OSHA Inspection: TRUCK TOYS OF TEXAS

Issued

Oct 10, 2012

Abate by

Oct 17, 2012

Penalty

Initial $1,600 · Current $640 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1): The employer did not ensure that each affected employee used 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:    This violation occurred on August 3, 2012, near the spray booth, where the employer did not ensure that an employee using a polisher/sander to prepare trucks for bed lining wore appropriate eye protection.

Issued

Oct 10, 2012

Abate by

Oct 31, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $800 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required respirator use:    This violation occurred on August 3, 2012, when the employer had not established and implemented a written respiratory protection program for at least one employee who was required to wear a full facepiece supplied-air respirator during truck bed lining operations.

Issued

Oct 10, 2012

Abate by

Oct 17, 2012

Penalty

Initial $1,600 · Current $640 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(g)(2)(i): Except as elsewhere required or permitted by Subpart S of Part 1910, live parts of electric equipment operating  at 50 volts or more were not guarded against accidental contact by use of approved cabinets or other forms of approved enclosures or by any of the means identified in paragraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D) of 29 CFR 1910.303(g)(2)(i):    This violation occurred on August 3, 2012, in the room behind the spray booth, where electrical circuits to an air compressor were not guarded against accidental contact.

Issued

Oct 10, 2012

Abate by

Oct 31, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $800 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(1): Employee(s) were exposed to an airborne concentration of methylene bisphenyl isocyanate (MDI) listed in Table Z-1 in excess of the ceiling concentration of 0.2 milligrams per cubic meter:    This violation occurred on August 3, 2012, in the spray booth, where a sprayer was exposed to methylene bisphenyl isocyanate (MDI) at an airborne concentration of 0.3 milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m3) of air, approximately 1.5 times the ceiling limit of 0.2 mg/m3.  Sampling was performed for 15 minutes and the ceiling was assessed as a 15-minute time weighted average exposure.

Issued

Oct 10, 2012

Abate by

Oct 31, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(e): Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not determined and implemented to achieve compliance with the limits prescribed in 29 CFR 1910.1000(a) through (d):    This violation occurred on August 3, 2012, in the spray booth, where the employer did not determine and implement feasible administrative or engineering controls to achieve compliance with the ceiling limit for methylene bisphenyl isocyanate.

Issued

Oct 10, 2012

Abate by

Oct 31, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $800 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:    This violation occurred on August 3, 2012, when the employer had not developed, implemented, and maintained a written hazard communication program for an employee performing truck bed lining operations who was exposed to hazardous chemicals including, but not limited to, parts cleaner and two-part polyurethane coating containing methylene bisphenyl isocyanate.