OSHA Inspection: SANIMAX USA INC

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 6, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3)(ii):     The employer did not document that equipment complies with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices.    The employer did not document that the process equipment complied with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices when it turned off the nitrogen blanketing system for transesterification process tanks.

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $1,500

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(3)(v):     The process hazard analysis did not address facility siting.    The employer failed to conduct a process hazard analysis that address the facility siting, including, but not limited to, the location of the control room in relation to the biodiesel process.

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $5,500 · Current $5,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(5):     The employer did not establish a system to promptly address the PHA team's findings and recommendations; assure that the recommendations are resolved in a timely manner and that the resolution is documented; document what actions are to be taken; complete actions as soon as possible; develop a written schedule of when these actions are to be completed; communicate the actions to operating, maintenance and other employees whose work assignments are in the process and who may be affected by the recommendations or actions.    The employer failed to assure that the recommendations from the 2009 PHA were resolved in a timely manner and to complete the actions as soon as possible.

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(f)(1)(i)(C):     The employer did not develop and implement written operating procedures that provide clear instructions for safely conducting temporary operations.    The employer did not develop written operating procedures that provide clear instructions for safely conducting temporary operations, such as but not limited to, operating procedures when bypassing interlocks and controls for the biodiesel manufacturing process.

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $5,000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(f)(1)(i)(E):     The employer did not develop and implement written operating procedures that provide clear instructions for safely conducting activities involved in each covered process consistent with the process safety information and did not address at least emergency operations.    The employer failed to develop written operating procedures that provide clear instructions for safely conducting emergency operations for the biodiesel process.

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(f)(3):     The employer did not certify that operating procedures were current and accurate.    The employer failed to certify the operating procedures were current and accurate for the biodiesel process.

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $5,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(4)(i):     The employer did not perform inspection and tests on process equipment.     The employer did not perform inspection and tests on controls, including alarms and interlocks, on the Delta V control system.

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $5,500 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(k)(2):     The permit did not document that the fire prevention and protection requirements in 29 CFR 1910.252(a) have been implemented prior to beginning the hot work operations.      The employer did not ensure that the hot work followed the fire prevention and protection requirements in 1910.252(a).    a) The employer did not designate a management individual responsible for authorizing cutting and wel  ding operations not specifically desinged for such processes.    b) The employer did not ensure that authorization was preceded by site inspection by the individual responsible for authorizing cutting and welding operations, per 1910.252(a)(2)(iv).

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $5,500 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(l)(1):     The employer did not implement procedures to manage changes to process chemicals, technology, equipment, and procedures, and changes to facilities that affect a covered process.    The employer failed to implement the management of change procedures when a new pressure regulator was installed for the nitrogen inerting/blanketing system on the biodiesel process.

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(o)(1):     The employer did not certify that they have evaluated compliance with the provisions of this section:    The employer failed to conduct a compliance audit and certify that they had evaluated compliance of the biodiesel process with the provisions of this section.

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $5,000 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.120(q)(6)(ii):     First responders at the operational level did not receive at least eight hours of training or did not have sufficient experience to objectively demonstrate competency in the areas required by 29 CFR 1910.120(q)(6)(ii)(A) through (q)(6)(ii)(F) and/or the employer did not so certify:      The employer failed to train personnel in at least 8 hours of First Responders-Operational Level training for responding to releases of hazardous materials.

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $1,500

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 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:    The employer failed to train Incident Commanders in at least 24 hours of training equal to the First Responder-Operations Level and competency in the areas outlined in 29 CFR 1910.120(q)(6)(v)(A) through (q)(6)(v)(F) for responding to releases of hazardous materials.

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(i):     The employee training did not include the methods and observations that may be used to detect the presence or release of a hazardous chemical in the work area:    The employer failed to train employees in the proper use of the combustible gas indicators for detection of flammable atmospheres.

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(c)(1):     The employer did not develop a written plan of action regarding the implementation of the employee participation required by this paragraph.    The employer failed to develop a written plan of action for employee participation in process safety management for the biodiesel process.

Issued

Feb 6, 2012

Abate by

Feb 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(c)(2):     The employer did not consult with employees and their representatives on the conduct and development of process hazards analyses and on the development of the other elements of process safety management in this standard.    The employer did not consult with employees on the conduct and development of the process hazard analysis and on the development of elements of process safety management:    a) The 2009 Process Hazard Analysis.    b) The frequency of refresher training.    c) Contractor selection and training.