OSHA Inspection: ROBINSON DRILLING OF TEXAS LTD.

Issued

Dec 11, 2012

Abate by

Dec 17, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $3,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

Section (5)(a)(1):  The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees    Rig #11: On or about June 19, 2012, the employer did not implement the Hydrogen Sulfide Emergency Evacuation Plan during a release of Hydrogen Sulfide. Employees were not instructed to evacuate the rig. This condition exposed employees to air contaminant hazards.     Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable means of abatement would be to alert and account for facility personnel, move away from the hydrogen sulfide or sulfur dioxide source and get out of the affected area as outlined American Petroleum Institute (API) Recommended Practice (RP) for Drilling and Well Servicing Operations Involving Hydrogen Sulfide, RP 49 (third edition, May 2001, reaffirmed, March 2007), Paragraph 7.5.

Issued

Dec 11, 2012

Abate by

Dec 17, 2012

Penalty

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

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(b)(2): Employees were exposed to an airborne concentration of Hydrogen Sulfide listed in Table Z-2 in excess of the ceiling concentration of 50 ppm:    Rig #11: On June 19, 2012, one employee was overexposed to hydrogen sulfide (H2S) at 71 ppm for over 11 minutes. The employer's administrative or engineering controls were not feasible to achieve full compliance. Neither personal protective equipment nor any other protective measures were used to keep exposures of employees to air contaminants within such limits.

Issued

Dec 11, 2012

Abate by

Dec 17, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(e):  In an instance where administrative or engineering control were not feasible to achieve full compliance with the limits prescribed in 29 CFR 1910.1000(a) through (d), neither personal protective equipment nor any other protective measures were used to keep exposures of employees to air contaminants within such limits:     Rig #11: On June 19, 2012, employees were exposed to hydrogen sulfide concentrations as high as 108 ppm without personal protective equipment.  This condition exposed employees to health hazards.

Issued

Dec 11, 2012

Abate by

Dec 17, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(a)(2)  Respirators were not provided by the employer when such equipment was necessary to protect the health of the employee(s):    Rig #11: On or about June 19, 2012, when hydrogen sulfide was present at the workplace in concentrations exceeding acceptable ceiling concentrations, the employer did not ensure the use of respirators needed to protect employees from hazardous exposures.