OSHA Inspection: LEGACY MEASUREMENT SOLUTIONS, INC.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

Penalty

Initial $8,315 · Current $2,496 Reduced

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 October 25, 2017, the blaster was exposed to continuous noise levels at 296.0% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 90 dbA or equivalently, a dose of 100 percent), during the 454 minute sampling period.   Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 26 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(d)(1): When information indicated that any employee's exposure equaled or exceed the 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels, the employer did not develop and implement a monitoring program:  The employer did not develop and implement a monitoring program for employees exposed to 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) sound levels of 85 dBA or greater (50%).  a) On October 25, 2017, the Shot Blaster was exposed to continuous noise levels at 310% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dBA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 454 minute sampling period. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 26 minutes not sampled. The employer had not developed or implemented a monitoring program to asses employee noise level exposures in the area.  b) On October 25, 2017, a Welder was exposed to continuous noise levels at 85.1% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dBA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 443 minute sampling period. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 37 minutes not sampled. The employer had not developed or implemented a monitoring program to asses employee noise level exposures in the area.  c) On October 25, 2017, a Welder was exposed to continuous noise levels at 125.2% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dBA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 444 minute sampling period. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 36 minutes not sampled. The employer had not developed or implemented a monitoring program to asses employee noise level exposures in the area.  d) On October 25, 2017, a Welder was exposed to continuous noise levels at 95.4% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dBA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 433 minute sampling period. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 47 minutes not sampled. The employer had not developed or implemented a monitoring program to asses employee noise level exposures in the area.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(g)(1): The employer did not establish and maintain an audiometric testing program as provided by 29 CFR 1910.95(g) by making audiometric testing available to all employees whose exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels:  a) On October 25, 2017, the Shot Blaster was exposed to continuous noise levels at 310% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dBA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 454 minute sampling period.   Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 26 minutes not sampled. The employee has been employed by the company for 1 year and has not received a audiogram.   b) On October 25, 2017, a Welder was exposed to continuous noise levels at 85.1% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dBA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 443 minute sampling period.   Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 37 minutes not sampled. The employee has been employed by the company for 1 year and has not received a audiogram.   c) On October 25, 2017, a Welder was exposed to continuous noise levels at 125.2% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dBA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 444 minute sampling period.   Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 36 minutes not sampled. The employee has been employed by the company for 1 year and has not received a audiogram.   d) On October 25, 2017, a Welder was exposed to continuous noise levels at 95.4% of the permissible daily exposure (8-hour, time-weighted average sound level of 85 dBA or equivalently, a dose of 50 percent), during the 433 minute sampling period.   Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 47 minutes not sampled. The employee has been employed by the company for 3 year and has not received a audiogram.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(k)(1): The employer did not train each employee who is exposed to noise at or above an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.95(k):  On or about October 25, 2017, the employer had not provided training to employees exposed to a 8 hour time weighted average of 85 decibels.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(k)(2): The training program was not repeated annually for each employee included in the hearing conservation program. Information in the training program was not updated to be consistent with changes in protective equipment and work processes:  On or about October 25, 2017, the employer had not provided annual training to employees involved in the hearing conservation program.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

Penalty

Initial $6,652 · Current $1,996 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.107(b)(5)(i): Visible gauges were not maintained so as to indicate or ensure that the required air velocity is maintained:    a.) On or about October 6, 2017, the employer did not maintain the manometer in Paint Booth #1. Air velocity measurements were taken at the face of the booth. The booth averaged 98.75 fpm.    a.) On or about October 6, 2017, the employer did not maintain the manometer in Paint Booth #2. Air velocity measurements were taken at the face of the booth. The booth averaged 81.88 fpm.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.107(g)(2): All spraying areas were not kept as free from the accumulation of deposits of combustible residues as practical, with cleaning conducted daily if necessary:  a.) On or about October 6, 2017, the employer did not keep surfaces, such as but not limited to, walls, floors, and filters free from the accumulation of combustible paint overspray in Paint Booth #1.  b.) On or about October 6, 2017, the employer did not keep surfaces, such as but not limited to, walls, floors, and filters free from the accumulation of combustible paint overspray in Paint Booth #2.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

Penalty

Initial $4,989 · Current $1,506 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): In any workplace where respirators are necessary to protect employee health or whenever respirators are required by the employer, a written respiratory protection program with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented:    a.) On or about October 6, 2017, the painters and blasters were required to wear respiratory protection by the employer; however, the company had not implemented a written respiratory protection program.    b.) On or about October 6, 2017, the welders were voluntarily wearing respiratory protection while welding; however, the company had not implemented a written respiratory protection program.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

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:  a.) On or about October 6, 2017, employees were required to wear 3M half-face tight-fitting respiratory protection while spray finishing or blasting and have not received a medical evaluation.  b.) On or about October 6, 2017, employees were voluntarily wearing 3M half-face tight-fitting respiratory protection while welding and have not received a medical evaluation.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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) on a annual basis:   On or about October 6, 2017, employees were required to wear 3M half-face tight-fitting respiratory protection while spray finishing or blasting and have not received a fit test.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(1):  The employer did not provide effective training that covered the required elements in 1910.134(k)(1)(i) through 1910.134(k)(1)(vii):  a.) On or about October 6, 2017, employees were required to wear respiratory protection while spray finishing or blasting. Employees have not received respiratory protection training in accordance with the standard.  b.) On or about October 6, 2017, employees voluntarily weraing respiratory protection while welding have not received respiratory protection training in accordance with the standard.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

Penalty

Initial $4,989 · Current $1,506 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:    On or about October 6, 2017, the company did not implement and maintain a written hazard communication program at the site. Employees are working with hazardous chemicals such as, but not limited to, cutting oils, welding fumes, paint, metal dust and coolant.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1): The employer did not provide employees with effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment, and whenever a new physical or health hazard the employees had not previously been trained about was introduced into their work area;  On or about October 6, 2017, the company did notprovide training to employees on hazardous chemicals such as, but not limited to, cutting oils, welding fumes, paint, metal dust and coolant at the time of their initial assignment and when a new chemical was introduced.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.107(g)(7): "No smoking" signs in large letters on contrasting color background shall be conspicuously posted at all spraying areas and paint storage rooms:  On or about October 6, 2017, the employer did not have NO SMOKING signs posted on the spraying booths located in paint department.

Issued

Jan 23, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2): The employer did not verify that the required workplace hazard assessment has been performed through a written certification that identifies the workplace evaluated, the person certifying that the evaluation has been performed, the date(s) of the hazard assessment, and which identifies the document as a certification of hazard assessment:  On or about October 6, 2017, the workplace hazard assessment had not been put in writing and certified with the person conducting the evaluation and the dates the hazard assessment was completed. Safety glasses, ear plugs, welding helmets, and respirators are required.