OSHA Inspection: PRECISION PERFORMANCE

Issued

2013-11-04 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2100.00 · Current $1260.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(c)(1): The employer did not administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.9(c) through (o) whenever employee noise exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 decibels measured on the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent:  a. Bottom room - employees exposed to continuous noise levels up to 139.2% of the allowable 8 hour TWA (85 dBA) did not receive annual audiograms. The equivalent dBA level of this dose % is 92.38 dBA.  The sampling was performed for 431 minutes during one shift.  Violation was observed on or about 09/24/13.

Issued

2013-11-04 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-11-08 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2100.00 · Current $1260.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.138(a): The employer did not select and require employees to use appropriate hand protection when employees hands were exposed to hazardous conditions:  a. Bottom room - employees were exposed to defatting agents and dermatitis, in that, the use of chemical protective gloves was not enforced while working with chemicals such as, but not limited to, Solvent OMS 125, Raycut S Series 4244 lubricant, and Raycut C-20 lubricant. Violation observed on or about 09/19/13.

Issued

2013-11-04 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-11-08 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

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:  a. Bottom room - the employer did not have a written personal protective equipment certification. Violation observed on or about 09/19/13.

Issued

2013-11-04 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-11-08 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2100.00 · Current $1260.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(6): The employer did not certify that each operator has been trained and evaluated as required by this paragraph (l):  a. At the site - employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard, in that, employees operating a Toyota forklift model 8FGU25, serial number 37945 were not trained. Violation observed on or about 09/19/13.

Issued

2013-11-04 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-11-08 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2100.00 · Current $1260.00 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:  a. At the site - the employer did not develop a written hazard communication program for employees exposed to chemicals such as, but not limited to, Solvent OMS 125, Raycut S Series 4244 lubricant, and Raycut C-20 lubricant. Violation observed on or about 09/19/13.

Issued

2013-11-04 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-11-08 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

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:  a. At the site - the employer did not provide hazard communication training to employees exposed to chemicals such as, but not limited to, Solvent OMS 125, Raycut S Series 4244 lubricant, and Raycut C-20 lubricant. Violation observed on or about 09/19/13.