Inadequate safeguards to protect workers against potential ammonia releases at an ice plant have resulted in $264,700 in fines at a nationwide ice manufacturer and distributor. This inspection was conducted under OSHA’s PSM Covered Chemical Facilities National Emphasis Program. OSHA cited the company for 19 violations of workplace safety standards following a comprehensive inspection that began in March. Several of the violations involve deficiencies in the plant’s PSM program. Among the hazards found at the plant were incomplete operating procedures, undocumented inspections and testing, failing to prove employees with process safety information, failing to document that process equipment complied with RAGAGEP and inadequate work space in front of electrical equipment. As a result of these conditions, OSHA has cited the company for six repeat violations with $203,500 in fines. Other hazards included a lack of required exit routes; a locked exit door; failure to train employees in emergency response; unguarded and unanchored machinery; improper storage of oxygen and acetylene tanks; the use of improperly rated electrical switches in a wet environment; incomplete process safety information; lack of employee participation in process safety management; and failure to verify that employees understood process safety management training. These conditions resulted in the issuance of 13 serious violations, with $71,200 in fines. Here is a break down of the citations:
PLEASE NOTE: these citations are NOT the final settlement and some are BEFORE the employer’s informal conference. They are shared as a learning tool to show what types of issues OSHA and EPA are finding in their PSM/RMP inspections. I have scrubbed all company information from these postings as this is NOT about any one company, but rather a trend of issues that continue to be found by OSHA and EPA.
Citation 1 Item 1
Type of Violation: Serious; $5,500
29 CFR 1910.36(b)(1): At least two exit routes were not available in a workplace to permit prompt evacuation of employees and other building occupants during an emergency, except as allowed in paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
a) The facility: Two exits were not available in the workplace to permit prompt evacuation of employees and other building occupants during an emergency
Citation 1 Item 2
Type of Violation: Serious; $5,500
29 CPR 1910.36(d)(1): Employees were not able to open an exit route door from the inside at all times without keys, tools, or special knowledge.
a) Exit route door to the north of the workshop and into the office area: Employees were not able to open an exit route door from inside at all times without keys, tools, or special knowledge. The exit route door was locked which requires a key to open.
Citation 1 Item 3
Type of Violation: Serious; $5,500
29 CFR 1910.3 7(b )(5): Each doorway or passage along an exit access that could be mistaken for an exit was not marked “Not an Exit” or similar designation, or be identified by a sign indicating its actual use (e.g., closet).
a) 2nd floor, door to the roof: The doorway to the roof along an exit access that could be mistaken for an exit was not marked “Not an Exit” or similar designation. There was no sign to identify and indicate the doors actual use.
Citation 1 Item 4
Type of Violation: Serious; $5,500
29 CFR 1910.119(c)(2): Employers did not consult with employees and their representatives on the conduct and development of process hazards analyses and on the development of the other elements of process safety management in this standard.
At the facility:
a) The employer did not consult with the plant manager and employees on the conduct and development of process hazards analyses and on the development of the other elements of process safety management in this standard. Employees are affected by emergency evacuation procedures, but were not involved in emergency planning and response.
b) The plant manager oversees the anhydrous ammonia refrigeration systems when the plant engineer is not on site during off season and when the systems are not running, but he was not involved in process hazard analyses and other elements of process safety management.
Citation 1 Item 5
Type of Violation: Serious; $7,000
29 CFR 1910.119( d)(2)(i)(E): Information concerning the technology of the process did not include: An evaluation of the consequences of deviations, including those affecting the safety and health of employees.
a) The facility: The employer did not do an evaluation of the consequences of deviations from using process safety information concerning the construction, operation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment such as but not limited to the reciprocating compressors, of the ammonia refrigeration systems.
For example: the employer did not evaluate the consequences of deviation if safe upper and lower limits of process equipment were exceeded.
Citation 1 Item 6
Type of Violation: Serious; $5,500
29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3)(i)(D): Information pertaining to the equipment in the process did not include: Relief system design and design basis.
a) The facility: The employer provided data and specifications for the safety relief system in the process, but did not explain the design basis for the relief system in their process safety information.
Citation 1 Item 7
Type of Violation: Serious; $5,500
29 CFR 1910.119(g)(3): The employer did not ascertain that each employee involved in operating a process has received and understood the training required by this paragraph. The employer did not prepare a record which contains the identity of the employee, the date of training, and the means used to verify that the employee understood the training.
a) The facility: XXXXXX XXXXXXXX, who is the plant engineer that inspects, maintains, and operates the ammonia refrigeration systems, received refrigeration engineer training from FDNY. FDNY certificate did not contain information on the means used to verify that the employee understood the training on site specific ammonia refrigeration systems in the plant.
Citation 1 Item 8
Type of Violation: Serious; $7,000
29 CFR 1910.120( q)(6): Employees who participate, or are expected to participate, in emergency response, were not given training before they take part in actual emergency operations on an incident.
a) The facility: The employer expects the plant engineer to participate in emergency response operations by entering the engine room to investigate and control a release of anhydrous ammonia. The plant engineer was not given training.
Citation 1 Item 9
Type of Violation: Serious; $5,500
29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1): One or more methods of machine guarding were not provided to protect the operator and other employees in the machine area from hazards such as those created by point of operation, ingoing nip points, rotating parts, flying chips and sparks. Examples of guarding methods are-barrier guards, two-hand tripping devices, electronic safety devices, etc.
a) 1st floor, ice bin #2: An employee who was working with ice bin #2 was exposed to the rotating auger inside the ice bin. The guard that protects employees from falling into the ice bin and the auger was broken.
b) 1st floor, packaging lines 1 – 4: Employees were using packaging machines to package ice cubes in plastic bags. The packaging machines have exposed moving parts, which employees are exposed to while working.
Citation 1 Item 10
Type of Violation: Serious; $4,400
29 CPR 1910.212(b): Machines designed for a fixed location were not securely anchored to prevent walking or moving.
a) 1st floor, workshop: An employee used a drill press to drill flat metal sheets. The drill press was designed for a fixed location and was not securely anchored to prevent it from moving.
Citation 1 Item 11a
Type of Violation: Serious; $4,400
29 CFR 1910.253(b)(2)(iv): Valve protection caps, where cylinder is designed to accept a cap, were not in place, hand-tight, except when cylinders are in use or connected for use.
a) 1st floor, Well Room: Valve protection caps were not in place on oxygen and acetylene cylinders which were designed to accept caps and were in storage.
Citation 1 Item 11b
Type of Violation: Serious; Grouped
29 CFR 1910.253(b)(4)(iii): Oxygen cylinders in storage were not separated from fuel-gas cylinders or combustible materials (especially oil or grease), a minimum distance of20 feet (6.1 m) or by a noncombustible barrier at least 5 feet (1.5 m) high having a fire-resistance rating of at least one-half hour.
a) 1st floor, Well Room: Oxygen cylinders in storage were not separated from acetylene gas cylinders. Oxygen and acetylene cylinders were stored adjacent to each other.
Citation 1 Item 12
Type of Violation: Serious; $5,500
29 CFR 1910.305(e)(2): Switches, circuit breakers, and switchboards installed in wet locations were not enclosed in weatherproof enclosures.
a) 1st floor, South of packaging lines 1 – 4: The main electrical switches for packaging machines were installed in a wet location where ice cubes and melted ice water dripped from the ice feed for packaging machines to the top of the switches. Electrical switches were not enclosed in weatherproof enclosures and corroded severely in a wet environment.
Citation 1 Item 13
Type of Violation: Serious; $4,400
29 CFR 1910.305(g)(1)(iv)(B): Flexible cords and cables were used: Where run through holes in walls, ceilings, or floors.
a) 1st floor, workshop entrance: Power cord of a UV light, which was installed in the stairway outside the workshop, ran through holes in walls and was routed to an electrical outlet inside the workshop.
Citation 2 Item 1
Type of Violation: Repeat; $27,500
29 CFR 1910.l19(c)(3): Employers did not provide to employees and their representatives access to process hazard analyses and to all other information required to be developed under this standard.
a) The facility: The plant manager oversees the anhydrous ammonia refrigeration systems when the plant engineer is not on site during off season and when the systems are not running, but he does not have access to process hazard analyses and process and instrument diagrams when the plant engineer is not on site.
1st REPEAT, Business WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD, ITS EQUIVALENT, OR ESSENTIALLY SIMILAR STANDARD, 29 CFR 1910.119(c)(3), WHICH WAS CONTAINED IN OSHA INSPECTION NUMBER 623559, CITATION NUMBER 1, ITEM NUMBER 7a, ISSUED ON 02/19/2013, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON 10/29/2013, WITH RESPECT TO A WORKPLACE LOCATED AT 500 Fenimore Street, Mamaroneck, NY 10543.
Citation 2 Item 2
Type of Violation: Repeat; $38,500
29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3)(ii): The employer did not document that equipment complies with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices.
a) Engine Room: The employer did not document that the engine room, where the ammonia refrigeration systems are located, complied with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices, such as but not limited to: 2009 International Mechanical Codes, System Application Requirements (Section 1104.2), which required that “all components containing the refrigerant shall be located either outdoors or in a machinery room where the quantity of refrigerant in an independent circuit of system exceeds the amounts shown in Table 1103.1 “,which is 0.022 lbs/1,000 cubic feet for ammonia.
b) Engine Room: The employer did not document that the physical barriers used to protect the ammonia refrigeration systems complied with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices, such as but not limited to: 2009 International Mechanical Codes, General Protection (Section 1101.3), which required that “Any portion of a refrigeration system that is subject to physical damage shall be protected in an approved manner.”
c) Rooftop of Building: The employer did not document that the pressure relief vent line, which extended approximately 8.5 feet above the roof, complied with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices, such as but not limited to: 2009 International Mechanical Codes, Termination of Relief Devices (Section 1105. 7), which required that “Pressure relief devices, fusible plugs and purge systems located within the machinery room shall terminate outside of the structure at a location not less than 15 feet above the adjoining grade level and not less than 20 feet from any window, ventilation opening or exit.”
1st REPEAT, business WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD, ITS EQUIVALENT, OR ESSENTIALLY SIMILAR STANDARD, 29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3)(ii), WHICH WAS CONTAINED IN OSHA INSPECTION NUMBER 623559, CITATION NUMBER !, ITEM NUMBER Sb, ISSUED ON 02/19/2013, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON 10/29/2013, WITH RESPECT TO A WORKPLACE LOCATED AT 500 Fenimore Street, Mamaroneck, NY 10543.
Citation 2 Item 3
Type of Violation: Repeat; $27,500
29 CFR 191O.119(f)(1)(ii)(B): Operating procedures did not include steps required to correct or avoid deviation:
a) Ammonia Reciprocating Compressors: Operating procedures for all ammonia reciprocating compressors on site did not include steps required to correct or avoid deviation from operating limits.
b) Ammonia Evaporative Condensers: Operating procedures for all ammonia evaporative condensers on site did not include steps required to correct or avoid deviation from operating limits.
c) Ammonia Suction Accumulators: Operating procedures for all ammonia suction accumulators on site did not include steps required to correct or avoid deviation from operating limits.
d) High Pressure Receivers: Operating procedures for all high pressure receivers on site did not include steps required to correct or avoid deviation from operating limits.
e) Ice Makers: Operating procedures for all ice makers on site did not include steps required to correct or avoid deviation from operating limits.
1st REPEAT, business WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FORA VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD, ITS EQUIVALENT, OR ESSENTIALLY SIMILAR STANDARD, 29 CFR 1910.119(f)(l)(ii)(B), WHICH WAS CONTAINED IN OSHA INSPECTION NUMBER 623559, CITATION NUMBER I, ITEM NUMBER !Of, ISSUED ON 02/19/2013,AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON 10/29/2013, WITH RESPECT TO A WORKPLACE LOCATED AT 500 Fenimore Street, Mamaroneck, NY I 0543.
Citation 2 Item 4
Type of Violation: Repeat; $27,500
29 CFR 1910. 119(f)(1)(iii)(B): The employer did not develop and implement written operating procedures that provided clear instructions for the precautions necessary to prevent exposure, including engineering controls, administrative controls, and personal protective equipment:
a) Ammonia Reciprocating Compressors: Operating procedures for evacuation of ammonia vapor from the equipment and re-introduction of ammonia vapor to the equipment were unclear, in that they failed to specify what personal protective equipment is required to be worn to perform these operations, and the availability of the required personal protective equipment.
b) Ammonia Evaporative Condensers: Operating procedures for evacuation of ammonia vapor from the equipment and re-introduction of ammonia vapor to the equipment were unclear, in that they failed to specify what personal protective equipment is required to be worn to perform these operations, and the availability of the required personal protective equipment.
c) Ammonia Suction Accumulators: Operating procedures for evacuation of ammonia vapor from the equipment and re-introduction of ammonia vapor to the equipment were unclear, in that they failed to specify what personal protective equipment is required to be worn to perform these operations, and the availability of the required personal protective equipment.
d) High Pressure Receivers: Operating procedures for evacuation of ammonia vapor from the equipment and re-introduction of ammonia vapor to the equipment were unclear, in that they failed to specify what personal protective equipment is required to be worn to perform these operations, and the availability of the required personal protective equipment.
e) Ice Makers: Operating procedures for evacuation of ammonia vapor from the equipment and re-introduction of ammonia vapor to the equipment were unclear, in that they failed to specify what personal protective equipment is required to be worn to perform these operations, and the availability of the required personal protective equipment.
f) The facility: The employer did not develop and implement written emergency operating procedures that provided clear instructions to plant engineer, who is required to respond and handle ammonia releases, about precautions necessary to prevent exposure while responding to ammonia releases, including engineering controls, administrative controls, and personal protective equipment.
1st REPEAT, business WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FORA VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD, ITS EQUIVALENT, OR ESSENTIALLY SIMILAR STANDARD, 29 CFR 191O.ll9(f)(l )(iii)(B), WHICH WAS CONTAINED IN OSHA INSPECTION NUMBER 623559, CITATION NUMBER 1, ITEM NUMBER 1 Og, ISSUED ON 02/19/2013, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON 10/29/2013, WITH RESPECT TO A WORKPLACE LOCATED AT 500 Fenimore Street, Mamaroneck, NY 10543.
Citation 2 Item 5
Type of Violation: Repeat; $55,000
29 CPR 1910.119Q)(4)(iv): The documentation for each inspection and test did not identify the date of the inspection or test, the name of the person who performed the inspection or test, the serial number or other identifier of the equipment on which the inspection or test was performed, a description of the inspection or test performed, and the results of the inspection or test.
a) The facility: For each inspection and test performed on process equipment, the employer did not document on the “Ammonia Refrigeration Mechanical Integrity Checklist” the serial number or other identifier of the equipment on which the inspection or test was performed, a description of the inspection or test performed, and the results of the inspection or test.
2nd REPEAT, business WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD, ITS EQUIVALENT, OR ESSENTIALLY SIMILAR STANDARD, 29 CFR l 910. l l 9(j)(4)(iv), WHICH WAS CONTAINED IN OSHA INSPECTION NUMBER 314235276, CITATION NUMBER 1, ITEM NUMBER 4b, ISSUED ON 11/25/2011,AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON 01/07/2012, WITH RESPECT TO A WORKPLACE LOCATED AT 410 Bethel Avenue, Aston, PA 19014; AND IN OSHA INSPECTION NUMBER 623559, CITATION NUMBER 2, ITEM NUMBER 1e, ISSUED ON 02/19/2013,AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON 10/29/2013, WITH RESPECT TO A WORKPLACE LOCATED AT 500 Fenimore Street, Mamaroneck, NY 10543.
Citation 2 Item 6
Type of Violation: Repeat; $27,500
29 CFR 1910.303(g)(1)(ii): Working space required by this standard was used for storage.
a) 1st floor, Well Room: The required working space for operating electric equipment rated 600 volts, nominal, or less to ground, was used for storage. Oxygen cylinders, Acetylene cylinders, Freon tanks, and other items were stored in the working space for electric cabinet and control boxes.
1st REPEAT, business WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FORA VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD, ITS EQUIVALENT, OR ESSENTIALLY SIMILAR STANDARD, 29 CFR l 910.303(g)(l), WHICH WAS CONTAINED IN OSHA INSPECTION NUMBER 623559, CITATION NUMBER I, ITEM NUMBER !Sa, ISSUED ON 02/19/2013, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON 10/29/2013, WITH RESPECT TO A WORKPLACE LOCATED AT 500 Fenimore Street, Mamaroneck, NY 10543.
CLICK HERE to download the citations