SAUGET, IL ·
OSHA Inspection: R. KNEPPER CONSTRUCTION, INC.
Unprogrammed Related inspection · Health discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened an unprogrammed Related health inspection of R. KNEPPER CONSTRUCTION, INC. in W.G.KRUMMRICH PLANT, 500 MONSANTO AVE., SAUGET, IL 62201 (NAICS 000000). OSHA activity number 106550726.
OSHA opens inspections for many reasons: routine scheduling under a national or local emphasis program, an employee complaint or referral, or a follow-up after a reported injury. Opening or conducting an inspection is not itself an allegation or a finding that this employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.
Where did this inspection happen?
- Establishment
- R. KNEPPER CONSTRUCTION, INC.
- Site address
- W.G.KRUMMRICH PLANT, 500 MONSANTO AVE.
- City
- SAUGET
- State
- IL
- ZIP
- 62201
- Mailing
- #10 WILSHIRE COURT, BELLEVILLE, IL 62223
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Unprogrammed Related (G)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Health
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- Union (Y)
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 000000
- SIC code (legacy)
- 1711
- Employees
- 6
- Ownership type
- Private (A)
Citations
9 citations on file for this inspection.
5(a)(1)
- Issued
- Jan 18, 1995
- Abate by
- Feb 27, 1995
- Penalty
- Initial $750 · Current $450 Reduced
General-duty citation text
Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees in that employees were exposed to: The employer had assigned their employees to work in an area where there was a known potential for an explosion and/or fire but did not develop and implement a written safe work practices and procedures to cover the project. Safe work practices and procedures include hazards and controls for dust, water, source(s) of ignition, monitoring, line breaking, hot work permit(s), and engineering controls. Monitoring procedures and practices should include monitoring for the potential loss of the nitrogen blanket or the presence of oxygen at or near the point of entry. The employees were involved in the turnaround and repair of the P2S5 Processing Unit and had opened an elevator on the unit. AMONG OTHER METHODS, ONE FEASIBLE AND ACCEPTABLE ABATEMENT METHOD TO CORRECT THIS HAZARD IS to take the following multi-stepped corrective action. 1. Complete a hazard analysis of the project to be completed to determine potential hazards such as those created during line breaking, equipment repair, and hopper entry. 2. Review owners and other contractors work practices for the area to determine if they have recognized other hazards which need to be addressed or if they have work practices which could cause potential problems during your operation. 3. Develop a written safe work practices and procedures to cover the project operations and work practices. 4. Train employees who will be working on the project on the safe work practices and procedures including, but not limited to, recognition of ignition sources, monitoring procedures, line breaking procedures, chemical hazards, hot work permit(s) and special engineering controls to be used. 5. Obtain and use equipment as necessary to implement the program such as monitors for oxygen and nitrogen levels in the process lines and other safety equipment and PPE as deemed necessary. This might include such equipment as monitors for the presence of nitrogen, hydrogen sulfide, and oxygen at various strategic points inside of the process with audible and/or visible alarms which would allow time for a response by the workers. 6. Insure compliance with the program and the programs effectiveness through followup inspections of the work procedures. DISCLAIMER: 1. You are not limited to the abatement methods suggested above. 2. The methods explained are general and may not be effective in all cases. 3. The employer is responsible for selecting and carrying out an appropriate abatement method.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $450.00
- · Z (S) $750.00
1910.132 A
- Issued
- Jan 18, 1995
- Abate by
- Feb 27, 1995
- Penalty
- Initial $750 · Current $450 Reduced
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $450.00
- · Z (S) $750.00
1910.134 A01
- Issued
- Jan 18, 1995
- Abate by
- Jan 23, 1995
- Penalty
- Initial $750
Recent events (2)
- · I (S)
- · Z (S) $750.00
1910.147 C04 I
- Issued
- Jan 18, 1995
- Abate by
- Jan 30, 1995
- Penalty
- Initial $750
Recent events (2)
- · I (S)
- · Z (S) $750.00
1910.147 C04 II
- Issued
- Jan 18, 1995
- Abate by
- Jan 30, 1995
1910.147 F03 I
- Issued
- Jan 18, 1995
- Abate by
- Jan 30, 1995
1910.147 F03 IID
- Issued
- Jan 18, 1995
- Abate by
- Jan 30, 1995
1910.1000 E
- Issued
- Jan 18, 1995
- Abate by
- Feb 27, 1995
- Penalty
- Initial $750 · Current $450 Reduced
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $450.00
- · Z (S) $750.00
1910.134 B08
- Issued
- Jan 18, 1995
- Abate by
- Feb 27, 1995
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 000000)
More inspections in IL
Source
This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). OSHA publishes its own view of this case as inspection number 106550726.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.