OSHA Inspection: STARFLITE SYSTEMS INC.

Issued

2012-10-29 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2800.00 · Current $1400.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 8111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(d)(1): A representative monitoring program was not developed and implemented when information indicated that an employee's exposure may equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 dBA:     a) In the Connequenessing Faciility, on or about May 24, 2012 - The employer did not monitor noise exposure levels in the workplace to accurately identify employees' exposure to noise at or above 85 decibels (dB) averaged over 8 working hours, or an 8-hour time-weighted average.

Issued

2012-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-12-31 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 8111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(g)(1): An audiometric testing program was not established and maintained for all employees whose noise exposure equaled or exceeded an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 dBA:     a) In the Connequenessing facility, on or about May 24, 2012 - The employer did not establish and maintain an audiometric testing program for an employee designated as a welder and exposed to continuous noise at 78.9% of the allowable 8-hour time-weighted average sound level (90 dBA).  The equivalent dBA level for the exposure was 88.3 dBA.

Issued

2012-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-12-31 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(k)(1): A training program was not instituted for all employees who were exposed to noise at or above an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) of 85 dBA:     a) In the Connequenessing facility, on or about May 24, 2012 - The employer did not train employees exposed to noise at or above an 8-hour TWA level of 85 dBA in the effects of noise; the purposes, advantages, disadvantages, and attenuation of various types of hearing protectors; the selection, fit, and care of various types of protectors; and the purpose and procedures of audiometric testing.

Issued

2012-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-11-28 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1600.00 · Current $1000.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.106(d)(3)(ii): Storage cabinets for flammable and combustible liquids were not designed or constructed to meet minimal fire resistance as required:     a) In the Connoquenessing, Pennsylvania facility, on or about May 10, 2012 - The storage cabinets for flammable and combustible liquids used by the employer were not designed or constructed to meet minimal fire resistance.

Issued

2012-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-12-31 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2000.00 · Current $1000.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.107(c)(2): The employer did not ensure that there was no open flame or spark producing equipment in any spraying area nor within 20-feet thereof, unless separated by a partition.    a) In the Connoquenessing, Pennsylvania facility, on or about May 7, 2012 - The employer did not ensure that there was no open flame or spark producing equipment in a paint spraying area.  Employees were MIG welding in a spray area while painting was being conducted.

Issued

2012-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-12-31 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $500.00 · Current $600.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): The employer did not establish and implement a written respiratory protection program with worksite specific procedures, in any workplace where respirators are necessary to protect the health of the employee or whenever respirators are required by the employer:     a) In the Connoquenessing, Pennsylvania facility, on or about May 7, 2012 - The employer did not establish and implement a written respiratory protection program where employees are required to wear tight-fitting respirators in the workplace for protection from paint vapors.    b) In the Saxonburg, Pennsylvania facility, on or about May 10, 2012 - The employer did not establish and implement a written respiratory protection program where employees are required to wear tight-fitting respirators in the workplace for protection from paint vapors.

Issued

2012-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-12-31 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(iii): The employer did not identify and evaluate the respiratory hazards in the workplace, including a reasonable estimate of employee exposure to respiratory hazards:     a) In the Connoquenessing, Pennsylvania facility, on or about May 7, 2012 - The employer did not identify and evaluate the respiratory hazards in the workplace that included a reasonable estimate of employee exposure to paint vapors.

Issued

2012-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-12-31 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employees ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:     a) In the Connoquenessing, Pennsylvania facility, on or about May 7, 2012 - The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to an employee required to wear a tight-fitting half-mask respirator in the workplace for protection from spray paint vapors.

Issued

2012-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-12-31 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): The employer did not ensure that an employee using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator was fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator, whenever a different respirator facepiece was used, and at least annually thereafter:     a) In the Connoquenessing, Pennsylvania facility, on or about May 10, 2012 - The employer did not ensure that an employee required to wear a tight-fitting respirator in the workplace for protection from paint vapors was provided with a fit test prior to initial use of the respirator.

Issued

2012-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-12-31 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1200.00 · Current $600.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.252(b)(2)(iii): Workers and other persons adjacent to the welding area were not protected from the rays by noncombustible or flameproof screens or shields or were not required to wear appropriate goggles:     a) In the Connoquenessing, Pennsylvania facility, on or about May 24, 2012 - The employer did not ensure that employees working adjacent to a welding area were required to wear appropriate goggles when noncombustible or flameproof screens or shields were not used.

Issued

2012-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-12-31 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

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 a written certification that identifies the workplace evaluated; the person certifying that the evaluation had been performed; the dates of the hazard assessment; and, which identifies the document as a certification of hazard assessment:      a) In the facility, on or about May 24, 2012 - The employer did not provide written certification that a workplace hazard assessment had been completed that identifies the workplace evaluated; the name of the person conducting the assessment; the date of the assessment; and identification of the document certifying completion of the hazard assessment.

Issued

2012-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-12-31 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop and implement a written hazard communication program which at least describes how the criteria in 29 CFR 1910.1200 (f), (g), and (h) of this section for labels and other forms of warning, material safety data sheets, and employee information and training will be met:     a) In the facility, on or about May 7, 2012 - The employer did not develop and implement a written hazard communication program for employees exposed to hazardous materials, such as, but not limited to naphtha, xylene, toluene, and acetone.

Issued

2012-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-12-31 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1): Employees were not provided with effective information and training as specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(2) and (3) on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment, and whenever a new physical or health hazard the employees have not previously been trained about is introduced into their work area:     a) In the facility, on or about May 7, 2012 - The employer did not provide an effective training program to inform employees of specific hazards associated with chemicals used in the workplace, such as, but not limited to naphtha, xylene, toluene, and acetone.