OSHA Inspection: DICKSON INVESTMENT HARDWARE, INC.

Issued

Nov 27, 2015

Abate by

Apr 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $3,920 Reduced

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(b)(1): The employer did not administer feasible administrative or engineering controls for employees who were subjected to sound exceeding those listed in Table G-16:     a.) Abrasive Bead Blasting Area - On or about September 23, 2015, Employee who was bead blasting parts was exposed to continuous noise at 238% of the daily permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 96.2 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 460 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 20 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not utilize feasible engineering controls to reduce noise levels for employees exposed over the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA.    b.) Sprue Cutting Area - On or about September 23, 2015, Employee who was cutting the parts off of the sprue was exposed to continuous noise at 165% of the daily permissible exposure limit 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 93.6 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 460 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 20 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not utilize feasible engineering controls to reduce noise levels for employees exposed over the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA.    c.) Knock Out Area - On or about September 23, 2015, Employee who was separating molds from casting parts was exposed to continuous noise at 131.9% of the daily permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 92 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 446 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 34 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not utilize feasible engineering controls to reduce noise levels for employees exposed over the permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA.    Feasible methods of abatement include, but are not limited to:    1.  Administratively control the time employees work at high noise operations.  2.  Close all openings in the Pangburn Blast cleaning machine to further control noise.  3.  Install new gloves in the Pangburn Blast cleaning machine to close those openings.  4.  Repair high pressure air leak at Pangburn Blast cleaning machine.  5.  Repair damaged to door to the knockout machine to contain noise to the inside of the machine and replace damaged window so that the machine door can remain closed while employees observe operation.  6.  Repair/close other openings in the knockout machine to help contain noise to the interior of the machine.  7.  Line the inside of the knock out machine with high density rubber to reduce impact noise.

Issued

Nov 27, 2015

Abate by

Jan 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $3,920 Reduced

Hazardous substances 81108111

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.) Abrasive Bead Blasting Area - On or about September 23, 2015, Employee who was bead blasting parts was exposed to continuous noise at 238% of the daily permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 96.2 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 460 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 20 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not establish or maintain an audiometric testing program.    b.) Sprue Cutting Area - On or about September 23, 2015, Employee who was cutting the parts off of the sprue was exposed to continuous noise at 165% of the daily permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 93.6 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 460 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 20 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not establish or maintain an audiometric testing program.    c.) Abrasive Sanding Area - On or about September 23, 2015, Employees who were sanding parts were exposed to continuous noise at 110.9% of the daily permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 91.4 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 439 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 41 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not establish or maintain an audiometric testing program.    d.) Knock Out Area - On or about September 23, 2015, Employee who was separating molds from casting parts was exposed to continuous noise at 131.9% of the daily permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 92 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 446 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 34 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not establish or maintain an audiometric testing program.

Issued

Nov 27, 2015

Abate by

Apr 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 81108111

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.) Abrasive Bead Blasting Area - On or about September 23, 2015, Employee who was bead blasting parts was exposed to continuous noise at 238% of the daily permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 96.2 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 460 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 20 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not implement a monitoring program as require to identify employees who should be in a hearing conservation program and to identify the need for engineering controls.    b.) Sprue Cutting Area - On or about September 23, 2015, Employee who was cutting the parts off of the sprue was exposed to continuous noise at 165% of the daily permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 93.6 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 460 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 20 minutes not sampled. The employer did not implement a monitoring program as require to identify employees who should be in a hearing conservation program and to identify the need for engineering controls.      c.) Abrasive Sanding Area- On or about September 23, 2015, Employees who were sanding parts were exposed to continuous noise at 110.9% of the daily permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 91.4 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 439 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 41 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not implement a monitoring program as require to identify employees who should be in a hearing conservation program and to identify the need for engineering controls.      d.) Knock Out Area - On or about September 23, 2015, Employee who was separating molds from casting parts was exposed to continuous noise at 131.9% of the daily permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 92 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 446 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 34 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not implement a monitoring program as require to identify employees who should be in a hearing conservation program and to identify the need for engineering controls.

Issued

Nov 27, 2015

Abate by

Jan 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(k)(2): The training program was not repeated annually for each employee included in the hearing conservation program:    a.) Abrasive Bead Blasting Area - On or about September 23, 2015, Employee who was bead blasting parts was exposed to continuous noise at 238% of the daily permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 96.2 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 460 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 20 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not provide or maintain a noise training program.    b.) Sprue Cutting Area - On or about September 23, 2015, Employee who was cutting the parts off of the sprue was exposed to continuous noise at 165% of the daily permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 93.6 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 460 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 20 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not provide or maintain a noise training program.    c.) Abrasive Sanding Area - On or about September 23, 2015, Employees who were sanding parts were exposed to continuous noise at 110.9% of the daily permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 91.4 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 439 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 41 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not provide or maintain a noise training program.    d.) Knock Out Area - On or about September 23, 2015, Employee who was separating molds from casting parts was exposed to continuous noise at 131.9% of the daily permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 92 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 446 minute sampling period on 9/23/15. A zero exposure was assumed for the 34 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not provide or maintain a noise training program.

Issued

Nov 27, 2015

Abate by

Jan 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(6): Certification. The employer shall certify that each operator has been trained and evaluated as required by this paragraph (l). The certification shall include the name of the operator, the date of the training, the date of the evaluation, and the identity of the person(s) performing the training or evaluation.  a. Establishment - On or about November 3, 2015 The employer did not maintain training certifications for employees who operated a Komatsu forklift.  Exposing employees to forklift operational hazards.