OSHA Region VI 2019 The Gun Range Tap

OSHA Region VI 2019 The Gun Range – Tap, Rack, Bang Indoor Shooting Range, Killeen, TX Four (4) Willful violations Fifteen (15) Serious violations $224 k proposed penalty, Settled 50% Stephen Boyd, Deputy Regional administrator 1

OSHA Process Overview OSH Act – 1970 Each employer shall furnish to employees…shall comply KEY No = Employee / Employer relationship jurisdiction for “Public” exposure scenarios 2

OSHA Process Overview Lead NEP (National Emphasis), CPL 03 -00 -009 Since SIC 2001, Renewed 2008 7999 – “Recreation” includes Shooting Range Operations Employee Complaint 3

OSHA Basic Lead Safety 1910. 1025 Lead – All Occupational Exposures (d)(2) Initial determination of workplace exposures Any observations or calculations; Any measurements of airborne lead; Any complaints of symptoms. 4

OSHA Basic Lead Safety Lead is pervasive – sticks to surfaces and stays with you (g)(1) Protective clothing and proper hygiene; (i)(1) Avoid eating and drinking in suspect areas; Could be tracked home to children and family. 5

Resources Involved OSHA Austin Area Office – Jurisdictional Office Three entry level Industrial Hygienists Assisted with air/surface sampling, and performed noise survey OSHA Oklahoma City Area Office Senior Industrial Hygienist Provided experience for sampling accuracy 6

Resources Involved Bell County Health Department Initial site visit 1 month prior to OSHA inspection Referral to TX DHHS and City of Killeen Worked with OSHA to issue Public Health Notice OSHA Health Response Team Technical Expertise in Sampling 7 **Note – BCHD, TX DHHS, City Killeen had no sampling means**

The Facility • Indoor Shooting Range – Handgun and Rifle • New Facility – marketed as State of the Art • Monthly memberships • Opened to Public on June 30, 2018 • Simulator, TV lounge, Snack Bar • Gun Repair area and Retail area 8

Inspection • Opened August 17, 2018 (Friday) • Covered 15 staff members, variable shifts • Facility is open 7 days/week • Operation is busiest Saturdays/Sundays • Showcases rifle range with special events 9

Complaint Items Malfunctioning ventilation system (lead) No medical surveillance program (lead) No fit-testing or medical evaluations (respirators) No hazard communication program Bullets exit the facility 10

Initial Findings • Range Safety Officer (RSO) had acute lead symptoms first week • RSO blood lead levels of 18 micrograms per 100 g of whole blood • Subject RSO had chelation agent prescribed by personal physician • ER reluctant to purchase HEPA vac or PPE due to low cash flow • No initial monitoring or baseline measurements 11

New facility – feel good PPE, no gloves. Dry sweeping, dust on surfaces, beverage handy. 12

More dry sweeping. Hole in PPE due to “reuse. ” 13

Shell casings and other sweepings, no gloves. 14

Backstop area contaminated with large amounts of lead dust. 15

Load out and storage of the shell casings. Lead dust tracked throughout facility. 16

New Facility “appears” shiny and clean. 17

Key Management Owner Visits the site daily “I let the general manager run the facility” Owner pulled back on checkbook citing, “We need to get some cash flow first. ” 18

Key Management General Manager Onsite daily and works with team Shared concerns with Owner “Hard to change anything if there is no money” Gunsmith Researched proper lead programs and policy Recommended HEPA Vac and Medical monitoring 19

Owner’s Perspective Third-party Builder Professionals supplying turn-key operation Providing facility and management programs Provides any necessary safety policies General Manager Hands-on at the facility All aspects of implementation Responsible for necessary programs and policy Safety Range Safety Officers General PPE for cleanliness – Reuse Tyvek Suits to save $$$ Respirators and sweep-up 20

Onsite Reality Third Party Builder Constructing a new, functional facility Not responsible for management programs (PPE, Medical, Respirators, Safety & Health policy) General Manager No gun range management experience No policy or program guidelines to follow Beholden to Owner for any funds Safety Dry sweeping, tracking lead dust, no gloves used No fit testing, bearded employees Poor hygiene practices and no baseline/initial monitoring 21

Smoothie Bar • Inviting • Kid-friendly • Surface sample (100 sq. cm. ) • Result on Bar 23. 27 ug / 100 cm 2 • HUD = < 21. 5 ug/100 cm 2 22

Dry Sweeping the Range • Fully covered • Perhaps due to OSHA onsite • Still no gloves • Red flags for OSHA 23

OSHA Initial Monitoring August 17 – 19, 2018 Range Safety Officers Duties: range monitor, customer service, partial clean-up 7 of 7 personal air samples > PEL of 50 ug/m 3 Severity of Overexposure = 5 to 30 x PEL 3 RSOs did not wear a Respirator 4 RSOs only donned a Respirator while sweeping the range 24

OSHA Initial Monitoring August 17 – 19, 2018 Wipe/Surface Samples 33 of 34 samples positive for lead 17 of 34 exceed HUD levels for surface lead (21. 5 ug/100 cm 2) Training Room Tabletop = 22. 26 ug/100 cm 2 Snack Bar Countertop = 23. 27 ug/100 cm 2 OSHA initial concerns Multiple overexposures and Visible haze in the range Broad surface contamination Family friendly setting and Range PEL dose reached in 90 minutes 25

OSHA/HRT Follow-up Monitoring September 24, 2018 Purpose Better understand Public vs. RSO/Staff exposures Solidify results and work with Health Department Air Monitoring Hand Gun Range = 2 to 5 x PEL within 90 minutes of sampling Rifle Range = 5 to 15 x PEL within 90 minutes of sampling No overexposure in Retail Area Wipe/Surface Samples 13 of 14 samples positive for lead 9 of 34 exceed HUD levels for surface lead (21. 5 ug/100 cm 2) Included classroom tables, smoothie bar, door handles, retail counters, and exit push bars 26

OSHA 1 st Actions October 19, 2018 Citation 1, 1: 1910. 1025(d)(2) Initial Determination Failure to make an initial lead exposure assessment Cited lead exposure of 15 x the PEL for 90 minutes sampled Proposed penalty $5, 174 Citation 1, 2: 1910. 1025(h)(1) Surface contamination Failure to maintain “As Free As Practicable” from lead dust Cited HUD guideline exceeded at multiple public areas Proposed penalty $5, 174 Citation 1 issued October 19, 2018 – Publicly Available Used by Bell County for Public Health Notice release 27

OSHA Final Action Citation 2 (Serious) issued January 18, 2019 Citation 2, 1: 1910. 95(c)(1) Hearing Cons. Program Citation 2, 2: Grouped. 132/. 133/. 151(c) PPE hazard assessment, safety glasses, eye wash Citation 2, 3: Grouped various 1910. 1025 Lead No lead program; Failure to measure ventilation controls No respiratory program; Failure use respirators effectively Citation 2, 4: Grouped various 1910. 1025 Lead Failure to supply adequate protective clothing Failure to provide effective training Citation 2, 5: 1910. 1025(j)(3) Medical Exam or consult not provided for symptomatic employee 28

OSHA Final Action Citation 3 (Willful) issued January 18, 2019 Citation 3, 1: 1910. 1025(c)(1) Exceeded PEL Citation 3, 2: 1910. 1025(g)(2) PPE repairs Failure to implement feasible vacuuming methods ($44 k) Citation 3, 4: 1910. 1025(j)(1) Medical surveillance Failure to replace PPE at no cost to the employee ($44 k) Citation 3, 3: 1910. 1025(h)(2) Shovel and Sweep RSOs airborne exposures ($51 k) No surveillance where exposed > 30 days ($51 k) Citation 4, 1: Other-than-Serious for recordkeeping 1904 - Failure to complete OSHA 301/300 forms 29

Willful Aspects • Owner’s attitude and lack of action ― Not his problem, working to hold builder accountable ― No action on employee medical complaints ― Stated he is doing everything he can • Employee knowledge and actions ― Complained to managers and sought personal health care ― Researched and initiated development of Lead Action Plan ― Purchased spare PPE with personal funds • Timeline of Events ― Noticeable haze during opening month of June ― EE health symptoms within the first few weeks (June/July) ― Lead Action Plan presented to Owner and “implemented” July 12 th • Owner’s Lack of Good Faith ― Withheld requested funds for HEPA Vacuum (approx. $5, 000) ― Withheld requested funds for PPE replacements ― To GM, “Need to wait for facility to see some Cash Flow” ― Sampling & Medical – Consistently stated he was looking for better bids