OSHA Inspection: GENERAL SHALE BRICK, INC.

Issued

Mar 7, 2018

Abate by

Apr 11, 2018

Penalty

Initial $7,853 · Current $4,300 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(m)(1): Records of medical evaluations required by 29 CFR 1910.134 were not retained and made available in accordance with 1910.1020:    (a) General Shale Brick, Inc., at 1845 West Dartmouth Ave. Denver, CO: On and before December 20, 2017, the employer did not ensure that records of medical evaluations were retained for employees required to wear half-face elastomeric air purifying respirators in the Grinding and Reclamation Plants. This condition exposed the employees to a silica hazard.    Abatement Note: Employee medical records, including medical evaluation for respirator use, for each employee shall be preserved and maintained for at least the duration of employment plus thirty years.

Issued

Mar 7, 2018

Abate by

Apr 11, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(m)(2)(ii): Fit test records were not retained for respirator users until the next fit test was administered:    (a) General Shale Brick, Inc., at 1845 West Dartmouth Ave. Denver, CO: On and before December 20, 2017, the employer did not ensure that records of fit testing were retained for employees required to wear half-face elastomeric air purifying respirators in the Grinding and Reclamation Plants. This condition exposed the employees to a silica hazard.

Issued

Mar 7, 2018

Abate by

Mar 9, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(c): An employee was exposed to respirable silica in excess of the 8-hour time weighted average limits listed in Table Z-3:  (a) General Shale Brick, Inc., at 1845 West Dartmouth Ave. Denver, CO: On and before December 20, 2018, employee exposure to a substance listed in Table Z-3 exceeded the 8 hour Time Weighted Average for that substance. One employee, working in the Grinding and Reclamation Plants, was exposed to respirable silica at a concentration greater than the 8 hour Time Weighted Average (TWA) Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 0.625 mg/m3. The employee was exposed to respirable silica at a concentration of 0.956 mg/m3 as an 8 hour TWA. This is 1.53 times the PEL. This condition exposed the employee to a respirable silica hazard.

Issued

Mar 7, 2018

Abate by

Mar 9, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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) General Shale Brick, Inc., at 1845 West Dartmouth Ave. Denver, CO: On and before December 20, 2017, the employer did not ensure that feasible administrative or engineering controls were determined and implemented to achieve complaint with the limits prescribed in 29 CFR 1910.1000(a) through (d). One employee, working in the Grinding and Reclamation Plants, was exposed to respirable silica at a concentration greater than the 8 hour Time Weighted Average (TWA) Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 0.625 mg/m3. The employee was exposed to respirable silica at a concentration of 0.956 mg/m3 as an 8 hour TWA. This is 1.53 times the PEL. This condition exposed the employee to a respirable silica hazard.    Abatement Note:  Feasible engineering controls include, but are not limited to: 1) Thorough initial cleaning, using water or HEPA vacuums, of all surfaces, including floors, walls, and equipment, to remove settled dust.        2) Daily removal, using water or HEPA vacuums, of generated rock dust to remove settled dust. 3) Enclosures with local exhaust ventilation and dust curtains at open ends around conveyor drops or material transfer points. 4) Enclosures around screens.  Abatement Note:  Abatement of this item will normally be multi-step as follows:  1. Effective respiratory protection shall be provided and used by exposed employees as an interim protective measure until feasible engineering and/or administrative controls can be implemented or whenever such controls fail to reduce employee exposure to within exposure limits.  STEP 1 ABATEMENT DATE (15 DAYS):   2. Submit to the Area Director a written detailed plan of abatement outlining a schedule for the implementation of engineering and /or administrative measures to control employee exposures to the hazardous substance referenced in this citation.  The plan shall include, at a minimum, target dates for the following actions which should be consistent with the dates required by this citation: a. Evaluation of the extent and location of the hazard source; b. Evaluation of control measure options; c. Selection of optimum control measures; d. Determination of control measure design; e. Ordering and delivery of equipment; f. Installation of control measures; g. Training of employees in proper operation and maintenance of newly implemented control measures; and h. Assurance of the effective performance of control measures.  All proposed control measures shall be evaluated for each particular use by a competent Industrial Hygienist or other technically qualified person.  Thirty day progress reports are required during the abatement period.  The progress report must identify the action taken to achieve abatement and the date the action was taken.  STEP 2 ABATEMENT DATE (60 DAYS):   3. Abatement will be completed by the implementation of feasible engineering and/or administrative controls and upon verification of their effectiveness in achieving compliance.  STEP 3 ABATEMENT DATE (120 DAYS):

Issued

Mar 7, 2018

Abate by

Apr 11, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:  (a) General Shale Brick, Inc., at 1845 West Dartmouth Ave. Denver, CO: On and before December 14, 2017, the employer developed but did not implement or maintain at the workplace a site specific written hazard communication program which describes the criteria for Globally Harmonized System labels and employee training.  Employees are potentially exposed to hazardous chemicals, including but not limited to the following:  1) Barium Chloride 2) Barium Carbonate  3) Hydrochloric Acid 4) Nickel Oxide 5) Sodium Silicate Solution

Issued

Mar 7, 2018

Abate by

Apr 11, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(6): The employer used written materials, such as signs, placards, process sheets, or batch tickets in lieu of affixing labels to individual stationary process containers that failed to identify the container(s) to which they were applicable and did not convey the information required by 29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(5):  (a) General Shale Brick, Inc., at 1845 West Dartmouth Ave. Denver, CO: On and before December 14, 2017, the employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged or marked with the identity of the hazardous chemicals contained within. Employees were potentially exposed to mislabeled hazardous chemicals including but not limited to nickel oxide and sodium silicate solution in the Clay Lab. This condition exposed employees to chemical hazards.

Issued

Mar 7, 2018

Abate by

Apr 11, 2018

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:  (a) General Shale Brick, Inc., at 1845 West Dartmouth Ave. Denver, CO: On and before December 14, 2017, the employer did not provide employees with effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area.  Employees did not know about the Globally Harmonized System for labeling secondary containers with hazardous chemicals. This condition exposed employees to chemical hazards.