OSHA Inspection: ADVANCED WELDING TECHNOLOGIES, INC

Issued

Jul 20, 2012

Abate by

Aug 19, 2012

Penalty

Initial $1,600 · Current $1,040 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:      a) Advanced Welding Technologies, Inc- On or about June 21, 2012, the following noise exposures were measured:    1. A laborer was exposed to a mixed noise level of 90.5 dBA or an equivalent dose of 106.7%, as an 8-hour TWA; and    2. A machinist was exposed to a mixed noise level of 88.6 dBA or an equivalent dose of 83.1%, as an 8-hour TWA.

Issued

Jul 20, 2012

Abate by

Aug 19, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 8111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(g)(1): The employer did not establish and maintain an audiometric testing program as provided by 29 CFR 1910.95(g) by making audiometric testing available to all employees whose exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels:    a) Advanced Welding Technologies, Inc- On or about June 21, 2012, the following noise exposures were measured:    1. A laborer was exposed to a mixed noise level of 90.5 dBA or an equivalent dose of 106.7%, as an 8-hour TWA.    The Company had not provided Audiometric testing for the affected employee.

Issued

Jul 20, 2012

Abate by

Jul 25, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 8111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(i)(3): Employees were not given the opportunity to select their hearing protectors from a variety of suitable hearing protectors provided by the employer:      a) Advanced Welding Technologies, Inc- On or about June 21, 2012, the following noise exposures were measured:    1. A laborer was exposed to a mixed noise level of 90.5 dBA or an equivalent dose of 106.7%, as an 8-hour TWA; and    2. A machinist was exposed to a mixed noise level of 88.6 dBA or an equivalent dose of 83.1%, as an 8-hour TWA.

Issued

Jul 20, 2012

Abate by

Aug 19, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 8111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(k)(1): The employer did not train each employee who is exposed to noise at or above an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.95(k):      a) Advanced Welding Technologies, Inc- On or about June 21, 2012, the following noise exposures were measured:    1. A laborer was exposed to a mixed noise level of 90.5 dBA or an equivalent dose of 106.7%, as an 8-hour TWA; and    2. A machinist was exposed to a mixed noise level of 88.6 dBA or an equivalent dose of 83.1%, as an 8-hour TWA.

Issued

Jul 20, 2012

Abate by

Oct 19, 2012

Penalty

Initial $1,200 · Current $780 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.107(b)(5)(i): The spraying operation was not so designed, installed and maintained that the average air velocity over the open face of the booth (or booth cross section during spraying operations) shall be not less than 100 linear feet per minute.     a) Spray finishing- Company employees periodically conducted spray finishing operations in the company's spray booth.  On or about, and dates prior to, June 21, 2012, the average air velocity over the open face of the booth was 25.5 linear feet per minute.

Issued

Jul 20, 2012

Abate by

Jul 25, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.107(g)(2): Scrapers, spuds, or other such tools used for cleaning purposes were not of nonsparking material:    a) Spray finishing- Company employees periodically conducted spray finishing operations in the company's spray booth.  On or about, and dates prior to, June 21, 2012, a steel scraper was used to remove overspray/excess spray finishing material from the walls of the spray booth.

Issued

Jul 20, 2012

Abate by

Aug 19, 2012

Penalty

Initial $1,200 · Current $780 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): Employee(s) using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator were not annually fit tested:      a.) Advanced Welding Technologies, LLC-  The employer had not ensured that employees required to utilize 3M brand tight-fitting air purifying respirators, during spray finishing operations, were fit-tested annually. Employees were last fit tested September, 2009.

Issued

Jul 20, 2012

Abate by

Aug 19, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(5): Respiratory protection retraining was not conducted annually:    a.) Advanced Welding Technologies, LLC-  The employer had not ensured that employees required to use 3M brand tight fitting air purifying respirators received respiratory protection training annually. Employees were last trained September, 2009.

Issued

Jul 20, 2012

Abate by

Jul 23, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A): Respirators with tight-fitting facepieces were worn by employees who had facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face:      a.) Advanced Welding Technologies, LLC- Employees were required to wear 3M brand half-face air-purifying respirators while conducting spray finishing operations in the spray booth. On or about 6/21/12, the seal between the tight-fitting respirator facepiece and an employee's face was compromised by facial hair.

Issued

Jul 20, 2012

Abate by

Jul 25, 2012

Penalty

Initial $1,200 · Current $780 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.) Storage Building- 55 gallon drums of Anti Rust 156 and Signal Cut 121B were not labeled with the identity of the hazardous chemical(s) contained therein. The labels were illegible due to oil saturation.

Issued

Jul 20, 2012

Abate by

Jul 25, 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:      a.) Storage Building- 55 gallon drums of Anti Rust 156 and Signal Cut 121B were not labeled with the hazards of the hazardous chemical(s) contained therein.  The labels were illegible due to oil saturation.    b.) Spray booth area- bottles of Anti Rust 156 were not labeled with the hazards of the hazardous chemical(s) contained therein.

Issued

Jul 20, 2012

Abate by

Jul 25, 2012

Penalty

Initial $1,000 · Current $650 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1904.29(b)(1): A log of all recordable work-related injuries and illness (OSHA Form 300 or equivalent) was not completed in the detail required by the regulation.    a.)Advanced Welding Technologies, Inc - The OSHA Form 300 for calendar year 2012 did not provide specific detail, about the object/substance that directly injured or made the employee ill, in Column F.

Issued

Jul 20, 2012

Abate by

Jul 30, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 8111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(l)(1): The employer did not make available to affected employees or their representatives copies of 29 CFR 1910.95 and did not post a copy in the workplace:    a) Advanced Welding Technologies, Inc- On or about June 21, 2012, the following noise exposures were measured:    1. A laborer was exposed to a mixed noise level of 90.5 dBA or an equivalent dose of 106.7%, as an 8-hour TWA; and    2. A machinist was exposed to a mixed noise level of 88.6 dBA or an equivalent dose of 83.1%, as an 8-hour TWA.

Issued

Jul 20, 2012

Abate by

Aug 19, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2): The employer did not verify, through a written certification, the identity of the workplace evaluated, the person certifying that the evaluation had been performed, and the date the hazard assessment was done:        a) Advanced Welding Technologies, Inc- Company employees were exposed to hazards including, but not limited to,   welding flash, welding fumes, foot injuries (while handling heavy parts).  A personal protective equipment hazard assessment had not been completed.