For three consecutive reporting years, EPA’s settlement record says regulated chemicals were present above disclosure thresholds at Kent Unlimited’s Birmingham facility, yet the required annual inventory forms were not submitted to any of the three designated emergency-planning recipients.

The facility, operated by Kent Unlimited, formerly Kent Corp., is located at 4446 Pinson Valley Parkway in Birmingham, Alabama. The case concerns Section 312 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, commonly called EPCRA.

Section 312 requires covered facilities to report hazardous chemical inventories each year. The information must be sent by March 1 for the preceding calendar year to a state commission, a local planning committee, and the fire department responsible for the facility.

What the missing reports were supposed to do

The reporting system connects a company’s on-site chemical inventory to public institutions responsible for emergency planning. The consent agreement describes the process in four steps:

1. Track the inventoryA covered facility determines which hazardous chemicals were present and in what amounts.
2. Apply the thresholdsReporting is triggered when regulated quantities meet or exceed the applicable level.
3. File the annual formA Tier I or Tier II inventory form is due by March 1 for the previous calendar year.
4. Send it to three recipientsThe form goes to state and local planning bodies and the fire department with jurisdiction.

Process summary based on the Section 312 requirements described in the consent agreement.

For most hazardous chemicals identified in the order, the relevant quantity was at least 10,000 pounds. Extremely hazardous substances are governed by a lower threshold: the substance’s threshold planning quantity or 500 pounds, whichever is less. The agreement identifies sulfuric acid as an extremely hazardous substance and states that it was present at 500 pounds or more.

Five materials, three annual reporting cycles

The settlement record says the following materials were present at or above the listed quantities at some point during each of the 2021, 2022, and 2023 calendar years:

EPA alleged that Kent Unlimited failed to submit completed Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory Forms covering those materials by the applicable March 1 deadlines. The alleged reporting gap therefore spanned information for three calendar years and all three legally designated recipients.

How the reporting gap reached a final order

1. Calendar years 2021 to 2023The agreement says the five regulated materials were present above the relevant quantities during each year.
2. Following March 1 deadlinesEPA alleged that the required annual forms were not submitted to the state commission, local committee, or fire department.
3. September 1, 2026Kent Unlimited’s president signed the consent agreement on behalf of the company.
4. September 8, 2026The consent agreement and final order were filed, making the order effective and concluding the administrative proceeding.

Why an inventory form matters before an emergency

This case does not establish that anyone was exposed to a chemical or that a response operation failed. It does establish the regulatory purpose of the missing submissions: the same inventory information had to reach three separate institutions charged with receiving emergency-planning data.

The available order does not say whether those institutions received comparable information from another source. It does not identify an emergency during the reporting period or quantify any operational effect caused by the missing forms. Claims about actual exposure, contamination, or impaired response would therefore go beyond the record.

The penalty reflects the company’s ability to pay

Kent Unlimited agreed to an assessed civil penalty of $26,474. The agreement says EPA reviewed the company’s financial information after it submitted a documented ability-to-pay claim and determined that the amount was appropriate to settle the action.

The company may pay the full assessed penalty within 30 days of the order’s effective date and avoid interest. Alternatively, it may use a six-installment schedule. Under that schedule, principal and interest total $26,988.78, which is $514.78 more than the assessed penalty.

Installments are due at 30-day intervals through 180 days after the effective date. The order also provides for interest, handling charges, and a late-payment penalty if the company fails to pay on time.

No admission, but binding consequences

The settlement language draws a careful line. Kent Unlimited did not admit the factual allegations, and there was no adjudication after a contested hearing. At the same time, the company agreed not to contest the alleged violations in this proceeding and accepted a binding final order.

By executing the agreement, Kent Unlimited also certified, to the best of its knowledge, that it was currently complying with the relevant EPCRA requirements and that all alleged violations had been corrected. The order counts as an enforcement action that may be considered in any later review of the company’s compliance history.

The settlement resolves federal civil penalty liability only for the violations and facts specifically identified in the agreement. It does not relieve the company of other legal obligations or prevent EPA from seeking other forms of relief where the law permits.

The case is about what responders were supposed to know

A chemical inventory form can look like routine paperwork after the fact. EPCRA treats it as part of the emergency-planning system itself. The duty exists before a fire, release, or other incident, when accurate information can be incorporated into institutional planning rather than reconstructed under pressure.

The Kent Unlimited order does not prove that the alleged reporting failures caused physical harm. Its narrower conclusion is still concrete: EPA alleged that five regulated materials went unreported through the required annual process for three years, and the company accepted a $26,474 penalty, certified correction, and gave up the right to contest the allegations in this proceeding.