OSHA Inspection: DAN HOSLER

Issued

Dec 18, 2013

Abate by

Feb 6, 2014

Penalty

Initial $400 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1903.19(c)(1): The employer did not certify to OSHA, within 10 calendar days after the abatement date, that the cited violation had been abated:    On September 18, 2013, Dan Hosler, dba Hosler Roofing, was issued citations and the employer did not verify, through written certification that each citation was abated.  Abatement certification was not received for the following violations:          a.      Citation 1 Item 1a - f,  b.      Citation 1 Item 2, and.   c.      Citation 3a - c

Issued

Dec 18, 2013

Abate by

Feb 6, 2014

Penalty

Initial $400 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1903.19(d)(1): The employer did not submit to the Agency documents demonstrating that abatement is complete for each willful or repeat violation and for any serious violation for which the Agency indicates in the citation that such abatement documentation is required.     On September 18, 2013, Dan Hosler, dba Hosler Roofing was issued citations and the employer did not verify, through documents that each citation was abated.  Abatement documentation was not received for the following violations:            a.      Citation 1 Item 1a - f,      b.      Citation 1 Item 2, and.       c.      Citation 3a - c

Issued

Sep 18, 2013

Abate by

Oct 15, 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:   An employee voluntarily wore a tight-fitting, half-face respirator when applying spray foam insulation containing isocyanates, on a commercial roof, and the employer had not provided a medical evaluation.

Issued

Sep 18, 2013

Abate by

Oct 15, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1): The employer did not ensure that employee(s) required to use a tight-fitting facepiece respirator passed the appropriate qualitative fit test (QLFT) or quantitative fit test (QNFT):    An employee voluntarily wore a tight-fitting, half-face respirator when applying spray foam insulation containing isocyanates, on a commercial roof, and the employer did not ensure that fit testing was performed prior to the use of the respirator.

Issued

Sep 18, 2013

Abate by

Oct 15, 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):  An employee voluntarily wore a tight-fitting, half-face respirator when applying spray foam insulation containing isocyanates, on a commercial roof, and the employer did not ensure that the employee was trained in the use and limitations of the respirator.

Issued

Sep 18, 2013

Abate by

Sep 30, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A): Respirators with tight-fitting facepieces were worn by employees who had facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face or that interfered with valve function:   An employee voluntarily wore a tight-fitting, half-face respirator when applying spray foam insulation containing isocyanates, on a commercial roof, and the employer did not ensure that the employee did not have facial hair that would interfere with the sealing of the respirator to the employee's face.

Issued

Sep 18, 2013

Abate by

Sep 30, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(h)(1): Respirators were not cleaned and disinfected using the procedures in Appendix B-2 of 29 CFR 1910.134 or equivalent procedures recommended by the respirator manufacturer:    An employee voluntarily wore a tight-fitting, half-face respirator when applying spray foam insulation containing isocyanates, on a commercial roof, and the employer did not ensure that the respirator was cleaned.

Issued

Sep 18, 2013

Abate by

Sep 30, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(h)(3)(i)(A): Respirators used in routine situations were not inspected before each use and during cleaning:   An employee voluntarily wore a tight-fitting, half-face respirator when applying spray foam insulation containing isocyanates, on a commercial roof, and the employer did not ensure that the respirator were inspected.

Issued

Sep 18, 2013

Abate by

Sep 30, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(h)(4): Respirators that failed an inspection or were otherwise found to be defective were not removed from service and discarded or repaired:    An employee was wearing a respirator with torn straps on the harness and the employer had not removed the respirator from service or repaired defective harness.

Issued

Sep 18, 2013

Abate by

Oct 15, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,000 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:     An employee was exposed to isocyanates while applying a Bayseal spray foam roofing system on a commercial roof and the employer had not developed and implemented a hazard communication program.

Issued

Sep 18, 2013

Abate by

Sep 30, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(ii): Employee training did not include the physical and health hazards of the chemicals in the work area:    Employees were exposed to isocyanates while applying a Bayseal spray foam roofing system on a commercial roof and the employer had not provided training on the physical and health hazards of the chemicals the employees were using.

Issued

Sep 18, 2013

Abate by

Sep 30, 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:    Employees were exposed to isocyanates while applying a Bayseal spray foam roofing system on a commercial roof and the employer had not provided training on the measures the employees needed to take to protect themselves from the physical and health hazards of the chemicals being utilized.

Issued

Sep 18, 2013

Abate by

Oct 15, 2013

Penalty

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

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:     An employee voluntarily wore a tight-fitting, half-face respirator when applying spray foam insulation containing isocyanates, on a commercial roof, and the employer had not developed and implemented a written respiratory protection program.

Issued

Sep 18, 2013

Abate by

Oct 15, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(iii): The employer did not identify and evaluate the respiratory hazard(s) in the workplace; including a reasonable estimate of employee exposures to respiratory hazards and identification of the contaminants chemical state and physical form:    An Employee voluntarily wore a tight-fitting, half-face respirator when applying spray foam insulation containing isocyanates, on a commercial roof.  The employer did not perform employee personal monitoring to determine the   employee exposure level to the isocyanates and if the respiratory protection was appropriate for the hazard.