stores substances listed in, or pursuant to, CAA § 112(r)(3) or other extremely hazardous substances identified as such due to toxicity, reactivity, flammability, volatility, or corrosivity. The release of Vacuum Tower bottoms at the Facility on July 22,2012, constituted an “accidental release” as that term is defined by section 112(r)(2)(A) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(2)(A).
Respondent failed to design and maintain a safe facility and did not take such necessary steps to prevent accidental releases by not fully utilizing commonly available and accepted practices to ensure safety. Respondent’s failure constitutes a violation of the general duty clause in section 112(r)(1) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(r)(J). Respondent is therefore subject to the assessment of penalties pursuant to sections 113(a)(3) and 113(d)(J)(B) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7413(a)(3) and 7413(d)(J )(B), for at least two days of violation of the general duty clause of section 112(r)(J) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. §7412(r)(J).
Pursuant to the authority granted in sections 113(a)(3) and 113(d)(1)(B) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7413(a)(3) and 7413(d)(1)(B), and taking into consideration the size of the Respondent’s business, the economic impact of the penalty on the Respondent’s business, the Respondent’s full compliance history and good faith efforts to comply, the duration of the violation, payment by Respondent of penalties previously assessed for the same violation (if any), the economic benefit of noncompliance, and the seriousness of the violation, as well as other factors which justice may require, EPA and Respondent agree that an appropriate penalty to settle this matter is $75,000 for two days
of violations (the day of the fire and the day before) associated with the violations alleged in this document.
CLICK HERE to see the entire EPA document