OSHA Inspection: U.S. CHUTES CORPORATION

Issued

Jul 7, 2015

Abate by

Aug 21, 2015

Penalty

Initial $770 · Current $400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1903.19(c)(1): The employer did not certify to OSHA, within 10 calendar days after the abatement date, that the cited violation had been abated:    On, or about, June 30, 2015, the employer had not certified to OSHA, within 10 calendar days, that abatement had been completed on the following Serious citations issued to the company on January 6, 2015:    A.  Serious Citation 1; Items 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, and 10.  B.  Repeat Other-Than-Serious Citation 2; Items 1 and 3.  C.  Repeat Serious Citation 2; Items 6, 7, and 8.  D.  Other-Than Serious Citation 3; Items 1 and 2.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,080 · Current $262 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.36(c)(1): Each exit discharge did not lead directly outside or to a street, walkway, refuge area, public way, or open space with access to the outside.    SOUTH SIDE OF BUILDING:    On or about July 10, 2014, a door marked with signage as an exit led to a grassy embankment with no sidewalk or railings.  Four to five feet from the door was a downward slope to a driveway.  The grade of the slope was approximated at 50 to 70%.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,080 · Current $1,000 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:    PRODUCTION AREA:    On or about July 10, 2014, two compressed gas cylinders were not secured from being knocked over.  One cylinder was labeled as containing carbon dioxide and a the other one contained 75% argon/25% carbon dioxide mix.  (REFERENCE CGA P-1-1965 Section 3.3.1)

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,080 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): The respiratory protection program was not updated as necessary to reflect those changes in workplace conditions that affected respirator use:    SPRAY BOOTHS and WELDING AREAS:    On or about July 10, 2014, the employer had not updated the written Respiratory Protection Program that they had developed in 2009.  At the time the program was developed all respirator use was voluntary.  Respirators are now required to be used by employees when welding or spray painting.  In addition, several employees are assigned responsibilities by name in the existing program and, with the exception of the owner of the company, none of them (including the designated supervisors, medical surveillance administrator, and training coordinator) are currently employed at the facility.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,080 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(1): The employer did not ensure that each employee can demonstrate knowledge of items in (i)-(vii):    SPRAY BOOTHS and WELDING AREAS:    On or about July 10, 2014, the employer required employees to wear respirators when welding stainless and/or galvanized steel or when spray painting manufactured parts.  The employer had not provided the employees with effective training on how respirators can and cannot protect them; how to use, inspect and maintain their respirators; and how to recognize when the respirator may be causing harm.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,080 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(g)(2): Facilities were not provided for flushing and neutralizing spilled electrolyte, for fire protection, for protecting charging apparatus from damage by trucks, and/or for adequate ventilation for dispersal of fumes from gassing batteries.    PIV CHARGING STATION/VICINITY OF PANEL LPL    On or about July 10, 2014, the employer did not take measures to protect the battery chargers for the powered industrial vehicles/fork trucks from damage by the trucks.  In addition, there was no quick flush shower or eye wash for neutralizing battery acid.  The battery chargers were located at the base of the column on which Electrical Panel LPL is mounted with no barriers to prevent collisions from occurring.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,620 · Current $4,031 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.252(c)(2)(i): Mechanical ventilation was not provided when welding or cutting was done on metals not covered in 29 CFR 1910.252(c)(5) through 29 CFR 1910.252 (c)(12):    WELDING AREA:    On or about July 10, 2014, employees were directed to weld galvanized and stainless steel without having appropriate ventilation to minimize their exposure to welding fumes.  During the initial walk-around, smaller welding areas (11 feet by 11 feet) were enclosed by welding screens thereby restricting air movement in those areas.  There were no localized exhaust hoods or booths installed in any of the welding areas.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,080 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(b)(2): Listed or labeled electrical equipment was not used or installed in accordance with instructions included in the listing or labeling:    In the following locations, electrical equipment was improperly used or installed:    A)  WELDING AREA NEAR OFFICE:  On or about July 22, 2014, a Hevi-Duty transformer that was installed between the overhead buss bar and Panel RP22, a 120/208 circuit breaker panel, was installed with conduit entering the top of the transformer enclosure instead of using the opening provided by the manufacturer.      B)  OFFICE AREA:  On or about July 10, 2014, a GE refrigerator was energized by a relocatable power tap mounted to the wall.    C)  OFFICE AREA:  On or about July 10, 2014, three relocatable power taps were connected in series.  Each was also used to energize computer and telephone peripherals.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,080 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.304(f)(1)(iv): Overcurrent devices for circuits rated 600 volts, nominal, or less, were not readily accessible to each employee or authorized building management personnel:    PRODUCTION AREA:    On or about July 10, 2014, the employer did not ensure that the working space about electrical panels was clear of stored items for a minimum of three feet and that the panels were accessible.    A)  Panels LPL and LPN were blocked by the battery chargers for Powered Industrial Vehicles (PIVs) as well as the PIVs themselves.      B)  Panel RP10 was blocked by chutes manufactured at the facility as well as shovels, a dust mop, a box and other debris.    C)  Panel LPJ was blocked by a shovel and chutes manufactured at the facility.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,850 · Current $1,200 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(d)(1): The employer with a workplace or work operation covered by this standard did not determine the 8-hour time-weighted average exposure for each employee exposed to chromium (VI):    WELDING AREA:    On or about July 10, 2014, the employer had not conducted initial exposure monitoring to determine whether employees involved in welding of stainless steel were exposed to hexavalent chromium (Cr6+) at or above the permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 5 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3).

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,850 · Current $1,200 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(g)(2): The employer required respirator use for protection against chromium (VI); however, the employer did not institute a respiratory protection program in accordance with the Respiratory Protection standard, 29 CFR 1910.134, which covers each employee required to use a respirator:    WELDING AREAS:    On or about July 22, 2014, the employer had not developed and implemented a written Respiratory Protection Program addressing the required use of respirators while welding stainless steel.  The existing program, developed in 2009 and not updated, addresses only voluntary use of respirators while welding.  Respirator use is now required of employees who are welding.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $154 · Current $100 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2): The employer did not verify that the required workplace hazard assessment has been performed through a written certification that identifies: the workplace evaluated; the person certifying that the evaluation has been performed; the date(s) of the hazard assessment; and, which identifies the document as a certification of hazard assessment:    COMPANY-WIDE:    On or about July 10, 2014, the employer had not conducted a job hazard analysis and did not have a certified hazard assessment identifying the personal protective equipment indicated for use for each job task.  Tasks performed at the facility include, but are not limited to: welding and cutting stainless and galvanized steel; using various machines such as power presses, press brakes, an iron worker, and a shear;  and spray painting.    The company was previously cited for a violation of the Occupational Safety and Health Standard which was contained in inspection number 311763981, citation number 1, item 6b, issued on November 4, 2009, with respect to a workplace located at 607 Bantam Road, Bantam, CT.  The final order date was December 15, 2009.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $6,160 · Current $4,031 Reduced

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 fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:    SPRAY BOOTHS and WELDING AREAS:    On or about July 22, 2014, the employer required employees to use either half-face, tight-fitting respirators or N-95 filtering facepieces without providing medical evaluations prior to respirator use.    The company was previously cited for a violation of the Occupational Safety and Health Standard which was contained in inspection number 311763981, citation number 1, item 7b, issued on November 4, 2009, with respect to a workplace located at 607 Bantam Road, Bantam, CT.  The final order date was December 15, 2009.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $154 · Current $100 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1): The employer did not ensure that an employee required to use a tight-fitting respirator passed the appropriate qualitative fit test (QLFT) or quantitative fit test (QNFT):    SPRAY BOOTH:    On or about July 22, 2014, the employer required a painter to use a tight-fitting half-face respirator while spray painting manufactured parts.  The painter had not been fit-tested to ensure that the respirator he was using had a proper fit.    The company was previously cited for a violation of the Occupational Safety and Health Standard which was contained in inspection number 311763981, citation number 1, item 7c, issued on November 4, 2009, with respect to a workplace located at 607 Bantam Road, Bantam, CT.  The final order date was December 15, 2009.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $7,700 · Current $4,031 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(b)(1)(ii): Unused openings in boxes, cabinets, or fittings were not effectively closed:    PRODUCTION AREA:    On or about July 10, 2014, employees were exposed to electric shock hazard when an electrical panel (RP-10) had a breaker missing and no panel blank was in place.    The company was previously cited for a violation of the Occupational Safety and Health Standard which was contained in inspection number 311763908, citation number 1, item 15, issued on November 4, 2009, with respect to a workplace located at 607 Bantam Road, Bantam, CT.  The final order date was December 15, 2009.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $6,160 · Current $4,031 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(g)(1)(iv)(A): Flexible cords and/or cables were used as a substitute for the fixed wiring of a structure:    OFFICE AREA:    On or about July 22, 2014, a flexible cord was observed to connect a receptacle on the wall over building structures to a junction box mounted on a beam at the ceiling.  The flexible cord runs from a junction box to an outlet on the wall behind the manager's desk.  A relocatable power tap (RPT) is plugged into the outlet.  A refrigerator and communications equipment were energized by the RPT.    The company was previously cited for a violation of the Occupational Safety and Health Standard which was contained in inspection number 311763908, citation number 1, item 18, issued on November 4, 2009, with respect to a workplace located at 607 Bantam Road, Bantam, CT.  The final order date was December 15, 2009.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,620 · Current $4,031 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:    COMPANY-WIDE:    On or about July 10, 2014, the employer had not implemented and maintained a written hazard communication program for employees who were exposed to hazardous chemicals including, but not limited to: flammable solvents, irritating mastic, and fumes from welding galvanized and stainless steel.    The company was previously cited for a violation of the Occupational Safety and Health Standard which was contained in inspection number 311763981, citation number 1, item 8, issued on November 4, 2009, with respect to a workplace located at 607 Bantam Road, Bantam, CT.  The final order date was December 15, 2009.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,620 · Current $4,031 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(8): The employer did not ensure that material safety data sheets (MSDSs) were readily accessible to the employees in their work area during each work shift:    COMPANY-WIDE:    On or about July 10, 2014, the employer did not have copies of MSDSs accessible for employees to use during their work shift.  Hazardous chemicals used on-site include, but are not limited to: flammable lacquer thinner, irritating mastic, and welding materials that generate hexavalent chromium and/or other toxic welding fumes.    The company was previously cited for a violation of the Occupational Safety and Health Standard which was contained in inspection number 311763981, citation number 1, item 9c, issued on November 4, 2009, with respect to a workplace located at 607 Bantam Road, Bantam, CT.  The final order date was December 15, 2009.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,620 · Current $4,031 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:    COMPANY-WIDE:    On or about July 10, 2014, the employer did not ensure that employees were formally trained in the physical and health hazards associated with the job tasks that they were responsible for including, but not limited to, welding on galvanized and/or stainless steel as well as using flammable paints and solvents.    The company was previously cited for a violation of the Occupational Safety and Health Standard which was contained in inspection number 311763981, citation number 1, item 10, issued on November 4, 2009, with respect to a workplace located at 607 Bantam Road, Bantam, CT.  The final order date was December 15, 2009.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(iv): The employer did not select respirators from a sufficient number of respirator models and sizes to ensure the respirators used in the worksite were acceptable to and correctly fit the users:  SPRAY BOOTHS:  On or about July 10, 2014, an employee required to wear a tight-fitting, negative pressure respirator while spray painting was not provided with a selection of respirators to choose from to ensure that he was using a respirator with a proper fit.  The employee was provided with a 3M half face respirator purchased off the shelf at Home Depot.  The respirator does not fit properly as evidenced by the employee's use of a wet cloth between the respirator and his face "to get a better seal".

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i)(B): Respirators with tight-fitting facepieces were worn by employees with a condition that interfered with the face-to-facepiece seal or valve function:  SPRAY BOOTHS:  On or about July 22, 2014, an employee who is required to wear a negative-pressure, tight-fitting respirator was allowed to wear it with a wet cloth between his face and the respirator thereby preventing a seal between the respirator and his face.  The employee stated he wears it in this manner because he gets a better seal.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:  SPRAY BOOTH:  On or about July 10, 2014, an employee required to wear a tight-fitting respirator while spray painting did not maintain his respirator in a clean and sanitary condition.  The respirator was observed to have been left on a table covered with dust, used/dirty gloves, and other equipment.

Issued

Jan 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 24, 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:  SPRAY BOOTHS:  On or about July 10, 2014, the respirator used by an employee who does spray painting of manufactured parts was observed to be stored on a table covered in dust, dirty gloves, chemicals, and other equipment.  The respirator was not stored in a bag or other container.