Text For Citation: 02 Item/Group: 003 Hazard: REFINERY

29 CFR 1910.119(j)(4)(i): Inspections and tests were not performed on process equipment to maintain its mechanical integrity: (a) Unit 23 FCC - The company did not inspect all instrumentation it credited as a safeguard in its Process Hazard Analysis of the unit in that the Low Level Alarm 23-LAL-748 on the 23-D-8 Surge Drum did not have a history of any inspections done to assure it was capable of functioning as intended. This condition was noted on or about February 26, 2009. (b) Unit 23 FCC - The company did not inspect all instrumentation it credited as a safeguard in its Process Hazard Analysis of the unit in that the temperature indicating loop 23-TI-502 on the outlet of 23-E-4A Slurry Cooler Heat Exchanger did not have a history of any inspections done to assure it was capable of functioning as intended. This condition was noted on or about February 26, 2009. (c) Unit 23 FCC - The company did not inspect all instrumentation it credited as a safeguard in its Process Hazard Analysis of the unit in that the temperature indicating loop 23-TI-505 on a bypass line for 23-E-4A through C Slurry Cooler Heat Exchangers did not have a history of any inspections done to assure it was capable of functioning as intended. This condition was noted on or about February 26, 2009. (d) Unit 23 FCC - The company did not inspect all instrumentation it credited as a safeguard in its Process Hazard Analysis of the unit in that the temperature indicating loop 23-TI-549A on Tray 2 of the Fractionator did not have a history of any inspections done to assure it was capable of functioning as intended. This condition was noted on or about February 26, 2009. (e) Unit 23 FCC - The company did not inspect all instrumentation it credited as a safeguard in its Process Hazard Analysis of the unit in that the temperature indicating loop 23-TI-549B on Tray 2 of the Fractionator did not have a history of any inspections done to assure it was capable of functioning as intended. This condition was noted on or about February 26, 2009. (f) Unit 23 FCC - The company did not inspect all instrumentation it credited as a safeguard in its Process Hazard Analysis of the unit in that the High Pressure Alarm 24-PC-302B on the Wet Gas Compressor Suction did not have a history of any inspections done to assure it was capable of functioning as intended. This condition was noted on or about February 26, 2009. (g) Unit 23 FCC - The company did not inspect all instrumentation it credited as a safeguard in its Process Hazard Analysis of the unit in that the Pressure Indicator 23-PI-414 on the Reactor did not have a history of any inspections done to assure it was capable of functioning as intended. This condition was noted on or about February 26, 2009. (h) Unit 23 FCC - The company did not inspect all instrumentation it credited as a safeguard in its Process Hazard Analysis of the unit in that the Low Level Alarm 23-LAL-741 on the 23-D-5 Fractionator Overhead Receiver did not have a history of any inspections done to assure it was capable of functioning as intended. This condition was noted on or about February 26, 2009. (i) Unit 23 FCC - The company did not inspect all instrumentation it credited as a safeguard in its Process Hazard Analysis of the unit in that the Low Level Alarm 23-LAL-735 on the Regenerator did not have a history of any inspections done to assure it was capable of functioning as intended. This condition was noted on or about February 26, 2009. ABATEMENT DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED The company was previously cited for a violation of this occupational safety and health standard, which was contained in OSHA Inspection Number 310265830, Citation Number 1, Item Number 2, issued on April 15, 2008, at its Port Arthur, Texas refinery.