OSHA Inspection: 99 CENTS ONLY STORES TEXAS, INC.

Issued

Aug 7, 2023

Abate by

Mar 15, 2024

Penalty

Initial $11,162 · Current $7,813 Reduced

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 February 11, 2023, and at times prior, at the 99 cents facility in Katy, Texas, the employer did not document that equipment complied with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices, such as IIAR Bulletin No. 114 (2014), Identification of Ammonia Refrigeration Piping and System Components, Section 4.1.1, Marker body, when the employer did not label piping containing anhydrous ammonia, exposing employees to toxic hazards in the event of an ammonia release.

Issued

Aug 7, 2023

Abate by

Mar 15, 2024

Penalty

Initial $15,625 · Current $15,625

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  (a) On February 11, 2023, at the 99 Cents facility in Katy Texas, the employer did not promptly address the recommendations from the current PHA findings including the recommendation (1.1.1.1) to develop a procedure for testing safety cutouts, in a timely manner. This condition exposed employees to toxic hazards in the event of an ammonia release.  (b) On February 11, 2023, at the 99 Cents facility in Katy Texas, the employer did not promptly address the recommendations from the current PHA findings including the recommendation (6.1.1.1) to add vibration analysis to the preventative maintenance program and perform vibration analysis on compressors, in a timely manner. This condition exposed employees to toxic hazards in the event of an ammonia release.

Issued

Aug 7, 2023

Abate by

Oct 16, 2023

Penalty

Initial $15,625 · Current $15,625

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.119(h)(2)(ii): The employer did not inform contract employers of the known potential fire, explosion, or toxic release hazards related to the contractor's work and the process:  (a) On or about February 11, 2023, and at times prior, at the 99 cents facility in Katy Texas, the employer did not inform the contract employer (EE Reed) of the known potential fire, explosion, or toxic release hazards related to the contractor's work and the process, exposing employees to toxic hazards in the event of an ammonia release.

Issued

Aug 7, 2023

Abate by

Oct 16, 2023

Penalty

Initial $15,625 · Current $10,938 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(2): The employer did not establish written procedures to maintain the on-going integrity of process equipment  (a) On or about February 11, 2023, and at times prior, at the 99 Cents facility in Katy, Texas, the employer did not develop written procedures for Corrosion Under Insulation (CUI) inspections for ammonia pressure vessels and piping exposing employees to toxic hazards in the event of an ammonia release.  (b) On or about February 11, 2023, and at times prior, at the 99 Cents facility in Katy, Texas, the employer did not develop written procedures for inspecting pressure vessels exposing employees to toxic hazards in the event of an ammonia release.  (c) On or about February 11, 2023, and at times prior, at the 99 Cents facility in Katy, Texas, the employer did not develop written procedures testing Safety cutouts including high/low pressure, temperature, and oil differential cutout exposing employees to toxic hazards in the event of an ammonia release.  (d) On or about February 11, 2023, and at times prior, at the 99 Cents facility in Katy, Texas, the employer did not develop written procedures for testing and inspecting Emergency shutdown systems exposing employees to toxic hazards in the event of an ammonia release.  (e)  On or about February 11, 2023, and at times prior, at the 99 Cents facility in Katy, Texas, the employer did not develop written procedures inspecting and testing Ammonia detectors in the engine room exposing employees to toxic hazards in the event of an ammonia release.

Issued

Aug 7, 2023

Abate by

Oct 16, 2023

Penalty

Initial $15,625 · Current $15,625

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 February 11, 2023, and at times prior, at the 99 Cents facility in Katy, Texas, the employer did not correct deficiencies in the engine room ammonia detectors in a safe and timely manner exposing employees to toxic hazards in the event of an ammonia release.

Issued

Aug 7, 2023

Abate by

Oct 16, 2023

Penalty

Initial $15,625 · Current $15,625

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.119(l)(1): 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:  a) On or about February 11, 2023, at the 99 cents facility located in Katy, Texas, the employer did not implement written procedures to manage the tie-in of a new 4" pipe to a covered process, exposing employees to toxic hazards in the event of an ammonia release.

Issued

Aug 7, 2023

Abate by

Sep 22, 2023

Penalty

Initial $15,625 · Current $10,938 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.119(o)(1): Employers did not verify that the procedures and practices developed under the standard were adequate:   (a) On February 11, 2023, and at times prior, at the 99 cents facility located in Katy, Texas, the employer did not certify that they have evaluated compliance with the PSM standard at least every three years to verify that the procedures and practices developed under the standard are adequate, exposing employees to toxic hazards in the event of an ammonia release.