Standard Cited: 5A0001 OSH Act General Duty Paragraph

Violation Items
Nr: 102281128 Citation: 01001 Issuance: 01/27/1993 ReportingID: 0625700
Viol Type:Serious NrInstances:6 Contest Date:02/12/1993
Abatement Date:02/01/1993 X Nr Exposed:125 Final Order:
Initial Penalty:5000.00 REC: Emphasis:
Current Penalty:5000.00 Gravity:10 Haz Category:CHEMICAL



Text For Citation: 01 Item/Group: 001 Hazard: CHEMICAL

The employer is not limited to abatement methods suggested by OSHA, i.e., methods explained are general and may not be effective in all cases. Other methods of abatement may be equally or more appropriate. Ultimate responsibility for determining the most appropriate abatement methods rests with the employer, given its superior knowledge of the specific conditions on its worksite. Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees in that employees were exposed to the recognized hazard of explosion/toxic chemical release. Specifically: (a) Written operating procedures did not address properties of, and hazards presented by, the chemicals used in the Urea Plant process. Feasible abatement methods to correct this condition may include, but are not limited to, revising written operating manual to address chemicals in the process and hazards involved. (b) Written operating procedures for the Urea Plant did not address control measures to be taken if physical contact or airborne exposure occurred. Feasible abatement methods to correct this condition may include, but are not limited to, revising written operating manual to adddress control measures to be taken if physical contact or airborne exposure occurred. (c) Written operating procedures in the Urea Plant did not detail safety systems and their functions. Feasible abatement methods to correct this condition may include, but are not limited to, revising written operating manual to address detail safety systems and their function. (d) Safe work practices were not developed and implemented for employees and contractors in the Urea Plant to control hazards during operations such as control over the entrance into a facility by maintenance, contractor, laboratory, or other support personnel. Feasible abatement methods to correct this condition may include, but are not limited to, having a written procedure for control of personnel upon entry into the operating area of the Urea Plant. (e) The employer did not establish and implement written procedures to maintain the ongoing integrity of process equipment excluding the Urea Reactor. Feasible abatement methods to correct this condition may include, but are not limited to, establishing and implementing written procedures, a training program for maintenance personnel, and inspection and testing procedures for process equipment. (f) Written procedures to manage changes to process chemicals, technology, equipment, and procedures that affect a covered process did not assure that the necessary time period for the change was addressed. Feasible abatement methods to correct this condition may include, but are not limited to, including the written procedures whether the changes are temporary or permanent and, if a temporary change, including the temporary time period.