A hydrogen compressor explosion led to some injuries and a TOSHA inspection, resulting in some PSM citations.
Citation 1 Item 1
Type of Violation: Serious; $7,000
29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3)(ii): The employer did not ensure that equipment complies with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices.
In that the employer did not ensure that equipment in the process complies with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices (RAGAGEP):
a) In that the employer failed to ensure that the deflagration venting in the following Hydrogen compressor rooms located in Building B 156 complied with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 68 Standard on Explosion Protection:
1) Compressor room 114 housing compressor T101 was not designed with adequate deflagration venting to reduce the likelihood of extensive structural damage and injuries to personnel.
2) Compressor room 110 housing compressor T102 was not designed with proper deflagration venting to reduce the possibility of extensive structural damage and injuries to personnel.
3) Compressor room 112 housing compressor T103 was not designed with adequate deflagration venting to reduce the likelihood of extensive structural damage and injuries to personnel.
4) Compressor room 115 housing compressor T104 was not designed with adequate deflagration venting to reduce the likelihood of extensive structural damage and injuries to personnel.
b) In that, the employer failed to ensure that the Variable Frequency Drive room 111 located in Building B156 had equipment capable of providing positive pressure to prevent a hazardous atmosphere as referenced in National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 496 Standard for Purged and Pressurized Enclosures for Electrical Equipment.
Citation 1 Item 2
Type of Violation: Serious; $4,000
29 CFR 1910.119(j)(6)(iii): The employer did not assure that maintenance materials, spare parts, and equipment were suitable for the process application for which they were used:
In that, the Neac Hydrogen Compressor T103 had undergone a revamp where the 20-inch piston was replaced with a 24-inch piston. The new piston failed during operation resulting in the head of the compressor being blown off, and deflagration of the escaping hydrogen resulted in extensive damage to the building.
Citation 1 Item 3
Type of Violation: Serious; $4,000
29 CFR 1910.147(c)(6)(i): The employer did not conduct a periodic inspection of the energy control procedure at least annually to ensure that the procedure and the requirement of this standard were being followed:
In that, the employer did not conduct a periodic inspection of 1he lockout procedures to en me that employees were following line break procedures in B156 to ensure all employees exposed to the hazards of a release were protected.
Citation 1 Item 4
Type of Violation: Serious;
29 CFR 1910.147(f)(3)(ii)(D): Each authorized employee did not affix a personal lockout or tagout device to the group lockout device before working on the machine or equipment:
In that, the new employees and intern employees participating in line breaks that require the use of group lockout were not necessary to put an individual lock on the group lockout box to ensure that they are not exposed to the unexpected startup, energization, or release of stored energy.
Citation 1 Item 5
Type of Violation: Serious; $3,200
29 CFR 1910.147(c)(7)(i): The employer did not provide adequate training to ensure that employees understood the purpose and function of the energy control program:
In that, the employer did not provide training to all authorized employees so that they were knowledgeable of the methods and means necessary to perform work safely under the employer’s Lock, Tag, Try program.
Citation 2 Item 1
Type of Violation: Other-than-Serious; $500
29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(6)(ii): Except as provided in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(7) and 29 CFR 191O.1200(f)(8), the employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged or marked with the product identifier and words, pictures, symbols, or combination thereof, which provide at least general information regarding the hazards of the chemicals and which, in conjunction with the other information immediately available to employees under the hazard communication program, would provide employees with the specific information regarding the physical and health hazards of the hazardous chemical.
In that, a bottle of an unknown chemical was found in the control room of Building B156 that was not labeled as to what was in the container (presumed to be alcohol) and what hazards were associated with it.
Citation 2 Item 2
Type of Violation: Other-than-Serious; $500
29 CFR 191O.1200(h)(2)(iii): The employer did not provide information to the employees as to the location and availability of the written hazard communication program, and material safety data sheets required by 29 CFR 1910.1200:
In that, all employees were not aware of where the Safety Data Sheets were located for the hazardous chemicals that they worked with such as, but not limited to, Chlorosilanes and Hydrogen.
CLICK HERE to download citations