OSHA Inspection: ALL-FEED PROCESSING AND PACKAGING, INC.

Issued

May 9, 2014

Abate by

Dec 1, 2015

Penalty

Initial $53,900 · Current $35,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances E101E200

General-duty citation text

Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: The employer does not furnish employment and a place of employment which is free from recognized hazards that are causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees in that employees are exposed to combustible dust explosion, deflagration, and other fire hazards while working at, near, or upstream of a dust collection system (primary cyclonic separator and secondary filter media collector) which was not adequately designed, installed, or otherwise equipped to prevent employee exposure in the event of an internal deflagration or other fire event:    Employees in or near M2 are exposed to fire and explosion hazards while processing Class II, combustible (explosible) dusts, and the following deficiencies are observed:      Combustible dusts such as, but not limited to, pea flour (pea screens) are processed and the employer does not ensure the dust collection system [Buell Norblo secondary filter media collector and Nolin primary cyclonic separator] is 1) equipped with a means of explosion protection and 2) equipped with a means of deflagration propagation protection (isolation).      Among other methods, a feasible abatement method to correct this hazard is to follow the guidelines of:      NFPA Standard 654 - 2006, Standard for the Prevention of Fire and Dust Explosions from the Manufacturing, Processing, and Handling of Combustible Particulate Solids, including, but not limited to:    Section 7.13.1.3.1: Air-material separators shall be protected in accordance with 7.1.2.      Section 7.1.2: The design of explosion protection for equipment shall incorporate one or more of the following methods of protection: Deflagration suppression systems in accordance with NFPA 69, Deflagration venting, etc.      Section 7.13.1.5: Isolation devices shall be provided for air-material separators in accordance with 7.1.4.      Section 7.1.4.1: Where an explosion hazard exists, isolation devices shall be provided to prevent deflagration propagation between pieces of equipment connected by ductwork.      Section 7.1.5.1: Where an explosion hazard exists, isolation devices shall be provided to prevent deflagration propagation from air-material separators upstream to the work areas.      NFPA Standard 61 - 2008, Standard for the Prevention of Fires and Dust Explosions in Agricultural and Food Processing Facilities, including, but not limited to:      Section 10.4.2: Dust collectors and filters used for grinders or hammermills shall be located outside and shall be protected in accordance with Section 6.3.      Section 6.3.1: Equipment requiring explosion prevention shall be protected by containment, suppression, inerting, or explosion venting.      Section 6.1: Explosion prevention, relief, and venting, shall encompass the design and installation of devices and systems to vent the gases and overpressure resulting from a combustion explosion occurring in equipment, rooms, or other enclosures so that damage is minimized. (A.6.1): Ultimately, if explosion venting is provided or equipment fails, explosion propagation could still be possible.  Additional information on deflagration isolation can be found in NFPA 69 and NFPA 654.      Specifically, (1) Equip the primary and secondary components with a functional method of explosion protection such as chemical deflagration suppression in accordance with NFPA 69 or explosion venting to a safe location in accordance with NFPA 68; and (2) Provide a listed method of deflagration propagation protection (isolation) between the primary component and the facility and between the primary and secondary component such as a chemical suppression isolation in accordance with NFPA 69.  Select, design, install, and maintain any explosion venting systems in accordance with a recognized and generally accepted engineering practice such as NFPA 68.  Select, design, install, and maintain any chemical deflagration suppression systems in accordance with a recognized and generally accepted engineering practice such as NFPA 69.     ***ALL-FEED PROCESSING AND PACKAGING, INC. WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD OR ITS EQUIVALENT STANDARD 5(a)(1) UNDER INSPECTION NUMBER 314850454, CITATION 01, ITEMS 001-003, ISSUED ON NOVEMBER 02, 2011, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON FENRUARY 11, 2013, WITH RESPECT TO THE WORKSITE LOCATED AT 717 W. DIVISION STREET, GALVA, ILLINOIS.***      ***ALL-FEED PROCESSING AND PACKAGING, INC. WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD OR ITS EQUIVALENT STANDARD 5(a)(1) UNDER INSPECTION NUMBER 312886237, CITATION 1, ITEMS 1 & 2, ISSUED ON OCTOBER  05, 2009, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON OCTOBER 22, 2010, WITH RESPECT TO THE WORKSITE LOCATED AT 717 W. DIVISION STREET, GALVA, ILLINOIS.***       ***ALL-FEED PROCESSING AND PACKAGING, INC. WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD OR ITS EQUIVALENT STANDARD 5(a)(1) UNDER INSPECTION NUMBER 310801790, CITATION 2, ITEM 1, ISSUED ON JANUARY 13, 2009, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON FEBRUARY 3, 2009, WITH RESPECT TO THE WORKSITE LOCATED AT 717 W. DIVISION STREET, GALVA, ILLINOIS.***

Issued

May 9, 2014

Abate by

Dec 1, 2015

Penalty

Initial $53,900 · Current $35,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9135

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(2): Employees are exposed to an airborne concentration of Total Dust listed in Table Z-1 in excess of the Permissible Exposure Limit:    The employer does not protect employees from exposures to Total Dust (particulates not otherwise regulated) at concentrations in excess of the Permissible Exposure Limit while performing routine work activities:      a)    On or about 11/14/13, Employee #1 (M2 Operator) was exposed to an eight-hour time-weighted average level of 20.53 mg/cubic meter, approximately 1.37 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 15.0 mg/cubic meter for Total Dust, while working in M2. The exposure level is derived from a sample collected over a 405 minute sampling period with zero exposure assumed for the unsampled period of time (75 minutes).       b)    On or about 11/14/13, Employee #2 (M2 Operator)  was exposed to an eight-hour time-weighted average level of 24.49 mg/cubic meter, approximately 1.63 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 15.0 mg/cubic meter for Total Dust, while working in M2. The exposure level is derived from a sample collected over a 406 minute sampling period with zero exposure assumed for the unsampled period of time (74 minutes).      c)    On or about 12/16/13, Employee #3 (bagging room operator) was exposed to an eight-hour time-weighted average level of 30.49 mg/cubic meter, approximately 2.03 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 15.0 mg/cubic meter for Total Dust, while working in Bagging Area. The exposure level is derived from a sample collected over a 385 minute sampling period with zero exposure assumed for the unsampled period of time (95 minutes).      d)    On or about 12/19/13, Employee #4 (M3 operator) was exposed to an eight-hour time-weighted average level of 57.93 mg/cubic meter, approximately 3.86 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 15.0 mg/cubic meter for Total Dust, while working in M3. The exposure level is derived from a sample collected over a 202 minute sampling period with zero exposure assumed for the unsampled period of time (278 minutes).      e)    On or about 12/19/13, Employee #5 (M3 operator and forklift driver) was exposed to an eight-hour time-weighted average level of 20.44 mg/cubic meter, approximately 1.36 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 15.0 mg/cubic meters for Total Dust, while working in M3 Area. The exposure level is derived from a sample collected over a 203 minute sampling period with zero exposure assumed for the unsampled period of time (277 minutes).      *Zero exposure, product changes, concentration of exposure, and duration of exposure may impact amount of exposure.      ***ALL-FEED PROCESSING AND PACKAGING, INC. WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD OR ITS EQUIVALENT STANDARD 29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(2) UNDER INSPECTION NUMBER 314850454, CITATION 01, ITEM 011(a), ISSUED ON NOVEMBER 02, 2011, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON FEBRUARY 11, 2013, WITH RESPECT TO THE WORKSITE LOCATED AT 717 W. DIVISION STREET, GALVA, ILLINOIS.***      ***ALL-FEED PROCESSING AND PACKAGING, INC. WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD OR ITS EQUIVALENT STANDARD 29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(2) UNDER INSPECTION NUMBER 314848649, CITATION 2, ITEM 3-A, ISSUED ON JUNE 30, 2011, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON FEBRUARY 11, 2013, WITH RESPECT TO THE WORKSITE LOCATED AT 717 W. DIVISION STREET, GALVA, ILLINOIS.***      ***ALL-FEED PROCESSING AND PACKAGING, INC. WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD OR ITS EQUIVALENT STANDARD 29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(2) UNDER INSPECTION NUMBER 310801790, CITATION 2, ITEM 3-A, ISSUED ON JANUARY 13, 2009, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON FEBRUARY 3, 2009, WITH RESPECT TO THE WORKSITE LOCATED AT 717 W. DIVISION STREET, GALVA, ILLINOIS.***    To abate this violation, the employer must ensure that its employees are not exposed to airborne concentrations of Total Dust (particulates not otherwise regulated) in excess of OSHA's Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 15.0 mg/cubic meter through the introduction of feasible administrative or engineering controls as required by 29 CFR 1910.1000(e).  The employer must implement a mandatory respiratory protection program in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.134 during periods when feasible administrative or engineering controls are being developed and/or installed.

Issued

May 9, 2014

Abate by

Dec 1, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9135

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(e): Feasible administrative or engineering controls are not determined and implemented to achieve compliance with the limits prescribed in 29 CFR 1910.1000(a) through (d) and protective equipment or any other protective measures are not used to keep the exposure of employee to air contaminants within the limits prescribed:    The employer does not determine and implement adequate engineering controls to prevent employee exposures to Total Dust (particulates not otherwise regulated) at concentrations in excess of the Permissible Exposure Limit while performing routine work activities.  The employer also does not use protective equipment (mandatory respirator use) to keep the exposure of employees to Total Dust (particulates not otherwise regulated) at concentrations below the Permissible Exposure Limit while performing routine work activities during periods which it is responsible for determining and implementing adequate engineering controls:      a)    On or about 11/14/13, Employee #1 (M2 Operator) was exposed to an eight-hour time-weighted average level of 20.53 mg/cubic meter, approximately 1.37 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 15.0 mg/cubic meter for Total Dust, while working in M2. The exposure level is derived from a sample collected over a 405 minute sampling period with zero exposure assumed for the unsampled period of time (75 minutes).       b)    On or about 11/14/13, Employee #2 (M2 Operator)  was exposed to an eight-hour time-weighted average level of 24.49 mg/cubic meter, approximately 1.63 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 15.0 mg/cubic meter for Total Dust, while working in M2. The exposure level is derived from a sample collected over a 406 minute sampling period with zero exposure assumed for the unsampled period of time (74 minutes).      c)    On or about 12/16/13, Employee #3 (bagging room operator) was exposed to an eight-hour time-weighted average level of 30.49 mg/cubic meter, approximately 2.03 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 15.0 mg/cubic meter for Total Dust, while working in Bagging Area. The exposure level is derived from a sample collected over a 385 minute sampling period with zero exposure assumed for the unsampled period of time (95 minutes).      d)    On or about 12/19/13, Employee #4 (M3 operator) was exposed to an eight-hour time-weighted average level of 57.93 mg/cubic meter, approximately 3.86 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 15.0 mg/cubic meter for Total Dust, while working in M3. The exposure level is derived from a sample collected over a 202 minute sampling period with zero exposure assumed for the unsampled period of time (278 minutes).      e)    On or about 12/19/13, Employee #5 (M3 operator and forklift driver) was exposed to an eight-hour time-weighted average level of 20.44 mg/cubic meter, approximately 1.36 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 15.0 mg/cubic meters for Total Dust, while working in M3 Area. The exposure level is derived from a sample collected over a 203 minute sampling period with zero exposure assumed for the unsampled period of time (277 minutes).      *Zero exposure, product changes, concentration of exposure, and duration of exposure may impact amount of exposure.      ***ALL-FEED PROCESSING AND PACKAGING, INC. WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD OR ITS EQUIVALENT STANDARD 29 CFR 1910.1000(e) UNDER INSPECTION NUMBER 314850454, CITATION 01, ITEM 011(b), ISSUED ON NOVEMBER 02, 2011, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON FEBRUARY 11, 2013, WITH RESPECT TO THE WORKSITE LOCATED AT 717 W. DIVISION STREET, GALVA, ILLINOIS.***      ***ALL-FEED PROCESSING AND PACKAGING, INC. WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD OR ITS EQUIVALENT STANDARD 29 CFR 1910.100(e) UNDER INSPECTION NUMBER 314848649, CITATION 2, ITEM 3-B, ISSUED ON JUNE 30, 2011, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON FEBRUARY 11, 2013, WITH RESPECT TO THE WORKSITE LOCATED AT 717 W. DIVISION STREET, GALVA, ILLINOIS.***      ***ALL-FEED PROCESSING AND PACKAGING, INC. WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD OR ITS EQUIVALENT STANDARD 29 CFR 1910.1000(e) UNDER INSPECTION NUMBER 310801790, CITATION 2, ITEM 3-B, ISSUED ON JANUARY 13, 2009, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON FEBRUARY 3, 2009, WITH RESPECT TO THE WORKSITE LOCATED AT 717 W. DIVISION STREET, GALVA, ILLINOIS.***     To abate this violation, the employer must ensure that its employees are not exposed to airborne concentrations of Total Dust (particulates not otherwise regulated) in excess of OSHA's Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 15.0 mg/cubic meter through the introduction of feasible administrative or engineering controls.  The employer must implement a mandatory respiratory protection program in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.134 during periods when feasible administrative or engineering controls are being developed and/or installed.

Issued

May 9, 2014

Abate by

Dec 1, 2015

Penalty

Initial $7,700 · Current $28,000

Hazardous substances 8110

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(g)(1): The employer does not establish and maintain an audiometric testing program by making audiometric testing available to all employees whose exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels:       The employer does not establish and maintain an audiometric testing program where employees' exposure to noise exceeds an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 dBA, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent.  The employer does not provide baseline and subsequent annual audiograms to exposed employees.  The employer's hearing conservation program does not address provisions for baseline and annual audiometric testing:      a)    On or about 12/16/13, Employee #1 (peanut cleaner) was exposed to continuous noise levels at 67% of the allowable time-weighted average sound level (90 dBA), while performing work activities in the Peanut Cleaner.   This level exceeds a noise dose of 50%.  The equivalent dBA level of the 67% is approximately 87.1 dBA.  This level exceeds an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level (TWA) of 85 dBA. The exposure level was derived from a sample collected over a 397 minute sampling period with zero exposure assumed for the unsampled period of time (83 minutes).      b)    On or about 12/16/13, Employee #2 (M2 operator) was exposed to continuous noise levels at 126.6% of the allowable time-weighted average sound level (90 dBA), while performing work activities in M2. This level exceeds a noise dose of 50%.   The equivalent dBA level of the 126.6% is approximately 91.7 dBA. This level exceeds an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level (TWA) of 85 dBA. The exposure level was derived from a sample collected over a 366 minute sampling period with zero exposure assumed for the unsampled period of time (114 minutes).        ***ALL-FEED PROCESSING AND PACKAGING, INC. WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD OR ITS EQUIVALENT STANDARD 29 CFR 1910.95(c)(1) UNDER INSPECTION NUMBER 314850454, CITATION 01, ITEM 04, ISSUED ON NOVEMBER 02, 2011, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON FEBRUARY 11, 2013, WITH RESPECT TO THE WORKSITE LOCATED AT 717 W. DIVISION STREET, GALVA, ILLINOIS.***     ***ALL-FEED PROCESSING AND PACKAGING, INC. WAS PREVIOUSLY CITED FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARD OR ITS EQUIVALENT STANDARD 29 CFR 1910.95(c)(1) UNDER INSPECTION NUMBER 310801790, CITATION 1, ITEM 2, ISSUED ON JANUARY 13, 2009, AND WAS AFFIRMED AS A FINAL ORDER ON FEBRUARY 3, 2009, WITH RESPECT TO THE WORKSITE LOCATED AT 717 W. DIVISION STREET, GALVA, ILLINOIS.***      To abate this violation, the employer must implement an audiometric testing program in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.95(g) for all employees whose noise exposure equals or exceeds an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level (TWA) of 85 dBA or equivalently a noise dose of 50%.