OSHA Inspection: RTSP

Issued

Jun 19, 2014

Abate by

Sep 8, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,100 Reduced

Hazardous substances 8111

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 equaled or exceeded an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 decibels measured on the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent:    a)  A Range Safety Officer was exposed to noise levels at 463% of the permissible daily noise exposure (8 hour Time Weighted Average sound level of 90 dBA) which is 4.63 times the allowable exposure limit.  The action level (AL) is 85 dBA.  The equivalent sound level of the measured dose is 101 dBA.  Sampling was performed for 286 minutes on 4/24/2014, with the unsampled portion of time considered to represent zero for the exposure calculation.     b) A Range Safety Officer was exposed to noise levels at 550% of the permissible daily noise exposure (8 hour Time Weighted Average sound level of 90 dBA) which is 5.50 times the allowable exposure limit.  The action level (AL) is 85 dBA.  The equivalent sound level of the measured dose is 102 dBA.  Sampling was performed for 351 minutes on 4/24/2014, with the unsampled portion of time considered to represent zero for the exposure calculation.     c) A Range Safety Officer was exposed to noise levels at 543% of the permissible daily noise exposure (8 hour Time Weighted Average sound level of 90 dBA) which is 5.43 times the allowable exposure limit.  The action level (AL) is 85 dBA.  The equivalent sound level of the measured dose is 102 dBA.  Sampling was performed for 382 minutes on 4/24/2014, with the unsampled portion of time considered to represent zero for the exposure calculation.     d)  A Range Safety Officer was exposed to noise levels at 581% of the permissible daily noise exposure (8 hour Time Weighted Average sound level of 90 dBA) which is 5.81 times the allowable exposure limit.  The action level (AL) is 85 dBA.  The equivalent sound level of the measured dose is 103 dBA.  Sampling was performed for 377 minutes on 4/24/2014, with the unsampled portion of time considered to represent zero for the exposure calculation.     Violation occurred on or about 4/24/14.

Issued

Jun 19, 2014

Abate by

Aug 6, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,680 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.151(c): Where employees were exposed to injurious corrosive materials, suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body were not provided within the work area for immediate emergency use:    a) Gunsmith shop    The employer did not provide an eyewash for employees using Chem-Crest 235 (pH 11.4) in an ultrasonic bath.     Violation occurred on or about 2/18/14.

Issued

Jun 19, 2014

Abate by

Aug 6, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,100 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(d)(2): An initial determination was not made to determine if any employee may be exposed to lead at or above the action level:    a) Firing Ranges 1 and 2    An initial determination of lead exposure was not made for Range Safety Officers whose duties included cleaning the firing ranges since the facility was opened in November 2011.      Violation occurred on or about 2/18/14.

Issued

Jun 19, 2014

Abate by

Aug 6, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(h)(1): All surfaces were not maintained as free as practicable of accumulations of lead:  a) Firing Range 1  Floors where Range Safety Officers spent their days monitoring and assisting customers were not cleaned daily.  Lead levels in wipe samples collected 4/24/14 during the day contained 7,600 micrograms per square foot and 2,700 micrograms per square foot.  Two wipe samples collected 5/27/14 before the range opened contained 980 and 1500 micrograms lead per square foot, respectively.  Violation occurred on or about 4/24/14.

Issued

Jun 19, 2014

Abate by

Aug 6, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,100 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) Establishment    The employer did not develop and implement a hazard communication program for Range Safety Officers and the gunsmith who worked with hazardous substances including, but not limited to, small arms ammunition (lead, antimony), Chem-Crest 235 (sodium metasilicate, pH 11.4) and Hoppe's #9 Nitro Powder Solvent (ethyl alcohol).     Violation occurred on or about 2/18/14.

Issued

Jun 19, 2014

Abate by

Aug 6, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(8): The employer did not maintain copies of the required material safety data sheets for each hazardous chemical in the workplace:  a) Establishment  The employer did not have copies of material safety data sheets for all hazardous chemicals in the workplace.  Range Safety Officers and the gunsmith worked with hazardous substances including, but not limited to, small arms ammunition (lead, antimony), Chem-Crest 235 (sodium metasilicate, pH 11.4) and Hoppe's #9 Nitro Powder Solvent (ethyl alcohol).   Violation occurred on or about 2/18/14.

Issued

Jun 19, 2014

Abate by

Aug 6, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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) Establishment  The employer did not provide information and training to the gunsmith who worked with hazardous substances including, but not limited to, Chem-Crest 235 (sodium metasilicate, pH 11.4) and Hoppe's #9 Nitro Powder Solvent (ethyl alcohol).   Violation occurred on or about 2/18/14.

Issued

Jun 19, 2014

Abate by

Aug 6, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(2)(i): Respirator users were not provided with the information contained in Appendix D to 29 CFR 1910.134 when the employer determined that any voluntary respirator use was permissible:  1) Establishment  The employer did not provide the information in 29 CFR 1910.134 Appendix D to employees electing to wear uncertified filtering facepiece respirators while cleaning the firing ranges and an employee wearing a P-100 filtering facepiece respirator when changing range ventilation system filters and emptying a Nilfisk S2 HEPA filter vacuum.  Violation occurred on or about 2/18/14.