OSHA Inspection: NORMAN MILLER DBA MILLER PALLET

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Nov 30, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,422 · Current $1,882 Reduced

General-duty citation text

OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1): Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which was free from recognized hazards that caused or were likely to cause death or serious physical harm in that employees were exposed to combustible dust explosion, deflagration, or other fire hazards:    The employer did not ensure that employees were protected from wood dust explosion and deflagration hazards due to the utilization of a dust collection system with the following deficiencies:    1.  The dust collection system, to include the cyclone dust collector and associated ductwork, did not have deflagration isolation or venting, spark detection or fire suppression mechanisms installed, was not comprised of metallic materials, and was not bonded or grounded.   2.  Fans and/or blowers used in the dust collection system were not placed in locations upstream of the dust collector appropriate for the nature of the wood dust being generated.   3.  The employer did not ensure that a dust hazard analysis had been performed, to include but not limited to, identifying the explosive and flammable properties of the wood dust being generated.  4.  The employer did not have records or other such documentation regarding the dust collection system, to include but not limited to, paperwork regarding the initial installment of the dust collection system, the manufacturer of the system components, routine system inspections, and fire & safety inspections.

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Aug 15, 2018

Penalty

Initial $3,422 · Current $1,882 Reduced

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(b)(1): When employees were subjected to sound exceeding those listed in Table G-16, feasible administrative or engineering controls were not utilized:    On or about May 22nd, 2017, an employee was exposed to continuous noise levels exceeding 90 dBA over an 8-hour period, resulting in a dose equivalent of 140%, and no engineering or administrative controls were implemented to reduce noise levels.

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Nov 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:  Whenever employee noise exposures equaled or exceeded an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 decibels measured in the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent, the employer did not administer an effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.95(c) through (o):  a. On or about May 22, 2017 an employee was exposed to continuous and intermittent noise at 135.6% of the action level or an equivalent sound level of approximately 92.1 dBA during the 411 minute sample period.  b. On or about May 22, 2017, an employee was exposed to continuous and intermittent noise at 122.7% of the action level or an equivalent sound level of approximately 91.4 dBA during the 449 minute sample period.  c. On or about May 22, 2017, an employee was exposed to continuous and intermittent noise at 98.5% of the action level or an equivalent sound level of approximately 89.8 dBA during the 447 minute sample period.  d. On or about May 22, 2017, an employee was exposed to continuous and intermittent noise at 144.9% of the action level or an equivalent sound level of approximately 92.6 dBA during the 450 minute sample period.  e. On or about May 22, 2017, an employee was exposed to continuous and intermittent noise at 153.6% of the action level or an equivalent sound level of approximately 93.0 dBA during the 448 minute sample period.  f.  On or about May 22, 2017, an employee was exposed to continuous and intermittent noise at 131.5% of the action level or an equivalent sound level of approximately 91.9 dBA during the 448 minute sample period.

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Nov 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,445 · Current $1,345 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1): The employer did not assess the workplace to determine if hazards are present, or are likely to be present, which necessitate the use of personal protective equipment (PPE):    The employer did not perform a hazard assessment of the facility that addressed the hazards presented by contact with unfinished wooden slats and pallets.

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Oct 12, 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:  The employer did not provide or require employees to use leather or other such gloves while handling unfinished wood products, exposing employees to punctures, abrasions and cuts.

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Oct 12, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,445 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(h)(1): Except as provided by paragraphs (h)(2) through (h)(6) of this section, the protective equipment, including personal protective equipment (PPE), used to comply with this part, shall be provided by the employer at no cost to employees.    The employer did not ensure that hearing and eye protection was provided to employees without cost when it was required by the employer to use.

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Nov 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,933 · Current $1,613 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(2)(ii): The employer did not establish and implement those elements of a written program necessary to ensure that any employee using a respirator voluntarily was medically able to use that respirator, and that the respirator was cleaned, stored, and maintained so that its use does not present a health hazard to the user:    The employer did not ensure that a written respiratory program was established and implemented that addressed the medical evaluation of the employee's fitness to use the respirator, nor the cleaning, storage and maintenance of the respirator for employees voluntarily using 1/2 mask, tight-fitting air-purifying respirators during spray painting activities.

Issued

Sep 15, 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:  The employer did not perform a respiratory assessment for the workplace to identify the presence and quantities of paint vapors produced from spray-painting activities.

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Nov 2, 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:  The employer did not ensure that employees received a medical evaluation to determine their ability to use a respirator before being allowed to voluntarily use a 1/2 mask, tight-fitting air-purifying respirator during spray-painting activities.

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Nov 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(6): The employer did not provide the basic advisory information on respirators, as presented in Appendix D of 29 CFR 1910.134, in written or oral format to employees who wear respirators when such use was not required by the employer:  The employer did not provide Appendix D to employees who were permitted to use 1/2 mask, tight-fitting air-purifying respirators on a voluntary basis while performing spray-painting activities.

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Oct 12, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,422 · Current $1,882 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.141(a)(3)(i): Places of employment were not kept clean to the extent that the nature of the work allowed:    The employer did not ensure that the area surrounding the milling machine was kept free from the accumulation of wood dusts, which were identified as being of a Class II designation.

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Nov 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,422 · Current $1,882 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(m)(11): Approved industrial trucks were not used in hazardous locations:    The employer did not ensure that propane-fueled forklift trucks were approved for use in a location where Class II wood dusts were present in significant quantities.

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Nov 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,422 · Current $1,882 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.307(c): Equipment, wiring methods, and installations of equipment in hazardous (classified) locations were not intrinsically safe, approved for the hazardous (classified) location, or safe for the hazardous (classified) location:    The employer did not ensure that the wiring methods and equipment being used in the facility were intrinsically safe or approved for use in an environment where Class II wood dusts were present.

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Nov 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,422 · Current $1,882 Reduced

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:    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 for employees exposed to hazardous compounds such as, but not limited to, combustible wood dusts and aerosol spray paints.

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Oct 12, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(8):   The employer did not maintain in the workplace copies of the required safety data sheets for each hazardous chemical, and did not ensure that they were readily accessible during each work  shift to employees when they were in their work area(s):  The employer did not ensure that the safety data sheets for hazardous compounds, to include but not limited to, hardwood lumbers and Touch N' Tone aerosol spray paints, were available to employees while they were in their work area.

Issued

Sep 15, 2017

Abate by

Nov 2, 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:  The employer did not ensure that training was provided to employees exposed to hazardous compounds in the workplace, upon hire or whenever a new hazard was introduced, such as but not limited to, combustible wood dusts and aerosol spray paints.