Exposure to dangerous toxins at an Alabama chemical manufacturing plant lead to the deaths of two (2) workers and sickened another worker after the employer failed to provide appropriate protective equipment and implement safe work practices during maintenance activities on chemical processing equipment. An OSHA investigation found the exposure occurred while the workers were conducting maintenance activities requiring a processing line break, a nitrogen purge, and atmospheric venting of equipment, resulting in the release of toxic fluorocarbons and other hazardous chemicals.
The alleged violations below have been grouped because they involve similar or related hazards that may increase the potential for injury or illness.
Citation 1 Item 1a
Type of Violation: Serious; $13,653
29 CFR 1910.119(d)(1): Process safety information pertaining to the hazards of the highly hazardous chemicals in the process did not consist of the elements specified in 29 CFR 1910.119 (d)(1)(i) through (vii):
(a) On or about 07/02/2021 – M1/M2 Process Area, employees were exposed to respiratory hazards when performing activities such as maintenance tasks that required a line break and M2 Plant Lab Plant sampling and to potentially delayed medical treatment when information pertaining to the hazards of the highly hazardous chemicals in the process, as often found on safety data sheets, were not obtained or developed for all of the chemicals in the M2 Process such as, but not limited to, Perfluoroisobutene or PFiB and Telomer or class of chemical formed from combination of hydrogen chloride and difluorcarbene (CF2), resulting in compounds with formula H(CF2)nCl, where n equals the number of difluorocarbenes.
Citation 1 Item 1b
Type of Violation: Serious
29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(1): Chemical manufacturers and importers did not obtain or develop a safety data sheet for each hazardous chemical and for each chemical that posed a hazard not otherwise classified that they produce or import:
(a) On or about 07/02/2021 – M1/M2 Process Area, employees were exposed to respiratory hazards when performing activities such as maintenance tasks that required a line break and M2 Plant Lab Plant sampling and to potentially delayed medical treatment when information pertaining to the hazards of the highly hazardous chemicals in the process, as often found on safety data sheets, were not obtained or developed for all of the chemicals in the M2 Process such as, but not limited to, Perfluoroisobutene or PFiB and Telomer or class of chemical formed from combination of hydrogen chloride and difluorcarbene (CF2), resulting in compounds with formula H(CF2)nCl, where n equals the number of difluorocarbenes.
Citation 1 Item 2
Type of Violation: Serious; $13,653
29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3)(i)(G): Information pertaining to the equipment in the process did not include material and energy balances for processes built after May 26, 1982:
(a) On or about 7/2/2021 – M1/M2 Process Area, when the M2 Process P&ID Material Balance PFD-10 did not accurately reflect all of the chemicals in the process, employees were exposed to respiratory hazards from chemicals such as, but not limited to, Perfluoroisobutene (PFiB), Octafluoroisomethylether (OIME), Methanol (MeOH), and Vinylidene Fluoride (VdF) and flammable hazards from chemicals such as, but not limited to, Methanol (MeOH) and Vinylidene Fluoride (VdF) that were used as an input or were formed as part of the Tetrafluoroethylene (TFE) manufacturing process. Employees operated the process, performed maintenance tasks that required a line break, worked and walked in areas where process gas was allowed to vent to the atmosphere while purging equipment and piping, and processed M2 process samples.
The alleged violations below have been grouped because they involve similar or related hazards that may increase the potential for injury or illness.
Citation 1 Item 3a
Type of Violation: Serious; $13,653
29 CFR 1910.119(f)(1)(iii)(B): The employer did not develop and implement written operating procedures that provided clear instructions for safely conducting activities involved in each covered process consistent with the process safety information that addressed health and safety considerations, such as precautions necessary to prevent exposure, including engineering controls, administrative controls, and personal protective equipment.
(a) On or about 7/2/2021 – M1/M2 Process Area, employees were exposed to respiratory hazards from hazardous chemicals such as, but not limited to, Chlorotrifluoroethylene (CTFE), Chlorofluoromethane (R-31), Hexafluoropropylene (HFP), and Trifluoromethane (R-23) when performing activities such as maintenance tasks that required a line break and M2 Plant Lab Plant sampling and the written procedures did not clearly identify the required level of respiratory protection.
Citation 1 Item 3b
Type of Violation: Serious
29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(i): Selection of appropriate respirators was not based on the respiratory hazard(s) to which the worker was exposed and user factors that affect respirator performance and reliability:
(a) On or about 7/2/2021 – M1/M2 Process Area, employees were exposed to respiratory hazards from hazardous chemicals such as, but not limited to, Chlorotrifluoroethylene (CTFE), Chlorofluoromethane (R-31), Hexafluoropropylene (HFP), and Trifluoromethane (R-23) when performing activities such as maintenance tasks that required a line break and M2 Plant Lab Plant sampling and the employer had not selected an appropriate respirator.
Citation 1 Item 4
Type of Violation: Serious; $13,653
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 temporary operations:
(a) On or about 07/02/2021 – M1/M2 Process Area, employees were exposed to respiratory hazards when hazardous chemicals such as, but not limited to, Perfluoroisobutene (PFiB), Perfluorocyclobutane (C-318), Octafluoroisomethylether (OIME), and Hydrogen Fluoride (HF) were identified to be in the process streams and the instructions were not clear in the “M2 – By-Passing T250 for Maintenance” procedure prd-m2-0 in Section 5 Returning T250 to Normal Operations.
Citation 1 Item 5
Type of Violation: Serious; $13,653
29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1)(i): When the employer had assessed the workplace hazard(s) and determined that hazard(s) were present, the employer did not select and/or use the types of personal protective equipment that would protect the affected employee from the hazards identified in the hazard assessment:
(a) On or about 7/2/2021 – M1/M2 Process Area, employees were exposed to health and safety hazards from hazardous chemicals such as, but not limited to, Chlorotrifluoroethylene (CTFE) and Chlorofluoromethane (R-31) when performing activities such as maintenance tasks that required a line break and M2 Plant Lab Plant sampling and the employer had not selected personal protective equipment.
(b) On or about 7/2/2021 – M1/M2 Process Area, employees were exposed to respiratory hazards from hazardous chemicals such as, but not limited to, Hexafluoropropylene (HFP) and Trifluoromethane (R-23) when performing activities such as maintenance tasks that required a line break and M2 Plant Lab Plant sampling and the employer had not selected the appropriate respirator.
Citation 1 Item 6
Type of Violation: Serious; $13,653
29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(iii): The employer did not identify and evaluate the respiratory hazard(s) in the workplace; including a reasonable estimate of employee exposures to respiratory hazards and identification of the contaminant’s chemical state and physical form:
(a) On or about 07/02/2021 – M1/M2 Process Area, employees were exposed to respiratory hazards from unknown chemicals and known chemicals such as, but not limited to, Perfluoroisobutene (PFiB), Perfluorocyclobutane (C- 318), Octafluoroisomethylether (OIME), and Hydrogen Fluoride (HF) when the 3RT Product process stream was vented to atmosphere while the employees were performing work to return T250 to normal operations as part of the “M2 – By-Passing T250 for Maintenance” procedure prd-m2-0060 and the employer had not conducted air sampling or monitoring identify all of the chemicals and the concentration of the chemicals in the air.
Citation 1 Item 7
Type of Violation: Serious; $13,653
29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(11): Safety data sheets were not made readily available, upon request, to designated representatives, the Assistant Secretary, and the Director, in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.1020(e):
(a) On or about 8/12/2021 – M1/M2 Process Area, employees were exposed to respiratory hazards when the employer did not provide twenty-four safety data sheets for the hazardous chemicals in the M2 Process such as, but not limited to Perfluoroisobutene (PFib) and Hydrogen Fluoride (HF) to the Assistant Secretary in a timely matter after written requests on 8/12/2021, 9/1/2021, 11/1/2021, and 12/8/2021.
Citation 2 Item 1
Type of Violation: Willful – Serious; $136,532
29 CFR 1910.119(f)(4): The employer did not develop and implement safe work practices to provide for the control of hazards during operations such as lockout/tagout; confined space entry; opening process equipment or piping; and control over entrance into a facility by maintenance, contractor, laboratory, or other support personnel:
(a) On or about 07/02/2021 – M1/M2 Process Area, employees were exposed to respiratory hazards when hazardous toxic chemicals such as, but not limited to, Perfluoroisobutene (PFiB), Perfluorocyclobutane (C-318), Octafluoroisomethylether (OIME), and Hydrogen Fluoride (HF) were identified to be expected in the process streams and the employer did not ensure that all of the critical safe work practices such as, but not limited to, strategies and effective practices to manage and mitigate hazards, possible work flow, risk assessment of hazards, permit control process, and communication were followed before employees performed the non-routine tasks required in “M2 – By-Passing T250 for Maintenance” procedure prd-m2-0060.
CLICK HERE for the citations