OSHA Inspection: M&K EMPLOYEE SOLUTIONS, LLC - SUMMIT

Issued

Oct 18, 2018

Abate by

Nov 14, 2018

Penalty

Initial $12,934 · Current $7,761 Reduced

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.  On or about August 31, 2018, throughout the facility, the employer had not completed personal protective equipment assessments to identify the potential hazards for job tasks that may necessitate the use of personal protective equipment.  Employees were exposed to high temperature liquids and chemicals such as, but not limited to, hydrofluoric acid, potassium hydroxide and petroleum distillates.

Issued

Oct 18, 2018

Abate by

Dec 6, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(f)(1):   The employer did not provide training to each employee who was required by this section to use personal protective equipment.  Each such employee was not trained to know at least the elements outlined in 1910.132(f)(1)(i)-(v):  a.  On or about August 31, 2018, throughout the facility, employees were not trained to know at least the following:       1.  What PPE is necessary.       2.  When PPE is necessary.       3.  How to properly don, doff, adjust and wear the PPE.       4.  The limitations of PPE.       5.  The proper care, maintenance useful life and disposal of the PPE.    Employee chemical exposures included, but were not limited to: high temperature liquids, hydrofluoric acid, potassium hydroxide and petroleum distillates.

Issued

Oct 18, 2018

Abate by

Nov 14, 2018

Penalty

Initial $9,239 · Current $5,543 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(4)(i): Refresher training in relevant topics was not provided to the operator who had been involved in an accident or near-miss incident:    a.  On or about May 11, 2018, in the facility, an employee was involved in a powered industrial vehicle accident.  The employee was not provided refresher training to ensure that the employee had the knowledge and skills available to operate the vehicle safely.

Issued

Oct 18, 2018

Abate by

Dec 6, 2018

Penalty

Initial $11,086 · Current $6,652 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:    a.  On or about August 31, 2018, in the facility, the employer failed to develop and implement a hazard communication program.  Employee exposure included, but was not limited to hydrofluoric acid, potassium hydroxide and petroleum distillates.

Issued

Oct 18, 2018

Abate by

Dec 6, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(8):   The employer did not maintain in the workplace copies of the required safety data sheets for each hazardous chemical:  a.  On or about August 31, 2018, in the facility, employees used hazardous materials including but not limited to, hydrofluoric acid, potassium hydroxide and petroleum distillates.  The employer failed to ensure that safety data sheets were available for each hazardous material used on site, nor did the employer ensure that the most current safety data sheets for the hazardous materials on site were present in the workplace.

Issued

Oct 18, 2018

Abate by

Nov 14, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(iii): Employee training did not include the measures employees can take to protect themselves from chemical hazards, including specific procedures the employer had implemented to protect employees from exposure to hazardous chemicals, such as appropriate work practices, emergency procedures and personal protective equipment to be used:  a.  On or about August 31 ,2018, in the utility department,  an employee was exposed to hydrofluoric acid when using an aluminum deoxidizer.  The employer failed to train employees on proper emergency procedures to be taken in the event of skin contact with chemicals including, but not limited to hydrofluoric acid.  b.  On or about August 31, 2018, in the utility department, an employee was exposed to hydrofluoric acid when using an aluminum deoxidizer.  The employer failed to ensure that the clinic and or hospital nearby had the appropriate emergency response treatment, calcium gluconate solution or calcium gluconate gel, available in the event of a possible exposure to hydrofluoric acid.