OSHA Inspection: BROLITE PRODUCTS, INC.

Issued

Mar 23, 2018

Abate by

Apr 19, 2019

Penalty

Initial $6,467 · Current $1,500 Reduced

Hazardous substances E200M104

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 in that employees were exposed to combustible agricultural dust deflagration, explosion, and other fire hazards while working inside facilities containing indoor dust collection systems that were not designed to prevent or minimize employee exposure in the event of an internal deflagration:      (a)    Brolite Products, Inc.:  On or about October 3, 2017 the employer operated the Packaging Line Dust Collector (Camco filter media-dust collector / baghouse) inside of the facility without the means to protect employees from the hazards associated with (1) a dust collector explosion resulting from the pressures associated with an internal deflagration in the dust collector and (2) propagation of a deflagration from and internal dust collector to connected upstream equipment and/or outside of the units material discharge hopper.      (b)   Brolite Products, Inc.: On or about October 3, 2017 the employer operated the Mixing Room / Tower Dust Collector (BISCO filter media-dust collector  / baghouse) inside of the facility without the means to protect employees from the hazards associated with (1) a dust collector explosion resulting from the pressures associated with an internal deflagration in the dust collector and (2) propagation of a deflagration from and internal dust collector to connected upstream equipment and/or outside of the units material discharge hopper.      Among other methods, feasible and acceptable means of abatement would be to follow the guidance in the National Fire Protection Association's (NFPA) "Standard 61 Standard for the Prevention of Fires and Dust Explosions in Agricultural and Food Processing Facilities, 2017 ed." - Sections 8.3.4.2 (dust collector location), 8.8.4(equipment protection), and 8.8.5 (equipment isolation).    Specifically, provide indoor dust collectors with a recognized means of explosion protection and deflagration propagation protection (isolation).  Indoor dust collectors can be protected from explosion hazards through either deflagration venting provided in accordance with the requirements of NFPA 68 "Standard on Explosion Protection by Deflagration Venting, 2013 ed." or through the use of a dry chemical deflagration suppression systems provided in accordance with the requirements of NFPA 69 "Standard on Explosion Prevention Systems, 2014 ed."  Deflagration propagation protection (isolation) methods include both passive and active isolation technologies as outlined in NFPA 69.  An example of a passive isolation system technology that could be used on the upstream (dirty-air / inlet) side of a vented, indoor dust collector includes the use of a flow-actuated flap valves designed in accordance with the requirements of NFPA 69.  An example of a passive isolation system technology that could be used on the material discharge of a dust collectors hopper include rotary valves (material chokes) designed in accordance with the requirements of NFPA 69.  An example of an active isolation system that could be used to protect a dust collectors upstream ducting inlet and a dust collectors material discharge hopper outlet includes the use of a dry chemical deflagration suppression system provided in accordance with the requirements of NFPA 69.

Issued

Mar 23, 2018

Abate by

Apr 17, 2018

Penalty

Initial $5,174 · Current $1,500 Reduced

Hazardous substances 2037

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:      a) Brolite Products, Inc. - On October 3, 2017, the employer did not ensure  that employees were provided medical evaluation to determine employees' ability to use a respirators when they were required to use Survivair full face-piece respirators during chemical pest control (fogging) operations.

Issued

Mar 23, 2018

Abate by

Apr 17, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 2037

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2):  Employee(s) using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator were not annually fit tested:     a) Brolite Products, Inc.  -  On October 3, 2017, the employer did not ensure that employees using a tight fitting full face-piece respirator were fit tested prior to the initial use of the respirator. The employees were required to use Survivair full face-piece respirators during chemical pest control (fogging) operations.

Issued

Mar 23, 2018

Abate by

Apr 17, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 2037

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(1): The employer did not provide respirator training that would ensure that each employee could demonstrate knowledge of items in section (i)-(vii):    (a)    Brolite Products, Inc. - On October 3, 2017,  the employer did not ensure that employees required to wear Survivair full face-piece respirators during chemical pest control (fogging) operations were provided training.

Issued

Mar 23, 2018

Abate by

Apr 17, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $1,500

Hazardous substances 2037

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(ii): Employees were not trained on the physical, health, simple asphyxiation, combustible dust, and pyrophoric gas hazards, as well as hazards not otherwise classified, of the chemicals in the work area:      a)  Brolite Products, Inc. - On October 3, 2017,  the employer did not ensure that employees were provided with training on the hazards of combustible agriculture dusts (flour) in the work area.

Issued

Mar 23, 2018

Abate by

Apr 17, 2018

Penalty

Initial $5,174 · Current $1,500 Reduced

Hazardous substances 2037M110

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(2)(ii): The employer did not provide information to the employees on operations in their work area where hazardous chemicals were present.    a) Brolite Products, Inc. - On October 3, 2017, the employer did not ensure that employees who conducted chemical pest control (fogging) operations were provided information and training on hazardous chemicals. in their  work area. The employees were exposed to hazardous chemicals, including, but not limited to, Petroleum Distillates and S-Methoprenen.