A food additive manufacturer’s failure to handle hazardous materials and respond properly to an emergency led to an explosion that injured four workers, including two contractors who scaled an 8-foot security fence topped with triple-strand barbed wire to escape the fireball. An OSHA investigation found the business violated process safety management procedures for the handling…...
July 7, 2016 UPDATE – Company is Contesting all citations OSHA has issued nine serious safety violations to a food industry provider of cold storage warehousing and logistical services. A January 2016 complaint investigation found the company violated OSHA’s process safety management procedures for using ammonia in its refrigeration warehouse facility. An investigation by the…...
Respondent owned and operated the a chemical manufacturing facility. On September 8-11, 2014, EPA Region 6 conducted an unannounced, onsite CAA 40 C.F.R. Part 68 and Section 112(r) Partial Compliance Evaluation of the Facility. The faility’s RMP lists three covered processes subject to Program 3 requirements. The regulated flammable substances that are held above the…...
Respondent owns a Utilities Plant that maintains the support of steam, refrigeration, compressed air, cooling and process water; wastewater treatment, electricity, and natural gas for a chemical manufacturing complex. The Utilities Plant includes methanol storage and ammonia storage tank operations and distribution systems. Respondent produces, processes, stores, or handles up to a maximum of 51,180,000 pounds…...
Respondent owns and operates a global technology and specialty materials company operating in the production of vinyl acetate. Respondent operates the Facility in part to produce vinyl acetate in a reactor process. Vinyl acetate is identified at 40 C.F.R. Part 68.130 as a toxic regulated substance with a threshold quantity of 15,000 pounds. Respondent produces, stores,…...
Respondent owned and operated a chemical plant where regulated substances and other extremely hazardous substances are produced, processed, stored, and handled, and from which an accidental release could occur. Within the Facility, at the time of the incidents described herein, Respondent used and produced butadiene, chlorine, pentane, sodium hydroxide, hydrochloric acid, toluene, 1 ,4-dichloro-2-butene, 3,4-dichloro-1…...
NOTE: This case is important as it is based on the simple fact that the facility did not follow it’s own internal procedures regarding changes and construction. This incident also occurred via a “TEMPORARY CHANGE” where the MOC called for a check-valve, the spec’s called for a check-valve; yet a check-valve was NOT installed. This…...
OSHA found an Idaho frozen food manufacturer failed to safeguard employees and was unprepared to respond to a release of 1,300 lbs. of anhydrous ammonia on Dec. 1, 2015. While no one suffered an injury in the December incident, other major ammonia releases at the facility have hospitalized employees in the past. In its review…...
Respondent is the owner and operator of an ammonia and fuel retail business. On or about June 12, 2014 EPA inspected the facility to determine compliance with Section 112(r) of the CAA and 40 C.F.R. Part 68. At the time of the 2014 inspection, Respondent had greater than 10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia stored in…...
Respondent is a limited liability company which owns a chemical plant where regulated substances and other extremely hazardous substances are produced, processed, stored, and handled, and from which an accidental release occured. Within the facility, the Respondent produces nylon intermediates (adiponitrile (ADN), hexamethylene diamine (HMC), adipic acid, C12, and C12 co-products). On May 9, 2015,…...
Respondent is a Dairy Company that was incorporated in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in 1921. Respondent has owned and operated the fluid milk manufacturing facility since 1973. Respondent uses anhydrous ammonia for refrigeration of raw milk, juice concentrate, and product storage…. Membership Required You must be a member to access this content.View Membership LevelsAlready a...
Respondent is the owner and/or operator of a public water treatment facility that uses chlorine in its water treatment process. The amount of chlorine on hand at the facility is up to 9,000 pounds. At all times relevant to this Consent Agreement and Final Order (CAFO), Respondent produced, processed, handled or stored chlorine at its…...
