OSHA Inspection: KORENS USA, INC.

Issued

Oct 3, 2019

Abate by

Oct 30, 2019

Penalty

Initial $10,229 · Current $8,250 Reduced

Hazardous substances 8330

General-duty citation text

OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1): The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to workers, in that workers were exposed to excessive heat:  On or about and at times prior to August 20, 2019, employees loading parts onto jigs, operating equipment, and moving pallets in a facility with no air conditioning were exposed to high ambient heat and radiant heat from processes and equipment, which produced an Indoor Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGTi) of 82.6 degrees Fahrenheit (Heat Index of 102.2 degrees Fahrenheit).  Employees perform a moderate workload wearing normal clothing.  Such exposures may lead to the development of serious heat-related illnesses such as, but not limited to heat cramps, heat exhaustion, and heat stroke.

Issued

Oct 3, 2019

Abate by

Oct 30, 2019

Penalty

Initial $8,524 · Current $3,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances 8111

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)     Facility: On or about August 20, 2019: an employee in the area of small press #1 was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 92.7% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 89.4 dBa) which is approximately 2.31 times the action level for a 10 hour work day of 40% (equivalent to an 10 hour TWA of 83.4dBa) and the employer had not developed a monitoring program to ensure employees were adequately protected from noise. Sample taken over 466 minutes with no noise added for the 14 not sampled.     b)         Facility: On or about 20, 2019: an employee operating the big press was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 74.4% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 87.8 dBa) which is approximately 1.86 times the action level for a 10 hour work day of 40% (equivalent to an 10 hour TWA of 83.4dBa) and the employer had not developed a monitoring program to ensure employees were adequately protected from noise. Sample taken over 465 minutes with no noise added for the 15 not sampled    c)     Facility: On or about August 20, 2019: an employee in the area of small press #2 was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 101.7% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 90.1 dBa) which is approximately 3.05 times the action level for a 12 hour work day of 33.34% (equivalent to an 12 hour TWA of 82.07dBa) and the employer had not developed a monitoring program to ensure employees were adequately protected from noise. Sample taken over 468 minutes with no noise added for the 12 not sampled.       d)      Facility: On or about August 20, 2019: an employee operating the pre-maverick was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 48.6% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 84.7 dBa) which is approximately 1.45 times the action level for a 12 hour work day of 33.34% (equivalent to an 12 hour TWA of 82.07dBa) and the employer had not developed a monitoring program to ensure employees were adequately protected from noise. Sample taken over 435 minutes with no noise added for the 45 not sampled.

Issued

Oct 3, 2019

Abate by

Oct 30, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 8111

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):  a)     Facility: On or about August 20, 2019: an employee in the area of small press #1 was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 92.7% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 89.4 dBa) which is approximately 2.31 times the action level for a 10 hour work day of 40% (equivalent to an 10 hour TWA of 83.4dBa) and the employer had not trained each exposed employee on the effects of noise on their hearing, the purpose and use of hearing protection and purpose of audiometric testing and test procedures. Sample taken over 466 minutes with no noise added for the 14 not sampled.     b)         Facility: On or about 20, 2019: an employee operating the big press was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 74.4% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 87.8 dBa) which is approximately 1.86 times the action level for a 10 hour work day of 40% (equivalent to an 10 hour TWA of 83.4dBa)  and the employer had not trained each exposed employee on the effects of noise on their hearing, the purpose and use of hearing protection and purpose of audiometric testing and test procedures. Sample taken over 465 minutes with no noise added for the 15 not sampled    c)     Facility: On or about August 20, 2019: an employee in the area of small press #2 was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 101.7% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 90.1 dBa) which is approximately 3.05 times the action level for a 12 hour work day of 33.34% (equivalent to an 12 hour TWA of 82.07dBa)  and the employer had not trained each exposed employee on the effects of noise on their hearing, the purpose and use of hearing protection and purpose of audiometric testing and test procedures. Sample taken over 468 minutes with no noise added for the 12 not sampled.       d)      Facility: On or about August 20, 2019: an employee operating the pre-maverick was exposed to continuous noise at a level of 48.6% (equivalent to an 8 hour TWA of 84.7 dBa) which is approximately 1.45 times the action level for a 12 hour work day of 33.34% (equivalent to an 12 hour TWA of 82.07dBa)  and the employer had not trained each exposed employee on the effects of noise on their hearing, the purpose and use of hearing protection and purpose of audiometric testing and test procedures. Sample taken over 435 minutes with no noise added for the 45 not sampled.