OSHA Inspection: HALO METAL PREP INC.

Issued

Oct 29, 2024

Abate by

Dec 31, 2024

Penalty

Initial $3,687 · Current $1,843 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:  The employer failed to administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program (including the elements of noise monitoring, audiometric testing, and training) for employees performing required duties with noise exposures that exceeded 85 dBA for an 8-hour time weighted average.  Employees not included in a hearing conservation program include the following instances for noise exposure during blasting operations:  a.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 74.9% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 88.7 dBA, as measured over 430 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 87.9 dBA  accounting for the period of 50 minutes unmonitored.   b.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 104.7% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 91.2 dBA, as measured over 427 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 90.3 dBA  accounting for the period of 53 minutes unmonitored.  c.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 77.27% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 89.0 dBA, as measured over 426 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 88.2 dBA  accounting for the period of 54 minutes unmonitored.  d.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 92.38% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 90.4 dBA, as measured over 422 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 89.4 dBA  accounting for the period of 58 minutes unmonitored.

Issued

Oct 29, 2024

Abate by

Dec 31, 2024

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:  The employer did not develop and implement a monitoring program for employees performing required duties with noise exposures that exceeded 85 dBA for an 8-hour time weighted average. Employees not included in a monitoring program included the following exposures during blasting operations:  a.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 74.9% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 88.7 dBA, as measured over 430 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 87.9 dBA  accounting for the period of 50 minutes unmonitored.   b.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 104.7% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 91.2 dBA, as measured over 427 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 90.3 dBA  accounting for the period of 53 minutes unmonitored.  c.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 77.27% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 89.0 dBA, as measured over 426 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 88.2 dBA  accounting for the period of 54 minutes unmonitored.  d.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 92.38% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 90.4 dBA, as measured over 422 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 89.4 dBA  accounting for the period of 58 minutes unmonitored.

Issued

Oct 29, 2024

Abate by

Dec 31, 2024

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:  An audiometric testing program was not established and maintained by making audiometric testing available for employees performing required duties with noise exposures that exceeded 85 dBA for an 8-hour time weighted average. Employees not included in an audiometric testing program included the following employees with exposures during blasting operations:  a.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 74.9% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 88.7 dBA, as measured over 430 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 87.9 dBA  accounting for the period of 50 minutes unmonitored.   b.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 104.7% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 91.2 dBA, as measured over 427 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 90.3 dBA  accounting for the period of 53 minutes unmonitored.  c.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 77.27% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 89.0 dBA, as measured over 426 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 88.2 dBA  accounting for the period of 54 minutes unmonitored.  d.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 92.38% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 90.4 dBA, as measured over 422 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 89.4 dBA  accounting for the period of 58 minutes unmonitored.

Issued

Oct 29, 2024

Abate by

Dec 31, 2024

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.95(k)(1):The employer did not institute a training program and ensure employee participation in the program:  The employer did not train employees performing required duties with noise exposures that exceeded 85 dBA for an 8-hour time weighted average.  The employer did not institute a training program and ensure that the following employees were trained in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.95(k)(3)(i)-(iii):  a.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 74.9% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 88.7 dBA, as measured over 430 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 87.9 dBA  accounting for the period of 50 minutes unmonitored.   b.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 104.7% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 91.2 dBA, as measured over 427 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 90.3 dBA  accounting for the period of 53 minutes unmonitored.  c.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 77.27% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 89.0 dBA, as measured over 426 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 88.2 dBA  accounting for the period of 54 minutes unmonitored.  d.) On or about October 4, 2024, an employee was exposed to noise at 92.38% of the permissible daily dose, or an average sound level of 90.4 dBA, as measured over 422 minutes of sampling while running the blasting machines. This dose is equivalent to an 8-hour TWA exposure of 89.4 dBA  accounting for the period of 58 minutes unmonitored.

Issued

Oct 29, 2024

Abate by

Nov 25, 2024

Penalty

Initial $2,765 · Current $1,383 Reduced

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 August 29, 2024, the employer did not ensure that affected employees used appropriate eye protection when exposed to hazardous chemicals to include, but not limited to, aluminum oxide and steel shot while performing blasting operations. An employee was found to be wearing standard prescription glasses instead of approved safety glasses.

Issued

Oct 29, 2024

Abate by

Dec 31, 2024

Penalty

Initial $2,765 · Current $1,383 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.134(c)(1):A written respiratory protection program 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:  On or about August 29, 2024, the employer failed to implement a written respiratory protection program where employees are required to wear N95 respirators while doing dust generating tasks to include, but not limited to, cleaning the machines and emptying the dust collectors.

Issued

Oct 29, 2024

Abate by

Dec 31, 2024

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:  On or  about August 29, 2024, the employer failed to provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator for employees required to use N95 respirators while doing dust generating tasks to include, but not limited to, cleaning the machines and emptying the dust collectors.

Issued

Oct 29, 2024

Abate by

Dec 31, 2024

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 August 29, 2024, the employer failed to ensure employees using a tight-fitting respirator were fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator for employees required to wear N95 respirators while doing dust generating tasks to include, but not limited to, cleaning the machines and emptying the dust collectors.

Issued

Oct 29, 2024

Abate by

Dec 31, 2024

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A):Respirators with tight-fitting facepieces were worn by employees who had facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face or that interfered with valve function:  On or about August 29, 2024, the employer failed to ensure employees required to wear an N95 respirator while doing dust generating tasks to include, but not limited to, cleaning the machines and emptying the dust collectors did not have facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the facepiece and face.

Issued

Oct 29, 2024

Abate by

Nov 25, 2024

Penalty

Initial $2,765 · Current $1,383 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.1200(h)(1):Employees were not provided effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard that the employees had not been previously trained about was introduced into their work area:  On or about August 29, 2024, the employer failed to provide effective information and training on hazardous chemicals to employees at the time of their initial assignment. Employees are exposed to hazardous chemicals to include, but not limited to, aluminum oxide and steel shot.