OSHA Inspection: 99 CENTS ONLY STORES TEXAS, INC.

Issued

Sep 21, 2012

Abate by

Nov 5, 2012

Penalty

Initial $5,000 · Current $3,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2): The employer did not verify that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed through written certification that identified the workplace evaluated; the person certifying that the evaluation had been performed; the date(s) of the hazard assessment; and, identified the document as a certification of the hazard assessment    The employer does not verify that the required workplace hazard assessment is performed through a written certification.  This violation occurred at the workplace where the employer did not certify that an hazard assessment was conducted this exposes employees to dermal and eye hazards associated with anhydrous ammonia, Premium 2-Stage Hydrocracked Compressor Fluid, propylene glycol, and extreme cold temperatures.

Issued

Sep 21, 2012

Abate by

Nov 5, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1):     The employer did not ensure that each affected employee uses appropriate eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids, chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation.    The employer does not ensure that each affected employee use appropriate eye or face protection.  This violation occurred at the 99 Cents Only Stores where employees were exposed to eye hazards associated with anhydrous ammonia, Premium 2-Stage Hydrocracked Compressor Fluid, and propylene glycol.

Issued

Sep 21, 2012

Abate by

Nov 5, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.138(a): The employer did not select and require employee(s) to use appropriate hand protection when employees' hands were exposed to hazards such as those from skin absorption of harmful substances; severe cuts or lacerations; severe abrasion; punctures; chemical burns; thermal burns; and harmful temperature extremes.      The employer does not ensure that each affected employee use appropriate hand protection.  This violation occurred at the 99 Cents Only Stores where employees were exposed to dermal hazards associated with anhydrous ammonia, Premium 2-Stage Hydrocracked Compressor Fluid, propylene glycol, and extreme cold temperatures.

Issued

Sep 21, 2012

Abate by

Nov 5, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,200 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1):     The employer did not develop and implement a written respiratory protection program with required worksite-specific procedures and elements for required respirator use:     The employer does not develop nor implement a written respiratory protection program with required worksite-specific procedures and elements for required respirator use.  This violation occurred at the 99 Cents Only Stores where employees were required to wear a Panorama Nova full face respirator for draining oil in compressors and responding to potential anhydrous ammonia leaks.

Issued

Sep 21, 2012

Abate by

Nov 5, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,200 Reduced

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:     The employer does not develop, maintain, or implement at the workplace a written hazard communication program. This violation occurred in the 99 Cents stores facility where employees were exposed to dermal and eye hazards associated with anhydrous ammonia and propylene glycol.

Issued

Sep 21, 2012

Abate by

Oct 5, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:    The employer does not ensure that containers of drained refrigeration oil were labeled, tagged, or marked to identify contents. This violation occurred in the ammonia refrigeration engine room where employees were exposed to dermal and eye hazards when working with the unlabeled containers.

Issued

Sep 21, 2012

Abate by

Oct 5, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(5)(ii):     The employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged or marked with the appropriate hazard warnings:    The employer does not identify containers and convey the information required by 1910.1200 (f)(5).  This violation occurred in the ammonia refrigeration engine room where employees were exposed to dermal and eye hazards when working with containers of refrigeration oil that did not identify the appropriate warning.