OSHA Inspection: CSI CONTRACTORS INC

Issued

Aug 21, 2023

Penalty

Initial $3,572 · Current $2,500 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): A written respiratory protection program (RPP) that included the provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required respirator use:  At 202 West Street. Pittsfield, MA:   On May 17, 2023, and at times prior, the employer did not implement a required RPP to protect employees from the health effects of respirable crystalline silica.  A RPP must cover procedures for selecting respirators, medical evaluations of employees required to use respirators, fit testing procedures for tight-fitting respirators, procedures for proper use of respirators in routine emergency situations, cleaning and storing procedures for respirators, training of employees, and procedures for regularly evaluating the effectiveness of the program.  ABATEMENT NOTE:� A respirator program shall include the following elements:��  -Procedures for selecting respirators� -Medical evaluations for employees required to use respirators� -Procedures for fit testing tight fitting respirators� -Procedures for proper use of respirators� -Procedures and schedules for cleaning, storing, inspecting, and maintaining respirators� -Training of employees about respiratory hazards in the work place� -Training on proper use of respirators� -Procedures for regularly evaluating the effectiveness of the program  *Abatement notes are intended only to provide clarity regarding existing requirements under the law or agency policies. Abatement notes do not create (or diminish) legal obligations under the Occupational Safety and Health Act.

Issued

Aug 21, 2023

Abate by

Oct 6, 2023

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9000

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:  At 202 West St.  Pittsfield MA:  On May 17, 2023, and at times prior, the employer did not ensure employees were medical evaluated prior to using required-use respirators for concrete jackhammering operations.

Issued

Aug 21, 2023

Abate by

Oct 6, 2023

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1): The employer shall ensure that employees using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator pass an appropriate qualitative fit test (QLFT) or quantitative fit test (QNFT) as stated in this paragraph.  At 202 West St. Pittsfield, MA: On May 17, 2023, and at times prior, the employer did not ensure that employees were fit-tested prior to using half face respirators during concrete cutting and jack hammering.

Issued

Aug 21, 2023

Abate by

Oct 6, 2023

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9000

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 (RPP) in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.134:  At 202 West Street. Pittsfield, MA:   On May 17, 2023, and at times prior, the employer did not implement a required RPP for employees using half-face respirators and exposed to respirable crystalline silica.  An RPP must cover 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1) - (c)(1)(ix).  ABATEMENT NOTE:� A respirator program shall include the following elements:��  -Procedures for selecting respirators� -Medical evaluations for employees required to use respirators� -Procedures for fit testing tight fitting respirators� -Procedures for proper use of respirators� -Procedures and schedules for cleaning, storing, inspecting, and maintaining respirators� -Training of employees about respiratory hazards in the work place� -Training on proper use of respirators� -Procedures for regularly evaluating the effectiveness of the program  *Abatement notes are intended only to provide clarity regarding existing requirements under the law or agency policies. Abatement notes do not create (or diminish) legal obligations under the Occupational Safety and Health Act.

Issued

Aug 21, 2023

Abate by

Oct 6, 2023

Penalty

Initial $4,465 · Current $3,126 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9000

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 (RCS) in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section.  At 202 West Street. Pittsfield, MA:   On May 17, 2023, and at times prior, the employer did not ensure that employees engaged in jackhammering of concrete floor, a Table I task, were fully and properly implementing the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protection specified in Table I.

Issued

Aug 21, 2023

Abate by

Oct 6, 2023

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1153(c)(2)(i): A means of exhaust was not provided to minimize the accumulation of visible airborne dust for tasks performed indoors or in enclosed areas:  At 202 West St. Pittsfield, MA: On May 17, 2023, and at times prior, the employer did not ensure Table 1 tasks used in enclosed spaces, minimized the accumulation of visible airborne dust.  The employer erected a barrier system that did not contain exhausted silica dust from escaping through the top, and sides, due to tears along the containment seal.

Issued

Aug 21, 2023

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1153(g)(1): The employer did not establish and implement a written exposure control plan (ECP) tailored to what the company does, complying with the requirements of 1926.1153(g)(1) through (g)(4):   At 202 West St. Pittsfield MA:  On May 17, 2023, and at times prior, the employer did not establish a written ECP that covers (g)(1) through (g)(4) as required for employees with exposure to respirable crystalline silica.