OSHA Inspection: SMITHS AEROSPACE COMPONENTS - ASHEVILLE

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jul 18, 2005

Penalty

Initial $688 · Current $378 Reduced

General-duty citation text

North Carolina General Statute 95-129(1) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of North Carolina:  The
employer did not furnish to each of his employees conditions of employment
and a place of employment which
were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause
death or serious physical harm to
employees:
a)Facility - - The load ratings for cranes within the facility were
incorrectly applied based on the
latest load testing conducted in August 2004.  Load ratings were
applied/confirmed based on the
maximum weight used for the tests instead of being reduced to 80of the
maximum sustained
load.
REFERENCE:ANSI/ASME B30.11-1973 - Monorail Systems and Underhung Cranes,
Chapter
11-2 - Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance, Section 11.2.2.2 Rated Load
Test:
(a) Prior to initial use all new, extensively repaired, and altered
equipment shall
be tested by or under the direction of an appointed person and a written
report
furnished by such person, confirming the load rating of the system.  The
load
rating shall not be more than 80 percent of the maximum load sustained
during
the test.  Test loads shall not be more than 125 percent of the rated load
unless
otherwise recommended by the manufacturer.  These test reports shall be
placed
on file where they are readily available to appointed personnel.
NOTE:Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable method to correct
this hazard is to
require that load tests be conducted at 125of the rated load recommended
by the
manufacturer or to assign a load rating to the crane/hoist be no more than
80% of the
maximum sustained load applied during the load test.

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005

Penalty

Initial $688 · Current $378 Reduced

General-duty citation text

North Carolina General Statute 95-129(1) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of North Carolina:  The
employer did not furnish to each of his employees conditions of employment
and a place of employment which
were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause
death
or serious physical harm to
employees:
a)Facility - - Operators are not performing an operational test of the
upper limit device on
electric-powered hoists at the beginning of each work shift.
REFERENCE:ANSI/ASME B.30.16-2003 - Overhead Hoists (Underhung), Chapter
16-2 -
Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance, Section 16-2.1.2 - Frequent
Inspections,
(c)The following items shall be inspected:
(2)Hoist upper limit device of electric- or air-powered hoists, without a
load on the hook, at the beginning of each shift.  Care shall be
exercised.  The load block shall be inched into its limit device or run in
slow speed on multi-speed or variable-speed hoists.
NOTE:Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable method to correct
this hazard is to
properly train affected employees and to initiate a process through which
the upper limit
devices on all electric- and air-powered hoists are operationally tested
at
the beginning
of each work shift during which the hoists are available for use.

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005

Penalty

Initial $688 · Current $378 Reduced

General-duty citation text

North Carolina General Statute 95-129(1) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of North Carolina:  The
employer did not furnish to each of his employees conditions of employment
and a place of employment which
were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause
death or serious physical harm to
employees:
a)Vertical Lathe Area - - The rated load capacity was not displayed on the
side of a jib crane
structure.
REFERENCEANSI/ASME B30.11-1998 - Monorails and Underhung Cranes, Chapter
11-1 -
Construction and Installation, Section 11.1.1.1 - Rated Load Markings -
Crane:  The
rated load of the crane shall be marked on the crane, and if the crane has
more than one
hoisting unit, each hoist shall have its rated load marked on the hoist or
its load block so
that the rated load marking shall be legible from the ground or floor.
The
combined
load on all hoists on the crane shall not exceed the rated load of the
crane.
NOTE:Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable method to correct
this hazard is to
clearly mark or label the rated capacity of the jib structure on both side
of the hoist
support beam.

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005

Penalty

Initial $688 · Current $378 Reduced

General-duty citation text

North Carolina General Statute 95-129(1) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of North Carolina:  The
employer did not furnish to each of his employees conditions of employment
and a place of employment which
were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause
death or serious physical harm to
employees:
a)Lathe Area - - At eight (8) cranes, a CM Shop Star hoist with a rated
capacity of 600 pounds
was mounted on a Gorbel jib crane structure with a rated capacity of 500
pounds.
REFERENCE:ANSI/ASME B30.11-1998 - Monorails and Underhung Cranes, Chapter
11-1
-
Construction and Installation, Section 11-1.1.1 - Rated Load Markings -
Crane:  The
rated load of the crane shall be marked on the crane, and if the crane has
more than one
hoisting unit, each hoist shall have its rated load marked on the hoist or
its load block so
that the rated load marking shall be legible from the ground or floor.
The combined
load on all hoists on the crane shall not exceed the rated load of the
crane.
NOTE:Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable method to correct
this hazard is to derate the
load capacity of the CM Shop Star hoist and attach a label limiting the
capacity of the hoist to
500 pounds.y

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005

Penalty

Initial $688 · Current $378 Reduced

General-duty citation text

North Carolina General Statute 95-129(1) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of North Carolina:  The
employer did not furnish to each of his employees conditions of employment
and a place of employment which
were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause
death or serious physical harm to
employees:
a)Lathe Area - -The control buttons on the pendant controls for the hoists
mounted on Cranes #9,
#34, and #48 were not marked to indicate the direction of resultant motion.
REFERENCE:ANSI/ASME B30.16-2003 - Overhead Hoists (Underhung), Chapter
16-1 -
Marking, Construction, and Installation, Section 16-1.1.2 - Controls:  Each
control actuator of an electric- or air-powered hoist shall be marked to
indicate
the direction of resultant motion.
NOTE:Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable method to correct
this hazard is to
label each control button on the pendant control with a word or arrow that
clearly
details the motion of the hoist/hook when the control button is activated.

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jul 18, 2005

Penalty

Initial $688 · Current $378 Reduced

General-duty citation text

North Carolina General Statute 95-129(1) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of North
Carolina:  The employer did not furnish to each of his employees
conditions of employment
and a place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that
were causing or
likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees:
a)Lathe Area - - One balanced 'C' hook type below-the-hook lifting device
observed in this area did not have a nameplate or permanent marking.
REFERENCE:ANSI/ASME B.30.20-1985 - Below-the-Hook Lifting Devices,
Chapter 20-1.2 - Markings and Construction, Section 20-1.2.1
Markings:
(b)Identification.  A nameplate or other permanent marking
shall be affixed displaying the following information:
(1)Manufacturer's name.
(2)Serial Number.
(3)Lifter weight, if over 100 lb (45 kg).
(4)Rated Load.
NOTE:Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable method to correct
this hazard is to ensure that nameplates or other permanent markings
with the required information are affixed to all below-the-hook
lifting devices available for use within the facility.

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 3, 2005

Penalty

Initial $963 · Current $530 Reduced

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 10, 2005

Penalty

Initial $688 · Current $378 Reduced

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jul 18, 2005

Penalty

Initial $688 · Current $378 Reduced

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 10, 2005

Penalty

Initial $688 · Current $378 Reduced

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 10, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005

Penalty

Initial $413 · Current $227 Reduced

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 3, 2005

Penalty

Initial $688 · Current $378 Reduced

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 10, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 10, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 10, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 3, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 10, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Aug 1, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005

Issued

May 31, 2005

Abate by

Jun 24, 2005