OSHA Inspection: BRITE SERVICES INC.

Issued

Mar 14, 2013

Abate by

Apr 30, 2013

Penalty

Initial $3,600 · Current $2,520 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(c)(1): The employer did not administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.9(c) through (o) whenever employee noise exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 decibels measured on the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent:    a)  421 East 16th Plant, Wash Area:  The employer did not administer an effective hearing conservation program for the employee whose exposure levels to noise exceeded the OSHA's Permissible Exposure Limit of 85 dBA Action Level, thus exposing employee to potential hearing loss, on or about 1/7/13. One employee, who was involved in handling detergents and operating industrial laundry dryers, was exposed to noise levels that was 89 dBA which was equivalent dose percentage of 92% of the allowable 8-hour Time-Weighted Average Action Level (85 dBA). The sampling time was 465 minutes. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.    b) 421 East 16th Plant, Drying Area:  The employer did not administer an effective hearing conservation program for the employee whose exposure levels to noise exceeded the OSHA's Permissible Exposure limit of 85 dBA Action Level, thus exposing employee to potential hearing loss, on or about 1/7/2013. One employee, who was involved in operating industrial laundry dryers, was exposed to noise levels that was 88 dBA which was equivalent dose of 87% of the allowable 8-hour Time-Weighted Average Action Level(85 dBA). The sampling time was 435 minutes. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.

Issued

Mar 14, 2013

Abate by

Apr 30, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,700 · Current $1,860 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1470

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1): The employer shall ensure that each affected employee uses 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.    a) 436 East 16th St. Plant, Wash Area: The employee, who transfers Hydrogen Peroxide by scooping it manually from a 20 gallon container and pouring it into washing machines, did not wear safety goggles, thus exposing the employee to 34 % hydrogen peroxide to the eyes, on or about 01/04/2013.

Issued

Mar 14, 2013

Penalty

Initial $3,600 · Current $2,520 Reduced

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) 421 East 16th St. Plant, Wash Area:  The eyewash, which was provided for employees' emergency use, was blocked by 2-55gallon drums, thus exposing employees to potentially prolonged chemical burns to the eyes, on or about 01/04/2013.

Issued

Mar 14, 2013

Abate by

Apr 30, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,700 · Current $1,860 Reduced

Hazardous substances 14702260

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): Employers shall 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:    a)  421 East 16th Plant, Wash Area:  The employer did not develop and implement a written hazard communication program, where employees handled and used hazardous chemicals such as, but not limited to, hydrogen peroxide, Starlite containing sodium hydroixde, and Tru Sour containing hexafluorosilisic acid, on or about 9/27/2012.

Issued

Mar 14, 2013

Abate by

Apr 30, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(1): The employer did not have a material safety data sheet for each hazardous chemical in use:    a) 421 16th St. Plant: The employer did not have material safety data sheets for the hazardous chemicals such as, but not limited to nitric acid, hydrogen peroxide, and dry cleaning solvent which contained hexane, on or about 01/04/2013.

Issued

Mar 14, 2013

Abate by

Apr 30, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1): Employees were not provided effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard that the employees had not been previously trained about was introduced into their work area:    a) 421 East 16th St. Plant, Wash Area:  The employer did not provide employees with training on the hazards associated with chemicals such as, but not limited to, 34% hydrogen peroxide solution, Starlite containing sodium hydroxide, and Tru Sour containing hexafluorsilisic acid, on or about 9/17/2012.