OSHA Inspection: TRANSAXLE, LLC

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $6300.00 · Current $3780.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 81108111

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:    Noise monitoring was not conducted for the employees with the following exposures:    a) Differential cell, far end (nearest the Proceco washer) - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 314 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately  98.3 dBA. The sampling was performed for 452 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     b) Differential cell - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 113.1 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately 90.9 dBA. The sampling was performed for 253 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     c) Fuller cell - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 178.0 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately  94.2 dBA. The sampling was performed for 400 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     d) Fuller cell (far end near offices) - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Action Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 70.9 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately 87.5 dBA. The sampling was performed for 431 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-22 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $6300.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 81108111

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:    Audiometric testing was not provided for the employees with the following exposures:    a) Differential cell, far end (nearest the Proceco washer) - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 314 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately  98.3 dBA. The sampling was performed for 452 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     b) Differential cell - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 113.1 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately 90.9 dBA. The sampling was performed for 253 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     c) Fuller cell - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 178.0 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately  94.2 dBA. The sampling was performed for  400 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     d) Fuller cell (far end near offices) - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Action Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 70.9 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately 87.5 dBA. The sampling was performed for 431 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     NOTE: IN ADDITION TO ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION, THE EMPLOYER IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT ABATEMENT DOCUMENTATION FOR THIS ITEM. FAILURE TO COMPLY WILL RESULT IN AN ADDITIONAL PENALTY OF $1000.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH 29 CFR 1903.19.

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-22 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $6300.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced

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:    The wearing of hearing protection was not required for the employees with the following exposures:    a) Differential cell, far end (nearest the Proceco washer) - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 314 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately  98.3 dBA. The sampling was performed for 452 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     b) Differential cell - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 113.1 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately 90.9 dBA. The sampling was performed for 253 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     c) Fuller cell - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 178.0 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately  94.2 dBA. The sampling was performed for  400 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     d) Fuller cell (far end near offices) - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Action Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 70.9 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately 87.5 dBA. The sampling was performed for 431 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.    NOTE: IN ADDITION TO ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION, THE EMPLOYER IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT ABATEMENT DOCUMENTATION FOR THIS ITEM. FAILURE TO COMPLY WILL RESULT IN AN ADDITIONAL PENALTY OF $1000.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH 29 CFR 1903.19.

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-22 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(i)(3): Employees were not given the opportunity to select their hearing protectors from a variety of suitable hearing protectors provided by the employer:    Two types of hearing protection (ear plugs and ear muffs) was not provided for the employees with the following exposures:    a) Differential cell, far end (nearest the Proceco washer) - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 314 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately  98.3 dBA. The sampling was performed for 452 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     b) Differential cell - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 113.1 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately 90.9 dBA. The sampling was performed for 253 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     c) Fuller cell - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 178.0 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately  94.2 dBA. The sampling was performed for 400 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     d) Fuller cell (far end near offices) - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Action Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 70.9 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately 87.5 dBA. The sampling was performed for 431 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     NOTE: IN ADDITION TO ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION, THE EMPLOYER IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT ABATEMENT DOCUMENTATION FOR THIS ITEM. FAILURE TO COMPLY WILL RESULT IN AN ADDITIONAL PENALTY OF $1000.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH 29 CFR 1903.19.

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-22 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $6300.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(k)(1): The employer did not train each employee who is exposed to noise at or above an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.95(k). The employer did not institute a training program and ensure employee participation in the program:    Noise training was not provided for the employees with the following exposures:    a) Differential cell, far end (nearest the Proceco washer) - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 314 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately  98.3 dBA. The sampling was performed for 452 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12.  Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     b) Differential cell - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 113.1 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately 90.9 dBA. The sampling was performed for 253 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     c) Fuller cell - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Permissible Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 178.0 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately  94.2 dBA. The sampling was performed for 400 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     d) Fuller cell (far end near offices) - A mechanic was exposed to continuous noise levels in excess of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average sound level (Action Level). The employee's dosimeter dBA level was 70.9 % of the permissible level (90 dBA) and was equivalent to approximately 87.5 dBA. The sampling was performed for 431 minutes during one shift on 12/13/12. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of time.     NOTE: IN ADDITION TO ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION, THE EMPLOYER IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT ABATEMENT DOCUMENTATION FOR THIS ITEM. FAILURE TO COMPLY WILL RESULT IN AN ADDITIONAL PENALTY OF $1000.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH 29 CFR 1903.19.

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3060.00 · Current $1836.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii)(C): The energy control procedure did not clearly and specifically outline the steps for placement, removal and transfer of lockout devices or tagout devices and the responsibility for them:    a) Production Shop - There were no provisions in the employer's written lockout program requiring that each employee who performed lockout related tasks on production equipment such as, but not limited to the Proceco washer, apply their own individual lock to the disconnect. On or about 12/3/12.

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-22 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(7)(i): The employer did not provide adequate training to ensure that employees acquired the knowledge and skills required for the safe application, usage and removal of energy control devices:    a) Production Shop - Employees who performed lockout related tasks on production equipment such as, but not limited to the Proceco washer, were not trained to apply their own individual lock to the disconnect. On or about 12/3/12.    NOTE: THE EMPLOYER IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION FOR THIS ITEM. FAILURE TO COMPLY WILL RESULT IN AN ADDITIONAL PENALTY OF $1000.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH 29 CFR 1903.19.

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2295.00 · Current $1377.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.215(a)(4): Grinding machinery was not used with work rest(s) to support offhand grinding work:    a) Production shop - Bench grinders including, but not limited to the bench grinder used by employees in the differential cell nearest the Proceco washer did not have adjustable tool rests. On or about 12/13/12.

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.215(b)(9): The distance between the abrasive wheel periphery(s) and the adjustable tongue or the end of the safety guard peripheral member at the top exceeded one fourth inch:    a) Production shop - Bench grinders including, but not limited to the bench grinder used by employees in the differential cell nearest the Proceco washer did not have adjustable tongue guards. On or about 12/13/12.

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2295.00 · Current $1377.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.242(b): Compressed air used for cleaning purposes was not reduced to less than 30 p.s.i.:    a) Production shop - The compressed air used by mechanics to clean their work areas was measured at approximately 90 p.s.i. On or about 12/13/12.

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2295.00 · Current $1377.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(b)(2): Listed or labeled electrical equipment was not used or installed in accordance with instructions included in the listing or labeling:    a) Production shop, floor near office - A four receptacle outlet that was designed to be mounted to a surface was being used as an extension cord. On or about 12/13/12.    b) Production shop, drying area near the discharge end of the Proceco washer - A four receptacle outlet that was designed to be mounted to a surface was being used as an extension cord. On or about 12/13/12.

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.146(c)(2): The employer did not inform exposed employees, by posting danger signs or by any other equally effective means, of the existence and location of and the danger posed by the permit spaces:     a) Production shop - There was no warning sign posted on the door of the Proceco washer informing employees that the space was a permit required confined space.  On or about 12/3/12.    NOTE: A sign reading DANGER-PERMIT-REQUIRED CONFINED SPACE, DO NOT ENTER or using other similar language would satisfy the requirement for a sign.

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.146(c)(4): When the employer decided that its employees would enter permit spaces, the employer did not develop and implement a written permit space entry program that complied with 29 CFR 1910.146:    a) Production shop - There were no written procedures developed for entry into the facilitys permit required confined spaces including, but not limited to the Proceco washer. On or about 12/3/12.

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-22 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop, implement, and/or maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which describes how the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) will be met:     a) Establishment - A written chemical hazard communication program was not developed for employees who used chemical products including, but not limited to spray paints (toluene), and mineral spirits. On or about 12/3/12.    NOTE: THE EMPLOYER IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION FOR THIS ITEM. FAILURE TO COMPLY WILL RESULT IN AN ADDITIONAL PENALTY OF $1000.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH 29 CFR 1903.19.

Issued

2013-01-28 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-02-22 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)Establishment - Training in the hazards of chemicals in the workplace was not provided. Employees used chemical products including, but not limited to spray paints (toluene), and mineral spirits. On or about 12/3/12.    NOTE: THE EMPLOYER IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION FOR THIS ITEM. FAILURE TO COMPLY WILL RESULT IN AN ADDITIONAL PENALTY OF $1000.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH 29 CFR 1903.19.