OSHA Inspection: M-B-W, INC.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

May 10, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,500 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) The employer did not have written procedures when performing maintenance/service and set-up activities for authorized employees to follow.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

May 10, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(4)(iii):   An evaluation of each powered industrial truck operator's performance was not being conducted at least once every three years:  (a)  The employer did not re-evaluate each forklift operator to ensure they had the skills and knowledge necessary to safely operate the forklift.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

May 11, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.184(d):   Damaged or defective sling(s) were not immediately removed from service:  (a)  In the Assembly Area, a synthetic sling by the roller assembly area had visible damage of fraying and was not taken out of service.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

May 11, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.184(e)(1):   Alloy steel sling(s) did not have permanently affixed durable identification stating size, grade, rated capacity, and reach:  (a)  In the Assembly Area, chains slings were used to move parts to be assembled.  The chains were not labeled exposing employees to struck by hazards.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

May 11, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.184(e)(3)(ii):   Records of the most recent month in which each alloy steel chain sling was thoroughly inspected were not available for examination:  (a) The employer did not maintain records of each alloy steel chain sling to ensure all were inspected and found without defect.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

Apr 19, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1):   One or more methods of machine guarding was not provided to protect the operator and other employees in the machine area from hazards such as those created by point of operation, ingoing nip points, rotating parts, flying chips and  (a)  In the Machine Shop, a Hitachi Seiki CNC lathe (Type:  HT25S, S/N:  HTS25138) had inadequate guarding exposing employees to struck by hazards when loading and unloading parts.  (b)  In the Model Shop, the Takisawa (Yuasa International, Inc.) lathe had an unguarded work-holding device (chuck) exposing employees to struck by hazards.  (c)  In the Model Shop, the Wells (Model:  8M, S/N:  17469) horizontal metal band saw had the unused portion of the blade unguarded exposing employees to struck by hazards.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

Apr 19, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $4,900

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)  In the Fabrication Department; the LVD Press brake was used to bend parts with small quantities, the employees would hold the parts with their hands and activate the press with the foot control exposing employees to struck by hazards.  (b)  In the Machine Shop, door interlock keys were allowed to stay in the equipment while running production on equipment such as but not limited to:  Mori Seiki NH5000 horizontal mill, Brother TC-S2A CNC Taping Center Vertical mill, Mori Seiki CNC lathe, Mori Seiki NL2500, and Mori Seiki NH5000 DCG mill.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

Apr 19, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.215(a)(2):   Abrasive wheel(s) used on grinding machinery were not provided with safety guard(s) which covered the spindle end, nut, flange projections:  (a)  In the Tool Room, a pedestal grinder (unknown manufacturer) was missing the spindle guard on the right side exposing employees to struck by hazards.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

Apr 19, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.215(a)(4):   Work rest(s) on grinding machinery were not adjusted closely to the wheel with a maximum opening of one eighth inch:  (a)  In the Model Shop; the 8" Enco pedestal grinder 3/4 H.P. had the work rest adjusted to approximately 1 1/2" exposing employees to struck by hazards.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

Apr 19, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.215(b)(9):   The distance between the abrasive wheel periphery(s) and the adjustable tongue or the end of the safety guard peripheral member at the top exceeded one fourth inch:  (a) In the Tool Room; the pedestal grinder (unknown manufacturer) was missing the tongue guard on both sides exposing employees to struck by hazards.  (b)  In the Model Shop; the 8" Enco pedestal grinder 3/4 H.P. had the tongue guard adjusted to approximately 3/4" exposing employees to struck by hazards.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

Mar 30, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1904.29(b)(3):   Each recordable injury or illness was not entered on the OSHA 300 Log and/or an incident report (OSHA Form 301or equivalent) within seven (7) calendar days  of receiving information that a recordable injury or illness has occurred:  (a)  On or about June 1, 2011; M-B-W, Inc. had a work-related injury, however, it was not entered onto the OSHA 300 form until January 31, 2012.  (b)  On or about September 20, 2011; M-B-W, Inc. had a work-related injury, however, it was not entered onto the OSHA 300 form until January 31, 2012.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

Apr 19, 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)  Employees did not receive any training, as outlined in Appendix D, when utilizing a dust mask on a voluntary basis.  This exposed employees to health hazards.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

May 10, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1030(c)(1)(iv):   The Exposure Control Plan was not reviewed and updated when necessary to reflect new or modified tasks and procedures which affect occupational exposure and to reflect new or revised employee positions with occupational exposure:  (a)   The employer did not review the exposure control plan at least annual to reflect any changes in technology or personnel, this exposed employees to potential health illnesses.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

May 10, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1030(g)(2)(ii)(B):   The employer did not ensure that training provided to employees with occupational exposure was conducted at least annually.  (a)  The employer provided blood borne pathogens training in 2009, this was not conducted at least annual to ensure they maintained the skills and knowledge necessary to safely respond to and clean up blood and OPIM.

Issued

Mar 29, 2012

Abate by

Apr 5, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(5):   The employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged, or marked with the identity and appropriate hazard warnings regarding the chemicals contained therein:  (a) In the Model Shop area; a spray bottle filled with WD-40 was not labeled with the name and appropriate warning exposing employees to health hazards.