Page 1 Health Hazard Evaluation Report 2009-0131-3171 Evaluation of Sensitization and Exposure to Flour Dust, Spices, and Other Ingredients Among Poultry Breading Workers Report No. 2009-0131-3171 April 2013 Elena H

Page 20

Health Hazard Evaluation Report 2009-0131-3171

Administrative Control

The term administrative controls refers to employer-dictated work practices and policies 

to reduce or prevent hazardous exposures. Their effectiveness depends on employer 

commitment and employee acceptance. Regular monitoring and reinforcement are necessary 

to ensure that policies and procedures are followed consistently.

1.  Institute a medical surveillance program for employees who are exposed to batter 

and breading mixes. At a minimum, use a medical questionnaire that focuses on skin, 

mucous membrane, and respiratory symptoms that are work related. The questionnaire 

should be given prior to placement in a job with batter and breading mix exposure and 

periodically thereafter. The medical surveillance program should be supervised by a 

physician experienced in occupational medicine or allergy.

2.  Employees should report work-related skin, eye, and respiratory symptoms to their 

supervisor. Employees who report work-related symptoms should be evaluated by 

a physician experienced in occupational medicine or allergy. If employees develop 

occupational rhinitis or asthma, they should be removed from exposure to flour dust 

and placed in a job without flour dust exposure while maintaining their earnings, 

seniority, and other rights and benefits. 

3.  Encourage employees to use slow, smooth movements when handling powdered 

ingredients to keep dust concentrations low. Transport distances between the paper bag 

and dispensing hoppers should be kept to a minimum. The height at which powdered 

ingredients are dropped into a container should also be kept to a minimum. Opening both 

ends of paper bags will reduce the amount of dust that becomes airborne when emptied. 

Personal Protective Equipment

Personal protective equipment is the least effective means for controlling hazardous 

exposures. Proper use of personal protective equipment requires a comprehensive program 

and requires a high level of employee involvement and commitment. The right personal 

protective equipment must be chosen for each hazard. Supporting programs such as 

training, change-out schedules, and medical assessment may be needed. Personal protective 

equipment should not be the sole method for controlling hazardous exposures. Rather, 

personal protective equipment should be used until effective engineering and administrative 

controls are in place.

1.  Use respiratory protection until engineering controls and work practices can be 

implemented that reduce employee exposure below the ACGHI TLV for flour dust. 

Implementation should follow the OSHA respiratory protection standard [29 CFR 

1910.134]. Respiratory protection should be used as a temporary control, not a 

permanent solution to controlling dust exposures.

with a negative pressure bag dump station that locally captures and exhausts airborne 

dust. This will eliminate the need for employees to add powdered ingredients to the 

dispensing hoppers using awkward postures and reduce unnecessary dust exposure. 

---

Page 21

Health Hazard Evaluation Report 2009-0131-3171

On the basis of our air sampling data, bread and batter operators should wear 

particulate respirators with a minimum assigned protection factor of 1,000. Using the 

NIOSH respirator selection logic this would mean using a pressure-demand supply-

air respirator equipped with a half-mask [NIOSH 2004]. According to OSHA, a full 

facepiece powered air purifying respirator also provides an assigned protection factor 

of 1,000 [OSHA 2009]. Line leaders, lay-on employees, and oven operators should 

wear particulate respirators with a minimum assigned protection factor of 50. All 

other employees in the production areas of the plant should wear respirators with a 

minimum assigned protection factor of 10. Because these two assigned protection 

categories include several types of respirators we suggest reviewing the NIOSH 

respirator selection logic 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2005-100/pdfs/2005-100.

pdf

 and the OSHA Assigned Protection Factors for the Revised Respiratory Protection 

Standard 

http://www.osha.gov/Publications/3352-APF-respirators.pdf

 [NIOSH 2004; 

OSHA 2009].

---

Page 22

Health Hazard Evaluation Report 2009-0131-3171

Appendix A: Tables

Table A1. Personal breathing zone air sampling results for inhalable flour dust

Exposure 

group

Position description

# samples

Concentration

(mg/m

3

)

Median

Min

Max

Lower

Bagger operator or twin bagger operator

3

1.03

0.66

1.0

Frozen shipping

3

0.265

0.22*

0.31

Grader

2

2.00

1.1

2.9

Ingredients warehouse

1

1.11

—

—

Packer

6

1.42

0.75

15

Pallet jack or manual pallet jack operator

2

1.25

1.2

1.3

Quality assurance production and support

4

1.01

0.80

1.3

Receiving

2

0.376

0.24*

0.51

Stack off or stacker

1

0.785

—

—

Temperature checker

1

0.800

—

—

Line 6

7

0.655

0.49

2.7

Cups

3

1.09

0.64

1.1

Higher

Bone checker marination

3

2.23

1.4

2.6

Bread and batter operator

14

32.2

11

93

Foremax operator

2

5.63

5.3

6.0

Lay-on

23

9.72

1.5

28

Marination

2

2.62

1.7

3.6

Oven operator

6

3.92

1.2

22

Quality assurance technicians

6

1.10

0.59

8.3

Lay-on post fryer

7

3.16

1.7

39

 

Line leader

2

10.4

8.2

13

Min = minimum

Max = maximum

*Trace: between the minimum detectible concentration and minimum quantifiable concentration

---