OSHA Inspection: APCO GRAPHICS, INC.

Issued

Jan 7, 2020

Abate by

Jan 27, 2020

Penalty

Initial $11,934 · Current $5,967 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.  Building A, Screen Exposure and Screen Washout Areas: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed employees to corrosive hazards associated with the use of Activator 6%, "Chemical Consultants, Inc." GR-9 Screen Wash/Ink Degradent and "Chemical Consultants, Inc." LSR-30 liquid stain remover in that, the employer did not address corrosive chemicals in in the hazard assessment for Screen Printers affecting deficiencies in training, personal protective equipment, and emergency eyewash and shower installations.    b.  Building A, Paint Department: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed employees to corrosive and flammable hazards associated with the use of Matthews Paint" Catalyst 74 766SP, "Mathews Paint" Catalyst 43 270SP, "Mathews Paint" Reducer 45 280SP, "Mathews Paint" Undercoat 274 777SP, "Mathews Paint" Satin Map Mixing Base N 953SP, "Printers Service" XCELLO and acetone in that, the employer did not address corrosive or flammable chemicals in the hazard assessment for Painters affecting deficiencies in training, personal protective equipment, and emergency eyewash and shower installations.    c.  Building C, Paint Department: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed employees to corrosive and flammable hazards associated with the use of "Matthews Paint" Undercoat 74 770SP, "Matthews Paint" Catalyst 74 766SP and "PPG" DP402LF Epoxy Primer Catalyst in that, the employer did not address corrosive or flammable chemicals in the hazard assessment for Painters affecting deficiencies in training, personal protective equipment, and emergency eyewash and shower installations.

Issued

Jan 7, 2020

Abate by

Jan 27, 2020

Penalty

Initial $11,934 · Current $5,967 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1): The employer did not ensure that each affected employee uses appropriate eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids, chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation:    a.  Building A, Screen Exposure Area and Screen Washout Area:  On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed employees to corrosive hazards associated with Activator 6%, "Chemical Consultants, Inc." GR-9 Screen Wash/Ink Degradent and "Chemical Consultants, Inc." LSR-30 liquid stain remover, in that the employer did not ensure the screen printer and his assistant use chemical protective goggles, or in lieu thereof, safety glasses and a face shield while cleaning silk screens.    b.  Building A, Digital Output Room:  On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed employees to Class IV laser hazards associated with the use of "Kern Laser Systems" laser printers, in that the employer did not provide all affected employees with, and ensure the use of, laser protective eyewear while working in the vicinity of the laser printers.    c.  Building C, Paint Department:  On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed an employee to corrosive hazards associated with "Matthews Paint" Undercoat 74 770SP, "Matthews Paint" Catalyst 74 766SP and "PPG" DP402LF Epoxy Primer Catalyst, in that the employer did not ensure that the affected painter use chemical protective goggles, or in lieu thereof, safety glasses and a face shield while mixing chemicals.

Issued

Jan 7, 2020

Abate by

Jan 27, 2020

Penalty

Initial $11,934 · Current $5,967 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.151(c): Where employees were exposed to injurious corrosive materials, suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body were not provided within the work area for immediate emergency use:    a.  Building A, Screen Exposure Area and Screen Washout Area:  On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed employees to corrosive hazards associated with Activator 6%, "Chemical Consultants, Inc." GR-9 Screen Wash/Ink Degradent and "Chemical Consultants, Inc." LSR-30 liquid stain remover, in that the employer did not provide means for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body in the work area for the screen printer and his assistant.    b.  Building A, Paint Department:  On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed an employee to corrosive hazards associated with "Matthews Paint" Catalyst 74 766SP and the employer did not provide means for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body in the work area.      c.  Building C, Paint Department:  On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed an employee to corrosive hazards associated with "Matthews Paint" Undercoat 74 770SP, "Matthews Paint" Catalyst 74 766SP and "PPG" DP402LF Epoxy Primer Catalyst, in that the employer did not provide means for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body in the work area.

Issued

Jan 7, 2020

Abate by

Jan 27, 2020

Penalty

Initial $11,934 · Current $5,967 Reduced

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.  Building A, Screen Exposure and Screen Washout Areas: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed employees to corrosive hazards associated with the use of Activator 6%, "Chemical Consultants, Inc." GR-9 Screen Wash/Ink Degradent and "Chemical Consultants, Inc." LSR-30 liquid stain remover in that, the employer did not provide effective hazard communication program training to the screen printer and his assistant.    b.  Building A, Paint Department: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed employees to corrosive and flammable hazards associated with the use of Matthews Paint" Catalyst 74 766SP, "Mathews Paint" Catalyst 43 270SP, "Mathews Paint" Reducer 45 280SP, "Mathews Paint" Undercoat 274 777SP, "Mathews Paint" Satin Map Mixing Base N 953SP"Printers Service" XCELLO and acetone in that, the employer did not provide effective chemical hazard communication program training.     c.  Building C, Paint Department: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed employees to corrosive and flammable hazards associated with the use of "Matthews Paint" Undercoat 74 770SP, "Matthews Paint" Catalyst 74 766SP and "PPG" DP402LF Epoxy Primer Catalyst in that, the employer did not provide effective chemical hazard communication program training.

Issued

Jan 7, 2020

Abate by

Jan 27, 2020

Penalty

Initial $813 · Current $407 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c): The employer did not develop and implement a written respiratory protection program with required worksite-specific procedures and elements for required respirator use. The program was not administered by a suitably trained program administrator.    a.  Building A, Screen Exposure and Screen Washout Areas: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed a screen printer employee to hazards associated with the use of tight-fitting respirators in that, the employer  provided the screen printer with an "MSA" Comfo Classic half-face respirator used on a voluntary basis while cleaning silk screens, but did not implement the site's written respiratory protection program and the administrator in charge of the program was not adequately trained with respect to respiratory protection to administer the program.    b.  Building A, Paint Department: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed a painter to hazards associated with the use of tight-fitting respirators in that, the employer required the painter to wear a "Moldex" tight-fitting, full-face respirator while mixing chemicals and spray painting but did not implement the site's written respiratory protection program and the administrator in charge of the program was not adequately trained with respect to respiratory protection to administer the program.    c.  Building C, Paint Department: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed a painter to hazards associated with the use of tight-fitting respirators in that, the employer required the painter to wear an "MSA" Comfo Classic, half-face respirator while mixing chemicals and spray painting but did not implement the site's written respiratory protection program and the administrator in charge of the program was not adequately trained with respect to respiratory protection to administer the program.

Issued

Jan 7, 2020

Abate by

Jan 27, 2020

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:  a.  Buildings A and B, Paint Departments:  On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed painters to hazards associated with respirator use, in that the employer did not provide medical evaluations to employees required to use respirators including, but not limited to, "MSA" Comfo Classic half-face, "Moldex" full-face and "North" Compact Air 200 series, powered air purifying respirators, while spray painting or mixing paint chemicals.

Issued

Jan 7, 2020

Abate by

Jan 27, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): Employee(s) using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator were not annually fit tested:  a.  Buildings A and B, Paint Departments:  On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed painters to hazards associated with respirator use, in that the employer did not provide annual fit tests to employees required to wear tight fitting respirators including, but not limited to, "MSA" Comfo Classic half-face and "Moldex" full-face respirators, while spray painting or mixing paint chemicals.

Issued

Jan 7, 2020

Abate by

Jan 27, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(h)(2)(i): Respirators were not stored to protect them from damage, contamination, dust, sunlight, extreme temperatures, excessive moisture, and damaging chemicals or  were not packed or stored to prevent deformation of the facepiece and exhalation valve:  a.  Building A, Screen Exposure and Screen Washout Areas: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed a screen printer employee to hazards associated with the use of tight-fitting respirators in that, the employer did not ensure that the employee's "MSA" Comfo Classic half-face was stored in a manner to protect if from contamination or damage when not in use.  b.  Building A, Paint Department: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed a painter to hazards associated with the use of tight-fitting respirators in that, the employer did not ensure that the employee's "Moldex" tight-fitting, full-face respirator was stored in a manner to protect if from contamination or damage when not in use.  c.  Building C, Paint Department: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed a painter to hazards associated with the use of tight-fitting respirators in that, the employer did not ensure that the employee's "MSA" Comfo Classic half-face was stored in a manner to protect if from contamination or damage when not in use.

Issued

Jan 7, 2020

Abate by

Jan 27, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k): The employer did not provide comprehensive, understandable training which did not occur annually and/or more often if necessary:  a.  Building A, Screen Washout Area: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed a screen printer employee to hazards associated with the use of tight-fitting respirators in that, the employer  provided the screen printer with an "MSA" Comfo Classic half-face used on a voluntary basis while cleaning silk screens, but did not include the employee in an effective respiratory protection training program.  b.  Building A, Paint Department: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed a painter to hazards associated with the use of tight-fitting respirators in that, the employer required the painter to wear a "Moldex" tight-fitting, full-face respirator while mixing chemicals and spray painting but did not include the employee in an effective respiratory protection training program.  c.  Building C, Paint Department: On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed a painter to hazards associated with the use of tight-fitting respirators in that, the employer required the painter to wear an "MSA" Comfo Classic, half-face respirator while mixing chemicals and spray painting but did not include the employee in an effective respiratory protection training program.

Issued

Jan 7, 2020

Abate by

Jan 27, 2020

Penalty

Initial $813 · Current $407 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.157(g)(2): The educational program to familiarize employees with the general principles of fire extinguisher use and the hazards involved with incipient stage fire fighting was not provided to all employees upon initial employment, and at least annually thereafter:    a.  Buildings A, B, C and D:  On or about July 17, 2019, and at times prior, the employer exposed employees to smoke inhalation hazards, in that information on the general principles of fire extinguisher use and the hazards of incipient stage fire fighting was not provided to employees on initial hire and at least annually thereafter where the employer provided fire extinguishers throughout the facility for voluntary use.