OSHA Inspection: CARGILL MEAT SOLUTIONS CORPORATION

Issued

Sep 6, 2017

Abate by

Oct 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $8,465 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0170

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3)(ii): The employer did not document that equipment complies with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices:  (a) On or about March 20, 2017, in the West Machinery Room (aka: Compressor Room) there was an approximately five (5) inch diameter hole in the wall above the entry/exit door.  This was not in accordance with ANSI/IIAR 2-2008 to ensure the ammonia machinery room was sealed tight.  (b) On or about March 20, 2017, in the East Machinery Room, on the south wall, an approximately three (3) inch diameter hole and an approximately five (5) inch by 16 inch pipe opening were noted.  This was not in accordance with ANSI/IIAR 2-2008 to ensure the ammonia machinery room was sealed tight.  (c) On or about June 30, 2017, in the West Machinery Room, water was leaking from the ceiling, resulting in water accumulating on the floor in front of and in close proximity to the Main Control Panel, water was leaking onto Compressors WRC-01 and WRC-04, and water was leaking in close proximity to electrical disconnects located on the mezzanine level of the West Engine Room.  This was not in accordance with ANSI/IIAR 2-2008.  (d) On or about November 4, 2016, in the East Plant, an incident occurred involving an over-pressure release from one of the dual pressure relief valves provided for the IMECO Evaporative Condenser.  Following this incident, the dual pressure relief valves were switched to the alternate side that did not release.  However, the relief valve that did release was not replaced at the first opportunity.  This was not in accordance with IIAR Bulletin No. 110.

Issued

Sep 6, 2017

Abate by

Oct 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $8,465 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0170

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(3): The employer did not train each employee involved in maintaining the on-going integrity of process equipment in the procedures applicable to the employee's job tasks to ensure that the employee can perform the job tasks in a safe manner:  (a) Adequate training has not been provided to refrigeration opeators regarding procedures and job tasks necessary  to safely access and perform mechanical integrity inspections of the IMECO Evaporative Condenser EEC-03, located on a platform on the roof of the East Plant.   (b) Training has not been provided to refrigeration operators on procedures and job tasks necessary to safely determine whether safety cutouts on ammonia compressors in the East Engine Room and the West Engine Room are functioning properly.

Issued

Sep 6, 2017

Abate by

Oct 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $12,675 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0170

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:  (a) In the West Compressor Room, inspection of the WRC-01 Howe Compressor was not performed to evaluate "Drive condition (including guards)" at a frequency of Every Three (3) Months.  This was not consistent with the employer's "Mechanical Integrity Program for Compressors, Condensers, Pumps, Evaporators, and Motors."  (b) In the West Compressor Room, inspection of the WRC-03 Vilter Compressor was not performed to evaluate "Drive condition (including guards)" at a frequency of Every Three (3) Months.  This was not consistent with the employer's "Mechanical Integrity Program for Compressors, Condensers, Pumps, Evaporators, and Motors."  (c) In the West Compressor Room, inspection of the WRC-04 Vilter Compressor was not performed to evaluate "Drive condition (including guards)" at a frequency of Every Three (3) Months.  This was not consistent with the employer's "Mechanical Integrity Program for Compressors, Condensers, Pumps, Evaporators, and Motors."  (d) In the West Compressor Room, inspection of the WRC-06 Sabroe Compressor was not performed to evaluate "Drive condition (including guards)" at a frequency of Every Three (3) Months.  This was not consistent with the employer's "Mechanical Integrity Program for Compressors, Condensers, Pumps, Evaporators, and Motors."  (e) In the West Compressor Room, inspection of the WRC-01 Howe Compressor was not performed to evaluate "All safety cutouts"  Bi Annually (every 6 months).  This was not consistent with the employer's "Mechanical Integrity Program for Compressors, Condensers, Pumps, Evaporators, and Motors."  (f) In the West Compressor Room, inspection of the WRC-03 Vilter Compressor was not performed to evaluate "All safety cutouts" Bi Annually (every 6 months).  This was not consistent with the employer's "Mechanical Integrity Program for Compressors, Condensers, Pumps, Evaporators, and Motors."  (g) In the West Compressor Room, inspection of the WRC-04 Vilter Compressor was not performed to evaluate "All safety cutouts" Bi Annually (every 6 months).  This was not consistent with the employer's "Mechanical Integrity Program for Compressors, Condensers, Pumps, Evaporators, and Motors."  (h) In the West Compressor Room, inspection of the WRC-06 Sabroe Compressor was not performed to evaluate "All safety cutouts" Bi Annually  (every 6 months). This was not consistent with the employer's "Mechanical Integrity Program for Compressors, Condensers, Pumps, Evaporators, and Motors."  (i) In the East Compressor Room, inspection of the EAC-03 Vilter Compressor was not performed to evaluate "Drive condition (including guards)" at a frequency of Every Three (3) Months.  This was not consistent with the employer's "Mechanical Integrity Program for Compressors, Condensers, Pumps, Evaporators, and Motors."  (j) In the East Compressor Room, inspection of the EAC-4  Vilter Compressor was not performed to evaluate "Drive condition (including guards)" at a frequency of Every Three (3) Months.  This was not consistent with the employer's "Mechanical Integrity Program for Compressors, Condensers, Pumps, Evaporators, and Motors."  (k) In the West Plant, monthly inspections were not performed in April, 2017 and May, 2017 of the Viking Pump, involving defrost and inspection of external condition. This was not consistent with the employer's "Mechanical Integrity Program for Compressors, Condensers, Pumps, Evaporators, and Motors."  (l) In the East Plant and the West Plant, monthly inspections of evaporators, such as but not limited to WPE-71 Vilter and Gebhart Evaporator located in the West Plant,  were not performed which included inspection and cleaning finned heat exchanger surfaces.   This was not consistent with the employer's "Mechanical Integrity Program for Compressors, Condensers, Pumps, Evaporators, and Motors."  (m) In the East Plant and the West Plant, weekly inspection of evaporative condensers, such as but not limited to EEC-03 Imeco Evaporative Condenser Located in the East Plant, were not performed to address water conditions, pan strainers, and purge air.   This was not consistent with the employer's "Mechanical Integrity Program for Compressors, Condensers, Pumps, Evaporators, and Motors."

Issued

Sep 6, 2017

Abate by

Oct 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0170

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) before use:  (a) On the East Roof, piping deficiencies identified by the preventive maintenance (PM) East Roof Check inspection performed on or about February 27, 2017, involving frayed defrost condensate piping, including but not limited to EPE - 07,08,09, were not corrected.

Issued

Sep 6, 2017

Abate by

Oct 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $8,465 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0170

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:  (a) When the Maximo system was replaced by the SAP system, on or around August, 2016, for scheduling and tracking mechanical integrity inspections and preventative maintenance of Ammonia Refrigeration equipment, this change affected the content and maintenance of some of these inspection/maintenance records. The employer did not implement procedures to manage these changes.   For example, some of the inspection records generated after August, 2016 have a Maximo number:  - Annual Inspection record for the Viking Pump performed on 12-5-2016 (Maximo #4900),   - Annual Inspection record for Evaporator WPE-71 performed on 11-4-16 (Maximo #4894)   Also the SAP Maintenance Work Order for "Compressor General Service - All compressor receive inspection and routine service" was not consistent in its content with the employer's established Mechanical Integrity Program for Compressors.  For example, on or around June 6, 2017, a Refrigeration Operator utilized SAP work order #400735218 to perform 6 month (Biannual) inspection and service on East Ammonia Compressor #3.  The SAP work order  did not cover Items Requiring Attention as listed in the employer's Mechanical  Integrity Program for Compressors, Condensers, Pumps, Evaporators and Motors.  According to the specific Mechanical Integrity procedure for Vilter Compressors (including East Ammonia Compressor#3),  Bi Annually an Operational Inspection  must  include Lubricate as directed (bearings requiring grease),  and Bi Annually a  Major Inspection must include All safety cutouts. However, the SAP work order neither covered lubrication nor safety cutouts.     (b) In 2016 there were four (4) Refrigeration Operators, whereas during 2017 the number of Refrigeration Operators was reduced to two (2).  This reduction in staffing potentially impacted the employer's ability to perform necessary mechanical integrity inspections of process equipment and piping.  Also this reduction in staffing potentially affected the employer's ability to investigate ammonia releases which may occur and to perform activities such as line breaking and isolating process equipment.  No management of change has been performed to evaluate and manage the effects of this change in staffing.

Issued

Sep 6, 2017

Abate by

Oct 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $8,465 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0170

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.151(c): Where employees were exposed to injurious corrosive materials, suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body were not provided within the work area for immediate emergency use:   (a) In the East Engine Room, workers' eyes and bodies were potentially exposed to anhydrous ammonia, a corrosive chemical.  There was not suitable provision of emergency eyewash and safety shower, in-that there was no emergency eyewash and safety shower installed just outside the engine room's exit door (in accordance with IIAR Bulletin 109).  (b)  In the West Engine Room, workers' eyes and bodies were potentially exposed to anhydrous ammonia, a corrosive chemical.  There was not suitable provision of emergency eyewash and safety shower, in-that there was no emergency eyewash and safety shower installed just outside the engine room's exit door (in accordance with IIAR Bulletin 109).

Issued

Sep 6, 2017

Abate by

Oct 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $5,079 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(iv):   The details of the hazard communication program developed by the employer, did not include an explanation of the labels received on shipped containers and the workplace labeling system used by their employer; the safety data sheet, including the order of information and how employee could obtain and use the appropriate hazard information:  (a) Workers were not provided training on the GHS (Globally Harmonized System) label format (including pictograms, signal word, hazard statements, and precautionary statements) received on shipped containers.  Also, training was not provided regarding the order of information in safety data sheets (SDS).  Hazardous chemicals used at this workplace included, but were not limited to, anhydrous ammonia, WD-40, compressor oil, paint, paint thinner, and water treatment chemicals.                 .

Issued

Sep 6, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:  (a) In the West Plant Boiler Room, extension cords were used in lieu of fixed wiring.  A yellow extension cord was run across the floor, potentially causing trip and electrical shock hazards, to provide power for a printer.  (b) In the West Plant Boiler Room, extension cords were used in lieu of fixed wiring. A black extension cord was run along a wall over and around pipes, potentially causing an electrical shock hazard, to provide power for a power strip.