Plant 44 Audit Reports - Wright-Patterson Air Force Base

•FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDistribution authorized to 000 components and their contractors only; administrative/operational use; August 19, 2005.Other requests for this document shall be referred to the Chief, Acquisition Environmental Safety & Health Division,Engineering Directorate, ASC/ENV, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, OH 45433The audit followed an audit protocol based on Air Force established audit procedures, which wasmodified for the Raytheon audit. [t should be understood that the audit consisted of evaluating asample of practices and was conducted in a short span of time relative to the review period. Effortswere directed toward sampling major facets of industrial hygiene performance during the periodunder review, but it is important to recognize that this method is intended to uncover major programdeficiencies, and this audit might not have identified all potential problems.Audit FindingsA. Previous Findings:I. Inconsistent requirement for daily operator checks on paint booths prior to use wasidentified. This appears to be a lack of training of the booth operators. (Corrected)2. Bldg. 80 I: Needs to have the Machine Shop area evaluated for eyewash requirements.(Corrected)3. Bldg, 830: In the welding area there were two compressed gas cylinders in a store roomwhich were unsecured. In the center aisle the eyewash was blocked and two flammable cabinetswere missing the sidewall plugs. Outside the building there were mu[tiple unsecured compressedgas cylinders, this is a repeat finding from the 2003 facility review. (Not Corrected)4. Bldg. 864: On the north side of the building outside there was an unsecured compressedgas cylinder. (Corrected)5. Bldg. 815: The mechanics room needs to be evaluated for the requirement of aneyewash. The loading dock was utilizing an unapproved set of portable stairs to access the dockarea. There were several improperly secured compressed gas cylinders on the loading dock.(Corrected)6. The portable eyewash bottles, which have an expiration date, were labeled with aRaytheon labe[ indicating no expiration. (Corrected)B. New Findings:1. Bldg, 830: Outside the building there were multiple unsecured compressed gascylinders, this is a repeat finding, third year in a row.C. Overall OpinionBased on the review ofthe program at Plant 44, Raytheon, over the last 7 years, I believe that asignificant improvement ofthe IH program continues to be made over the previous years and meetsall applicable governmental and company policies and procedures. This opinion is based on myprofessional judgment and the application of USAF established audit procedures. I wish to thankthe IH staff for their assistance in the effort.Attachment 2