OSHA Inspection: PHOENIX PRODUCTS COMPANY

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,280 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.22(b)(1): Aisles and passageways were not kept clear and in good repair, with no obstruction across or in aisles that could create a hazard.    COMPRESSOR AREA, 55 CONTAINER DRIVE:    On or about July 14, 2015, aisles leading to and around the compressor area were reduced to 15 inches in some areas and 20 inches in others.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,135 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.23(c)(1): 29 CFR 1910.23(c)(1): Open-sided floor(s) or platform(s) 4 feet (1.22 m) or more above the adjacent floor or ground level were not guarded by standard railings (or the equivalent as specified in 29 CFR 1910.23(e)(3) of this section) on all open sides:    LIQUIDS DEPARTMENT, 55 CONTAINER DRIVE:    On or about June 11, 2015, the chain provided across the short end of the platform was insufficient in that it was attached to the posts at a height less than 42 inches, it was not capable of withstanding a load of at least 200 pounds, and there was no chain or railing provided at an intermediate height.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Mar 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.23(e)(1): Standard railing(s) did not consist of top rail, intermediate rail and/or posts and/or did not have a vertical height of 42 inches (106.7 cm) nominal from upper surface of top rail to floor, platform runway, or ramp level:    A)  LIQUIDS DEPARTMENT, 97 NAPCO DRIVE:  On or about June 11, 2015, a platform used when making additions to the mixing tank was not equipped with standard railings.  The long side adjacent to the tanks was missing a top rail.  The short side of the platform was missing a mid-rail and the chain intended to serve as a guard rail was not 42 inches above the platform.      B)  MEZZANINE, DIVINA ROOM, 55 CONTAINER DRIVE:  On or about July 20, 2015, standard railings were not installed continually around the mezzanine.  There was no top rail at the openings to any of the five mixing tanks.  There was no mid-rail installed at Tank 5.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,135 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.37(a)(3): Exit route(s) were not kept free and unobstructed:    BLEACH AREA, 55 CONTAINER DRIVE:    On or about July 14, 2015, the emergency exit route from the bleach area was blocked on the outside by a pallet containing 56 empty 5-gallon bleach containers.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,710 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.106(d)(3)(ii)(a): The door of the metal storage cabinet(s) for flammable and combustible liquids not provided with a three point lock:    SCREEN PRINTING STORAGE ROOM, 97 NAPCO DRIVE, TERRYVILLE, CT    On or about June 8, 2015, a flammable cabinet used to store flammable inks had no door handle and therefore the three point lock was non-functional.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,710 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.106(e)(9)(iii): Combustible waste material and residues in a building or unit operating area were not kept to a minimum, stored in covered metal receptacles and disposed of daily:    PRINTSHOP, 97 NAPCO DRIVE, TERRYVILLE, CT    On or about June 8, 2015, two JustRite safety cans labeled as "Satellite Storage" were observed to be overflowing with rags and not able to close.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Jan 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,135 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:    97 NAPCO DRIVE and 55 CONTAINER DRIVE, TERRYVILLE, CT    On or about June 8, 2015, the employer had not reviewed operations nor evaluated the processes to identify the appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) necessary for employees to perform each task safely.  Operations in which employees wore inadequate PPE included, but were not limited to:     A)  Wearing safety glasses as opposed to splash goggles while dispensing and mixing flammable/corrosive inks with a hand blender and filling containers with flammable, corrosive, and/or oxidizing liquids    B)  Wearing a shock-absorbing lanyard while using the order selector to access upper shelves on the storage racking system.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,710 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.176(b): Material stored in tiers was not stacked, blocked, interlocked or limited in height so that it was stable and secure against sliding and collapse:    FLAMMABLE ROOM, 55 CONTAINER DRIVE:    On or about July 14, 2015, several 5-gallon metal cans of AmKote 45-III Supergrade High Performance Chlorinated Rubber Paint were stacked on a pallet on an upper level storage rack 87 inches above the floor.  At least two of the cans were severely dented preventing them from stacking safely.  Another pallet holding twenty 1-gallon cans of paint was stored on top of the 5-gallon cans.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Mar 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,135 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 sparks:    DIVINA ROOM, 55 CONTAINER DRIVE:    On or about July 20, 2015, open mixing tanks were not properly guarded to prevent employees from falling into the tank while working on the mezzanine and/or adding chemicals to the tank.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,135 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.253(b)(4)(iii): Oxygen cylinders in storage were not separated from fuel-gas cylinders or combustible materials (especially oil or grease), a minimum distance of 20 feet (6.1 m) or by a noncombustible barrier at least 5 feet (1.5 m) high having a fire-resistance rating of at least one half-hour.    TOOL CRIB, 55 CONTAINER DRIVE:    On or about July 14, 2015, oxygen and acetylene cylinders were stored together without separation of a non-combustible barrier.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Jan 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,710 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:    97 NAPCO DRIVE:    In the following instances, equipment was not being used in accordance with manufacturer's instructions:    A)  On or about June 8, 2015 in the office area at 97 Napco Drive, a relocatable power tap (RPT) was observed to be energizing a Goldstar air conditioner, a cordless phone, a paper shredder, and Emerson microwave oven, and a Magic Chef refrigerator.    B)  On or about June 8, 2015 in the Deco Computer Area, a flexible extension cord was used to energize a relocatable power tap (RPT) which was energizing computer peripherals and a cordless telephone.  The cordless telephone and computer monitor were energized by a flexible extension cord plugged into the RPT.  One of the outlets of the short extension cords had burn marks.    C)  On or about June 8, 2015 in the Deco Computer Area, a 9-inch Hawaiian Breeze desk top fan, designed and listed for household use, was observed on top of a scanner at a work station.      D)  On or about June 8, 2015 in the office area, a knockout box designed for permanent mounting was not mounted.    E)  On or about June 11, 2015 in the Deco Ink Room, a Conair hair dryer was used when repairing screens to accelerate the drying of Ulano Extra Heavy Blockout.    F)  On or about June 8, 2015 in the Print Shop, an 18-inch WindMachine fan, designed and listed for household use, was observed on top of Cyclo Flo Dryer #34.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Mar 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,710 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(f)(2): Each service, feeder, and branch circuit, at its disconnecting means or overcurrent device, was not legibly marked to indicate its purpose, nor located and arranged so the purpose was evident:    FACILITY-WIDE:    On or about October 28, 2015, the breakers in electrical panels throughout both buildings were unlabeled.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Mar 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,710 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(g)(1)(i)(A): For electric equipment operating at 600 volts, nominal, or less to ground, and likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized, the depth of the working space in the direction of access to live parts (as measured from the live parts where they were exposed or from the enclosure front or opening where they were enclosed) was less than indicated in Table S-1 of Subpart S of Part 1910:     97 NAPCO DRIVE:    A)  On or about June 8, 2015 near the pellet storage area, access to an electrical panel was reduced to 28 inches by storage shelves that were erected and loaded with pallets of drums of pool chemicals.      B)  On or about June 8, 2015, a paper crimper was stored adjacent to a 480V electrical panel.    55 CONTAINER DRIVE:    C)  On or about July 14, 2015, Electrical panels 1, 2, 3, and 4 in the Compressor Area were blocked by transformers that were mounted on the floor.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,710 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.304(g)(5): The path to ground from circuits, equipment, and enclosures was not permanent, continuous, and effective:    97 NAPCO DRIVE and 55 CONTAINER DRIVE:    A)  On or about June 8, 2015, a vending machine located just outside the break room in the northwest corner of the building at 97 Napco Drive was not properly grounded.    B)  On or about July 20, 2015, in the Divina Room at 55 Container Drive, a 42-inch County Line Tractor Supply Fan was not properly grounded.    C)  On or about July 20, 2015, an Intertek light located in the Quality Assurance Lab was not properly grounded.    D)  On or about July 14, 2015, a Corning Stirrer/Hot Plate in the Quality Assurance Lab was not properly grounded.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Jan 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,710 Reduced

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:    97 NAPCO DRIVE:     A)  On or about June 8, 2015, a Rice Lake Counter Part Scale at Cone #2 in the production area of 97 Napco Drive was energized with an extension cord that was connected to an outlet at the wall.        B)  On or about June 8, 2015, a vibratory shaker at Cone #4 was energized by an extension cord connected to an outlet at the wall.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,135 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.307(c): Equipment, wiring methods, and installations of equipment in hazardous (classified) locations were not intrinsically safe, approved for the hazardous (classified) location, or safe for the hazardous (classified) location:     DECO PAINT ROOM, 97 NAPCO DRIVE:    On or about June 11, 2015, a hand mixer, designed and intended for household kitchen use, was used to mix flammable inks.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Mar 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,135 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1048(d)(2): Employees who may have been exposed to formaldehyde at or above the action level or STEL were not identified, and the exposure was not accurately determined for each identified employee:    SILK SCREENING AREAS:    On or about July 20, 2015, no initial monitoring was conducted to determine formaldehyde exposure of employees who worked with ink that contained the chemical at a concentration of 1-2.5%.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Dec 23, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,280 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1048(h)(1)(i): All contact of the eyes and skin with liquids containing 1 percent or more formaldehyde was not prevented by the use of chemical protective clothing made of material impervious to formaldehyde and the use of other personal protective equipment such as goggles and face shields, as appropriate to the operation:    SCREEN PRINTING AREAS:    On or about July 20, 2015, employees who were using inks containing 1-2.5% formaldehyde were not required to wear personal protective equipment that would prevent skin and eye exposure to the chemical.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Dec 23, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,135 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1048(h)(2)(ii)(A): Signs. Storage areas for contaminated clothing and equipment shall have signs bearing the following legend:      DANGER   FORMALDEHYDE-CONTAMINATED [CLOTHING] EQUIPMENT   MAY CAUSE CANCER   CAUSES SKIN, EYE AND RESPIRATORY IRRITATION   DO NOT BREATHE VAPOR   DO NOT GET ON SKIN    SCREEN PRINTING AREAS:    On or about July 20, 2015, the employer had not posted signs where the used silk screens were stored to inform employees of the potential hazards of exposure to the formaldehyde on the screens from residual ink.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Dec 23, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1048(h)(2)(ii)(B): Labels. The employer shall ensure containers for contaminated clothing and equipment are labeled consistent with the Hazard Communication Standard, Sec. 1910.1200, and shall, as a minimum, include the following:    DANGER  FORMALDEHYDE-CONTAMINATED [CLOTHING] EQUIPMENT  MAY CAUSE CANCER  CAUSES SKIN, EYE, AND RESPIRATORY IRRITATION  DO NOT BREATHE VAPOR  DO NOT GET ON SKIN  SCREEN PRINTING AREAS:  On or about July 20, 2015, safety containers used for formaldehyde-contaminated rags were not labeled with regard to the presence of formaldehyde and the health hazards associated with exposure.  In addition, disposable personal protective equipment (PPE) used when working with formaldehyde-containing inks was discarded with the regular trash and containers were not labeled.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Dec 23, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,280 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1048(h)(2)(iv): The employer did not ensure that no employee took home equipment or clothing that was contaminated with formaldehyde:    SCREEN PRINTING AREAS:    On or about July 20, 2015, employees wore their street clothes while doing screen printing using formaldehyde-containing ink.  If their clothes became contaminated with ink during the day, they were worn through the day and taken home for laundering with other clothing.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Jan 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,135 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1048(i)(3): When there was a possibility that an employee's eyes could be splashed with solutions containing 0.1 percent or greater formaldehyde, the employer did not provide acceptable eyewash facilities within the immediate work area for emergency use:    SCREEN PRINTING AREAS at 97 NAPCO DRIVE and 55 CONTAINER DRIVE:    On or about July 20, 2015, eyewash facilities were not provided in the immediate work area of employees working with inks containing 1% to 2.5% formaldehyde.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Jan 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.151(c): Where employees were exposed to injurious corrosive materials, suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body were not provided within the work area for immediate emergency use:  SCREEN PRINTING AREAS at 97 NAPCO DRIVE and 55 CONTAINER DRIVE:  On or about July 20, 2015, there was neither an eye wash nor an emergency shower provided in the area where employees were working with flammable, corrosive inks while screen printing.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Jan 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,710 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1048(j)(2): In work areas where spillage may have occurred, the employer did not make provisions to contain the spill, to decontaminate the work area, and to dispose of the waste:    SCREEN PRINTING AREAS:    On or about July 20, 2015, the employer had not developed a procedure for addressing a spill of screen printing ink which contained 1-2.5% formaldehyde.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Jan 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1048(k): When there was the possibility of an emergency involving formaldehyde, the employer did not ensure  that appropriate procedures were adopted to minimize injury and loss of life and implemented in the event of an emergency:  SCREEN PRINTING AREAS:  On or about July 20, 2015, the employer had not trained employees using formaldehyde-containing screen printing ink what to do in the event of a spill or other emergency involving the ink.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Dec 23, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,135 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1048(n)(1): The employer did not ensure that all employees who were assigned to workplaces where there was exposure to formaldehyde participated in a training program:    SCREEN PRINTING AREAS:    On or about June 11, 2015 the employer had not provided training for employees who were required to conduct tasks using formaldehyde-containing inks.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Jan 25, 2016

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:  COMPANY-WIDE:  On or about June 11, 2015, employees who worked with hazardous chemicals such as phosphoric and hydrochloric acids, sodium hydroxide, 99% acetone, 99% isopropyl alcohol, and ethyl acetate were not provided with information and training pertaining to the chemicals to which they may be exposed.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Jan 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,420 Reduced

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:    COMPANY-WIDE:    On or about June 8, 2015 the employer had not developed and implemented a written hazard communication program.  Hazardous chemicals used at the facility include, but are not limited to: formaldehyde-containing ink, 99% isopropyl alcohol. 99% acetone, ethyl acetate, sodium hypochlorite, phosphoric acid, hydrochloric acid, and sodium hydroxide.

Issued

Dec 4, 2015

Abate by

Jan 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(6)(ii): Except as provided in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(7) and 29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(8), the employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged or marked with the product identifier and words, pictures, symbols, or combination thereof, which provide at least general information regarding the hazards of the chemicals and which, in conjunction with the other information immediately available to employees under the hazard communication program, would provide employees with the specific information regarding the physical and health hazards of the hazardous chemical:  PRODUCTION AREA, 97 NAPCO DRIVE:  On or about June 11, 2015, containers of hazardous chemicals were not properly labeled.  Two spray bottles with the hand-written designation "Ultimate Clean" were observed on top of a steel 55-gallon drum in the powders department and two containers labeled as "EB" were observed in the Deco Ink Room and Screen Printing Area.  There were no other markings on the containers.