OSHA Inspection: THE GENT MACHINE COMPANY

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Abate by

Jan 31, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $1,400 Reduced

Hazardous substances 8110

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(b)(1): When employees were subjected to sound exceeding those listed in Table G-16, feasible administrative or engineering controls were not utilized:     On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport Machines 27-29 in the west room was exposed to noise at an 8 hour time-weighted average of 92.96 dBA (equivalent dose of 150.9%) during the 469 minute sampling period.  Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 11 minutes not sampled.  This exposure exceeded the daily permissible exposure limit for an 8 hour time-weighted average of 90 dBA or equivalently, a dose of 100 percent.         Abatement Steps:         Effective hearing protection shall be provided and used by all exposed employees as an interim protection measure and when administrative or engineering controls fail to reduce sound levels within the levels of table G-16.  In addition, an effective hearing conservation program in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.95(c) thru (n) shall be maintained.  Abatement must be completed by___________.             Submit to the Area Director a written detailed plan of abatement outlining a schedule for the implementation of engineering and /or administrative measures to control employee exposure to noise as referenced in this citation.  This plan shall include at a minimum, target dates for the following actions which must be consistent with the dates required by this citation.                a)   Evaluation of engineering control options.   b)   Selection of optimum control method and completion of design.   c)   Procurement, installation and operation of selected control measures.       d)   Testing and acceptance or modifications/redesign of controls.                 All proposed control measures shall be evaluated for each particular use by a competent Industrial Hygienist or other technically qualified person.  Abatement must be completed by _______________.                 Abatement should have been completed by the implementation of feasible engineering and/or administrative controls upon verification of their effectiveness in achieving compliance.  Abatement must be completed by _________________________.

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 8111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(g)(1): The employer did not establish and maintain an audiometric testing program as provided by 29 CFR 1910.95(g) by making audiometric testing available to all employees whose exposures equaled or exceeded a dose of 50% over the extended work shift:     The following employees working in the Davenport rooms were not included in an audiometric testing program:     a.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machines 27-29 in the west room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 193.1% during the 585 minute sampling period.      b.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machines 24-26 in the west room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 157.5% during the 579 minute sampling period.      c.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machines 15-17 in the main room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 157.5% during the 560 minute sampling period.      d.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machines 4-7 in the main room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 136.4% during the 557 minute sampling period.      e.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machines 17-19 in the main room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 132.0% during the 578 minute sampling period.      f.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machine 19 in the main room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 135.4% during the 568 minute sampling period.      g.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machines 10-12 in the main room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 116.2% during the 547 minute sampling period.      h.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machines 20-13 in the main room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 94.3% during the 585 minute sampling period.

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 8111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(k)(1): The employer did not train each employee whose noise exposures equaled or exceeded a dose of 50% over the extended work shift, in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.95(k):   The following employees working in the Davenport rooms were not included in a hearing conservation training program:    a.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machines 27-29 in the west room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 193.1% during the 585 minute sampling period.     b.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machines 24-26 in the west room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 157.5% during the 579 minute sampling period.     c.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machines 15-17 in the main room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 157.5% during the 560 minute sampling period.     d.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machines 4-7 in the main room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 136.4% during the 557 minute sampling period.     e.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machines 17-19 in the main room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 132.0% during the 578 minute sampling period.     f.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machine 19 in the main room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 135.4% during the 568 minute sampling period.     g.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machines 10-12 in the main room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 116.2% during the 547 minute sampling period.     h.  On or about June 4, 2013, the employee operating Davenport machines 20-13 in the main room was exposed to noise above the Action Level of 50% dose at the 80 dBA threshold level time weighted over the extended work shift.  The level found was 94.3% during the 585 minute sampling period.

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Abate by

Dec 31, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,200 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(a): Protective equipment was not used when necessary whenever hazards capable of causing injury and impairment were encountered:    On or about June 13, 2013, the employer failed to provide and enforce the use of body protection, including but not limited to chemically resistant aprons or rubber aprons and forearm protection, for employees who dispense Formula 21200Tackle, which has a pH of 13.

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Abate by

Dec 31, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:       On or about June 13, 2013, the employer failed to have an eye wash station and shower where employees dispense Formula 21200Tackle, which has a pH of 13.

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Abate by

Dec 31, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.157(g)(2):  The educational program to familiarize employees with the general principles of fire extinguisher use and the hazards involved with incipient stage fire fighting was not provided to all employees upon initial employment, and at least annually thereafter:     As of May 14, 2013, portable fire extinguishers were available for employees to use, but initial and annual training were not provided.     Note the employer may exercise one of the following options:     1. Provide portable fire extinguishers as specified in 29 CFR 1910.157(c)(1), meet the distribution requirements per 29 CFR 1910.157(d) (75 to the nearest extinguisher for Class A fires and 50 to the nearest unit for Class B fires), and provide training and education for all employees in the use of such equipment and the hazards associated with incipient stage fire fighting as specified in 29 CFR 1910.157(g).  The other sections of 29 CFR also apply.     2. Provide extinguishers as specified in 29 CFR 1910.157(c)(1), designate certain employees to be the only employees authorized to use such equipment and require all other employees to immediately evacuate upon the sound of the fire alarm, establish this in writing in an emergency action plan as outlined in 29 CFR 1910.38(a) and train/educate designated employees per 1910.157(g).  Utilizing this option exempts the employer from distribution requirements of 29 CFR 1910.157(d).     3. Establish a written fire safety policy which requires the immediate and total evacuation of employees from the workplace upon the sounding of a fire alarm signal.  This policy shall include an emergency action plan and a fire prevention plan as specified in 29 CFR 1910.38(a) and 29 CFR 1910.39(a).  Utilizing this option exempts the employer from the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.157 to include the need for providing portable fire equipment unless a specific standard requires that a portable fire extinguisher be provided (such as those requirements in 29 CFR 1910.106/107 related to the use/storage of flammable/combustible liquids).  If extinguishers are provided, but not intended for employee use, 29 CFR 1910.157(e) and (f) are still applicable (inspection, maintenance, and testing of equipment).

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $1,400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.242(b): Compressed air used for cleaning purposes was not reduced to less than 30 p.s.i.:       On or about May 14, 2013, in Building 441, he employer failed to reduce compressed air pressure used for cleaning parts to less than 30 p.s.i.  The dead end pressure for one air gun was measured to be 100 p.s.i. and the other gun had a dead end pressure measured to be 55 p.s.i.  At least one employee was observed using compressed air to blow off their body/clothes.

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,200 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:     As of May 14, 2013, the employer failed to establish and implement a hazard communication program for employees who work with chemicals, including but not limited to, CNC machining fluids, 340 Solvent, propane, Formula 21200 Tackle floor cleaner, and trichloroethylene.

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:   As of May 14, 2013, the employer failed to label secondary containers with the identity of the hazardous chemicals therein, including but not limited to, 340 Solvent.

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:       As of May 14, 2013, the employer failed to label secondary containers with appropriate hazard warnings for the hazardous chemicals therein, including but not limited to, 340 Solvent

Issued

Oct 4, 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:   As of May 14, 2013, the employer failed to provide hazard communication program training for employees who work with chemicals, including but not limited to, CNC machining fluids, 340 Solvent, propane, Formula 21200 Tackle floor cleaner, and trichloroethylene.

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(8): The employer did not maintain copies of the required material safety data sheets for each hazardous chemical in the workplace:   As of May 14, 2013, the employer failed to maintain copies of material safety data sheets for employees who work with chemicals, including but not limited to, CNC machining fluids, 340 Solvent, propane, Formula 21200 Tackle floor cleaner, and trichloroethylene.

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2):   The employer did not verify, through a written certification, that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed:   On or about June 13, 2013, no written workplace hazard assessment had been completed by the employer for all of their operations.

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required respirator use:    As of May 14, 2013, the employer failed to establish a respiratory protection program for at least one employee who is required to wear a tight fitting half mask respirator with cartridges while performing work with trichloroethylene.

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:   As of May 14, 2013, the employer failed to perform a medical evaluation for at least one employee who is required to wear a tight fitting half mask respirator with cartridges while performing work with trichloroethylene.

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): Employee(s) using tight-fitting facepiece respirators were not fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator:   As of May 14, 2013, the employer failed to perform respirator fit testing for at least one employee who is required to wear a tight fitting half mask respirator with cartridges while performing work with trichloroethylene.

Issued

Oct 4, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(3): Training was not provided prior to requiring employees to use a respirator in the workplace:   As of May 14, 2013, the employer failed to provide respiratory protection program training for at least one employee who is required to wear a tight fitting half mask respirator with cartridges while performing work with trichloroethylene.