Violation Detail
Standard Cited: 19261127 D01 I Cadmium
Inspection Nr: 907402.015
Citation: 01008
Citation Type: Serious
Abatement Date: 11/11/2013 5
Initial Penalty: $2,800.00
Current Penalty: $2,800.00
Issuance Date: 11/01/2013
Nr Instances: 1
Nr Exposed: 1
Related Event Code (REC): C
Gravity: 10
Report ID: 0625700
Contest Date:
Final Order: 12/30/2013
Emphasis:
Substance: C141
Type | Latest Event | Event Date | Penalty | Abatement Due Date | Citation Type | Failure to Abate Inspection |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Penalty | Z: Issued | 11/01/2013 | $2,800.00 | 11/11/2013 | Serious |
Text For Citation: 01 Item/Group: 008 Hazard:
29 CFR 1926.1127(d)(1)(i): The employer did not establish the applicability of this standard by determining whether cadmium was present in the work place and whether there was the possibility that employee exposure will be at or above the action level prior to performance of any construction work and did not designate a competent person to make the determination and did not ensure the that the investigation techniques used included a review of relevant plans, past reports, material safety data sheets, and other available records, with consultations with the property owner and discussions with appropriate individuals and agencies. On or about May 14, 2013, at the residential home remodeling project located at 2621 Prytania St., New Orleans, LA, the employer did not protect at least one employee from exposure to cadmium in excess of 5 micrograms per cubic meter (Permissible Exposure Limit) as an 8 hour Time Weighted Average while removing paint from the exterior siding using a power sander. The work was performed in an unsealed containment on the east side of the house. The employee was documented to be exposed to airborne cadmium levels of 14 ug/m(3), which is equivalent to 2.86 times the PEL. This exposure was determined from one 309 minute sample. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled 171 minute period. The employer had not determined whether or not cadmium was present in the workplace and whether there could be an overexposure to cadmium. Employees were exposed to the hazards of systemic poisoning from airborne lead.