OSHA Inspection: HARDY INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES

Issued

Jan 25, 2016

Abate by

Feb 27, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,100 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) On September 24, 2015, a DAF Area employee was exposed to continuous noise levels at a time weighted average (TWA) 90.5 dbA (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dbA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 450 minute sampling period.   Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 30 minutes not sampled.     b)  On September 24, 2015, a Still Area employee was exposed to continuous noise levels at a time weighted average (TWA) 92.7 dbA (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dbA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 450 minute sampling period.   Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 30 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Jan 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(e): The employer did not notify each employee exposed at or above an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels of the results of the monitoring:    On or about December 29, 2015, the employer did not provide the noise sampling results from previous noise monitoring done by HITT Consulting, Inc. to employees exposed to noise at 90.5 dbA and 92.7 dbA.

Issued

Jan 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,260 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.151(c): Where employees were exposed to injurious corrosive materials, suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body were not provided within the work area for immediate emergency use:    On or about December 29, 2015, the employer did not provide a eye wash station to employees who were exposed to 25% sodium hydroxide while adding to the industrial waste water.

Issued

Jan 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,260 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.253(b)(4)(i): Oxygen cylinders were stored near highly combustible material, especially oil and grease; or near reserve stocks of carbide and acetylene or other fuel-gas cylinders, or near other substance likely to cause or accelerate fire:     On or about December 29, 2015, the employer had oxygen tanks and hydrogen tanks stored together outside the lab area. The stock reserves of hydrogen and oxygen were stored near the back entrance of the lab and near the exit route for the semi trucks.

Issued

Jan 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(6): The employer did not provide the basic advisory information on respirators, as presented in Appendix D of 29 CFR 1910.134, in written or oral format to employees who wear respirators when such use was not required by the employer:    On or about December 29, 2015, the employer did not provide employees with Appendix D of the respiratory standard when voluntarily using N-95 filtering face piece respirators while working around the prill tower during the blow down.

Issued

Jan 25, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(6)(i): Except as provided in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(7) and 29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(8), the employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged or marked with the information required by 29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(1)(i) through 29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(1)(v):    On or about December 29, 2015, the employer did not ensure that tanks of 25% sodium hydroxide were labeled with the identity of the chemical. Unlabeled containers were located on the waste water treatment facility in the DAF area.