OSHA Inspection: THERMALEX, INC.

Issued

Jan 17, 2014

Abate by

Jan 28, 2014

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $2,700 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(g)(6): At least annually after obtaining the baseline audiogram, the employer did not obtain a new audiogram for each employee exposed at or above an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels :  a)      Press 1 Operator:  On November 13, 2013 and at times prior; the employer exposed the employee to noise at levels of 76.8% (equivalent to an 8 hour time weighted average TWA of 88.0 dBA) which is 1.53 times the action level of 50 % (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85 dBA) while operating the press #1 of the facility.  Results were calculated for a 465 minutes sampling period with a zero concentration assumption for the remaining 15 minutes.  The employer failed to ensure employees with noise exposures over the action level were given an audiogram on an annual basis.    b)      Press 2 Operator:  On November 13, 2013 and at times prior; the employer exposed the employee to noise at levels of 135.4% (equivalent to an 8 hour time weighted average TWA of 92.2 dBA) which is 1.35 times the permissible exposure limit of 100 % (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 90 dBA) while operating the press #2 of the facility.  Results were calculated for a 458 minutes sampling period with a zero concentration assumption for the remaining 22 minutes.  The employer failed to ensure employees with noise exposures over the Permissible Exposure Limit were given an audiogram on an annual basis.   c)       Press 4 Operator:  On November 13, 2013 and at times prior; the employer exposed the employee to noise at levels of 122.0% (equivalent to an 8 hour time weighted average TWA of 91.4 dBA) which is 2.44 times the action level of 50 % (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85 dBA) while operating the press #4 of the facility.  Results were calculated for a 485 minutes sampling period with a zero concentration assumption for the 5 minutes over.  The employer failed to ensure employees with noise exposures over the action level were given an audiogram on an annual basis.   d)      Press 5 Operator:  On November 13, 2013 and at times prior; the employer exposed the employee to noise at levels of 203.3% (equivalent to an 8 hour time weighted average TWA of 95.1 dBA) which is 2.03 times the permissible exposure limit of 100 % (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 90 dBA) while operating the press #5 of the facility.  Results were calculated for a 496 minutes sampling period with a zero concentration assumption for the 16 minutes over.  The employer failed to ensure employees with noise exposures over the Permissible Exposure Limit were given an audiogram on an annual basis.

Issued

Jan 17, 2014

Abate by

Jan 28, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(k)(3): The employer did not ensure that each employee exposed  to noise at or above  an 8-hour time weighted average of 85 decibels was trained and informed of the information included in sections k(3)(i) through k(3)(iii).  a)      Press 1 Operator:  On November 13, 2013 and at times prior; the employer exposed the employee to noise at levels of 76.8% (equivalent to an 8 hour time weighted average TWA of 88.0 dBA) which is 1.53 times the action level of 50 % (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85 dBA) while operating the press #1 of the facility.  Results were calculated for a 465 minutes sampling period with a zero concentration assumption for the remaining 15 minutes.  Annual training on the effects of noise, purpose of hearing protection and audiometric testing was not provided to the employee.     b)      Press 2 Operator:  On November 13, 2013 and at times prior; the employer exposed the employee to noise at levels of 135.4% (equivalent to an 8 hour time weighted average TWA of 92.2 dBA) which is 1.35 times the permissible exposure limit of 100 % (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 90 dBA) while operating the press #2 of the facility.  Results were calculated for a 458 minutes sampling period with a zero concentration assumption for the remaining 22 minutes.  Annual training on the effects of noise, purpose of hearing protection and audiometric testing was not provided to the employee.     c)       Press 4 Operator:  On November 13, 2013 and at times prior; the employer exposed the employee to noise at levels of 122.0% (equivalent to an 8 hour time weighted average TWA of 91.4 dBA) which is 2.44 times the action level of 50 % (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85 dBA) while operating the press #4 of the facility.  Results were calculated for a 485 minutes sampling period with a zero concentration assumption for the 5 minutes over.  Annual training on the effects of noise, purpose of hearing protection and audiometric testing was not provided to the employee.     d)      Press 5 Operator:  On November 13, 2013 and at times prior; the employer exposed the employee to noise at levels of 203.3% (equivalent to an 8 hour time weighted average TWA of 95.1 dBA) which is 2.03 times the permissible exposure limit of 100 % (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 90 dBA) while operating the press #5 of the facility.  Results were calculated for a 496 minutes sampling period with a zero concentration assumption for the 16 minutes over.  Annual training on the effects of noise, purpose of hearing protection and audiometric testing was not provided to the employee.

Issued

Jan 17, 2014

Abate by

Mar 14, 2014

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 employees ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace.  a)  On or about November 13, 2013 the employer failed to provide a medical evaluation to determine the employees ability to use a respirator, exposing the employees to respiratory hazards

Issued

Jan 17, 2014

Abate by

Mar 14, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): Employee(s) using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator were not annually fit tested.  a)  On or about November 12, 2013 the employer failed to provide a fit test to determine the employees ability to use a respirator, exposing the employees to respiratory hazards.