OSHA Inspection: DAYTON PHOENIX GROUP, INC.

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 25, 2009

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $2,111 Reduced

General-duty citation text

Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970:  The
employer did not
furnish 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 in that employees
were exposed to crushing and amputation hazards while operating machines:
a)  In Department 25, on the Wisconsin Forcemaster mechanical power press
brake, the foot
treadle was not protected against accidental activation by a locking pin
or cover from falling or
moving objects or from someone accidently stepping on it.
b)  In Department 25, on the two Cincinnati mechanical power press brakes,
the foot treadle was
not protected against accidental activation by a locking pin or cover from
falling or moving
objects or from someone accidentally stepping on it.
Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable abatement methods to
correct this hazard is
to follow the guidelines in the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI)
B11.3-2002 Safety
Requirements for the Construction, Care and Use of Power Press Brakes,
Section 6.10.3.  When
provided, a foot treadle that serves as an operator control shall be
equipped with a means to
prevent unattended machine activation.

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Sep 8, 2009

Penalty

Initial $1,800 · Current $691 Reduced

General-duty citation text

Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970:  The
employer did not
furnish 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 in that employees
were exposed to struck by hazards while lifting and transporting
armature/commutators and
metal plates:
a)  In Department 22, Dip & Bake, an employee was using tongs, an under
the hook device in
conjunction with an overhead hoist to lift an armature/commutator onto a
table was exposed to
a falling part and struck-by hazard due to an unknown rated load capacity
and lack of a periodic
inspection of the tongs.
b)  In Department 29, Cabinet Fabrication, an employee was using a
screwclamp, an under the
hook device in conjunction with an overhead hoist to lift metal plates
weighing approximately
175 lbs onto the bed of a table of a horizontal (Bulldozer) press and was
exposed to a crushing
hazard from a falling plate due to an unknown rated load capacity and lack
of a periodic
inspection of the screwclamp.
c)  In Department 22 Dip & Bake, an employee was using a hook, an under
the hook lifting
device in conjunction with an overhead hoist to lift up and move an
armature/commutator into
the Dip & Bake Oven was exposed to a falling part and struck-by hazard due
to an unknown
rated load capacity and lack of a periodic inspection of the hook.
Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable abatement method to
correct this hazard is
to follow the guidelines in the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) B30.20-2006,
Section 20-1.2.1 wherein it specifies that below the hook lifting devices
must
be capable of
lifting loads within its rated load capacity, which must be marked so as
inform the user to
prevent overloading and failure of the device.  The employer can also
determine during the
periodic inspection of these devices that the rated load capacity is
marked and used within its
rated load capacity on specified loads.

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 25, 2009

Penalty

Initial $1,800

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 25, 2009

Penalty

Initial $1,800

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 31, 2009

Penalty

Initial $1,800 · Current $1,111 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 31, 2009

Penalty

Initial $2,250 · Current $1,000 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 25, 2009

Penalty

Initial $2,250 · Current $691 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 31, 2009

Penalty

Initial $2,250 · Current $1,000 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Dec 12, 2010

Penalty

Initial $2,250 · Current $1,555 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Sep 8, 2009

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $2,334 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Dec 12, 2010

Penalty

Initial $2,250 · Current $1,555 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Sep 8, 2009

Penalty

Initial $2,250 · Current $1,555 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 31, 2009

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $555 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 31, 2009

Penalty

Initial $2,250 · Current $1,000 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Sep 8, 2009

Penalty

Initial $1,800 · Current $655 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 31, 2009

Penalty

Initial $1,800 · Current $600 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 25, 2009

Penalty

Initial $2,250 · Current $2,000 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Sep 8, 2009

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $1,111 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 25, 2009

Penalty

Initial $2,250 · Current $1,000 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 25, 2009

Penalty

Initial $2,250 · Current $1,555 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 25, 2009

Penalty

Initial $1,800 · Current $1,255 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 25, 2009

Penalty

Initial $2,250

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 25, 2009

Penalty

Initial $2,250

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 25, 2009

Penalty

Initial $1,350

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 31, 2009

Penalty

Initial $2,250

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 25, 2009

Penalty

Initial $1,800

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Sep 8, 2009

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $3,111 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Sep 8, 2009

Penalty

Initial $2,250 · Current $1,555 Reduced

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 25, 2009

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Aug 31, 2009

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Sep 8, 2009

Issued

Aug 20, 2009

Abate by

Sep 8, 2009