Violation Detail
Standard Cited: 5A0001 OSH Act General Duty Paragraph
This violation item has been deleted.
Inspection Nr: 103374351
Citation: 01001
Citation Type: Serious
Abatement Status: X
Initial Penalty: $2,500.00
Current Penalty: $2,500.00
Issuance Date: 04/24/1992
Nr Instances: 1
Nr Exposed: 414
Abatement Date: 04/29/1992
Gravity: 03
Report ID: 0636900
Contest Date:
Final Order:
Related Event Code (REC): C
Emphasis:
| Type | Latest Event | Event Date | Penalty | Abatement Due Date | Citation Type | Failure to Abate Inspection |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Penalty | I: Informal Settlement | 05/18/1992 | $2,500.00 | 04/29/1992 | Serious | |
| Penalty | Z: Issued | 04/24/1992 | $2,500.00 | 04/29/1992 | Serious |
Text For Citation: 01 Item/Group: 001 Hazard: CHEMICAL
Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees in that employees were exposed to: a. In departments 140, 170, and 074, employees such as final assembly workers engaged in electrical installation and testing, hydraulics connecting and testing, and quality assurance work, working in close proximity to spray painting operations were exposed to the hazard of chemical exposure to isocyanate containing mists and vapors from paint overspray, and evaporation resulting in employees experiencing diagnosed cases of respiratory and/or skin sensitization to isocyanates of respirtory and/or skin sensitization due to inhalation or contact of isocyanate containing mists and vapors from overspray and evaporation. At least four eployees in these areas were diagnosed by the company physician as sensitive to isocyanates and a majority of the employees in the area complained of respiratory irritation, skin irritation, nausea, headaches, and dizziness. Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable abatement method to correct this hazard is: Elimination of spray painting on the assembly line. The employer is not limited to abatement methods suggested by OSHA, i.e., methods explained are general and may not be effective in all cases. Other methods of abatement may be equally or more appropriate. Ultimate reresponsibility for determining the most appropriate abate- ment method rests with the employer, given its superior knowledge of the specific conditions on its worksite. The violation(s) described in this citation are alleged to have occurred on or about the day(s) the inspection was made unless other- wise indicated within the description given below each violation.
Translate