OSHA Inspection: ANTEK MADISON PLASTICS USA, LTD

Issued

May 24, 2018

Abate by

Jun 20, 2018

Penalty

Initial $2,956 · Current $1,774 Reduced

Hazardous substances 8111

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:    An effective hearing conservation program which included noise monitoring, audiometric testing of employees and training of employees as detailed in the standard was not instituted by Antek-Madison Plastics USA Ltd.    a. An employee in the grinding area was exposed to continuous noise levels at 66.2% of the allowable permissible exposure limit 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 90 dBA. The equivalent dBA level of 66.2% is approximately 87 dBA.  The sampling was performed for 475 minutes during one shift on March 28, 2018.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time, 5 minutes.

Issued

May 24, 2018

Abate by

Jul 12, 2018

Penalty

Initial $3,696 · Current $2,217 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(1): The employer did not establish a program consisting of an energy control procedure, employee training and periodic inspections to ensure that before any employee performed any servicing or maintenance on a machine or equipment where the unexpected energizing, startup or release of stored energy could occur and cause injury, the machine or equipment shall be isolated from the energy source and rendered inoperative:      a. On or about March 8, 2018, in the facility, the maintenance employee was required to perform maintenance activities on equipment including, but not limited to, the grinding machine.  The employer did not have a written lockout program, which included energy control procedures, periodic inspections and employee training.  The employees were thereby exposed to the hazards associated with unexpected start up of machines and equipment.

Issued

May 24, 2018

Abate by

Jul 12, 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) On or about March 8, 2018, the employer did not develop and implement a written hazard communication program in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1) that would describe or include at least the following:    1) Requirement for labeling of containers of hazardous chemicals; 2) Safety data sheet availability; 3) Training of employees; 4) A complete list of hazardous chemicals known to be present in the workplace; 5) Methods to inform employees of the hazards on non-routine tasks; and 6) Methods to inform other employer(s) of material safety data sheet availability; the labeling system and any precautionary measures to protect employees.    Employees were exposed to hazardous materials, including propane and plastic dust.