Translate
Violation Detail
Standard Cited: 5A0001 OSH Act General Duty Paragraph
This violation item has been deleted.
Inspection Nr: 1134242.015
Citation: 01001
Citation Type: Serious
Abatement Status:
Initial Penalty: $12,471.00
Current Penalty: $0.00
Issuance Date: 08/19/2016
Nr Instances: 8
Nr Exposed: 9
Abatement Date: 09/08/2016
Gravity: 10
Report ID: 0626600
Contest Date: 09/16/2016
Final Order: 05/05/2017
Related Event Code (REC): C
Emphasis:
| Type | Latest Event | Event Date | Penalty | Abatement Due Date | Citation Type | Failure to Abate Inspection |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Penalty | R: Review Commission | 05/05/2017 | $0.00 | 09/08/2016 | Serious | |
| Penalty | C: Contested | 09/16/2016 | $12,471.00 | 09/08/2016 | Serious | |
| Penalty | Z: Issued | 08/19/2016 | $12,471.00 | 09/08/2016 | Serious |
Text For Citation: 01 Item/Group: 001 Hazard:
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 severe burns from the potential of dust explosions, deflagration and/or fire hazards caused by the accumulation of combustible plastic dusts in work areas that contained potential ignition sources. On or about March 21, 2016, and again on or about June 1, 2016: a. In the Katy North and Katy South plants, quantities of combustible dust were present on beams and on equipment in some locations greater than 1 inch in depth and were located on and above potential ignition sources such as unclassified motors, grinders, heated injectors and mold machines. b. In the Katy North and Katy South plants, the employer had not performed a dust hazard analysis in the areas. c. In the Katy North plant, the employer had not performed an incident investigation from an incident on December 28, 2013, that resulted in property damage and production shutdown time. d. In the Katy North and Katy South plants, the employer did not inspect on a routine basis the work areas for dust accumulation and the employer did not require cleaning of the areas on a routine basis. e. In the Katy North and Katy South plants, equipment such as grinders, dust socks, and dust filters were not maintained to perform as designed and operated in a manner that minimized the escape of dust. f. In the Katy North and Katy South plants, pneumatic conveying system designs were not documented to include information that could affect the fire protection of the process. g. In the Katy North and Katy South plants, an electrical classification evaluation was not performed for areas where combustible dust could be suspended in the air. h. In the Katy North and Katy South plants, training and certification of employees and contractors regarding combustible dust hazards was not provided.