OSHA Inspection: NIECE PRODUCTS OF KANSAS INC

Issued

Mar 6, 2015

Abate by

Mar 30, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.107(b)(2): The interior surfaces of paint booth were not smooth and continuous without edges and otherwise designed to prevent pocketing of residues and facilitate cleaning and washing without injury.  At 3904 Liberty Bell Rd., in Fort Scott Kansas the paint booth was constructed of corrugated metal with edges exposing employees to hazards of fire and explosion.

Issued

Mar 6, 2015

Abate by

Mar 30, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.107(b)(5)(iv): Space within the paint booth on the downstream and upstream sides of filters were not protected with approved automatic sprinklers:  At 3904 Liberty Bell Rd., in Fort Scott Kansas the paint booth was not provided with a sprinkler system, exposing employees to the hazards of fire and explosion.

Issued

Mar 6, 2015

Abate by

Mar 30, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.107(e)(2): The quantity of flammable or combustible liquids kept in the vicinity of spraying operation(s) exceeded the minimum required for operation:  At 3904 Liberty Bell Rd., in Fort Scott Kansas the paint booth had seven drums containing flammable liquids with a capacity of approximately 295 gallons stored in side of the paint booth, exposing employees to the hazards of fire and explosion.

Issued

Mar 6, 2015

Abate by

Mar 30, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.107(e)(9): Flammable liquids for use in spraying operations were transferred from one container to another without both containers being effectively bonded and grounded to prevent discharge sparks of static electricity.  At 3904 Liberty Bell Rd., Fort Scott Kansas, the paint booth had six of the seven drums containing flammable liquids stored in side of the paint booth were not grounded, exposing employees to the hazards of fire and explosion.

Issued

Mar 6, 2015

Abate by

Mar 30, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 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:    At 3904 Liberty Bell Rd, Fort Scott Kansas, the employer had not developed and implemented a written respiratory protection program, exposing welders and painters to respiratory hazards associated with working inside a vessel during the tank fabrication processes.

Issued

Mar 6, 2015

Abate by

Mar 30, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(iii): The employer did not identify and evaluate the respiratory hazard(s) in the workplace; including a reasonable estimate of employee exposures to respiratory hazards and identification of the contaminant's chemical state and physical form:  On or about November 19, 2014, the employer did not evaluate the employee exposure to respiratory hazards associated with workers inside tanks that generate welding fumes during fabrication, exposing employees to respiratory hazards.

Issued

Mar 6, 2015

Abate by

Mar 30, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.146(c)(4): When the employer decided that its employees would enter permit spaces, the employer did not develop and implement a written permit space entry program that complied with 29 CFR 1910.146:  At 3904 Liberty Bell Rd, Fort Scott Kansas, the employer had not developed and implemented a written confined space program, exposing welders and painters to hazards associated with working inside a vessel during the tank fabrication processes.

Issued

Mar 6, 2015

Abate by

Mar 30, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(2): Employee(s) were exposed to an airborne concentration of copper fume listed in Table Z-1 in excess of the 8 hour Time Weighted Average concentration of 0.1 mg/m3:  On or about November 19, 2014, a welder working inside a tank had an exposure that exceeded the 8 hour time weighted average (TWA) permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 0.1 mg/m3 for copper fume. The worker was exposed to an 8-hour TWA concentration of 0.257 mg/m3, approximately 2.5 times the PEL. The exposure was derived from a sample taken over a 577 minute period.

Issued

Mar 6, 2015

Abate by

Mar 30, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(2): Employee(s) were exposed to an airborne concentration of iron oxide fume listed in Table Z-1 in excess of the 8 hour Time Weighted Average concentration of 10.0 mg/m3:  On or about November 19, 2014, a welder working inside a tank had an exposure that exceeded the 8 hour time weighted average (TWA) permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 10.0 mg/m3 for iron oxide fume. The worker was exposed to an 8-hour TWA concentration of 25.323 mg/m3, approximately 2.5 times the PEL. The exposure was derived from a sample taken over a 577 minute period.