OSHA Inspection: ASSOCIATED TRUCK PARTS

Issued

Mar 13, 2019

Abate by

Aug 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $8,354 · Current $6,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(b)(1) When employees were subjected to sound exceeding those listed in Table G-16, The employer did not implement feasible administrative or engineering controls:    a.) Brake Lining Department - On or about February 5, 2019, Employees, who were washing old brake linings and cores were exposed to continuous noise at 171.1% of the exposure level of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 93.9 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 434 minute sampling period on 2/5/19. A zero exposure was assumed for the 46 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not implement feasible engineering controls.     b.) Brake Lining Department - On or about February 5, 2019, Employees, who were riveting new lining to the cores were exposed to continuous noise at 85.3% of the exposure level of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 89.1 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 462 minute sampling period on 2/5/19. A zero exposure was assumed for the 18 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not implement feasible engineering controls.     c.) Brake Lining Department - On or about February 5, 2019, Employees, who were operating the bead blaster were exposed to continuous noise at 192.5% of the exposure level of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 94.7 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 464 minute sampling period on 2/5/19. A zero exposure was assumed for the 16 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not implement feasible engineering controls.     Feasible methods of abatement include but are not limited to:       (1) Use of damping material or  a plastic interior on the riveting machines for the supply for the rivets.     (2) Isolation of different processes from each other.     (3) Use of damping material on abrasive bead blaster.     (4) Rotating employees through the different operations.         ABATEMENT NORMALLY WILL BE MULTISTEP AS FOLLOWS:    Step 1:   EFFECTIVE HEARING 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 PERMISSIBLE EXPOSURE LIMITS.    Step 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 EXPOSURE TO HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AS REFERENCED IN THIS CITATION.  THIS PLAN SHALL INCLUDE, AT A MINIMUM, TARGET DATES FOR THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS WHICH MUST BE CONSISTANT WITH THE ABATEMENT DATES REQUIRED BY THIS CITATION:    (1)        EVALUATION OF ENGINEERING/ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OPTIONS;    (2)        SELECTION OF OPTIMUM CONTROL METHODS AND COMPLETION OF DESIGN;    (3)        PROCUREMENT, INSTALLATION AND OPERATION OF SELECTED CONTROL MEASURES; AND      (4)        TESTING AND ACCEPTANCE OR MODIFICATION/REDESIGN OF CONTROLS.    Step3:  ABATEMENT SHALL HAVE BEEN COMPLETED BY THE IMPLEMENTATION OF FEASIBLE ENGINEERING AND/OR ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS UPON THE VERIFICATION OF THEIR EFFECTIVENESS IN ACHIEVING COMPLIANCE.

Issued

Mar 13, 2019

Abate by

Aug 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(d)(1): When information indicated that any employee's exposure equaled or exceed the 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels, the employer did not develop and implement a monitoring program:     a.) Brake Lining Department - On or about February 5, 2019, Employees, who were washing old brake linings and cores were exposed to continuous noise at 171.1% of the exposure level of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 93.9 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 434 minute sampling period on 2/5/19. A zero exposure was assumed for the 46 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not develop and implement a monitoring program.     b.) Brake Lining Department - On or about February 5, 2019, Employees, who were riveting new lining to the cores were exposed to continuous noise at 85.3% of the exposure level of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 89.1 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 462 minute sampling period on 2/5/19. A zero exposure was assumed for the 18 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not develop and implement a monitoring program.     c.) Brake Lining Department - On or about February 5, 2019, Employees, who were operating the bead blaster were exposed to continuous noise at 192.5% of the exposure level of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 94.7 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 464 minute sampling period on 2/5/19. A zero exposure was assumed for the 16 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not develop and implement a monitoring program.

Issued

Mar 13, 2019

Abate by

May 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(g)(1): The employer did not establish and maintain an audiometric testing program as provided by 29 CFR 1910.95(g) by making audiometric testing available to all employees whose exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels:     a.) Brake Lining Department - On or about February 5, 2019, Employees, who were washing old brake linings and cores were exposed to continuous noise at 171.1% of the exposure level of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 93.9 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 434 minute sampling period on 2/5/19. A zero exposure was assumed for the 46 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not establish an audiometric testing program.     b.) Brake Lining Department - On or about February 5, 2019, Employees, who were riveting new lining to the cores were exposed to continuous noise at 85.3% of the exposure level of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 89.1 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 462 minute sampling period on 2/5/19. A zero exposure was assumed for the 18 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not establish an audiometric testing program.     c.) Brake Lining Department - On or about February 5, 2019, Employees, who were operating the bead blaster were exposed to continuous noise at 192.5% of the exposure level of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 94.7 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 464 minute sampling period on 2/5/19. A zero exposure was assumed for the 16 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not establish an audiometric testing program.

Issued

Mar 13, 2019

Abate by

May 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(k)(1): The employer did not train each employee who is exposed to noise at or above an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.95(k). The employer did not institute a training program and ensure employee participation in the program:    a.) Brake Lining Department - On or about February 5, 2019, Employees, who were washing old brake linings and cores were exposed to continuous noise at 171.1% of the exposure level of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 93.9 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 434 minute sampling period on 2/5/19. A zero exposure was assumed for the 46 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not develop and implement a training program.     b.) Brake Lining Department - On or about February 5, 2019, Employees, who were riveting new lining to the cores were exposed to continuous noise at 85.3% of the exposure level of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 89.1 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 462 minute sampling period on 2/5/19. A zero exposure was assumed for the 18 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not develop and implement a training program.     c.) Brake Lining Department - On or about February 5, 2019, Employees, who were operating the bead blaster were exposed to continuous noise at 192.5% of the exposure level of 90 dBA or an eight hour time weighted average (TWA) noise exposure of 94.7 dBA. This exposure was observed occurring over a 464 minute sampling period on 2/5/19. A zero exposure was assumed for the 16 minutes not sampled.  The employer did not develop and implement a training program.

Issued

Mar 13, 2019

Penalty

Initial $4,774 · Current $3,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0070X100

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.253(b)(4)(i): Oxygen cylinders were stored near highly combustible material, especially oil and grease; or near reserve stocks of carbide and acetylene or other fuel-gas cylinders, or near other substance likely to cause or accelerate fire:    a.) Outside of Brake Lining Department: On or about January 3, 2019, Employees were exposed to hazards from oxygen cylinders being stored with acetylene cylinders.

Issued

Mar 13, 2019

Abate by

May 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $4,774 · Current $3,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances 0070X100

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.) Establishment - On or about January 3, 2019, The employer did not develop and implement a written Hazard Communication Program for employees exposed to the hazards of chemicals, including but not limited to, flammables and oxygen gases.

Issued

Mar 13, 2019

Abate by

May 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 0070X100

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.) Establishment - On or about January 3, 2019, The employer did not provide training on the chemicals they were working with or the written program for employees exposed hazardous of chemicals, including but not limited to, flammables and oxygen gas.