OSHA Inspection: SABEL STEEL SERVICE, INC.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,613 · Current $1,800 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.23(c)(1): Open-sided floors and/or platforms four feet or more above adjacent floor or ground level were not guarded with standard railings (or equivalent).  a)  Top of the building at the Shear control area; On or about November 4, 2014 and at times prior thereto the employer exposed employees to fall hazards in that employees were allowed to walk and work on a roof approximately 14 feet above the next level that did not have a standard height handrail which included a mid-rail.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Abate by

Jun 10, 2015

Penalty

Initial $5,000 · Current $2,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(i): Procedures were not developed, documented and utilized for the control of potentially hazardous energy when employees were engaged in activities covered by this section:  a)  Facility; On or about November 4, 2014 and at times prior thereto the employer exposed employees to potential hazardous energies in that employees were allowed to work on the equipment such as but not limited to the shear without locking it out in accordance with the established procedures.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Abate by

Jun 10, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,613 · Current $1,700 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:  a)  Warehouse attached to the office; On or about November 4, 2014 and at times prior thereto the employer exposed employees to electrical hazards in that employees were allowed to workaround and access an electrical outlet that was damaged and had exposed live parts.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(b)(1)(i): Conductors entering cutout boxes, cabinets, or fittings were not protected from abrasions:  a) Shear; On or about November 4, 2014 and at times prior thereto the employer exposed employees to electrical hazards in that employees were allowed to walk and work around electrical conductors entering an electrical box on the Shear that were not protected from abrasion.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(b)(2)(i): Each outlet box in completed installations did not have a cover, faceplate, or fixture canopy:  a) Warehouse attached to the office: On or about November 4, 2014 and at times prior thereto the employer exposed employees to electrical hazards in that employees were allowed workaround and access an electrical outlet that did not have a cover.  b) Shear shaker table: On or about November 4, 2014 and at times prior thereto the employer exposed employees to electrical hazards in that employees were allowed to work around an electrical junction box that did not have a cover.  a) Time clock: On or about November 4, 2014 and at times prior thereto the employer exposed employees to electrical hazards in that employees were allowed to workaround an electrical outlet that did not have a cover.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Abate by

May 27, 2015

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $3,700 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(d)(2): An initial determination was not made to determine if any employee may be exposed to lead at or above the action level:  a) Burn yard: On or about November 5, 2014: The employer exposed employees to a lead level of 0.085 mg/m3, 1.71 times the permissible exposure level of 0.050 mg/m3 without having evaluated the job task to determine the levels of lead that the employees could be exposed to.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Abate by

May 27, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(e)(3)(i): The employer did not establish and implement a written compliance program to reduce exposures to or below the permissible exposure limit, solely by means of engineering and work practice controls:  a) Burn yard: On or about November 5, 2014: The employer exposed employees to a lead level of 0.085 mg/m3, 1.7 times the permissible exposure level of 0.050 mg/m3 without having a lead control program in place in the facility.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Abate by

May 27, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(c)(1): Employee(s) were exposed to lead at concentrations greater than fifty micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an eight-hour period:  a) Burn yard: On or about November 5, 2014: The employer exposed employees to a lead level of 0.085 mg/m3, 1.71 times the permissible exposure level of 0.050 mg/m3 while performing torch cutting operations.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Abate by

May 27, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(f)(2)(i): The employer did not implement a respiratory protection program in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.134(b) through (d) (except (d)(1)(iii)), and (f) through (m) for each employee required by 29 CFR 1910.1025 to use a respirator:  a) Burn yard: On or about November 5, 2014: The employer exposed employees to a lead level of 0.085 mg/m3, 1.71 times the permissible exposure level of 0.050 mg/m3 without putting in place the necessary elements of a respiratory protection program to protect the employees.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Abate by

May 27, 2015

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,700 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(g)(1): Appropriate protective work clothing and equipment was not provided when employee(s) were exposed to lead above the permissible exposure limit (PEL), without regard to the use of respirators, or where the possibility of skin or eye irritation exists:  a) Burn yard: On or about November 5, 2014: The employer exposed employees to a lead level of 0.085 mg/m3, 1.71 times the permissible exposure level of 0.050 mg/m3 while using a cutting torch without providing appropriate protective clothing for the employees.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Abate by

May 27, 2015

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,700 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(i)(2)(i): Clean change rooms were not provided for employees exposed to lead in excess of the permissible exposure limit (PEL), without regard to the use of respirators:  a) Burn yard: On or about November 5, 2014: The employer exposed employees to a lead level of 0.085 mg/m3, 1.71 times the permissible exposure level of 0.050 mg/m3 without providing change rooms for the exposed employees.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Abate by

May 27, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(i)(3)(i): Employee(s) exposed to lead in excess of the permissible exposure limit (PEL), without regard to the use of respirators, were not required to shower at the end of the work shift:  a) Burn yard: On or about November 5, 2014: The employer exposed employees to a lead level of 0.085 mg/m3, 1.71 times the permissible exposure level of 0.050 mg/m3 without having a shower available for employees to use at the end of their work shift.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Abate by

May 27, 2015

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,700 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(j)(1)(i): A medical surveillance program was not instituted for all employee(s) who were, or could be exposed to lead above the action level for more that thirty days per year:  a) Burn yard: On or about November 5, 2014: The employer exposed employees to a lead level of 0.085 mg/m3, 1.71 times the permissible exposure level of 0.050 mg/m3 without having the employees in a medical surveillance program.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Abate by

May 27, 2015

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,700 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(l)(1)(ii): The employer did not train each employee who is subject to exposure to lead at or above the action level, or for whom the possibility of skin or eye irritation exists, in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.1025:  a) Burn yard: On or about November 5, 2014: The employer exposed employees to a lead level of 0.085 mg/m3, 1.71 times the permissible exposure level of 0.050 mg/m3 without training employees on the control methods to protect there employees from lead.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Abate by

May 27, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,250 · Current $2,400 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(m)(2)(v): Employer did not post the following warning signs in each work area where the permissible exposure limit (PEL) was exceeded that included the following; WARNING, LEAD WORK AREA, POISON, NO SMOKING OR EATING:  a) Burn yard: On or about November 5, 2014: The employer exposed employees to a lead level of 0.085 mg/m3, 1.71 times the permissible exposure level of 0.050 mg/m3 without placing warning signs in the area where lead exposures may be present.

Issued

Apr 30, 2015

Abate by

May 27, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.180(d)(2)(ii): 29 CFR 1910.180(d)(2)(ii):  Periodic inspection(s), 1-12 month interval, or as specifically recommended by the manufacturer was not conducted:  a) Facility: On or about November 4, 2014: The employer failed to ensure that the locomotive crane used on the site was given a periodic inspection at least once in a 12 month time span.