OSHA Inspection: THE FRIENDLY HOME

Issued

Dec 18, 2013

Abate by

Jan 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,000 · Current $1,800 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1)(i): The employer did not select and have each affected employee use, the types of personal protective equipment that would protect the affected employee(s) from the hazards identified in the hazard assessment:    a.) Facility - On or about 7/19/13, the facility has a variety of operations for which personal protective equipment (PPE) has been identified and provided for employees, such as but not limited to, safety glasses, gloves, gowns, etc.  Employees have sustained rashes from contact with floor stripper (caustic) and bodily fluids (non-BBP) splashed/sprayed in eyes from catheterization procedures.  The employer does not have each affected employee use the types of personal protective equipment that would protect the affected employees from the hazard identified in the hazard assessment.    ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 18, 2013

Abate by

Jan 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(f)(3): When the employer had reason to believe that an affected employee who had already been trained did not have the understanding and skill required by paragraph (f)(2) of this section, the employer did not retrain that employee:  a.) Facility - On or about 7/17/13, employees had sustained splashes to eyes from chemcials and bodily fluids (non-BBP).  The employer did not ensure, that when it was believed that affected employees did not have an understanding of how and when to use personal protective equipment properly, that the employees are retrained on the use and the requirement for personal protective equipment.  ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 18, 2013

Abate by

Jan 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1): Protective eye equipment was not required where there was a reasonable probability of injury that could be prevented by such equipment:  (a) Facility - On or about 7/17/13, employees exposed to eye hazards were not required to wear protective eye equipment that could prevent an injury to the eyes.  While performing work tasks with eye hazards, employees sustained splashes of chemicals and bodily fluids (non-BBP) to the eyes.  The employer did not require that employees wear safety glasses or goggles when working in situations in which splashes to the eyes can occur.  ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 18, 2013

Abate by

Jan 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $5,000 · Current $3,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1001(j)(3)(i): The building owner, facility owner, or employer did not determine the presence, location, and quantity of ACM or PACM at the worksite and did not exercise due diligence in complying with these requirements to inform employers and employees about the presence and location of asbestos-containing material (ACM) and presumed asbestos containing material (PACM):    a) On or about 7/17/13, the facility (buildings dating from 1916 and 1960) has thermal system insulation surrounding pipes and 9 x 9 tiles (presumed vinyl asbestos flooring) in areas such as but not necessarily limited to the basement of the facility.  The employer has not determined the presence, location and quantity of ACM or PACM at the worksite and did not exercise due diligence in compying with these requirements to inform employees about the presence and location of asbestos-contining materilas (ACM) and presumed asbestos containing materials (PACM).    ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 18, 2013

Abate by

Jan 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9020

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1001(j)(5)(i): The employer did not affix signs or labels to materials that were previously identified to be ACM and/or PACM, so that employees would be notified of what materials contain ACM and/or PACM :  a.) Facility - On or about July 17, 2013, the buildings (circa 1916 and 1960) have asbestos-containing materials (ACM), including overhead pipes insulated with thermal system insulation (TSI).  The facility has not affixed signs or labels to materials that were previously identified to be ACM and/or PACM, so that employees would be notified of what materials contain ACM and/or PACM.  ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 18, 2013

Abate by

Jan 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9020

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1001(j)(7)(iv): The employer did not provide, at no cost to employees who perform housekeeping operations in an area which contains presumed asbestos-containing material (PACM) and/or other asbestos-containing material (ACM), an asbestos awareness training course:  (a) Facility areas, such as but not limited to laundry, housekeeping/porters and maintenance - On or about 8/15/13, employees work in areas that contain overhead asbestos-containing pipes and vinyl asbestos floor tiles.  Employees working in these areas performing housekeeping acitivities, such as but not limited to, floors sweeping and cleaning, have not been provided the required asbestos awareness training.  ABATEMENT CERTIFIATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 18, 2013

Abate by

Dec 30, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1904.8(a):  Work-related needlestick injuries or cuts from sharp objects contaminated with another person's blood or potentially infectious material(OPIM) were not entered on the OSHA 300 Log as a privacy case.  a.) Facility - On or about July 17, 2013, it was noted that two (2) sharps-related incidents recorded on the 2011 OSHA 300 log were not entered as privacy cases.  The employer did not record needlestick injuries contminated with another person's blood or OPIM as privacy cases.  ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 18, 2013

Abate by

Dec 30, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1030(h)(5)(i): The employer did not establish and maintain a sharps injury log for the recording of percutaneous injuries from contaminated sharps:  a.) Facility - As of July 17, 2013, it was determined that the employer had not maintained a Sharps Injury log for two (2) incidents that took place in 2011.  The employer had not established and maintained a sharps injury log for the recording of percutaneous injuries from contaminated sharps.