A worker at a chemical plant was sent to an Indianapolis hospital after being exposed to an open tank of benzene. The incident was reported around 6:15 p.m. Capt. Mike Pruitt said a 1,000-gallon tank had a crack in it and used to hold benzene, though it was now empty. He said paramedics were concerned that residual fumes may have exposed the worker to danger. The employee was decontaminated at the scene, then sent to a Hospital to be evaluated. He was alert and speaking.
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.
Safety Order 01 Item 001
Type of Violation: Serious; $4,500
29 CFR 1910.119(e)(3)(i): The process hazard analysis did not address the hazards of the process:
Plant 27 -The process hazard analysis for Tank 212 [Node (49) Tank MT–620.212, including pump PP-620.XXXC. to FV-102.4 (01-008) dated 5/24/2004] did not identify hazards such as, but not limited to, those associated with a blocked conservation vent when pressurized steam was used to open frozen/blocked transfer piping during cold weather operations.
Safety Order 01 Item 002
Type of Violation: Serious; $4,500
29 CFR 1910.119(f)(1)(i)[C]: The employer did not develop and implement written operating procedures that provide clear instructions for safely conducting activities involved in each covered process consistent with the process safety information and did not address the steps for temporary operations:
Plant 27 – No operating procedures were developed for processes such as, but not limited to, pressurized steaming operations conducted during cold weather to open frozen/blocked piping as occurred on the Tank 212 piping on January 29, 2014, which led to an over pressurization of the tank and structural failure that created a potential benzene release to the atmosphere.
Safety Order 01 Item 003
Type of Violation: Serious; $4,500
29 CFR 191O.119(j)(4)(i): Inspections and tests were not performed on process equipment:
Instance A Plant 27 – Tanks such as, but not limited to, 212 were covered under the PSM standard and no inspection and tests were conducted on the process equipment as outlined in the Mechanical Integrity Overview. Failure to complete routine inspections and tests conld allow for failure of the tank resulting in hazards such as, but not limited to, employee exposure to toxic chemicals such as, but not limited to, Benzene.
Instance B Plant 27 – Conservation vents such as, but not limited to the vent on tank 212 were covered under the PSM standard and no inspection and tests were conducted on the process equipment as outlined in the Mechanical Integrity Overview. Failure to complete routine inspections and tests could allow for failure of the vent resulting in hazards such as, but not limited to, employee exposure to toxic chemicals such as, but not limited to Benzene.
Safety Order 01 Item 004
Type of Violation: Serious; $4,500
29 CFR 1910.119(j)(4)(iv): The employer did not document each inspection and test that had been performed on process equipment.
The documentation 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:
Instance A Plant 27 – Tanks such as, but not limited to, 212 were covered under the PSM standard and did not have documentation that inspections and tests on the process equipment had been completed as outlined in the Mechanical Integrity Overview. Failure to document that inspections had been completed per the schedule stated in the Mechanical Integrity Overview increases the liklihood of the inspection and tests not being completed leading to hazards such as, but not limited to, employee exposure to toxic chemicals such as, but not limited to Benzene.
Instance B – Conservations vents such as, but not limited to, the conservation vent on Tank 212, covered under the PSM standards, did not have documentation that inspections had been completed as outlined in the Mechanical Integrity Overview. Failure to document that inspections had been completed per the schedule stated in the Mechanical Integrity Overview increased the liklihood of the inspections and testing not being completed, leading to hazards such as, but not limited to. employee exposure to toxic chemicals snch as, but not limited to Benzene.
Here is the official citation http://www.in.gov/dol/files/VERTELLUS_SPECIALTIES.pdf