OSHA Inspection: ALL PALLETS, INC.

Issued

Sep 25, 2017

Abate by

Dec 29, 2017

Penalty

Initial $4,183 · Current $3,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970:       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 fire, deflagration and explosion hazards.  The most recent occurrence of this was found on the job site located at 208 E. Jackson St. Fremont, NE where the employer has employees building wood pallets with woodworking machinery that generates high levels of wood dust and as a result of an effective dust collection system has left a buildup of dust that measured in access of half an inch along the horizontal surfaces and floor.  Instances of ineffective dust collection include but are not limited to:   1)         Employer has employees to continue to operate the Newman gang saw used to cut 2x4s to length despite that four out of the five saws does not have the dust collection hose connected thus failing to provide the suction necessary to capture and contain the fugitive dust as outlined in Section 11.1.2.1 of the 2012 NFPA 664; this section states ?Where deflagrable wood dust is produced by process equipment, continuous suction to capture and contain fugitive dust shall be provided? and Section 11.1.2.2 of the 2012 NFPA 664; this section states ?The captured dust shall be conveyed to one or more dust collectors.?.   Among other methods, feasible and acceptable methods of abatement are:   i.      The employer can upgrade the current dust collector to meet the NFPA 664 Section 11 requirements.   ii.     The employer can purchase and install a new system that meets NFPA 664 Section 11 requirements.   2)         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 fire, deflagration and explosion hazards.  The most recent occurrence of this was found on the job site located at 208 E. Jackson St. Fremont, NE where the employer has employees storing the collected fugitive dust in 55 gallon steel drums without covers, creating the potential for providing fuel necessary for the secondary explosion that is common in combustible dust explosions; thus failing to provide the proper storage of fugitive dust as outlined in Section 11.1.5 of the 2012 NFPA 664: this section states ?Combustible waste that cannot be reintroduced to the production process or utilized as fuel shall be placed in covered metal receptacles until removed to a safe place for daily disposal?.                    Among other methods, feasible and acceptable methods of abatement are:   i.      The employer can install the covers for the current 55 gallon drums to meet the NFPA 664 Section 11 requirements.   ii.     The employer can purchase new metal containers and replace the current 55 gallon drums to meet NFPA 664 Section 11 requirements.   3)         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 fire, deflagration and explosion hazards.  The most recent occurrence of this was found on the job site located at 208 E. Jackson St. Fremont, NE where the employer has employees to continue to operate the Newman gang saw used to cut 2x4s to length despite that four out of the five saws does not have the dust collection hose connected thus failing to limit the amounts of escaped dust to a minimum as outlined in Section 11.1.7 of the 2012 NFPA 664: this section states ?Production equipment shall be maintained and operated in a manner that minimizes the escape of debris or dust in accordance with Chapter 8.?.   Among other methods, feasible and acceptable methods of abatement are:   i.      The employer can upgrade the current dust collector to meet the NFPA 664 Section 11 requirements.   ii.     The employer can purchase and install a new system that meets NFPA 664 Section 11 requirements.   4)         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 fire, deflagration and explosion hazards.  The most recent occurrence of this was found on the job site located at 208 E. Jackson St. Fremont, NE where the employer has employees manufacturing pallets using various rough cut saws which generate excessive amounts of dust deposits along elevated inaccessible areas to daily housekeeping thus failing to control the excessive dust build up as outlined in Section 11.1.8 of the 2012 NFPA 664: this section states ?Spaces inaccessible to housekeeping shall be sealed to prevent dust accumulation.?.   Among other methods, feasible and acceptable methods of abatement are:   iii.    The employer can upgrade the current dust collectors to meet the NFPA 664 Section 11 requirements.   iv.    The employer can purchase and install a new system that meets NFPA 664 Section 11 requirements.

Issued

Sep 25, 2017

Abate by

Nov 17, 2017

Penalty

Initial $4,183 · Current $3,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.22(a)(1): All places of employment, passageways, storerooms and service rooms were not kept clean and free from hazards associated with excessive dust build up:    The employer is failing to protect employees from explosion hazards associated with excessive combustible dust build up along the horizontal surfaces throughout the facility.  The most recent occurrence of this was evident during the inspection of the facility located at 208 E. Jackson St. Fremont, NE, where the employer has employees building wood pallets with woodworking machinery that generates high levels of wood dust, a known combustible dust that measured in access of half an inch along the horizontal surfaces.

Issued

Sep 25, 2017

Abate by

Nov 17, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.22(a)(2):  Floor(s) of workroom(s) were not maintained in a clean and, so far as possible, a dry condition:   The employer is failing to protect employees from explosion hazards associated with excessive combustible dust build up along the floors throughout the facility.  The most recent occurrence of this was evident during the inspection of the facility located at 208 E. Jackson St. Fremont, NE, where the employer has employees building wood pallets with woodworking machinery that generates high levels of wood dust, a known combustible dust that measured in access of half an inch on the floor behind the Newman gang saw.

Issued

Sep 25, 2017

Abate by

Nov 17, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,988 · Current $2,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(i): Procedures were not developed, documented and utilized for the control of potentially hazardous energy when employees were engaged in activities covered by this section:    The employer is failing to protect employees from electrical, amputation and caught between hazards associated with maintaining or cleaning equipment that requires the de-energizing of hazardous energy.  The most recent occurrence of this was evident during the inspection of the facility located at 208 E. Jackson St. Fremont, NE, where the employer has employees changing the blade on the Baker re-saw without having provided a written specific procedure.

Issued

Sep 25, 2017

Abate by

Nov 17, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,988 · Current $2,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(7)(i): The employer did not provide training to ensure that the purpose and function of the energy control program are understood by employees and that the knowledge and skills required for the safe application, usage, and removal of the energy controls are acquired by employees:    The employer is failing to provide adequate Lockout Tag-Out training.  The most recent occurrence of this was evident during the inspection of the facility located at 208 E. Jackson St. Fremont, NE, where the employer has employees operating equipment that requires the de-energizing of stored energy during maintenance and cleaning operations.  Instances include but are not limited to:  i.  Employees not having been trained to recognize various types of hazardous energy as they relate to the different equipment throughout the facility.      ii. Employees have not been trained on the written procedures used in the de-energizing of equipment throughout the facility.