OSHA Inspection: U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION, SEATTLE PORT OF ENTRY

Issued

Apr 8, 2016

Abate by

Apr 23, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1): The employer did not assess the workplace to determine if hazards were present, or were likely to be present, which necessitated the use of personal protective equipment:  a)      The employer did not evaluate the hazard of employees cleaning up mouse feces on their desktops and in desk drawers during the infestation.

Issued

Apr 8, 2016

Abate by

Apr 23, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1)(i): The employer did not select and have each affected employee use, the types of personal protective equipment that would protect the affected employee(s) from the hazards identified in the hazard assessment:  a)      The employer did not ensure that employees wore gloves and cleaned feces with bleach wipes or another bleach containing cleaner.

Issued

Apr 8, 2016

Abate by

Apr 23, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1)(ii): The employer did not communicate personal protection equipment selection decision(s) to each affected employee:  a)      The employer did not instruct employees to wear gloves and clean feces with bleach wipes or  another bleach containing cleaner.

Issued

Apr 8, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(6)(ii): 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 product identifier and words, pictures, symbols, or combination thereof, which provide at least general information regarding the hazards of the chemicals and which, in conjunction with the other information immediately available to employees under the hazard communication program, would provide employees with the specific information regarding the physical and health hazards of the hazardous chemical:   a)  Agriculture Cubicle 3rd from the Exit discharge door;   A secondary bottle of isopropyl alcohol did not have a hazard label warning.

Issued

Apr 8, 2016

Abate by

Apr 18, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(1): Employers did not have a safety data sheet in the workplace for each hazardous chemical which they use:  a)  Garage;  The employer did not have safety data sheets for propane.  b)  Workout Room;  The employer did not have safety data sheets for Spray Nine, Multi-Purpose Cleaner and Disinfectant.

Issued

Apr 8, 2016

Abate by

May 13, 2016

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)      Employee training did not include Global Harmonization training which includes 2012 program requirements, pictograms, safety data sheet layout and information.

Issued

Apr 8, 2016

Abate by

May 13, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(h)(1): All surfaces were not maintained as free as practicable of accumulations of lead:  a)      Gun Cleaning Area;  There was surface lead contamination on the table on which guns were cleaned.   The U.S. Customs and Border Protection was previously cited for a violation of this occupational safety and health standard or its equivalent standard, which was contained in OSHA inspection number 1009466, citation number 2, item number 1B and was affirmed as a final order on March 4, 2015, with respect to a workplace located at Sumas, Washington.  The U.S. Customs and Border Protection was previously cited for a violation of this occupational safety and health standard or its equivalent standard, which was contained in OSHA inspection number 977496, citation number 1, item number 1C and was affirmed as a final order on July 2, 2014, with respect to a workplace located at Lynden, Washington.  The U.S. Customs and Border Protection was previously cited for a violation of this occupational safety and health standard or its equivalent standard, which was contained in OSHA inspection number 977497, citation number 1, item number 1 and was affirmed as a final order on July 2, 2014, with respect to a workplace located at Ferndale, Washington.

Issued

Apr 8, 2016

Abate by

May 13, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1904.30(a): Employer did not maintain separate OSHA 300 Logs for each establishment that is expected to be in operation for one year or longer:  a)      The employer had all the Puget Sound Area Custom and Border Protection employees on one log and 300A form for 2013 .  b)      The employer had all the Puget Sound Area Custom and Border Protection employees on one log and 300A form for 2014.

Issued

Apr 8, 2016

Abate by

May 13, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1904.40(a): The employer did not provide an authorized government representative the records within the four business hours:    a)      Copies of the OSHA 300 logs for 2013, 2014 and 2015 were not provided to the compliance officer.  Copies of the 300 A summary forms were provided, but not the logs which lists employees names and types of injuries.