OSHA Inspection: SHELTON'S PALLET COMPANY

Issued

2014-03-03 00:00:00

Abate by

2014-06-05 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2000.00 · Current $1200.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(b)(1): The employer did not utilize feasible administrative or engineering controls when employees were subjected to sound exceeding those listed in Table G-16.     a) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to continuous noise at 275.0 percent of the permissible exposure limit or an eight (8) hour time-weighted average noise exposure of 97.23 dBA. This exposure occurred over a 419 minute sampling period on February 11, 2014. A zero noise exposure was assumed for the 61 minutes not sampled. The employer did not implement feasible engineering or administrative controls to reduce employee exposure below the 90 dBA eight hour time-weighted average permissible exposure limit.     b) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Recycling Saw Operator) while operating a pallet recycling saw was exposed to continuous noise at 256.4 percent of the permissible exposure limit or an eight (8) hour time-weighted average noise exposure of 96.79 dBA. This exposure occurred over a 470 minute sampling period on February 11, 2014. A zero noise exposure was assumed for the 10 minutes not sampled. The employer did not implement feasible engineering or administrative controls to reduce employee exposure below the 90 dBA eight hour time-weighted average permissible exposure limit.     c) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Recycling Saw Operator) while operating a pallet recycling saw was exposed to continuous noise at 225.0 percent of the permissible exposure limit or an eight (8) hour time-weighted average noise exposure of 95.85 dBA. This exposure occurred over a 475 minute sampling period on February 11, 2014. A zero noise exposure was assumed for the 5 minutes not sampled. The employer did not implement feasible engineering or administrative controls to reduce employee exposure below the 90 dBA eight hour time-weighted average permissible exposure limit.     d) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to continuous noise at 217.0 percent of the permissible exposure limit or an eight (8) hour time-weighted average noise exposure of 95.59 dBA. This exposure occurred over a 425 minute sampling period on February 11, 2014. A zero noise exposure was assumed for the 55 minutes not sampled. The employer did not implement feasible engineering or administrative controls to reduce employee exposure below the 90 dBA eight hour time-weighted average permissible exposure limit.     e) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to continuous noise at 178.6 percent of the permissible exposure limit or an eight (8) hour time-weighted average noise exposure of 94.18 dBA. This exposure occurred over a 430 minute sampling period on February 11, 2014. A zero noise exposure was assumed for the 50 minutes not sampled. The employer did not implement feasible engineering or administrative controls to reduce employee exposure below the 90 dBA eight hour time-weighted average permissible exposure limit.

Issued

2014-03-03 00:00:00

Abate by

2014-06-05 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

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:        a) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not develop a continuing and effective hearing conservation program for the employee exposed above the 90 dBA permissible exposure limit. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance a.    b) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Recycling Saw Operator) while operating a pallet recycling saw was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not develop a continuing and effective hearing conservation program for the employee exposed above the 90 dBA permissible exposure limit. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance b.     c) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Recycling Saw Operator) while operating a pallet recycling saw was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not develop a continuing and effective hearing conservation program for the employee exposed above the 90 dBA permissible exposure limit. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance c.    d) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not develop a continuing and effective hearing conservation program for the employee exposed above the 90 dBA permissible exposure limit. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance d.     e) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not develop a continuing and effective hearing conservation program for the employee exposed above the 90 dBA permissible exposure limit. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance e.       ABATEMENT NOTE: A comprehensive, effective hearing conservation program consisting of the following elements shall be developed and implemented for all employees whose exposure equals or exceeds 85 dBA on an eight hour time-weighted average:    1. Initial exposure monitoring and periodic reassessment of employees to determine noise exposures.    2. Establishment and maintenance of an audiometric testing program.    3. Provision and enforcement of hearing protection devices when required.    4. Institution of an initial training program for employees, as well as annual refresher training, including information on hazards of noise, purpose of audiometric testing and proper use of hearing protectors.    5. Maintenance of records as they relate to employee exposure measurements, medical examinations and training.

Issued

2014-03-03 00:00:00

Abate by

2014-06-05 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(d)(1): When information indicated that any employee's exposure equaled or exceed the 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels, the employer did not develop and implement a monitoring program:      a) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not establish a noise monitoring program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance a.    b) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Recycling Saw Operator) while operating a pallet recycling saw was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not establish a noise monitoring program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance b.     c) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Recycling Saw Operator) while operating a pallet recycling saw was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not establish a noise monitoring program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance c.    d) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not establish a  noise monitoring program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance d.     e) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not establish a noise monitoring program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance e.

Issued

2014-03-03 00:00:00

Abate by

2014-06-05 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(g)(1): The employer did not establish and maintain an audiometric testing program as provided by 29 CFR 1910.95(g) by making audiometric testing available to all employees whose exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels:      a) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not establish and maintain an audiometric testing testing program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance a.    b) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Recycling Saw Operator) while operating a pallet recycling saw was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not establish and maintain an audiometric testing program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance b.     c) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Recycling Saw Operator) while operating a pallet recycling saw was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not establish and maintain an audiometric testing program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance c.    d) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not establish and maintain an audiometric testing program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance d.     e) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not establish and maintain an audiometric testing program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance e.

Issued

2014-03-03 00:00:00

Abate by

2014-06-05 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(k)(1): The employer did not train each employee who is exposed to noise at or above an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.95(k). The employer did not institute a training program and ensure employee participation in the program:      a) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not institute a training program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance a.    b) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Recycling Saw Operator) while operating a pallet recycling saw was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not institute a training program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance b.     c) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Recycling Saw Operator) while operating a pallet recycling saw was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not institute a training program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance c.    d) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not institute a training program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance d.     e) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford): An employee, (Pallet Repair Employee) while repairing pallets was exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA and the employer did not institute a training program. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instance e.

Issued

2014-03-03 00:00:00

Abate by

2014-03-11 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(l)(1): The employer did not make available to affected employees or their representatives copies of 29 CFR 1910.95 and did not post a copy in the workplace:   a) Shelton's Pallet Company (Oxford) Employees, (Pallet Repairers and Pallet Saw Operators) while repairing and cutting wooden pallets exposed to noise above the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA as an eight hour time-weighted average and the employer did not post a copy of the noise standard (29 CFR 1910.95) at the workplace. On or about February 11, 2014. See description in Citation Number 1, Item 001, Instances a through e.