OSHA Inspection: EASTERN CAST HARDWARE COMPANY

Issued

Nov 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,650 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.124(g)(2):     Employees who  worked with liquids that could burn, irritate, or otherwise harm their skin were not provided with an emergency eye-wash station close to the dipping and coating operation:       (a) Plating Line:  The eye wash station adjacent to the Plating Line was not operational in that the handle for the valve was loose and would not activate the eye wash.

Issued

Nov 21, 2012

Abate by

Dec 18, 2012

Penalty

Initial $1,200 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2):     The employer did not verify that the required workplace hazard assessment has been performed through a written certification which included the requirements as outlined in 29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2):       a)   The employer did not perform a workplace hazard assessment determining which job operations require personal protective equipment and determining the type of personal protective equipment required for each specific job. The employer did not have a written certification stating that a workplace hazard assessment had been done.

Issued

Nov 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,650 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(b)(2)(i):     Electrical pull boxes, junction boxes, and fittings were not provided with covers approved for the purpose:          (a)   Plating Line:  Mid-way down the Plating Line walk-way there was an uncovered electrical junction box with a live electrical wire.

Issued

Nov 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,650 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(d)(2):     An initial determination was not made to determine if any employee may be exposed to lead at or above the action level:         (a) Hand Buffing and Finish Buffing:   An employee performing hand buffing and machine Finish Buffing of brass plated "Name" plates was exposed to airborne lead at a concentration of 49 ug/m3 as an 8 hour, time-weighted average on 6/13/12.  This exposure exceeds the OSHA Action Level for lead which is 30 ug/m3 as an 8 hour, time-weighted average.   The employer had not performed any air monitoring to determine which jobs expose employees to airborne lead at concentrations in excess of the Action Level.

Issued

Nov 21, 2012

Abate by

Dec 18, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1592

General-duty citation text

The violations listed below have been grouped together as a single violation because they involve related hazards that may increase the potential for occupational illness resulting from exposure to a toxic material.   ***************************************************      29 CFR 1910.1025(j)(2)(i):     Required biological monitoring in the form of blood sampling and analysis for lead and zinc protoporphyrin (ZPP) levels were not provided to each employee covered under 29 CFR 1910.1025 (j)(1)(i):           (a)   Hand Buffing and Finish Buffing Operations:  An employee performing hand buffing and finish buffing of brass plated "Name" plates was exposed to airborne lead at a concentration of 49 ug/m3 as an 8 hour, time-weighted average on 6/13/12.  The employer did not provide the exposed employees with blood sampling and analysis for lead and zinc protoporphyrin (ZPP) levels.  Blood sampling must be done at the frequency of every 6 months.

Issued

Nov 21, 2012

Abate by

Dec 18, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1592

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(j)(3)(i)(B): The employer did not make available medical examinations to employees prior to assignment to a work area in which airborne concentrations to lead are at or above the OSHA Action Level.        a).  Hand Buffing and Finish Buffing Operations:   An employee performing hand buffing and finish buffing of brass plated Name plates was exposed to airborne lead at a concentration of 49 ug/m3 as an 8 hour, time-weighted average on 6/13/12.  This is an exposure above the OSHA Action Level which is 30 ug/m3 as an 8 hour, time-weighted average.  The employer did not make available initial medical examinations to exposed employees before their assignment to those job operations.

Issued

Nov 21, 2012

Abate by

Dec 18, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1592

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(l)(1)(ii): The employer did not institute a training program for all employees who are subject to exposure to airborne lead are at or above the OSHA Action Level.          a).  Hand Buffing and Finish Buffing Operations:   An employee performing hand buffing and finish buffing of brass plated Name plates was exposed to airborne lead at a concentration of 49 ug/m3 as an 8 hour, time-weighted average on 6/13/12.  This is an exposure above the OSHA Action Level which is 30 ug/m3 as an 8 hour, time-weighted average.  The employer did not institute training programs for employees before their assignment to those job operations covering the adverse health effects of exposure to lead, the medical surveillance program required, and the personal protective equipment, the engineering controls, and the work practices necessary to prevent excessive exposure.

Issued

Nov 21, 2012

Abate by

Dec 18, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,650 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop, implement, and maintain at each workplace a written Hazard Communication Program which described how the employer will ensure containers of hazardous chemicals are labeled, ensure the maintenance of Material Safety Data Sheets, and perform employee training in chemical hazards.        a).  The employer did not have a written Hazard Communication Program.

Issued

Nov 21, 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 within.    a)   Adjacent to the Spray Booth:  There were two 55 gallon drums which were being used to strip rejected plates and parts.  Neither drum had accurate labels indicating the identity of the chemical within.  ******************************************  b).  Plating Line:  The Sulfuric Acid Tank was not labeled.    c)   Plating Line:  The Hydrochloric Acid Tank was not labeled.     d)   Plating Line:  The Fluoroboric Acid Tank was not labeled.    e)  Plating Line:  The Nickel Plating Tank was not labeled.    f)  Plating Line:  The Copper Cyanide Tank was not labeled.    g)  Plating Line:  The Brass Plating Tank which contained a mixture of copper cyanide and zinc cyanide was not labeled as to the identities of the chemicals within.        h)  Plating Line:   The extra Brass Plating Tank was not labeled.    i)  Plating Line:   The Antiqueing  Tank was not labeled as to the identities of the chemicals within.    j)  Cyanide Storage Locker:  There were two 5 gallon pails of Sodium Cyanide in the locker which were not labeled.    k)  Cyanide Storage Locker:  There was a fiberboard drum of Zinc Cyanide which was not labeled.    l)   Aisle Adjacent to the Cyanide Storage Locker:  Ther was a 5 gallon pail of Sodium Cyanide on the aisle which was not labeled.    m)  Beginning of the Plating Line, adjacent to the Emergency Shower:  There were 2 drums of Nitric Acid which were not labeled.

Issued

Nov 21, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200 (g)(8): The employer did not maintain in the workplace copies of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS=s) for each hazardous chemical and ensure that they were accessible to employees in their work areas.      a).  The employer did not have a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for the C.E. Bradley lacquer thinner which is used in operations at the company.       b).  The employer did not have an MSDS for the 325 Cleaner which is used on the Plating Line.