OSHA Inspection: AMERICAN HAT COMPANY

Issued

2015-09-04 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2800.00 · Current $1540.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1)(i): The employer did not select and have each affected employee use, the types of personal protective equipment that would protect the affected employee(s) from the hazards identified in the hazard assessment:    In the lacquer room, employees were exposed to dermal hazards from chemicals such as but not limited to lacquer thinner and clear lacquer without adequate length gloves to protect the skin on the forearms.

Issued

2015-09-04 00:00:00

Abate by

2015-10-14 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $4200.00 · Current $2310.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c): The employer did not develop and implement a written respiratory protection program with required worksite-specific procedures and elements for required respirator use:    In the lacquer room, employees were exposed to physiological hazards associated with wearing half-mask respirators with no written respiratory program.  Employees wore a Moldex half-mask respirator when applying lacquer to hats via dip operation.        a)  Procedures for selecting respirators for use in the workplace 29 CFR 1910.134(d)           b)  Medical evaluations of employees required to use respirators 29 CFR 1910.134(e)           c)  Fit testing procedures for tight-fitting respirators 29 CFR 1910.134(f)           d)  Procedures for proper use of respirators 29 CFR 1910.134(g)           e)  Procedures and schedules for cleaning, storing, inspecting, repairing, and maintaining 29 CFR 1910.134(h)           f)   Procedure to ensure adequate air quality 29 CFR 1910.134(i)           g)  Training of employees in the respirator hazards and proper use 29 CFR 1910.134(k)           h)  Procedures for regular evaluating the effectiveness of the program 29 CFR 1910.134(l)

Issued

2015-09-04 00:00:00

Abate by

2015-09-23 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2800.00 · Current $1540.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(2): Employee(s) were exposed to an airborne concentration of toluene listed in Table Z-2 in excess of the 8 hour Time Weighted Average concentration of 200ppm:    In the lacquer room, employees were exposed to toluene while dip coating straw hats into a clear lacquer over the permissible exposure limit 8 hour time weighted average.          a)  Employees were exposed to toluene at a concentration of 290 ppm calculated as an 8-hour time weighted average, this exposure was measured over a 420 minute sample period and zero exposure was assumed for 60 minutes.        b)  Employees were exposed to toluene at concentrations of 220 ppm calculated as an 8-hour time weighted average, this exposure was measured over a 420 minute sample period and zero exposure was assumed for 60 minutes.

Issued

2015-09-04 00:00:00

Abate by

2015-12-30 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(e): Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not determined and implemented to achieve compliance with the limits prescribed in 29 CFR 1910.1000(a) through (d):    In the lacquer room, employees were exposed to a toluene while dip coating straw hats into a clear lacquer over the permissible exposure limit 8 hour time weighted average of 200 ppm without adequate engineering or administrative controls in place.          a)  Employees were exposed to toluene at a concentration of 290 ppm calculated as an 8-hour time weighted average, this exposure was measured over a 420 minute sample period and zero exposure was assumed for 60 minutes.        b)  Employees were exposed to toluene at a concentration of 220 ppm calculated as an 8-hour time weighted average this exposure was measured over a 420 minute sample period and zero exposure was assumed for 60 minutes.

Issued

2015-09-04 00:00:00

Abate by

2015-10-27 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $4200.00 · Current $2310.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): Employer had not developed or implemented a written hazard communication program included the requirements outlined in 29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1)(i) and (e)(1)(ii):     In the lacquer room, the employer failed to develop a written hazard communication program.  Employees were exposed to inhalation hazards and dermal hazards such as but not limited to, toluene, n-butyl acetate, acetone and xylene.           a)  No written program 29 CFR 1910.1200(e)      b)  No labels on bottles 29 CFR 1910.1200(f)      c)  Adequate training was not provided to employees 29 CFR 1910.1200(h)