OSHA has cited the propane facility with 21 serious violations following a November 2012 fire that required three workers to be hospitalized and four workers to be treated and released. The plant inspection was expanded to include the national emphasis program on Process Safety Management Covered Chemical Facilities. Proposed penalties total $105,000. The serious violations cited under the process safety management (PSM) standard include: failing to compile process safety information for safety systems, such as emergency shutdowns; ensure equipment complies with recognized and good engineering practices, such as relief systems; address various elements of a process safety hazards analysis, including the use of a methodology appropriate to the complexity of the process, human factors, facility siting and addressing action items or recommendations in a timely manner; inspect and test equipment, including vessels and piping and identify safeguards; and perform the lockout/tagout of equipment and processes and provide training for employees in the use of lockout/tagout. Here is breakdown of the citations:
Process Safety Information
1910.119(d)(3)(i)(B): The employer’s piping and instrument diagrams were not accurate and did not represent equipment that was existing and was part of the process
The employer does not ensure that piping and instrument diagrams are accurate and represent equipment that is current and is part of the process. (SERIOUS; $5K)
The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure that the piping and instrument diagrams were accurate and represented the existing process. Identified errors or missing process equipment include but not limited to:
a. Propane gas/liquid line from cylinder evacuation vessel to the compressor was not shown on P&ID-03A
b. Flex hose on the 2 inch discharge line from the liquid propane pumps not shown on P&ID-03B
c. Misplaced check valve and missing block valve on the discharge line of the liquid propane pumps on P&ID-03B
d. Missing a gate valve on the liquid propane line that was feeding the new carousel on P&ID-03C.
These condition exposed employees to fire and explosion hazards.
1910.119( d)(3)(i)(H): Process safety information pertaining to the equipment in the process did not include the safety systems (e.g., interlocks, detection or suppression systems) (SERIOUS; $7K)
Identified safety systems include but are not limited to Emergency Stop(s) (e-stop). This condition exposed employees to inhalation, fire, and explosion hazards.
Process Hazards Analysis
1910.119(e)(2): The employer did not use or did not use correctly one or more of the methodologies presented in 1910.119( e)(2)(i) through (vii) that were appropriate to determine
and to evaluate the hazards of the process being analyzed. (SERIOUS; $7K)
The employer does not ensure the correct use of one or more of the methodologies presented in 1910.119(e)(2)(i) through (vii) that are appropriate to evaluate the hazards of the process being analyzed. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, occurred in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure that the 2004 and 2011 process hazard analyses was appropriate to the complexities of the process and did not identify evaluate, and control the hazards involved. Facility’s use of the What-if methodology did not correctly evaluate the hazards of the process being analyzed. In the propane container filling and evacuation areas the hazards present in the process were not addressed or not specific enough to provide appropriate recommendations to safeguard the hazards. Hazards include but not limited to:
- Failure or leak in the carrousel rotary joint
- Failure of buried liquid propane piping to the carrousel
1910.119(e)(3)(iii): The process hazard analysis did not address the engineering and administrative controls applicable to the hazards and their interrelationship, such as, appropriate detection methodologies to provide early warning of releases. (Acceptable detection methods might include process monitoring and control instrumentation with alarms, and detection hardware such as hydrocarbon sensors.) (SERIOUS; $7K)
The employer does not ensure that the process hazard analysis is appropriate to the complexities of the process and does not identify evaluate, and control the hazards involved. The process hazard analysis did not include engineering and administrative controls applicable to the hazards and their interrelationships such as appropriate application of detection methodologies to provide early warning of releases.
The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the 2004 and 2011 PHAs did not address lower explosion limit detection methodologies and alarms to provide early warning of releases.
1910.119(e)(3)(v): The process hazard analysis did not address facility siting. (SERIOUS; $3K)
The employer does not ensure the process hazard analysis addresses facility siting. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure the process hazard analysis addressed facility siting as part of the 2004 and 2011 PHA.
1910.119(e)(3)(vi): The process hazard analysis did not address human factors. (SERIOUS; $3K)
The employer does not ensure the process hazard analysis addresses human factors. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure the process hazard analysis addressed human factors as part of the 2004 and 2011 PHA. Identified human factors include but not limited to language barriers, communication during an emergency, evacuation or emergency drills, and employee turnover.
1910.119(e)(5): The employer did not establish a system to assure that the process hazard analysis team’s recommendations are resolved in a timely manner and that the resolution is documented.
The employer does not ensure a system is established to assure that the process hazard analysis teams recommendations are resolved in a timely manner and resolutions are documented. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure a system was established to assure that the 2004 and 2011 process hazard analysis (PHA) teams recommendations were resolved in a timely manner and resolutions are documented. Identified recommendations include but not limited to:
a. Review procedures with all employees.
b. Review emergency shutdown procedures with all employees.
Operating Procedures
1910.119(f)(1): 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. (SERIOUS; $7K)
The employer does not ensure written operating procedures are developed and implemented that provided clear instructions for safely conducting activities involved in each process consistent with the process safety information. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure written operating procedures were developed and implemented with clear instructions for safely conducting the filling and evacuation of containers.
1910.119(f)(1)(i)(D): The employer’s written operating procedures covering the steps for each operating phase did not address emergency shutdown including the conditions under which emergency shutdown is required, and the assignment of shutdown responsibility to qualified operators to ensure that emergency shutdown in a safe and timely manner. (SERIOUS; $0)
The employer does not ensure written operating procedures covering the steps for each operating phase addressed the emergency shutdown including the conditions emergency shutdown is required and assignment of shutdown responsibility. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure written operating procedures addressed the conditions emergency shutdown is required and the assignment of shutdown
responsibility.
1910.119(f)(3): The employer did not certify annually that the operating procedures are current and accurate. (SERIOUS; $0)
The employer does not ensure standard operating procedures are certified annually as being current and accurate. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure that standard operating procedures were certified annually as being current and accurate.
1910.119(f)(1)(ii): The employer’s written operating procedures did not address the consequences of and the steps required for correcting or avoiding deviation from the operating limits. (SERIOUS; $7K)
The employer does not ensure written operating procedures addressed the consequences of deviation and steps required for correcting or avoiding deviations from the safe upper and lower limits of the process. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure written operating procedures addressed the consequences of deviation and steps required for correcting or avoiding deviations from the safe upper and lower limits of the process. Missing operating limits and procedures for equipment included, but were not limited to the following:
a. 30,000-gallon tank pressure
b. 30,000-gallon tank level
c. 30,000-gallon tank temperature
d. Liquid Propane pump high and low pump discharge pressure.
1910.119(f)(1)(iv): The employer’s written operating procedures did not address requirements for the safety systems and their functions. (SERIOUS; $5K)
The employer does not ensure that written operating procedures address the requirements for safety systems and their functions. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling, liquid propane storage, and container evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure that the written operating procedures for the propane-filling, liquid storage and evacuation areas address safety systems and their functions. Identified safety systems include but not limited to:
a. Emergency stops on the fill dock
b. Emergency stops in storage tank area.
1910.119(f)(4): The employer did not develop and implement safe work practices for employees and contractor employees to provide for the control of hazards during operations such as over entrance into a facility by maintenance, contractor, laboratory, or other support personnel. (SERIOUS; $3K)
The employer does not ensure that safe work practices are developed and implemented for employees and contractor employees for the control over entrance into a facility by maintenance, contractor and other support personnel. This violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto where the employer failed to ensure that safe work practices were developed and implemented for employees and contractors for the control over entrance into the facility. The facility has no restrictions or access requirements to enter the two main entrances and employees and visitors are parked inside the complex main gate(s).
Mechanical Integrity
1910.119(j)(2): The employer did not establish and implement written procedures to maintain the on-going mechanical integrity of process equipment. (SERIOUS; $7K)
The employer does not ensure written procedures are established and implemented to maintain the ongoing mechanical integrity of the process equipment.
a. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure that written procedures were established and implemented for the testing ahd inspection of the facilities emergency shutdowns (ESD). Identified ESDs included but not limited to the container filling station (carrousel), liquid propane truck unloading, and the 30,000-gallon Propane storage tank.
b. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure that written procedures were established and implemented for the testing and inspection of the facilities liquid and gas propane piping. Identified piping includes but is not limited to the liquid propane piping shown on the process and instrument diagrams (P&ID) PID-03A, PID-03B, and PID-03C.
c. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure that written procedures were established and implemented for the testing and inspection of the facilities liquid propane storage vessels. Identified vessels included but not limited to the 30,000-gallon storage tank.
d. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure that written procedures were established and implemented for the testing and inspection of the facilities relief valves. Identified relief valves included but not limited to those on the 30,000-gallon storage.
e. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure that written procedures were established and implemented for the testing and inspection of the rotary joint on the container filling carrousel.
f. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure that written procedures were established and implemented for the testing and inspection of the liquid propane pump{s) bypass valves.
1910.119G)(4)(iv): The employer did not document the date of inspection, the name of the person performing the inspection, the serial number or other identifier of the equipment on which the inspection or test was performed, a description of the inspection, and the results of the inspection for each piece of process equipment. (SERIOUS; $0)
The employer does not ensure testing and inspection performed on process equipment is documented including the date, serial number or identifier of equipment, a description, and the results of the inspection and/or test performed. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure the documentation of the date, system identifier, description, and results of inspections and tests of the emergency shutdowns (E-Stops).
1910.119(j)(4)(i): The employer did not perform inspection and tests on process equipment. (SERIOUS; $7K)
The employer does not ensure inspection and tests are performed on process equipment.
a. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure inspection and testing of storage vessel(s) were performed. Identified vessels include but are not limited to 30,000 gallon storage tank.
b. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure inspections, tests and/or replacement of relief valves was conducted. Identified relief valves include but are not limited to those on the 30,000-gallon propane storage vessel.
c. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure inspection and testing of liquid and gas propane piping was conducted. Identified piping includes but is not limited to the liquid propane piping shown on the process and instrument diagrams (P&ID) PID-03A, PID-03B, and PID-03C.
Management of Change
1910.119(l)(1): The employer did not establish and implement written procedures to manage changes to process chemicals, technology, equipment, and procedures; and, changes to facilities that affect a covered process. (SERIOUS; $3K)
The employer does not ensure written procedures are established and implemented for managing changes to the process equipment and operating procedures. The violation occurred on or about January 18, 2013 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling area where the employer failed to ensure that written procedures were established and implemented for the installation of a larger (12 station) container filling station.
Compliance Audits
1910.119(o)(1): The employer did not certify that they had evaluated compliance with the provisions CFR 1910.119 at least every three years to verify that the procedures and practices developed under this standard were adequate and are being followed. (SERIOUS; $3K)
The employer does not ensure it has evaluated the compliance with the provisions of 29 CFR 1910.119 at least every three years. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to· ensure that a process safety management compliance audit was completed and certified at least every three years.
LOTO
1910.147(c)(2)(iii): New machines and equipment that were installed after January 2, 1990 were not provided with energy isolating devices designed to accept lockout devices.
The employer does not ensure new equipment installed after January 2, 1990 is installed with energy isolating devices design to accept a lockout devices. (SERIOUS; $7K)
The violation occurred on or about January 18,2013 and times prior thereto, in the liquid propane container filling carrousel area where the employer failed to ensure valves installed on the containerfilling carrousel were capable of accepting a lockout device.
1910.147(d)(4)(i): Lockout or tagout devices were not affixed to each energy isolating device by authorized employees. (SERIOUS; $0)
The employer does not ensure that authorzed employees affix a lockout or tagout device to the energy isolating device(s) before working on the machine or equipment. The violation occurred on or about December 14, 2012 in the liquid propane storage/pump where the employer failed to ensure a personal lockout or tagout device to the inlet and outlet valves to the liquid propane pumps on the 30,000-gallon storage tanks.
1910.147(c)(6)(i): The employer did not conduct a periodic inspection of the energy control procedure at least ammally to ensure that the procedure and the requirement of this standard were being followed. (SERIOUS; $5K)
The employer does not ensure a periodic inspection of the energy control procedure was conducted annually to ensure the procedure and the requirements of the standard were followed. The violation occurred on or about November 6, 2012 and times prior thereto, in the propane container filling and evacuation areas where the employer failed to ensure a periodic inspection of the energy control procedures was conducted annually to ensure the procedure and the requirement of the standard is followed.
CLICK HERE (pdf) to download the citations.