Violation Detail
Standard Cited: 5A0001 OSH Act General Duty Paragraph
This violation item has been deleted.
Inspection Nr: 306483470
Citation: 01002
Citation Type: Serious
Abatement Status:
Initial Penalty: $4,500.00
Current Penalty:
Issuance Date: 05/06/2005
Nr Instances: 1
Nr Exposed: 3
Abatement Date: 06/08/2005
Gravity: 10
Report ID: 0626700
Contest Date:
Final Order:
Related Event Code (REC):
Emphasis:
| Type | Latest Event | Event Date | Penalty | Abatement Due Date | Citation Type | Failure to Abate Inspection |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Penalty | I: Informal Settlement | 06/01/2005 | 06/08/2005 | Serious | ||
| Penalty | Z: Issued | 05/06/2005 | $4,500.00 | 06/08/2005 | Serious |
Text For Citation: 01 Item/Group: 002 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: Medical mismanagement at Keneka Texas Corporation, in the main laboratory. After the companies annual employee physical, conducted on 09/02/04, the company doctor discovered an employee had chemical toxin liver damage. His ALT was greater than twice the upper average, (average ALT-40). On November 22, 2004, when the employee and his personal physician pulled him from work, his ALT was 195 U/L. A memo, dated September 29, 2004, to the company from the doctor, clearly recommended the employee avoid hepatoxins and clearly states, "NOT Cleared" to work with hazardous chemicals. The employee was not removed form his regular assignments of working with hazardous chemicals. Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable abatement method is to: (1)Follow the company doctor's recommendations of avoiding hazardous chemicals especially hepotoxins. (2)Evaluate the workplace for chemical exposure. (3)Relocate the employee to a job assignment where no chemical exposure will occur. DISCLAIMER:1)You are not limited to the abatement methods suggested above. 2)The methods are general and may not be effective in all cases. 3)The employer is responsible for selecting and carrying out and appropriate method.
Translate