OSHA Inspection: AGJ INDUSTRIES, INC.

Issued

Jan 13, 2021

Abate by

Apr 1, 2021

Penalty

Initial $4,048 · Current $3,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9010

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:  Worksite: When employees were jackhammering concrete during renovation activities, the employer did not fully and properly implement the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protection specified for that task on Table 1, under 29 CFR 1926.1153(c)(1).

Issued

Jan 13, 2021

Abate by

Apr 1, 2021

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9010

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:  Worksite: When employees were using a jackhammer to break apart concrete, 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 the performance option in 29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(2)(ii), or the scheduled monitoring option in 29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(2)(iii).

Issued

Jan 13, 2021

Abate by

Apr 1, 2021

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9010

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1153(f)(1): The employer allowed dry sweeping or dry brushing where such activity could contribute to employee exposure to respirable crystalline silica and wet sweeping, HEPA-filtered vacuuming or other methods were feasible:  Worksite: When the employer assigned workers to jackhammer and replace a concrete sidewalk arrangements were not made to ensure the workers would not dry sweep the debris during the process.  Employees did not use water, or equivalent methods of control, to minimize or eliminate generation of respirable silica-containing dust.

Issued

Jan 13, 2021

Abate by

Apr 1, 2021

Penalty

Initial $4,048 · Current $3,000 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9010

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1153(g)(1): The employer did not establish and implement a written exposure control plan: Worksite: When employees conducted jackhammering of concrete the employer did not develop and implement a written exposure control program that contained the required elements found in  29 CFR 1926.1153(g)(1)(i) through (iv).

Issued

Jan 13, 2021

Abate by

Apr 1, 2021

Penalty

Initial $2,892 · Current $1,700 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9010

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1153(i)(1): The employer did not include respirable crystalline silica in the program established to comply with the hazard communication standard (HCS) (29 CFR 1910.1200):  Worksite: When employees conducted jackhammering operations on concrete to replace access into a storefront, the employer did not conduct training in the aspects of crystalline silica as outlined in 29 CFR 19226.1153(i)(2)(i)(A) through (F).