OSHA Inspection: JAS CONSTRUCTION LLC

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Abate by

Jan 29, 2019

Penalty

Initial $3,880 · Current $1,500 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1) as referenced by 29 CFR 1926.103:  A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required respirator use:  a) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  The  employer did not develop or implement a written respiratory protection program for employees required to wear half mask elastomeric negative pressure respirators while performing  exterior masonry repair with tuck pointing saws.  On 10-30-18  two employees performing this masonry work were exposed to crystalline silica at 66.06  ug/m3 and 191.25 ug/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter) as an 8 hour time weighted average (TWA) which was 1.32 and 3.82 times the permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 50 ug/m3, respectively.  The workers were sampled for 441 minutes and 459 minutes, respectively with zero exposure assumed for the remainder of time not sampled.    Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Abate by

Jan 29, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1) as referenced by 29 CFR 1926.103:  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) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  The  employer did not provide medical evaluations for employees required to wear half mask elastomeric negative pressure respirators while performing  exterior masonry repair with tuck pointing saws.  On 10-30-18  two employees performing this masonry work were exposed to crystalline silica at 66.06  ug/m3 and 191.25 ug/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter) as an 8 hour time weighted average (TWA) which was 1.32 and 3.82 times the permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 50 ug/m3, respectively.  The workers were sampled for 441 minutes and 459 minutes, respectively with zero exposure assumed for the remainder of time not sampled.    Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Abate by

Jan 29, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1) as referenced by 29 CFR 1926.103: 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):   a) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  The employer did not provide fit tests for  employees required to use half mask elastomeric negative pressure respirators while performing  exterior masonry repair with tuck pointing saws.   On 10-30-18  two employees performing this masonry work were exposed to crystalline silica at 66.06  ug/m3 and 191.25 ug/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter) as an 8 hour time weighted average (TWA) which was 1.32 and 3.82 times the permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 50 ug/m3, respectively.  The workers were sampled for 441 minutes and 459 minutes, respectively with zero exposure assumed for the remainder of time not sampled.    Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Abate by

Jan 29, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(3) as referenced by 29 CFR 1926.103: Training was not provided prior to requiring employees to use a respirator in the workplace:    a) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  The employer failed to provide employees with respirator training to include but not limited to the use, fit check, maintenance and inspection of  half mask elastomeric negative pressure respirators while performing  exterior masonry repair with tuck pointing saw.  On 10-30-18  two employees performing this masonry work were exposed to crystalline silica at 66.06  ug/m3 and 191.25 ug/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter) as an 8 hour time weighted average (TWA) which was 1.32 and 3.82 times the permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 50 ug/m3, respectively.  The workers were sampled for 441 minutes and 459 minutes, respectively with zero exposure assumed for the remainder of time not sampled.    Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Abate by

Jan 29, 2019

Penalty

Initial $2,772 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1) as referenced by 29 CFR 1926.59:  Employer had not developed or implemented a written hazard communication program included the requirements outlined in 29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1)(i) and (e)(1)(ii):   a) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  The employer  did not implement a hazard communication program for  employees tuck pointing exterior masonry brick using tuckpointing saws and performing mortar repair with Extech Color Mortar Blend product that contains crystalline silica.   Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Abate by

Jan 29, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(1) as referenced by 29 CFR 1926.59:  Employers did not have a safety data sheet in the workplace for each hazardous chemical which they use:  a) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  The employer  did not provide safety data sheets for concrete products containing crystalline silica which were used by workers to include brick and mortar, and Extech Color Mortar Blend.    Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Abate by

Jan 29, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1153(i)(1):  The employer did not ensure that at least the following hazards were addressed: Cancer, lung effects, immune system effects, and kidney effects:  a) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  The employer  did not include  health hazard effects of exposure to crystalline silica exposure for employees tuck pointing exterior masonry brick and performing mortar repair with Extech Color Mortar Blend product that contains crystalline silica.   Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Abate by

Jan 29, 2019

Penalty

Initial $3,880 · Current $1,500 Reduced

Hazardous substances 8110

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.52(b): When employees are subjected to sound levels exceeding those listed in Table D-2 of this section, feasible administrative or engineering controls were not utilized. If such controls fail to reduce sound levels within the levels of the table, personal protective equipment as required in Subpart E, was not provided nor used to reduce sound levels within the levels of the table:  Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  a) An employee tuckpointing exterior masonry brick with a Bosch saw was exposed to continuous noise levels of 404% of the permissible daily noise exposure (8 hour Time Weighted Average sound level of 90 dBA) which is 1.11 times the allowable exposure limit.  The equivalent sound level of the measured dose is 100.07 dBA.  Sampling was performed for 471 minutes on 10/30/2018, with the unsampled portion of time considered to represent zero for the exposure calculation.  The employer did not attempt to implement administrative or engineering controls, and also did not provide any personal protective equipment such as hearing protection earplugs or ear muffs, to the employee.   b) An employee tuckpointing exterior masonry brick with a Bosch saw was exposed to continuous noise levels at 583%  of the permissible  daily noise exposure (8 hour Time Weighted Average sound level of 90 dBA) which is 1.14  times the allowable exposure limit.  The equivalent sound level of the measured dose is 102.14  dBA.  Sampling was performed for 470 minutes on 10/30/2018, with the unsampled portion of time considered to represent zero for the exposure calculation.  The employer did not attempt to implement administrative or engineering controls, and also did not provide any personal protective equipment such as hearing protection earplugs or ear muffs, to the employee.   Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Abate by

Jan 29, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 8110

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.52(d)(1): In all cases where the sound levels exceeded the values shown in Table D-2 of 29 CFR 1926.52, a continuing, effective hearing conservation program was not administered:  a) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  a) An employee tuckpointing exterior masonry brick with a Bosch saw was exposed to continuous noise levels at 404%  of the permissible  daily noise exposure (8 hour Time Weighted Average sound level of 90 dBA) which is 1.11 times the allowable exposure limit.   The equivalent sound level of the measured dose is 100.07 dBA.  Sampling was performed for 471 minutes on 10/30/2018, with the unsampled portion of time considered to represent zero for the exposure calculation.   b) An employee tuckpointing exterior masonry brick with a Bosch saw was exposed to continuous noise levels at 583%  of the permissible  daily noise exposure (8 hour Time Weighted Average sound level of 90 dBA) which is 1.14  times the allowable exposure limit.   The equivalent sound level of the measured dose is 102.14  dBA.  Sampling was performed for 470 minutes on 10/30/2018, with the unsampled portion of time considered to represent zero for the exposure calculation.   Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Penalty

Initial $2,772 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.451(g)(3)(i): Verical lifelines were not protected from sharp edges and abrasion:  a) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  Four employees on 2 swing stage scaffolds used lifelines with rope grabs as part of their fall protection system.  The four rope lifelines for each employee were not protected against abrasion from the parapet wall edge.     Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Penalty

Initial $2,772 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.501(b)(1): Each employee on a walking/working surface with an unprotected side or edge which was 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above a lower level was not protected from falling by the use of guardrail systems, safety net systems, or personal fall arrest systems:  a) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  An employee exited the swing stage and disconnected the fall arrest harness to clean the canopy roof surface approximately 20 feet above grade with a leaf blower.  The employee was not protected by any means of fall protection.   Violation occurred on or about 10-26-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Abate by

Jan 29, 2019

Penalty

Initial $3,880 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1153(c)(1): For each employee engaged in a task identified on Table 1, the employer did not fully and properly implement the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protection specified for the task on Table 1, unless the employer assesses and limits the exposure of the employee to respirable crystalline silica in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section:   a) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  Employees tuck pointed exterior masonry brick using tuckpointing saws with a vacuum port, and a shop vac engineering control, instead of a continuous water spray as described in Table 1.  In addition, the filter used with the shop vac did not meet the minimum filtration specification required by the manufacturer.  See Citation 1, Item 6b for exposure information.    Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Abate by

Jan 29, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(1): The employer did not ensure that employees were not exposed to an airborne concentration of respirable crystalline silica in excess of 50 ug/m3, calculated as an 8-hour TWA:  a) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  On 10-30-18  two employees performing this masonry work were exposed to crystalline silica at 66.06  ug/m3 and 191.25 ug/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter) as an 8 hour time weighted average (TWA) which was 1.32 and 3.82 times the permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 50 ug/m3, respectively.  The workers were sampled for 441 minutes and 459 minutes, respectively with zero exposure assumed for the remainder of time not sampled.    Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Abate by

Jan 29, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(2)(i): The employer did not assess the exposure of each employee who was or may reasonably be expected to be exposed to respirable crystalline silica at or above the action level in accordance with either the performance option in paragraph (d)(2)(ii) or the scheduled monitoring option in paragraph (d)(2)(iii) of this section:  a) a) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  The employer did not assess employee exposure to respirable crystalline silica during exterior tuck pointing using tuckpointing saws with a vacuum port, and a shop vac engineering control, instead of a continuous water spray as described in Table 1.  In addition,  the filter used with the shop vac did not meet the minimum filtration specifications required by the manufacturer.  See Citation 1, Item 6b for exposure information.  Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Abate by

Jan 29, 2019

Penalty

Initial $3,880 · Current $1,500 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1153(g)(1): The employer did not establish and implement a written exposure control plan:  a) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  The employer did not establish and implement a written exposure control plan for employees exposed to silica  for employees tuck pointed exterior masonry brick using tuckpointing saws.  See Citation 1, Item 6b for exposure information.    Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18

Issued

Dec 31, 2018

Abate by

Jan 29, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1153(g)(4): The employer did not designate a competent person to make frequent and regular inspections of job sites, materials, and equipment to implement the written exposure control plan:  a) Workplace, 78 John Miller Way, Kearny, NJ  The employer did not designate a competent person to implement a crystalline silica exposure control plan for employees exposed to silica while tuck pointing exterior masonry brick using tuckpointing saws.  See Citation 1, Item 6b for exposure information.    Violation occurred on or about 10-30-18