OSHA Inspection: TRI-C CO.

Issued

2012-10-09 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-11-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3500.00 · Current $2450.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(1):     The employer did not establish an energy control program consisting of energy control procedures, employee training and periodic inspections to ensure that before any employee performed any servicing or maintenance on a machine or equipment where the unexpected energizing, start up or release of stored energy could occur and cause injury, the machine or equipment would be isolated, and rendered inoperative:    An employee performs service and maintenance on equipment and the employer has not developed an energy control program to ensure the release of stored energy does not cause injury to the employee.

Issued

2012-10-09 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-11-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(1)(ii):   Procedures did not clearly and specifically outline the scope, purpose, authorization, rules, and techniques to be utilized for the control of hazardous energy, and the means to enforce compliance including, but not limited to, 29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii)(A)  (D):    An employee performs service and maintenance on equipment and the employer has not developed an machine specific energy control procedures to ensure the machines are denergized and any stored energy is released before any servicing and/or maintenance work is performed.

Issued

2012-10-09 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-11-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3500.00 · Current $2450.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(7)(i):     The employer did not provide training to ensure that the purpose and function of the energy control program was understood by the employees and that the knowledge and skill required for the safe application, usage and removal of the energy controls was acquired by the employees:    An employee performs service and maintenance on equipment and the employer has not developed an energy control program which includes training to ensure the purpose and function of the program is understood by the employee.

Issued

2012-10-09 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-10-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3500.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(5)(ii)(B):     Lockout and tagout devices were not standardized within the facility in at least one criteria: Color; shape;or size:    An employee was required to perform service and maintenance on equipment and more than one key was available for the locks and the keys to the locks were capable of opening more than one lock.

Issued

2012-10-09 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-10-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(5)(ii)(C)(2):     Tagout devices, including their means of attachement, were not substantial enough to prevent inadvertent or accidental removal:    An employee was required to perform service and maintenance on equipment and the tagout device and the means of attachement for the tagout device was not substantial enough to prevent inadvertent or accidental removal.

Issued

2012-10-09 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-11-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3500.00 · Current $2450.00 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.  An employee working in the Pipe Area was exposed to the unexpected energization of the Mori Seiki Horizontal Lathe SL6-2 when cleaning out chips because the moveable barrier guard is bypassed and the machine is not shut down and locked out.    b.  An employee working in the Pipe Area was exposed to the unexpected energization of the Mori Seiki Horizontal Lathe SL6-1 when cleaning out chips because the moveable barrier guard is bypassed and the machine is not shut down and locked out.    c.  An employee working in the Gears Department was exposed to the unexpected energization of the 5V2 when cleaning out chips because the moveable barrier guard is bypassed and the machine is not shut down and locked out.

Issued

2012-10-09 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-11-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $4200.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.176(a):     Permanent aisles or passageways were not appropriately marked:    Employees working throughout the facility were exposed to injury because the aisles and passageways were not appropriately marked.

Issued

2012-10-09 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-11-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3500.00 · Current $2450.00 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 sparks:    a.  An employee working in the Pipe Area was exposed to injury while operating the Mori Seiki Horizontal Lathe SL6-2 because the rotating horizontal shaft was not enclosed or guarded in accordance with the standard.    b.  An employee working in the Pipe Area was exposed to injury while operating the Mori Seiki Horizontal Lathe SL6-1 because the rotating horizontal shaft was not enclosed or guarded in accordance with the standard.    c. An employee working in the Tool Room was exposed to injury while operating the Hyundai Kia Veritcal Mill V-750 because the employee loads and unloads parts and the point of operation is not guarded.    d.  An employee working in the Tool Room was exposed to injury while operating the Hurco VM1 CNC Mill because the employee loads and unloads parts and the point of operation is not guarded.

Issued

2012-10-09 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-10-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2800.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(5):     Fan blade guard(s) were not provided where the periphery of the blades was less than seven feet from the floor or working level:    Employees working in the Mill Area and Tool Room were exposed to the hazard of contact with the rotating periphery of the fans located in these areas.  The guard openings on the fans were two inches wide.

Issued

2012-10-09 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-10-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2800.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.242(b):     Compressed air used for cleaning purposes was not reduced to less than 30 p.s.i.:    An employee working in the Mill Area was exposed to embolism hazards because the compressed air used for cleaning purposes exceeded 30 psi.

Issued

2012-10-09 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-10-10 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2380.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(b)(2):     Listed or labeled electrical equipment was not used or installed in accordance with instructions included in the listing or labeling:    a.  An employee working in the Shop was exposed to electrical hazards because a metal receptacle outlet box that contained knock-outs was lying unsecured.  The metal receptacle outlet box was not being used for its intended purpose.    b.  An employee working in the Gears Department was exposed to electrical hazards because a metal receptacle outlet box that contained knock-outs was lying unsecured.  The metal receptacle outlet box was not being used for its intended purpose.

Issued

2012-10-09 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-11-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2800.00 · Current $1960.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1):     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 of serious physical harm to employees in that employees were exposed to the hazard of crushing injuries:    a.  An employee working in the Gears Department was exposed to the hazard of being crushed by a load suspended from the underhung crane because the crane was not marked with its rated load.    b.  An employee working in the Gears Department was exposed to the hazard of being crushed by a load suspended from the underhung crane because the crane was not marked with its rated load.

Issued

2012-10-09 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-10-16 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2800.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1):     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 the hazard of crushing injuries:    a.  An employee working in the Pipe Area at the Mori Seiki Horizontal Lathe SL6-2 was exposed to the hazard of being crushed by a load suspended from the hoist because the lifting device was not marked with the rated load where it was visible and a nameplate of the permanent marking was not affixed on the lifting device containing the manufacturer name and address, serial number, lifter weight and the rated load.    b.  An employee working in the Gears Department at the Hwacheon 553 Vertical Lathe was exposed to the hazard of being crushed by a load suspended from the hoist because the lifting device was not marked with the rated load where it was visible and a nameplate of the permanent marking was not affixed on the lifting device containing the manufacturer name and address, serial number, lifter weight and the rated load.    c.  An employee working in the Gears Department at the Hwacheon Hi Tech 400A CNC Machine was exposed to the hazard of being crushed by a load suspended from the hoist because the lifting device was not marked with the rated load where it was visible and a nameplate of the permanent marking was not affixed on the lifting device containing the manufacturer name and address, serial number, lifter weight and the rated load.