OSHA Inspection: BERG STEEL PIPE CORP.

Issued

2016-02-26 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-10-04 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $7000.00 · Current $7000.00

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(b)(1): When employees were subjected to sound exceeding those listed in Table G-16, feasible administrative or engineering controls were not utilized:    The employer failed to utilize feasible administrative or engineering controls to reduce or eliminate noise levels for employees who are exposed to noise, equal or exceeding the Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL), of an 8-hour time-weighted average of 90 dBA or its equivalent noise dose of 100%, when working with equipment such as angle grinders. The following monitored employees exceeded the PEL (all exposure calculations included a zero increment for the time not sampled):    a) In the Pipe Plant, a support operator and welder was exposed to continuous noise of 92.4 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 139.5% during the 462 minute sampling period on October 6, 2015.    b) In the Pipe Plant, a weld prep operator was exposed to continuous noise of 96.6 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 251.3% during the 467 minute sampling period on October 6, 2015.    c) In the Pipe Plant, a tac-welder operator was exposed to continuous noise of 92.4 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 139.8% during the 408 minute sampling period on October 7, 2015.    d) In the Pipe Plant, a temporary worker was exposed to continuous noise of 95.7 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 221.3% during the 452 minute sampling period on October 7, 2015.    e) In the Pipe Plant, a temporary worker was exposed to continuous noise of 96.1 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 234.6% during the 410 minute sampling period on October 7, 2015.    f) In the Pipe Plant, a weld prep operator was exposed to continuous noise of 97 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 267.2% during the 409 minute sampling period on October 7, 2015.    g) In the Pipe Plant, a temporary worker was exposed to continuous noise of 94.1 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 177.9% during the 399 minute sampling period on October 8, 2015.    h) In the Pipe Plant, a temporary worker was exposed to continuous noise of 95.3 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 209.9% during the 437 minute sampling period on October 8, 2015.    i) In the Pipe Plant, a temporary worker was exposed to continuous noise of 96.5 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 246.3% during the 420 minute sampling period on October 8, 2015.    j) In the Pipe Plant, a QC inspector was exposed to continuous noise of 97.6 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 289% during the 433 minute sampling period on October 8, 2015.    k) In the Coating Plant, a temporary worker was exposed to continuous noise of 96.8 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 257.2% during the 461 minute sampling period on November 3, 2015.

Issued

2016-02-26 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-04-13 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $7000.00 · Current $7000.00

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(g)(5)(i): The employer did not establish, within 6 months of an employee's first exposure at or above the action level, a valid baseline audiogram against which subsequent audiograms can be compared:    The employer failed to establish, within 6 months of an employee's first exposure at or above the action level, a valid baseline audiogram against which subsequent audiograms can be compared:    a) In the Pipe Plant, a temporary worker was exposed to continuous noise of 91.2 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 118.2% during the 470 minute sampling period on October 6, 2015. The employer did not establish a baseline audiogram within 6 months of the employee's first exposure at or above the action level.    b) In the Pipe Plant, a temporary worker was exposed to continuous noise of 96.1 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 234.6% during the 410 minute sampling period on October 7, 2015. The employer did not establish a baseline audiogram within 6 months of the employee's first exposure at or above the action level.  c) In the Pipe Plant, a temporary worker was exposed to continuous noise of 94.1 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 177.9% during the 399 minute sampling period on October 8, 2015. The employer did not establish a baseline audiogram within 6 months of the employee's first exposure at or above the action level.    d) In the Pipe Plant, a temporary worker was exposed to continuous noise of 95.3 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 209.9% during the 437 minute sampling period on October 8, 2015. The employer did not establish a baseline audiogram within 6 months of the employee's first exposure at or above the action level.    e) In the Coating Plant, a temporary worker was exposed to continuous noise of 91.5 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 123.4% during the 463 minute sampling period on October 21, 2015. The employer did not establish a baseline audiogram within 6 months of the employee's first exposure at or above the action level.    f) In the Coating Plant, a temporary worker was exposed to continuous noise of 91.6 dBa or the equivalent noise dose of 124.9% during the 461 minute sampling period on November 3, 2015. The employer did not establish a baseline audiogram within 6 months of the employee's first exposure at or above the action level.

Issued

2016-02-26 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-04-13 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $7000.00 · Current $7000.00

Hazardous substances 81108111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(i)(5): The employer did not ensure proper initial fitting and supervise the correct use of all hearing protectors:    a) On or about September 23, 2015, throughout establishment, the employer failed to ensure that employees, who are exposed to noise levels exceeding an 8-hour time-weighted average of 90 decibels, correctly insert and wear their ear plugs.

Issued

2016-02-26 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-04-13 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $5000.00 · Current $5000.00

Hazardous substances 0435A614

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.151(c): Where employees were exposed to injurious corrosive materials, suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body were not provided within the work area for immediate emergency use:    On or about September 23, 2015, throughout establishment, where janitors used hazardous corrosive chemicals, such as, but not limited to, Greased Lightning Super Strength Cleaner & Degreaser (corrosive, pH 12.5-13) and Ammoniated Window Cleaner (corrosive, pH 9-10), suitable facilities for quick drenching and/or flushing of the eyes (eyewash) and/or body (safety shower) were not provided for immediate emergency use:    a) Pipe Plant near Edge Planner: The eyewash station was not suitable due to lack of maintenance, metal dusts build up and the water level was low and did not provide adequate flow.    b) Pipe Plant next Men's Bathroom Entrance/Finishing Area: The eyewash station was not suitable due to lack of maintenance, metal dusts build up.  c) Pipe Plant in the Expander Area: The eyewash/shower station was blocked by equipment installed around it and thus, not accessible for immediate emergency use.    d) Coating Plant near Entrance to Coating Plant: The eyewash/shower station was not suitable due to lack of maintenance, metal dusts build up and the water level was low and did not provide adequate flow.    e) Coating Plant next to water fountain in the Acid Rinse Area: The eyewash/shower station was not suitable due to lack of maintenance, metal dusts build up and the water level for the shower was low and did not provide adequate flow. Moreover, water temperature for the eyewash station was too hot.

Issued

2016-02-26 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-04-13 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $7000.00 · Current $7000.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.242(a): Hand and portable powered tools or equipment were not kept in safe condition:  a) On or about October 7, 2015, in the Pipe plant's Final Inspection Area, on one of the Makita GA7001L 7-inch Electric Angle Grinders being used, the power cord was frayed exposing the energized copper conductors inside.    b) On or about October 8, 2015, , in the Pipe plant's Final Inspection Area, on one of the Makita GA7001L 7-inch Electric Angle Grinders being used, the power cord's male plug was bent and pulled apart.

Issued

2016-02-26 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-04-13 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $5000.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.252(b)(2)(iii): Workers and other persons adjacent to the welding area were not required to wear appropriate goggles to protect them from the rays when noncombustible or flameproof screens or shields were not used:      a) On or about October 6, 2015, in the Pipe plant's Mig & Grind area, a welder did not use protective curtains while welding a tab at the end of a metal pipe. This condition exposed employees working and/or transiting in the area to the arc flash.

Issued

2016-02-26 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-04-13 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3000.00 · Current $3000.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(j)(2)(iv): A receptacle installed in a wet or damp location was not suitable for the location:    On or about October 8, 2015, employees were exposed to 120V electrical hazards where water fountains were not protected with ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) outlets:    a)    Water fountain in the Pipe plant next to the Mens Bathroom.  b)    Water fountain in Coating plants Acid Rinse area.

Issued

2016-02-26 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-10-08 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3000.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 04350731152016202587

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 or about, September 23, 2015, throughout establishment, the employer did not provide employees with chemical-specific effective information and training on each of the hazardous chemicals in their work area. Employees were exposed to hazardous chemicals, including, but not limited to, Greased Lighting Super Strength Cleaner & Degreaser (corrosive, carcinogen to animals, pH 12.5-13); Ammoniated Window Cleaner (corrosive, pH 9-10); Crystalline Silica; Copper Fumes; Manganese Fumes; Zinc Oxide Fumes; and Iron Oxide Fumes.

Issued

2016-02-26 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-04-13 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 90109015S103

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(2)(i): Respirator users were not provided with the information contained in Appendix D to 29 CFR 1910.134 when the employer determined that any voluntary respirator use was permissible:    a) On or about September 23, 2015, throughout establishment, the employer did not provide the basic advisory information on respirators, as presented in Appendix D of 29 CFR 1910.134, in written or oral format to employees who wear N95 dust masks on a voluntary basis, when the employer determined that voluntary use was permissible.

Issued

2016-02-26 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-04-13 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(1)(ii): 29 CFR 1910.178(l)(1)(ii):  The employer did not ensure that each operator had successfully completed the training required by paragraph (l), except as permitted by paragraph (l)(5), prior to permitting an employee to operate a power industrial truck:  a) On or about September 23, 2015, throughout establishment, the employer did not ensure each powered industrial truck operator had successfully completed training and evaluation prior to operating powered industrial trucks.