Document p2Z9om1Evn8jrL5JkOxqRbwpk

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region6 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200 Dallas, Texas 75202 - 2733 FEB 2 6 2015 CERTWIED MAIL-RETURN-RECEIPT REQUESTED: 7014 0150 0000 2453 8905 Mr. Bill Gibson Director EHS&T Audits Enterprise Products Operating LLC 1100 Louisiana Houston; Texas 77002 Re: Enterprise Products Operating LLC, Docket No. CAA-06-2015-3307 Dear Mr. Gibson: Enclosed is a final Consent Agreement and Final Order (CAFO) that has been filed with the Region 6 Regional Hearing Clerk and is now effective. As provided in the CAFO, Enterprise Products Operating LLC shall have thirty (30) days from the effective date of the CAFO to pay the civil penalty of $35,000.00. Ifyou have any questions regarding this CAFO, please contact Jeffrey Clay, Assistant Regional Counsel, at (214) 665-7297. . Enclosure Director Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division FILED UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENC~GIGNAL HE/dt:!lG CLERK REGION6 Ph RECIO?~ Ill DALLAS, TEXAS In the Matter of: Enterprise Products Operating, LLC Respondent Consent Agreement and Final Order EPA Docket No. CAA-06-2015-3307 CONSENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL ORDER The Director of the Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division of the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), Region 6 ("Complainant") and, Enterprise Products Operating, LLC ("Respondent") in the above-referenced proceeding, hereby agree to resolve this matter through the issuance of this Consent Agreement and Final Order ("CAFO"). I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1. This proceeding for the assessment of civil penalties is brought by EPA pursuant to sections 113(a)(3) and 113(d)(l)(B) of the Clean Air Act, as amended ("Act" or "CAA"), 42 U.S.C. 7413(a)(3) and 7413(d)(l)(B), and is simultaneously commenced and concluded through the issuance of this CAFO pursuant to 40 C.F.R. 22.13(b), 22.18(b)(2) and (3), and 22.34. 2. For purposes of this proceeding, Respondent admits the jurisdictional allegations contained herein; however, Respondent neither admits nor denies the specific factual allegations contained in this CAFO. Enterprise Products Operating, LLC Docket No. CAA-06-2015-3307 3. Respondent explicitly waives any right to contest the allegations and its right to appeal the proposed Final Order set forth herein, and waives all defenses, which have been raised or could have been raised to the claims set forth in this CAf'.O. 4. Compliance with all the terms and conditions of this CAFO shall only resolve Respondent's liability for federal civil monetary penalties for the violations and facts, alleged in this CAFO. 5. Respondent consents to the issuance of this CAFO and to the assessment and payment of the stated civil penalty in the amount and by the method set forth in this CAFO. II. EPA'S ALLEGATIONS 6. Respondent is a limited liability company authorized to do business in the State of Texas. 7. Respondent operates the Shoup Plant, a natural gas processing and fractionation facility located at 802 McKenzie Road, Corpus Christi, Nueces County, Texas 78410 ("Facility"). 8. Respondent had maintenance activities performed on the Inlet Filter Separator ("Vessel") on March 10, 2014 and March 11, 2014. 9. The Respondent used a contractor, Strike Construction to perform the routine maintenance on the vessel, specifically, to replace filters. 10. The Vessel was flooded with water overnight on March 10, 2014, which cleaned residual hydrocarbons from the vessel. 11. All of the High Point Vent Valves on the vessel were not opened prior to flooding the vessel with water. Page 2of12 Enterprise Products Operating, LLC Docket No. CAA-06-2015-3307 12. On the day of the incident, March 11, 2014, the Vessel was drained and the filters were removed. 13. Upon returning from lunch, but before the arrival of the Enterprise Products operator assigned to oversee the project, the contractors noted white smoke escaping from the vessel. 14. In response to the smoke one of the four contractors sprayed water into the vessel. A pyrophoric reaction occurred inside the vessel, and the ensuing fire injurred the four contractors. 15. The local fire department and other local and state officials were notified. 16. The fire was extinguished and the injured workers were transported to emel'.gency medical treatment. 17. The Respondent provided a Team Incident Investigation Report dated July 23, 2014, which included a description summary, classification/causal factors, recommendations and timeline of the incident. The Respondent stated in this report that procedure "SHP-001 Process Filter Element Change Out" did not specify that all the High Point Vent valves needed to be open when the Vessel was flooded with water as the Vessel has multiple compartments, thus restricting the complete removal of hydrocarbons when all the high point vent valves are not opened. 18. The facility identified along with various in~ustry and manufacturer sources, the need to ensure that all the High Point Vent valves need to be opened when the Vessel is flooded with water to avoid restricting the complete removal of hydrocarbons and thus avoiding pyrophoric reactions which lead to igniting hydrocarbons. ~!9. The hazards associated with ignition sources in and l:ltQund vessels containing flammable or explosive substances, such as hydrocarbons, are well established as are the standards for preventing or minimizing explosions and fires in such areas. Page 3of12 Enterprise Products Operating, LLC Docket No. CAA..,06-2015-3307 20. The Respondent failed to safely ensure that the prop~r safety procedures were followed during the replacement of the filters in the Vessel on March I0 and 11, 2014. 21. Pursuant to section l 12(r)(l) ofthe CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7412(r)(l), an owner/operator of a stationary source producing, processing, handling or storing substances listed pursuant to section l 12(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. 22. Respondent is a "person" as that term is defined by section 302(e) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7602(e). 23. The Facility is a "stationary source" as that term is defined by section 112(r)(2)(C) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 74_12(r)(2)(C). 24. Respondent is the "owner or operator" as those terms are defined by section 112(a)(9) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7412(a)(9), of a stationary source. 25. 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. 26. The release of flammable hydrocarbons from the Vessel at the Facility on March 11, 2014 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). 27. Respondent failed to design and maintain a safe facility and did not take such necessary steps to minimize the consequences of accidental releases by not fully utilizing Page 4of12 Enterprise Products Operating, LLC Docket No. CAA-06-2015-3307 commonly available and accepted practices to ensure safety by failing to follow the proper SOP when flooding the vessel with water in preparation for maintenance activities. 28. Respondent's failure constitutes a violation of the general duty clause in section 112(r)(I) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7412(r)(l). 29. Respondent is therefore subject to the assessment of penalties pursuant to sections 113(a)(3) and 113(d)(l)(B) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7413(a)(3) and 7413(d)(l)(B), for at least one day of violation of the general duty clause of section 112(r)(I) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7412(r)(I). III. TERMS OF SETTLEMENT A. CIVIL PENALTY 30. Pursuant to the authority granted in sections 113(a)(3) and l 13(d)(l)(B) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7413(a)(3) and 7413(d)(l)(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 $35,000. 31. Respondent shall pay the assessed penalty within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this CAFO. Respondent shall pay the assessed civil penalty by certified check, cashier's check, or wire transfer, made payable to "Treasurer, United States of America, EPA - Region 6." Payment shall be remitted in one of three ways: regular Page 5of12