OSHA Inspection: QUAM-NICHOLS COMPANY

Issued

Apr 30, 2012

Abate by

Jun 12, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,050 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1):  The employer did not ensure that a written respiratory protection program with worksite-specific procedures was established and implemented to include the provisions of (i)-(ix), as applicable:    a.  On or about November 23, 2011,  in the facility,  the employees were provided with and required to wear half mask air purifying respirators for use during manual electrostatic powder coating operations.  The employer did not develop or implement a written respirator program that included the provisions in 1910.134(c)(1)(i)-(ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required use.

Issued

Apr 30, 2012

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:    a.  On or about November 23, 2011,  in the facility,  the employees were provided with and required to wear half mask air purifying respirators for use during manual electrostatic powder coating operations.  Employees required to wear tight fitting respirators had not received a medical evaluation.

Issued

Apr 30, 2012

Abate by

May 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2):  Employee(s) using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator were not annually fit tested:    a. On or about November 23, 2011, in the facility,  employee(s) were required to wear Pro Tech half-mask respirators with cartridges during manual electrostatic powder coating operations.  Employees required to wear tight-fitting respirators had not been fit tested.

Issued

Apr 30, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(h)(3)(ii)[A]: The employer did not ensure that respirator inspections included a check of respirator function,  tightness of connections,  and the condition of the various parts including,  but not limited to, the facepiece,  head straps,  valves,  connecting tube,  and cartridges, canisters or filters:      a.  On or about November 23, 2011,  in the facility,  the employees were provided with and required to wear half mask air purifying respirators for use during manual electrostatic powder coating operations.  The employer did not ensure that respirator inspections included a check of the valves of  two (2) Pro-Tech half mask tight fitting respirators worn by powder coating employees.  The valves were missing from the respirator.

Issued

Apr 30, 2012

Abate by

Jun 12, 2012

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:    a. On or about November 23, 2011, in the facility, in the facility,  employee(s) were required to wear Pro Tech half-mask respirators with cartridges during manual electrostatic powder coating operations.  Employees required to wear tight-fitting respirators had not received respirator training.

Issued

Apr 30, 2012

Abate by

May 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,050 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.136(a): The employer did not ensure that each affected employee uses protective footwear when working in areas where there is a danger of foot injuries due to falling or rolling objects, or objects piercing the sole, and where such employee's feet are exposed to electrical hazards:    a.  On or about December 6, 2011,  in the punch press area,  employees were required to lift steel coils weighing approximately 3000 pounds.  The employer did not require employees to wear adequate metatarsal foot protection to protect employees from foot injury hazards.

Issued

Apr 30, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,050 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.151(c):     Where employees were exposed to injurious corrosive materials, suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body were not provided within the work area for immediate emergency use:    a. On or about November 23, 2011,  in the white powder coating department,  employees regularly worked with corrosive chemicals such as KCI Liqua Phos 6929 (phosphoric acid & nitric acid).  Yet,  an eyewash was not provided in the white powder area for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes.

Issued

Apr 30, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.184(i)(9)(iii): Synthetic web sling(s) with snags, punctures, tears, or cuts were not immediately removed from service:    a.  On or about December 6, 2011,  in the punch press area,  a synthetic nylon sling with rips and tears were used by employee(s) to lift a steel coil weighing approximately 3000 pounds.  The employees were thereby exposed to the hazards associated with being struck by a steel coil.

Issued

Apr 30, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(j)(1)(i): Fixtures, lampholders, lamps, rosettes, and receptacles located had live parts normally exposed to employee contact:    a. On or about December 6, 2011,  in the punch press area, the electrical box on the back of a halogen lamp was broken and pulled away exposing internal wiring, thereby exposing live electrical parts.  The employees were thereby exposed to the hazards associated with live electrical parts.

Issued

Apr 30, 2012

Abate by

Jun 12, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,050 Reduced

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:    a. On or about November 23, 2011,  in the facility, employees required to manufacture loadspeakers and loudspeaker assemblies were exposed to contact with hazardous materials,  including but not limited to powder coatings (epichlorohydrin, epoxy resin, titanium dioxide), nitric acid,  phosphoric acid, nitrogen, oxygen, press lubricants & associated manufacturing chemicals. Employees were not provided with effective information & training on hazardous chemicals.

Issued

Apr 30, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.101(b): The in-plant handling, storage, and utilization of all compressed gases in cylinders, portable tanks, rail tankcars, or motor vehicle cargo tanks were not in accordance with Compressed Gas Association Pamphlet P-1-1965, which is incorporated by reference as specified in CFR 1910.6.  Compressed gas cylinder(s) in use were not properly supported to prevent them from being knocked over:    a.  On or about December 6, 2011,  in the white powder coating area,  a nitrogen cylinder was not secured to avoid the possibility of being knocked over.