OSHA Inspection: ANNAT, INC.

Issued

Feb 24, 2017

Abate by

Mar 22, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,622 · Current $1,811 Reduced

Hazardous substances 2140

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:    On or about September 8, 2016, at the above addressed worksite, the employer did not select or require the use of appropriate eye and/or face protection for employees who were required to work with hazardous corrosive chemicals, such as, but not limited to, Liquid Renu-It (pH 14) while performing screen printing operations.

Issued

Feb 24, 2017

Abate by

Mar 22, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,622 · Current $1,811 Reduced

Hazardous substances 2140

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.138(a): The employer did not select and require employees to use appropriate hand protection when employees hands were exposed to hazardous condition(s):    On or about September 8, 2016, at the above addressed worksite, the employer did not require the use of appropriate hand protection for employees who were required to work with hazardous corrosive chemicals, such as, but not limited to, Liquid Renu-It (pH 14) while performing screen printing operations.

Issued

Feb 24, 2017

Abate by

Mar 22, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,622 · Current $1,811 Reduced

Hazardous substances 2140

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:      On or about September 8, 2016, at the above addressed worksite, the employer did not provide suitable facilities for quick drenching to employees who were required to work with hazardous corrosive chemicals, such as, but not limited to, Liquid Renu-It (pH 14) while performing screen printing operations.

Issued

Feb 24, 2017

Abate by

Mar 22, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,622 · Current $1,811 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 power industrial truck:    On or about September 8 2016, at the above addressed worksite, the employer did not ensure each powered industrial truck operator had successfully completed training and evaluation prior to operating powered industrial trucks.

Issued

Feb 24, 2017

Abate by

Mar 22, 2017

Penalty

Initial $5,070 · Current $2,535 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(p)(1): Powered industrial truck(s) found to be in need of repair, defective, or in any way unsafe had not been  taken out of service until restored to safe operating condition(s):    a) On or about September 8 2016, at the above addressed worksite, the employer did not ensure that the Toyota sit down type forklift (Model#02-6FG430. Serial# 61437), which was in need of repair due to defective brakes, broken seat and worn/damaged tires, was taken out of service until it had been restored to safe operating condition.    b) On or about September 8 2016, at the above addressed worksite, the employer did not ensure that the Toyota sit down type forklift (Model#7FGU25. Serial# 61641), which was in need of repair due to leaks/bad lines, broken seat and worn/damaged tires, was taken out of service until it had been restored to safe operating condition.

Issued

Feb 24, 2017

Abate by

Mar 22, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(q)(7): Industrial trucks were being placed in services after the examination showed condition(s) adversely affecting the safety of the vehicle:  a) On or about September 8 2016, at the above addressed worksite, the employer did not ensure that the Toyota sit down type forklift (Model#02-6FG430. Serial# 61437), was examined after each shift with immediate reporting and correcting of defects. Powered industrial truck examinations/inspections were not performed to detect for possible defects or issues involving, but not limited to, defective brakes, broken seat and worn/damaged tires.  b) On or about September 8 2016, at the above addressed worksite, the employer did not ensure that the Toyota sit down type forklift (Model#7FGU25. Serial# 61641), was examined after each shift with immediate reporting and correcting of defects. Powered industrial truck examinations/inspections were not performed to detect for possible defects or issues involving, but not limited to, performed to detect for possible defects or issues involving, but not limited to, leaks/bad lines, broken seat and worn/damaged tires.

Issued

Feb 24, 2017

Abate by

Mar 22, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,622 · Current $1,811 Reduced

Hazardous substances 2590

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:    On or about September 8, 2016, at the above addressed worksite, the employer did not develop and implement a written hazard communication program for employees performing screen printing operations, and who were required to work with hazardous chemicals, such as, but not limited to, Xylene, ER/35 (Skin and Eye Irritant); Liquid Renu-It (Corrosive, pH 14); and 711 Thinner (Carcinogenic).

Issued

Feb 24, 2017

Abate by

Mar 22, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 2590

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:  On or about September 8, 2016, at the above addressed worksite, the employer did not provide any effective information and training on hazardous chemicals  for employees performing screen printing operations, and who were required to work with hazardous chemicals, such as, but not limited to, Xylene, ER/35 (Skin and Eye Irritant); Liquid Renu-It (Corrosive, pH 14); and 711 Thinner (Carcinogenic).

Issued

Feb 24, 2017

Abate by

Mar 22, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 2590

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:  On or about September 8, 2016, at the above addressed worksite, the employer did not have a written respiratory protection program for employees required to wear 3M 6200 Reusable Half Face Mask respirators in the workplace, while performing screen printing operations.

Issued

Feb 24, 2017

Abate by

Mar 22, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 2590

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employees ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:  On or about September 8, 2016, at the above addressed worksite, the employer did not provide medical evaluations prior to requiring employees to wear 3M 6200 Reusable Half Face Mask respirators in the workplace, while performing screen printing operations.

Issued

Feb 24, 2017

Abate by

Mar 22, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 2590

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):   On or about September 8, 2016, at the above addressed worksite, the employer did not ensure fit testing was done  for employees required to wear 3M 6200 Reusable Half Face Mask respirators in the workplace, while performing screen printing operations.