OSHA Inspection: FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES

Issued

Aug 18, 2014

Abate by

Sep 18, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,550 · Current $1,530 Reduced

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) In the Centralizer, a hearing conservation program had not been established.  A machine operator was exposed to 102.0% of the noise dose which is equivalent to approximately 90.1 dBA. Sampling was conducted for 391 minutes on June 17, 2014. Zero exposure was assumed for the remaining 209 minutes.   b) In the Centralizer, a hearing conservation program had not been established.  A machine operator was exposed to 99.36% of the noise dose which is equivalent to approximately 89.9 dBA. Sampling was conducted for 412 minutes on June 17, 2014. Zero exposure was assumed for the remaining 188 minutes.   c) In the Centralizer, a hearing conservation program had not been established.  A machine operator was exposed to 81.2% of the noise dose which is equivalent to approximately 88.4 dBA. Sampling was conducted for 403 minutes on June 17, 2014. Zero exposure was assumed for the remaining 197 minutes.   d) In the Centralizer, a hearing conservation program had not been established.  A machine operator was exposed to 74.2% of the noise dose which is equivalent to approximately 87.8 dBA. Sampling was conducted for 404 minutes on June 17, 2014. Zero exposure was assumed for the remaining 196 minutes.   e) In the Centralizer, a hearing conservation program had not been established.  A laborer was exposed to 68.82% of the noise dose which is equivalent to approximately 87.3 dBA. Sampling was conducted for 402 minutes on June 17, 2014. Zero exposure was assumed for the remaining 198 minutes.

Issued

Aug 18, 2014

Abate by

Aug 26, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,400 · Current $2,040 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(f)(2): Each service, feeder, and branch circuit, at its disconnecting means or overcurrent device, was not legibly marked to indicate its purpose, nor located and arranged so the purpose was evident:  (a) at the facility, to the right of the dip tanks in the phosphorous line, the disconnecting means for the exhaust fans was not labeled.  (b) at the facility, to the right of the dip tanks in the phosphorous line, the disconnecting means for the lifting device was not labeled.

Issued

Aug 18, 2014

Abate by

Aug 26, 2014

Penalty

Initial $4,250 · Current $2,550 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(b)(1)(i): Conductors entering cutout boxes, cabinets, or fittings were not protected from abrasions:  (a) at the facility, to the right of the phosphorous line, conductors going from the disconnecting means for the exhaust fan into the bottom of the on/off switch were not protected from abrasions.

Issued

Aug 18, 2014

Abate by

Aug 26, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,550 · Current $1,530 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(8):   The employer did not maintain in the workplace copies of the required safety data sheets for each hazardous chemical, and did not ensure that they were readily accessible during each work  shift to employees when they were in their work area(s):  (a)  at the facility on the phosphate line, a Safety Data Sheet (SDS) for Soluhib 5340, an irritant, was not readily accessible to employees in their work area.

Issued

Aug 18, 2014

Abate by

Sep 18, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,550 · Current $1,530 Reduced

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)  at the facility on the phosphate line, employees were not informed of the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.1200; operations in their work area where hazardous chemicals were present; and the location and availability of the written hazard communication program , including the required lists of hazardous chemicals and the safety data sheets.  Employees were not trained on the methods and observations that may be used to detect the presence or release of a hazardous chemical in the work area; the physical and health hazards of chemicals in the work area; protective measures; and the details of the employer's hazard communication program, including how employees can obtain and use the appropriate hazard information.  Employees use hazardous substances such as, but not limited to, Solucoat 5047, a corrosive.