OSHA Inspection: APMAR USA, INC.

Issued

Jul 21, 2016

Abate by

Sep 7, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,120 Reduced

Hazardous substances 07311520

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.94(a)(3)(i)(a): All air inlets and access openings were not baffled or so arranged that by the combination of inward air flow and baffling the escape of abrasive or dust particles into an adjacent work area will be minimized and visible spurts of dust will not be observed.    In the Berkshire polishing room at 175 Progress Avenue Springfield, MA: On or about June 8, 2016, the employer did not ensure that the glove access openings contained installed rubber gloves which resulted in visible dust on the exterior of the Cyclo-Blast, model 4228 F, bead blast cabinet while a polisher used the cabinet.

Issued

Jul 21, 2016

Abate by

Dec 5, 2016

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $1,960 Reduced

Hazardous substances 8111

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 (TWA) sound level of 85 decibels (dB) measured on the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent:    In the polishing rooms at 175 Progress Avenue Springfield, MA: On or about June 8, 2016, the employer did not administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.9(c) through (o) for polishers in that noise dosimetry revealed one polisher had an 8-hour TWA sound level exposure of 86.8 dB which is 1.02 times the action level of 85 dB.

Issued

Jul 21, 2016

Abate by

Dec 5, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $1,400 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0691

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.124(h)(4): Employees working with chromic acid were not provided with periodic examinations of their exposed body parts, especially their nostrils:    On the manual plating line at 175 Progress Avenue Springfield, MA: On or about June 8, 2016, the employer did not ensure employees working on the manual electroplating line were provided periodic examinations of their exposed body parts, especially their nostrils.

Issued

Jul 21, 2016

Abate by

Dec 5, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.124(j)(2)(i): The employer did not ensure airflow was adequate at least quarterly during operation:  On the manual, auto and Berkshire plating lines at 175 Progress Avenue Springfield, MA: On or about June 8, 2016. the employer did not ensure airflow is adequate at least quarterly during operation of dip tanks in the three plating areas within the facility.

Issued

Jul 21, 2016

Abate by

Dec 5, 2016

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $1,960 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0731

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c): The employer did not develop and implement a written respiratory protection program with required worksite-specific procedures and elements for required respirator use:    In the two polishing rooms at 175 Progress Avenue Springfield, MA: On or about June 8, 2016, the employer had not developed and implemented a written respiratory protection program for polishers who were required to wear filtering facepiece device (FFPD) respirators.

Issued

Jul 21, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0731

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(iii): The employer did not identify and evaluate the respiratory hazard(s) in the workplace; including a reasonable estimate of employee exposures to respiratory hazards and identification of the contaminant's chemical state and physical form:  In the polishing rooms at 175 Progress Avenue Springfield, MA: On or about June 8, 2016, the employer had not identified or evaluated the respiratory hazards of employees, who were performing polishing and grinding on various parts and who were required to wear filtering facepiece device (FFPD) N-95 respirators.

Issued

Jul 21, 2016

Abate by

Dec 5, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:  In the polishing rooms at 175 Progress Avenue Springfield, MA: On or about June 8, 2016, the employer had not provided medical evaluations to employees who were required to wear filtering facepiece device respirators during polishing activities.

Issued

Jul 21, 2016

Abate by

Dec 5, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0731

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):  In the two polishing rooms at 175 Progress Avenue Springfield, MA: On or about June 8, 2016, the employer did not ensure that employees, required to wear filtering facepiece device (FFPD) respirators during polishing activities, were provided and passed QLFTs or QNFTs.

Issued

Jul 21, 2016

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $1,960 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1): One or more methods of machine guarding was not provided to protect the operator and other employees in the machine area from hazards such as those created by point of operation, ingoing nip points, rotating parts, flying chips and sparks:    In the Berkshire polishing room at 175 Progress Avenue Springfield, MA: On or about May 13, 2016, the employer did not ensure a method of guarding was provided for the various polishing equipment in the Berkshire room to protect polishers from rotating parts.

Issued

Jul 21, 2016

Abate by

Dec 5, 2016

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $1,960 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0731

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(2): Employee(s) were exposed to an airborne concentration of 0.63 milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m3) of air for Copper fume listed in Table Z-1, which is 6.3 times in excess of the 8 hour Time Weighted Average (TWA) concentration of 0.1 mg/m3:    In the two polishing and grinding rooms at 175 Progress Avenue Springfield, MA: On or about June 8, 2016, the employer did not ensure that an employee was not exposed in excess of the Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for Copper fume in that an employee performing pneumatic grinding of various parts and was exposed to an airborne Copper fume concentration of 0.63 mg/m3 which was six point three (6.3) times greater than the PEL of 0.1 mg/m3.

Issued

Jul 21, 2016

Abate by

Dec 5, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0731

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)(2):  In the polishing rooms at 175 Progress Avenue Springfield, MA: On or about June 8, 2016, the employer did not ensure feasible administrative or engineering controls were implemented for a polisher performing grinding with a pneumatic hand grinder without local exhaust ventilation while exposed to an airborne Copper fume concentration of 0.63 mg/m3 which was six point three (6.3) times greater than the PEL of 0.1 mg/m3.

Issued

Jul 21, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $1,640 Reduced

Hazardous substances 069107312310

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:    In the electroplating facility at 175 Progress Avenue Springfield, MA: On or about May 18,2016, the employer had not developed or maintained a written hazard communication program for the electroplaters, polishers, wastewater operators and maintenance employees who handle and work with a variety of hazardous chemicals, including but not limited to, Trichrome corrector, Chromic Acid flakes, Lead and Copper and Zinc Oxide fumes.

Issued

Jul 21, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 069107312310

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1)(i): The employer did not compile a list of the hazardous chemicals known to be present using a product identifier that was referenced on the appropriate safety data sheet (SDS):  In the electroplating facility at 175 Progress Avenue Springfield, MA: On or about May 18, 2016, the employer had not compiled a list of hazardous chemicals used in facility and did not have a product identifier which referenced the appropriate SDS.

Issued

Jul 21, 2016

Abate by

Dec 5, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0691073114602310

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(ii): Employee training did not include the physical and health hazards of the chemicals in the work area:  In the electroplating and polishing areas at 175 Progress Avenue Springfield, MA: Onor about May 18, 2016, the employer did not ensure the employee training includes physical and health hazard hazards of the hazardous chemicals used in the facility including, but not limited to, Trichrome corrector, Chromic Acid flakes, Lead, Copper and Zinc Oxide fumes.