OSHA Inspection: MILWAUKEE FORGE, LLC

Issued

Oct 30, 2012

Abate by

Nov 30, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,208 · Current $2,525 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0260

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1018(e)(2):     Initial monitoring was not performed for each workplace, or work operation covered by 29 CFR 1910.1018 to accurately determine the airborne concentration of inorganic arsenic to which employees may be exposed: (Construction Reference: 1926.1118)    (a) Milwaukee Forge maintenance workers assisted Interstate Erecting iron workers in the demolition of two boilers located in the Old Boiler Room.  Demolition was performed by various means, including torch cutting.  These boilers had historically been coal-fired.  Torch cutting of coal-fired boilers at other workplaces, such as power plants, has been associated with arsenic exposure.  However, no initial air monitoring was performed at this worksite to evaluate the concentration of airborne arsenic to which workers performing such demolition work were exposed.

Issued

Oct 30, 2012

Abate by

Nov 30, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,525 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(1):     Each employer who had a workplace or operation covered by 29 CFR 1926.62 did not initially determine if any employee was exposed to lead at or above the action level of 30 micrograms per cubic meter of air (30ug/m3) calculated as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA):    (a) Maintenance workers from Milwaukee Forge assisted iron workers from Interstate Erecting in performing demolition of two boilers and associated structures in the Old Boiler Room .  This demolition work included torch cutting, and some of the torch cutting may have involved painted components.  For example, on or around August 15, 2012, maintenance worker(s) performed torch cutting of an air duct, which was partially coated with paint.  No initial monitoring was conducted to evaluate the lead exposure of worker(s) performing this task.

Issued

Oct 30, 2012

Abate by

Nov 30, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,525 · Current $1,767 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(v):     29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(v)(A): Prior to the performance of an employee exposure assessment as required by (d) of this section, the employer did not provide to employees performing the tasks described in paragraphs (d)(2)(i)-(iv) of this section interim protection, including appropriate respiratory protection in accordance with paragraph (f) of this section:    (a) The disposable dust mask provided to the worker(s) performing torch cutting of a partially painted exhaust duct in the Old Boiler Room on or around August 15, 2012, was not appropriate respiratory protection. According to paragraph (d)(2)(iv), torch cutting may result in lead exposures exceeding 50 times the Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL); appropriate respiratory protection for that anticipated exposure would be required unless actual air monitoring results indicated that lead exposure was less than 50 times the PEL.

Issued

Oct 30, 2012

Abate by

Dec 4, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(v)(E):     Until the employer performed an employee exposure assessment as required under 29 CFR 1926.62(d) and determined actual employee exposure, the employer did not provide to employees performing the tasks described in 29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(i), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(2)(iii), and (d)(2)(iv) with biological monitoring in accordance with 1926.62(j)(1)(i), to consist of blood sampling and analysis for lead and zinc protoporphyrin levels:    (a) No interim biological monitoring was provided to maintenance worker(s) performing torch cutting on the exhaust duct in the Old Boiler Room on or around August 15, 2012.  The exterior surface of the duct was partially painted.

Issued

Oct 30, 2012

Abate by

Nov 30, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(v)(F):     Until the employer performed an employee exposure assessment as required under 29 CFR 1926.62(d) and determined actual employee exposure, the employer did not provide to employees performing the tasks described in 29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(i), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(2)(iii), and (d)(2)(iv) with training as required under 29 CFR 1926.62(l)(1)(i) regarding 29 CFR 1926.59, Hazard Communication:    (a) Maintenance workers performing tasks associated with demolition of boilers in the Old Boiler Room were potentially exposed to airborne lead from torch cutting of painted structures.  For example, on or around August 15, 2012, torch cutting was done on a partially painted duct, exposing workers to fumes generated by this process.  No training was provided to these workers regarding potential health hazards of lead exposure.