OSHA Inspection: HAMMONASSETT CONSTRUCTION, LLC

Issued

Dec 16, 2014

Abate by

Feb 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $2,000

Hazardous substances 1592BWPBL294

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(i)(2)(i): The employer did not provide clean change areas as an interim protection for employees performing tasks as specified in 29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2), without regard to the use of respirators:    (a) Bridge #03500, Farmington, Connecticut - On or about August 20, 2014, clean change areas were not provided for employees exposed to lead at concentrations of greater than three times the permissible exposure limit of 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an 8-hour period. Employees were using a needle scaler and manually scraping to remove lead based paint from the painted surface of the bridge.

Issued

Dec 16, 2014

Abate by

Feb 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1592BWPBL294

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(i)(4)(i): The employer did not provide lunchroom facilities or eating areas for employees whose airborne exposure to lead was above the permissible exposure limit, without regard to the use of respirators:    (a) Bridge #03500, Farmington, Connecticut- On or about August 20, 2014, a designated eating area was not provided for employees, whose airborne exposure to lead was greater than three times the permissible exposure limit of 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an 8-hour period. Employees ate at their vehicles. Employees were exposed to lead while manually scraping and while using a needle scaler to remove lead based paint from the painted surface of the bridge.

Issued

Dec 16, 2014

Abate by

Feb 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $2,000

Hazardous substances 1592BWPBL294

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(i)(3)(i): The employer did not provide shower facilities, where feasible, for use by employees whose airborne exposure to lead was above the permissible exposure limit:    (a) Bridge #03500, Farmington, Connecticut- On or about August 20, 2014, the employer did not provide showers for employees, whose airborne exposure to lead was greater than three times the permissible exposure limit of 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an 8-hour period. Employees were exposed to lead while manually scraping and while using a needle scaler to remove lead based paint from the painted surface of the bridge.

Issued

Dec 16, 2014

Abate by

Feb 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $1,200 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1592BWPBL294

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(m)(2)(i): The employer did not post the following warning signs    "WARNING  LEAD WORK AREA  POISON  NO SMOKING  OR EATING"    in each work area where an employee exposure to lead was above the permissible exposure limit:    (a) Bridge #03500, Farmington, Ct - On or about August 20, 2014, signs were not provided to indicate to employees and others that may work in the area that lead was present and that smoking or eating in the work area was prohibited. Employees were exposed to lead at concentrations of greater than to three times the permissible exposure limit of 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an 8-hour period while manually scraping and needle scaling to remove lead based paint from the painted surface of the bridge.

Issued

Dec 16, 2014

Abate by

Feb 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $2,000

Hazardous substances 1592BWPBL294

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A): Respirators with tight-fitting facepieces were worn by employees who had facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face or that interfered with valve function: (Construction Reference 1926.103)    (a) Bridge # 03500, Farmington, Connecticut - On or about August 15, 2014, an employee that wore a 3M, 6200, half face, negative pressure respirator, had more than one days' growth of facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the facepiece. The employee was exposed to lead while using a needle scaler and manually scraping to remove lead based paint from the painted surface of the bridge.

Issued

Dec 16, 2014

Abate by

Feb 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1592BWPBL294

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(c)(1): The employer did not ensure that no employees were exposed to lead at concentrations greater than fifty micrograms per cubic meter of air (50 ug/m3) averaged over an 8-hour period:    Bridge #03500, Farmington, Connecticut - On or about August 20, 2014, employees were exposed to lead, at concentrations greater than three times the permissible exposure limit of 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an 8-hour period while removing lead based paint from the painted surface of the bridge.     (a) Employee 1 was exposed to airborne lead at an 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) of 1.60 micrograms per cubic meter, which is 3.14 times the permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 50 micrograms per cubic meter while using a needle scaler and manually scraping to remove lead based paint from the bridges painted surface.  The exposure level was derived from a sample collected over a 417 minute sampling period on August 20, 2014.  Zero exposure was assumed for the 63 minutes not sampled.    (b) Employee 2 was exposed to airborne lead at an 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) of 1.10 micrograms per cubic meter, which is 2.12 times the permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 50 micrograms per cubic meter while using a needle scaler and manually scraping to remove lead based paint from the bridges painted surface.  The exposure level was derived from a sample collected over a 404 minute sampling period on August 20, 2014.  Zero exposure was assumed for the  76 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Dec 16, 2014

Abate by

Feb 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1592BWPBL294

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(1)(i): Each employer who had a workplace or operation covered by 29 CFR 1926.62 did not initially determine if any employee was exposed to lead at or above the action level of 30 micrograms per cubic meter of air calculated as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA):    (a) Bridge #03500, Farmington, Connecticut - On or about August 20, 2014, the employer failed to initially determine if any employee was exposed to lead at or above the action level of 30 micrograms per cubic meter of air. Employees were exposed to lead at concentrations of greater than three times the permissible exposure limit of 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an 8-hour period while manually scraping and needle scaling to remove lead based paint from the painted surface of the bridge.

Issued

Dec 16, 2014

Abate by

Feb 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1592BWPBL294

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(1)(iii): The employer did not collect personal samples representative of a full shift, including at least one sample for each job classification in each work area, either for each shift or for the shift with the highest exposure level:    (a) Bridge #03500, Farmington, Connecticut - On or about August 20, 2014, the employer failed to collect personal samples representative of a full shift for each job classification in each work area. Employees were exposed to lead concentrations of greater than three times the permissible exposure limit of 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an 8-hour period while manually scraping and needle scaling to remove lead based paint from the painted surface of the bridge.

Issued

Dec 16, 2014

Abate by

Feb 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1592BWPBL294

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(e)(1): The employer did not implement all feasible engineering and work practice controls, including administrative controls, to reduce and maintain employee exposure to lead to or below the permissible exposure limit:    (a) Bridge #03500, Farmington, Connecticut - On or about August 20, 2014, the employer did not implement all feasible engineering, work practice and administrative controls to ensure that no employee was exposed to lead at concentrations greater than fifty micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an 8-hour period. Employees were exposed to lead at concentrations greater than three times the permissible exposure limit while manually scrapping and using a needle scaler which had an attached HEPA filtered vacuum to remove lead based paint from the painted surface of the bridge.     One feasible means of abatement would be to implement administrative controls and rotate employees that are manually scraping or needle scaling.

Issued

Dec 16, 2014

Abate by

Feb 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1592BWPBL294

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.62(e)(2)(i): The employer did not establish and implement a written compliance program to achieve compliance with 29 CFR 1926.62(c) prior to commencement of the job:    (a) Bridge #03500, Farmington, Connecticut - On or about August 20, 2014, the employer failed to establish and implement a written lead compliance program to ensure that no employee was exposed to lead at concentrations greater than the permissible exposure limit of 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an 8-hour period. Employees were exposed to lead at concentrations greater than three times the permissible exposure limit while using a needle scaler and manually scraping to remove lead based paint from the painted surface of the bridge.