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.

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

PITTSBURGH — The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has cited Mariani & Richards Inc. for failing to protect workers from falls on a construction site following the investigation of a worker who fell 225 feet to his death.

OSHA began its investigation on Aug. 18, 2009, and found that Mariani & Richards did not provide workers with any fall protection while they were performing maintenance on The Pennsylvanian Building, a historic landmark in downtown Pittsburgh. As a result of the investigation, the company has been cited with one willful violation and a proposed penalty of $70,000.

“This company was cited for the same violation in November 2007 but never took the proper steps to ensure workers were safe at this worksite, resulting in this tragedy,” said Robert Szymanski, director of OSHA’s Pittsburgh office. “OSHA will not tolerate employers who flagrantly ignore the regulations designed to protect workers on the job.”

Top Stories

Owner pleads guilty to related criminal charge

Federal OSHA has fined the C.A. Franc construction company $539,000 following the investigation of a roofing worker who fell 40 feet to his death at a Washington worksite. The Valencia, Pa.-based roof installer – whose owner is Christopher A. Franc – was cited for 10 per instance willful citations for failing to protect workers from falls.

“Mr. Franc knowingly and willfully failed to protect his workers from falling to their death,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. “Despite repeated requests from workers that he provide fall protection, on this steep roof, Mr. Franc refused to provide readily available protection. We will not tolerate this type of blatant and egregious disregard for the health and safety of workers.”

OSHA began its investigation immediately following the worker’s death on Aug. 15, 2009, and found the C.A. Franc company had failed to provide any fall protection to its employees working on a pitched roof 40 feet off the ground. In addition, Mr. Franc failed to train a newly hired college student in hazards and the necessary safety measures for roofing work. As a result of the investigation, the company has been cited for 10 alleged per-instance willful violations, one for each employee working unprotected on the roof, with a proposed penalty of $490,000, and one additional alleged willful violation for failing to train the new employee, with a penalty of $49,000.

General contractor Hospitality Builders Inc. also has been cited with one willful violation and a proposed penalty of $70,000 for failing to ensure that C.A. Franc workers had fall protection.

“This fall fatality was one of five that occurred during a 15-day span in the Pittsburgh area,” said John M. Hermanson, OSHA’s regional administrator in Philadelphia, Pa. “Falls are the leading cause of fatalities in the construction industry. Failure to provide employees with fall protection is unconscionable. We urge construction companies to take the necessary action to ensure their workers are protected.”

OSHA Believes that they have detailed information about fall hazards and safeguards is available on it’s Web site at http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/fallprotection/construction.html.

In a related criminal charge, Christopher A. Franc today entered a guilty plea in federal court to a violation of 29 U. S. C. Section 666(e). Sentencing is scheduled for June 18.

Top Stories

Business Owners being charged with contempt order and payment of over $250,000 in fines and growing.

Federal OSHA announced on February 11th the issuance of contempt of court orders against Brian Andre, former owner of Andre Tuckpointing and Brickwork (AT&B), Andre Stone and Mason Work Inc. (AS&MW) and Regina Shaw, owner of AS&MW. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued the contempt orders against the St. Louis-area company and individuals for failing to comply with court orders enforcing citations of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC).

“Companies that expose employees to hazards, and then blatantly ignore citations requiring correction of those hazards, will not be overlooked,” said Charles E. Adkins, OSHA regional administrator in Kansas City, Mo. “Employers must fulfill their responsibility to keep employees safe, as well as satisfy any sanctions levied for failing to do so.”

The cases stem from numerous citations OSHA issued to AT&B and its successor, AS&MW, for willful, repeat and serious violations related to fall hazards, scaffolding erection deficiencies, power tool guarding and other hazards in connection with multiple projects in the St. Louis area.

When the companies failed to comply with the court’s order enforcing OSHRC’s final order, the secretary of labor filed petitions for contempt. As a result, a special master of the Court of Appeals concluded that Brian Andre, AS&MW and Regina Shaw were in contempt of the order, and recommended various sanctions. The Eighth Circuit substantially accepted the master’s recommendations, found all three parties in contempt, and imposed sanctions, including: Brian Andre, AS&MW and Regina Shaw must pay outstanding monetary penalties, which continue to accrue interest, and other miscellaneous fees, in the current amount of $258,582.08; AS&MW and Regina Shaw must pay a $100 daily penalty, calculated from the time of default, in early 2008, on the OSHRC final order; AS&MW must provide OSHA weekly notification of all current jobs, and known future jobs, at least 72 hours prior to commencement of work for a period of three years; and, AS&MW must provide “competent person” training to all people currently and subsequently designated as jobsite “competent persons,” prior to beginning any work, and provide the secretary records of such training.

Top Stories

Federal OSHA has has cited O.S. Interior Systems Inc. for alleged workplace safety violations following a fatality at the company’s worksite at 20555 State Highway 249 in Houston. Proposed penalties total $112,000.

“This employer failed to advise its employees on the locations of electrical lines,” said Dean McDaniel, OSHA’s regional administrator in Dallas. “If the company had followed OSHA’s standards, it is possible this tragic accident could have been avoided.”

OSHA’s Houston North Area Office began its inspection on Aug. 14 when an employee who was removing a demountable wall made contact with a live wire and died. The company was cited for two alleged willful violations for failing to adequately protect employees from energized electrical circuits and failing to inform employees about the hazards involved with energized electrical circuits.

Top Stories

In fiscal 2009, Federal OSHA conducted 797 fatality inspections, down from 936 the previous year. The year before that, the agency performed 1,043 fatality inspections; the year before that, 1,081; and the year before that, 1,114.

The percentage of violations issued as serious also has been rising over the last five years, increasing from 72 percent in 2005 to 77 percent in 2009.

In fiscal 2009, OSHA conducted 39,004 inspections, a 0.9 percent increase over the 38,667 inspections in 2008.

The agency also issued 87,663 citations in fiscal 2009, up 0.5 percent from the 87,210 citations the previous year.

The 2009 in-compliance rate was 25 percent, meaning 75 percent of the time OSHA inspectors found hazards and issued citations. In 2008 the rate was 23 percent.

Top Stories