OSHA Inspection: REDDY ICE, LLC

Issued

Mar 17, 2020

Abate by

Jul 20, 2020

Penalty

Initial $7,711 · Current $5,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(c)(1): The employer did not administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.9(c) through (o) whenever employee noise exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 decibels measured on the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent:     (a) Reddy Ice, LLC at 9670 E. 40th Ave, Denver, CO: On and around November 25, 2019, the employer did not administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.95(c) through (o) whenever employee noise exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 decibels measured on the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent.  Noise monitoring found three employees working in Production Areas exposed to noise at doses of 67.9, 77.6, and 90.4 %. This condition exposed employees to the hazard of noise induced hearing loss.       Abatement Note:  A Hearing Conservation Program shall consist of:  (1) Development and implementation of a noise monitoring program;  (2) The institution of engineering, work practice, and administrative controls for excessive noise,  (3) Notification of employees who are exposed to noise doses in excess of the action level;   (4) Baseline audiogram within six months of exposure at or above the action level with annual follow-up audiogram for purposes of tracking changes in employee hearing acuity;  (5) Providing a variety of hearing protection and requiring its use where employees are exposed to noise above the Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 100% dose, where employees are exposed to noise above the Action Limit (AL) of 50% dose and have not received a baseline audiogram or has experienced a standard threshold shift;   (6) Annual training with regards to effects of noise upon hearing, use of hearing protection, and the purpose of the audiometric testing; and,  (7) Retention of all records including audiometric testing results and noise monitoring results.

Issued

Mar 17, 2020

Abate by

Jun 22, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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) Reddy Ice Corporation at 9670 E. 40th Ave, Denver, CO: On and around November 25, 2019, the employer did not develop a noise monitoring program in that no noise monitoring had been conducted at the facility.  This condition exposed employees to a noise hazard.        Abatement Note: Noise monitoring is intended to identify employees for inclusion in the hearing conservation program and to enable the proper selection of hearing protectors.

Issued

Mar 17, 2020

Abate by

Jun 20, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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) Reddy Ice, LLC at 9670 E. 40th Ave, Denver, CO: On and around November 25, 2019, the employer did not establish an audiometric testing program as provided by 29 CFR 1910.95(g) by making audiometric testing available to three employees, working in the Production Area, whose exposures were approximately 1.6, 1.8 and 1.3 times above an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels. This condition exposed employees to the hazard of noise induced hearing loss.

Issued

Mar 17, 2020

Abate by

Apr 20, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(8): The employer did not maintain in the workplace copies of the required safety data sheets for each hazardous chemical:  (a) Reddy Ice, LLC at 9670 E. 40th Ave, Denver, CO: On and around November 25, 2019, the employer did not update material safety data sheet to safety data sheets or maintain the required safety data sheets for each hazardous chemical in the workplace.