OSHA Inspection: TITAN INDUSTRIAL SERVICES INC.

Issued

Dec 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,380 · Current $2,380

Hazardous substances 0560

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(i)(7): Oil lubricated compressor(s) used to supply breathing air did not have a high-temperature or carbon monoxide alarm(s) or both:  (a) PADOT Project PA5544 T468 Catawissa Creek; A Doosan HP1600 air compressor which used petroleum lubrication supplied breathing air and was not equipped with a continuous carbon monoxide monitor/alarm or tested at sufficient intervals to ensure carbon monoxide did not exceed 10 ppm in the breathing air stream, July 18, 2013.    ABATEMENT OBSERVED DURING INSPECTION - NO CERTIFICATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,975 · Current $2,975

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(i)(2)(i): The employer did not provide clean change areas for employees whose airborne exposure to lead was above the permissible exposure limit, without regard to the use of respirators:    (a) PADOT Project PA5544 T468 Catawissa Creek; employees who performed blasting and interior containment vacuuming were exposed to airborne lead levels above the Permissible Exposure Limit and did not have a readily available change area that provided a clean area in which to dress into street clothes at the end of the work shift, July 18, 2013      ABATEMENT OBSERVED DURING INSPECTION - NO CERTIFICATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(i)(3)(i): The employer did not provide shower facilities, where feasible, for use by employees whose airborne exposure to lead was above the permissible exposure limit:    (a) PADOT Project PA5544 T468 Catawissa Creek; employees who performed blasting and interior containment vacuuming were exposed to airborne lead levels above the Permissible Exposure Limit and did not have a readily available shower facility, July 18, 2013      ABATEMENT OBSERVED DURING INSPECTION - NO CERTIFICATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1126(h)(1): The employer did not provide washing facilities, in conformance with the Sanitation standard, 29 CFR 1926.51, for employees whose skin were in contact with chromium (VI):   (a) PADOT Project PA5544 Bridge T468 Catawissa Creek; employees who performed blasting and interior containment vacuuming were exposed to airborne hexavalent chromium levels above the Permissible Exposure Limit and did not have a readily available shower and sink facility, July 18, 2013  ABATEMENT OBSERVED DURING INSPECTION - NO CERTIFICATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1126(h)(2): The employer did not ensure that a change room at a worksite with chromium (VI) exposures was equipped with separate storage facilities for protective clothing and equipment and for street clothing and that the facilities prevent cross-contamination:   (a) PADOT Project PA5544 Bridge T468 Catawissa Creek; employees who performed blasting and interior containment vacuuming were exposed to airborne hexavalent chromium levels above the Permissible Exposure Limit and did not have a readily available change area that provided a clean area in which to dress into street clothes at the end of the work shift, July 18, 2013    ABATEMENT OBSERVED DURING INSPECTION - NO CERTIFICATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 9, 2013

Abate by

Mar 12, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,975 · Current $1,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(c)(1): The employer did not ensure that no employees were exposed to lead at concentrations greater than fifty micrograms per cubic meter of air (50 ug/m3) averaged over an 8-hour period:    (a) An employee, blaster, was exposed to lead at an 8 hour time weighted average of 3797 micrograms per cubic meter of air (ug/M3) while removing coatings.  The exposure was 75.9 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 50 ug/M3. The PEL was established to prevent damage to the blood-forming, nervous, urinary, and reproductive systems. The exposure was established over 225 minutes of personal sampling conducted on July 18, 2013.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.      (b) An employee, vacuum operator, was exposed to lead at an 8 hour time weighted average of 1266 micrograms per cubic meter of air (ug/M3) while removing coatings.  The exposure was 25.3 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 50 ug/M3. The PEL was established to prevent damage to the blood-forming, nervous, urinary, and reproductive systems. The exposure was established over 225 minutes of personal sampling conducted on July 18, 2013.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.      ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 9, 2013

Abate by

Mar 12, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(e)(1): The employer did not implement all feasible engineering and work practice controls, including administrative controls, to reduce and maintain employee exposure to lead to or below the permissible exposure limit:    (a) An employee, blaster, was exposed to lead at an 8 hour time weighted average of 3797 micrograms per cubic meter of air (ug/M3) while removing coatings. Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not implemented to reduce the employee's exposure, July 18, 2013.      (b) An employee, vacuum operator, was exposed to lead at an 8 hour time weighted average of 1266 micrograms per cubic meter of air (ug/M3) while removing coatings.  Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not implemented to reduce the employee's exposure, July 18, 2013.      ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED      General methods of control would include, but are not limited to the following:      1.      Use mechanical dilution ventilation within the containment area.      2.      Erect smaller compartmentalized containment areas such that the existing exhaust system is more effective      3.      Erect smaller compartmentalized containment areas such that the vacuum operator is separated from the blaster operations.      4.      In a single compartment containment area stagger the times in which vacuum operations are conducted so that they are not done concurrently with blasting inside the same containment area.      5.      Use blast nozzles with integral vacuum shroud collection systems on those portions of the removal where supported by site conditions.      6.      Use vacuum wands to collect spent grit and debris instead of sweeping the deck with brooms towards the central collection intakes          Abatement Schedule      Step 1 A written detailed plan of abatement shall be submitted to the Area Director outlining a schedule for the implementation of engineering and/or administrative measures to control employee exposures to hazardous substances as referenced in this citation. This plan shall include, at a minimum, target dates for the following actions, which must be consistent with the abatement dates required by this citation:       (1)    Evaluation of engineering/administrative control options;  (2)    Selection of optimum control methods and completion of design;  (3)    Procurement, installation and operation of selected control measures;  (4)    Testing and acceptance or modification/redesign of controls.      All proposed control measures shall be approved for each particular use by a competent industrial hygienist or other technically qualified person.       Step 2 Abatement shall have been completed by the implementation of feasible engineering and /or administrative controls upon verification of their effectiveness in achieving compliance.

Issued

Dec 9, 2013

Abate by

Mar 12, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,975 · Current $2,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1126(c): The employer did not ensure that no employee was exposed to an airborne concentration of chromium (VI) in excess of 5 micrograms per cubic meter of air calculated as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA):    (a) An employee, blaster, was exposed to hexavalent chromium at an 8 hour time weighted average of 171 micrograms per cubic meter of air (ug/M3) while removing coatings.  The exposure was 34 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 5 ug/M3. The PEL was established to prevent lung cancer and damage to the eyes and skin. The exposure was established over 238 minutes of personal sampling conducted on July 29, 2013.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.      (b) An employee, vacuum operator, was exposed to hexavalent chromium at an 8 hour time weighted average of 26.6 micrograms per cubic meter of air (mg/M3) while removing coatings.  The exposure was 5.3 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 5 ug/M3. The PEL was established to prevent lung cancer and damage to the eyes and skin. The exposure was established over 255 minutes of personal sampling conducted on July 29, 2013.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.      ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 9, 2013

Abate by

Mar 12, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

(a) An employee, blaster, was exposed to hexavalent chromium at an 8 hour time weighted average of 171 micrograms per cubic meter of air (ug/M3) while removing coatings.  Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not implemented to reduce the employee's exposure, July 29, 2013.      (b) An employee, vacuum operator, was exposed to hexavalent chromium at an 8 hour time weighted average of 26.6 milligrams per cubic meter of air (ug/M3) while removing coatings.  Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not implemented to reduce the employee's exposure, July 29, 2013.      ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED      General methods of control would include, but are not limited to the following:      1.      Use mechanical dilution ventilation within the containment area.      2.      Erect smaller compartmentalized containment areas such that the existing exhaust system is more effective      3.      Erect smaller compartmentalized containment areas such that the vacuum operator is separated from the blaster operations.      4.      In a single compartment containment area stagger the times in which vacuum operations are conducted so that they are not done concurrently with blasting inside the same containment area.      5.      Use blast nozzles with integral vacuum shroud collection systems on those portions of the removal where supported by site conditions.      6.      Use vacuum wands to collect spent grit and debris instead of sweeping the deck with brooms towards the central collection intakes              Abatement Schedule      Step 1 A written detailed plan of abatement shall be submitted to the Area Director outlining a schedule for the implementation of engineering and/or administrative measures to control employee exposures to hazardous substances as referenced in this citation. This plan shall include, at a minimum, target dates for the following actions, which must be consistent with the abatement dates required by this citation:       (1)   Evaluation of engineering/administrative control options;  (2)   Selection of optimum control methods and completion of design;  (3)   Procurement, installation and operation of selected control measures;   (4)   Testing and acceptance or modification/redesign of controls.      All proposed control measures shall be approved for each particular use by a competent industrial hygienist or other technically qualified person.       Step 2 Abatement shall have been completed by the implementation of feasible engineering and /or administrative controls upon verification of their effectiveness in achieving compliance.

Issued

Dec 9, 2013

Abate by

Mar 12, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,380 · Current $2,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances 06869135F104Z102

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.55(a): Employee(s) were exposed to material(s) at concentrations above those specified in the Threshold Limit Values of Airborne Contaminants for 1970 of the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists:    (a) An employee, blaster, was exposed to iron oxide at an 8 hour time weighted average of 25.90 milligrams per cubic meter of air (mg/M3) while removing coatings.  The exposure was 2.69 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 10 mg/M3. The PEL was established to prevent pulmonary siderosis. The exposure was established over 225 minutes of personal sampling conducted on July 18, 2013.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.      (b) An employee, blaster, was exposed to zinc oxide at an 8 hour time weighted average of 7.35 milligrams per cubic meter of air (mg/M3) while removing coatings.  The exposure was 1.5 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 15 mg/M3. The PEL was established to prevent acute systemic toxicity. The exposure was established over 225 minutes of personal sampling conducted on July 18, 2013.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.       (c) An employee, blaster, was exposed to particulates not elsewise regulated at an 8 hour time weighted average of 54.13 milligrams per cubic meter of air (mg/M3) while removing coatings.  The exposure was 3.6 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 15 mg/M3. The PEL was established to prevent lung damage. The exposure was established over 225 minutes of personal sampling conducted on July 18, 2013.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.      (d) An employee, blaster, was exposed to chromic acid and chromates (as CrO3) at an 8 hour time weighted average of 0.0163 milligrams per cubic meter of air (mg/M3) while removing coatings.  The exposure was 1.6 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 0.1 mg/M3. The PEL was established to prevent lung cancer and chronic asthmatic bronchitis. The exposure was established over 238 minutes of personal sampling conducted on July 29, 2013.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.      (e) An employee, vacuum operator, was exposed to chromic acid and chromates (as CrO3) at an 8 hour time weighted average of 0.0138 milligrams per cubic meter of air (mg/M3) while removing coatings.  The exposure was 1.4 times the Permissible Exposure Limit of 0.1 mg/M3. The PEL was established to prevent lung cancer and chronic asthmatic bronchitis. The exposure was established over 255 minutes of personal sampling conducted on July 29, 2013.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.      ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED

Issued

Dec 9, 2013

Abate by

Mar 12, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 06869135F104Z102

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.55(b): Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not implemented to reduce employee exposure(s):    (a) An employee, blaster, was exposed to iron oxide at an 8 hour time weighted average of 25.90 milligrams per cubic meter of air (mg/M3) while removing coatings.  Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not implemented to reduce the employee's exposure, July 18, 2013.      (b) An employee, blaster, was exposed to zinc oxide at an 8 hour time weighted average of 7.35 milligrams per cubic meter of air (mg/M3) while removing coatings.  Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not implemented to reduce the employee's exposure, July 18, 2013.      (c) An employee, blaster, was exposed to particulates not elsewise regulated at an 8 hour time weighted average of 54.13 milligrams per cubic meter of air (mg/M3) while removing coatings.  Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not implemented to reduce the employee's  exposure, July 18, 2013.      (d) An employee, blaster, was exposed to chromic acid and chromates (as CrO3) at an 8 hour time weighted average of 0.0163 milligrams per cubic meter of air (mg/M3) while removing coatings.  Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not implemented to reduce the employee's exposure, July 29, 2013.      (e) An employee, vacuum operator, was exposed to chromic acid and chromates (as CrO3) at an 8 hour time weighted average of 0.0138 milligrams per cubic meter of air (mg/M3) while removing coatings.  Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not implemented to reduce the employee's exposure, July 29, 2013.      ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED      General methods of control would include, but are not limited to the following:      1.      Use mechanical dilution ventilation within the containment area.      2.      Erect smaller compartmentalized containment areas such that the existing exhaust system is more effective      3.      Erect smaller compartmentalized containment areas such that the vacuum operator is separated from the blaster operations.      4.      In a single compartment containment area stagger the times in which vacuum operations are conducted so that they are not done concurrently with blasting inside the same containment area.      5.      Use blast nozzles with integral vacuum shroud collection systems on those portions of the removal where supported by site conditions.      6.      Use vacuum wands to collect spent grit and debris instead of sweeping the deck with brooms towards the central collection intakes      Abatement Schedule      Step 1 A written detailed plan of abatement shall be submitted to the Area Director outlining a schedule for the implementation of engineering and/or administrative measures to control employee exposures to hazardous substances as referenced in this citation. This plan shall include, at a minimum, target dates for the following actions, which must be consistent with the abatement dates required by this citation:       (1)   Evaluation of engineering/administrative control options;  (2)   Selection of optimum control methods and completion of design;  (3)   Procurement, installation and operation of selected control measures;   (4)   Testing and acceptance or modification/redesign of controls.      All proposed control measures shall be approved for each particular use by a competent industrial hygienist or other technically qualified person.       Step 2 Abatement shall have been completed by the implementation of feasible engineering and /or administrative controls upon verification of their effectiveness in achieving compliance.