OSHA Inspection: MAHER INDUSTRIES

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(vi): The written program did not contain procedures to ensure adequate air quality, quantity, and flow of breathing air for atmosphere-supplying respirators:     (a) On the construction site at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA: On or about April 1, 2014, the employer's written respiratory protection program included a checklist to be used for respirator inspections, but did not have procedures to ensure the quality, quantity and flow of breathing air for atmosphere-supplying respirators.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(i)(7): For oil-lubricated compressors, the employer shall use a high-temperature or carbon monoxide alarm, or both, to monitor carbon monoxide levels. If only high-temperature alarms are used, the air supply shall be monitored at intervals sufficient to prevent carbon monoxide in the breathing air from exceeding 10 ppm.    a) On the construction site at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA: On or about April 2, 2014, two air compressors used for breathing air by employees had high temperature alarms and no carbon monoxide alarms, and the employer did not monitor the air supply for carbon monoxide.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591S122

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(h)(1)(i): Respirators issued for the exclusive use of an employee were not cleaned and disinfected as often as necessary to be maintained in a sanitary condition:    (a) In building G at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA: On or about April 2, 2014, the employer did not ensure an employee, using a supplied air blasting helmet, cleaned and disinfected the respirator at the end of the previous day or cleaned and disinfected it prior to use.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(h)(2)(i): Respirators were not stored to protect them from damage, contamination, dust, sunlight, extreme temperatures, excessive moisture, and damaging chemicals or  were not packed or stored to prevent deformation of the facepiece and exhalation valve:      (a) On the second floor between buildings E and G: On or about April 1, 2014, an employee left his supplied air, abrasive blasting hood on the floor outside the containment of building E, exposing it to airborne and surface dust, where it remained until April 2, 2014 when it was used during abrasive blasting operations.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591S122

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee was required to use the respirator in the workplace:    (a) In buildings E and G at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA:  On or about April 2, 2014, four employees using respirators to perform abrasive blasting and blasting media clean-up were not provided a medical evaluation prior to using the respirators in the workplace.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): Employee(s) using tight-fitting facepiece respirators were not fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator:    (a) On the second floors of building E and H at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA:  On or about April 2 and 9, 2014, two employees performing abrasive blasting media clean-up wore tight-fitting respirators without being fit-tested prior to use.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591S122

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(1): The employer did not provide respirator training that would ensure each employee could demonstrate knowledge of items in section (i)-(vii):    (a) On the second floor of building G at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA: On or about April 1, 2014, the employer requiring employees to use respirators had not provided any respirator training to employees.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9050S122

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.55(a): Employees were exposed to materials at concentrations above those specified in the Threshold Limit Values (TLV) of Airborne Contaminants for 1970 of the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists:    (a) On the second floor of building E at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA:  On or about April 2, 2014, an employee performing abrasive blasting was over exposed to an airborne amorphous silica concentration of 1571.8 million particles per cubic foot of air (mppcf) averaged over an 8-hour time period, which is approximately 78 times the TLV of 20 mppcf.      (b) On the second floor of building E at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA:  On or about April 2, 2014, an employee performing abrasive blast media clean-up was over exposed to an airborne amorphous silica concentration of 700.9 million particles per cubic foot of air (mppcf) averaged over an 8-hour time period, which is approximately 35 times the TLV of 20 mppcf.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9050S122

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.55(b): Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not implemented to reduce employee exposures:    (a) On the second floor of building E at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA:  On or about April 2, 2014, an employee performing abrasive blasting was over exposed to an airborne amorphous silica concentration of 1,571.8 million particles per cubic foot of air (mppcf) averaged over an 8-hour time period, approximately 78 times the TLV of 20 mppcf, without the use of feasible administrative or engineering controls.      (b) On the second floor of building E at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA:  On or about April 2, 2014, an employee performing abrasive blast media clean-up was over exposed to an airborne amorphous silica concentration of 700.9 million particles per cubic foot of air (mppcf) averaged over an 8-hour time period, approximately 35 times the TLV of 20 mppcf, without the use of feasible administrative or engineering controls.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $920 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(c)(1): The employer did not ensure that no employees were exposed to lead at concentrations greater than fifty micrograms per cubic meter of air (50 ug/m3) averaged over an 8-hour period:    (a) On the second floor of building E at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA:  On April 2, 2014, an employee performing abrasive blasting was exposed to an airborne lead concentration of 132 ug/M3 averaged over an 8-hour period, which is approximately 2.6 times the OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 50 ug/M3.    (b) On the second floor of building E at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA:  On April 2, 2014, an employee performing abrasive blast media clean-up was exposed to an airborne lead concentration of 88.9 ug/M3 averaged over an 8-hour period, which is approximately 1.7 times the permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 50 ug/M3.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(1)(i): Each employer who had a workplace or operation covered by 29 CFR 1926.62 did not initially determine if any employee was exposed to lead at or above the action level of 30 micrograms per cubic meter of air (30 ug/m3) calculated as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA):    a) In the mill being renovated at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA: On or about April 2, 2014: employees performing abrasive blasting and abrasive blast media clean-up were exposed to airborne lead concentrations above the action level and permissible exposure limit and the employer had not performed an initial exposure determination.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(1)(iii): The employer did not collect personal samples representative of a full shift, including at least one sample for each job classification in each work area, either for each shift or for the shift with the highest exposure level:    (a) In the mill at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA: On or about April 2, 2014, the employer did not collect any personal air samples representative of a full shift for each job classification in the work area.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(e)(1): The employer did not implement all feasible engineering and work practice controls, including administrative controls, to reduce and maintain employee exposure to lead to or below the permissible exposure limit (PEL):    a)  On second floor of building E at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA: On or about April 2, 2014, the employer did not implement any engineering or work practice controls to reduce and maintain employee exposure to lead at or below the PEL.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(e)(2)(i): The employer did not establish and implement a written compliance program to achieve compliance with 29 CFR 1926.62(c) prior to commencement of the job:    a) In the mill at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA: On or about April 2, 2014, the employer had not established and implemented a written lead compliance program prior to an abrasive blasting job involving lead.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(f)(3)(i)(C): The employer did not provide HEPA filters for powered and non-powered air-purifying respirators:    a) On the second floor of building E, 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA: On or about April 2 and 9, 2014, employees performing abrasive blast media clean-up were not provided HEPA filters for their non-powered air purifying respirators.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(g)(1): Where employees were exposed to lead above the permissible exposure limit, without regard to the use of respirators; where employees were exposed to lead compounds which may cause skin or eye irritation; and as interim protection for employees performing tasks as specified in 29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2), the employer did not provide at no cost to the employee and ensure that each employee used appropriate protective work clothing and equipment that prevented contamination of the employee and the employee's garments, such as, but not limited to, coveralls or similar full-body work clothing:    a) On the second floor of building E at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA: On or about April 2, 2014, a general laborer performing abrasive blast media clean-up was exposed to airborne lead above the permissible exposure limit  and did not wear coveralls potentially exposing him to the hazards of lead due to contaminated personal clothing.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(g)(1)(iii): Where employees were exposed to lead above the permissible exposure limit, without regard to the use of respirators; where employees were exposed to lead compounds which may cause skin or eye irritation; and as interim protection for employees performing tasks as specified in 29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2), the employer did not ensure that the employee used appropriate protective work clothing and equipment that prevented contamination of the employee and the employee's garments, such as, but not limited to face shields, vented goggles, or other appropriate protective equipment which complies with 29 CFR 1910.133:  a)  On the second floor of building E at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA: On or about April 2, 2014, a general laborer performing abrasive blast media clean-up was exposed to airborne lead above the permissible exposure limit and the employer did not ensure the employee used eye protection to protect the employee from the abrasive blast rebound hazard present during the abrasive blasting process.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(i)(1): The employer did not ensure that food or beverage was not present or consumed in areas where employees were exposed to lead above the Permissible Exposure Level without regard to the use of respirators:    a) On the second floor of building G at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA: On or about April 1, 2014, the employer did not ensure employees were not consuming beverage in areas adjacent to active abrasive blasting areas.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(i)(2)(i): The employer did not provide clean change areas for employees whose airborne exposure to lead was above the permissible exposure limit (PEL), without regard to the use of respirators:    (a) In the mill at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA: On or about April 2, 2014, the employer did not provide change areas for employees exposed to airborne lead above the PEL.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(i)(3)(i): The employer did not provide shower facilities, where feasible, for use by employees whose airborne exposure to lead was above the permissible exposure limit:    (a) In the mill at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA: On or about April 2, 2014, the employer did not provide shower facilities for employees exposed to airborne lead above the PEL.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(j)(1)(i): The employer did not make available initial medical surveillance to employees occupationally exposed on any day to lead at or above the action level:    (a) In the mill at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA:  On or about April 2, 2014, the employer did not make available initial medical surveillance to two employees occupational exposed to lead above the action level.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(j)(2)(i): "Blood lead and ZPP level sampling and analysis". The employer did not make available biological monitoring in the form of blood sampling and analysis for lead and zinc protoporphyrin levels to each employee occupationally exposed to airborne lead at or above the action level:  (a)  In the mill at 15 Cottage Street in Easthampton, MA: On or about April 2, 2014, the employer did not make available biological monitoring in the form of blood sampling and analysis for lead and zinc protoporphyrin levels to each employee occupationally exposed to airborne lead above the action level.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(l)(1)(i): Hazard communication. The employer did not include lead in the program established to comply with the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) (� 1910.1200):    (a) In the mill at 15 Cottage Street Easthampton, MA:  On or about April 2, 2014, the employer provided a copy of his written Hazard Communication Program which did not include lead.

Issued

Jul 14, 2014

Abate by

Jan 12, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $880 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(m)(1)(i): The employer did not post lead warning signs in each work area where an employee's exposure to lead is above the PEL.     (a) In the mill at 15 Cottage Street in Easthampton, MA:  On or about April 2, 2014, the employer did not post lead warning signs in or around the second floor of building E where an employee's exposure to lead was above the PEL.