OSHA Inspection: YRC INC.

Issued

Jun 7, 2017

Abate by

Jul 3, 2017

Penalty

Initial $12,675 · Current $6,325 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.120(q)(3)(ii): The individual in charge of the incident command system did not identify, to the extent possible, all hazardous substances or conditions present and did not address, as appropriate, site analysis, maximum exposure limits, and hazardous substance handling procedures:      a) On or about December 21, 2016, at the above located worksite, an employee was allowed to enter a trailer containing an unknown concentration of Lithium Hydroxide. The individual in charge of a response to a release of Lithium Hydroxide did not identify, to the extent possible, the hazardous substance present and did not conduct an effective site analysis and determine the appropriate, hazardous substance handling procedures.

Issued

Jun 7, 2017

Abate by

Jul 3, 2017

Penalty

Initial $12,675 · Current $12,675

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.120(q)(3)(iii): Based on the hazardous substances and/or conditions present, the individual in charge of the Incident Command System (ICS) did not implement appropriate emergency operations and did not ensure that the personal protective equipment worn was appropriate for the hazards encountered:       a) On or about December 21, 2016, at the above located worksite, an employee was allowed to enter a trailer containing an unknown concentration of Lithium Hydroxide. The individual in charge did not ensure that personal protective equipment such as goggles, skin protection and proper gloves were worn.

Issued

Jun 7, 2017

Abate by

Jul 3, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.120(q)(3)(iv): Employees engaged in emergency response and exposed to hazardous substances presenting an inhalation hazard or potential inhalation hazard, did not wear positive-pressure self-contained breathing apparatus until such time that the individual in charge of the incident command system determined through the use of air monitoring that a decreased level of respiratory protection would not result in hazardous exposures to employees:    a) On or about December 21, 2016, at the above located worksite an employee was allowed to enter a trailer containing an unknown concentration of Lithium Hydroxide while wearing only a paper mask (not a respirator). The employer did not require the employee engaged in an emergency response and exposed to an inhalation hazard to wear a positive-pressure self-contained breathing apparatus until such time that the individual in charge of the incident determined through the use of air monitoring that a decreased level of respiratory protection would not result in hazardous exposures to employees.