OSHA Inspection: POLYCHEM SERVICES, INC.

Issued

Jan 25, 2012

Abate by

Oct 10, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,000 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(f)(1):     The employer shall 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 shall address at least the following elements.       On or about August 12, 2011, the employers operating procedures did not address elements necessary to provide clear instructions for safely conducting activities involved with each covered process. Such omissions in the repackaging process (isotaner) included, but were not limited to the following elements:    a.	Emergency shutdown, including the conditions under which emergency shutdown is required, and the assignment of shutdown responsibility to qualified operators to assure that emergency shutdown is executed in a safe and timely manner.  b.	Operating limits and the consequences of deviation, also the steps required to correct or avoid deviation.  c.	Properties of and hazards presented by the chemicals used in the process and indicating precautions necessary to prevent exposure, including engineering and administrative controls and personal protective equipment.  d.	Control measures to be taken if physical contact or airborne exposure occurs.  e.	Safety systems and their functions.

Issued

Jan 25, 2012

Abate by

Jul 16, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,000 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(g)(1)(i):     Each employee presently involved in operating a process, and each employee before being involved in operating a newly assigned process, shall be trained in an overview of the process and in the operating procedures as specified in paragraph (f) of this section.  The training shall include emphasis on the specific safety and health hazards, emergency operations including shutdown, and safe work practices applicable to the employee's job tasks.    On or about August 12, 2011, the employer had not trained all of its employees involved in operating the repackaging process (isotaner) in an overview of the processes and in all aspects of the operating procedures as specified in 29CFR1910.119(f).

Issued

Jan 25, 2012

Abate by

Nov 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,000 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(2):     Written procedures.  The employer shall establish and implement written procedures to maintain the on-going integrity of process equipment.    On or about August 12, 2011, the employer did not establish and implement written procedures to maintain the on-going integrity of its process equipment in the repackaging process (isotaner).

Issued

Jan 25, 2012

Abate by

Jun 28, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(4)(i):     Inspections and tests were not performed on process equipment to maintain its mechanical integrity.    On or about August 12, 2011, the employer did not conduct tests and inspections on its process equipment in the packaging process (isotaner) to assure its continued integrity for service. Such equipment included, but was not limited to:    a.	High pressure reactors R-1, R-2 and R-3.  b.	Three 20,000 gallon flammable liquids storage tanks.  c.	High pressure piping systems throughout the facility in flammables and caustic service.  d.	Controls (including monitoring devices and sensors, alarms, and interlocks).  e.	Pumps.  f.	Bonding and grounding connections.

Issued

Jan 25, 2012

Abate by

Mar 29, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,400 · Current $1,200 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1):     The employer did notl assess the workplace to determine if hazards are present, or are likely to be present, which necessitate the use of personal protective equipment (PPE).    On or about August 12, 2011,  the employer did not assess its workplace area where employees transfer highly flammable amines from large containers (Isotaners) into smaller cylinders and drums, with fires as a likely hazard necessitating the use of appropriate personal protective equipment.

Issued

Jan 25, 2012

Abate by

Jun 1, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1)(i):     The employer did not select, and have each affected employee use, the types of PPE that will protect the affected employee(s) from the hazards identified in the hazard assessment;    On or about August 12, 2011, the employer did not select and have each of its employees using fire resistant clothing when they were working in the amine transfer area to protect against the hazard of fires.

Issued

Jan 25, 2012

Abate by

Jul 16, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,000 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(b)(12):     The employer did not classify the atmosphere or location as to whether it is hazardous or nonhazardous prior to the consideration of industrial trucks being used therein and the type of industrial truck required shall be as provided in paragraph (d) of this section for such location.    On or about August 12, 2011, the employer was using a forklift to move containers and drums containing highly flammable amines and had not classified the area as to whether it is hazardous prior to deciding on the type of forklift required.