OSHA Inspection: LEXINGTON ABRASIVES, INC.

Issued

Jan 8, 2013

Abate by

Feb 28, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,975 · Current $1,488 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii)(D): The energy control procedures did not clearly and specifically outline the requirements for testing a machine or equipment to determine and verify the effectiveness of lockout devices, tagout devices, and other energy control:      Although the employer developed and implemented an energy control program for use at the facility, it was deficient in that; the energy control procedures did not include steps to test and/or verify the effectiveness of the lockout device(s).  Additionally employees are task with completing routine maintenance on machinery at the site

Issued

Jan 8, 2013

Abate by

Feb 10, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(6)(i): The employer did not conduct a periodic inspection of the energy control procedure at least annually to ensure that the procedure and the requirement of this standard were being followed:        As of 08/29/2012 annual inspections or audits of the company's lockout procedures were not completed, as required.

Issued

Jan 8, 2013

Abate by

Jan 25, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,975 · Current $1,488 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):       The point of operation of the Hudson 110 ton hydraulic press, located in the Specialty Department, was not adequately guarded to prevent employees from having their body in the danger zone during the operating cycle. There was a 1-1.75 inch gap between the press bed and the sensing field of the light curtain.

Issued

Jan 8, 2013

Abate by

Jan 25, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.217(c)(2)(i)(a): Point of operation guard(s) on mechanical power press(es) did not prevent entry of hands or fingers into the point of operation by reaching through, over, under or around the guard(s):    On and before 08/29/2012 the manual A gate of the Minster 22 ton mechanical power press, located in the Specialty Department, was inadequate.  The opening of the A gate measured approximately 1 1/2- 1 7/8 inches and did not prevent the operator's hand(s) or other body parts from reaching through or around the guard into the point of operation.

Issued

Jan 8, 2013

Abate by

Jan 25, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.217(c)(3)(i)(f): Enclosing the point of operation before a press stroke can be initiated, and maintaining this closed condition until the motion of the slide had ceased:      The Minster full revolution mechanical power press, located in the Specialty Department, was not effectively guarded.  The manually operated/moveable barrier guard Type A gate did not maintain a closed condition until the motion of the slide ceased. The existing interlock was not of the locking type, and it will not stop the motion of the slide, should the guard be opened up during the stroke.

Issued

Jan 8, 2013

Abate by

Feb 28, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,975 · Current $1,487 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.217(d)(9)(i): The employer did not establish a die setting procedure for mechanical power press(es) that would ensure compliance with 29 CFR 1910.217(c):          The employer did not develop, implement and ensure that die setting procedures were established at the facility and strickly adhered to by those employees responsible for set-up of the company's mechanical power presses.