An administrative law judge of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission affirmed all workplace safety citations against a Pennsylvania abrasive blasting and painting company and assessed $44,536 in penalties.

Pro-Spec Corp., doing business as Pro-Spec Painting, was engaged in abrasive blasting and painting activities at worksites in Easton, Pennsylvania, and Quakertown, Pennsylvania, according to review commission documents.

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration opened an investigation of Pro-Spec’s Easton worksite on May 27, 2016, in response to a hazard referral from a local municipality and an investigation of Pro-Spec’s Quakertown worksite on Aug. 31, 2016, in response to an anonymous complaint. The Easton investigation resulted in citations and proposed penalties for serious and other-than-serious violations of the respiratory protection, scaffolds, fall protection, ladders and recordkeeping standards on Sept. 21, 2016, while the Quakertown investigation led to citations and proposed fines for serious and other-than-serious violations of the respiratory protection, scaffolds, ladders, wiring and confined spaces standards issued on Jan. 29, 2017.

The company contested both sets of citations, but did not cooperate during the discovery process, leading to the imposition of sanctions that prohibited the Pro-Spec from introducing evidence, witnesses or documentation initially sought by the U.S. Secretary of Labor in the discovery process and barred the company from offering evidence for affirmative defenses at the hearing, according to review commission documents.

The administrative law judge determined that the secretary met the burden of proof in relation to the applicability of the standards, employee exposure to the violations and the employer’s knowledge of the violation. 

Pro-Spec “had knowledge of the cited hazardous conditions because the hazards were in plain view of an onsite supervisory employee,” the law judge stated. “If Pro-Spec management had exercised reasonable diligence and inspected the worksite, it could have known of the violative conditions.”

The cited respiratory protection standard requires an employer to implement a written respiratory program with worksite-specific procedures, including conducting employee medical evaluations, conducting proper fit testing and training employees on the proper maintenance and storage of respirators, but the company violated the standard because it did not implement a program that met those requirements.

“Reasonable diligence would have revealed it had not implemented a written respiratory protection program,” the law judge stated.

Pro-Spec has closed down, said Ronald Yarbrough of Vineland, New Jersey, identified as president of the company in review commission documents. But he said he could not comment further because he was not familiar with the citation dispute, calling it a “mistake.”