Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,189,214Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-16 Last loaded 2026-07-20

OSHA Inspection: PHOENIX BRONZE RESOURCES

Complaint inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of PHOENIX BRONZE RESOURCES in 100 STEEL STREET, ALIQUIPPA, PA 15001 (NAICS 331522). OSHA activity number 335306601.

Watch Phoenix Bronze Resources — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Phoenix Bronze Resources is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
100 STEEL STREET
City
ALIQUIPPA
State
PA
ZIP
15001
Mailing
100 STEEL STREET, ALIQUIPPA, PA 15001
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
331522
Employees
40
Ownership type
A

12 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.134 C01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $2800.00 · Current $1400.00 Reduced
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)  Facility:  On or about July 18, 2012, the employer did not establish and implement a written respirator protection program whenever respirators were required by the employer.  Employees designated as a molder and a painter are required to use respirators in the workplace.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $1400
  • — Z (S) $2800

1910.134 D01 I

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(i):     The employer did not select and provide an appropriate respirator based on the respiratory hazard(s) to which the worker is exposed:      a)  Mold Area:  On or about July 18, 2012, the employer did not select and provide an appropriate respirator based on the respiratory hazard to which the worker is exposed.  An employee designated as a molder was utillizing an organic vapor respirator rather than a particulate respirator when exposed to dust, fumes and mists.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.134 E01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1):     The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:        a)  Facility:  On or about July 18, 2012, the employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator in the workplace.   Employees designated as a molder and a painter are required to use respirators in the workplace.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.134 F02

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
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 (size, style, model or make) is used, and at least annually thereafter      a)  Facility:  On or about July 18, 2012, the employer did not ensure that employees using a tight-fitting respirator are fit tested prior to initial use of that respirator.  Employees designated as a molder and a painter are required to use a tight fitting respirator in the workplace.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.134 K

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.134(k):     The employer did not provided effective training to employees who are required to use respirators:      a)  Facility:  On or about July 18, 2012, the employer did not provide training to employees who are required to wear respiratosr in the workplace.   Employees designated as a molder and a painter are required to use respirators in the workplace.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.132 D02

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 8 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $2100.00 · Current $1050.00 Reduced
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 identified the workplace evaluated;  the person certiftying that the evaluation has been performed;  the date(s) of the hazard assessment;  and which identifies the document as a certification of hazard assessment:      a)  Facility:  On or about July 18, 2012, the employer did not perform a written certification that the required workplace personal protective equipment hazard assessment had been performed.  Employees utilize personal protective equipment including but not limited to safety glasses and aluminized suits.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $1050
  • — Z (S) $2100

1910.132 F01

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 8 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.132(f)(1):     The employer did not provide training to each employee who is required by this section to use PPE:    a)  Facility:  On or about July 18, 2012, the employer did not provide training to each employee who is required to use personal protective equipment.   Employees utilize personal protective equipment including but not limited to safety glasses and aluminized suits.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.1200 E01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 8 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $4000.00 · Current $2005.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1):     The employer did not develop, implement and maintain at the workplace, a written hazard communication program which at least describes how the criteria specified in paragraphs (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)  Facility:  On or about May 31, 2012, the employer did not develop, implement and maintain a written hazard communication program at the facility.  Employees work with hazardous materials including but not limited to copper, lead and various paints.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $2005
  • — Z (S) $4000

1910.1200 F05 I

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 8 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
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)  Mold Area:  On or about July 18, 2012, the employer did not label, tag or mark two sand hoppers in the Mold Area with the identity of the hazardous chemical.  The total capacity of the sand hoppers is approximately 3 tons.      b)  Chip & Chase Area:  On or about July 18, 2012, the employer did not label, tag or mark two ten ton sand holding silos with the identity of the hazardous chemical.  One silo contained new sand and the other silo contained reclaimed sand.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.1200 F05 II

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 8 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
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)  Mold Area:  On or about July 18, 2012, the employer did not label, tag or mark two sand hoppers in the Mold Area with the appropriate hazard warning.  The total capacity of the sand hoppers is approximately 3 tons.      b)  Chip & Chase Area:  On or about July 18, 2012, the employer did not label, tag or mark two ten ton sand holding silos with the appropriate hazard warning.  One silo contained new sand and the other silo contained reclaimed sand.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.1200 H01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 8 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1):     The employer did not provide employees with effective information and training on hazardous chemials in their work area at the time of their initial assignment, and whenever a new physical or health hazard the employees had not previously been trained about was introduced into their work area:      a)  Facility:  On or about July 18, 2012, the employer did not provide information and training to employees on the hazardous chemicals in their work areas.  Employees work with hazardous chemicals including but not limited to copper, lead and various paints.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.1025 L01 I

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.1025(l)(1)(i):     Each employer who has a workplace in which there is a potential exposure to airborne lead at any level did not inform employees of the content of Appendices A and B of this regulation:      a)  Facility:  On or about July 18, 2012, the employer did not inform employees of the content of Appendices A and B of the lead standard when employees were exposed to airborne levels of lead.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). The original IMIS detail view is available at OSHA's Establishment Search for activity number 335306601.