OSHA Inspection: SKRL DIE CASTING, INC.

Issued

Oct 25, 2011

Abate by

Sep 17, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $2,700 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(b)(1):     When employees were subjected to sound exceeding those listed in Table G-16, feasible administrative or engineering controls were not utilized:      a.  On September 13, 2011, the operator of the #1 die cast machine was exposed to continuous noise levels at 203% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 90 dbA or equivalently, a dose of 100 percent), during the 433 minute sampling period.  Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 47 minutes not sampled.     b.  On September 13, 2011, the operator of the #2 die cast machine was exposed to continuous noise levels at 432% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 90 dbA or equivalently, a dose of 100 percent), during the 431 minute sampling period.   Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 49 minutes not sampled.     Abatement Steps:    1.  Effective hearing protection shall be provided and used by all exposed employees as an interim protection measure and when administrative or engineering controls fail to reduce sound level within the levels of table G-16.  In addition, an effective hearing conservation program in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.95(c) thru (n) shall be maintained.  Abatement must be completed by (one week from issuance date)    2.  Submit to the Area Director a written detailed plan of abatement outlining a schedule for the implementation of engineering and/or administrative measures to control employee exposure to noise as referenced in this citation.  This plan shall include at a minimum, target dates for the following actions which must be consistent with the dates required by this citation.    a)  Evaluation of engineering control options.    b)  Selection of optimum control method and completion of design.    c)  Procurement, installation and operation of selected control measures.    d)  Testing and acceptance or modifications/redesign of controls.

Issued

Oct 25, 2011

Abate by

Jul 25, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $2,700 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(c)(1):     The employer did not administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.9(c) through (o) whenever employee noise exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 decibels measured on the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent:    a.  On September 13, 2011, the operator of the #1 die cast machine was exposed to continuous noise levels at 211% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dbA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 433 minute sampling period.   Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 47 minutes not sampled.     b.  On September 13, 2011, the operator of the #2 die cast machine was exposed to continuous noise levels at 434% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dbA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 431 minute sampling period.   Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 49 minutes not sampled.     c.  On September 13, 2011, the operator of the #8 die cast machine was exposed to continuous noise levels at 136.8% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dbA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 431 minute sampling period.   Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 49 minutes not sampled.     d.  On September 13, 2011, the metal man was exposed to continuous noise levels at 84.1% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dbA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 449 minute sampling period.   Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 31 minutes not sampled.     e.  On September 13, 2011, the metal man was exposed to continuous noise levels at 89.1% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dbA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 449 minute sampling period.   Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 31 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Oct 25, 2011

Abate by

Sep 17, 2012

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1):     The employer did not assess the workplace to determine if hazards were present, or were likely to be present, which necessitated the use of personal protective equipment:      The employer did not have a written certification of hazard assessment, on or about August 24, 2011.  Employees were exposed to hazards such as, but limited to noise, flying particles, and molten metal.

Issued

Oct 25, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1):     The employer did not ensure that each affected employee uses appropriate eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids, chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation:      The employer did not ensure that employees wore safety glasses with side shields when exposed to flying metal chips when operating lathes and cleaning equipment with compressed air, on or about August 24, 2011.

Issued

Oct 25, 2011

Abate by

Nov 24, 2011

Penalty

Initial $2,700 · Current $1,620 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1):     A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required respirator use:      The employer did not have a written respiratory protection program and employees were required to wear tight-fitting half-face respirators and dust masks when rebuilding/relining furnaces, on or about August 24, 2011.

Issued

Oct 25, 2011

Abate by

Nov 25, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1):     The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:    The employer did not provide medical evaluations to employees required to wear tight-fitting half-face respirators and dust masks when rebuilding/relining furnaces, on or about August 24, 2011.

Issued

Oct 25, 2011

Abate by

Nov 25, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1):     The employer did not ensure that employee(s) required to use a tight-fitting facepiece respirator passed the appropriate qualitative fit test (QLFT) or quantitative fit test (QNFT):      The employer did not fit test employees required to wear tight-fitting half-face respirators dust masks when rebuilding/relining furnaces, on or about August 24, 2011.

Issued

Oct 25, 2011

Abate by

Nov 25, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k):     The employer did not provide comprehensive, understandable training which did not occur annually and/or more often if necessary:      The employer did not provide respiratory protection training to employees required to wear tight-fitting half-face respirators and dust masks when rebuilding/relining furnaces, on or about August 24, 2011.

Issued

Oct 25, 2011

Abate by

Jul 25, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(6):     The employer did not provide the basic advisory information on respirators, as presented in Appendix D of 29 CFR 1910.134, in written or oral format to employees who wear respirators when such use was not required by the employer:      The employer did not provide the basic advisory information in Appendix D of the Respiratory Protection standard to employees voluntarily wearing a dust mask, on or about August 24, 2011.

Issued

Oct 25, 2011

Abate by

Jan 25, 2012

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

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:      The employer did not have a written hazard communication program and employees were exposed to hazardous chemicals such as, but not limited to, crystalline silica, oil mist, molten aluminum metal, hydraulic oil, and liquefied petroleum gas, on or about August 24, 2011.

Issued

Oct 25, 2011

Abate by

Nov 25, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1):  Employees were not provided effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard that the employees had not been previously trained about was introduced into their work area:      The employer did not provide information and training to employees exposed to hazardous chemicals such as, crystalline silica, oil mist, molten aluminum metal, hydraulic oil, and liquefied petroleum gas, on or about August 24, 2011.

Issued

Oct 25, 2011

Abate by

Nov 25, 2011

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(l)(1):  The employer did not make available to affected employees or their representatives copies of 29 CFR 1910.95 and did not post a copy in the workplace:      The employer did not have a copy of the occupational noise exposure standard posted in the workplace, on or about September 13, 2011.