Spill Compliance News

ECA Home Image
Training Instructor

READ this new article from ECA . . .
(most) Everything you wanted to know about the SPCC Rule but were afraid to ask by Brett D. Smith, PE

***

Recent EPA Enforcement Cases

For some background on SPCC enforcement by the EPA, visit http://www2.epa.gov/enforcement.

News Release (below): EPA cites Longview, WA oil company for spill prevention and control violations

On February 2, 2017, the EPA settled with Wilson Oil Inc., (dba Wilcox & Flegel Oil Co.) for Clean Water Act spill prevention violations at its Terminal facility in Longview, Washington.

EPA determined after a 2015 inspection that the company failed to implement an adequate Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan and lacked adequate secondary containment for large oil storage tanks in one of the Terminal’s tank farms. Since the inspection, the company constructed new secondary containment for that tank farm and upgraded their SPCC Plan.

As part of the settlement, the Company will pay a $44,069 civil penalty and will implement a Supplemental Environmental Project worth approximately $125,000.

In December 2014, a Northwest US fuel supplier was fined $37,500 for multiple violations for failing to comply with spill prevention, control and countermeasure (SPCC) rules regarding adjacent wetlands and a nearby lake.

In September 2014, a Seattle, Washington marine diesel facility was fined $34,100 for violating SPCC rules regarding a nearby navigable water of the US.

In September 2014, a gas company was fined $269,900 for violating SPCC rules at its facility near an environmentally protected area.

News Release (below): Oregon farm and fuel supplier fined for federal oil spill prevention and response violations

(Seattle – March 9, 2011) Under an agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Hartley Farms & Feedlot LLC and Valley Trucking LLC Inc. have agreed to pay a $34,000 penalty for spilling diesel fuel at the Hartley Farms property near Nyssa, Oregon in violation of the federal Clean Water Act.

According to Edward Kowalski, EPA’s Director of Compliance and Enforcement in Seattle, “this spill could have been prevented if Hartley Farms had Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures provisions in place. Beginning on Nov. 10, 2011, all above-ground oil storage facilities regulated under the Clean Water Act’s SPCC rules, including farms, will be required to have a spill prevention plan and secondary containment.”

News Release (below): Idaho fuel suppliers fined for federal oil spill prevention and response violations

(Seattle – Sept. 27, 2010) John C. Berry & Sons, Inc. agreed to pay a $15,000 fine for alleged violations of the Clean Water Act at its oil storage and distribution facility in Idaho Falls, Idaho under an order issued by the EPA.

During an August 2009 inspection of the facility, inspectors noted several violations of Clean Water Act regulations including:
Failure to prepare an adequate spill prevention plan,
Inadequate secondary containment structures,
Failure to conduct inspections and spill prevention training.

(Seattle – Sept. 19, 2011) Kimble Oil, Inc. agreed to pay a $15,000 fine for alleged violations of the Clean Water Act at its oil storage and distribution facility in Challis, Idaho under an order issued by the EPA.

During an August 2009 inspection of the facility, inspectors noted several violations of Clean Water Act regulations including:
Failure to prepare an adequate spill prevention plan,
Inadequate secondary containment structures,
Failure to control drainage for undiked areas,
Failure to conduct inspections and spill prevention training.

News Release (below): Alta Mesa Services, L.P., fined for Violating the Clean Water Act

(DALLAS – September 26, 2012) The Environmental Protection Agency has fined Alta Mesa Services, L.P., of Houston, Texas, $29,400 for violating federal Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) regulations at two of its oil production facilities in Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana.

A May 1, 2012, federal inspection at the facilities found numerous violations including: failure to adequately conduct and document facility inspections, failure to provide the locations for spare sump pumps and to provide annual pressure test data to demonstrate compliance with SPCC regulations. The inspections also revealed inadequate documentation of SPCC training and failure to describe the method of activation or control of surface and subsurface well shut-in valves and devices at the facilities.

The oil production facilities inspected and fined were North Turtle Bayou ($9,200) and Turtle Bayou ($20,400).

News Release (below): Oregon fuel companies fined for federal oil spill prevention and response violations

(Seattle – April 1, 2013) Three Oregon fuel companies will pay fines and invest in facility upgrades for violating federal oil spill prevention and response rules at their Oregon facilities, according to separate settlements with the EPA. EPA inspections of each facility from 2007 and 2011 found multiple violations of federal spill prevention rules and spill response requirements under the Clean Water Act, intended to protect people and the environment.

“Companies storing large amounts of fuel must be prepared to prevent and respond to fuel spills to protect people’s health and the environment,” said Jeff KenKnight, manager of the EPA Region 10 compliance unit. “With strong SPCC in place, accidental fuel spills are far less likely to occur.”

Tyree Oil, Inc. failed to install sufficient containment to prevent and contain fuel spills at North Bend and Eugene facilities and failed to develop a federal Facility Response Plan at its North Bend facility. They also spilled nearly 300 gallons of diesel fuel at its Eugene facility, some of which reached the Willamette River. They will pay a $27,920 federal fine, a $2,080 state fine and complete $200,000 in secondary containment system upgrades to their transload facility in Eugene.

Carson Oil Co. failed to install sufficient containment to prevent and contain fuel spills at its North Bend facility. They also spilled 29 gallons of diesel fuel, some of which reached Coos Bay. They will pay a $29,843 federal fine and complete $35,000 in stormwater control upgrades to their facility.

Ferrell’s Fuel Network failed to install sufficient containment to prevent and contain fuel spills at its facility in Klamath Falls. They will pay a $28,200 federal fine.

***

Federal law requires that facilities with the potential for oil spills take every possible step to prevent discharges to rivers, lakes, or oceans by implementing Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure plans. Facilities with more than 1,320 gallons of aboveground fuel storage capacity must have SPCC Plans to prevent and contain spills, such as installing secondary containment around fuel storage tanks and transfer areas.

Facilities are also required by federal law to minimize environmental damage if oil spills do occur. Facility Response Plan rules under the Clean Water Act require facilities that store and distribute oil be prepared for containing and cleaning up spills. To safely respond to a spill, a facility must have adequate employee training, spill response equipment, and a contingency plan for containing and cleaning up a release.

Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures regulation: http://www.epa.gov/emergencies/content/spcc/index.htm

***

NOW SOME GOOD NEWS…

ECA can help you with your spill compliance needs. We will prepare your facility-specific SPCC Plan, perform integrity inspections of regulated tanks, as per STI SP001 (5th edition) requirements and refer you to ethical / knowledgeable service providers who will make ONLY the necessary tank wall repairs to make your tanks certified Suitable for Continued Service and in compliance your facility SPCC Plan.

Please note – to be certified Suitable for Continued Service, tanks DO NOT NEED upgraded vents, lining, paint, etc.

REMEMBER – facilities with 1,320 gallons of aggregate tank / container (55-gals or more) storage must be in compliance with the SPCC Regulation (40CFR112) or risk being fined by the EPA. If you’re concerned about your facility being in compliance, please contact us for a FREE initial consultation.