OSHA Inspection: JCI JONES CHEMICALS, INC.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Feb 9, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $2,250 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.23(c)(1): Open-sided floor(s) or platform(s) 4 feet or more above the adjacent floor or ground level were not guarded by standard railings (or the equivalent as specified in 29 CFR 1910.23(e)(3)(i) through (v)), on all open sides:  a.  Railcar connecting/disconnecting - The work areas at the top of the tank cars were not provided with standard railings or the equvalent to protect employees from falling approximately 13 ft to the ground.    ABATEMENT NOTE:  The rails around the center dome of the railcar do not meet the requirements of a standard guardrail.  A variety of commercially products are available to provide adequate fall protection, such as swing out platforms equipped with guardrails designed to extend over and supplement the rail around the dome.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Nov 9, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.23(c)(2):  Runways four feet or more above floor or ground level were not guarded by standard railings (or the equivalent):  a.  On 04/21/11 the moveable runway between the platform and a rail car which contained Sulfur dioxide was not guarded by standard railings or equivalent.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Dec 2, 2011

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $2,250 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(3)(i): The process hazard analysis (PHA) did not address the hazards of the process:  a.  Establishment  - As of 4/21/11- The PHA did not address the hazard of liquid chlorine becoming trapped in the body of the valves, or short sections of piping, such as:        1. The railcar nipples, and/or the whips when the shut-down system is activated       2. Pipe sections between manual shut off valves and actuated valves at ton and cylinder filling

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Dec 2, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(3)(ii): The process hazard analysis did not identify any previous incident which had a likely potential for catastrophic consequences in the workplace:   a. Establishment - On or about 4/21/11 The 2009 PHA did not identify the following incident:  1.  On 1/14/09, the failure of one of two bolts for the flange that connected the chlorine whip to the piping of the railcar caused a release of liquid chlorine.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Dec 2, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(3)(vi): Process hazard analysis did not address human factors:   a.  Establishment - On or about 4/21/11 - PHAs did not address human factors such as, but not limited to:    1. The positioning and readability of guages;  2. The need for additional devices such as lights to indicate which system is active or connected (i.e. whether a station is on fill, blow, or vacuum).  3. Communications between employees regarding the status of the system when people swap tasks.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Dec 2, 2011

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(4)(iv):  The employer did not document each inspection and test that was performed on process equipment to include: 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:  a.  Establishment - As of 04/21/11, the 2010 annual inspection records were inadequate in that they did not provide the following required information:       1.  Each piece of process equipment inspected was not specifically identified       2.  A description of the inspection methods and criteria used (visual, functional, measurement, presence of debris, etc.), or a reference to methods and criteria contained elsewhere in the operating procedures or manufacturers's instructions.       3. The location/identification of the section(s) of piping which were selected for removal, inspection, and/or measurement        4.  Results of the pipe measurements   b.  Establishment - As of 04/21/11- Documentation for inspection records was not available for all records prior to 2008.    NOTE:  Results of inspections, testing, & measurements, become part of the process safety information (PSI) for the equipment and system.  That information must be maintained at least for the lifetime of the process/equipment.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $2,250 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(5): The employer did not correct deficiencies in equipment that were outside acceptable limits (defined by the process safety information on paragraph (d) of this section) before further use, or in a safe and timely manner:  a. Walkway between Ton Filling and Cylinder Filling - As of 05/12/11 Sections of the chlorine blow-down pipe from the railcar connection had not been replaced in a timely manner after serious corrosion due to exterior pipe condensation with pipe deformation was found under labels wrapped around the pipe.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Nov 18, 2011

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(m)(4)(iv):  The report of the incident investigation for a release that resulted in, or could reasonably have resulted in a catastrophic release of highly hazardous chemical in the workplace did not include factors that contributed to the incident:  a.  Railcar whip connection - As of 04/21/11, the investigation report for a liquid chlorine release incident that occurred on 01/14/09 did not include factors contributing to the incident, such as, but not limited to:       1. A reason why the bolt failed and/or the wrong type of bolt was used.       2. Lack of a written procedure for assured verification during each repair or installation that the parts used are the proper parts for the job

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Nov 18, 2011

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.120(q)(2)(ii): The emergency response plan did not address, to the extent not addressed elsewhere, personnel roles, lines of authority, and communication:  a.  Establishment - As of 4/21/11 - The plan did not indicate whether the Emergency Response Team will wait for arrival of the Manchester Fire Department before entering the scene of the leak.  b. Establishment - As of 4/21/11 - The plan did not specifically address the procedures or roles of the backup team responders when the 'A' team members were not avialable.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Nov 18, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.120(q)(2)(vi):  The emergency response plan did not address, to the extent not addressed elsewhere, evacuation routes and procedures:  a. Establishment - As of 4/21/11- The written Contingency Plan did not address the process of ensuring that the gate at the south end of the facility would be unlocked if it was necessary to use this route to leave the property.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Nov 18, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.120(q)(2)(ix): The emergency response plan did not address, to the extent not addressed elsewhere, emergency alerting and response procedures:   a. Establishment - As of 4/21/11 -The Contingency Plan did not iaddress how employees would be notified that an emergency existed, but only partial evacuation was necessary  b. Establishment - As of 4/21/11 - The Contingency Plan did not have a clear description of the alarm system (tones, horns, signals) used at the Merrimack facility to notify employees to evacuate, in that, it did not differentiate between  process alarms.  c. Establishment - As of 4/21/11 The Contingency plan did not indicate how employees, including the office employees, would be notified that an emergency did not exist when an alarm went off due to other causes.     Note: Alarm systems must comply with the requirements of 1910.165.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Nov 9, 2011

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $2,250 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(h)(3)(iii): Air and oxygen cylinders of self-contained breathing apparatus were not maintained in a fully charged state:    a.  HAZMAT TEAM - On 05/12/11 two SCBA units (available for use) did not have fully charged breathing air cylinders.  Both units were not removed from service.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Dec 18, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.120(q)(6)(iii): Employees who participated as hazardous materials technicians, or were expected to participate as hazardous materials technicians, had not received at least 24 hours of training equal to the first responder operations level, and in addition have competency in the areas outlined in 29 CFR 1910.120(q)(6)(iii)(A) through (q)(6)(iii)(I) and/or the employer did not so certify:  a. Emergency Response Team - As of  04/21/11 the employer did not certify that the 4 members of the Emergency Response Team, who were expected to participate as hazardous materials technicians to control releases of liquid chlorine or sulfur dioxide, had received 24 hours of training meeting the requirements of this standard and additionally had competency in the areas covered by paragraphs 29 CFR 1910.120(q)(6)(iii)(A) through (q)(6)(iii)(I).

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Dec 18, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.120(q)(6)(v): Incident commanders did not receive at least 24 hours of training equal to the first responder operations level; and/or in addition have competency in the areas outline in 29 CFR 1910.120(q)(6)(v)(A) through (q)(6)(v)(F); and/or the employer did not so certify:  a. HAZMAT Team - As of 04/21/11 the leader of the HAZMAT Team who was expected to act as incident commander until the arrival of the fire department, did not have his initial 24 hour training and additional competencies certified as required.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Dec 18, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.120(q)(7):  Trainers who taught the training subjects specified in 29 CFR 1910.120(q) had not satisfactorily completed a training course for teaching the subjects they were expected to teach, such as the courses offered by the U.S. National Fire Academy, and/or did not have academic credentials and instructional experience necessary to demonstrate competent instructional skills and a good command of the subject matter of the courses they were to teach.    a. HAZMAT Team - As of 04/21/11 the trainer for emergency responders had not completed the training course for teaching or have academic credentials to demonstrate competent instructional skills of the subject matter to train hazardous materials technicians.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Jan 9, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): The employer did not develop and implement a written respiratory protection program with required worksite-specific procedures and elements for required respirator use as described in (c)(1)(i) - (ix):  a.  Establishment - As of 04/21/11 the written respirator program did not contain a worksite specific description of procedures and elements as follows:   1.  The written program did not include an evaluation of workplace exposures at the Merrimack facility used as a basis for respirator selection including a reasonable estimate of exposure levels under different conditions (for example what conditions/operations would cause IDLH exposure).  1910.134(c)(1)(i)   2.  The program did not include the requirement that SCBAs be fit tested in a negative presssure mode, or a description of the modifications, equipment, etc. necessary to do this. 1910.134(c)(1)(iii)    3.  The program did not contain a description of procedures and checks to be performed when donning SCBA units. 1910.134(c)(1)(iv)   4.  The program did not contain a description of conditions that would trigger use of the respirators, and what respirators would be used in different circumstances. i.e. mouthbit respirators vs MSA full face respirators for escape.  1910.134(c)(1)(iv)   5.  The program did not contain a description of use of MSA full face respirators for purposes other than escape such as when an operator or maintenance is replacing a gasket or valve where residual chlorine may be present. 1910.134(c)(1)(iv)    6.  The program did not contain a description of the limitations of the mouthbit (escape from non-IDLH conditions, i.e. < 10 ppm).  1910.134(c)    7.  The program did not contain a description of the limitations of the MSA full-face canister respirators (escape from chlorine concentrations up to 5000 ppm).  1910.134(c)(1)(iv)    8.  The program did not include a worksite specific schedule for changing canisters and a description of the information used to determine the change schedule.  1910.134(c)(1)(v)    9.  The program did not state the necessity to obtain a certification that air used for filling the SCBAs met at least Grade D Standards.  1910.134(c)(1)(v)

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(h)(1)(ii): Respirators issued to more than one employee were not cleaned and disinfected before being worn by different individuals:  a.    General operations - As of 05/12/11 the MSA canister respirators were not properly cleaned and disinfected between users, in that procedures under 29 CFR 1910.134 Appendix B-2 or as outlined by the respirator manufacturer were not used.    Abatement Note:    Procedures listed in 1910.134 Appendix B-2 (mandatory) or procedures detailed by the respirator manufacturer must be used to clean respirators between users.  The MSA instruction manual for the Ultravue canister respirators used stated "DO NOT use alcohol as a germicide because it may deteriorate rubber parts."  The respirators were cleaned with isopropyl alcohol wipe tissues between users.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Nov 9, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(i)(4)(ii):   Cylinders of purchased breathing air did not have a certificate of analysis from the supplier stating that the breathing air met the requirements for Grade D breathing air:  a. Emergency Response team - As of 05/12/11 A certificate of analysis was not obtained from the dive shop where the SCBA cyliders were refilled.

Issued

Oct 19, 2011

Abate by

Nov 9, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(m)(2)(i)(C): The employer did not establish a record of the qualitative and quantitative fit tests administered to an employee which included the specific make, model, style and size of respirator tested:    a.  Establishment - As of 05/12/11, the fit-testing records did not include the specific model or the size of the respirator tested.