OSHA Inspection: WELLBORN FOREST PRODUCTS, INC.

Issued

Aug 24, 2015

Abate by

Sep 18, 2015

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $4,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees in that employees were exposed to being struck by pneumatically propelled nails:     a) Facility wide: On or about April 8, 2015 the employer exposed employees to struck-by hazards in that the employer provided employees assembling cabinets with pneumatic nailers that did not have a workpiece contact device, thereby allowing nails 18 gauge and larger to be discharged from the tool when not firmly in contact with the object being nailed and exposing employees to injury.

Issued

Aug 24, 2015

Abate by

Sep 18, 2015

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $4,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(c)(1): The employer did not administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.95(c) through (o) whenever employee noise exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 decibels measured on the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent:    a) Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the MMX profiler was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 183.3% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 94.3 dBa) which is approximately 1.83 times the permissible exposure level of 100% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 90 dBa) and the employer did not have a written hearing conservation program in place.    b) Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the panel saw was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 93.4% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 89.5) which is approximately 1.86 times the action level of 50% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85dBa) and the employer did not have a written hearing conservation program in place.    c) Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the Hendricks Machine was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 112.6% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 90.8) which is approximately 2.25 times the action level of 50% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85dBa) and the employer did not have a written hearing conservation program in place.    d) Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the Luaderdale #2 saw was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 124.8% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 91.6) which is approximately 2.5 times the action level of 50% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85dBa) and the employer did not have a written hearing conservation program in place.

Issued

Aug 24, 2015

Abate by

Sep 18, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(d)(1): When information indicated that any employee's exposure equaled or exceed the 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels, the employer did not develop and implement a monitoring program:  a)  Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the MMX profiler was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 183.3% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 94.3 dBa) which is approximately 1.83 times the permissible exposure level of 100% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 90 dBa) and the employer had not developed a monitoring program to ensure employees were adequately protected from noise.  b) Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the panel saw was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 93.4% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 89.5) which is approximately 1.86 times the action level of 50% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85dBa) and the employer had not developed a monitoring program to ensure employees were adequately protected from noise.  c) Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the Hendricks Machine was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 112.6% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 90.8) which is approximately 2.25 times the action level of 50% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85dBa) and the employer had not developed a monitoring program to ensure employees were adequately protected from noise.  d) Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the Luaderdale #2 saw was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 124.8% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 91.6) which is approximately 2.5 times the action level of 50% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85dBa) and the employer had not developed a monitoring program to ensure employees were adequately protected from noise.

Issued

Aug 24, 2015

Abate by

Sep 18, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(g)(1): The employer did not establish and maintain an audiometric testing program as provided by 29 CFR 1910.95(g) by making audiometric testing available to all employees whose exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels:  a)   Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the MMX profiler was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 183.3% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 94.3 dBa) which is approximately 1.83 times the permissible exposure level of 100% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 90 dBa) and the employer did not establish an audiometric testing program to evaluate the employees hearing.  b) Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the panel saw was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 93.4% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 89.5) which is approximately 1.86 times the action level of 50% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85dBa) and the employer did not establish an audiometric testing program to evaluate the employees hearing.  c) Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the Hendricks Machine was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 112.6% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 90.8) which is approximately 2.25 times the action level of 50% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85dBa) and the employer did not establish an audiometric testing program to evaluate the employees hearing.  d) Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the Luaderdale #2 saw was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 124.8% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 91.6) which is approximately 2.5 times the action level of 50% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85dBa) and the employer did not establish an audiometric testing program to evaluate the employees hearing.

Issued

Aug 24, 2015

Abate by

Sep 18, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(k)(1): The employer did not train each employee who is exposed to noise at or above an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.95(k):  a) Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the MMX profiler was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 183.3% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 94.3 dBa) which is approximately 1.83 times the permissible exposure level of 100% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 90 dBa) and the employer did not train employees upon initial assignment and annually there after.  b) Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the panel saw was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 93.4% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 89.5) which is approximately 1.86 times the action level of 50% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85dBa) and the employer did not train employees upon initial assignment and annually there after.  c) Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the Hendricks Machine was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 112.6% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 90.8) which is approximately 2.25 times the action level of 50% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85dBa) and the employer did not train employees upon initial assignment and annually there after.  d) Saw cut area: On or about April 16, 2015: an employee operating the Luaderdale #2 saw was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 124.8% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 91.6) which is approximately 2.5 times the action level of 50% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 85dBa) and the employer did not train employees upon initial assignment and annually there after.

Issued

Aug 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,060 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1): One or more methods of machine guarding was not provided to protect the operator and other employees in the machine area from hazards such as those created by point of operation, ingoing nip points, rotating parts, flying chips and    a)  CNC panel saw; On or about April 8, 2015, an at times prior thereto the employer exposed employees to caught-in and stuck-by hazards in that employees were allowed to operate the Morbideli CNC saw with the rear moving gantry area unguarded.

Issued

Aug 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,825 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(g)(2)(i): Live parts of electric equipment operating at 50 volts or more were not guarded against accidental contact by approved cabinets of other forms of approved enclosures, or other means listed under this provision:    a)  Hendricks Saw; On or about April 8, 2015 and at times prior thereto the employer exposed employees to electrical hazards in that employees were allowed to walk and work around an automatic saw with the switch cover for the air table removed exposing live 440 volt AC.

Issued

Aug 24, 2015

Abate by

Sep 18, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(2)(ii): The employer did not establish and implement those elements of a written program necessary to ensure that any employee using a respirator voluntarily was medically able to use that respirator, and that the respirator was cleaned, stored, and maintained so that its use does not present a health hazard to the user:  a)  Facility; On or about April 16, 2015 and at times prior thereto the employer exposed employees to respiratory hazards in that employees were allowed to wear tight fitting elastomeric respirators without first being medical evaluated to determine their ability to wear a respirator and were not trained on the requirement for cleaning storage and maintenance of the respirator.

Issued

Aug 24, 2015

Abate by

Sep 18, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1):  Employees were not provided effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard that the employees had not been previously trained about was introduced into their work area.     a)  Facility: On or about April 8, 2015 and at times prior; the employer exposed employees to hazards related to chemicals used on site including but not limited to paints, varnish and wood dust without training employees in the required element of the hazard communication standard including those element required under the global harmonization revisions to the standard.