OSHA Inspection: R.J. DOUGHERTY ASSOCIATES LLC

Issued

Jun 2, 2017

Abate by

Jul 20, 2017

Penalty

Initial $12,675 · Current $6,338 Reduced

Hazardous substances 81108111

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 sound level of 85 decibels measured on the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent:     a. In the Lamination Department, an employee using a hand grinder to scuff on a hull was exposed to a noise dose of 203.8%, or an equivalent dBA of 95.1 dBA, which was capable of causing permanent hearing loss. The sampling was performed for 446 minutes during one shift on March 22, 2017.  The employer did not have a continuing, effective hearing conservation program.      b. In the Trim and Grind Area, an employee using hand drills, grinders, and sanders on hulls, decks, and small parts was exposed to a noise dose of 157.4%, or an equivalent dBA of 93.2 dBA, which was capable of causing permanent hearing loss. The sampling was performed for 473 minutes during one shift on March 23, 2017.  The employer did not have a continuing, effective hearing conservation program.    c. In the Lamination Department, an employee using a hand grinder on various boat parts was exposed to a noise dose of 98.5%, or an equivalent dBA of 89.9 dBA, which was capable of causing permanent hearing loss. The sampling was performed for 427 minutes during one shift on March 22, 2017.  The employer did not have a continuing, effective hearing conservation program.    d. In the Finishing Department, Small Parts Area, an employee using hand sanders on various boat parts was exposed to a noise dose of 67.9%, or an equivalent dBA of 87.2 dBA, which was capable of causing permanent hearing loss. The sampling was performed for 476 minutes during one shift on March 23, 2017.  The employer did not have a continuing, effective hearing conservation program.

Issued

Jun 2, 2017

Abate by

Jul 20, 2017

Penalty

Initial $9,054 · Current $4,527 Reduced

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.  On or about March 21, 2017, employees who were required to wear NIOSH approved half-face and full-face respirators while sanding, grinding, and spraying boat hulls, decks and small parts in the Lamination and Finishing Departments had not been provided with medical evaluations prior to wearing the respirators.

Issued

Jun 2, 2017

Abate by

Jul 20, 2017

Penalty

Initial $12,675 · Current $6,338 Reduced

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):    a.  On or about March 21, 2017, employees who were required to wear NIOSH approved 3M half-face and full-face respirators had not been fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator.

Issued

Jun 2, 2017

Abate by

Jul 20, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): Employee(s) using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator were not annually fit tested:  a.  On or about March 21, 2017, employees who were required to wear NIOSH approved 3M half-face and full-face respirators had not received an annual fit test.

Issued

Jun 2, 2017

Abate by

Jul 20, 2017

Penalty

Initial $12,675 · Current $6,338 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9135

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A): Respirators with tight-fitting facepieces were worn by employees who had facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face or that interfered with valve function:    a.  On or about March 21, 2017, employees who were required to wear NIOSH approved 3M half-face and full-face respirators had facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the respirator facepiece and the face.

Issued

Jun 2, 2017

Abate by

Jul 20, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(3): Training was not provided prior to requiring employees to use a respirator in the workplace:(  a. On or about March 21, 2017, employees who were required to wear NIOSH approved half-face and full-face respirators while sanding, grinding, and spraying boat hulls, decks and small parts in the Lamination and Finishing Departments had not received respirator training.

Issued

Jun 2, 2017

Abate by

Aug 31, 2017

Penalty

Initial $12,675 · Current $6,338 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9135

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(a):  The employer shall ensure that no employee is exposed to any substance at a level in excess of the exposure limit given for that substance in Table Z-1 of this standard:    a. In the Trim and Grind Area, an employee using hand drills, grinders, and sanders on hulls, decks, and small parts was exposed to Total Dust at a Time Weighted Average (TWA) of 82.9 milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m3), 5.5 times the permissible exposure limit of 15.0 mg/m3. The sampling was performed for 477 minutes during one shift on March 23, 2017.    b. In the Lamination Department, an employee using a hand grinder on various boat parts was exposed to Total Dust at a Time Weighted Average (TWA) of 30.4 milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m3), 2.0 times the permissible exposure limit of 15.0 mg/m3. The sampling was performed for 424 minutes during one shift on March 22, 2017.

Issued

Jun 2, 2017

Abate by

Aug 31, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9135

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):    a. On or about March 23, 2017, In the Trim and Grind Area, an employee using hand drills, grinders, and sanders on hulls, decks, and small parts was exposed to Total Dust in excess of the OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL), the employer did not determine the feasibility of administrative or engineering controls to reduce exposure levels below the PEL.      b. On or about March 22, 2017, In the Lamination Department, an employee using a hand grinder on various boat parts was exposed to Total Dust in excess of the OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL), the employer did not determine the feasibility of administrative or engineering controls to reduce exposure levels below the PEL.

Issued

Jun 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(d)(1): The employer with a workplace or work operation covered by this standard did not determine the 8-hour time-weighted average exposure for each employee exposed to chromium (VI):  a. On or about March 28, 2017, the employer did not perform initial exposure monitoring for chromium (VI) for employees who welded on stainless steel.