OSHA Inspection: LUCKY STONE, INC.

Issued

May 14, 2019

Abate by

Jul 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $2,842 · Current $2,842

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): 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: (Construction Reference 1926.103)(a)   In a strip mall at 1235 Farmington Ave. in Bristol, where a nail salon was being constructed;  On or about 3/29/19, the employer did not have a written respiratory program for employees required to wear respiratory protection while performing tasks on table 1 of the crystalline silica standard. Employees were using a jackhammer and saw to cut and break concrete.

Issued

May 14, 2019

Abate by

Jul 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): 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: (Construction Reference 1926.103)(a)   In a strip mall at 1235 Farmington Ave. in Bristol, where a nail salon was being constructed;  On or about 3/29/19, the employer had not provided a medical evaluation to employees that were required to wear respiratory protection while performing tasks on table 1 of the crystalline silica standard. Employees were using a jackhammer and saw to cut and break concrete indoors.

Issued

May 14, 2019

Abate by

Jul 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1): 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): (Construction Reference 1926.103)(a)  In a strip mall at 1235 Farmington Ave. in Bristol, where a nail salon was being constructed;  On or about 3/29/19, the employer had not provided fit testing for employees required to wear respiratory protection while performing tasks on table 1 of the crystalline silica standard. Employees were using a jackhammer and saw to cut and break concrete indoors.

Issued

May 14, 2019

Abate by

Jul 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(1): The employer did not provide respirator training that ensured that each employee could demonstrate knowledge of at least the following elements: Why the respirator is necessary and how improper fit, usage, or maintenance can compromise the protective effect of the respirator; What the limitations and capabilities of the respirator are; How to use the respirator effectively in emergency situations, including situations in which the respirator malfunctions; How to inspect, put on and remove, use, and check the seals of the respirator; What the procedures are for maintenance and storage of the respirator, and How to recognize medical signs and symptoms that may limit or prevent the effective use of respirators:  In a strip mall at 1235 Farmington Ave. in Bristol, where a nail salon was being constructed;  On or about 3/29/19, the employer did not provide respiratory protection training for employees required to wear respiratory protection while performing tasks on table 1 of the crystalline silica standard. Employees were using a jackhammer and saw to cut and break concrete indoors.

Issued

May 14, 2019

Abate by

Jul 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $2,273 · Current $2,273

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.28(a): The employer did not require the wearing of appropriate personal protective equipment in all operations where there is an exposure to hazardous conditions.  In a strip mall at 1235 Farmington Ave. in Bristol, where a nail salon was being constructed;  On or about 3/29/19, the employer had not evaluated the hazards of the work being performed and required the appropriate personal protective equipment. Employees were cutting and jackhammering concrete indoors, exposing them to eye and foot hazards. They were not wearing safety glasses or steel toed boots for these tasks.

Issued

May 14, 2019

Abate by

Jul 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.102(a)(1): Employees were not provided with eye and face protection equipment when machines or operations presented potential eye or face injury from physical, chemical, or radiation agents:  In a strip mall at 1235 Farmington Ave. in Bristol, where a nail salon was being constructed;  On or about 3/29/19, the employer had not provided eye protection for employees that were cutting and jackhammering concrete indoors. Employees were exposed to flying pieces of concrete and concrete dust.

Issued

May 14, 2019

Abate by

Jul 1, 2019

Penalty

Initial $2,842 · Current $2,842

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.  In a strip mall at 1235 Farmington Ave. in Bristol, where a nail salon was being constructed;  On or about 3/29/19, the employer did not implement the controls required by Table 1 of the standard in two instances:  1. An employee operated a gas-powered masonry saw indoors without a water supply connected to the tool and continuously providing water to the blade.  2. An employee operated a jackhammer that was not equipped with either a continuous water supply connected to the tool or a commercially available shroud and dust collector.

Issued

May 14, 2019

Abate by

Jul 1, 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:  In a strip mall at 1235 Farmington Ave. in Bristol, where a nail salon was being constructed;   On or about 3/29/19, the employer did not assess employees' exposure to crystalline silica, where they did not follow controls in table 1 of the standard, in two instances:  1. An employee operated a gas-powered masonry saw indoors without a water supply connected to the tool and continuously providing water to the blade.  2. An employee operated a jackhammer that was not equipped with either a continuous water supply connected to the tool or a commercially available shroud and dust collector.