OSHA Inspection: INTERNATIONAL TECHNICAL COATINGS INC.

Issued

Dec 9, 2015

Abate by

Mar 1, 2016

Penalty

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

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(c)(1): The employer shall administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program, as described in paragraphs (c) through (o) of this section, whenever employee noise exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level (TWA) of 85 decibels measured on the A scale (slow response) or, equivalently, a dose of fifty percent.     At the work site, the employer had not established and implemented an effective hearing conservation program per the requirements of 1910.95 for employees with noise exposures that exceeded the OSHA Action Level of an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level (TWA) of 85 dBA or, equivalently, a noise dose of 50 percent.     a.   In the Draw Line area, an employee who operated a Tares wire processor was exposed to continuous noise levels above the OSHA Action Level of 85 decibels (dBA) and greater than 50% of the daily noise dose allowed under the standards.  The sampling was performed for 477 minutes during one shift on July 21, 2015.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time, 3 minutes.  The employee's noise dose was 106.1 % with an equivalent dBA of approximately 90.4 dBA.       b. In the Roll Form area, an employee who worked as a Team Lead was exposed to continuous noise levels above the OSHA Action Level of 85 decibels (dBA) and greater than 50% of the daily noise dose allowed under the standards.  The sampling was performed for 479 minutes during one shift on July 21, 2015.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time, 1 minute.  The employee's noise dose was 104.3 % with an equivalent dBA of approximately 90.3 dBA.     c. In the Wire Room area, an employee who operated the GCR welder was exposed to continuous noise levels above the OSHA Action Level of 85 decibels (dBA) and greater than 50% of the daily noise dose allowed under the standards.  The sampling was performed for 480 minutes during one shift on July 21, 2015. The employee's noise dose was 98.3% with an equivalent dBA of approximately 89.9 dBA.     d. In the FSO area, an employee who operated a FSO Mesh Welder was exposed to continuous noise levels above the OSHA Action Level of 85 decibels (dBA) and greater than 50% of the daily noise dose allowed under the standards.  The sampling was performed for 478 minutes during one shift on July 21, 2015.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time, 2 minutes.  The employee's noise dose was 111.2% with an equivalent dBA of approximately 90.7 dBA.     e. In the Ideal Welder area, an employee who operated the Ideal 10 Welder was exposed to continuous noise levels above the OSHA Action Level of 85 decibels (dBA) and greater than 50% of the daily noise dose allowed under the standards.  The sampling was performed for 475 minutes during one shift on July 21, 2015.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time, 5 minutes.  The employee's noise dose was 77.7% with an equivalent dBA of approximately 88.1 dBA.     f. In the Accurshear area, an employee who operated the Accurshear was exposed to continuous noise levels above the OSHA Action Level of 85 decibels (dBA) and greater than 50% of the daily noise dose allowed under the standards.  The sampling was performed for 479 minutes during one shift on July 21, 2015.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time, 1 minute.  The employee's noise dose was 70.6% with an equivalent dBA of approximately 87.4 dBA.

Issued

Dec 9, 2015

Abate by

Dec 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $5,000 · Current $3,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9130

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.107(l)(4)(i): All areas shall be kept free of the accumulation of powder coating dusts, particularly such horizontal surfaces as ledges, beams, pipes, hoods, booths, and floors.  a.  The employer did not ensure that the combustible fugitive dust was not allowed to accumulate in the Nordson automated powder coating booth area at the work site.  The Nordson powder coat booth operator swept the floor around the booth with a broom several times per shift to remove fugitive, combustible dust from the floors.  Accumulated fugitive dust was also observed on pipes, walls, floors, berms, handrails, edges, beams, booths, oven, conveyor and stored materials in the powder coating booth area.

Issued

Dec 9, 2015

Abate by

Dec 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 244091309135

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.107(l)(4)(ii): Surfaces shall be cleaned in such manner as to avoid scattering dust to other places or creating dust clouds.  a.  At the work site, the Nordson powder coat booth operator swept the floor around the booth with a broom several times per shift.  The employer did not provide employees with an alternative method of cleaning up the combustible dust so that it did not scatter powder or create dust clouds such as (but not limited to) the use of a Class II-rated industrial vacuum.

Issued

Dec 9, 2015

Abate by

Dec 24, 2015

Penalty

Initial $5,000 · Current $3,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances 22609135

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(3): The employer shall ensure that each affected employee who wears prescription lenses while engaged in operations that involve eye hazards wears eye protection that incorporates the prescription in its design, or wears eye protection that can be worn over the prescription lenses without disturbing the proper position of the prescription lenses or the protective lenses.  a.  At the work site, employees wearing prescription eyewear were not provided with safety glasses to be worn over their prescription eyewear nor prescription safety glasses.  These employees were exposed to flying metal pieces and sparks during the cutting and welding of metal wire.

Issued

Dec 9, 2015

Abate by

Mar 1, 2016

Penalty

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

Hazardous substances 9135

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(a)(2): A respirator shall be provided to each employee when such equipment is necessary to protect the health of such employee. The employer shall provide the respirators which are applicable and suitable for the purpose intended. The employer shall be responsible for the establishment and maintenance of a respiratory protection program, which shall include the requirements outlined in paragraph (c) of this section. The program shall cover each employee required by this section to use a respirator.    a.  At the work site, employees provided with respirators for voluntary use were exposed to respirable dust above the Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) while operating a Nordson Electrostatic Powder Coating System, Model No. N524 Serial No C96-362-0. The employer failed to develop and implement a written respiratory protection program and to ensure the use of respiratory protection when employees were exposed to hazardous levels of air contaminants.

Issued

Dec 9, 2015

Abate by

Jan 13, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9135

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(2): Employee(s) were exposed to an airborne concentration of Total Dust listed in Table Z-1 in excess of the 8 hour Time Weighted Average concentration of 15 mg/m3:  a.  At the work site, on July 21, 2015, an employee operating a Nordson Excel 2000 (Model No. N524) electrostatic powder coating spray booth was exposed to airborne powder coating dust at an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) of 27.0 mg/m3, approximately 1.8 times the permissible exposure limit (PEL) for particulates not otherwise regulated (PNOR), total dust fraction of 15 mg/m3.  The exposure was derived from samples collected over a 464 minute period.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of 16 minutes.

Issued

Dec 9, 2015

Abate by

Jan 28, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9135

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(e): To achieve compliance with paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, administrative or engineering controls must first be determined and implemented whenever feasible. When such controls are not feasible to achieve full compliance, protective equipment or any other protective measures shall be used to keep the exposure of employees to air contaminants within the limits prescribed in this section. Any equipment and/or technical measures used for this purpose must be approved for each particular use by a competent industrial hygienist or other technically qualified person.  a.  At the work site, the employer failed to implement engineering and/or administrative controls to reduce exposures to below the OSHA PEL for employees who operated a Nordson Excel 2000 electrostatic powder coat booth.  On July 21, 2015, an employee operating a Nordson Excel 2000 (Model No. N524) electrostatic powder coating spray booth was exposed to airborne powder coat dust at an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) of 27.0 mg/m3, approximately 1.8 times the permissible exposure limit (PEL) for particulates not otherwise regulated (PNOR), total dust fraction of 15 mg/m3.