OSHA Inspection: 4R COMPANY, LLC

Issued

Aug 9, 2017

Abate by

Nov 8, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,803 · Current $2,825 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(c): Employees were exposed to an airborne concentration of chromium (VI) which exceeded 5 micrograms per cubic meter of air, as an 8-hour time-weighted average:    (a) Belt Sanding Operation:  On or about July 10, 2017 an employee was exposed to hexavalent chromium over the permissible exposure limit during spot heating operations to correct deficiencies in the chrome coating on hydraulic cylinders.  The employee was exposed to an 8-hour Time Weighted Average of 9 micrograms per cubic meter of air over a 173 minute sampling period.  An exposure level of zero was assumed for the 307 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Aug 9, 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) Belt Sanding Operation:  On or about June 28, 2017 the employer had not determined the 8-hour time-weighted average exposure for employees who were exposed to hexavalent chromium.  An employee (Sander) was exposed over the permissible exposure limit during spot heating operations to correct deficiencies in the chrome coating on hydraulic cylinders.  The employee was exposed to an 8-hour Time Weighted Average of 9 micrograms per cubic meter of air over a 173 minute sampling period.  An exposure level of zero was assumed for the 307 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Aug 9, 2017

Abate by

Sep 5, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(e)(1): The employer did not establish a regulated area wherever an employee's exposure to airborne concentrations of chromium (VI) was, or could reasonably be expected to be, in excess of the permissible exposure limit:  (a) Belt Sanding Operation:  On or about July 10, 2017 a regulated area was not established where an employee was exposed to hexavalent chromium over the permissible exposure limit during spot heating operations to correct deficiencies in the chrome coating on hydraulic cylinders.  The employee was exposed to an 8-hour Time Weighted Average of 9 micrograms per cubic meter of air over a 173 minute sampling period.  An exposure level of zero was assumed for the 307 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Aug 9, 2017

Abate by

Nov 8, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(f)(1)(i): Feasible engineering controls and work practices were not instituted to reduce and maintain employee exposures to chromium (VI) at or below the permissible exposure limit:  (a) Belt Sanding Operation:  On or about July 10, 2017 feasible engineering controls and/or work practices were not instituted where an employee was exposed to hexavalent chromium over the permissible exposure limit during spot heating operations to correct deficiencies in the chrome coating on hydraulic cylinders.  The employee was exposed to an 8-hour Time Weighted Average of 9 micrograms per cubic meter of air over a 173 minute sampling period.  An exposure level of zero was assumed for the 307 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Aug 9, 2017

Abate by

Sep 5, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(g)(1)(i): The employer did not provide each employee an appropriate respirator during periods necessary to install or implement feasible engineering and work practice controls:  (a) Belt Sanding Operation:  On or about July 10, 2017 respiratory protection was not provided where an employee was exposed to hexavalent chromium over the permissible exposure limit during spot heating operations to correct deficiencies in the chrome coating on hydraulic cylinders.  The employee was exposed to an 8-hour Time Weighted Average of 9 micrograms per cubic meter of air over a 173 minute sampling period.  An exposure level of zero was assumed for the 307 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Aug 9, 2017

Abate by

Sep 5, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(k)(2)(i): The employer did not provide a medical examination within 30 days after initial assignment:  (a) Belt Sanding Operation:  On or about June 28, 2017 the employer had not provided a medical examination within 30 days of taking control of the facility for employees with an exposure over the Permissible Exposure Limit who have not been evaluated in the past twelve months.  The employee, Sander Operator, was exposed to an 8-hour Time Weighted Average of 9 micrograms per cubic meter of air over a 173 minute sampling period.  An exposure level of zero was assumed for the 307 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Aug 9, 2017

Abate by

Sep 5, 2017

Penalty

Initial $1,630 · Current $1,222 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(h)(1): A hazard was present or was likely to be present from skin or eye contact with chromium (VI); however, the employer did not provide appropriate personal protective clothing and equipment at no cost to employees, and/or did not ensure that employees used such clothing and equipment:    (a) Belt Sanding Operation:  On or about July 10, 2017 an employee was not wearing protective gloves while exposed to hexavalent chromium during spot heating operations to correct deficiencies in the chrome coating on hydraulic cylinders.

Issued

Aug 9, 2017

Abate by

Sep 5, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

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):  (a) Belt Sanding Operation:  On or about July 10, 2017 the employer had not conducted a personal protective equipment assessment in that an employee was not wearing protective gloves while exposed to hexavalent chromium during spot heating operations to correct deficiencies in the chrome coating on hydraulic cylinders.

Issued

Aug 9, 2017

Abate by

Sep 5, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(i)(4)(i): Employees were allowed to consume food or beverages at a worksite where chromium (VI) was present; however, the employer did not ensure that the eating and drinking areas were maintained as free as practicable of chromium (VI):    (a) Lunchroom:  On or about June 28, 2017 the employer did not have a cleaning program to maintain the lunchroom as free of hexavalent chromium as possible.

Issued

Aug 9, 2017

Abate by

Sep 5, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0689

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1026(i)(4)(ii): Employees were allowed to consume food or beverages at a worksite where chromium (VI) was present; however, the employer did not ensure that employees did not enter the eating and drinking areas with chromium (VI)-contaminated protective clothing or equipment:  (a) Lunchroom:  On or about June 28, 2017 the employer did not ensure that employees did not enter the eating and drinking areas with chromium (VI)-contaminated protective clothing or equipment.