OSHA Inspection: BARROW ENTERPRISES, INC.

Issued

Aug 11, 2015

Abate by

Sep 28, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:  a)  Body Shop - The employer did not establish a written respiratory protection program, to include training, medical evaluations, and fit testing, for the employees required to wear respiratory protection while spray painting vehicle parts, exposing employees to upper respiratory irritations and chemical sensitivity.

Issued

Aug 11, 2015

Abate by

Sep 28, 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:    a)  Body Shop - The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to all employees required to wear the 3M 5301 organic vapor cartridge respirator while spraying isocyanate containing chemicals, exposing employees to upper respiratory irritations and chemical sensitivity.

Issued

Aug 11, 2015

Abate by

Sep 28, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1): The employer did not ensure that employee(s) required to use a tight-fitting facepiece respirator passed the appropriate qualitative fit test (QLFT) or quantitative fit test (QNFT):  a)  Body Shop - The employer did not provide a fit test to all employees required to wear the 3M 5301 organic vapor cartridge respirator while spraying isocyanate containing chemicals, exposing employees to upper respiratory irritations and chemical sensitivity.

Issued

Aug 11, 2015

Abate by

Sep 28, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k): The employer did not provide comprehensive, understandable training which did not occur annually and/or more often if necessary:  a)  Body Shop - The employer did not provide annual training for all employees required to wear respiratory protection while spray painting vehicle parts, exposing employees to upper respiratory irritations and chemical sensitivity.

Issued

Aug 11, 2015

Abate by

Sep 28, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:  a)   Body Shop - The employer did not establish a written hazard communication program for the employees exposed to hazardous substances such as, but not limited to, Chroma Premier 12305S (containing aliphatic polyisocyanate resin [CAS # 28182-81-2], methyle amyl ketone, and butyl acetate) and Chroma Premier Pro 14301S (containing aliphatic polyisocyanate resin [CAS # 28182-81-2], xylene, ethylbenzene, and butyl acetate), exposing the employees to respiratory, eye, and skin irritation and/or sensitization.

Issued

Aug 11, 2015

Abate by

Sep 28, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(iv): The details of the hazard communication training did not include an explanation of the Global Harmonization System (GHS) with respect to the labeling, pictograms, and safety data sheets, including the order of information and how employees could obtain and use the appropriate hazard information:  a) Body Shop:  The employer did not provide training to employees on the new Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS) that took effect December 1, 2013. Employees were not familiar with the new hazard communication standard.