OSHA Inspection: GANDY'S DAIRIES, LLC

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Aug 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,300 · Current $2,300 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:
On or about January 30, 2012 and at times prior thereto, on the north wall
in the maintenance
break room Lubbock, Texas, employees exposed to electric hazards when an
outlet
was within
6 feet of a sink without a GFCI.
Among other methods, feasible and acceptable abatement would be to
installed a GFCI on the
outlet within 6 feet of the sink.

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Oct 9, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,300 · Current $2,800 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3)(i)(B):  Process safety information pertaining to the
equipment in the
process did not include the piping and instrument diagrams (P&ID'S):
On or about January 30, 2012 and at times prior thereto, P & IDs were not
updated to reflect
accurate location of pressure relief devices.

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Aug 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,900 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(5):  The employer did not establish a system to
promptly address the
process hazard analysis team's findings and recommendations:
On or about January 30, 2012 and at times prior thereto, the employer did
not ensure the
process hazard analysis team's findings and recommendations were addressed
promptly.
a) Recommendation #1, from the 2009 Process Hazard Analysis for 1.5.6:
Test
compressor
high sides annually.
b) Recommendation #4, from the 2009 Process Hazard Analysis for 1.3.2:
Review all liquid
lines and determine where NH3 could be trapped by closing two valves.
c) Recommendation #6. from the 2009 Process Hazard Analysis for 1.4.2:
Consider piping
oil drain from the ice builder to the suction side of the suction
accumulator VS-104.
d) Recommendation #7, from the 2009 Process Hazard Analysis for 1.5.18:
Include correct
valve settings for 1275 & 1276 valves in the SOPs.
e) Recommendation #9, from the 2009 Process Hazard Analysis for 1.5.20:
Install reseating
regulator around valve 2166.
f) Recommendation #10, from the 2009 Process Hazard Analysis for 1.5.20:
Lockout/tagout
in open position valves 2165 & 2166.
g) Recommendation #11, from the 2009 Process Hazard Analysis for 1.6.10:
Pipe SRV vent
lines for GC-101 (including oil pot & surge drum) to 15' above the roof
and at least 20' from
an intake vent.

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Aug 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $5,500 · Current $3,850 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(f)(1):  The employer did not develop and implement written
operating
procedures that provided clear instructions for safety conducting
activities in each covered
process consistent with the process safety information and which addressed
the elements listed
in 29 CFR 1910.119(f)(1)(i) through (f)(1)(v):
On or about January 30, 2012 and times prior thereto, employees were
exposed to chemical
hazards when the employer did not establish and implement written
procedures.

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Oct 9, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,900 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(n):  The employer's emergency action plan did not include
procedures for
handling small releases:
On or about January 30, 2012 and at times prior thereto, the employer did
not ensure that
procedures for ammonia release was included in the emergency action plan.

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Aug 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,300 · Current $2,300 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.157(c)(1):  Portable fire extinguishers were not provided and
mounted, located and
identified so that they were readily accessible without subjecting the
employees to injuries:
On or about January 31, 2012 and at times prior thereto, in the warehouse
Lubbock, Texas,
employees were exposed to fire hazards when a fire extinguisher was
blocked by a work station.

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Aug 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,400 · Current $3,080 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(q)(1):  Powered industrial truck(s) not in safe operating
conditions were not
removed from service:
On or about January 30, 2012 and at times prior thereto, at the back of
the case dock area
Lubbock, Texas, employees were exposed to caught in between hazards when
Humech 50, serial
#222035A forklift had a damaged rear tire.

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Aug 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,300 · Current $2,300 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1):  Machine guarding was not provided to protect
operator(s) and other
employees from hazard(s) created by rotating parts:
On or about January 30, 2012 and at times prior thereto, employees were
exposed to rotating
parts while operating equipment without guards in the production areas in
the plant, Lubbock,
Texas.
a) The pump located in the homogenizing production area.
b) The pump located in the CIP area.
c) The back label machine for the gallon jugs located in the gallon blow
mold area.
d) The motor that pulls the chain around the track located on the west
wall in the cooler
area. These conditions exposed employees to caught by hazards.

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Aug 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,300 · Current $2,300 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(b)(2):  Listed or labeled electrical equipment was not
used or installed in
accordance with instructions included in the listing or labeling:
On or about January 30, 2012 and at times prior thereto, on the south wall
of the distribution
office Lubbock, Texas, employees were exposed to electrical hazards when a
Datagard surge
protector power strip was used to supply electric current to a coffee pot
and microwave.

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Aug 7, 2012

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(h)(3):  Sufficient space was not provided and/or
maintained about electric
equipment to permit ready and safe operation and/or maintenance of such
equipment:
On or about January 30 2012 and at times prior thereto, at the case dock
area Lubbock, Texas,
employees were exposed to electrical hazards when the electrical panel
boxes were blocked by
milk crates.

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Aug 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,300 · Current $2,300 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(b)(1)(ii):  Unused openings in boxes, cabinets, or
fittings were not effectively
closed:
On or about January 30, 2012 and at times prior thereto, employees exposed
to electric hazards.
a) Corrugated box room: Southwest corner, an opening in a 6 outlet
receptacle was not
effectively closed.
b) Compressor room: An opening in an electric junction box on the
intercooler VS106 was
not effectively closed.
c) Plate Chiller-HTST: An opening in an electric junction box on the
glycol plate chiller for
the blow mold was not effectively closed.

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Aug 7, 2012

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(g)(2)(iii):  Flexible cords were not connected to devices
and fittings so that
strain relief was provided which would have prevented pull from being
directly transmitted to
joints or terminal screws:
On or about January 30, 2012 and at times prior thereto, on the east wall
of the maintenance
shop Lubbock, Texas, employees were exposed to electric hazards when the
flexible cord on the
bench grinder was pulled from the strain relief.

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Aug 7, 2012

Penalty

Current $3,300

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Aug 7, 2012

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Aug 7, 2012

Penalty

Current $4,400

Issued

Jul 26, 2012

Abate by

Aug 7, 2012

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(4)(ii):  Inspections and testing procedures performed
on process equipment
to maintain its mechanical integrity, did not follow recognized and
generally accepted good
engineering practices:
On or about January 31, 2012 and at time prior thereto, employees were
exposed to corrosive
chemical hazards such as anhydrous ammonia when the  employer did not
complete external
corrosion under insulation (CUI) inspections according to generally
accepted good engineering
practices.g