OSHA Inspection: THE PENRAY COMPANIES, INC.

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Jan 2, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,100 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0420137121509685K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(c)(2): Employers did not consult with employees and their representatives on the conduct and development of process hazard analyses and on the development of the elements of process safety management in this standard.    a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The employer did not consult with employees on the conduct and development of process hazards analyses. The employer did not involve or consult with employee's who work in the fill room for the April 21, 2008 and April 10, 2013 Process Hazard Analyses (PHA), standard operating procedures and mechanical integrity program.

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Jan 2, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,100 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0040042013712150K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(3)(ii): The process hazard analyses did not address the identification of any previous incident which had a likely potential for catastrophic consequences in the workplace;  a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The employer did not ensure the November 1, 2011 and January 31, 2013 incidents that occurred in the fill room, which created a fire and had a likely potential for catastrophic consequence in the workplace were not identified or addressed on the April 10, 2013 Process Hazard Analysis (PHA).

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Jan 2, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0040042013712150K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(3)(iii): - The process hazard analyses did not address engineering and administrative controls applicable to the hazards and their interrelationships such as appropriate application of detection methodologies to provide early warning of releases. (Acceptable detection methods might include process monitoring and control instrumentation with alarms, and detection hardware such as hydrocarbon sensors).      a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The employer's April 21, 2008 and April 10, 2013 process hazard analysis did not identify engineering and administrative controls including appropriate safeguards to control high consequence hazards such as leaving valves open.

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Jan 2, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0040042013712150K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(3)(iv): The process hazard analyses did not address the consequences of failure of engineering and administrative controls;  a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The April 21, 2008 and April 10, 2013 process hazard analyses (PHA) for the filling of aerosol cans with flammable propellant gases did not address the hazards assocated with the consequences of failure of engineering and administrative controls,     1) The consequences of failure of deactivating or altering the setpoints of the audible alarms and interlocks.  2) Power failures, including total, brief, partial, or brownout on safety detectors and interlocks, as well as, the performance of the ventilation system.  3) The introduction of unapproved safe electrical equipment in the aerosol fill room.

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Jan 2, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0040042013712150K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(3)(v): The process safety hazard analyses did not address facility siting.   a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The employer's April 21, 2008 and April 10, 2013 Process Hazard Analyses (PHA) did not address in the process of filling of aerosol cans with flammable propellant gases the hazards of facility siting, which include, but are not limited to:      1) The spacing between components in the fill room.  2) The location of large inventories of flammable propellant gases in the storage area (outside) and fill room (inside).  3) The location of machine shops, weld shops, forklift traffic and other likely sources of ignition.  4) The location of the flammable gases storage and the fill room relative to onsite and off-site surroundings.  5) The electrical classification of facility and fill room.

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Jan 2, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0040042013712150K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(3)(vi): The process hazard analyses did not address human factors.  a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The April 21, 2008 and April 10, 2013 Process Hazard Analyses (PHA) did not address human factors affecting the aerosol fill operation such as but not limited to, the following: lack of trained operators when trained employees are on leave; and operator overload during normal operations, emergency operations and emergency shutdown.

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Jan 2, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0040042013712150K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(3)(vii): The process hazard analyses did not address a qualitative evaluation of a range of the possible safety and health effects of failure of controls on employees in the workplace.  a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The Employer's April 21, 2008 and April 10, 2013 Process Hazard Analyses (PHA) did not address an evaluation of all possible safety and health effects due to failure of each control; as employees are potentially exposed to the hazards related to a chemical release such as, but not limited to, propane frostbite and inhalation hazards.

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Jan 2, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,100 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0040042013712150K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(f)(1): 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 the following elements.    a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The employer did not develop and implement written operating procedures that provided clear instructions for safely conducting activities in each covered process consistent with the process safety information and which addressed the elements listed in 29 CFR 119(f)(1)(i) through (f)(1)(iv). The employer did not address the following elements:      1) Steps for the other operating phases, including normal operations, temporary operations and emergency shutdown for the fill room, emergency operations and startup following a shutdown.      2) Operating limits, including consequences of deviation and steps required to correct/avoid deviation.      3) Safety and health considerations.      4) Safety systems and their functions. - The employer's written operating procedures did not address requirements for the safety systems and their functions: The written operating procedures for safety systems and their functions in the fill line operation did not have alarm and interlock information for equipment such as, but not limited to the following equipment MSA 5100 and MSA Quad Gas II connected to the MSA Ultra sensors. The written operating procedures did not identify the outside MSA 5100 would alarm and activate the solenoid valve at 35% of the Lower Explosive Limit (LEL). Also the written operating procedures did not identify the inside MSA Quad Gas II would alarm and activate the solenoid valve at 29% of the Lower Explosive Limit (LEL).

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Jan 2, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,200 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0420137121509685K105

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, were not trained in an overview of the process and in the operating procedures as specified in paragraph (f) of this section.     a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The fill line operators did not receive process overview training prior to being required to operate the process. The employees did not receive overview training on the hazards of the process, standard operating procedures, chemicals in the process and protective measures in place.

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Apr 30, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,100 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0420137121509685K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(2) The employer did not establish and implement written procedures to maintain the ongoing integrity of process equipment.     a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The employer did not establish and implement written procedures for installing and replacing hoses and O-rings on the aerosol can fill lines.        b) The Penray Companies Inc.  - The employer did not establish written procedures for testing the interlocks on the aerosol can fill lines.        c) The Penray Companies Inc. - The employer did not establish and implement written procedures for inspecting and testing piping and associated components such as pumps and shut off valves on the aerosol can filling operation.

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Apr 30, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,100 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0040042013712150K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(4)(i): The employer did not assure that inspections and tests were performed on process equipment:     a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The employer did not assure that inspections and tests were performed on process equipment that included piping and tanks for the aerosol can filling operation.          b) The Penray Companies Inc. -  The employer did not assure that inspections and tests were performed on process equipment that included emergency stops for the aerosol can filling operation.        c) The Penray Companies Inc.  - The employer did not assure that inspections and tests were performed on process equipment that included safety valves for the aerosol can filling operation.

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Jan 2, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,100 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0420137121509685K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(5): Equipment deficiencies. The employer did not correct deficiencies in equipment that are outside acceptable limits before further use or in a safe and timely manner when necessary means are taken to assure safe operation.     a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The employer did not ensure deficiencies in equipment were corrected in a safe and timely manner to assure safe operation. On December 30, 2011 inspection report identified the TF-4 safety valve was not working. On May 10, 2012 inspection report indicated the TF-4 safety valve was installed.     b) The Penray Companies Inc. - The employer did not ensure deficiencies in equipment were corrected in a safe and timely manner to assure safe operation. On April 25, 2013 inspection identified the Line 3 MSA Quad Gas II sensor 3 as not working. The May 1, 8, 15, 2013 inspections identified the Line 3 MSA Quad Gas II sensor as "sensor 3 being replaced." On August 15, 2013 the inspection report indicated the Line 3 MSA Quad Gas II sensor as replaced.

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Jan 2, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,100 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0040042013712150K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(l)(1): The employer did not establish and implement written procedures to manage changes (except for "replacements in kind") to process chemicals, technology, equipment, and procedures; and, changes to facilities that affect a covered process.  a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The employer did not establish written procedures to manage changes to process chemicals, technology, equipment, and procedures, and changes to facilities that affect a covered process. On April 25, 2013 inspection identified the Line 3 MSA Quad Gas II sensor 3 as "not working". The May 1, 8, 15, 2013 inspections identified the Line 3 MSA Quad Gas II sensor as "sensor 3 being replaced." Facility management changed fill line procedures by prohibiting flammable and combustible gas fill operations on Line 3 while the MSA Quad Gas II sensor was not in operation without establishing written procedures to manage the change.

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Jan 2, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,100 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0040042013712150K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(o)(3): A report of the findings of the audit(s) were not developed.  a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The employer did not develop a report of the findings of the 2012 and 2013 process safety management audits.

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0040042013712150K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(e)(1)(iv): All initial process hazards analyses were not completed by May 26, 1997.  a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The employer did not ensure the initial process hazard analysis was completed by May 26, 1997. The initial process hazard analysis for the covered process (aerosol filling) was not completed until April 21, 2008.

Issued

Oct 22, 2013

Abate by

Jan 2, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0040042013712150K105

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(n): The emergency action plan did not include procedures for handling small releases.   a) The Penray Companies Inc. - The employer did not implement an emergency plan that included procedures for handling small releases of flammable liquids and gases.