ENGLEWOOD, CO —
OSHA Inspection: PROFESSIONAL RESTORATION & REPAIR
Complaint inspection · Health discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of PROFESSIONAL RESTORATION & REPAIR in 9200 E. PANORAMA CIRCLE, ENGLEWOOD, CO 80112 (NAICS 238140). OSHA activity number 330770249.
OSHA opens inspections for many reasons — routine scheduling under a national or local emphasis program, an employee complaint or referral, or a follow-up after a reported injury. Opening or conducting an inspection is not itself an allegation or a finding that this employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.
Where did this inspection happen?
- Establishment
- PROFESSIONAL RESTORATION & REPAIR
- Site address
- 9200 E. PANORAMA CIRCLE
- City
- ENGLEWOOD
- State
- CO
- ZIP
- 80112
- Mailing
- 2017 W. COLORADO AVE #102, COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80904
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Complaint (B)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Health
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- B
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 238140
- Employees
- 8
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
5 citations on file for this inspection.
1910.134 C01
- Issued
- Sep 9, 2011
- Abate by
- Oct 11, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $2,550 · Current $2,000 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required respirator use: a) On or about June 22, 2011, and at times prior, the employer did not establish a written respiratory protection program and provide effective training to employees who used respirators to protect themselves from respirable dust containing silica. Employees used elastomeric half-face respirators without being provided medical evaluations and basic training which ensured that the use of the respirators themselves did not present a health hazard to the employees. In addition, the employer had not based respirator selection on an evaluation of the respiratory hazards in the environment.
Recent events (2)
- — I (O) $2000
- — Z (S) $2550
1926.52 D01
- Issued
- Sep 9, 2011
- Abate by
- Nov 10, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $2,040 · Current $2,000 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.52(d)(1): In all cases where the sound levels exceed the values shown in Table D-2, a continuing, effective hearing conservation program was not administered:\r\n\r\na) On or about June 22, 2011, and at times prior, the employer failed to protect the hearing of employees exposed above 90 dBA as an 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) by developing and implementing a hearing conservation program. Two employees were monitored on June 22, 2011 and were found to be exposed to 100.4 dBA TWA (394% dose) and 92.9 dBA TWA (139.5% dose) while operating portable grinders over period of 450 minutes and 447 minutes respectively. \r\n
Recent events (2)
- — I (O) $2000
- — Z (S) $2040
1926.55 A
- Issued
- Sep 9, 2011
- Abate by
- Nov 10, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $2,550 · Current $2,000 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.55(a): Employee(s) were exposed to material(s) at concentrations above those specified in the Threshold Limit Values of Airborne Contaminants for 1970 of the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists: a) On or about June 22, 2011, and at times prior, employees were exposed to respirable dust containing silica at an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) above the OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL). These employees were not wearing fit tested respirators. On June 22, 2011, two employee exposures were measured to be 28.09 million particle per cubic foot (mppcf), or approximately 2.2 times the PEL of 13.01 mmpcf, and 24.73 mmpcf, or approximately 1.8 times the PEL of 13.89 mppcf. Sampling was conducted for 450 and 457 minutes, respectively. The calculation assumed zero exposure for the unsampled portion of the shift.
Recent events (2)
- — I (O) $2000
- — Z (S) $2550
1926.55 B
- Issued
- Sep 9, 2011
- Abate by
- Nov 10, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.55(b): Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not implemented to reduce employee exposure:\r\n\r\na) On or about June 22, 2011, and at times prior, employees were exposed to respirable dust containing silica at an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) above the OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL). The employer had not adequately controlled the dust generated from the grinding of concrete in order to prepare joints for caulking.
Recent events (2)
- — I (O) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.1200 E01
- Issued
- Sep 9, 2011
- Abate by
- Oct 9, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop, implement, and/or maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which describes how the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) will be met: a) On or about June 22, 2011, and at times prior, the employer failed to develop and implement a hazard communication program and did not effectively inform employees who performed concrete grinding of the hazards of silica exposure.
Recent events (2)
- — I (O) $0
- — Z (O) $0
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 238140)
More inspections in CO
Source
This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). The original IMIS detail view is available at OSHA's Establishment Search for activity number 330770249.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.