OSHA Inspection: ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING LABORATORIES, INC.

Issued

2013-01-24 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-20 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1200.00 · Current $600.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1430186022602310

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(a):     Protective equipment was not used when necessary whenever hazards capable of causing injury and impairment were encountered:    a) At the lab, on or about July 31, 2012 and at times prior to, protective clothing such as an impervious apron was not worn by employees who worked with corrosive liquids including by not limited to sulfuric acid, hydrochloric acid, nitric acid, and sodium hydroxide to prevent skin contact, resulting in a chemical hazard.

Issued

2013-01-24 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-20 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 143018602310

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1):     Protective eye and face equipment was not required where there was a reasonable probability of injury that could be prevented by such equipment:    a) In the wet chem lab, on or about July 31, 2012 and at times prior to, a faceshield and goggles were not worn by an employee who transferred concentrated acids, including but not limited to sulfuric acid, nitric acid and hydrochloric acid from containers up to four liters in size into smaller containers, resulting in a chemical hazard.

Issued

2013-01-24 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-20 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1600.00 · Current $800.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.138(a):     The employer did not select and require employees to use appropriate hand protection when employees hands were exposed to hazardous condition(s):    a) In the wet chem lab, on or about July 31, 2012 and at times prior to, the employer did not ensure that employees wore protective gloves while working with chemicals and water samples that potentially contained biological hazards, resulting in chemical and biological hazards.

Issued

2013-01-24 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-20 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1600.00 · Current $800.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.141(g)(2):     Employees were permitted to consume food or beverage in area(s) exposed to toxic materials:    a) In the wet chem lab, on or about July 31, 2012 and at times prior to, employees were allowed to eat and drink in the lab area where hazardous chemicals and wastewater samples were handled, resulting in chemical and biological hazards.

Issued

2013-01-24 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-20 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1600.00 · Current $800.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1430186022602310

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.151(c):     Where employees were exposed to injurious corrosive materials, suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body were not provided within the work area for immediate emergency use:    a) In the warehouse, on or about July 31, 2012 and at times prior to, a suitable eyewash was not provided for an employee who transferred small quantities of sulfuric, hydrochloric, and nitric acids into sample bottles, resulting in a chemical hazard.    b) In the wet chem lab, on or about July 31, 2012 and at times prior to, a suitable eyewash / safety shower was not provided for an employee who worked with various corrosive liquids, including but not limited to sulfuric acid, hydrochloric acid, nitric acid, and sodium hydroxide, resulting in a chemical hazard.

Issued

2013-01-24 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2800.00 · Current $1400.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1730

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1450(c):     The employer did not ensure that laboratory employees' exposures to OSHA regulated substances did not exceed the permissible exposure limits specified in 29 CFR Part 1910, Subpart Z:    a) In the semi-volatiles extraction lab, on or about August 1, 2012, an employee who was performing an extraction process was exposed to methylene chloride at an 8 hour Time-Weighted average of 49.36 parts per million, which is 1.974 times the OSHA permissible exposure limit of 25 ppm, resulting in a chemical hazard.  The exposure level is derived from a sample collected over a 398 minute sampling period; the calculations include a zero value for the 82 minutes not sampled.

Issued

2013-01-24 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 1730

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1450(i):     Where the use of respirators was necessary to maintain exposure below permissible exposure limits, the respirators were not selected and used in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.134:    a) In the semi-volatiles extraction lab, on or about August 1, 2012, respiratory protection was not provided for an employee performing an extraction process who was exposed to methylene chloride at an 8 hour Time-Weighted average of 49.36 parts per million, which is 1.974 times the OSHA permissible exposure limit of 25 ppm, resulting in a chemical hazard.  The exposure level is derived from a sample collected over a 398 minute sampling period; the calculations include a zero value for the 82 minutes not sampled.

Issued

2013-01-24 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2800.00 · Current $1400.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1730

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1450(d)(1):     The employer did not measure the laboratory employee's exposure to a substance regulated by a standard which required monitoring when there was reason to believe that exposure levels for that substance routinely exceeded the action level or in the absence of an action level, the permissible exposure limit:    a) In the semi-volatiles extraction lab, on or about August 1, 2012, the employer did not provide initial monitoring to determine the methylene chloride exposure level for an employee performing an extraction process who was exposed to methylene chloride at an 8 hour Time-Weighted average of 49.36 parts per million, which is 1.974 times the OSHA permissible exposure limit of 25 ppm, resulting in a chemical hazard.  The exposure level is derived from a sample collected over a 398 minute sampling period; the calculations include a zero value for the 82 minutes not sampled.

Issued

2013-01-24 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-20 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2000.00 · Current $1000.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1450(e)(1):     Where hazardous chemicals were used in the workplace, the employer did not develop and carry out the provisions of a written Chemical Hygiene Plan which was capable of protecting employees from health hazards associated with hazardous chemicals:    a) At the lab, on or about July 31, 2012 and at times prior to, the employer had not developed or implemented a written chemical hygiene plan for employees who worked with hazardous chemicals, including but not limited to methylene chloride, hexane, nitric acid, hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, sodium hydroxide, ammonia, hydrogen peroxide, potassium permanganate, phenol, and boric acid, resulting in a chemical hazard.

Issued

2013-01-24 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-20 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1450(f)(3)(i):     The employer did not inform laboratory employees were not informed of the contents of this standard and its appendices:    a) At the lab, on or about July 31, 2012 and at times prior to, the employer did not provide information about the contents of the standard 29 CFR 1910.1450 and its appendices for employees who worked with hazardous chemicals, including but not limited to methylene chloride, hexane, nitric acid, hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, sodium hydroxide, ammonia, hydrogen peroxide, potassium permanganate, phenol, and boric acid, resulting in a chemical hazard.