OSHA Inspection: MAXIM CONSTRUCTION GROUP, CORP

Issued

Mar 25, 2015

Abate by

May 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,200 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 (Construction Reference 1926.103):      On or about January 6, 2015, at the above addressed jobsite, the employer did not establish a written respiratory program with procedures for employees wearing tight fitting half mask respirators and dust masks when exposed to silica during concrete restoration operations.

Issued

Mar 25, 2015

Abate by

May 22, 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 (Construction Reference 1926.103):    On or about January 6, 2015, at the above addressed jobsite, employees performing sandblasting of rebar during concrete restoration process wear tight fitting half mask respirators without a medical evaluation.

Issued

Mar 25, 2015

Abate by

May 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9010

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): Employee(s) using tight-fitting facepiece respirators were not fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator (Construction Reference 1926.103):    On or about January 6, 2015, at the above addressed jobsite, the employer did not conduct fit testing for employees required to wear tight-fitting respirators, while performing concrete restoration tasks, such as, but not limited to, sandblasting rebar.

Issued

Mar 25, 2015

Abate by

May 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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):    On or about January 6, 2015, at the above addressed jobsite, the employer permitted employees with facial hair to wear tight-fitting respirators while performing concrete restoration tasks, such as, but not limited to, sandblasting.

Issued

Mar 25, 2015

Abate by

May 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(1)(vii): The employer did not ensure that each user could demonstrate knowledge of the general requirements of the standard (Construction Reference 1926.103):    On or about January 6, 2015, at the above addressed jobsite, the employer did not ensure that employees who are required to wear a respirator were able to properly inspect, check the seals of the respirator, know why proper fit is necessary, and how maintenance could compromise the protective effect of the respirator.

Issued

Mar 25, 2015

Abate by

May 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9010

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.55(a): Employee(s) were exposed to material(s) at concentrations above those specified in the Threshold Limit Values of Airborne Contaminants for 1970 of the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists:    On or about January 26, 2015, at the above addressed jobsite, two employees engaged in sandblasting rebar activity were overexposed to respirable silica dust at a concentration of 0.38 mg/m3 (equivalent to 3.82 mppcf) and  0.97 mg/m3 (equivalent to 9.74 mppcf) expressed as an 8-hour time weighted average of approximately 1.29 and  1.71 times the daily Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 0.28 mg/m3 (equivalent to 2.78 mppcf) and 0.54 mg/m3 (equivalent to 5.42 mppcf) based on 332 and 348 minute sampling periods; exposure calculations included a zero-increment for the 148 and 132 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Mar 25, 2015

Abate by

May 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9010

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.55(b): Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not implemented to reduce employee exposure:    On or about January 26, 2015, at the above addressed jobsite, the employer did no implement engineering or administrative controls for two employees engaged in sandblasting rebar activity were overexposed to respirable silica dust at a concentration of 0.38 mg/m3 (equivalent to 3.82 mppcf) and  0.97 mg/m3 (equivalent to 9.74 mppcf) expressed as an 8-hour time weighted average of approximately 1.29 and  1.71 times the daily Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 0.28 mg/m3 (equivalent to 2.78 mppcf) and 0.54 mg/m3 (equivalent to 5.42 mppcf) based on 332 and 348 minute sampling periods; exposure calculations included a zero-increment for the 148 and 132 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Mar 25, 2015

Abate by

May 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,200 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9010

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 (Construction Reference: 1926.59):    On or about January 6, 2015, at the above addressed jobsite, the employer did not develop a hazard communication program for employees who are exposed to hazardous materials such as, but not limited to, Portland cement and silica dust, being used and generated during concrete restoration tasks.

Issued

Mar 25, 2015

Abate by

May 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9010

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(ii): Employee training did not include the physical and health hazards of the chemicals in the work area (Construction Reference: 1926.59):    On or about January 6, 2015, at the above addressed jobsite, the employer did not train employees on the hazards, such as, but not limited to, the carcinogenic properties of silica dust generated from sandblasting rebar with silica sand during concrete restoration operations.

Issued

Mar 25, 2015

Abate by

May 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 8110

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.52(d)(1): In all cases where the sound levels exceeded the values shown in Table D-2 of 29 CFR 1926.52, a continuing, effective hearing conservation program was not administered:    On or about January 26, 2015, at the above addressed jobsite, the employer did not implement elements of a hearing conservation program, such as, but not limited to, employee exposure monitoring, work practice controls, and training for employees engaged in concrete restoration tasks, such as chipping concrete and sandblasting rebar,  were exposed to continuous noise at 217.2%, 170.2%, and 150.2% of the permissible exposure limit of noise exposure (8-hour time weighted average of 90 dba) or the equivalent sound level of approximately 95.6, 93.8, and 92.9 dba, during 385, 345, and 307 minute sampling periods; exposure calculations included a zero (0) increment for the 95, 135, and 173 minutes not sampled, respectively.