OSHA Inspection: ROGERS CORPORATION

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Jun 1, 2026

Penalty

Initial $10,050 · Current $5,025 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.1053(c): Permissible exposure limit (PEL). The employer shall ensure that no employee is exposed to an airborne concentration of respirable crystalline silica in excess of 50 mg/m3, calculated as an 8-hour TWA.  On or about August 11, 2025, an employee working in the Foamline mixing room was exposed to an 8 hour time weighted average (TWA) of 87.5 ?g/m3 for respirable crystalline silica.  The exposure level was calculated for the 110 minute sampling period, with a zero exposure increment for the unsampled period of 370 minutes.  Abatement documentation is required in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1903.19(d).

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Jun 1, 2026

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.1053(f)(1): Engineering and work practice controls. The employer shall use engineering and work practice controls to reduce and maintain employee exposure to respirable crystalline silica to or below the PEL, unless the employer can demonstrate that such controls are not feasible. Wherever such feasible engineering and work practice controls are not sufficient to reduce employee exposure to or below the PEL, the employer shall nonetheless use them to reduce employee exposure to the lowest feasible level and shall supplement them with the use of respiratory protection that complies with the requirements of paragraph (g) of this section.  On or about August 11, 2025,  an employee working in the foamline mixing room was exposed to an 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) of 87.5 ?g/m3 for respirable crystalline silica.    The employer did not implement engineering or work practice controls to reduce the employee's exposure to lead below the PEL.  Abatement documentation is required in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1903.19(d).

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Penalty

Initial $10,050 · Current $5,025 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.1053(d)(1): The employer shall assess the exposure of each employee who is 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) or the scheduled monitoring option in paragraph (d)(3) of this section.  On or about May 16, 2025, the employer did not assess the exposure of each employee who may reasonably be expected to be exposed to respirable crystalline silica at or above the action level while cleaning the dust collector for the mixing room.    This item was corrected during the inspection.

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Dec 15, 2025

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 9000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.1053(f)(2)(i)(A):The exposure control plan did not contain a description of all tasks in the workplace that involve exposure to respirable crystalline silica:  On or about May 16, 2025, a maintenance technician was exposed to respirable crystalline silica while providing preventative maintenance to the Donaldson Torit DFO2-8 Dust collector.  The employer did not include this job task within the company silica exposure control plan.    Abatement certification is required in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1903.19(d).

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Dec 15, 2025

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.1200(h)(1):The employer did not provide employees with effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment, and whenever a new physical or health hazard the employees had not previously been trained about was introduced into their work area:  On or about May 19, 2025, employees were sweeping industrial sweeping compound in the foamline mixing room.  The employer did not provide employees with effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new physical or health hazard the employees had not previously been trained about was introduced into their work area.  Item was corrected during the inspection.