OREGON, Ohio — The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited BP North American Inc. and BP-Husky Refining LLC’s refinery in Oregon, Ohio, with 42 alleged willful violations, including 39 on a per-instance basis, and 20 alleged serious violations for exposing workers to a variety of hazards including failure to provide adequate pressure relief for process units. Proposed penalties total $3,042,000.

“OSHA has found that BP often ignored or severely delayed fixing known hazards in its refineries,” said Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis. “There is no excuse for taking chances with people’s lives. BP must fix the hazards now.”

OSHA began its inspection at the refinery located near Toledo, Ohio, in September 2009 as part of the agency’s Refinery National Emphasis Program and as a follow-up to a 2006 inspection and a 2007 settlement agreement between OSHA and BP at this location. Although the 2009 inspection found that BP had complied with the settlement agreement, OSHA found numerous violations at the plant not previously covered by the agreement.

The inspection revealed that workers were exposed to serious injury and death in the event of a release of flammable and explosive materials in the refinery because of numerous conditions constituting violations of OSHA’s process safety management standard. OSHA has issued willful citations for numerous failures to provide adequate pressure relief for process units, failures to provide safeguards to prevent the hazardous accumulation of fuel in process heaters, and exposing workers to injury and death from collapse of or damage, in the event of a fire, to nine buildings in the refinery. Additional willful citations allege various other violations of OSHA’s standard addressing process safety management. These citations carry proposed penalties totaling $2,940,000.

The serious citations address a variety of other hazards, including violations of other requirements of the process safety management standard. These carry proposed penalties totaling $102,000.

Since 1991, this refinery has been inspected 12 times. Nationally, BP Products North American has been inspected by OSHA 44 times at various sites and is facing pending cases in which 439 willful citations and failure-to-abate notices were issued to its Texas City Refinery as a result of a 2009 inspection. Proposed penalties in those pending cases total $87 million, the largest penalties by far ever proposed by OSHA. BP’s Texas City Refinery experienced a devastating explosion and fire in 2005 that killed 15 workers and injured 170. A large portion of the penalties proposed for the Texas City Refinery results from OSHA’s allegations that BP failed to fully live up to a settlement agreement entered into after the explosion. BP has contested the citations, notifications of failure-to-abate and the proposed penalties in those cases.

BP North American Inc. operates and jointly owns the refinery with Canadian-based Husky Energy Inc. The company has 15 business days from receipt of the citations to comply, request an information conference with the OSHA area director or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

Toledo Refinery Citations and Proposed Penalties

Forty-two willful citations with proposed penalties totaling $2,940,000 are proposed as follows:

1. Thirty-eight (38) per-instance, willful citations with penalties totaling $2,660,000 allege as follows:

a. Twenty-six instances allege deficient pressure relief, a violation of 29 CFR parts 1910.119(d)(3) and 1910.119(j)(5), with total penalties of $1,820,000;

b. Three instances allege the lack of flame-out protection on heaters and a furnace, a violation of 29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3), with total penalties of $210,000; and

c. Nine instances allege facility-siting hazards, a violation of 29 CFR 1910.119(e)(5), with total penalties of $630,000.

2. Four willful citations with penalties totaling $280,000, allege as follows:

a. Lack of pressure vessel information, a violation of 29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3), with a penalty of $70,000;

b. Cross-connections between fire-emergency water supplies and process systems, a violation of 29 CFR parts 1910.119(d)(3) and 1910.119(e)(5), with a penalty of $70,000;

c. Failure to conduct thickness measurements at designated test sites and as required at the flare header, a violation of 29 CFR 1910.119(j)(4)(ii), with a penalty of $70,000; and

d. Failure to conduct thickness measurements in accordance with RAGAGEP, a violation of 29 CFR 1910.119(j)(4)(iii), with a penalty of $70,000.

Twenty serious citations with total penalties of $102,000 allege the following failures: to support pipes properly; to maintain heat transfer information for refractory-lined vessels; to assure the accuracy of P&IDs, the maintenance of pressure vessel nameplates, and proper documentation of pressure relief design information; to document implementation of the vessel grounding program; to assure that car-sealing practices were used for intervening valves; to password protect safety instrumented systems; to assure that PHAs addressed combustion safeguards, pressure relief, and human factors, and reflected updated layer of protection analysis and safety integrity levels; to establish and to implement a written program for refinery valve car-seal procedures; to consult employees on the frequency of refresher training; to implement procedures for operating limits changes and other matters; to investigate contamination of the fire-water system; to include contributing factors and recommendations in accident investigation reports; to audit a statistically significant number of pressure vessels, piping and instrument controls during compliance audits; to assure that LOTO procedures were implemented during burner maintenance; to assure that LOTO devices were applied during service and maintenance; and to assure that electric lighting equipment was appropriate for hazardous atmosphere classifications.

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited Hua Sheng International Group Corp. in Barrigada, Guam, for $139,500 in proposed penalties for hazardous working and living conditions at a jobsite and barracks in Harmon, Guam.

“The failure of employers to provide clean water to workers they are required to house can lead to serious infections and dehydration,” said Ken Nishiyama Atha, OSHA’s regional administrator in San Francisco. “We are vigorously enforcing the standards for adequate housing and safety for all workers, including H-2B temporary workers, especially as construction and other industries ramp up in support of the planned relocation of Marine Corps personnel and their dependents from Okinawa, Japan, to Guam.

OSHA has cited the company for one alleged willful violation and 28 alleged serious violations. The willful violation is for failing to provide workers with an adequate water supply for drinking, cooking, bathing, flushing and laundry. The proposed penalty for the willful violation is $70,000. A willful violation is one committed with intentional knowing or voluntary disregard for the law’s requirements or with plain indifference to employee safety and health.

The serious violations are for safety and health hazards related to poor living conditions at the employees’ barracks as well as at the worksite. Some include failing to maintain the fire alarm system; maintain toilet rooms in sanitary condition; install cooking and heating equipment to meet local ordinances codes and regulations; provide proper food-handling facilities and garbage containers; and provide first aid facilities and maintain a trained first aid person. The proposed penalty for the serious violations is $69,500 A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

OSHA cited this company six times in the two years prior to this inspection. Four of the inspections resulted in a total of nine serious violations.

Federal OSHA has cited the Allen Family Foods Inc. poultry processing facility in Harbeson Delaware for exposing workers to a variety of workplace safety hazards. Proposed penalties total $182,200.

OSHA initiated an investigation on Sept. 9, 2009, in response to a referral made by Maryland Occupational Safety and Health after numerous serious and willful violations were issued at a similar processing facility in Maryland.

OSHA has cited the company with 45 serious violations and proposed a penalty of $182,000, and two other-than-serious violations with a proposed penalty of $200. The serious violations address hazards with industrial trucks, falls, personal protective equipment, machine guarding, electrical hazards, process safety management, respirators and emergency response.

“It is vital that the company abate these hazards as quickly as possible to ensure that safety and health of workers at that facility are not at risk,” said Domenick Salvatore, director of OSHA’s Wilmington, Del., office.

The Maryland inspection netted three proposed “willful” violations involving Lockout/Tagout and machine guarding.  Proposed penalties of $109,750.

Proper Combustible Gas Monitoring Among Seven Key Safety Lessons from a CSB Investigation of Multiple Hot Work Disasters

 Wausau, Wisconsin, March 4, 2010 – The U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) today issued a safety bulletin warning of the hazards of conducting hot work in a variety of industries and identifying seven key lessons aimed at preventing worker deaths during hot work in and around storage tanks containing flammable materials.

Hot work is defined as any work activity that involves burning, welding, cutting, brazing, grinding, soldering, or similar spark-producing operations that can ignite a flammable atmosphere

The CSB began investigating hot work hazards following an explosion that occurred on July 29, 2008, at the Packaging Corporation of America (PCA) corrugated cardboard mill in Tomahawk, Wisconsin, which killed three maintenance workers and injured another. The CSB determined the explosion resulted from welding above an 80-foot-tall storage tank that contained highly flammable hydrogen gas – the product of bacterial decomposition of organic fiber waste inside the tank.

You can Read the rest of the article here on the U.S. Chemical Safety Board web site.

#501 - Trainer Course in OSHA Standards for General Industry, April 27-30, 2010 in Louisville, KY

This course is designed for personnel in the private and public sector interested in teaching the OSHA 10- and 30-hour general industry safety and health outreach program to their employees and other interested groups. Special emphasis is placed on those topics that are required in the 10- and 30-hour programs as well as on those that are the most hazardous, using OSHA standards as a guide. Course participants are briefed on effective instructional approaches and the effective use of visual aids and handouts. This course allows the student to become a trainer in the Outreach Program and to conduct both a 10- and 30-hour general industry safety and health course and to issue cards to participants verifying course completion. Prerequisites: Course #511 and five years of general industry safety experience. A college degree in occupational safety and health, a Certified Safety Professional (CSP), or Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH) designation, in the applicable training area may be substituted for two years of experience. NOTE: Students in Course #501 who wish to participate as authorized trainers in the Outreach Program must successfully pass a written exam at the end of the course. Outreach trainers are required to attend Course #503 at least once every four years to maintain their trainer status.

#503 - Update for General Industry Outreach Trainers, April 27-29, 2010 in Louisville, KY

This course is designed for private sector personnel who have completed course #501 Trainer Course in Occupational Safety and Health Standards for General Industry and who are active trainers in the outreach program. It provides an update on OSHA general industry standards and OSHA policies. Prerequisites: Course #501. NOTE: Outreach trainers are required to attend this course once every four years to maintain their trainer status. Students must bring their current trainer’s card for validation.

To register please contact Josh Dahl at with Eastern Kentucky University at (859)622-2961 or josh.dahl@eku.edu

Top Stories

By: Jordy Yager

But this year’s inspection data from the Office of Compliance inspections is an improvement over last year’s.

More than 70 percent of congressional offices have violated worker safety standards over the past year.

While the majority of all lawmaker offices on Capitol Hill have at least one health or safety hazard violation, this year’s inspection data from the Office of Compliance inspections is an improvement over last year’s.

The number of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) violations found in each office has significantly decreased over the years as well — from an average of about 8.15 violations per office in 2007 to an average of 1.75 hazards in each office this year.

You can see the rest of the article here on the thehill.com

Top Stories

BRAINTREE, Mass. - The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has proposed $136,000 in fines against William A. Berry & Son Inc., a Danvers, Mass., construction contractor, for 19 alleged violations of workplace health and safety standards while removing asbestos-containing material at Beth Israel Hospital in Boston, Mass., last September.

“Asbestos is well recognized as a health hazard since inhalation of asbestos fibers may lead to lung cancer and other diseases,” said Brenda Gordon, OSHA’s area director for Boston and southeastern Massachusetts. “OSHA standards are designed to minimize the risk of exposure and its potential impact on workers’ health, but they are effective only so long as employers adhere to them.”

OSHA’s inspection found that Berry employees were removing laboratory ventilation hoods with asbestos-containing panels without proper respiratory protection and required safeguards to minimize exposure. Specifically, the contractor failed to conduct an initial asbestos exposure assessment and monitor the worksite daily for asbestos exposure, establish regulated work areas, provide protective clothing and a decontamination area, use HEPA vacuums to collect debris and clean workers’ clothing, label containers of asbestos-containing materials, train employees in asbestos work, and ensure that the site was inspected and the work overseen by a competent person. Several respirator-related deficiencies also were identified.

As a result, OSHA has issued William A. Berry & Son one willful citation, with a $55,000 fine, for not establishing a regulated work area and 17 serious citations, with $80,000 in fines, for the remaining items. The employer also has been issued one other-than-serious citation, with a $1,000 fine, for not providing OSHA injury and illness logs in a timely manner.

OSHA defines a willful violation as one committed with plain indifference to or intentional disregard for worker safety and health, while serious citations are issued when death or serious physical harm is likely to result from hazards about which the employer knew or should have known. Detailed information on asbestos hazards and safeguards is available at http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/asbestos/index.html and http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/asbestos/construction.html.

William A. Berry & Son Inc. has 15 business days from receipt of its citations and proposed penalties to comply, participate in an informal conference with the OSHA area director or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. The inspection was conducted by OSHA’s Braintree Area Office; telephone 617-565-6924.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA’s role is to assure these conditions for America’s working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit http://www.osha.gov

Top Stories

Scenario:  You have a 48 year old male employee who reports to work on Wednesday morning and two hours into his work shift he experiences some sort of seizure and falls to the floor.  During this event when the employee falls he strikes his head on a work table and receives a laceration on his head that requires six stitches.  Further investigation determines the employee has epilepsy and a history of epileptic seizures.  The doctor verifies that what this employee experienced was indeed an epileptic seizure.   So you determined the event was due to a preexisting non-work related medical condition.  But since the employee struck his head while at work performing work, does the geographical presumption make this event an OSHA recordable? 

Answer:  Neither the seizures nor the laceration are recordable. Injuries and illnesses that result solely from non-work-related events or exposures are not recordable under the exception in section 1904.5(b)(2)(ii). Epileptic seizures are a symptom of a disease of non-occupational origin, and the fact that they occur at work does not make them work-related. Because epileptic seizures are not work-related, injuries resulting solely from the seizures, such as the laceration in the case in question, are not recordable.

Top Stories

I often hear the horror stories of OSHA experiences. Some are determined to be embellishments of an actual experience, but others justify certain levels of outrage and frustration.  I receive a monthly publication listing the results of OSHA inspections conducted in the state of Kentucky.  I was just reading the January edition of the publication and thought I would share with you a few findings that help to fuel the feelings people may have against OSHA.

In an event where two employees were killed after anhydrous ammonia was released while repairing a freezer pump, the employer was fined a total of $17,500. Now the interesting part about this is that 29% ($5,000) of the total dollar amount was because the employer did not notify OSHA within eight hours of being aware of the fatalities. 

In another situation, OSHA discovered five employees working on a roof 19 feet above the ground with no fall protection that netted (no pun intended) a serious violation of $2,500. So, this could leave one to think that delaying a phone call to OSHA after a fatality is twice as bad as actually exposing employees to a potential death hazard? 

I also found an occurrence where not having an emergency eyewash and shower was labeled as a serious violation and was accompanied with a monetary penalty of $4,500, yet the same violation was listed as an “other than serous” with no monetary penalty for another employer. 

In a situation with an employee who had a finger amputated, the hazards that caused the amputation were listed as a serious violation and cost the employer $4,500. The employer was then fined $3,250 for not reporting the event within 72 hours. Once again are we saying not reporting the event is almost as serious as the actual hazard that casued the event?

Now this one boggles my mind! Another employer was fined $6,600 due to an employee injury, but the entire monetary portion of the citation revolved around not reporting and not recording the injury.  The ensuing OSHA inspection found that the area around a cooker tank was not kept in a clean and dry condition and that the employer did not have proper lockout/tagout procedures in place nor have proper training certification for forklift operators.  Total dollar amount for those findings?  Zero dollars.  Yes, I said zero dollars.

Further down the page, I saw where a little “mom and pop” deli near my house was fined $1,250 for some water on the floor from a leaky roof. So is OSHA telling me grease and oil on the floor around a cooker tank isn’t a hazard but water is? 

One of the most frustrating inspection outcomes was when Kentucky OSHA fined a nonprofit charity organization “Methodist Mountain Mission” $250 for a toilet that “did not flush properly”.   Based on these findings, I can only assume an improperly flushing toilet is more serious than improper lockout procedures?  

Now I don’t pretend to know all the details around these events, but it doesn’t take much to see what could be perceived as significant inconsistencies in enforcement and levels of seriousness.  You want to know why OSHA sometimes gets a bad rap?  Well, just read.  

Note:  So they can get back to clothing and finding gainful employment for the poor in the mountains of Eastern Kentucky, I inserted a link to the Methodist Mountain Mission of KY just in case you might like to donate to their OSHA fine fund.

Top Stories

TSP Co., Inc. of Lexington Kentucky receives $420,000 in fines for safety violations discovered by Kentucky OSHA from a construction site inspection that occurred in October of 2009 at 100 Trojan Way in Vine Grove Kentucky.

The employer received nine Willful citations related to scaffolding violations.  Citations included employee was working on scaffolding that was more than 25 inches from wall with no fall protection.   Employees were seen climbing scaffolding to access work area; scaffold did not have proper means of access.  The employer did not ensure competent person inspected scaffolding before each work shift. Employees were working on scaffolding that was not erected under supervision of competent person. There were Masonry employees working on scaffolding at least 13 feet above lower level with no fall protection. There was an employee working near unguarded platform edge with no fall protection and Scaffolding did not have proper toe boards or other safety measures to protect three employees working below.  OSHA also observed scaffolding that was not properly joined together vertically by coupling or stacking pins or other means.

The final two willful citations involved the employer not providing training for employees working on scaffolds in fall and other hazards and not properly training employees on hazards associated with erecting, dismantling and working from scaffolds.

TSP also received an inspection in 2007 that is still listed as open by Kentucky OSHA that involves six similar citations with one being a repeat violation and five serious violations.  The current proposed fines for this inspection are $26,600.

Top Stories