OSHA Inspection: REPROLON

Issued

Jun 9, 2014

Abate by

Jun 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,200 Reduced

Hazardous substances 81108111

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:   On or about December 13, 2013, the employer did not institute an effective hearing conservation program for employees exposed to noise levels in excess of the allowable 8-hour Time Weighted Average (TWA) sound level of 85 dBA.      Noise sampling performed on an employee engaged in Teflon chopping for 484 minutes indicated that the employee was exposed to a 220.1% dose of the action level requiring a hearing conservation program and a 201.3% dose of the permissible exposure limit.

Issued

Jun 9, 2014

Abate by

Jun 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $1,200 · Current $720 Reduced

Hazardous substances 91309135

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:   On or about December 13, 2013, the employer required the use of tight fitting respirators for employees blending Teflon but had not developed and implemented a respiratory protection program.       Elements of a required respiratory program include, but are not limited to, medical evaluations for employees required to use respirators, fit testing for tight fitting respirators, training in use and care of respirator, and a change-out schedule for respirator cartridges.

Issued

Jun 9, 2014

Abate by

Jun 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $1,200 · Current $720 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:  On or about December 13, 2013, the employer did not develop, implement and maintain a written hazard communication program to inform employees of the hazards of the chemicals they work with, exposing employees to hazards such as, but not limited to, inhalation and absorption of hazardous chemicals.

Issued

Jun 9, 2014

Abate by

Jun 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(g)(2)(i): Except as elsewhere required or permitted by Subpart S of Part 1910, live parts of electric equipment operating  at 50 volts or more were not guarded against accidental contact by use of approved cabinets or other forms of approved enclosures or by any of the means identified in paragraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D) of 29 CFR 1910.303(g)(2)(i):  On about December 13, 2013, the light switch box used to operate the facility lighting was missing two of its three switches, exposing employees to an electrical hazard.