OSHA Inspection: CURT MANUFACTURING, LLC

Issued

Jan 13, 2012

Abate by

Feb 14, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,200 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(i): Procedures were not developed, documented and utilized for the control of potentially hazardous energy when employees were engaged in activities covered by this section:  (a) Throughout the facility; Machine specific lockout/ tagout procedures were not developed for certain machines with multiple stored energy sources, such as, but not limited to;   1. The 100 ton Accurpress hydraulic press brake  2. The Yuh-dak horizontal injection mold machines

Issued

Jan 13, 2012

Abate by

Feb 3, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii)(B): The energy control procedures did not clearly and specifically outline procedural steps for shutting down, isolating, blocking and securing machines or equipment to control hazardous energy;  (a) Throughout the facility; Machine specific energy control procedures did not specifically outline all the procedural steps or stored energies included, such as, but not limited to;   1. The machine specific lockout procedures for the Wysong THS 100-120 hydraulic press did not outline the procedural steps for the insertion and removal of the die safety block.

Issued

Jan 13, 2012

Abate by

Feb 28, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,200 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(6)(i): The employer did not conduct an annual or more frequent inspection of the energy control procedure to ensure that the procedure and requirements of this standard were followed:  (a) Throughout the facility; Annual lockout procedures were not inspected at least annually.

Issued

Jan 13, 2012

Abate by

Jan 23, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,200 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(d)(4)(i): Lockout or tagout devices were not affixed to each energy isolating device by authorized employees:  (a) Throughout the facility; Employees conducted maintenance tasks and did not lockout the machines, such as, but not limited to;  (1) Employees conducted die changes on Wysong, Mebusa and Accurpress press brakes and did not lockout the machines.  (2) Employees conducted saw blade changes on HE & M band saws and used a key switch to lockout the machines. The employer did not know if the key switch was an energy isolation device or control circuitry.  (3) Employees conducted mold changes on Yuh-dak horizontal injection molding machines, and did not lockout the machines.

Issued

Jan 13, 2012

Abate by

Feb 14, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(d)(6): Prior to starting work on machines or equipment that had been locked out or tagged out, the authorized employee did not verify that isolation and deenergization of the machine or equipment had been accomplished:  (a) Throughout the facility; Machine specific energy control procedures did not include procedural steps for verifying the isolation and de-energization of stored energies present, such as, but not limited to;  1. The Wysong THS 100-120 hydraulic press machine specific lockout procedures did not include procedural steps for verifying the isolation and de-energization of stored mechanical and hydraulic energies.

Issued

Jan 13, 2012

Abate by

Feb 3, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,200 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(3)(ii): Point(s) of operation of machinery were not guarded to prevent employee(s) from having any part of their body in the danger zone(s) during operating cycle(s):  (a) Throughout the facility; Machine guarding was not provided to keep employees body parts away from the operational danger zone, such as, but not limited to;  (1) A YLM tube bending machine in the saw department did not have point of operation guarding to keep employees out of the operational cycle danger zone.   (2) An Elliis band saw in the saw department did not have the blade guard at the point of operation adjusted to the minimum distance to keep employees body parts out of the danger zone.  (3) An Accurpress 100 ton press brake in the first market area did not have barrier guards for the backside of the machine.

Issued

Jan 13, 2012

Abate by

Feb 14, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $4,200 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(3)(iii): Special handtools for placing and removing material did not permit easy handling of material without the operator placing a hand in the danger zone.  (a) Fabrication department; Special handtools provided for the fabrication department were ineffective for employees to hold the thickness, size and weight of the materials being fabricated.

Issued

Jan 13, 2012

Abate by

Feb 14, 2012

Penalty

Initial $70,000 · Current $42,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(3)(ii): Point(s) of operation of machinery were not guarded to prevent employee(s) from having any part of their body in the danger zone(s) during operating cycle(s):  (a) On or about July 25, 2011, the employer assigned work and had employees exposed to amputation hazards, while operating an unguarded Accurpress press brake.  An employee had a partial thumb amputation while operating an unguarded hydraulic press brake.  (b) On or about July 25, 2011, the employer continued to assign work and had employees exposed to amputation hazards, while operating an unguarded Accurpress press brake.

Issued

Jan 13, 2012

Abate by

Feb 3, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(2)(i): Respirator users were not provided with the information contained in Appendix D to 29 CFR 1910.134 when the employer determined that any voluntary respirator use was permissible:  (a) Throughout the facility; Employees voluntarily used respirators and the employer did not provide 29 CFR 1910.146 Appendix D information to the employees.

Issued

Jan 13, 2012

Abate by

Feb 14, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.146(c)(1): The employer did not evaluate the workplace to determine if any spaces were permit-required confined spaces:  (a) Powder line; Employees entered the shot blaster, which had a restricted means of entry and exit, and it was not determined if it was a confined space.