OSHA Inspection: PITA PAN

Issued

Aug 29, 2013

Abate by

Nov 21, 2014

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $4,500

Hazardous substances M102

General-duty citation text

OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1): 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 combustible wheat flour dust deflagration, explosion or other fire hazards while working at or near indoor storage silo, dust collector (baghouse), sifter, holding bin and scale hopper which were not adequately designed to prevent or minimize employee exposure in the event of deflagration or other uncontrolled fire event,    (a) Silo Room: On or about July 2. 2013, the indoor storage silo containing combustible wheat flour lacked means of (1) explosion protection and (2) deflagration isolation protection to the connected unmarked/unlabeled pneumatic pulse type baghouse dust collector.    (b) Silo Room: On or about July 2, 2013, the indoor unmarked/unlabeled pneumatic pulse type baghouse dust collector connected to the indoor storage silo containing combustible wheat flour lacked (1) explosion protection and (2) deflagration isolation protection to the connected upstream indoor storage silo.    (c) Silo Room: On or about July 2, 2013, the indoor sifter handling combustible wheat flour lacked deflagration isolation protection to the connected downstream indoor scale hopper.    (d) Silo Room: On or about July 2, 2013, the indoor dusting flour holding bin containing combustible wheat flour lacked (1) explosion protection and (2) deflagration isolation protection to the connected upstream indoor sifter and downstream collection drum.     (e) Mixing Room: On or about July 2, 2013, the indoor scale hopper containing combustible wheat flour lacked (1) explosion protection and (2) deflagration isolation protection to the connected upstream indoor sifter.    AMONG OTHER METHODS, A FEASIBLE METHOD TO CORRECT THIS HAZARD WOULD BE TO FOLLOW NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION (NFPA) STANDARDS - NFPA 61 "STANDARD FOR THE PREVENTION OF FIRES AND DUST EXPLOSIONS IN AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD PROCESSING FACILITIES (2013)" SECTIONS A.6.1; 6.2.1; 6.3.1; 10.4.3; 10.4.10.1; 10.4.10.2 - NFPA 654 "STANDARD FOR THE PREVENTION OF FIRE AND DUST EXPLOSIONS FROM THE MANUFACTURING, PROCESSING, AND HANDLING OF COMBUSTIBLE PARTICULATE SOLIDS (2013)" SECTIONS 7.1.4; 7.1.6; 7.1.7; 7.2.3.2; 7.13; 10 AND/OR FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES IN FM GLOBAL PROPERTY LOSS PREVENTION DATA SHEET 7-76 "PREVENTION AND MITIGATION OF COMBUSTIBLE DUST EXPLOSIONS AND FIRE (2013)" SECTIONS 2.5; 2.6 AND FM GLOBAL PROPERTY LOSS PREVENTION DATA SHEET 7-73 "DUST COLLECTORS AND COLLECTION SYSTEMS (2012)" SECTION 2.1.    SPECIFICALLY, (1) RELOCATE THE INDOOR STORAGE SILO, INDOOR HOLDING BIN, AND INDOOR SCALE HOPPER TO AN OUTDOOR LOCATION AND PROTECT THE VESSELS WITH A FORM OF EXPLOSION PROTECTION SUCH AS DEFLAGRATION VENTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 68, CHEMICAL DEFLAGRATION SUPPRESSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 69, OR OXIDANT CONCENTRATION REDUCTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 69.  IF RELOCATION IS NOT POSSIBLE, PROVIDE A METHOD OF EXPLOSION PROTECTION SUCH AS DEFLAGRATION VENTING TO A SAFE OUTDOOR LOCATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 68, DEFLAGRATION VENTING THROUGH LISTED DUST RETENTION AND FLAME-ARRESTING DEVICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 68, CHEMICAL DEFLAGRATION SUPPRESSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 69, OR OXIDANT CONCENTRATION REDUCTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 69; (2) RELOCATE THE INDOOR STORAGE SILO'S DUST COLLECTOR TO A SAFE OUTDOOR LOCATION AND PROVIDE A METHOD OF EXPLOSION PROTECTION SUCH AS DEFLAGRATION VENTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 68.  IF RELOCATION IS NOT POSSIBLE, PROVIDE A METHOD OF EXPLOSION PROTECTION SUCH AS DEFLAGRATION VENTING TO A SAFE OUTDOOR LOCATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 68; DEFLAGRATION VENTING THROUGH LISTED DUST RETENTION AND FLAME-ARRESTING DEVICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 68, CHEMICAL DEFLAGRATION SUPPRESSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 69, OR OXIDANT CONCENTRATION REDUCTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 69; (3) INSTALL LISTED ACTIVE OR PASSIVE ISOLATION DEVICES BETWEEN CRITICAL PROCESS COMPONENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 69.

Issued

Aug 29, 2013

Abate by

Oct 17, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $4,500

Hazardous substances 8111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(c)(1): The employer shall administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program, as described in paragraphs (c) through (o) of this section, whenever employee noise exposures "action level" equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level (TWA) of 85 decibels measured on the A scale (slow response) or, equivalently, a dose of 50% of the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA (TWA).  For purposes of the hearing conservation program, employee noise exposures shall be computed in accordance with Appendix A and Table G-16a, and without regard to any attenuation provided by the use of personal protective equipment.    NOTE: Table G-16a of this Appendix is adjusted for workshifts greater or less than 8 hours as follows:  Exposure Time (hrs)        Action Level (dBA)        Dose(%)         8                                     85                      50               10                                   83.4                    40         12                                   82.1                    35         16                                   80                       25  (a) On or about June 17, 2013, at the packaging area, an employee required to perform bagging operations was exposed to continuous noise at a time-weighted average sound level of approximately 88.6 dBA or, equivalently, a dose of approximately 82.8% of the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA (TWA) during a 607 minute sampling period.    (b) On or about June 17, 2013, at the packaging area, an employee required to perform palletizing operations was exposed to continuous noise at a time-weighted average sound level of approximately 88.4 dBA or, equivalently, a dose of approximately 80.1% of the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA (TWA) during a 604 minute sampling period.  (c) On or about June 17, 2013, at the packaging area, an employee required to perform box machine operations was exposed to continuous noise at a time-weighted average sound level of approximately 87.9 dBA or, equivalently, a dose of approximately 75.2% of the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA (TWA) during a 605 minute sampling period.  (d) On or about June 17, 2013, at the packaging area, an employee required to perform packaging line operations was exposed to continuous noise at a time-weighted average sound level of approximately 87.2 dBA or, equivalently, a dose of approximately 68.2% of the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA (TWA) during a 604 minute sampling period.  (e) On or about June 17, 2013, at the packaging area, an employee required to perform pallet wrapping operations  was exposed to continuous noise at a time-weighted average sound level of approximately 85.2 dBA or, equivalently, a dose of approximately 51.1% of the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA (TWA) during a 605 minute sampling period.  A continuing, effective hearing conservation program had not been instituted by the employer.