Corporate Misconduct Accountability Project
Penske Logistics LLC · EPA Consent Agreement and Final Order
Penske Logistics Fined $161K for Ammonia Safety Failures at Indiana Facility
EPA cited the logistics giant for failing to protect workers and neighbors from a 10,000-pound toxic ammonia system with broken ventilation and incomplete hazard plans.
HIGH SEVERITY
TL;DR
Penske Logistics operated an ammonia refrigeration system at a Shelbyville, Indiana warehouse for over two decades with defective ventilation, incorrect electrical safety classifications, and incomplete hazard analyses. The EPA found the company failed to conduct required compliance audits and delayed fixing known safety problems. The company paid $161,421 to settle the case without admitting wrongdoing and no longer operates the facility.
This case shows how companies can neglect deadly chemical safety for years when fines are cheaper than compliance.
$161,421
Total civil penalty paid by Penske
10,000+ lbs
Anhydrous ammonia stored (toxic threshold)
22+ years
Period of alleged non-compliance (1999-2021)
100
Evaporators in the covered process
6
Separate Clean Air Act violations alleged
The Allegations: A Breakdown
Core Allegations
What Penske did wrong · 8 points
| 01 | Penske provided a ventilation system design that failed to meet required design code standards for the machinery room. The machinery room could only be classified as non-hazardous if the ventilation conformed with code, which it did not. | high |
| 02 | The company listed incorrect electrical classification for the facility machinery room, stating the environment was non-hazardous when it could not be without proper ventilation. | high |
| 03 | Penske failed to address engineering and administrative controls such as appropriate detection methodologies to provide early warning of ammonia releases in its 2017 Process Hazard Analysis. | high |
| 04 | The company failed to evaluate the possible safety and health effects of control failures in its hazard analysis, leaving employees and emergency responders uncertain about what could happen if a leak escalated. | high |
| 05 | Penske did not include at least one employee knowledgeable in the What-If methodology when conducting the 2017 Process Hazard Analysis, violating federal requirements. | medium |
| 06 | The company failed to establish a system to promptly address safety recommendations from its hazard analysis. During the September 2021 inspection, Penske could not provide documentation that it had completed recommendations from the 2017 analysis. | high |
| 07 | Penske failed to certify that it evaluated compliance with Risk Management Program provisions at least every three years, meaning procedures and practices were not verified as adequate. | medium |
| 08 | The facility had a regulated substance present in more than the threshold quantity since at least 1999, suggesting over two decades of potential non-compliance before the 2021 EPA inspection. | high |
Regulatory Failures
How oversight broke down · 6 points
| 01 | The EPA did not conduct a thorough inspection of the Shelbyville facility until September 2021, despite the facility storing large volumes of anhydrous ammonia since at least 1999. | high |
| 02 | The Administrator and Attorney General had to jointly determine that an administrative penalty action was appropriate for a violation period exceeding 12 months, suggesting the timeframe was extraordinary. | medium |
| 03 | The consent agreement allowed Penske to settle without admitting or denying the factual allegations, limiting transparency and accountability. | medium |
| 04 | The maximum penalty available under the Clean Air Act was $446,456 for violations after November 2015, but the actual penalty was only $161,421, representing 36% of the maximum. | medium |
| 05 | By the time enforcement action was taken, Penske had already transferred operations to Kroger Limited Partnership I, potentially limiting the practical impact of remedial measures. | medium |
| 06 | The settlement does not require Penske to implement specific corrective actions because the company certified it no longer operates the facility. | medium |
Profit Over People
Cost cutting at the expense of safety · 6 points
| 01 | Penske maintained a maximum inventory exceeding 10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia while failing to meet Program 3 safety requirements, allowing the company to avoid costly compliance upgrades. | high |
| 02 | The facility operated with a ventilation system that did not meet code standards, avoiding the expense of a compliant system redesign while exposing workers to elevated risk. | high |
| 03 | The company delayed completing safety recommendations from its 2017 hazard analysis until 2020, with no documentation of timely follow-through systems required by regulation. | high |
| 04 | Penske operated the facility under an incorrect electrical classification that assumed a non-hazardous environment, potentially allowing cheaper equipment purchases instead of explosion-proof alternatives. | medium |
| 05 | The $161,421 penalty represents a small fraction of a major logistics company’s revenue, making it more cost-effective to settle than to maintain rigorous ongoing compliance. | high |
| 06 | By transferring operations to Kroger before the settlement, Penske avoided having to implement corrective measures at its own expense. | medium |
Public Health and Safety
The risks to workers and neighbors · 7 points
| 01 | Anhydrous ammonia in the case of an accidental release is known to cause or may reasonably be anticipated to cause death, injury, or serious adverse effects to human health or the environment. | high |
| 02 | The facility stored enough ammonia to trigger the highest risk category under federal regulations, Program 3, because public receptors existed within the distance of an endpoint for a worst-case release. | high |
| 03 | Workers in the machinery room faced exposure risk because the ventilation system did not meet code standards and the electrical environment was incorrectly classified. | high |
| 04 | The facility included seven compressors, three storage vessels, one high pressure storage vessel, three condensers, and 100 evaporators, creating multiple potential points of failure. | medium |
| 05 | Penske failed to address appropriate detection methodologies to provide early warning of releases, leaving workers and neighbors without adequate alert systems. | high |
| 06 | The company did not conduct a qualitative evaluation of safety and health effects if controls failed, meaning no one assessed what would happen to people in the event of a system breakdown. | high |
| 07 | Written operating procedures did not address steps for emergency shutdown, leaving workers without clear guidance during a crisis. | high |
Worker Exploitation
Employees left unprotected · 6 points
| 01 | The Process Hazard Analysis team did not include at least one employee knowledgeable in the What-If methodology, denying workers expert representation in safety planning. | medium |
| 02 | Penske failed to communicate safety recommendations and actions to operating and maintenance employees whose work assignments were in the process, leaving them uninformed of known hazards. | high |
| 03 | Workers operated equipment in a machinery room with a ventilation system that did not meet code, exposing them to higher concentrations of ammonia in the event of a leak. | high |
| 04 | The company did not establish a system to promptly address hazard analysis findings, meaning employee safety concerns identified in 2017 remained unresolved for years. | high |
| 05 | Operating procedures lacked emergency shutdown steps, leaving workers without clear protocols to protect themselves during an ammonia release. | high |
| 06 | The facility operated under OSHA process safety management jurisdiction, yet still failed to meet basic requirements, suggesting systemic disregard for worker protections. | high |
Community Impact
How local residents were endangered · 6 points
| 01 | Public receptors existed within the distance of an endpoint for a worst-case ammonia release, meaning nearby residents, schools, and businesses faced direct exposure risk. | high |
| 02 | The facility operated in Shelbyville, Indiana, at 4301 County Rd 125 W for over two decades with unresolved safety deficiencies, creating long-term community vulnerability. | high |
| 03 | Penske failed to coordinate response actions adequately with local emergency planning and response agencies as required by regulations. | medium |
| 04 | The company did not develop adequate emergency response programs under the Risk Management Plan, leaving fire departments and emergency services unprepared for a potential release. | high |
| 05 | Local residents had no way to know about the facility’s compliance failures because transparency requirements were not enforced until the 2021 inspection. | medium |
| 06 | The economic benefit of jobs and tax revenue from the facility came with hidden costs in the form of elevated health and safety risks borne by the community. | medium |
Corporate Accountability Failures
How Penske avoided real consequences · 7 points
| 01 | Penske neither admitted nor denied the factual allegations in the settlement, allowing the company to avoid formal acknowledgment of wrongdoing. | medium |
| 02 | The company certified that it no longer operates the facility, avoiding any requirement to implement corrective actions at the site. | medium |
| 03 | Penske transferred operations to Kroger Limited Partnership I after the September 2021 inspection but before the final settlement, potentially limiting liability exposure. | medium |
| 04 | The civil penalty of $161,421 was not deductible for federal tax purposes, but represented a minor business expense for a major logistics corporation. | low |
| 05 | The settlement resolved only Penske’s liability for federal civil penalties for the violations alleged, leaving open the possibility of other unaddressed violations. | medium |
| 06 | The consent agreement did not affect Penske’s responsibility to comply with other laws, but imposed no specific monitoring or enhanced oversight requirements. | medium |
| 07 | The case was resolved through administrative process without public trial, limiting transparency and public scrutiny of the company’s safety practices. | medium |
Exploiting Delay
How time worked in Penske’s favor · 6 points
| 01 | The facility stored ammonia above threshold quantities since at least 1999, but EPA enforcement did not occur until September 2021, a gap of over 22 years. | high |
| 02 | Penske conducted a Process Hazard Analysis in June 2017 but failed to complete the recommendations until 2020, a three-year delay. | medium |
| 03 | During the September 2021 inspection, Penske could not provide documentation of completing 2017 recommendations and only supplied updated records on November 11, 2021, two months later. | medium |
| 04 | The Finding of Violation was not issued until December 6, 2022, over 14 months after the inspection. | low |
| 05 | The final Consent Agreement was not signed until December 20, 2023, more than two years after the initial inspection. | low |
| 06 | By the time the penalty was finalized, Penske had exited operations at the facility, mooting any injunctive relief or operational changes. | medium |
The Bottom Line
What this case reveals · 7 points
| 01 | Penske Logistics operated a high-risk ammonia refrigeration system for over two decades with fundamental safety deficiencies that regulators failed to catch until 2021. | high |
| 02 | The company paid a $161,421 penalty that represented a small fraction of maximum available fines and likely an even smaller fraction of the cost to implement full compliance. | medium |
| 03 | Workers and nearby residents faced years of elevated risk from a toxic chemical system with defective ventilation, inadequate hazard analysis, and missing emergency procedures. | high |
| 04 | The settlement allowed Penske to resolve the matter without admitting wrongdoing and without implementing any corrective measures because it no longer operates the facility. | medium |
| 05 | This case exemplifies how inadequate enforcement budgets, delayed inspections, and modest penalties create conditions where safety violations persist for decades. | high |
| 06 | The structural incentives of profit maximization meant that avoiding expensive compliance measures was economically rational for Penske until regulators intervened. | high |
| 07 | Real accountability would require penalties large enough to deter violations, mandatory corrective action regardless of ownership changes, and robust ongoing oversight to catch problems before they span decades. | high |
Timeline of Events
1999
Penske begins storing anhydrous ammonia above threshold quantities at Shelbyville facility
June 2017
Penske updates and revalidates Process Hazard Analysis with only two recommendations
July 2020
Facility completes fire drill with local fire department, three years after PHA recommendation
August 2020
Pipe labels replaced on roof, three years after PHA recommendation
September 16, 2021
EPA conducts announced inspection of the facility
November 11, 2021
Penske provides updated 2017 PHA with dates of completed recommendations
December 6, 2022
EPA issues Finding of Violation to Penske
January 31, 2023
Penske provides written response to Finding of Violation
February 6, 2023
EPA and Penske representatives meet for Section 113 Conference
December 20, 2023
Penske signs Consent Agreement
January 9, 2024
EPA Division Director signs Consent Agreement
January 12, 2024
Regional Judicial Officer signs Final Order
Direct Quotes from the Legal Record
QUOTE 1
Deadly chemical storage
allegations
“Anhydrous ammonia… in the case of an accidental release, are known to cause or may reasonably be anticipated to cause death, injury, or serious adverse effects to human health or the environment.”
💡 This confirms the extreme danger posed by the chemical Penske stored improperly for decades.
QUOTE 2
Decades of violations
allegations
“Penske maintained a maximum inventory of the regulated toxic substance anhydrous ammonia at the Facility which exceeds the threshold quantity of 10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia… since at least 1999.”
💡 Penske operated this high-risk system for over 22 years before regulators caught the violations.
QUOTE 3
Broken ventilation
allegations
“The ventilation system design demonstrates that the current ventilation system at the Facility did not meet the required design code standards.”
💡 The primary safety system protecting workers from toxic exposure was defective and out of code compliance.
QUOTE 4
Misclassified electrical hazards
allegations
“The Facility machinery room electrical classification provided in the RMP Documents states that the classification is based on the environment being ‘non-hazardous.’ The machinery room at the Facility may only be considered ‘non-hazardous’ provided that the ventilation system conforms with the required design code standards.”
💡 Penske falsely classified the electrical environment as safe when it depended on a ventilation system that did not meet code.
QUOTE 5
No early warning systems
allegations
“In the 2017 PHA, Penske did not address… Engineering and administrative controls applicable to the hazards and their interrelationships such as appropriate application of detection methodologies to provide early warning of releases.”
💡 Workers and neighbors had no adequate system to warn them if ammonia began leaking.
QUOTE 6
No evaluation of failure effects
allegations
“Penske did not address… A qualitative evaluation of a range of the possible safety and health effects of failure of controls.”
💡 No one assessed what would happen to human health if safety systems failed.
QUOTE 7
Unqualified hazard analysis team
allegations
“Penske did not include in the 2017 PHA at least one employee who is knowledgeable in the ‘What-If’ methodology.”
💡 The team conducting safety analysis lacked required expertise, undermining the entire process.
QUOTE 8
No documentation of fixes
allegations
“During the September 2021 inspection, Penske could not provide EPA with documentation of completing the 2017 PHA recommendations.”
💡 The company could not prove it had fixed known safety problems identified four years earlier.
QUOTE 9
Failed compliance audits
allegations
“Penske failed to certify that it evaluated compliance with the provisions of the compliance audit recommendations at least every three years to verify that procedures and practices developed are adequate and are being followed.”
💡 Mandatory three-year safety check-ins were not performed, allowing violations to persist undetected.
QUOTE 10
Missing emergency procedures
allegations
“These written operating procedures did not address steps for emergency shutdown.”
💡 Workers had no clear instructions on how to protect themselves during an ammonia emergency.
QUOTE 11
Public at risk
health
“There are public receptors within the distance of an endpoint for a worst-case release assessment, therefore the Covered Process at the Facility does not meet the Program 1 requirements.”
💡 Nearby residents, schools, and businesses were within the danger zone of a potential catastrophic release.
QUOTE 12
No admission of wrongdoing
accountability
“Respondent admits the jurisdictional allegations in this CAFO and neither admits nor denies the factual allegations in this CAFO.”
💡 Penske settled without formally acknowledging it violated safety laws.
QUOTE 13
Company no longer operates facility
accountability
“Respondent certifies that it no longer operates the Facility.”
💡 By exiting the facility, Penske avoided having to implement any corrective safety measures.
QUOTE 14
Modest penalty
accountability
“Based on analysis of the factors specified in Section 113(e) of the CAA… Complainant has determined that an appropriate civil penalty to settle this action is $161,421.”
💡 The penalty was less than half the maximum allowed and likely far less than the cost of full compliance.
QUOTE 15
Operations transferred before settlement
delay_tactics
“Prior to and during the September 2021 inspection, Kroger Limited Partnership I (Kroger) owned and Penske operated the ammonia refrigeration system at the Facility. After the September 2021 inspection, Kroger took over operations from Penske.”
💡 Penske handed off the facility after regulators showed up but before the final penalty, potentially limiting liability.
Frequently Asked Questions
What did Penske Logistics do wrong at the Shelbyville facility?
Penske operated an ammonia refrigeration system for over two decades with a ventilation system that did not meet code standards, incorrect electrical safety classifications, incomplete hazard analyses, and no system to ensure safety recommendations were completed. The company also failed to conduct required three-year compliance audits.
How dangerous is anhydrous ammonia?
Anhydrous ammonia is a regulated toxic substance that in the case of an accidental release is known to cause or may reasonably be anticipated to cause death, injury, or serious adverse effects to human health or the environment. It can cause severe respiratory damage, burns, and other serious injuries.
Were any workers or community members injured?
The legal documents do not report any documented injuries or ammonia releases. However, workers and nearby residents faced elevated risk for over two decades because of the safety violations.
Why did it take over 20 years for the EPA to discover these violations?
The EPA did not conduct a thorough inspection of the facility until September 2021, despite the facility storing large volumes of ammonia since at least 1999. This reflects broader challenges with underfunded regulatory agencies that cannot inspect every facility frequently.
How much did Penske pay in penalties?
Penske paid a civil penalty of $161,421 to settle the case. This was only 36% of the maximum penalty of $446,456 available under the Clean Air Act for these violations.
Did Penske admit it violated the law?
No. The settlement allowed Penske to neither admit nor deny the factual allegations while agreeing to pay the penalty and accept the terms of the consent agreement.
Does Penske still operate the Shelbyville facility?
No. Penske certified in the settlement that it no longer operates the facility. Operations were transferred to Kroger Limited Partnership I after the September 2021 EPA inspection.
What corrective actions was Penske required to take?
None. Because Penske no longer operates the facility, the settlement did not require the company to implement any specific corrective safety measures at the site.
What can concerned citizens do about cases like this?
Citizens can request public records on facilities storing hazardous chemicals in their communities, attend local government meetings to demand stronger oversight, support environmental advocacy organizations, and contact their elected representatives to push for better funding and enforcement of environmental regulations.
Are there other facilities with similar problems?
The legal document addresses only the Shelbyville facility, but similar patterns of deferred maintenance, incomplete hazard analyses, and inadequate regulatory oversight have been documented at industrial facilities nationwide, particularly those handling toxic refrigerants and chemicals.
EPA’s source on this story: https://yosemite.epa.gov/OA/RHC/EPAAdmin.nsf/Filings/A1ADD86AF914117F85258AA20052A3EC/$File/CAA-05-2024-0013_CAFO_PenskeLogisticsLLC_ShelbyvilleIndiana_19PGS.pdf
💡 Explore Corporate Misconduct by Category
Corporations harm people every day — from wage theft to pollution. Learn more by exploring key areas of injustice.
- 💀 Product Safety Violations — When companies risk lives for profit.
- 🌿 Environmental Violations — Pollution, ecological collapse, and unchecked greed.
- 💼 Labor Exploitation — Wage theft, worker abuse, and unsafe conditions.
- 🛡️ Data Breaches & Privacy Abuses — Misuse and mishandling of personal information.
- 💵 Financial Fraud & Corruption — Lies, scams, and executive impunity.
