OSHA Inspection: TOP DOLLAR HOLDINGS, LLC

Issued

Apr 20, 2020

Abate by

May 12, 2020

Penalty

Initial $5,398 · Current $2,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(a): Protective equipment was not used when necessary whenever hazards capable of causing injury and impairment were encountered.      On or about December 10, 2019, at the powder shop, the employer did not ensure that protective clothing for the arms was  provided and required to be used by employees to spray powders (irritants, toxic, skin sensitizer) which exposes employees to hazardous chemicals.

Issued

Apr 20, 2020

Abate by

May 12, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2): The employer did not verify that the required workplace hazard assessment has been performed through a written certification that identifies the workplace evaluated, the person certifying that the evaluation has been performed, the date(s) of the hazard assessment, and, which identifies the document as a certification of hazard assessment.   a.  On or about October 29, 2019, at the powder shop, the employer did not develop a written hazard assessment for personal protective equipment to be used by employees to spray powders, primers, and paints which exposes employees to hazardous chemicals.    b.  On or about October 29, 2019, at the plating building, the employer did not develop a written hazard assessment for personal protective equipment to be used by employees who worked with plating tanks that held caustic liquids which expose employees to hazardous chemicals.

Issued

Apr 20, 2020

Abate by

May 12, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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.   On or about December 17, 2019, at the plating building, the employer did not ensure employees wore appropriate eye and face protection when moving parts in and out of plating tanks that held caustic liquids.  Employees were exposed to contact with plating liquids (caustic).

Issued

Apr 20, 2020

Abate by

Jul 10, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(3):  The employer did not ensure that each affected employee who wore prescription lenses while engaged in operations that involved eye hazards wore eye protection that incorporated the prescription in its design, or wore eye protection that could be worn over the prescription lenses without disturbing the proper position of the prescription lenses or the protective lenses.      On or about December 10, 2019, at the powder shop, the employer did not ensure that appropriate protective eye equipment was required to be used by an employee who wore prescription glasses to spray powders (irritants, toxic, skin sensitizer) which exposes employees to hazardous chemicals.

Issued

Apr 20, 2020

Abate by

May 12, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.138(a): The employer did not select and require employee(s) to use appropriate hand protection when employees' hands were exposed to hazards such as those from skin absorption of harmful substances; severe cuts or lacerations; severe abrasion; punctures; chemical burns; thermal burns; and harmful temperature extremes.   On or about December 17, 2019, plating building, the employer did not require an employee to wear chemical resistant gloves when moving racked parts to plating tanks that held caustic liquids and exposed the employee to contact with plating liquids (caustic).

Issued

Apr 20, 2020

Abate by

May 12, 2020

Penalty

Initial $5,398 · Current $2,500 Reduced

Hazardous substances C113

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(ii): The employer did not select and use a NIOSH-certified respirator in compliance with the conditions of its certification.      On or about October 29, 2019, at the powder shop, tissue was used in a respirator cartridge retainer of a half face respirator.  The employer did not ensure half face respirators worn by employees to spray powder coatings were used in accordance with the NIOSH certification of the half mask respirator.  Employees  sprayed powders (irritants, toxic, skin sensitizer) at cabinet spray booths and were exposed to chemical hazards.

Issued

Apr 20, 2020

Abate by

May 12, 2020

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).   On or about October 29, 2019, at the powder shop, the employer did not provide employees with qualitative or quantitative fit testing for half mask respirators.  Employees were required to wear half mask respirators with organic vapor cartridges and particulate filters when spraying powders, primer, or paints that contained hazardous chemicals (irritants, toxic, skin sensitizers).

Issued

Apr 20, 2020

Abate by

May 12, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(h)(4): Respirators that failed an inspection or were otherwise found to be defective were not removed from service and discarded or repaired.   On or about October 29, 2019, at the powder shop, a tear was present in the facepiece of a half face respirator worn by an employee to spray powder and the employer did not ensure the half face respirator was removed from service and discarded or repaired.  Employees sprayed powders (irritants, toxic, skin sensitizer) at cabinet spray booths and were exposed to chemical hazards.

Issued

Apr 20, 2020

Abate by

May 12, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(1)(ii): The employer did not ensure that each employee could demonstrate knowledge of the limitations and capabilities of the respirator.   On or about October 29, 2019 at the powder shop, the employer did not ensure each employee could demonstrate knowledge of the limitations and capabilities of organic vapor cartridges and particulate filters used with half mask respirators.  Employees were required to wear half mask respirators with organic vapor cartridges and particulate filters when spraying powders, primer, or paints that contained hazardous chemicals (irritants, toxic, skin sensitizers).

Issued

Apr 20, 2020

Abate by

May 12, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(l)(1): Evaluations of the workplace were not conducted to ensure the written respiratory protection program was being effectively implemented.   On or about October 29, 2019, at the powder shop, the employer did not conduct evaluations of the workplace to ensure the written respiratory protection program was being effectively implemented.  Employees were required to wear half mask respirators with organic vapor cartridges and particulate filters when spraying powders, primer, or paints that contained hazardous chemicals (irritants, toxic, skin sensitizers).