Due to inadequate ventilation and recurring leaks from equipment in work areas, plus the use of methylene chloride in analyzing environmental samples, employees sustained exposures to methylene chloride, including some above the permissible exposure limit.
Despite knowledge of these employee complaints, management at Phoenix Environmental Laboratories Inc. took few effective measures to monitor and address the exposures and provide effective safeguards for its employees.
Phoenix Environmental Laboratories Inc. is an environmental laboratory specializing in analysis and testing of water, soil, sludge, air and solid samplings.
As a result, after an investigation the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) cited Phoenix Environmental Laboratories Inc. for six willful violations, 10 serious violations and one other than serious violation and assessed $907,253 in penalties.
- OSHA’s inspection found Phoenix Environmental Laboratories failed to:
- Ensure employees were not overexposed to methylene chloride
- Perform initial exposure monitoring and inform employees of monitoring results
- Determine employees’ exposure levels when the control methods were known to be inadequate
- Ensure adequate ventilation during procedures that exposed employees to methylene chloride
- Implement procedures to detect, contain and safely dispose of leaking methylene chloride
- Provide employees with adequate skin, eye and face protection from methylene chloride and other solvents
- Make medical surveillance available and provide medical exams to exposed employees
- Provide employees with information and training on the hazards associated with the chemicals they use
- Ensure chemical fume hoods functioned properly and did not leak onto employees
“Phoenix Environmental Laboratories knew of its employees’ exposure to a highly hazardous and carcinogenic chemical, yet chose to ignore their complaints and failed to take effective corrective action,” said OSHA Area Director Dale Varney in Hartford, Connecticut.
OSHA uncovered additional hazards during the inspection, which included exposure to flammable vapors, improper storage, unsafe handling and transfer of flammable chemicals, lack of suitable quick-drenching eye facilities where corrosives were used, and several electrical violations.
An exhaust ventilation system on an assembly line was not capturing all the vapors and workers were being exposed. After lengthy investigation, the exhaust fan was found to be turning backwards, providing only a small fraction of ventilation.
The motor was a three-phase induction type and it found that two of the phase wires were reversed. Switching them back provided more than ample exhaust velocity to remove the harmful vapors.
Sometimes it’s a simple solution.
As for electrical violations, this endemic in most workplaces. Only licensed, or under supervision of one, person should work on any permanent electrical installations. For machinery and process equipment, only qualified trained technicians and the equipment evaluated per NFPA 670, Industrial Machinery. NRTL field inspections by a field engineer should be performed as well. Basic electrical safety issues should be handled by on-sight safety inspections done by safety personnel and inspectors.
Thing to remember about GFCIs. They do NOT limit shock current, but only it’s duration to 1/40th of a second. During that time, the full circuit current is flowing. If high enough or person with coronary weakness, could go into ventricular fibrillation. Electricity is nothing to fool around with.