OSHA Inspection: ABSOLUTE ENVIRONMENTAL, INCORPORATED

Issued

Oct 7, 2013

Abate by

Feb 28, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1018(c): Employee(s) were exposed to inorganic arsenic at concentrations greater than ten micrograms per cubic meter of air, averaged over an 8-hour period: (Construction Reference: 1926.1118)    Location: Lovejoy Wharf, Boston MA:        Two employees who were performing abrasive blasting of painted concrete surfaces, were overexposed to the 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) concentration for inorganic arsenic:        Instance A) An Abrasive Blaster was exposed to inorganic arsenic in excess of the OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 10 micrograms per meter cubed (ug/m3).  This employee's 8-hr TWA exposure was 140 ug/m3, which is 14.0 times the OSHA PEL.         Instance B) A Floor Man was exposed to inorganic arsenic in excess of the OSHA PEL of 10 ug/m3.  This employee's 8-hr TWA exposure was 17 ug/m3 which is 1.7 times the OSHA PEL.

Issued

Oct 7, 2013

Abate by

Feb 28, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1018(g)(1)(i): The employer shall institute at the earliest possible time but not later than December 31, 1979, engineering and work practice controls to reduce exposures to or below the permissible exposure limit, except to the extent that the employer can establish that such controls are not feasible.    Location: Livejoy Wharf, Boston MA:        The employer did not provide adequate ventilation to reduce employee's exposure during abrasive blasting of a concrete surfaces.  Two employees were exposed to inorganic arsenic at 1.7 and 14 times in excess of the OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL).

Issued

Oct 7, 2013

Abate by

Feb 28, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1018(e)(2): Initial monitoring. Each employer who has a workplace or work operation covered by this standard shall monitor each such workplace and work operation to accurately determine the airborne concentration of inorganic arsenic to which employees may be exposed.        Location Lovejoy Wharf, Boston MA:                    The employer did not determine employee exposures to inorganic arsenic during blasting and related operations.

Issued

Oct 7, 2013

Abate by

Feb 28, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0260

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1018(g)(2)(ii):     The employee's written compliance program for inorganic arsenic did not include all the requirements of 29CFR 1910.101(g)(2)(ii)(A-G):    Location: LovejoyWharf, Boston, MA:    The employer's written compliance program to address and control emploee exposures to inorganic arsenic did not include all of the required written requirements of 1920.1018(g)(g)(ii)(A-G) for construction projects involving employee exposure to inorgani c arsenic.

Issued

Oct 7, 2013

Abate by

Feb 28, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1018(p)(1)(iii): Employers shall include inorganic arsenic in the hazard communication program established to comply with the HCS (� 1910.1200). Employers shall ensure that each employee has access to labels on containers of inorganic arsenic and to safety data sheets, and is trained in accordance with the requirements of HCS and paragraph (o) of this section.    Location: Lovejoy Wharf, Boston MA:        The employers written hazard communication program does not include training on the hazards of exposure to inorganic arsenic.

Issued

Oct 7, 2013

Abate by

Feb 28, 2014

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $3,675 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.51(f)(1): The employer did not provide adequate washing facilities for employees engaged in the application of paints, coatings, herbicides, or insecticides, or in other operations where contaminants may be harmful to the employees.  Such facilities were not in near proximity to the worksite and was not equipped as to enable employees to remove such substances:     Location: Lovejoy Wharf, Boston MA;         The handwash facility provided, a 5 gallon bucket of water, was not adequate for employees working with and exposed to lead and inorganic arsenic, in that the water was was not changed after each employee used it and the buckets were not maintained in a sanitary condition i.e. free from lead and inorganic arsenic contamination.

Issued

Oct 7, 2013

Abate by

Jan 13, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.51(f)(4)(i): Showers that are required by a particular standard were not provided in accordance with paragraphs (f)(4)(ii) through (v) of this section.   Location: Lovejoy Wharf, Boston MA:       Showers were not provided in accordance with the requirements of 1910.1018(m)(2), where employees are overexposed to inorganic arsenic and 1926.62(i)(3), where employees are overexposed to lead.

Issued

Oct 7, 2013

Abate by

Jan 13, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,625 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(e)(2)(ii):     The employer's written compliance program for lead did not include all the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.62(e)(2)(ii) (A)-(I):    Location: Lovejoy Wharf, Boston MA:    The employer's written compliance program for lead did not include the following:    (B) A description of the specific means that will be employed to achieve compliance and where engineering plans and studies used to determine methods selected for controlling exposure to lead;  (c) A report of the technology considered in meeting the PEL, and (I)(iv).  The written program must be revised and updated at lease annually to reglect the current status of the program.

Issued

Oct 7, 2013

Abate by

Jan 13, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(e)(3):     "Mechanical ventilation". When ventilation is used to control lead exposure, the employer shall evaluate the mechanical performance of the system in controlling exposure as necessary to maintain its effectiveness.    Location: Lovejoy Wharf, Boston, MA:    The employer did not evaluate the mechanical performance of the ventilation system to control employee exposure to below the PEL for lead.

Issued

Oct 7, 2013

Abate by

Jan 13, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $3,500

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(j)(1)(i): The employer did not make available initial medical surveillance, consisting of biological monitoring in the form of blood sampling and analysis for lead and zinc protoporphyrin levels, to employees occupationally exposed on any day to lead at or above the action level:   Location: Lovejoy Wharf, Boston MA:       An employee, working as a floor man, was exposed to lead at 1.89 times the OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 50 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) and had not received the required medical surveillance.

Issued

Oct 7, 2013

Abate by

Jan 13, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $2,100

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(i)(4)(ii): The employer did not ensure that lunchroom facilities or eating areas were as free as practicable from lead contamination:  Location:Lovejoy Wharf, Boston MA:      A table used by employees to eat lunch was contaminated with lead in excess of 200 ug/ft2.