OSHA Inspection: OMNISOURCE ST. MARY'S

Issued

2014-11-25 00:00:00

Abate by

2014-12-29 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $7000.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 07311520

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(2): An employee's exposure to any substance in Table Z-1, the exposure limit of which is not preceded by a "C", exceeded the 8-hour Time Weighted Average given for that substance any 8-hour work shift of a 40-hour work week.   a.  OmniSource St. Mary's worksite located in St Mary's, Ohio:  On or about August 29, 2014, an employee performing torch cutting activities in the North field for subcontractor CS Metals, Inc. was overexposed to copper fume at an eight hour time weighted average concentration of 0.138 mg/m3 which exceeded the OSHA Permissible Exposure limit of 0.10 mg/m3 by 130%.   b.   OmniSource St. Mary's worksite located in St. Mary's, Ohio:  On or about August 29, 2014, an employee performing torch cutting activities in the East Field for subcontractor CS Metals, Inc. was overexposed to iron oxide at an eight-hour time weighted average concentration of 11.25 mg/m3 which exceeded the OSHA Permissible Exposure limit of 10 mg/m3 by 112%.   c.  OmniSource St. Mary's worksite located in St. Mary's, Ohio:  On or about August 29, 2014, an employee performing torch cutting activities in the North Field for subcontractor CS Metals, Inc. was overexposed to iron oxide at an eight-hour time weighted average concentration of 17.96 mg/m3 which exceeded the OSHA Permissible Exposure limit of 10 mg/m3 by 179%.

Issued

2014-11-25 00:00:00

Abate by

2015-04-09 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 07311520

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(e): To achieve compliance with paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, administrative or engineering controls were not first determined and implemented whenever feasible. When such controls were not feasible to achieve full compliance, protective equipment or any other protective measures was not used to keep the exposure of employees to air contaminants within the limits prescribed in this section. Any equipment and/or technical measures used for this purpose must be approved for each particular use by a competent industrial hygienist or other technically qualified person. Whenever respirators are used, their use shall comply with 1910.134.   a. OmniSource St. Mary's worksite located in St Mary's, Ohio:  On or about August 29, 2014, the employer did not institute engineering controls when an employee performing torch cutting activities in the North field for subcontractor CS Metals, Inc. was overexposed to copper fume at an eight hour time weighted average concentration of 0.138 mg/m3 which exceeded the OSHA Permissible Exposure limit of 0.10 mg/m3 by 130%.   b. OmniSource St. Mary's worksite located in St. Mary's, Ohio:  On or about August 29, 2014, the employer did not institute engineering controls when an employee performing torch cutting activities in the East Field for subcontractor CS Metals, Inc. was overexposed to iron oxide at an eight-hour time weighted average concentration of 11.25 mg/m3 which exceeded the OSHA Permissible Exposure limit of 10 mg/m3 by 112%.   c. OmniSource St. Mary's worksite located in St. Mary's, Ohio:  On or about August 29, 2014, the employer did not institute engineering controls when an employee performing torch cutting activities in the North Field for subcontractor CS Metals, Inc. was overexposed to iron oxide at an eight-hour time weighted average concentration of 17.96 mg/m3 which exceeded the OSHA Permissible Exposure limit of 10 mg/m3 by 179%.    Step 1: Provide effective respiratory protection to and ensure it is used by exposed employees as an interim protective measure until feasible engineering and/or administrative controls can be implemented or whenever such controls fail to reduce employee exposure to within permissible exposure limits.      Step 2: A written detailed plan of abatement shall be submitted to the Area Director outlining a schedule for the implementation of engineering and/or administrative measures to control employee exposures to hazardous substances as referenced in this citation.  This plan shall include, at a minimum, target dates for the following actions which must be consistent with the abatement dates required by this citation:      (1)  Evaluation of engineering /administrative control options;  (2)  Selection of optimum control methods and completion of design;  (3)  Procurement, installation and operation of selected control measures;  (4)  Testing and acceptance or modification/redesign .      All proposed control measures shall be approved for each particular use by a competent industrial hygienist or other technically qualified person.  90 day progress reports are required during the abatement period.      Step 3: Abatement shall have been completed by the implementation of feasible engineering and/or administrative controls upon verification of their effectiveness in achieving compliance.      Feasible engineering controls include, but are not limited to using longer torches so the employee is removed from the generated fumes, proper positioning of the worker ensure they are standing upwind of the fumes while torching, and institute local ventilation.                    Step1: Abatement Date-                   Step2: Abatement Date-                   Step3: Abatement Date-

Issued

2014-11-25 00:00:00

Abate by

2014-12-29 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 0260

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1018(c):  The employer did not assure that no employee was exposed to inorganic arsenic at concentrations greater than 10 micrograms per cubic meter of air (10 ug/m(3)), averaged over any 8-hour period.   a. OmniSource St. Mary's worksite located in St Mary's, Ohio:  On or about August 29, 2014, an employee performing torch cutting activities in the North field for subcontractor CS Metals, Inc. was overexposed to arsenic at an eight hour time weighted average concentration of 0.0126 mg/m3 which exceeded the OSHA PEL of 0.010 mg/m3 by 126%.

Issued

2014-11-25 00:00:00

Abate by

2015-04-09 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 0260

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1018(g)(1)(i): The employer did not institute at the earliest possible time but no later than December 31, 1979, engineering and work practice controls to reduce exposures to or below the permissible exposure limit, except to the extent that the employer can establish that such controls are not feasible.    a.  OmniSource St. Mary's worksite located in St Mary's, Ohio:  On or about August 29, 2014, the employer did not ensure engineering controls were implemented which covered an employee performing torch cutting activities in the North field for subcontractor CS Metals, Inc. who was overexposed to arsenic at an eight hour time weighted average concentration of 0.0126 mg/m3 which exceeded the OSHA PEL of 0.010 mg/m3 by 126%.   Step 1: Provide effective respiratory protection to and ensure it is used by exposed employees as an interim protective measure until feasible engineering and/or administrative controls can be implemented or whenever such controls fail to reduce employee exposure to within permissible exposure limits.      Step 2: A written detailed plan of abatement shall be submitted to the Area Director outlining a schedule for the implementation of engineering and/or administrative measures to control employee exposures to hazardous substances as referenced in this citation.  This plan shall include, at a minimum, target dates for the following actions which must be consistent with the abatement dates required by this citation:      (1)  Evaluation of engineering /administrative control options;  (2)  Selection of optimum control methods and completion of design;  (3)  Procurement, installation and operation of selected control measures;  (4)  Testing and acceptance or modification/redesign .      All proposed control measures shall be approved for each particular use by a competent industrial hygienist or other technically qualified person.  90 day progress reports are required during the abatement period.      Step 3: Abatement shall have been completed by the implementation of feasible engineering and/or administrative controls upon verification of their effectiveness in achieving compliance.      Feasible engineering controls include, but are not limited to using longer torches so the employee is removed from the generated fumes, proper positioning of the worker ensure they are standing upwind of the fumes while torching, and institute local ventilation.                    Step1: Abatement Date-                   Step2: Abatement Date-                   Step3: Abatement Date-

Issued

2014-11-25 00:00:00

Abate by

2014-12-29 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(c)(1): The employer did not assure that no employee was exposed to lead at concentrations greater than fifty micrograms per cubic meter of air (50 ug/m(3)) averaged over an 8-hour period.  a.  OmniSource St. Mary's worksite located in St. Mary's, Ohio:  On or about August 29, 2014, an employee performing torch cutting activities in the North Field for subcontractor CS Metals, Inc. was overexposed to lead at an eight-hour time weighted average concentration of 187 ug/m3 which exceeded the OSHA Permissible Exposure limit of 50 ug/m3 by 374%.

Issued

2014-11-25 00:00:00

Abate by

2015-04-09 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(e)(1)(i): Where any employee was exposed to lead above the permissible exposure limit for more than 30 days per year, the employer did not implement engineering and work practice controls (including administrative controls) to reduce and maintain employee exposure to lead in accordance with the implementation schedule in Table I, except to the extent that the employer can demonstrate that such controls are not feasible. Wherever the engineering and work practice controls which can be instituted are not sufficient to reduce employee exposure to or below the permissible exposure limit, the employer shall nonetheless use them to reduce exposures to the lowest feasible level and shall supplement them by the use of respiratory protection which complies with the requirements of paragraph (f) of this section.   a.   OmniSource St. Mary's worksite located in St. Mary's, Ohio:  On or about August 29, 2014, an employee performing torch cutting activities working in the North Field for subcontractor CS Metals, Inc. was overexposed to lead at an eight-hour time weighted average concentration of 187 ug/m3 which exceeded the OSHA Permissible Exposure limit of 50 ug/m3 by 374%.    Step 1: Provide effective respiratory protection to and ensure it is used by exposed employees as an interim protective measure until feasible engineering and/or administrative controls can be implemented or whenever such controls fail to reduce employee exposure to within permissible exposure limits.      Step 2: A written detailed plan of abatement shall be submitted to the Area Director outlining a schedule for the implementation of engineering and/or administrative measures to control employee exposures to hazardous substances as referenced in this citation.  This plan shall include, at a minimum, target dates for the following actions which must be consistent with the abatement dates required by this citation:      (1)  Evaluation of engineering /administrative control options;  (2)  Selection of optimum control methods and completion of design;  (3)  Procurement, installation and operation of selected control measures;  (4)  Testing and acceptance or modification/redesign .      All proposed control measures shall be approved for each particular use by a competent industrial hygienist or other technically qualified person.  90 day progress reports are required during the abatement period.      Step 3: Abatement shall have been completed by the implementation of feasible engineering and/or administrative controls upon verification of their effectiveness in achieving compliance.      Feasible engineering controls include, but are not limited to using longer torches so the employee is removed from the generated fumes, proper positioning of the worker ensure they are standing upwind of the fumes while torching, and institute local ventilation.                       Step1: Abatement Date-                   Step2: Abatement Date-                   Step3: Abatement Date-