OSHA Inspection: PLAINS LPG SERVICES, L.P.

Issued

Jan 31, 2013

Abate by

Mar 15, 2013

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $7,000

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, did not assure that PHA recommendations were resolved in a timely manner, did not document the resolution of PHA recommendations, did not document what actions were to be taken to resolve PHA recommendations, did not complete actions to resolve PHA recommendations as soon as possible, did not develop a written schedule of actions to resolve PHA recommendations, and did not communicate actions to resolve PHA recommendations to operating, maintenance, and/or other employees whose work assignments are in the process and affected by the recommendations or actions:      On or about July 31, 2012, and at times prior thereto, the employer did not resolve the 2008 PHA revalidation recommendation to determine if the terminal office/operators' building could be affected by a release of liquified petroleum gas exposing employees to the hazard of fire and explosion.

Issued

Jan 31, 2013

Abate by

Mar 15, 2013

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $7,000

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) in a safe and timely manner when necessary means where taken to assure safe operation:    On or about July 31, 2012, and at times prior thereto, the employer did not take steps to repair or replace level gauges/indicators/transmitters for liquified petroleum gas Tanks 2, 4, 5 and 7.  Employee were exposed to the hazard of fire and explosion.

Issued

Jan 31, 2013

Abate by

Mar 15, 2013

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $7,000

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:    On or about July 31, 2012, and at times prior thereto, the employer did not implement management of change procedures when it reassigned level gauges/transmitters such that the readouts on the display board do not correspond to the actual conditions in the field for levels of liquified petroleum gas in tanks.  Employees were exposed to the hazard of fire and explosion.  Examples include, but are not limited to:    a)  The level gauge readout for Tank 9 displays as the level in Tank 2.  b)  The level gauge readout for Tank 8 displays as the level in Tank 5.  c)  The level gauge readout for Tank 5 displays as the level in Tank 7.  d)  The level gauge readout for Tank 7 displays as the level in Tank 8.  e)  The level gauge readout for Tank 2 displays as the level in Tank 9.