OSHA Inspection: BLUDWORTH MARINE, LLC

Issued

2012-07-13 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-08-12 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $4500.00 · Current $2250.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1915.15(c):  A competent person did not visually inspect and test each space certified as Safe for Workers or Safe for Hot Work as often as necessary to ensure that atmospheric conditions within that space were maintained within the conditions established by the certificate.    a)  At the facility in the floating drydock vessel repair area on Tank Barge GRIFCO 3801:  On February 22, 2012 the employer did not perform visual inspection and testing to ensure that atmospheric conditions established by Marine Chemists Certificate number 577-00071 issued 2-16-2012 by Certified Marine Chemist number 577 were maintained.  Employees conducted hot work to remove hull plating from compartments adjacent to cargo tanks and the competent person had not tested the spaces.    b)  At the facility in the floating drydock vessel repair area on Tank Barge GRIFCO 3801:  On February 22, 2012 the employer did not perform visual inspection and testing to ensure that atmospheric conditions established by Marine Chemists Certificate number 577-00071 issued 2-16-2012 by Certified Marine Chemist number 577 were maintained.  Employees conducted hot work to remove hull plating from compartments adjacent to cargo tanks and the competent person had no means available to test for volatile organic chemical levels (VOCs) as specified by the marine chemist.    c)  At the facility in the new vessel construction area on Tank Barge Hull 106:  On February 22, 2012 the employer did not perform visual inspection and testing to ensure that atmospheric conditions established by Marine Chemists Certificate number 0107516 issued 01-11-2012 by Certified Marine Chemist number 711 were maintained.  Employees conducted spray painting inside cargo tanks and the competent person had no means available to test for volatile organic chemical levels (VOCs) as specified by the marine chemist.

Issued

2012-07-13 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-08-12 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $900.00 · Current $450.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 8111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(d)(1):   When information indicated that any employee's exposure equaled or exceed the 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels, the employer did not develop and implement a monitoring program:    At the facility in the floating drydock vessel repair and new construction areas:  On February 22, 2012 the employer did not develop and implement noise dosimetry to determine if employee exposures exceeded 85 decibels as an 8-hour time weighted average when employees were exposed to noise hazards including but not limited to: air spray compressor, spray painting inside tanks, and grinding, using needle guns and blasting steel surfaces inside and outside of steel hulls and tanks.

Issued

2012-07-13 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-08-12 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $900.00 · Current $450.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0645108024972590

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(3):   The employer did not designate a program administrator who was qualified by appropriate training or experience to administer or oversee the respiratory protection program and to conduct the required evaluations of program effectiveness:    a)  At the facility in the new vessel construction area:  On February 22, 2012 the employer did not designate a qualified respiratory protection administrator to oversee use of respirators by employees conducting spray painting in confined spaces.  The MSDS for the Hempadur paint system specified to always use supplied air respiratory protection or powered air purifying respirators for prolonged spraying, but the employer prescribed air purifying respirators and had no assessment of employee exposure to base selection on.

Issued

2012-07-13 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-08-12 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $900.00 · Current $450.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(iii):  The employer did not identify and evaluate the respiratory hazard(s) in the workplace; including a reasonable estimate of employee exposures to respiratory hazards and identification of the contaminants chemical state and physical form:    At the facility in the floating drydock vessel repair and new vessel construction areas:  On February 22, 2012 the employer did not make reasonable assessment of employee exposure to air contaminants during painting, blasting and welding including but not limited to: ethylbenzene, epichlorohydrin, xylene, n-butanol, light aromatic solvent naphtha, triethylenetetramine, welding fume respirable and total dust, and hexavalanet chromium.

Issued

2012-07-13 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-08-12 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $900.00 · Current $450.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0372108020372497

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(ii):  Employee training did not include the physical and health hazards of the chemicals in the work area:    a)  At the facility in the floating drydock vessel repair area:  On February 22, 2012 the employer did not provide employees training on the physical and health hazards of vacuum gas oil, the previous cargo on tank barge GRICFO 3801.      b)  At the facility in the new vessel construction area:  On February 22, 2012 the employer did not provide employees training on the physical and health hazards of Hempadur epoxy paint system containing primer, base coat and hardener, and associated cancer, inhalation and skin sensitization hazards from contents including but not limited to xylene, bisphenol A (epichlorohydrin), epoxy resins, light aromatic solvent naphtha, n-butanol, ethylbenzene, and triethylenetetramine.    c)  At the facility in the new vessel construction area:  On February 22, 2012 the employer did not provide employees training on the physical and health hazards of hexavalent chromium during welding of stainless steel tanks for barges being newly constructed.

Issued

2012-07-13 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-08-12 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $900.00 · Current $450.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1080249725842590

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1915.152(b):   The employer did not assess its work activity to determine whether there were hazards present, which necessitate the employees' use of personal protective equipment.    a)  At the facility in the new vessel construction area:  On February 22, 2012 the employer did not assess work activity to determine proper personal protective equipment for  hazards present in Hempadur paint being sprayed in confined spaces by employees.  The MSDS for the Hempadur paint system specified to always use supplied air respiratory protection or powered air purifying respirators for prolonged spraying, but the employer prescribed air purifying respirators and had no assessment of employee exposure to base selection on.    b)  At the facility in the new vessel construction area:  On February 22, 2012 the employer did not assess work activity to determine proper personal protective equipment for  hazards present in Hempadur paint being mixed with chemical hardener by employees.  Non chemical resistant gloves were worn by employees when the paint components presented an allergic skin sensitization and skin absorption hazard.