OSHA Inspection: STONE HOUSE ENTERPRISES, INC.

Issued

Apr 7, 2016

Abate by

May 24, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9010

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required respirator use:    a. On or about March 14, 2016, employees were required to wear a N95 respirator when using a wet stone router and wet polishing natural stone in the fabrication area of the shop. The employer did not developer implement a written respiratory protection program that addressed the worksite-specific procedures such as but not limited to employee fit testing, and training on the use, maintenance and care of the respirators.      The employer did not implement and administer an effective respiratory protection program in that they did:      1)  Designate a program administrator to oversee the respiratory protection program in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(3);      2)  Provide a medical evaluation to determine the employees ability to use a respirator in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1);      3)  Ensure that an employee using a tight-fitting face-piece respirator is fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2); and        4)  Provide effective training to employees who are required to use respirators in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.134(k).

Issued

Apr 7, 2016

Abate by

May 24, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9010

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(c): Employee(s) were exposed to an airborne concentration of respirable silica dust listed in Table Z-3 in excess of the Permissible Exposure Limit(PEL):  a. On or about March 16, 2015 where an employee was using a wet router and wet polishing a natural stone countertop in fabrication shop was overexposed to respirable silica dust at a concentration of 1.63 mg/m3 expressed as an 8-hour time weighted average of approximately 2.11 times the daily Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 0.77 mg/m3 based on a 212 minute sampling period; exposure calculations included a zero-increment for the 268 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Apr 7, 2016

Abate by

May 24, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9010

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(e): Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not determined and implemented to achieve compliance with the limits prescribed in 29 CFR 1910.1000(a) through (d):  a. On or about March 16, 2015 where an employee was using a wet router and wet polishing a natural stone countertop in fabrication shop was overexposed to respirable silica dust at a concentration of 1.63 mg/m3 expressed as an 8-hour time weighted average of approximately 2.11 times the daily Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 0.77 mg/m3 based on a 212 minute sampling period; exposure calculations included a zero-increment for the 268 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Apr 7, 2016

Abate by

May 24, 2016

Penalty

Initial $1,200 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9010

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): Employer had not developed or implemented a written hazard communication program included the requirements outlined in 29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1)(i) and (e)(1)(ii):     a. On or about March 14, 2016, employees used hazardous chemicals such as, but not limited to Acetone, Omicron clear knife grade , and acetylene while working in the fabrication areas of the shop and the employer did not develop or implement at the workplace a written hazard communication program.

Issued

Apr 7, 2016

Abate by

May 24, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9010

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. On or about March 14, 2016, employees used hazardous chemicals such as, but not limited to Acetone, Omicron clear knife grade , and acetylene while working in the fabrication areas of the shop and the employer did not provide an explanation of the new labeling system and safety data sheet.