OSHA Inspection: GEIB REFINING CORPORATION

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,850 · Current $1,995 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(a): Protective equipment was not provided, used and maintained in a sanitary and reliable condition whenever necessary:    (a) On or about 6/20/16 the following was observed:        (1) Wet Process Areas:  Available face shields were observed heavily soiled.         (2) Furnace Areas:  Available heat gloves, heat aprons, and heat face shields were in poor condition.         (3) Ball Mill:  Available ear muffs were heavily soiled.         (4) Wet Process and Laboratory Areas:  Chemically resistant aprons were not provided.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2): The employer did not verify, through a written certification, that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed:    (a) Workplace:  The employer did not verify through a written certification that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed.    Abatement Note:  Once the PPE Hazard Assessment is completed you shall:    1) Certify that the hazard assessment has been performed through a written certification in accordance with 1910.132 (d)(2),    2) Provide training to affected employees in proper use of required PPE (1910.132 (f)(1)), and     Guidance on conducting and documenting a PPE Hazard Assessment can be found on OSHA's website at:      http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/personalprotectiveequipment/

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1): The employer did not ensure that each affected employee uses appropriate eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids, chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation:    (a)  On or about 6/20/16 the employer did not provide employees with appropriate eye and face protection.  The following was noted:    (1) Employees exposed to molten metals while working in furnace operations were not provided with safety glasses   (2) Employees exposed to corrosive chemicals while working in the laboratory were not provided with face shields

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.138(a): The employer did not select and require employee(s) to use appropriate hand protection when employees' hands were exposed to hazards such as those from skin absorption of harmful substances; severe cuts or lacerations; severe abrasion; punctures; chemical burns; thermal burns; and harmful temperature extremes:    (a) Laboratory:  On or about 6/20/16 the employer did not select and require that employees working with corrosive liquids wear protective gloves.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,563 · Current $2,494 Reduced

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) Workplace:  On or about 6-20-16, the employer did not maintain a written respiratory protection program that included the provisions of 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:  (a) Incineration Area:  On or about 6-20-16, the employer did not identify and evaluate employee exposures to respiratory hazards, including ash dusts.  (b) Ball Mill Area:  On or about 6-20-16, the employer did not identify and evaluate employee exposures to respiratory hazards, including ash dusts.  (c) Laboratory:  On or about 6-2-16, the employer did not identify and evaluate employee exposures to respiratory hazards, including ash dusts and lead based processing aides.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

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:    (a) Workplace:  On or about 6-20-16, the employer did not provide medical evaluations to determine the employees' ability to use a respirator before the employee was required to use a respirator.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(h)(2)(i): Respirators were not stored to protect them from damage, contamination, dust, sunlight, extreme temperatures, excessive moisture, and damaging chemicals or  were not packed or stored to prevent deformation of the facepiece and exhalation valve:  (a) Wet Process Areas:  On or about 6-20-16, respirators were not stored to protect them from contamination.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,563 · Current $2,494 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(c)(1): Employee(s) were exposed to lead at concentrations greater than fifty micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an eight-hour period:    (a) Lab Area:  Employees were exposed to lead in excess of the eight hour time weighted average permissible exposure level (PEL) of .05 milligrams per cubic meter (fifty micrograms per cubic meter).    On or about 9/15/16, an employee engaged in the fire flux assay method was monitored for inorganic lead for 222 minutes.  This employee was exposed to .127 milligrams per cubic meter, which is over the PEL.  A zero exposure level was considered for the remaining 258 minutes of the eight hour work day.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(d)(2): An initial determination was not made to determine if any employee may be exposed to lead at or above the action level:    (a) Lab Area: The employer did not conduct initial air monitoring to determine if employees were exposed to lead at or above the eight hour time weighted average action level of .03 milligrams per cubic meter.    On or about 9/15/16, an employee engaged in the fire flux assay method was monitored for inorganic lead for 222 minutes.  This employee was exposed to .127 milligrams per cubic meter, which is over the PEL.  A zero exposure level was considered for the remaining 258 minutes of the eight hour work day.    (b) Ball Mill Room: The employer did not conduct initial air monitoring to determine if employees were exposed to lead at or above the eight hour time weighted average action level of .03 milligrams per cubic meter.    On or about 9/15/16, an employee engaged in ball mill operations was monitored for inorganic lead for 412 minutes.  This employee was exposed to .033 milligrams per cubic meter, which is over the action level.  A zero exposure level was considered for the remaining 68 minutes of the work day.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(e)(1)(i): For any employees exposed to lead above the permissible exposure limit for more than 30 days per year the employer did not implement engineering and work practice controls (including administrative controls) were not implemented to reduce and maintain employee exposure to lead:      (a) Lab Area:  The employer did not implement engineering or work practice controls to limit employee exposure to lead in excess of the eight hour time weighted permissible exposure limit (PEL) .05 milligrams per cubic meter;      On or about 9/15/16, an employee engaged in the fire flux assay method was monitored for inorganic lead for 222 minutes.  This employee was exposed to .127 milligrams per cubic meter, which is over the PEL.  A zero exposure level was considered for the remaining 258 minutes of the eight hour work day.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,138 · Current $1,496 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(h)(1): All surfaces were not maintained as free as practicable of accumulations of lead:    (a) Worksite:  On or about 9/15/16 the employer did not ensure all working surfaces were maintained as free as practical from accumulations of lead:        (1) Laboratory Area: The administrative work station surface had  181.7 ug/ft2 inorganic lead       (2) Incinerator Area: The administrative work station surface had 137.2 ug/ft2 inorganic lead       (3) Ball Mill Area:  The administrative work station surface had 119 ug/ft2 inorganic lead       (4) Wet Processing Area:  The administrative work station area had 130.2 ug/ft2 inorganic lead

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1027(k)(1): Surfaces were not maintained as free as practicable of accumulations of cadmium:    (a) Worksite:  On or about 9/15/16, the employer did not ensure all working surfaces were maintained as free as practical from accumulations of cadmium:        (1) Incinerator Area: The administrative workstation surface had 4.7 ug/ft2,      (2) Wet Processing Area:  The administrative work station area had 7.5 ug/ft2

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,563 · Current $2,494 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(j)(1)(i): A medical surveillance program was not instituted for all employee(s) who were, or could be exposed to lead above the action level for more than thirty days per year:    (a) Lab Area:  The employer did not implement a medical surveillance program for employees who were exposed to lead in excess of the eight hour time weighted average action level of .03 milligrams per cubic meter.    On or about 9/15/16, an employee engaged in the fire flux assay method was monitored for inorganic lead for 222 minutes.  This employee was exposed to .127 milligrams per cubic meter, which is over the action level.  A zero exposure level was considered for the remaining 258 minutes of the eight hour work day.    (b) Ball Mill  Area:  The employer did not implement a medical surveillance program for employees who were exposed to lead in excess of the eight hour time weighted average action level of .03 milligrams per cubic meter.    On or about 9/15/16, an employee engaged in ball mill operations was monitored for inorganic lead for 412 minutes.  This employee was exposed to .033 milligrams per cubic meter, which is over the action level. A zero exposure level was considered for the remaining 68 minutes of the work day.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1025(m)(2)(i): 29 CFR 1910.1025(m)(2)(i): Warning signs bearing the legend: WARNING, LEAD WORK AREA, POISON, NO SMOKING OR EATING, were not posted in each work area where the permissible exposure limit (PEL) was exceeded:                                                     (a) Lab Area: Where the eight hour time weighted average permissible exposure level  (PEL) was exceeded for inorganic lead, the employer did not post warning signs in this area.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,850 · Current $1,995 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1)(i): At this establishment, the written hazard communication program, developed and implemented by this employer, did not include a complete list of the hazardous chemicals known to be present using an identity that was referenced on the appropriate safety data sheet:     (a) Laboratory:  On or about 6-20-16, the employer's list of hazardous chemicals did not include processing aids that contained lead, including Fire Assay Flux by Anachemia Mining.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Aug 31, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(5)(ii): The employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged or marked with the appropriate hazard warnings:    (a) Facility-wide:  On or about 6/20/16, the employer did not ensure that each container in the workplace was labeled with the appropriate hazard warnings.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Aug 31, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(8): The employer did not maintain copies of the required safety data sheets for each hazardous chemical in the workplace:    (a) Laboratory:  On or about 6/20/16, the employer did not maintain copies of the required safety data sheets for each chemical in the workplace, including Fire Assay Flux by Anachemia Mining.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(iv): Employee training did not include the details of the hazard communication program developed by the employer, including an explanation of the labeling system and the safety data sheet, and how employees can obtain and use the appropriate hazard information:      (a) Facility-wide:  On or about 6/20/16, the employer had not trained employees in the details of the 2012 "Global Harmonization System" labeling and safety data sheet elements.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.120(q)(8)(i): Employees who were trained in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.120(q)(6) did not receive annual refresher training of sufficient content and duration to maintain their competencies or did not demonstrate competency in those areas at least yearly:    (a) Workplace:  On or about 6-20-16, the employer did not ensure that employees trained in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.120(q)(6) received annual refresher training.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $400 · Current $232 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:    (a) Wet Process Areas:  On or about 6/20/16, the eye wash facilities in the gold recovery and in the gold stripping areas were not maintained clean and ready for immediate use.    (b) Wet Process Areas:  On or about 6/20/16, the eye wash in the gold recovery room had broken eye wash cup covers.

Issued

Dec 8, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(6): The employer did not certify that each operator has been trained and evaluated as required by this paragraph (l):    (a) Facility-wide:  On or about 6/20/16, the employer had not certified that each powered industrial truck operator had been trained and evaluated as required.