OSHA Inspection: STAFFORD MECHANICAL SERVICES, INC.

Issued

Nov 20, 2014

Abate by

Mar 3, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $2,000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1): The employer did not assess the workplace to determine if hazards were present, or were likely to be present, which necessitated the use of personal protective equipment:    COMPANY-WIDE:    On or about July 21, 2014, the employer had not conducted an assessment of job responsibilities to determine what personal protective equipment (PPE) should be worn.  Operations that are performed that may require PPE include, but are not limited to, handling caustic condenser coil cleaners and degreasers containing concentrated solutions of potassium hydroxide and/or sodium hydroxide in the stockroom and at customer sites.

Issued

Nov 20, 2014

Abate by

Mar 3, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(f)(1): The employer did not provide training to each employee who is required by this section to use personal protective equipment:    COMPANY-WIDE    On or about July 21, 2014, employees required to use personal protective equipment (PPE) were not provided training including selection, use, limitations and care of PPE.  Tasks that require PPE include, but are not limited to, handling caustic condenser coil cleaners and degreasers containing concentrated solutions of sodium hydroxide and potassium hydroxide in the stock area of the workshop and at customer sites.

Issued

Nov 20, 2014

Abate by

Mar 3, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1): The employer did not ensure that each affected employee uses appropriate eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids, chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation:    COMPANY-WIDE    On or about July 21, 2014, the employer did not require employees to wear chemical splash goggles and/or face shields when using caustic liquids containing sodium hydroxide and/or potassium hydroxide to clean HVAC condenser coils.

Issued

Nov 20, 2014

Abate by

Mar 3, 2015

Penalty

Initial $1,200 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required respirator use:    COMPANY-WIDE    On or about July 21, 2014, the employer had not developed and implemented a written respiratory protection program to address the required use of N-95 particulate respirators by employees while cleaning out boilers.

Issued

Nov 20, 2014

Abate by

Mar 3, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:    COMPANY-WIDE:    On or about July 21, 2014, employees were not provided with medical questionnaires prior to being required to wear N-95 particulate respirators.

Issued

Nov 20, 2014

Abate by

Mar 3, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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):    COMPANY-WIDE:    On or about July 21, 2014, employees who were required to wear N-95 particulate respirators were not provided with training pertaining to respirator use.  Such training needs to include: why respirator use is indicated, limitations and capacities of the respirator, how to don, doff and use the respirator; proper storage; and recognition of medical signs and symptoms indicating exposure.

Issued

Nov 20, 2014

Abate by

Mar 3, 2015

Penalty

Initial $1,600 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.138(a): The employer did not select and require employee(s) to use appropriate hand protection when employees' hands were exposed to hazards such as those from skin absorption of harmful substances; severe cuts or lacerations; severe abrasion; punctures; chemical burns; thermal burns; and harmful temperature extremes.    COMPANY-WIDE    On or about July 21, 2014, the employer did not require employees to wear chemical resistant gloves when using caustic condenser coil cleaner with a pH of 14 to clean HVAC coils/parts at customer locations.

Issued

Nov 20, 2014

Abate by

Mar 3, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $2,000

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 21, 2014, the employer had not developed and implemented a written hazard communication program to address hazards associated with exposure to chemicals including, but not limited to, coil cleaners containing concentrated sodium hydroxide and/or potassium hydroxide.

Issued

Nov 20, 2014

Abate by

Mar 3, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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 21, 2014, the employer had not provided training on hazardous chemicals stored in the work area and used in the field.  Chemicals used by employees include, but are not limited to, concentrated solutions of sodium hydroxide and/or potassium hydroxide.