OSHA Inspection: AIROLDI BROTHERS, INC.

Issued

Dec 8, 2015

Abate by

Jan 27, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,930 · Current $4,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(c)(1): The employer did not administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.9(c) through (o) whenever employee noise exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 decibels measured on the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent:    a)  The employer had not developed or implemented an effective hearing conservation program at the facility for employees exposed to noise.  The employee in the trailer repair area was exposed to continuous noise at 170.2% of the permissible daily noise exposure (8-hour time weighted average sound level of 90 dBA) or an equivalent sound level of approximately 93.8 dBA during the 476 minute sampling period on September 24, 2015;  exposure calculations include a zero increment for the four minutes not sampled.

Issued

Dec 8, 2015

Abate by

Feb 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,960 · Current $2,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii)(B): The energy control procedures did not clearly and specifically outline the steps for shutting down, isolating, blocking and securing machines or equipment to control hazardous energy:    a)  The energy control procedure for the isolation of energy sources when performing maintenance and service on over the road vehicles was inadequate to control the keys for vehicles that were place on the floor until the service was complete.

Issued

Dec 8, 2015

Abate by

Feb 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(6)(i): The employer did not conduct a periodic inspection of the energy control procedure at least annually to ensure that the procedure and the requirement of this standard were being followed:    a)  The employer had not performed or documented an annual evaluation and audit of the energy control program and specific procedures to ensure all requirements were followed since at least 2012.

Issued

Dec 8, 2015

Abate by

Dec 16, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,970 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.215(a)(4): Work rest(s) on grinding machinery were not adjusted closely to the wheel with a maximum opening of one eighth inch:    a)  The work rest was not properly adjusted being 1/2 inch from the grinding wheel for the Dewalt bench grinder Serial #200308 - Y0668 in the truck repair area used by employees repairing vehicles.

Issued

Dec 8, 2015

Abate by

Dec 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.215(b)(9): The distance between the abrasive wheel periphery(s) and the adjustable tongue or the end of the safety guard peripheral member at the top exceeded one fourth inch:    a)  The tongue guard was not properly adjusted being 3/4 inch from the grinding wheel for the Dewalt bench grinder Serial #200308 - Y0668 in the truck repair area used by employees repairing vehicles.

Issued

Dec 8, 2015

Abate by

Dec 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(5)(i): The employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged or marked with the identity of the hazardous chemical(s) contained therein:  a)  The company had not labeled, tagged or marked the containers of axle grease with the identity of the chemicals contained in the truck repair area.

Issued

Dec 8, 2015

Abate by

Dec 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(5)(ii): The employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged or marked with the appropriate hazard warnings:  a)  The company had not labeled, tagged or marked the containers of axle grease with the hazards of the chemicals contained in the truck repair area.

Issued

Dec 8, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(iv):   The details of the hazard communication program developed by the employer, did not include an explanation of the labels received on shipped containers and the workplace labeling system used by their employer; the safety data sheet, including the order of information and how employee could obtain and use the appropriate hazard information:  a)  Employees had not been provided training or information on the changes with the Global Harmonization (GHS) including safety data sheets and pictograms for chemicals used including but not limited to diesel fuel, axle grease, degreaser, LP gas and solvents.