OSHA Inspection: BUTLER EAGLE

Issued

Sep 8, 2015

Abate by

Oct 11, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,100 Reduced

Hazardous substances 8111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(c)(1): A continuing, effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.95(c) through (n) was not instituted when employee noise exposures equaled or exceeded an 8 hour time weighted average sound level (TWA) of 85 dBA:  a)  In the Facility, on or about September 1, 2015 - The employer did not institute a continuing effective hearing conservation program when employee noise exposures exceeded an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 dBA.  An employee designated as a Shipper was exposed to noise at a level of 66.6% of the allowable limit during a 160 minute sampling period on September 1, 2015.  This exposure is equivalent to a sound level of 87.07 dBA for the dose and time of employee exposure and is 1.02 times in excess of the 85 dBA action level (50%) at which the hearing conservation program is required.

Issued

Sep 8, 2015

Abate by

Oct 11, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 8111

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)  In the Facility, on or about September 1, 2015 - The employer did not establish and maintain an audiometric testing program to employees whose noise exposure exceeded an 8-hour time weighted average exposure of 85 decibels.  (See description of employee noise exposure in Citation 1, Item 1, Instance a).

Issued

Sep 8, 2015

Abate by

Oct 11, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 8111

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)  In the Facility, on or about September 1, 2015 - The employer did not provide training to employees whose noise exposure exceeded an 8-hour time weighted average exposure of 85 decibels.  (See description of employee noise exposure in Citation 1, Item 1, Instance a).

Issued

Sep 8, 2015

Abate by

Oct 11, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 8111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(l)(1): The employer did not post of copy of 29 CFR 1910.95 in the workplace:   a)  In the Facility, on or about September 1, 2015 - The employer did not post a copy of 29 CFR 1910.95, the Occupational Noise Standard, in the workplace.

Issued

Sep 8, 2015

Abate by

Oct 11, 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)  In the Facility, on or about August 25, 2015 - The employer did not develop, implement or maintain a written hazard communication program at the facility.  Employees work with chemicals including Tech Wash which contains mineral spirits.

Issued

Sep 8, 2015

Abate by

Oct 11, 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)  In the Facility, on or about August 25, 2015 - The employer did not provide information and training to employees on the hazardous chemicals in their work areas.

Issued

Sep 8, 2015

Abate by

Oct 11, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2): The employer did not verify, through a written certification, that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed:  a)  In the Facility, on or about August 25, 2015 - The employer did not verify through a written certification that the required written workplace personal protective equipment hazard assessment had been performed.  Employees at the facility utilize personal protective equipment, including but not limited to nitrile gloves, hearing protection and face shields.