OSHA Inspection: RIZZO BROTHERS PAINTING CONTRACTORS, INC.

Issued

Nov 18, 2011

Abate by

Jan 4, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.52(d)(1):  In all cases where the sound levels exceeded the values shown in Table D-2 of 29 CFR 1926.52, a continuing, effective hearing conservation program was not administered:    The employer did not provide a continuing, effective hearing conservation program which included exposure monitoring, baseline audiograms, annual audiograms and annual training for employees who were exposed to noise levels such as:    (a) On October 5, 2011 an employee who was blasting a railroad bridge was exposed to approximately 7401% of the PEL or 125.5 dBA for the 272 minute sampling period, which included breaks and one stop to wait for a train to cross the bridge.    (b)  On October 5, 2011 an employee who was blasting a railroad bridge was exposed to approximately 490% of the PEL or 105.8 dBA for the 276 minute sampling period, which included a two hour period outside the containment area, breaks and one stop to wait for a train to cross the bridge.

Issued

Nov 18, 2011

Abate by

Nov 28, 2011

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $4,900

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(1)(i):  Each employer who had a workplace or operation covered by 29 CFR 1926.62 did not initially determine if any employee was exposed to lead at or above the action level of 0.03 milligrams per cubic meter of air (0.03 mg/m3) calculated as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA):    (a)  The employer did not perform an initial exposure assessment for the blaster, who on October 5, 2011, was exposed to 0.41 mg/m3 as an eight hour TWA, during a 275 minute sampling period with a value of zero added for the 205 minutes not sampled to equal 480 minutes.

Issued

Nov 18, 2011

Abate by

Nov 28, 2011

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(i):  Until the employer performed an employee exposure assessment, as required in 29 CFR 1926.62(d), and documented that the employee(s) performing any of the listed tasks was not exposed above the Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL), the employer did not treat affected employee(s) as if they were exposed above the PEL, and not in excess of ten times the PEL, and did not implement employee protective measures prescribed in 29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(v):    (a)   The employer did not perform an initial exposure assessment for lead and did not treat affected employees as if they were exposed above the PEL when the blaster was exposed on October 5, 2011 to 0.41 mg/m3 as an eight hour TWA, during a 275 minute sampling period with a value of zero added for the 205 minutes not sampled, the employer did not provide appropriate personal protective clothing and equipment in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section;  change areas in accordance with paragraph (i)(2) of this section;  hand washing facilities in accordance with paragraph (i)(5) of this section;  and biological monitoring in accordance with paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section, to consist of blood sampling and analysis for lead and zinc protoporphyrin levels.