OSHA Inspection: ST. ARMANDS BAKING CO.

Issued

Dec 28, 2018

Abate by

Jan 25, 2019

Penalty

Initial $8,315 · Current $4,989 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii): Procedures did not clearly and specifically outline the scope, purpose, authorization, rules, and techniques to be utilized for the control of hazardous energy, and the means to enforce compliance including, but not limited to, 29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii)(A), (c)(4)(ii)(B), (c)(4)(ii)(C) and (c)(4)(ii)(D):  a) On or about 10/12/2018, at the facility, the employer did not have specific written procedural steps delineating how to de-energize, lockout and tagout equipment, and test equipment to ensure it was de-energized. Hazardous energy sources existed in the form of electrical up to 480 VAC, pneumatic moving parts, mechanical moving parts, and thermal.

Issued

Dec 28, 2018

Abate by

Feb 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(6)(i): The employer did not conduct a periodic inspection of the energy control procedure at least annually to ensure that the procedure and the requirement of this standard were being followed:  a) On or about 10/12/2018, at the bakery facility, periodic inspections of the energy control program were not being conducted. Hazardous energy included, but was not limited to: 110VAC - 480VAC, pneumatic and mechanical moving parts, and thermal energy.

Issued

Dec 28, 2018

Abate by

Jan 25, 2019

Penalty

Initial $8,315 · Current $4,989 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(f)(2)(i): When outside servicing personnel were engaged in activities in a facility, the onsite employer and the outside employer did not inform each other of their respective lockout or tagout procedures:  a) On or about 10/12/2018, at the St Armands Baking Co. facility, employees of Dakin Dairy engaged in maintenance work on a 480-volt Sani-Tech compactor. Neither St Armands Baking Co. nor Dakin Dairy performed lockout-tagout procedures for the compactor at its energy source, exposing employees of Dakin Dairy to caught in between/amputation hazards.

Issued

Dec 28, 2018

Abate by

Jan 25, 2019

Penalty

Initial $6,652 · Current $3,991 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.151(c): Where employees were exposed to injurious corrosive materials, suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body were not provided within the work area for immediate emergency use:  a) On or about 11/14/2018, at the dishwashing section of the facility, where a corrosive chemical was used for cleaning, the eyewash station was not suitable for use in that only one nozzle was functional, exposing employees to injurious corrosive material to the eyes or face.

Issued

Dec 28, 2018

Abate by

Feb 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $6,652 · Current $3,991 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(f)(2): Each service, feeder, and branch circuit, at its disconnecting means or overcurrent device, was not legibly marked to indicate its purpose, nor located and arranged so the purpose was evident:  On or about 10/12/2018, at a wall panel box that controlled power to the compactor, breakers were not legibly marked to indicate its purpose, exposing employees to hazardous energy.

Issued

Dec 28, 2018

Abate by

Feb 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $6,652 · Current $3,991 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(g)(2)(i): Except as elsewhere required or permitted by Subpart S of Part 1910, live parts of electric equipment operating  at 50 volts or more were not guarded against accidental contact by use of approved cabinets or other forms of approved enclosures or by any of the means identified in paragraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D) of 29 CFR 1910.303(g)(2)(i):  a) On or about 10/12/2018, at the packaging line, a blower for the packaging line had its power cord spliced resulting in the exposing of live electrical parts which created an electrical shock hazard for employees.

Issued

Dec 28, 2018

Abate by

Jan 25, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1)(i): The employer did not select and have each affected employee use, the types of personal protective equipment that would protect the affected employee(s) from the hazards identified in the hazard assessment:  a) On or about 11/14/2018, at the dishwashing area of the facility, employees used a corrosive chemical called Hi-Valu Oven Cleaner Plus without suitable eye protection for splash hazards in that employees did not wear chemical splash goggles or chemical aprons impervious to the corrosive chemical.

Issued

Dec 28, 2018

Abate by

Jan 25, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(g)(1)(ii): The required working space about electric equipment rated 600 volts, nominal, or less to ground, was used for storage:  a) On or about 10/12/2018, against the rear wall, electrical panel boxes were blocked by movable storage racks and containers.  b) On or about 10/12/2018, against the rear wall beside an exit door, electrical boxes were blocked by stacks of metal trays.

Issued

Dec 28, 2018

Abate by

Feb 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(g)(2)(iii): Flexible cords were not connected to devices and fittings so that tension would not be transmitted to joints or terminal screws:  On or about 10/12/2018, at the bakery facility, electrical cords were observed to be missing strain relief resulting in strain being placed on their inner conductors.  a) on packing table near the floor a cord entering a metal conduit had its outer insulation pulled away putting strain on the inner conductors  b) A cord by the oven feeding a box had its outer insulation broken away putting strain on the inner conductors  c) A cord feeding an e-stop near the oven was hanging from metal conduit by its inner wiring putting strain on its inner conductors