OSHA Inspection: LEE-CO COATING ENTERPRISES

Issued

Jul 28, 2016

Abate by

Aug 9, 2016

Penalty

Initial $1,600 · Current $960 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:  Employees wearing a tight fitting north respirator are exposed to respiratory hazards because they were not first medically evaluated.

Issued

Jul 28, 2016

Abate by

Aug 9, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,200 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1): The employer did not ensure that employee(s) required to use a tight-fitting facepiece respirator passed the appropriate qualitative fit test (QLFT) or quantitative fit test (QNFT):  Employees using tight fitting respirators while being exposed to hazardous chemicals were exposed to respiratory hazards because they were not first fit tested.

Issued

Jul 28, 2016

Abate by

Aug 9, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,200 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k): The employer did not provide comprehensive, understandable training which did not occur annually and/or more often if necessary:  Employees using respirators to protect themselves from inhaling hazardous chemicals were exposed to respiratory hazards because they were not trained in how to wear and take care of their respirators.

Issued

Jul 28, 2016

Abate by

Aug 9, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,400 · Current $1,440 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(1)(ii): The employer did not ensure that each operator had successfully completed the training required by paragraph (l), except as permitted by paragraph (l)(5), prior to permitting an employee to operate a forklift.  The employer did not ensure forklift operators were trained to operate forklifts:       a) Toyota - 8FDU25 - 32335.

Issued

Jul 28, 2016

Abate by

Aug 9, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,680 Reduced

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:  Employees using paints, epoxies, and paint thinners were exposed to chemical hazards because they were never trained in how to safely handle the chemicals.

Issued

Jul 28, 2016

Abate by

Aug 9, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:   Employees engaged in replacing air collectors were required to wear half mask tight fitting respirators but are not provided a written respiratory protection program.

Issued

Jul 28, 2016

Abate by

Aug 9, 2016

Penalty

Initial $400 · Current $240 Reduced

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:  Employees working with paints and epoxies were exposed to chemical hazards because they were not provided a written hazard communication program.