Document v119jz3Vomo5QMxnXQzmX7eOm

UNION OAK IU 1)0 COKPOKATION CHEMICALS ANU PLASTICS 270 Park Avenue, New York, N. Y. I00I7 TO: Group I Plant Managers Mr. R. N. Bates Mr. J. S. Burdick Mr. H. B. Coons/R. C. Glock Mr. W. B. Corydon Mr. R. A. DeCoudres Mr. D. L. Engle Mr. J. M. Fallon Mr. G. R. Kraft Mr. C. N. Rucker Mr. C. A. Wales Mr. W. B. Watkins Mr. D. L. Wiley Mr. R. L. Yelton^ Mr. J. 0. Zimmerman RECD- JAN 1 : 1973 RLYj cc: Mr. R. T. Bradley (Ltr. only) Mr. R. E. Graebert/R. J. Taylor Production Office (1 copy-circulate) SUBJECT: OSHA Inspection of Marietta, Ohio Plant Ferroalloys Division_______ ' Gentlemen: You will be interested in the attached report on an OSHA ^n s decrionJT'of-Trfoff-Marietta,rroaTRyS plant, as- provided by R. T. Bradley Very truly yours, RCH:js Att. '-v- \ 0 R. C. Hieronymus ^ 0 i H f\ \'.\SjW`AiC'\ eA S UCTC19749 UCC EMPLOYEE RELATIONS DEPARTMENT 270 Park Avenue New York, N.Y. 10017 RECEIVES JAN 4 1973 S V'v-. v - TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM January 3, 1973 OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH STEERING COMMITTEE R. T. Bradley TRANSMITTAL OF OSHA INSPECTION OF MARIETTA. OHIO.PLANT FERROALLOYS DIVISION Mr. K. C. Graham, Safety Director of our Ferroalloys Division kindly supplied me with copies of the subject inspection for distribution through the Committee. This was the first inspection of the environmental health type per se in that division and, as far as I know, the first such in IjCC^by OSHA. ___ _ The memorandum is unsigned. However, Mr. Graham informed me in his transmittal note that the author is Mr; -Spies, Plant Safety Engineer. RTB:mvd Attachment: cc: Messrs. K. C. Graham L. LaFrance J. V. Murray, Jr V7. J. 2j i araba J. W. George UCTC 19750 UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION rtrwalhtyi Division Marietta, tihici On Tuesday, December 5. 1972, Mr. D. W. Hoye, Superintendent - Industrial Relations, informed me that a representative of ,the United States Department of Labor wanted to see me and was in the lobby of the Main Office Building. I went to the lobby and met the representative, who introduced herself as Mrs. Mary Fulmer. She then showed me her identification folder which identified her as an Industrial Hygienist working for OSHA out of the Columbus, Ohio, Area Office. Mrs. Fulmer then gave me a copy of a complaint originating from the Marietta Power Station that stated the drinking water was bad, so bad that most Power Station employees carried their own drinking water. After reading the complaint I assured Mrs. Fulmer we could go to the Steam Station and sample the water. At this juncture of our conversation Mrs. Fulmer informed me that she was going to take samples for fume and dust in the Main Plant, i softly challenged her on this Main Plant inspection and she politely informed me that since a complaint had been filed and the Power Station and the Main Plant were under a common management a full scale inspection was in order. At this point of our conversation I informed Mrs. Fulmer we should have an entrance interview with the Assistant Manager, Mr. J. A. Simpkin. We walked to Mr. Simpkin's office where Mrs. Fulmer was introduced by the writer to Messrs. J. A. Simpkin and F. M. Charles. After a three-party discussion of the purpose of her plant visitation and a reading of the complaint, Mrs. Fulmer asked that the Union Representative be called. Mr. Simpkin contacted the Maintenance Department who relayed the message to Mr. W. R. LaRue, President of the Local Plant Union. Again, Mrs. Fulmer gave all the details for the inspection to a seemingly pleased Mr. LaRue. Mrs. Fulmer then suggested wc walk the plant, department by department, so she could get an idea of where she felt samples needed to be taken. UCTC 19751 -2- The first building we entered was the Machine Shop, and as we walked around and through the Machine Shop Mr. LaRue pointed out the welding fumes hovering near the ceiling of the building. She looked and stated a sampler on a welder might be needed. 1 gave a half-hearted challenge to her suggestion, stating the height and size of the building played a part on her thinking of a sample. She informed Mr. LaRue we would come back later. A sample was not taken in the Machine Shop at any time during her three days, and Mr. LaRue suggested one be taken on several occasions. While in the Machine Shop Mrs. Fulmer questioned the Sheet Metal Super visor S. Wentz as to the type of welding rod being used and asked pointedly if cadnium rod was used. A negative answer was given her by Mr. Wentz who also showed her the type rod we use and she was satisfied. Mrs. Fulmer asked how much stainless steel welding is performed. Mr. Wentz stated stainless welding was very infrequent. Mr. LaRue concurred with this as his job is a Sheet Metal "A". After the Machine Shop we went to the Locomotive Shop; no questions here. Then on to the Sanitary Water Plant where she checked the chlorine setup; said OK but asked why the chlorine cylinder did not have a water tub under it or why there wasn't a water tub nearby in case the cylinder leaked. I Informed her it was not needed. She replied that she had read such in The Federal Register. I stated 1 didn't think so. (The next morning she said she checked The Federal Register and it was not written there. Jokingly said that I had won my last point.) The three of us then walked the Ladle Repair area, Storeroom, 143, 096, 097, 076, 347 and 098. We went on to Simplex Division and walked through 082, 104 and 145; several points were noted for a sample. We then went to the Power Station and talked with D. Hendershot, Presi dent of the Union there; We toured the Steam Station by elevations, then went to the River Dock and to the Coal Handling area. This finished the day. The next two days, Wednesday and Thursday, December 6 and 7, were spent UCTC 19752 -3- in sample taking, instrument checking and talking to both salary and hourly people. Mrs. Fulmer had no private conversation with any employee. Any time a question was asked she made certain I heard the question and also heard her reply. All samples were taken with MSA Personal Sampler; the shortest samples were fifteen (15) minutes and the longest ran six (6) hours. Listed below are the locations where samples were taken. I repeat, all samples were taken by MSA Personal Sampler and the samples were not supervised; once the sampler was attached to the employee and operating we moved on to another location Dept. Location Employee Job 143 Crusher Hill Crusher Oper. 143 Fine Sizing Dimmerling Operator 076 Scale Car T. Maxon Scale Car Oper. 097 #12 Furnace Lyons Comb. Man (Tap) 097 # 8. Crane Hale Crane Oper. 082 4th Level (Carvan) Wingrove "B" Man 171 Cel 1 Room Dolak Chem "8" 174 Cell Room Ramsey Plate Setter 176 Bagging Machine Honesty Bagger 176 Cel 1 Room Baker Crane Oper. 327 171 Dept. - Leach Tank 506 Smith Lead Burner 023 Elev. 605 (Pulverizers) Hendershot Mechanic Time Sampling For: 171 Three Fifteen (15) Minute Sampl es Chromic Acid 174 Three Twenty (20) Minute Samples Ammonia 176 Three Fifteen (15) Minute Samples J. > One 2-Hour Sample (Sampler Failed) Sulfuric Acid Manganese 143 One 6-Hour Sample Fine Sizing Manganese UCTC 19753 -4- Dept. Tima Sampl1nq For: 097 Two 5-Hour Samples (Continuous) 023 One 6-Hour Sample H Chrome Coal Dust 076 One 5-Hour Sample II Mixture 082 One 6-Hour Sample II Vanadium 327 One 6-Hour Sample II Lead Mrs. Fulmer questioned me on how and where we handle and use asbestos I explained Furnace usage, Simplex usage. Storeroom and Maintenance. Took Mrs. Fulmer to the Pipe Shop. Explained to her we cut the asbestos with a knife, but before we cut or used the asbestos we wet the material. After this explanation she picked some asbestos strips off the work bench. They had been cut and were wet. She stated our handling of asbestos met with her approval. She then checked our drilling and cutting of Transite. She gave her blessings to our mobile collection but only after a white glove inspection of the equipment in the area where Transite is worked on. We traveled again to the Power Plant. Went to the Bunker Room, very dusty, Mr. Hendershot explained the reasons for the dusty atmosphere and informed Mrs. Fulmer the area is very good in normal conditions. Mrs. Fulmer took two samples of water from a water fountain on Elev. 605, this location because this is the fountain where Mr. Hendershot quenches his thirst. Mrs. Fulmer checked CO gas levels in 104 (hot wells), 104 where lift trucks were operating, 082, 097, 143, 076 and 098. In no area did she record a reading over 23 parts. Threshold limit is 50 parts. She used a MSA rechargeable battery monitoring unit designed only for picking up CO gas. The conduct of Mr. LaRue during Mrs. Fulmer's visit was above reproach. At times he did seek out help from fellow employees to determine bad areas. Each time we placed a sampler on an employee Mr. LaRue would explain the purpose and also introduce the employee to Mrs. Fulmer. UCTC 19754 -5- Mrs. Fulmer was a personable person, efficient In her work and capable. She related to me that Marietta had been most cooperative and from her visual check of the areas we sampled she could see no great problems, but only the samples could tell the accurate story and she hoped we would he in compliance in all areas. In a discussion with Mrs. Fulmer on personal protective equipment after she had checked our respirators (Welch), she said our respirator type was approved (Bureau of Mines). We also use an approved filter. She stated our sterilizing and repair program was one of the better she had seen. Therefore, she could find no fault. In my office at one lunch period Mrs. Fulmer inquired as to how our Noise Suppression Program was progressing. She had a copy of Marietta's schedule which has been accepted by the Area Director of OSHA. Mrs. Fulmer .asked If we had made a progress report and I answered in the affirmative and showed her a copy of the report we had sent to the Area Director on December 4, 1972. This satisfied Mrs. Fulmer. She did not take any decibel readings during her visit. Mrs. Fulmer did say when the follow-up OSHA inspection is made Marietta could be cited for a repeat violation in noise even though the noise area had not been noted on the original inspection. At the exit interview with Mr. Simpkin, Mr. LaRue and myself Mrs. Fulmer gave Mr. Simpkin a rundown on where the samples were-taken and what substance she was attempting to trap. Mrs. Fulmer felt she should cite us for not doing nasal examinations on employees working around Chromic Mists. Mr. Simpkin explained our employee examination schedule. From her reaction it was hard to determine what her final decision wi11 be. Mrs. Fulmer told Mr. Simpkin the plant appeared to have good coverage in her field; also, safety appeared to be a prime interest in the plant. UCTC 19755 C~ \,\>f rferry-, /(~r /i------ (?) fcL. 4-en "> PfES* V'u\i3^. uu ^V tX *'X aT-" UCTC 19748