OSHA Inspection: NALCO CHAMPION

Issued

Jul 25, 2016

Abate by

Aug 15, 2016

Penalty

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

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3)(ii):  The employer did not document that the equipment in the process complied with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices.      This violation was observed at NALCO Champion on or about March 1, 2016 and at times prior thereto and after where the employer failed to document that the pressure relief device was set at or below the design maximum allowable working pressure of Reactor 4 in accordance with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practice such as ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section VIII.

Issued

Jul 25, 2016

Abate by

Aug 15, 2016

Penalty

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

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(2):  The employer did not establish and implement written procedures to maintain the on-going mechanical integrity of process equipment.      The violation was observed at NALCO Champion on or about March 1, 2016 and at times prior thereto where the employer failed to establish and implement written procedures to maintain the on-going mechanical integrity draft policy for Reactor 3, E-801, E-909, Reactor 8, and V-401.

Issued

Jul 25, 2016

Abate by

Aug 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(4)(ii): Inspections and testing procedures performed on process equipment to maintain its mechanical integrity, did not follow recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices.     a.  The violation was observed on or about March 1, 2016 and at times prior thereto in the Amines plant at Nalco Champion where the employer failed to ensure inspections records for thickness monitoring were reviewed for E-801, reactor 3, reactor 4, reactor 6, reactor 8, V-009, V-1122, E-909, R-900, V-206 and V-401. The corrosion monitoring reported indicated that the retirement thickness had nor been determined or calculated by the formulas by the employer. The corrosion rates(short and long term) were not established by the employer.

Issued

Jul 25, 2016

Abate by

Aug 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(4)(iii): The frequency of inspections and tests of process equipment was not consistent with applicable manufacturers' recommendations and good engineering practices, and more frequently if determined to be necessary by prior operating experience.    The violation was observed on or about March 1, 2016 and times prior thereto in the Amines plant at Nalco Champion where the employer failed to ensure the frequency of inspections and tests of process equipment were in accordance with RAGAGEP such as API 510.

Issued

Jul 25, 2016

Abate by

May 30, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,550 · Current $1,275 Reduced

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.       In the old warehouse, a panel box used to energize the lights and electrical outlets was missing the door cover exposing employees to electrical hazards.

Issued

Jul 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,550 · Current $1,275 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(g)(1)(iv)(A): Flexible cords and/or cables were used as a substitute for the fixed wiring of a structure.    In the old warehouse area, an extension cord, wrapped around the steel beams located on the ceiling was used as permanent wiring to energize the water pump exposing employees to electrical shock hazards.