OSHA Inspection: ELBEX CORPORATION

Issued

Jan 24, 2017

Abate by

Feb 1, 2017

Penalty

Initial $8,873 · Current $5,325 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): In any workplace where respirators are necessary to protect employee health or whenever respirators are required by the employer, a written respiratory protection program with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented:    On or about October 21, 2016, the operator working in the mill department was required to wear respiratory protection as a result of being overexposed to respirable dust containing crystalline silica in 2015. However, the company had not implemented a written respiratory protection program.

Issued

Jan 24, 2017

Abate by

Feb 17, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(c): An employee was exposed to respirable dust containing crystalline silica in excess of the 8-hour time weighted average limits of (0.156 mg/m3) listed in Table Z-3:  On or about November 2, 2016, the operator working in the mill department was exposed to respirable dust containing crystalline silica at 0.321 mg/m3 which is approximately 2.06 times the permissable exposure limit (PEL) of 0.156 mg/m3; exposure calculations included a zero increment for 76 minutes not sampled. At this time employees are being exposed to levels above the PEL.

Issued

Jan 24, 2017

Abate by

Mar 13, 2017

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):  For the employee including, but not limited to, the employee whose exposure is described in Citation 1, Item 1(b):  On or about November 2, 2016, the operator working in the mill department was exposed to respirable dust containing crystalline silica at 0.321 mg/m3 which is approximately 2.06 times the permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 0.156 mg/m3; exposure calculations included a zero increment for 76 minutes not sampled. At this time employees are being exposed to levels above the PEL and the employer shall require mandatory use of a respirator until feasible engineering controls can be put in place.  General methods of control applicable in this circumstance include, but are not limited to the following:  1) Re-evaluate the overhead ventilation systems for ways  to improve air movement/capture of the high levels of silica dust generated while milling to further ensure the most adequate removal of the silica dust from the worker exposure;  2) Re-evaluate the existing work practices in the in the mill department to reduce the worker exposures to the airborne silica dust;  3) Explore the utilization of a downdraft table with local exhaust ventilation to further assist in removal of the high levels of silica dust.

Issued

Jan 24, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,802 · Current $2,275 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(6)(i): Except as provided in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(7) and 29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(8), the employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged or marked with the information required by 29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(1)(i) through 29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(1)(v):    On or about October 12, 2016, the employer did not ensure that paper cups containing nylo bond III and a squirt bottle containing working fluid, located throughout the shop were labeled with the identity of the chemical and the appropriate hazard warning label.

Issued

Jan 24, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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 October 14, 2016, the employer did not provide effective information and training to mill operators, to include but not limited too hazards associated with novisite which contains 70% crystalline silica.

Issued

Jan 24, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2): The employer did not verify that the required workplace hazard assessment has been performed through a written certification that identifies the workplace evaluated, the person certifying that the evaluation has been performed, the date(s) of the hazard assessment, and which identifies the document as a certification of hazard assessment:   On or about October 21, 2016, the workplace hazard assessment did not have the dates the hazard assessment was completed.