OSHA Inspection: ZOTOS INTERNATIONAL INC.

Issued

May 24, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,000 · Current $1,650 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.141(g)(4): Food or beverages were stored in area(s) exposed to toxic material(s):  Note:  See 1910.141(a)(2)(viii) for definition of toxic material.      a) In the Silk Screen Department, on or about 1/12/12: Food and beverage were stored in cabinet, located adjacent to where employees use RhinoMite RMA 3000R glue containing methylene chlroide.

Issued

May 24, 2012

Penalty

Initial $5,000 · Current $2,750 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) Next to the cooling tower, on or about 1/12/12: Where employees add corrosive chemicals including Justeq 07 containing sodium hypochlorite having a ph range of 12.5 to 13.7 to the cooling tower, an eyewash station was not provided in the area.

Issued

May 24, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(i)(2): It was reasonably foreseeable that an employee's eyes may contact solutions containing 0.1 percent or greater methylene chloride and the employer did not provide appropriate eyewash facilities within the immediate work area for emergency use:    a) In the Silk Screening Department, on or about 1/12/12: Where employees use RhinoMite RMA 3000R glue, containing 83%methylene chloride, the eyewash station provided for the area was not functional.

Issued

May 24, 2012

Abate by

Jun 23, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $3,850 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(c)(2): The employer did not ensure that no employee was exposed to an airborne concentration of methylene chloride in excess of 125 parts per million as determined over a sampling period of 15 minutes:      a) In the Silk Screening Department, on or about 3/15/12: During operations using Rhinomite RMA 3000R glue, an employee was exposed to an airborne concentration of 178 parts per million methylene chloride over 15 minutes.         Abatement documentation must be submitted for this item.

Issued

May 24, 2012

Abate by

Jun 23, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(f)(1): The employer did not institute and maintain the effectiveness of engineering controls and work practices to reduce employee exposure to or below the permissible exposure limits and wherever the feasible engineering controls and work practices which can be instituted were not sufficient to reduce employee exposure to or below the 8-hour time weighted average permissible exposure limit or short term exposure limit, the employer did not use them to reduce employee exposure to the lowest levels achievable and did not supplement them by the use of respiratory protection that compiled with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.1052(g):      a) In the Silk Screening Department, on or about 3/15/12: Effective engineering controls were not implemented where an employee had a short term exposure of 178 parts per million methylene chloride.     Abatement documentation must be submitted for this item.

Issued

May 24, 2012

Abate by

Jun 23, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(g)(1)(i): Respirators were not used during periods when an employee's exposure to methylene chloride exceeds the 8-hour time weighted average permissible exposure limit or short term exposure limit:        a) In the Silk Screen Department, on or about 3/15/12: Where employees use Rhinomite RMA 3000R glue, containing methylene chloride, respiratory protection was not used by employees. OSHA air sampling showed an employee short term exposure of 178 parts per million.

Issued

May 24, 2012

Abate by

Jun 23, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $3,850 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(e)(1): The employer did not establish a regulated area wherever an employee's exposure to airborne concentrations of methylene chloride exceeded or could reasonably be expected to exceed either the 8-hour Time Weighted Average Permissible Exposure Limit or the Short Term Exposure Limit:      a) In the Silk screening department, on or about 3/15/12: A regulated area was not established where an employee had a short term exposure of 178 parts per million methylene chloride.         Abatement documentation must be submitted for this item.

Issued

May 24, 2012

Abate by

Jun 23, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $3,850 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(j)(1)(i):     The employer did not make medical surveillance available for employees who were or potentially were  exposed to methylene chloride at or above the action level on 30 or more days per year, or above the 8-hour time weighted average permissible exposure limit or the short term exposure limit on 10 or more days per year:    a) In the silk screen department, on or about 1/12/12: The employer did not make medical surveillance available to employees who use Rhinomite RMA 3000R glue containing methylene chloride more than 30 days per year, where the employers sampling results showed employees exposed to a time weighted average of 21 parts per million, and OSHA sampling showed employees exposed to a time weighted average of 16 parts per million and a short term exposure level of 178 parts per million.

Issued

May 24, 2012

Abate by

Jun 23, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $3,850 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(l)(1): The employer did not provide information and training for each affected employee prior to or at the time of initial assignment to a job involving potential exposure to methylene chloride:      a) In the QA lab, on or about 2/14/12: Where employees use methylene chloride to perform QA work, the employer did not provide information and training on methylene chlroide.    b) In the silk screening dept, on or about 2/13/12: Where employees use Rhinomite RMA 3000R glue, containing methylene chloride, the employer did not provide information and training on methylene chloride.

Issued

May 24, 2012

Abate by

Jun 23, 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:      a) In the Silk Screen Department, on or about 1/12/12: Where Rhinomite RMA 3000R glue, containing methylene chloride and Rhinomite RMC 4 catalyst, containing MDI are used, an intern had not received adequate training on hazard communication.    b) In the Silk Screen Department, on or about 1/12/12: Where Rhinomite RMC 4 catalyst, containing MDI is used, employees had not received adequate training on hazard communication for hazardous chemicals in the area.

Issued

May 24, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,000 · Current $1,650 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(5)(i): The employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged or marked with the identity of the hazardous chemical(s) contained therein:      a) In the Packaging Department, near line 6, on or about 1/12/12: A bottle of flammable isopropyl alcohol was not labeled as to its chemical identity.    b) In the maintenance shop, on or about 1/12/12: A plastic squirt bottle, and red can containing flammable Methyl Ethyl Ketone were not labeled as to their chemical identity.

Issued

May 24, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(5)(ii): Appropriate hazard warnings, or alternatively, words, pictures, symbols, or combination thereof,which provide at least general information regarding the hazards of the chemicals, and which, in conjunction with the other information immediately available to employees under the hazard communication program, will provide employees with the specific information regarding the physical and health hazards of the hazardous chemical.      a) In the Packaging department, near line 6, on or about 1/12/12: A bottle of flammable isopropyl alcohol was not labeled as to appropriate hazard warnings.    b) In the maintenance shop, on or about 1/12/12: A squirt bottle and red can of flammable Methyl Ethyl Ketone were not labeled as to appropriate hazard warnings.