OSHA Inspection: BLUE BELL CREAMERIES, L.P.

Issued

Sep 28, 2012

Abate by

Oct 10, 2012

Penalty

Initial $6,000 · Current $6,000

Hazardous substances 0170

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(1):     The employer did not perform an initial process hazard analysis (hazard evaluation) on processes covered by this standard. The process hazard analysis shall be appropriate to the complexity of the process and shall identify, evaluate, and control the hazards involved in the process.    On or about 12 June 2012, and at times prior thereto, the employer's Process Hazard Analyses (PHA's) did not include a hazard analysis of the Oil Still as a component of the Ammonia System.  a) The Oil Still at the time of the inspection had icing at the bottom of the vessel, which is an indication of the presence of ammonia, and was labeled "Ammonia Oil Still". The build-up of icing on the vessel contributes to corrosion of the vessel, which leads to potential failure, and was not considered as a hazard during the analysis.  b) The Oil Still has to be drained periodically of excess oil, which allows for thepotential release of ammonia from the vessel that had been mixed in with the oil. Therefore, the potential hazards of the process were not evaluated.    Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the date of this citation, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure a Process Hazard Analysis (PHA) is performed for the Oil Still System and Oil Draining process.

Issued

Sep 28, 2012

Abate by

Nov 13, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,000 · Current $4,000

Hazardous substances 0170

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(5):     The employer did not assure that PHA (Process Hazard Analysis) recommendations were resolved in a timely manner.    On or about 12 June 2012, and at times prior thereto, the employer had open PHA recommendations that were not resolved in a timely manner.  For the PHA's completed on Compressors, Pressure Vessels, Evaporative Condensers, and Emergency Situations, Item #5 for each had a similar recommendation in the last review done in 2012 as to the original recommendations done in 1999.  a) For the Compressor PHA, Item 5 had a recommendation of develop PM for checking obstruction in reference to relief lines or headers in 1999, while 2012 states under Item 5 to develop a PM to check for liquid in relief drain legs via drain valves. The potential hazard in this situation would be a blocked relief line that could result in over-pressure either in the relief line or in the system piping causing a rupture or explosion, exposing the employees to ammonia vapors or liquid.  b) For the Pressure Vessels PHA, Item 5 had a recommendation of during maintenance make sure header is unobstructed in reference to relief lines or headers for 1999, while 2012 states under Item 5 to develop a PM to check for liquid in relief drain legs via drain valves. The potential hazard in this situation would be a blocked relief line that could result in over-pressure either in the relief line or in the system piping causing a rupture or explosion, exposing the employees to ammonia vapors or liquid.  c) For the Evaporative Condenser PHA, Item 5 had a recommendation of during maintenance make sure header is unobstructed in reference to relief lines or headers for 1999, while 2012 states under Item 5 to develop a PM to check for liquid in relief drain legs via drain valves. The potential hazard in this situation would be a blocked relief line that could result in over-pressure either in the relief line or in the system piping causing a rupture or explosion, exposing the employees to ammonia vapors or liquid.  d) For the Emergency Situation of the Refrigeration System PHA, Item 5 had a recommendation of install generator to power sumps and vent fans for 1999, while 2012 states under Item 5 to provisions for installation of a generator to power sump pumps and vent fans is in progress (4/5/12). The potential hazard in this situation would be the failure of sumps or vent fans running in the event an ammonia release, exposing the employees to ammonia vapors or liquid.    Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the date of this citation, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that recommendations from the PHAs are completed in a timely manner.

Issued

Sep 28, 2012

Abate by

Oct 10, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,000 · Current $4,000

Hazardous substances 0170

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(f)(1)(iii)(B):     Written operating procedures did not include safety and health precautions necessary to prevent exposure, including engineering controls, administrative controls, and personal protective equipment;    On or about 12 June 2012, and at times prior thereto, employees perform oil draining activities from the Oil Still by opening the drain valve, which creates the hazard of ammonia exposure. To perform this operation, the employees use a company Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) titled "Draining Oil from Area 1 Oil Still", which provides guidance on the process. However, the SOP does not indicate the hazards nor the Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) needed for the activity, exposing the employees to the hazards of ammonia corrosive burns and/or frostbite.    Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the date of this citation, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure safety and health precautions are included in the written and implemented operating procedures.

Issued

Sep 28, 2012

Abate by

Nov 13, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,000 · Current $3,000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(g)(2):     Refresher training was not provided at least every three years, and more often if necessary, to each employee involved in operating a process to assure that the employee understands and adheres to the current operating procedures of the process.    On or about 12 June 2012, and at times prior thereto, employees were operating and maintaining the ammonia refrigeration system without receiving Process Safety Management (PSM) refresher training at least every three years or as needed based on employee retention of the training.    Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the date of this citation, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure refresher training is conducted at least every 3 years or more frequently based on feedback from employees or an evaluation of such knowledge.

Issued

Sep 28, 2012

Abate by

Nov 13, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(g)(3):     Training documentation. The employer did not ascertain that each employee involved in operating a process has received and understood the training required by this paragraph. The employer shall prepare a record which contains the identity of the employee, the date of training, and the means used to verify that the employee understood the training.    On or about 12 June 2012, and at times prior thereto, the employer's documentation for the initial Process Safety Management (PSM) program training for the ammonia refrigerationsystem involving the highly hazardous chemical of anhydrous ammonia in excess of 10k pounds did not include the sign in sheet that indicated the date of training, name of employees receiving training, and the means used for verification that material taught was understood by the employees.    Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the date of this citation, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure training documentation contains at a minimum the identity of the employee, the date of training, and the means used to verify understanding of the training material.

Issued

Sep 28, 2012

Abate by

Oct 1, 2012

Penalty

Initial $5,000 · Current $3,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.304(b)(3)(ii)(A):     All 125-volt, single-phase, 15-, 20-, and 30-ampere receptacle outlets that are not part of the permanent wiring of the building or structure and that are in use by personnel did not have ground-fault circuit-interrupter protection for personnel.    On or about 12 June 2012, and at times prior thereto, two employees were located in standing water while utilizing an electric hand-held reciprocating saw to cut overhead piping in which the cord was laying in the water and connected to an outlet that was not GFCI protected, exposing the employees to electrical hazards.    Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the date of this citation, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure employees do not utilize electric tools while in or near water, or to utilize a GFCI outlet in such a situation.

Issued

Sep 28, 2012

Abate by

Oct 1, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,000 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(a)(2)(ix):     Lamps for general illumination were not protected from accidental contact or breakage by a suitable fixture or lampholder with a guard.    On or about 12 June 2012, and at times prior thereto, an overhead flourescent light fixture located within the Area 2 Maintenance Shop was missing the cover, therefore, allowing for the ~120 volt wiring to be visible and hanging down, exposing employees to electrical hazards while either changing the bulbs or moving tall items around within the shop.    Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the date of this citation, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure all overhead light fixtures have a guard to protect the fixture from accidental contact or breakage.

Issued

Sep 28, 2012

Abate by

Oct 1, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(b)(2)(i):     Pull boxes, junction boxes, and fittings were not provided with covers approved for the purpose:    On or about 12 June 2012, and at times prior thereto, several electrical pull boxes and junction boxes located within the Basement Areas of 1 and 2 were missing their covers and energized to at least ~120 volts, exposing employees who work in those areas to electrical hazards.    Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the date of this citation, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure all pull and junction boxes are provided with covers approved for the purpose.

Issued

Sep 28, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $3,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(g)(1)(iv)(C):     Flexible cords were used where run through doorways, windows, or similar openings;    On or about 12 June 2012, and at times prior thereto, employees were using an electrical extension cord to power a reciprocating saw where the cord ran through a metal doorway and plugged into a ~120 volt outlet, exposing the employees to an electrical hazard in the event of the cord being cut or pinched by the door.    Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the date of this citation, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure use of extension cords does not run them through doorways, windows, or other similar openings.