OSHA Inspection: AMERICAN METAL TREATING, INC.

Issued

Mar 28, 2008

Abate by

Apr 2, 2008

Penalty

Initial $100 · Current $100

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 free
from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or
serious physical harm to employees, in
that employees were exposed to:
a)Production area - the integral quence furnaces that were used for
hardening and
tempering processes were supplied oxygen deficient atmospheres via
endo-equivalent
systems.  The endo-equivalent systems created oxygen deficient atmospheres
by
feeding nitrogen and methanol into the furnaces, where the methanol was
coverted into
primarily carbon monoxide, nitrogen, and hydrogen gas, with trace amounts
of
methane and carbon dioxide. The percentage of carbon monoxide was 20, or
200,000 parts per million, and the percentage of hydrogen gas was 40, or
400,000
parts per million.  There were no carbon monoxide alarms nor lower
explosive limit
alarms for the hydrogen gas in the areas around the integral quence
furnaces.
NOTE:  Among other methods of abatement, one feasible and acceptable
method to correct
this hazard is to install carbon monoxide alarms with, or in addition to,
lower explosive limit
alarms in the production area where the integral quence furnaces were
operating.

Issued

Mar 28, 2008

Abate by

Apr 2, 2008

Penalty

Initial $100 · Current $100

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 free
from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or
serious
physical harm to employees, in
that employees were exposed to:
a)Production area - the bottom running bridge crane used to insert and
remove metals
from the tempering furnaces had not been load rated.  The crane and hoist
were not
labeled with the load capacities, and no load test documentation was
available to
determine the load capacity of the bridge crane.
b)Production area - the jib crane with hoist used to lift materials had
not been load rated.
The crane and hoist were not labeled with the load capacities, and no load
test
documentation was available to determine the load capacity of the jib
crane.
NOTE:  Among other methods of abatement, one feasible and acceptable
method to correct
this hazard is to complete load testing on all cranes and hoists, and
label
the cranes and hoists
with the load capacity.

Issued

Mar 28, 2008

Abate by

Apr 2, 2008

Issued

Mar 28, 2008

Abate by

Apr 2, 2008

Issued

Mar 28, 2008

Abate by

Apr 2, 2008