OSHA Inspection: STUDIO 247

Issued

May 22, 2012

Abate by

Jun 13, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,000 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1048(d)(1)(i): Each employer who has a workplace covered by this standard shall monitor employees to determine their exposure to formaldehyde.    On or about Feburary 14, 2012, the hair stylist working with Brazilian Blowout in the salon was exposed to formaldehyde vapors at 0.73 ppm. The employer did not monitor employees to determine if formaldehyde was present.

Issued

May 22, 2012

Abate by

Jul 31, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1048(m)(5): Written hazard communication program. The employer shall develop, implement, and maintain at the workplace, a written hazard communication program for formaldehyde exposures in the workplace, which at a minimum describes how the requirements specified in this paragraph for labels and other forms of warning and material safety data sheets, and paragraph (n) for employee information and training, will be met. Employers in multi-employer workplaces shall comply with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(2).    On or about Feburary 14, 2012, the hair stylist working with Brazilian Blowout in the salon was exposed to formaldehyde vapors and the employer did not have a written hazard communication program for formaldehyde exposure in the workplace.

Issued

May 22, 2012

Abate by

Jul 31, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1048(n)(1): Participation. The employer shall assure that all employees who are assigned to workplaces where there is exposure to formaldehyde participate in a training program, except that where the employer can show, using objective data, that employees are not exposed to formaldehyde at or above 0.1 ppm, the employer is not required to provide training.    On or about February 14, 2012, the hair stylist working with Brazilian Blowout in the salon was exposed to formaldehyde vapors at 0.73 ppm. The employer did not train employees exposed to formaldehyde at or above 0.1 ppm.

Issued

May 22, 2012

Abate by

Jul 31, 2012

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:    On or about November 22, 2011 the employer did not develop and implement a hazard communication program for employees who handle chemicals such as hair dye and perming solution.

Issued

May 22, 2012

Abate by

Jul 31, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(1): The employer did not have a material safety data sheet for each hazardous chemical which they used:     On or about November 22, 2011 the employer did not have a material safety data sheet (MSDS) for hazadous chemicals such as hair dye and perming solution.

Issued

May 22, 2012

Abate by

Jul 31, 2012

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:    On or about November 22, 2011 the employer did not provide training and information to employees who handle hazardous chemicals such as hair dye or perming solution.

Issued

May 22, 2012

Abate by

Jul 31, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2): The employer shall verify that the required workplace hazard assessment has been performed through a written certification that identifies the workplace evaluated; the person certifying that the evaluation has been performed; the date(s) of the hazard assessment; and, which identifies the document as a certification of hazard assessment.    On or about November 22, 2011 the employer did not have a written hazard assessment identifying the hazards throughout the facility.