OSHA Inspection: GERDAN SLIPFORMING, INC.

Issued

Jan 6, 2022

Abate by

Feb 2, 2022

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.50(c): A person who has a valid certificate in first-aid training was not available at the worksite to render first-aid:  On or about July 8, 2021, an employee engaged in cutting joints on newly poured bridge sidewalls with handheld power saws, while working alone from a bridge scaffold at a remote worksite at or near Route M bridge near Schell City, Missouri, was exposed to amputation and fall hazards when no person with a valid certificate was available at the worksite to render first aid. The worksite was greater than five minutes travel from any emergency service.  A fatal incident occurred when the lone employee fell from the bridge to the ground below, rolled into the water, and drowned.

Issued

Jan 6, 2022

Abate by

Feb 2, 2022

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:  Employees engaged in sawing concrete bridge sidewalls at the workplace located at Route M bridge, near Shell City, Missouri, were exposed to respiratory hazards in that the employer did not asses the employee exposure to respirable crystalline silica when engineering controls under 1926.1153(c)(1) were not utilized. Hazardous chemicals include, but are not limited to, silica dust.

Issued

Jan 6, 2022

Abate by

Feb 2, 2022

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.1153(d)(3)(i):Wherever such feasible engineering and work practice controls are not sufficient to reduce employee exposure to or below the PEL, the employer did not use them to reduce employee exposure to the lowest feasible level and did not supplement them with the use of respiratory protection that complies with the requirements of paragraph (e) of this section:  Employees engaged in sawing concrete bridge sidewalls at the workplace located at Route M bridge, near Shell City, Missouri, were exposed to respiratory hazards in that the employer did not utilize engineering controls or ensure employees were under a respiratory protection program compliant with paragraph (e) of this section.

Issued

Jan 6, 2022

Abate by

Feb 2, 2022

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.1153(e)(2):Where respirator use is required by this section, the employer did not institute a respiratory protection program in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.134:  At the jobsite located at or near Route M bridge near Schell City, Missouri:  Employees were exposed to pulmonary hazards from respirator use and respiratory illness from inhalation of silica dust and particulates. There is a discrepancy between the written respiratory protection program and its implementation in that the employer's respiratory protection program did not include those employees using respirators while cutting concrete without the engineering controls specified in Table 1 of 1926.1153. Employees were not medically evaluated or fit tested for the respirators in use at the worksite.

Issued

Jan 6, 2022

Abate by

Feb 2, 2022

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:  Employees engaged in sawing concrete bridge sidewalls at the workplace located at Route M bridge, near Shell City, Missouri, were exposed to pulmonary hazards in that the employees were not provided a medical evaluation to determine their ability to use a respirator prior to respirator use. Hazardous chemicals include, but are not limited to, silica dust.

Issued

Jan 6, 2022

Abate by

Feb 2, 2022

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.134(f)(2):The employer shall ensure that an employee using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator is fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator, whenever a different respirator facepiece (size, style, model or make) is used, and at least annually thereafter:  Employees engaged in sawing concrete bridge sidewalls at the workplace located at Route M bridge, near Shell City, Missouri, were exposed to respiratory hazards in that the employees were not fit tested prior to respirator use. Hazardous chemicals include, but are not limited to, silica dust.