OSHA Inspection: BROWNFIELD HEALTH CARE

Issued

2012-12-12 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-01-25 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1785.00 · Current $1428.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.36(g)(2):     An exit access was not at least 28 inches (71.1 cm) wide at all points. Where there is only one exit access leading to an exit or exit discharge, the width of the exit and exit discharge was not at least equal to the width of the exit access.    On or about August 22, 2012, employees were exposed to fire hazards in that the employer did not ensure that west door in the dietary area exit access was 28 inches in width.

Issued

2012-12-12 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-01-25 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1785.00 · Current $1428.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.37(b)(2):     Each exit was not clearly visible and marked by a sign reading "Exit."    On or about August 22, 2012, employees were exposed to fire hazards in that the employer did not ensure that an "EXIT" sign was posted on or above the door on the west wall in the dietary area.

Issued

2012-12-12 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-01-25 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1785.00 · Current $1428.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(a):     Application. Protective equipment, including personal protective equipment for eyes, face, head, and extremities, protective clothing, respiratory devices, and protective shields and barriers, was not provided, used, and maintained in a sanitary and reliable condition wherever it is necessary by reason of hazards of processes or environment, chemical hazards, radiological hazards, or mechanical irritants encountered in a manner capable of causing injury or impairment in the function of any part of the body through absorption, inhalation or physical contact.    On or about August 22, 2012, employees were exposed to chemical hazards in that the employer did not ensure that employees wore adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) such as gloves while applying degreaser to the stove.

Issued

2012-12-12 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-01-25 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1)(i):     Employer did not select, and have each affected employee use, the types of PPE that will protect the affected employee from the hazards identified in the hazard assessment:    On or about August 22, 2012, employees were exposed to chemical hazards in that the employer did not ensure that employees wore personal protective equipment (PPE) such as impervious gloves while cleaning the stove.

Issued

2012-12-12 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-25 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1785.00 · Current $1428.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.151(c):     Where the eyes or body of any person may be exposed to injurious corrosive materials, suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body was not provided within the work area for immediate emergency use.    On or about August 22, 2012, employees were exposed to chemical hazards in that the employer did not ensure that an eye wash station was in place to flush the eyes.

Issued

2012-12-12 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-01-25 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2380.00 · Current $1904.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1030(d)(2)(vii):     Contaminated needles and other contaminated sharps were bent, recapped, or removed except as noted in paragraphs (d)(2)(vii)(A) and (d)(2)(vii)(B) below. Shearing or breaking of contaminated needles is prohibited.    On or about August 22, 2012, employees were exposed to bloodborne pathogens hazards in that the employer did not ensure that employees did not recap sharps such as disposable razors.

Issued

2012-12-12 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-01-25 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2380.00 · Current $1904.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1030(d)(3)(iii):     Accessibility. The employer did not ensure that appropriate personal protective equipment in the appropriate sizes was readily accessible at the worksite or was issued to employees. Hypoallergenic gloves, glove liners, powderless gloves, or other similar alternatives was not readily accessible to those employees who were allergic to the gloves normally provided.    On or about August 22, 2012, employees were exposed to bloodborne pathogens in that that employer did not ensure that employees were provided appropriate sizes in personal protective equipment such as latex gloves.

Issued

2012-12-12 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-01-25 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1785.00 · Current $1428.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1):     Employer did not develop, implement, and maintain at each 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:    On or about August 22, 2012, employees were exposed to chemical hazards in that the employer had not established and implemented a written hazard communication program for employees who used a disinfectant to clean the showers.