OSHA Inspection: DAVICO INC

Issued

Sep 5, 2014

Abate by

Dec 10, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,142 · Current $1,071 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 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:  Shop, D-CELL: On 8-21-14, A worker was exposed to an 8 hour time weighted average noise level of  88 dBA (equivalently dose of 76.6 %) in excess of the 85 dBA action level while operating machinery during the work shift.  All elements of a hearing conservation program were not fully implemented. An effective program shall include a noise monitoring program, an audiometric testing program, offering of a variety of hearing protection devices,  a training program and the posting of the hearing conservation standard.

Issued

Sep 5, 2014

Penalty

Initial $1,366 · Current $683 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.101(b): The in-plant handling, storage, and utilization of all compressed gases in cylinders, portable tanks, rail tankcars, or motor vehicle cargo tanks were not in accordance with Compressed Gas Association Pamphlet P-1-1965, which is incorporated by reference as specified in CFR 1910.6:  Shop(storage area and in welding booths): All compressed gas cylinders were not secured with a chain or other device to prevent cylinders from falling over.

Issued

Sep 5, 2014

Abate by

Oct 27, 2014

Penalty

Initial $1,607 · Current $804 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(2)(ii): The employer did not establish and implement those elements of a written program necessary to ensure that any employee using a respirator voluntarily was medically able to use that respirator, and that the respirator was cleaned, stored, and maintained so that its use does not present a health hazard to the user  Shop: A worker wearing a negative pressure respirator while cutting catalyst ceramic blocks, was not medically evaluated.

Issued

Sep 5, 2014

Abate by

Oct 10, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,142 · Current $1,071 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1): One or more methods of machine guarding was not provided to protect the operator and other employees in the machine area from hazards such as those created by point of operation, ingoing nip points, rotating parts, flying chips and sparks:  Shop:   a) The top half and side of blade was not adequately guarded on a Dorringer  D350 and a Super Brown  350 saws.  b) Approximately 8 inches of the unused portion of the Hem band saw was not guarded.  c) Side guard missing on two belt sander exposing a rotating shaft end.

Issued

Sep 5, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.242(b): Compressed air used for cleaning purposes was not reduced to less than 30 p.s.i.:  Shop, Prototyping Station: An air hose operated at 75 psi.

Issued

Sep 5, 2014

Abate by

Oct 10, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(iv):   The details of the hazard communication program developed by the employer, did not include an explanation of the labels received on shipped containers and the workplace labeling system used by their employer; the safety data sheet, including the order of information and how employee could obtain and use the appropriate hazard information:  Shop: Workers had not received training on the new hazard communication labeling and safety data sheet requirements.