OSHA Inspection: ROMANCING THE STONE, INC.

Issued

Mar 6, 2019

Abate by

Aug 5, 2019

Penalty

Initial $2,842 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.36(d)(1): Employee(s) were not able to open an exit route door from the inside at all times without keys, tools, or special knowledge:    Production Area: A door labelled as "Exit" was affixed with two separate, independent locking mechanisms to prevent trespass from outside the facility.  In the event of a fire, or other emergency, two locking mechanisms may inhibit free and quick access and egress from the area.

Issued

Mar 6, 2019

Abate by

Aug 5, 2019

Penalty

Initial $2,842 · Current $1,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances 81108111

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 1910.95(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:    Employees conducting cutting, grinding and polishing tasks were exposed to noise in excess of OSHA's Action Level of 85 dBA as an eight-hour time-weighted average, and the employer did not institute a continuing, effective hearing conservation program:     Production Area:    1) On December 12, 2018, a Fabricator was conducting cutting, polishing, grinding activities on granite slabs.  The employee was overexposed to continuous noise at a level of 90.6 decibels. This level is 1.9 times in excess of OSHA's Action Level of 85 dBA, measured as an eight-hour Time-weighted Action Level.  The employee was sampled for 460 minutes.  Zero exposure was assumed for any unsampled time;    2) On December 12, 2018, a Fabricator was conducting cutting, polishing, and grinding activities on granite slabs.  The employee was overexposed to continuous noise at a level at 89.6 decibels.  This level is 1.79 times in excess of OSHA's Action Level of 85 dBA, as an eight-hour Time-weighted Action Level.  The employee was sampled for 465 minutes. Zero exposure was assumed for any unsampled time.

Issued

Mar 6, 2019

Abate by

Aug 5, 2019

Penalty

Initial $2,842 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(a): Protective equipment was not used when necessary whenever hazards capable of causing injury and impairment were encountered:    Production Area: When wet-grinding and cutting on granite and manufactured quartz stone counters, an employee wore eye protection that was inadequate to prevent eye injuries.  The equipment consisted of regular, eyeglass-type eyewear with openings above the eyes and open sides. This type of eyewear would allow stone debris and sparks to go through these openings and strike the worker's eyes.

Issued

Mar 6, 2019

Abate by

Aug 5, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1053(d)(3)(i): The employer did not perform initial monitoring to assess the 8-hour TWA exposure for each employee on the basis of one or more personal breathing zone air samples that reflect the exposures of employees on each shift, for each job classification, in each work area:    Facility: When employees performed cutting, grinding, and polishing on granite and manufactured quartz materials, the employer did not conduct initial monitoring to assess the 8-hour Time Weighted Average (TWA) exposure level to crystalline quartz for each employee.

Issued

Mar 6, 2019

Abate by

Aug 5, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9010

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1053(f)(2)(i): The employer did not establish and implement a written exposure control plan that contained the following elements:    (A): a description of the tasks in the workplace that involve exposure to respirable crystalline silica;  (B): a description of the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protection used to limit employee exposure to respirable crystalline silica for each task;  (C): a description of the housekeeping measures used to limit employee exposure to respirable crystalline silica:    Facility:  When employees conducted cutting, grinding, and polishing activities on granite and manufactured quartz products that exposed them to crystalline silica, the employer did not develop and implement a written exposure control plan containing the elements outlined in 29 CFR 1910.1053(f)(2)(i) (A) through (C).

Issued

Mar 6, 2019

Abate by

Aug 5, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9010

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1053(j)(3)(i): The employer did not ensure that each employee covered by this section can demonstrate knowledge and understanding of at least the following:         (A): that each employee covered by this section could demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the health hazards associated with exposure to respirable crystalline silica;  (B): that each employee covered by this section could demonstrate knowledge and understanding of specific tasks in the workplace that could result in exposure to respirable crystalline silica;  (C): that each employee covered by this section could demonstrate knowledge and understanding of specific measures the employer has implemented to protect employees from exposure to respirable crystalline silica, including engineering controls, work practices, and respirators to be used;  (D): that each employee covered by this section could demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the contents of this section;  (E): that each employee covered by this section could demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the purpose and a description of the medical surveillance program required by paragraph (i) of this section:    Facility:  When employees conducted cutting, grinding, and polishing of granite and manufactured quartz slabs, exposing them to crystalline quartz, the employer did ensure the each employee could demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the required elements in 29 CFR 1910.1053(i)(A) through (E).