Proposes Over $1.8 Million in Fines Against a Corn Milling Facility After Fatal Grain Dust Explosion

OSHA has proposed $1,837,861 in fines against a corn milling facility following a May 31, 2017, explosion that killed five workers and injured 12 others, including a 21-year-old employee who suffered a double leg amputation after being crushed by a railcar. OSHA found that the explosion likely resulted from failures to correct the leakage and accumulation of highly combustible grain dust throughout the facility and to properly maintain equipment to control ignition sources. OSHA cited the facility with 14 willful – including eight willful per-instance egregious– and five serious citations, most involving fire and explosion hazards. The company has been placed in OSHA’s Severe Violator Enforcement Program.

The egregious willful citations were issued for violating OSHA’s Grain Handling standard by failing to perform required maintenance on operating equipment and implementing a housekeeping program to control dust accumulations.

Willful citations were issued for failure to shut down ignition sources, prevent static electricity discharge, provide adequate personal protective equipment to employees, correct malfunctioning dust collection systems, maintain equipment safety controls, and have an emergency alarm system.

Serious citations addressed hazards associated with fires and explosions, and the lack of employee training.

Here is a breakdown of the citations:

Citation 1 Item 1

Type of Violation: Serious; $12,675

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 caused or were likely to cause death or serious physical harm in that employees were exposed to grain product fire hazards associated with an indoor fluid bed dryer processing dry com products which was not equipped with a means of fire protection: On or about May 17, 2017 through May 29, 2017, the employer operated the expander #5 fluid bed dryer located on the 1st floor of the C mill without an automatic fire protection system. The employer relied on employees to manually extinguish a fire that occurred on May 29, 2017 within this dryer.
Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable method to abate this hazard is to follow the provisions of 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.” to ensure that dryers have a means for detecting abnormal conditions that indicate the presence or potential of a fire and ensure that the detection system activates an alarm system and automatic fire extinguishing system. See NFPA 61 (2017) – Sections 8.3 .9.4.3 (dryer fire detection, alarm, and interlocking systems) and 8.3.9.4.4 (dryer suppression and extinguishing systems).

Citation 1 Item 2

Type of Violation: Serious; $12,675

29 CFR 1910.272(e)(1): The employer did not provide training to employees at least annually and when changes in job assignment exposed them to new hazards on the general safety precautions and specific procedures and safety practices listed in 29 CFR 1910.272(e)(l)(i) and (e)(l)(ii):

On or about May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017, the employer had not provided annual training on the following:

Employees were not trained at least annually on common ignition sources, such as but not limited to, inappropriate electrical equipment and wiring methods; static electricity including bonding of equipment to ground; mechanical sparks and friction; foreign materials capable of igniting combustibles (ferrous materials); heated surfaces and heating systems; properly rated powered industrial trucks; and improper preventative maintenance.
Employees were not trained at least annually on specific procedures and safety practices, such as but not limited to, specific housekeeping procedures, cleaning procedures for grinding equipment, preventative maintenance procedures, equipment safety systems (monitors, sensors, alarms, interlocks), and the safety practice prohibiting use of compressed air to clean in the presence of potential ignition sources.

Citation 1 Item 3

Type of Violation: Serious; $12,675 29

CFR 1910.272(1)(2): Filter collectors installed after March 30, 1988 were not:

located outside of the facility; or
located in an area inside the facility protected by an explosion suppression system; or
located in an area inside the facility that is separated from other areas of the facility by construction having at least one-hour fire-resistance rating, and which is adjacent to an exterior wall and vented to the outside:

On or about May 17, 2017 and through May 31, 2017, multiple filter media dust collectors such as, but not limited to, the following were located inside of the facility without means of explosion protection:

3rd floor mezzanine of F mill: Kice filter dust collector
2nd floor of F mill: Torit filter dust collector
4th floor of D mill: Flex-Kleen I Bran filter dust collector
2nd floor of D mill: Bran filter dust collector
Packaging room mezzanine: Pack line #1 filter dust collector
4th floor of B mill: Clean com filter dust collector
4th floor of B mill: BGM filter dust collector
4th floor of B mill: Expander #3 fine grinder filter dust collector
4th floor of B mill: 4-B Expander & Extruder I Expander #s 3 &4 dryer I Pre-gel filter dust collector
6th floor of A mill: NW filter dust collector
6th floor of A mill: NC filter dust collector
6th floor of A mill: NE filter dust collector
6th floor of A mill: SW filter dust collector
6th floor of A mill: SC filter dust collector
6th floor of A mill: SE filter dust collector
2nd floor of Bulk Loadout: Bulk loadout filter dust collector

Citation 1 Item 4

Type of Violation: Serious; $12,675

29 CFR 1910.272(m)(1)(i): Regularly scheduled inspections of at least the mechanical and safety control equipment associated with dryers, grain stream processing equipment, dust collection equipment including filter collectors, and bucket elevators were not accomplished:

On or about May 17, 2017 through May 29, 2017, the employer did not develop preventative maintenance procedures pertaining to mechanical equipment for the Expander #5 fluid bed dryer (employer ID #M16012) located on the 1st floor of C mill.

Citation 1 Item 5

Type of Violation: Serious; $12,675

29 CFR 1910.272(n): The employer did not equip grain stream processing equipment (such as hammer mills, grinders, and pulverizers) with an effective means of removing ferrous material from the incoming grain stream:

On or about May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017, effective means of removing ferrous material was not provided to remove ferrous material from the incoming grain stream of size reduction equipment such as, but not limited to, the following:

2nd floor of B mill: the Roll stand East Main Rolls #1 and Roll stand South Main Rolls #1 unit
2nd floor of B mill: the Roll stand East Main Rolls #2 and Roll stand South Main Rolls #2 unit
2nd floor of B mill: the Roll stand East Main Rolls #3 and Roll stand South Main Rolls #3 unit
2nd floor of B mill: the Roll stand East Main Rolls #4 and Roll stand South Main Rolls #4 unit
2nd floor of B mill: the Roll Stand East Main Rolls #5 and Roll stand South Main Rolls #5 unit
2nd floor of B mill: the Roll Stand East Main Rolls #6 and Roll stand South Main Rolls #6 unit
1st floor of B mill: the South Bran Grinder Bauermeister
4th floor of D mill: the Coarse Roller Mill Main Rolls unit
4th floor of D mill: the Fines Roller Mill Main Rolls unit

Citation 2 Item 1

Type of Violation: Willful; $126,749

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 caused or were likely to cause death or serious physical harm in that employees were exposed to hazards associated with combustible grain dust explosion, deflagration or other fire hazards resulting from the failure to ensure that switch station flex hoses (part of a grain pneumatic conveying system) on the 5th floor of A mill were conductive, bonded and grounded:

The employer does not ensure that pneumatic conveying systems handling combustible grain dusts are conductive, bonded, and grounded. This violation was most recently documented as occurring as outlined below:

On or about May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017, recognized conductivity and bonding/ grounding deficiencies associated with the non-metallic, non-conductive flexible hose utilized at the switch station on the 5th floor of A-mill had not been resolved. Non-conductive flexible ducting was utilized at the transfer switch stations on the 5th floor of the A-mill.

Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable method to abate this hazard is to follow the provisions of 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.” to ensure that pneumatic conveyance system ducting is made of conductive materials and is also bonded and grounded. See NFPA 61 (2017) – Sections 8.3.3.2.1 (system components to be electrically conductive), 8.3.3.2.2 (bonding and grounding for all system components), 8.5.2.2 (bonding and grounding as static ignition source control), and A.3.3.3.2. l (NFPA 77 for guidance on static electricity) and NFPA 77 “Recommended Practice on Static Electricity, 2014 ed.” – Sections 15 .7.2 (pipes and ducts to be metal and be grounded) and 15.8.1 (prohibited use of non-conductive flexible hoses).

Citation 2 Item 2

Type of Violation: Willful; $126,749

29 CFR 1910.132(a): Protective equipment, including personal protective equipment for the eyes, face, head and extremities, protective clothing, respiratory devices, and protective shields and barriers, were not provided, used, and maintained in a sanitary and reliable condition whenever it was necessary by reason of hazards of processes or environment, chemical hazards, radiological hazards, or mechanical irritants encountered in a manner capable of causing injury or impairment in the function of any part of the body through absorption, inhalation, or physical contact:

The employer does not provide and ensure the use of flame-resistant clothing (FRC) to protect employees from bums due to potential flash fires. This violation was most recently documented as occurring as outlined below:

On or about May 17, 2017 through May 31 , 2017, the employer failed to provide and ensure the use of flame-resistant clothing (FRC) necessary to protect employees from burns due to potential flash fires associated with combustible grain dust(s)/particulates in the milling, packaging, and bulk load out areas. Employee uniforms for mill operators, packaging employees, and bulk load-out employees were made of 100% spun polyester fabric.

To abate this violation, the employer must provide and ensure the use of FRC clothing where there is potential for exposure flash fires associated with combustible grain dust(s)/particulates. Appropriate guidance on FRC can be found in the National Fire Protection Association’s (NFPA) Standard 2113 “Standard on Selection, Care, Use, and Maintenance of Flame-Resistant Garments for Protection of Industrial Personnel Against Short-Duration Thermal Exposures from Fire, 2015 ed.”

The alleged violations below have been grouped because they involve similar or related hazards that may increase the potential for injury or illness.

Citation 2 Item 3a

Type of Violation: Willful; $126,749

29 CFR 1910.272(d): The employer did not develop and implement an emergency action plan meeting the requirements contained in 29 CFR 1910.38:

The employer does not establish and maintain an approved employee alarm system compliant with the requirements of 1910.272(d), 1910.38(d), and 1910.165. This violation was most recently documented as occurring as outlined below:

On or about May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017, the employer had not established an employee alarm system compliant with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.165 as required by 29 CFR 1910.38(d) and 29 CFR 1910.272( d), respectively.

To abate this violation, the employer must establish an approved employee alarm system having a distinctive signal for each emergency purpose and that also:

Provides warning for necessary emergency action as called for in the emergency action plan, or for reaction time for safe escape of employees from the workplace or the immediate work area, or both;
Is capable of being perceived above ambient noise or light levels by all employees in the affected portion of the workplace;
Is distinctive and recognizable as a signal to evacuate the work area or to perform actions designated under the emergency action plan.

Citation 2 Item 3b

Type of Violation: Willful; Grouped

29 CFR 1910.38(d): The employer did not have and maintain an employee alarm system using a distinctive signal for each purpose and complying with the requirements in 29 CFR 1910.165:

On or about May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017, the employer had not established an employee alarm system compliant with the requirements of29 CFR 1910.165 as required by 29 CFR 1910.38(d) and 29 CFR 19.10.272(d), respectively.

To abate this violation, the employer must establish an approved employee alarm system having a distinctive signal for each emergency purpose and that also: -Provides warning for necessary emergency action as called for in the emergency action plan, or for reaction time for safe escape of employees from the workplace or the immediate work area, or both; -Is capable of being perceived above ambient noise or light levels by all employees in the affected portion of the workplace; -Is distinctive and recognizable as a signal to evacuate the work area or to perform actions designated under the emergency action plan.

Citation 2 Item 4

Type of Violation: Willful; $126,749 29

CFR 1910.272(j)(1): The employer did not develop and implement a written housekeeping program that established the frequency and the method(s) determined best to reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust on ledges, floors, equipment, and other exposed surfaces:

The employer does not develop and implement a written housekeeping program that establishes the frequency and method( s) determined best to reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust on ledges, floors, equipment, and other exposed surfaces:

The frequencies of housekeeping established in the written programs do not best reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust emissions that are allowed to accumulate on elevated surfaces of the 1st floor, A Mill (A1). This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry corn milling facility.
The employer’s methods of housekeeping do not best reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust emissions that are allowed to accumulate on elevated surfaces of the 1st floor, A mill (A1) as demonstrated by the following deficiencies: lack of specific cleaning methods or training on cleaning methods; compressed air usage as a cleaning method is tolerated; methods of accessing and cleaning overhead areas are not provided; lack of management oversight and verification of housekeeping; and fugitive dust emissions from numerous pieces of process equipment and transfer points are not accounted for where they are a source for dust accumulation.

This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry corn milling facility.

To abate this violation, the employer must develop and implement a written housekeeping program that establishes the frequency and method(s) determined to best reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dusts on elevated surfaces. Consistent with Appendix A of 1910.272, the housekeeping program is to be designed to keep dust accumulations and emissions under control inside grain facilities. See Appendix A for additional guidance on the prevention of dust accumulations and the prevention and control dust emissions.

Citation 2 Item 5

Type of Violation: Willful; $126,749

29 CFR 1910.272(j)(1): The employer did not develop and implement a written housekeeping program that established the frequency and the method(s) determined best to reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust on ledges, floors, equipment, and other exposed surfaces:

The employer does not develop and implement a written housekeeping program that establishes the frequency and method(s) determined best to reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust on ledges, floors, equipment, and other exposed surfaces:

The frequencies of housekeeping established in the written programs do not best reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust emissions that are allowed to accumulate on elevated surfaces of the 1st floor, B Mill (B1). This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry com milling facility.
The employer’s methods of housekeeping do not best reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust emissions that are allowed to accumulate on elevated surfaces of the 1st floor, B mill (B1) as demonstrated by the following deficiencies: lack of specific cleaning methods or training on cleaning methods; compressed air usage as a cleaning method is tolerated; methods of accessing and cleaning overhead areas are not provided; lack of management oversight and verification of housekeeping; and fugitive dust emissions from numerous pieces of process equipment and transfer points are not accounted for where they are a source for dust accumulation. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31 ,2017 at the Cambria, WI dry com milling facility.

Citation 2 Item 6

Type of Violation: Willful; $126,749

The employer does not develop and implement a written housekeeping program that establishes the frequency and method(s) determined best to reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust on ledges, floors, equipment, and other exposed surfaces:

The frequencies of housekeeping established in the written programs do not best reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust emissions that are allowed to accumulate on elevated surfaces of the 4th floor, B Mill (B4). This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry corn milling facility.
The employer’s methods of housekeeping do not best reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust emissions that are allowed to accumulate on elevated surfaces of the 4th floor, B mill (B4) as demonstrated by the following deficiencies: lack of specific cleaning methods or training on cleaning methods; compressed air usage as a cleaning method is tolerated; methods of accessing and cleaning overhead areas are not provided; lack of management oversight and verification of housekeeping; and fugitive dust emissions from numerous pieces of process equipment and transfer points are not accounted for where they are a source for dust accumulation. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry corn milling facility.

Citation 2 Item 7

Type of Violation: Willful; $126,749

The employer does not develop and implement a written housekeeping program that establishes the frequency and method(s) determined best to reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust on ledges, floors, equipment, and other exposed surfaces:

The frequencies of housekeeping established in the written programs do not best reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust emissions that are allowed to accumulate on elevated surfaces of the 3rd floor, F Mill (F3). This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry com milling facility.
The employer’s methods of housekeeping do not best reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust emissions that are allowed to accumulate on elevated surfaces of the 3rd floor, F mill (F3) as demonstrated by the following deficiencies: lack of specific cleaning methods or training on cleaning methods; compressed air usage as a cleaning method is tolerated; methods of accessing and cleaning overhead areas are not provided; lack of management oversight and verification of housekeeping; and fugitive dust emissions from numerous pieces of process equipment and transfer points are not accounted for where they are a source for dust accumulation. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry com milling facility.

Consistent with Appendix A of 1910.272, the housekeeping program is to be designed to keep dust accumulations and emissions under control inside grain facilities. See Appendix A for additional guidance on the prevention of dust accumulations and the prevention and control dust emissions.

Citation 2 Item 8

Type of Violation: Willful; $126,749

The employer does not develop and implement a written housekeeping program that establishes the frequency and method(s) determined best to reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust on ledges, floors, equipment, and other exposed surfaces:

The frequencies of housekeeping established in the written programs do not best reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust emissions that are allowed to accumulate on elevated surfaces of the Pack area. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry corn milling facility.
The employer’s methods of housekeeping do not best reduce accumulations of fugitive grain dust emissions that are allowed to accumulate on elevated surfaces of the Pack area as demonstrated by the following deficiencies: lack of specific cleaning methods or training on cleaning methods; compressed air usage as a cleaning method is tolerated; methods of accessing and cleaning overhead areas are not provided; lack of management oversight and verification of housekeeping; and fugitive dust emissions from numerous pieces of process equipment and transfer points are not accounted for where they are a source for dust accumulation. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry corn milling facility.

Citation 2 Item 9

Type of Violation: Willful; $126,749

29 CFR 1910.272(j)(3): Compressed air was used to blow dust from ledges, walls, and other areas in grain handling facilities when machinery presenting an ignition source was not shut down, and when all other known potential ignition sources in the area were not removed or controlled:

Compressed air is permitted to be used to blow dust from ledges, walls and other areas when all machinery in the area that presents an ignition source is not shut down and when other known potential ignition sources in the area are not removed or controlled. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry com milling facility.

To abate this violation, the employer must not permit compressed air to be used to blow dust from ledges, walls, and other areas in grain handling facilities unless machinery presenting an ignition source is shut down, and all other known potential ignition sources in the areas are removed or controlled. Further guidance on this topic can be found in National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 61 “Standard for the Prevention of Fires and Dust Explosions in Agricultural and Food Processing Facilities, 2017 ed.”.

The alleged violations below have been grouped because they involve similar or related hazards that may increase the potential for injury or illness.

Citation 2 Item 10a

Type of Violation: Willful; $126,749

The employer does not implement regularly scheduled inspections pertaining to mechanical equipment on the North Bauermeister GM-120 gap mill (Employer ID# M13031) within the employer’s established preventative maintenance procedures, as follows:

Quarterly and semi-annual inspections are not getting completed within the employer’s established time frame. This violation most recent} y existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry corn milling facility.
Critical steps as outlined in the employer’s preventative maintenance procedures within weekly, monthly, and quarterly inspections that required the equipment to be shut down are not being performed. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry corn milling facility.

To abate this violation, the employer must implement preventative maintenance procedures consisting of performance of regularly scheduled inspections of the mechanical equipment associated with covered equipment such as dryers, grain stream processing equipment, dust collection equipment including filter collectors, and bucket elevators.

Citation 2 Item 10b

Type of Violation: Willful; Grouped

29 CFR 1910.272(m)(1)(ii): Lubrication and other appropriate maintenance in accordance with manufacturers’ recommendations, or as determined necessary by prior operating records were not accomplished:

The employer does not ensure that preventative maintenance procedures incorporate appropriate maintenance steps communicated by the equipment manufacturer for the North Bauermeister GM-120 gap mill, (employer ID # M 13031) located on the 1st floor of B mill, such as, but not limited to:

The employer does not perform complete lubrication system oil changes of the mill shaft bearing oil as outlined per the manufacturer’s operations manual. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry com milling facility.
The employer is not shutting down the equipment on a weekly basis to remove product build-up from the inside of the gap mill, to include the grinding baffle, rotor, and mill housing. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry corn milling facility.

To abate this violation, the employer must develop and implement preventative maintenance procedures including lubrication and other appropriate maintenance in accordance with manufacturer recommendations, or as otherwise determined necessary by prior operating records, for covered equipment such as dryers, grain stream processing equipment, dust collection equipment including filter collectors, and bucket elevators.

The alleged violations below have been grouped because they involve similar or related hazards that may increase the potential for injury or illness.

Citation 2 Item 11a

Type of Violation: Willful; $126,749 29

CFR 1910.272(m)(1)(i): Regularly scheduled inspections of at least the mechanical and safety control equipment associated with dryers, grain stream processing equipment, dust collection equipment including filter collectors, and bucket elevators were not accomplished:

The employer does not implement regularly scheduled inspections pertaining to mechanical equipment on the South Bauermeister GM-120 gap mill (Employer ID# M13030) within the employer’s established preventative maintenance procedures, as follows:

Quarterly inspections are not getting completed within the employer’s established time frame. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31 ,2017 at the Cambria, WI dry corm milling facility.
Critical steps as outlined in the employer’s preventative maintenance procedures within weekly, monthly, and quarterly inspections that required the equipment to be shut down are not being performed. This violatiOn most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry corn milling facility.

Citation 2 Item 11b

Type of Violation: Willful; Grouped

The employer does not ensure that preventative maintenance procedures incorporate appropriate maintenance steps communicated by the equipment manufacturer for the South Bauermeister GM-120 gap mill, (employer ID# M13030) located on the 1st floor of B mill, such as, but not limited to:

The employer does not perform complete lubrication system oil changes of the mill shaft bearing oil as outlined per the manufacturer’s operations manual. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry com milling facility.
The employer is not shutting down the equipment on a weekly basis to remove product build-up from the inside of the gap mill, to include the grinding baffle, rotor, and mill housing. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry corn milling facility.

Citation 2 Item 12

Type of Violation: Willful; $126,749

The employer does not perform regularly scheduled inspections of safety control equipment such as monitors, sensors, alarms, and associated interlocks on equipment such as size reduction equipment (hammer mills, gap mills, roller mills), fluid bed dryers, filter dust collectors, and bucket elevator legs. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry corn milling facility.

To abate this violation, the employer must develop and implement preventative maintenance procedures consisting of the performance of regularly scheduled inspections of the safety control equipment associated with covered equipment such as dryers, grain stream processing equipment, dust collection equipment including filter collectors, and bucket elevators.

Citation 2 Item 13

Type of Violation: Willful; $126,749

The employer does not ensure that preventative maintenance procedures incorporate appropriate maintenance steps communicated by the equipment manufacturer for the Pregel Bauermeister GM-80 gap mill (employer ID #M12227) located on the 1st floor of B Mill as follows:

The employer does not complete repacking of GM-80 mill shaft bearing with new grease every 2,000 hours as outlined per the manufacturer’s operations manual. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry com milling facility.
The employer is not shutting down the equipment on a weekly basis to remove product build-up from the inside of the gap mill, to include the grinding baffle, rotor, and mill housing. This violation most recently existed from May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017 at the Cambria, WI dry corn milling facility.

Citation 2 Item 14

Type of Violation: Willful; $126,749

29 CFR 1910.272(m)(2): The employer did not promptly correct dust collection systems which were malfunctioning or which were operating below designed efficiency:
The employer does not ensure that dust collection systems that are malfunctioning or operating below designed efficiency are promptly corrected.

This violation was most recently documented as occurring as outlined below:

On or about May 17, 2017 through May 31, 2017, the employer had not ensured that documented capture deficiencies associated with the Pack Line #1 filter dust collector had been promptly corrected.

To abate this violation, the employer must ensure that documented deficiencies with dust collection systems (such as low capture velocities, duct velocities, etc.) are promptly corrected.

CLICK HERE for the citations

Related Posts