OSHA Inspection: CARGILL CHEVROLET COMPANY

Issued

2017-09-15 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-11-02 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3802.00 · Current $1901.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 2651

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2): The employer did not verify, through a written certification, that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed:  FACILITY  On or about, June 26, 2017, the employer did not verify, through a written certification, that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed when employees coated truck beds with Scorpion Protective Coatings, that required the use of chemical butyl gloves and a full face, air purifying respirator.

Issued

2017-09-15 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-11-02 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 2651

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.138(b): The employer did not base selection of appropriate hand protection on an evaluation of the performance characteristics of the hand protection relative to the tasks to be performed, conditions present, duration of use, and the hazards and potential hazards identified:  FACILITY  On, or about, June 26, 2017, the employer did not select proper hand protection for employees that coated truck beds with chemicals, such as, but not limited to Scorpion Protective Coatings, which contained isocyanates that required the use of chemical butyl gloves. Employees were provided latex gloves.

Issued

2017-09-15 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-11-02 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $5070.00 · Current $2535.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 2651

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c): The employer did not develop and implement a written respiratory protection program with required worksite-specific procedures and elements for required respirator use:  FACILITY   On or about, June 26, 2017, the employer failed to implement a written respiratory protection program when an employee was required to use an N95, negative pressure respirator while coating truck beds with Scorpion Protective Coatings, which contained isocyanates.

Issued

2017-09-15 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-11-02 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 2651

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(i): Selection of appropriate respirators was not based on the respiratory hazard(s) to which the worker was exposed and user factors that affect respirator performance and reliability:  FACILITY   On or about, June 26, 2017, the employer incorrectly selected and required employees to use an N95 respirator while coating truck bedliners with Scorpion Protective Coatings, which contained isocyanates and required the use of a full face, air purifying respirator.

Issued

2017-09-15 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-11-02 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 2651

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:  FACILITY   On or about, June 26, 2017, the employer failed to provide a medical evaluation to determine an employees ability to wear a  respirator before requiring the employee to use an N95, negative pressure respirator while coating truck beds with Scorpion Protective Coatings, which contained isocyanates.

Issued

2017-09-15 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-11-02 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): Employee(s) using tight-fitting facepiece respirators were not fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator:  FACILITY   On, or about, June 26, 2017, the employer failed to fit test an employee prior to requiring the employee to use an N95, negative pressure respirator while coating truck beds with Scorpion Protective Coatings, which contained isocyanates.

Issued

2017-09-15 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-11-02 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 2651

General-duty citation text

229 CFR 1910.134(k): The employer did not provide comprehensive, understandable training which did not occur annually and/or more often if necessary:  FACILITY   On or about, June 26, 2017, the employer failed to provide comprehensive training  on respirators and their limitations, prior to requiring an employee to use an N95 respirator while coating truck beds with Scorpion Protective Coatings, which contained isocyanates.

Issued

2017-09-15 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-11-02 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3802.00 · Current $1901.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 2651

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:  FACILITY  On or about, June 26, 2017 the employer did not develop or implement a hazard communication program when employees coated truck beds with chemicals, such as, but not limited to Scorpion Protective Coatings, which contained isocyanates.

Issued

2017-09-15 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-11-02 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 2651

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:  FACILITY  On, or about, June 26, 2017 the employer did not  provide effective information and training on hazardous chemicals when employees coated truck beds with chemicals such as, but not limited to Scorpion Protective Coatings, which contained isocyanates.