OSHA Inspection: COASTAL PLATING COMPANY

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $7,000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.176(a):  Where mechanical handling equipment was used, sufficient safe clearances were not allowed:    In the cylinder shop, the area in front of the blasting cabinet was not marked so as to keep it clear of non-essential personnel while the blast cabinet was in use.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.23(a)(5): For every pit and/or trap door floor opening, while the cover was not in place, was not constantly attended by someone or was not protected on all exposing sides by removable standard railings:      In the cylinder shop, employees engaged in chromium electroplating and plating support activities were exposed to falls into an unguarded floor opening on the catwalk, over a reservoir of hazardous chemicals, such as, but not limited to, chromium plating solution.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,200 · Current $2,550 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:    In the cylinder shop and chrome shop, employees involved in chromium electroplating and plating support activities handle hazardous chemicals, such as, but not limited to, chromic acid flakes, chromium plating solution, caustic soda, and Anokleen.  The employer failed to enforce the use of personal protective equipment to prevent employees from receiving injuries to their skin and eyes.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1): The employer did not assess the workplace to determine if hazards are present, or are likely to be present, which necessitate the use of personal protective equipment (PPE):   In the cylinder shop and chrome shop, employees engaged in chromium electroplating and plating support activities were exposed to hazards, such as, but not limited to, chemical burns to skin, contact dermatitis.  The employer did not perform an assessment to determine the need for personal protective equipment (PPE), such as, but not limited to, impermeable gloves and protective clothing and footwear.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,200 · Current $2,550 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1): The employer did not 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:     In the chrome shop and cylinder shop, the employer did not provide adequate protection for employees involved in chromium electroplating and plating support activities, such as, but not limited to, handling corrosive chemicals; removing sludge from dip tanks; welding; grinding, honing, drilling, and dipping equipment, and were exposed to eye and face injuries.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,260 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(2)(ii): The employer did not implement those elements of a written program necessary to ensure that any employee using a respirator voluntarily was medically able to use that respirator, and that the respirator was cleaned, stored, and maintained so that its use does not present a health hazard to the user:     In the chrome shop, an employee engaged in chromium electroplating activities and plating support activities, such as, but not limited to, fabricating and repairing lead anodes, voluntarily wears a full-face and half-face negative-pressure, tight-fitting respirator and a medical evaluation was not provided.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(1): The employer did not provide respirator training that would ensure each employee could demonstrate knowledge of items in section (i)-(vii):   In the chrome shop, an employee engaged in chromium electroplating and support plating job tasks, such as, but not limited to, melting lead and fabricating and repairing lead anodes, voluntarily wear(s) a full-face and half-face, negative-pressure, tight-fitting respirators and was not provided training.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,200 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:    In the cylinder shop and chrome shop, employees handle hazardous chemicals without the benefit of a functional eyewash station and/or quick-drench shower station.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,260 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.179(j)(2)(iii): Monthly inspections of hooks, with signed reports, were not performed:         In the cylinder shop, the employer did not perform monthly inspections of hooks utilized on the overhead cranes which are used to hoist large industrial equipment, such as, but not limited to, crankshafts and cylinders, to and from prep areas, stripper tanks, and chrome plating tanks.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.179(j)(2)(iv): Monthly inspections of hoist chains, with a certification record which includes the date of inspection, the signature of the person who performed the inspection and an identifier of the chain which was inspected, were not performed:   In the cylinder shop, the employer did not perform inspections on the hoist chains for the overhead cranes used to lift large industrial equipment, such as, but not limited to, crankshafts and cylinders, to and from prep areas and dipping tanks.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,250 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.184(i)(9)(ii): Synthetic web sling(s) were not immediately removed from service for melted areas of any part of the sling surface:      In the cylinder shop, employees carrying out chromium plating activities used synthetic web slings that had melted sections throughout the length.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.184(i)(9)(iii):  Synthetic web slings were not immediately removed from service for snags, punctures, tears or cuts of any part of the sling surface:     In the cylinder shop, employees carrying out chromium plating activities used synthetic web slings which were snagged, torn, and/or cut.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,250 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(d)(2): An initial determination was not made to determine if any employee may be exposed to lead at or above the action level:     In the cylinder and chrome shop, employees involved in chromium electroplating and plating support activities were exposed to lead.  Monitoring was not conducted to ascertain lead exposure.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(h)(1): All surfaces were not maintained as free as practicable of accumulations of lead:   In the cylinder shop and the chrome shop, the employer did not clean the accumulation of lead residue and dust from where employees performed chromium electroplating and plating support activities.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(j)(2)(iv): Each employee whose blood lead level exceeded 40 micrograms per 100 grams of whole blood was not notified in writing within five working days after receipt of such results:   In the chrome shop, the employer had the employee(s) blood lead level taken, but did not notify the employee(s) of the blood lead level results within 5 working days.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(l)(2)(i): A copy of 29 CFR 1910.1025 and its appendices was not made readily available to all employees who had a potential exposure to airborne lead at any level:   In the chrome shop and cylinder shop, employees engaged in chromium electroplating and plating support activities were exposed to lead and a copy of the 1910.1025 standard was not made available to the exposed employees.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $7,000

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(c): Employees were exposed to an airborne concentration of chromium (VI) which exceeded 5 micrograms per cubic meter of air, as an 8-hour time-weighted average:    In the cylinder shop, an employee involved in electroplating activities was exposed to airborne levels of chromium (VI) at 13.11 micrograms per cubic meter (8-hour time-weighted average).  This level is 2.62 times the OSHA permissible exposure limit of 5 micrograms per cubic meter.  Sampling was performed on July 8, 2013 during a normal work shift for a period of 317 minutes.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unexampled period of 163 minutes.  The employer did not determine the level of employee exposure to chromium (VI).

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(d)(1): The employer with a workplace or work operation covered by this standard did not determine the 8-hour time-weighted average exposure for each employee exposed to chromium (VI):  In the cylinder shop and chrome shop, employees engaged in electroplating and plating support activities were exposed to airborne concentrations of chromium (VI).  Monitoring was not conducted to determine actual employee exposure levels.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(e)(1): The employer did not establish a regulated area wherever an employee's exposure to airborne concentrations of chromium (VI) was, or could reasonably be expected to be, in excess of the permissible exposure limit:  In the cylinder shop, an employee involved in electroplating activities was exposed to airborne levels of chromium (VI) 2.62 times the OSHA permissible exposure limit of 5 micrograms per cubic meter.  Wipe samples taken confirmed the presence of chromium (VI).

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 18, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(f)(1)(i): Where feasible engineering and work practice controls would not reduce employee exposures to chromium (VI) to or below the permissible exposure limit, the employer did not supplement these controls with respirators:  In the cylinder shop, an employee involved in electroplating activities was exposed to airborne levels of chromium (VI) at 2.62 times the OSHA permissible exposure limit of 5 micrograms per cubic meter.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(g)(1): Where respirator protection is required, the employer did not provide each employee an appropriate respirator that complies with the requirements of this paragraph. Respiratory protection is required during:  In the cylinder shop, an employee performing chromium electroplating activities was required to wear respiratory protection in the following instance:  An employee was exposed to airborne levels of chromium (VI) at 13.11 micrograms per cubic meter (8-hour time-weighted average).  This level is 2.62 times the OSHA permissible exposure limit of 5 micrograms per cubic meter.  Sampling was performed on July 8, 2013 during a normal work shift for a period of 317 minutes.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unexampled period of 163 minutes.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(h)(1): A hazard was present or was likely to be present from skin or eye contact with chromium (VI); however, the employer did not provide appropriate personal protective clothing and equipment at no cost to employees, and/or did not ensure that employees used such clothing and equipment:       In the cylinder shop and chrome shop, employees carrying out chromium plating and support plating work tasks were exposed to chromium (VI).  Wipe samples taken confirmed the presence of chromium (VI) in the work place.     In the cylinder shop and chrome shop, employees were exposed to skin contact with chromium (VI) while performing their work duties, such as, but not limited to, finishing cylinders, racking equipment, cleaning sludge from tanks, operating cranes, putting equipment in to and taking equipment out of tanks, and sweeping.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.141(e): Whenever employees were required by a particular standard to wear protective clothing because of the possibility of contamination with toxic materials, change rooms equipped with storage facilities for street clothes and separate storage facilities for the protective clothing was not provided:       In the cylinder shop and the chrome shop, employees engaged in chromium electroplating and support plating work tasks were exposed to chromium (VI).  Employees are not provided separate storage areas for street clothing and work uniforms.  Wipe samples confirmed the presence of chromium (VI) in the work place.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(i)(3)(i): Readily accessible washing facilities capable of removing chromium (VI) from the skin were not provided by the employer at a worksite with chromium (VI) exposures:     In the cylinder shop and chrome shop, employees carrying out chromium plating and support plating job duties were exposed to chromium (VI).  Employees do not wash chromium-contaminated areas of their bodies before leaving the work premises.  Wipe samples taken confirmed the presence of chromium (VI) in the work place.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.141(d)(3)(i): Whenever showers are required by a particular standard, the showers shall be provided in accordance with paragraphs (d)(3)(ii) through (v) of this section.      In the cylinder shop and chrome shop, employees engaged in chromium electroplating and support plating work activities were exposed to chromium (VI).  Wipe samples taken confirmed the presence of chromium (VI) in the work place.  Employees are not provided shower facilities to remove chromium (VI) contamination from their person.    The following must be provided for employee use:    a.  one shower per every 10 employees of each gender,     b.  body soap or other suitable cleansing agent,     c.  hot and cold water with a shared discharge line, and     d.  individual clean towels.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(j)(1)(i): The employer did not ensure that all surfaces were maintained as free as practicable of accumulations of chromium (VI):     In the cylinder shop and the chrome shop, employees involved in chromium electroplating and support plating job tasks were exposed to chromium (VI) dust and residue.  Wipe samples taken confirmed the presence of chromium (VI) in the work place.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,200 · Current $4,300

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(k)(1)(i)(A): The employer did not make medical surveillance available for all employees who were or could be occupationally exposed to chromium (VI) at or above the action level for 30 or more days a year:    In the cylinder shop, an employee carrying out chromium electroplating and support plating activities was exposed to airborne levels of chromium (VI) which exceeded the OSHA permissible exposure limit.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.124(h)(4): Employees working with chromic acid were not provided with periodic examinations of their exposed body parts, especially their nostrils:    In the cylinder shop and chrome shop, employees engaged in chromium electroplating activities and support plating job duties were exposed to chromic acid.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(j)(3)(i): The employer did not ensure that waste, scrap, debris, and any other materials contaminated with chromium (VI) and cosigned for disposal were collected and disposed of in sealed, impermeable bags or other closed, impermeable containers:      In the cylinder shop, employees were involved in chromium electroplating and support plating activities.  Chromium-containing waste , material, and debris were located in the following instances:     a.  seven full 100-pound chromic acid flake buckets and one partial 100-pound chromic acid flake bucket at the rear central area of the shop;     b.  four full 55-gallon barrels and one three-quarter full 100-pound chromic acid flake bucket in the southwest corner of the shop;     c.  four full 100-pound chromic acid flake buckets and one rectangular-shaped pan approximately eight feet long and four feet wide in the central area of the shop; and,     d.  one large disposal bag sitting inside a rectangular-shaped pan on the south central side of the shop.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(j)(3)(ii): The employer did not ensure that bags or containers of waste, scrap, debris, and any other materials contaminated with chromium (VI) and cosigned for disposal were labeled in accordance with the requirements of the Hazard Communication standard, 29 CFR 1910.1200:     In the cylinder shop, employees were involved in chromium electroplating and plating support activities.  The employer did not ensure the buckets, barrels, and bags containing chromium-contaminated materials were marked with information such as, but not limited to, pictures, symbols, and/or product information description, concerning the hazards in the following locations and instances:     a.  rear central area of the shop, seven full 100-pound chromic acid flake buckets and one partial 100-pound chromic acid flake bucket;     b.  southwest corner of the shop, four full 55-gallon barrels and one three-quarter full 100-pound chromic acid flake bucket;     c.  central area of the shop, four full 100-pound chromic acid flake buckets and one rectangular-shaped pan approximately eight feet long and four feet wide; and,     d.  south central side of the shop, one large disposal bag sitting inside a rectangular-shaped pan.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(l)(1)(i): The employer did not comply with all requirements of the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) (� 1910.1200) for chromium (VI):      In the chrome shop and cylinder shop, employees engaged in chromium plating and support plating activities were exposed to chromium (VI).  The employer did not implement the written hazard communication program, specifically the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f) and (h):    a.  labels and other forms of warning, and     b.  employee information and training.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

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:     In the cylinder shop and chrome shop, employees engaged in chromium plating and support plating job activities were exposed to chromium (VI) and were not provided with information and training on the Chromium (VI) standard.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(l)(2)(i)(B): 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 purpose and description of the requirements for a medical surveillance program as outlined by the Chromium (VI) standard, 29 CFR 1910.1026(k):     In the cylinder shop and chrome shop, employees involved in chromium electroplating and support plating activities were exposed to chromium (VI).  The employer did not ensure the employees were knowledgeable of the following chromium (VI) requirements:     a.  medical surveillance will be provided at no cost to the employee,     b.  the frequency with which the employer will provide medical surveillance to the employee,     c.  the details of the medical examination,     d.  information to be provided to the PLHCP, and    e.  providing the employee a copy of the PLHCP's written opinion within two week of the medical examination.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(l)(2)(ii): The employer did not make a copy of the Chromium (VI) standard, 29 CFR 1910.1026, readily available to all employees who were exposed to chromium (VI):     In the chrome shop and cylinder shop, employees involved in chromium electroplating and plating support activities were exposed to chromium (VI) and were not provided with a copy of the Chromium (VI) standard.

Issued

Nov 26, 2013

Abate by

Dec 26, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(iii): Employee training did not include the measures employees can take to protect themselves from chemical hazards, including specific procedures the employer had implemented to protect employees from exposure to hazardous chemicals, such as appropriate work practices, emergency procedures and personal protective equipment to be used:   In the cylinder shop and chrome shop, employees carrying out chromium electroplating and support plating activities handle and come into contact with hazardous and corrosive chemicals, such as, but not limited to, chromic acid flakes, sulfuric acid, caustic soda solution 50%, soda ash, Anokleen, and chromium plating solution.