OSHA Inspection: U.S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE FSIS

Issued

Dec 5, 2016

Abate by

Jan 9, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(c)(1): The employer did not administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.95(c) through (o) whenever employee noise exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 decibels measured on the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent:    (a) U.S. Dept. of Agriculture FSIS, 306 W 300 N St., Moroni, UT 84646: On and before July 26, 2016, the employer did not administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.95(c) through (o) whenever employee noise exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 decibels measured on the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent.  Noise monitoring conducted on July 26, 2016, found one employee who was wearing earplugs consumer safety inspections exposed to noise at a dose of 154%. This condition exposed employees to a noise hazard.       (b) U.S. Dept. of Agriculture FSIS, 306 W 300 N St., Moroni, UT 84646: On and before July 26, 2016, the employer did not administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.95(c) through (o) whenever employee noise exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 decibels measured on the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent.  Noise monitoring conducted on July 26, 2016, found one employee  who was wearing earplugs conducting meat inspection exposed to noise at a dose of 109%. This condition exposed employees to a noise hazard.          Abatement Note:  A Hearing Conservation Program shall consist of:  (1) Development and implementation of a noise monitoring program;  (2) The institution of engineering, work practice, and administrative controls for excessive noise,  (3) Notification of employees who are exposed to noise doses in excess of the action level;   (4) Baseline audiogram within six months of exposure at or above the action level with annual follow-up audiogram for purposes of tracking changes in employee hearing acuity;  (5) Providing a variety of hearing protection and requiring its use where employees are exposed to noise above the Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 100% dose, where employees are exposed to noise above the Action Limit (AL) of 50% dose and have not received a baseline audiogram or has experienced a standard threshold shift;   (6) Annual training with regards to effects of noise upon hearing, use of hearing protection, and the purpose of the audiometric testing; and,  (7) Retention of all records including audiometric testing results and noise monitoring results.

Issued

Dec 5, 2016

Abate by

Jan 9, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(g)(6): At least annually after obtaining the baseline audiogram, the employer did not obtain a new audiogram for each employee exposed at or above an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels :    (a) U.S. Dept. of Agriculture FSIS, 306 W 300 N St., Moroni, UT 84646: On and before July 26, 2016, the employer did not obtained a new audiogram for each employee at or above an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels. On July 26, 2016, one employee conducting consumer safety inspections was exposed to noise at a dose in excess of the Action Level. The employee, who was wearing earplugs, was exposed to noise at a dose of 154%. This is 3.08 times the Action Level. The employer did not at least annually obtain a new audiogram. This condition exposed employees to a noise hazard.     (b) U.S. Dept. of Agriculture FSIS, 306 W 300 N St., Moroni, UT 84646: On and before July 26, 2016, the employer did not obtained a new audiogram for each employee at or above an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels. On July 26, 2016, one employee conducting meat inspections was exposed to noise at a dose in excess of the Action Level. The employee, who was wearing earplugs, was exposed to noise at a dose of 109%. This is 2.18 times the Action Level. The employer did not at least annually obtain a new audiogram. This condition exposed employees to a noise hazard.

Issued

Dec 5, 2016

Abate by

Jan 9, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(8):     The employer shall maintain in the workplace copies of the required safety data sheets for each hazardous chemical, and shall ensure that they are readily accessible during each work shift to employees when they are in their work area(s). (Electronic access and other alternatives to maintaining paper copies of the safety data sheets are permitted as long as no barriers to immediate employee access in each workplace are created by such options.):    (a) U.S. Dept. of Agriculture FSIS, 306 W 300 N St., Moroni, UT 84646: On and before June 21, 2016, the employer did not maintain safety data sheets in the workplace. This condition potentially exposed employees that perform inspections to hazardous chemicals, including but not limited it the following:   1) Peroxyacetic Acid  2) Aqueous Sodium Hydroxide and Potassium Hydroxide solution  3) Ammonia  4) Dry Ice (Solid Carbon Dioxide)

Issued

Dec 5, 2016

Abate by

Jan 9, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1): Employees were not provided effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard that the employees had not been previously trained about was introduced into their work area:  (a) U.S. Dept. of Agriculture FSIS, 306 W 300 N St., Moroni, UT 84646: On and before June 21, 2016, the employer did not provide employees with effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area.  Employees did not know the hazards of the chemicals in their work areas. This condition exposed employees to chemical hazards, including but not limited it the following:  1) Peroxyacetic Acid 2) Aqueous Sodium Hydroxide and Potassium Hydroxide solution 3) Ammonia 4) Dry Ice (Solid Carbon Dioxide)   Abatement Note: Information and training may be designed to cover categories of hazards (e.g., flammability, carcinogenicity) or specific chemicals. Chemical-specific information must always be available through labels and safety data sheets.

Issued

Dec 5, 2016

Abate by

Jan 9, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1): The employer did not assess the workplace to determine if hazards are present, or are likely to be present, which necessitate the use of personal protective equipment (PPE):  (a) U.S. Dept. of Agriculture FSIS, 306 W 300 N St., Moroni, UT 84646: On and before June 21, 2016, the employer did not ensure that the workplace was assessed to determine if hazards were present which would necessitate the use of personal protective equipment.  The employer did not determine if foot, head, hand, eye, and/or face protection were required when working throughout the facility.   Abatement Note: The employer shall verify that the required workplace hazard assessment has been performed through a written certification that shall include the following:  1)         The workplace evaluated; 2)         The person certifying that the evaluation had been performed;  3)         The date(s) of the hazard assessment; and,  4)         The document identified as a certification of the hazard assessment.