Grass Valley Wastewater Treatment Plant - Executive Summary

| Accident History | Chemicals | Emergency Response | Registration | Source | Executive Summary |

The City of Grass Valley has instituted a Risk Management Program for their wastewater treatment facility, Grass Valley Wastewater Treatment Plant, as required by Federal Accidental Release Prevention (ARP) Program regulations at 40 CFR Part 68.  The Risk Management Program identifies the equipment, procedures, maintenance, inspection, and training associated with Regulated Substances (RS's) handled at this facility in excess of Federal threshold quantities; describes the structured assessment of hazards which was conducted to assess possible effects on employees and offsite public and environmental receptors; provides the results of an offsite consequences analysis; defines a prevention program, emergency response program, and mitigation measures to reduce the probability and magnitude of accidental releases of RS's; and establishes a schedule and responsibilities for implementation of mitigation measures and auditing of program elements.  This Risk Management Plan (RMP) is being file 
das required by ARP regulations in order to report the elements of the current Risk Management Program and to describe further measures planned to mitigate or prevent accidental releases of RS's.   
 
STATIONARY SOURCE AND REGULATED SUBSTANCES HANDLED 
 
The City of Grass Valley's  Wastewater Treatment Plant is located at 556C Freeman Lane, Grass Valley, CA in Nevada County, and uses chlorine and sulfur dioxide for disinfection and dechlorination in quantities greater than the Federal threshold quantity for these RS's.  The facility is located in a ravine on the west side of town.  There are 13 full-time employees at this site.  Chlorine and sulfur dioxide are received in ton containers by truck, handled with an electric hoist, and stored on ton container scales and trunnions inside the building.  The chlorine is used for odor control of the influent wastewater, to disinfect the wastewater effluent, and for other process uses.  The sulfur dioxide is used to dechlorinate the disinfected eff 
luent for aquatic toxicity control.  Pressurized chlorine gas within a ton container is withdrawn under pressure and piped to a vacuum regulator valve located in the storage room where the gas pressure is reduced to vacuum.  From there, the chlorine under vacuum is metered through rate valves and rotameters in chlorinators located in a separate room, and drawn into water solution by the passage of pressurized water through an injector.  Liquid sulfur dioxide is withdrawn from ton containers and evaporated to gas in an electrically-heated evaporator with a water bath surrounding a pressure vessel.  Pressurized gas from the evaporator is reduced to vacuum, metered, and fed to chlorinated effluent in a manner identical to the process for chlorination. 
 
ACCIDENTAL RELEASE PREVENTION AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE POLICIES 
 
It is the policy of the City of Grass Valley that the receipt, storage and handling of chlorine and sulfur dioxide at its facility be done in a manner which meets regulatory req 
uirements and minimizes the probability and severity of accidental releases of chlorine or sulfur dioxide to the atmosphere, in order to protect the health and safety of its workers, the public, and the environment.  In order to accomplish this goal, the City of Grass Valley has gathered safety information on chlorine and sulfur dioxide and on the process, equipment and procedures involving chlorine and sulfur dioxide; performed a structured assessment of hazards of the process and external events which might affect the process; performed an offsite consequences analysis of defined release scenarios; established a written program for prevention and mitigation of accidental releases; and established a written emergency response program coordinated with emergency response agencies. 
 
WORST CASE RELEASE SCENARIO 
 
A single "worst case" release scenario is required to be considered for each stationary source, resulting in the maximum distance to an endpoint for all toxic RS's contained on si 
te above the threshold quantity. 
The worst case release scenario for toxic chemicals is defined in the ARP regulations as the release of the contents of the largest single container of RS (in this case chlorine) over a period of 10 minutes. The scenario considered the release of the contents of the largest container of chlorine on site, in this case 2,000 lb.  This release scenario is not physically possible, due to the characteristics of chlorine. 
 
ALTERNATIVE CASE RELEASE SCENARIO 
 
An "alternative case" release scenario is required to be considered for each toxic RS handled in quantities greater than the threshold quantity at the site. 
The "alternative case" scenario is described in the ARP regulations as a likely release resulting in offsite effects, considering administrative controls and mitigation measures in place, and is to be determined by the facility operators as part of the Process Hazard Analysis required to be performed during RMP development.  The "alternative cases" con 
sidered for this facility are the release of chlorine or sulfur dioxide from a pinhole in one of the fusible plugs on a received ton container, due to a supplier error or damage in transit, with the release secured by application of a Type "B" Ton Container Repair Kit fixture after 20 minutes. 
 
ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS 
 
Administrative controls in effect at the City of Grass Valley which were considered to mitigate the severity of the Worst Case and Alternative Case release scenarios include the City of Grass Valley's written policies and procedures for training of operators and maintenance personnel, written procedures for control of the inventory of chlorine and sulfur dioxide at the facility, and policies regarding quality level of replacement materials and components for the chlorine and sulfur dioxide systems. 
 
MITIGATION MEASURES 
 
No mitigation measures were considered to limit the severity of the Worst Case scenario.  No passive mitigation measures were considered to limit the sev 
erity of the Alternative Case scenario.  Active mitigation was considered for the Alternative Case, in the form of the timely response of properly trained and equipped personnel following established emergency response procedures. 
 
GENERAL ACCIDENTAL RELEASE PREVENTION PROGRAMS 
 
General accidental release prevention programs instituted by the City of Grass Valley are categorized as administrative (management) programs; procedures, training, and engineering controls; and emergency response programs. 
The City of Grass Valley has instituted a Process Safety Management (PSM) Program meeting OSHA requirements at 29 CFR 1910.119 covering its disinfection and dechlorination process.  This constitutes the general accidental release prevention program for the City of Grass Valley's operations.  The program and document mangement procedures included in the PSM Program will be used as the management system for the Risk Management Program. 
 
CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC RELEASE PREVENTION STEPS 
 
Release preve 
ntion steps specific to chlorine and sulfur dioxide have been identified and implemented.  These include, among other things, discontinuing storage of full ton containers on rails outside the building, and creation of numerous facility-specific operation procedures with check boxes for completion of critical steps. 
 
FIVE YEAR ACCIDENT HISTORY 
 
There have been no accidents involving chlorine or sulfur dioxide at this facility within the past five years resulting in injuries or offsite consequences. 
 
EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROGRAM 
 
The City of Grass Valley's Emergency Response Program applicable to chlorine and sulfur dioxide has been coordinated with Nevada County Department of Environmental Health, the local agency responsible for hazardous materials inventory reporting and release response coordination.  The City of Grass Valley maintains First Responder capability with respect to chlorine and sulfur dioxide release incidents. 
 
PLANNED CHANGES TO IMPROVE SAFETY 
 
All of the improvements an 
d mitigation measures identified in the process hazard analysis which the City of Grass Valley committed to accomplish have been completed or are in progress.  Any other measures identified by employees during workplace hazard surveys, or as a result of audit activities, will be thoroughly reviewed and considered for implementation.
Click to return to beginning