OSHA Inspection: HARTSON ENTERPRISES, INC.

Issued

Jun 2, 2015

Abate by

Jun 26, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(c)(2): The employer did not ensure that no employee was exposed to an airborne concentration of methylene chloride in excess of 125 parts per million as determined over a sampling period of 15 minutes:  a)     On  April 22, 2015, the employer, Hartson Enterprises, Inc., did not protect employees who were exposed to airborne concentrations of methylene chloride measuring approximately 225 parts per million and 205 parts per million, respectively, as determined by short term exposure limit (STEL) sampling during the Formica 170 adhesive spraying process.

Issued

Jun 2, 2015

Abate by

Jun 26, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(e)(1): The employer did not establish a regulated area wherever an employee's exposure to airborne concentrations of methylene chloride exceeded or could reasonably be expected to exceed either the 8-hour Time Weighted Average Permissible Exposure Limit or the Short Term Exposure Limit:   a)   On  April 22, 2015, the employer, Hartson Enterprises, Inc., did not ensure a regulated area was established so as to address employee exposure to airborne concentrations of methylene chloride, which exceeded the Short Term Exposure Limit (STEL) during the Formica 170 adhesive spraying process.

Issued

Jun 2, 2015

Abate by

Jun 26, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(f)(1): The employer did not institute and maintain the effectiveness of engineering controls and work practices to reduce employee exposure to or below the permissible exposure limits and wherever the feasible engineering controls and work practices which can be instituted were not sufficient to reduce employee exposure to or below the 8-hour time weighted average permissible exposure limit or short term exposure limit, the employer did not use them to reduce employee exposure to the lowest levels achievable and did not supplement them by the use of respiratory protection that compiled with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.1052(g):  a)      On  April 22, 2015, the employer, Hartson Enterprises, Inc., did not ensure effective engineering controls were implemented and maintained so as to reduce or eliminate employee exposure to airborne concentrations of methylene chloride, which exceeded the Short Term Exposure Limit (STEL) during the Formica 170 adhesive spraying process.

Issued

Jun 2, 2015

Abate by

Jun 26, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(g)(1)(i): Respirators were not used during periods when an employee's exposure to methylene chloride exceeds the 8-hour time weighted average permissible exposure limit or short term exposure limit:  a)     On April 22, 2015, the employer, Hartson Enterprises, Inc., did not ensure adequate respiratory protection was provided to employees so as to mitigate exposure to airborne concentrations of methylene chloride, which exceeded the Short Term Exposure Limit (STEL) during the Formica 170 adhesive spraying process.

Issued

Jun 2, 2015

Abate by

Jun 26, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(j)(1)(i): The employer did not make medical surveillance available for employees who were or potentially were  exposed to methylene chloride at or above the action level on 30 or more days per year, or above the 8-hour time weighted average permissible exposure limit or the short term exposure limit on 10 or more days per year:   a)     On April 22, 2015, the employer, Hartson Enterprises, Inc., did not ensure medical surveillance was provided to employees, who were exposed to airborne concentrations of methylene chloride which exceeded the short term exposure limit (STEL), while engaged in the Formica 170 adhesive spraying process.

Issued

Jun 2, 2015

Abate by

Jun 26, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(l)(3)(ii): Where an employee(s) exposed to airborne concentrations of methylene chloride exceeded or can reasonably be expected to exceed the action level the employer did not inform each affected employee of the quantity, location, manner of use, release, storage, and/or specific operations that could result in exposure to methylene chloride particularly noting where exposures may be above the 8-hour time weighted average permissible exposure limit or the short term exposure limit:   a)     On April 22, 2015, the employer, Hartson Enterprises, Inc., did not ensure effective information and training regarding methylene chloride was provided to employees, who were exposed to airborne concentrations of methylene chloride which exceeded the short term exposure limit (STEL), while engaged in the Formica 170 adhesive spraying process.

Issued

Apr 29, 2015

Abate by

May 18, 2015

Penalty

Initial $1,200 · Current $1,200

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1): Protective eye equipment was not required where there was a reasonable probability of injury that could be prevented by such equipment:  a)     On or about November 18, 2014, the employer, Hartson Enterprises, Inc., did not ensure employees, who were required to use pneumatic staple guns during manufacturing processes, were protected from eye injury by means of appropriate personal protective equipment.

Issued

Apr 29, 2015

Abate by

Jun 16, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,400 · Current $2,400

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(d)(1)(i): Where methylene chloride was present in the workplace, the employer did not determine each employee's exposure:  a)     On or about November 18, 2014, the employer, Hartson Enterprises, Inc., did not determine employee exposure to methylene chloride during an adhesive spraying process.

Issued

Apr 29, 2015

Abate by

Jun 16, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(h)(1): Where needed to prevent methylene chloride induced skin or eye irritation, the employer did not provide clean protective clothing and equipment resistant to methylene chloride, at no cost to the employee, and/or did not ensure that each affected employee used it:  a)     On or about November 18, 2014, the employer, Hartson Enterprises, Inc., did not ensure employees exposed to chemical splashes of methylene chloride-containing adhesive during container transfers, were protected by means of appropriate personal protective equipment.

Issued

Apr 29, 2015

Abate by

Jun 16, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(l)(1): The employer did not provide information and training for each affected employee prior to or at the time of initial assignment to a job involving potential exposure to methylene chloride:  a)     On or about November 18, 2014, the employer, Hartson Enterprises, Inc., did not ensure employees required to engage in processes involving exposure to a methylene chloride-containing adhesive, were provided effective information and training in regard to methylene chloride exposure.

Issued

Apr 29, 2015

Abate by

May 18, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:  a)     On or about November 18, 2014, the employer, Hartson Enterprises, Inc., did not ensure various pieces of powered equipment were powered by fixed wiring of the facility.  Flexible cord sets were used as a substitute for the fixed wiring of the facility.