OSHA Inspection: SIRI MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC.

Issued

2013-02-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-04-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2200.00 · Current $1320.00 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:  Annealing Department: On or about January 10, 2013, employees working with XL-55, a corrosive cleaning chemical containing potassium hydroxide, were not provided with suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body.

Issued

2013-02-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-06-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2200.00 · Current $1320.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1001(j)(2)(i):  The building owner or facility owner did not determine the presence, location, and quantity of presumed asbestos-containing material (PACM) and/or other asbestos-containing material (ACM) at the work site:    Annealing Department: On or about January 10, 2013, the facility owner did not provide an asbestos survey that determined the location and quantity of all asbestos-containing material. An abandoned pipe, located in the annealing department is known to be asbestos-containing.

Issued

2013-02-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-04-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1001(j)(4)(i):  The employer did not affix warning labels or assure warning labels were affixed to all  raw materials, and/or mixtures, and/or scrap, and/or waste, and/or debris, and/or other products containing asbestos fibers, or to their containers:  Annealing Department: On or about January 10, 2013, an abandoned pipe that is known to contain asbestos did not have the required asbestos warning label.

Issued

2013-02-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-04-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2200.00 · Current $1320.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(l)(1): The employer did not ensure that all employees who were assigned to workplaces where there was exposure to chromium (VI) were provided with information and training as required by the Hazard Communication standard, 29 CFR 1910.1200:   On or about January 10, 2013,  employees exposed to chromium (VI) from butt-welding stainless steel  were not provided  chromium (VI) training.

Issued

2013-02-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-04-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(l)(2)(i)(A):  The employer did not provide appropriate information and training for all employees exposed to chromium (VI), in that employees could not demonstrate knowledge of the contents of the Chromium (VI) standard, 29 CFR 1910.1026:    On or about January 10, 2013,  employees exposed to hexavalent chromium from butt-welding stainless steel  could not demonstrate knowledge of hexavalent chromium  or the contents of the Chromium (VI) standard.

Issued

2013-02-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-06-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2200.00 · Current $1320.00 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:  Annealing Department: On or about January 10, 2013, the employer failed to develop and implement a hazard communication program. Employees worked with extremely corrosive chemicals such as XL-55, which contained potassium hydroxide.

Issued

2013-02-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-04-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(5)(i): The employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged or marked with the identity of the hazardous chemical(s) contained therein:  a.) Annealing Department - On or about January 10, 2013, wire bathing tanks, reported to contain XL-55, an industrial emulsifier containing potassium hydroxide were not labeled with their contents.  b.) Coating Department - On or about January 10, 2013, a coating tank, reported to contain Vicafil TS 640, a pre-coating chemical containing sodium tetraborate pentahydrate was not labeled with its contents.

Issued

2013-02-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-04-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(5)(ii): The employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged or marked with the appropriate hazard warnings:  a.) Annealing Department - On or about January 10, 2013, wire bathing tanks, reported to contain XL-55, an industrial emulsifier containing potassium hydroxide, were not labeled, tagged or marked with the required hazard warning.  b.) Coating Department - On or about January 10, 2013, a coating tank, reported to contain Vicafil TS 640, a pre-coating chemical containing sodium tetraborate pentahydrate was not labeled, tagged or marked with the required hazard warning.