OSHA Inspection: EPSCO POWDER AND INDUSTRIAL COATINGS LLC

Issued

2025-05-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2025-07-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $4965.00 · Current $2482.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 81108111

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) On March 3, 2025, an employee performing abrasive blasting was exposed to noise at a dose of 372% with an average sound level of 99.4 dBA during a 469-minute sampling period. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled time during the shift.   (b) On March 3, 2025, an employee performing powder coating was exposed to noise at a dose of 52.5% with an average sound level of 85.3 dBA during a 469-minute sampling period. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled time during the shift.

Issued

2025-05-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2025-07-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.95(i)(2)(i): The employer did not ensure that hearing protectors are worn by an employee who is required by 29 CFR 1910.95(b)(1) to wear personal protective equipment:  (a) On March 3, 2025, an employee performing abrasive blasting was exposed to noise at a dose of 372% with an average sound level of 99.4 dBA during a 469-minute sampling period. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled time during the shift. The employee wore a Clemco Apollo 600 Sand Blasting Hood with an NRR of 9 dB, which did not reduce the noise levels  below an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 dBA.   (b) On March 3rd, 2025, an employee performing powder coating was exposed to noise at a dose of 52.5% with an average sound level of 85.3 dBA during a 469-minute sampling period. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled time during the shift. The employer did not require the employee to use hearing protection.

Issued

2025-05-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2025-06-24 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $4965.00 · Current $2482.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1730

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.1052(d)(1)(i): Where methylene chloride was present in the workplace, the employer did not determine each employee's exposure:  (a) On March 3, 2025 and times prior thereto; employees used 1826 Flo-Strip Paint Stripper which contains 75-95%  methylene chloride to remove coatings from a variety of objects in order to prepare them for powder coating.

Issued

2025-05-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2025-07-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.1052(k)(1)(iii): The employer did not include methylene chloride in the hazard communication program established to comply with hazard communication standard (HCS) (1910.1200) and did not ensure each employee was trained in accordance with the requirements of HCS and paragraph (l) of this section:  (a) On March 3, 2025 and times prior thereto; employees used 1826 Flo-Strip Paint Stripper which contains 75-95% Methylene Chloride to strip coatings from the surface of a variety of objects.

Issued

2025-05-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2025-07-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.1200(e)(1)(i): The employer did not compile a list of the hazardous chemicals known to be present using a product identifier that was referenced on the appropriate safety data sheet.  (a) On March 3, 2025 and times prior thereto; employees used and were exposed to hazardous chemicals including but not limited POWDURA TGIC-Free Polyester Powder Coating Semi-Gloss Black which contains isobutyl methyl ketone, diacetone alcohol, and titanium dioxide and 1826 Flo-Strip Paint Stripper which contains Methylene Chloride during powder coating and stripping operations. The employers written hazard communication program was not maintained with an up-to-date chemical inventory.

Issued

2025-05-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2025-07-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

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:  (a) On March 3, 2025 and times prior thereto; employees used and were exposed to hazardous chemicals including but not limited POWDURA TGIC-Free Polyester Powder Coating Semi-Gloss Black which contains isobutyl methyl ketone, diacetone alcohol, and titanium dioxide and 1826 Flo-Strip Paint Stripper which contains Methylene Chloride during powder coating and stripping operations.

Issued

2025-05-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2025-07-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $4256.00 · Current $2126.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1730

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.1052(i)(2): Where it was reasonably foreseeable that an employee's eyes may contact solutions containing 0.1 percent or greater methylene chloride and the employer did not provide appropriate eyewash facilities within the immediate work area for emergency use:   (a) On March 3, 2025 and times prior thereto; employees used 1826 Flo-Strip Paint Stripper which contains 75-95% Methylene Chloride to strip coatings from the surface of a variety of objects. The nearest eyewash is approximately 100 feet away in a different building and would require the employee to pass through at least one doorway.

Issued

2025-05-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2025-06-09 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.132(d)(2): The employer did not verify, through a written certification, that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed:  (a) On March 3, 2025, and times prior thereto; employees were exposed to health hazards when performing powder coating and paint stripping activities with products containing toxic substances such as methylene chloride and isobutyl methyl ketone. A hazard assessment had been performed but did not include the date or the identity of the person certifying the accurateness of the assessment.