OSHA Inspection: SCHULTES PRECISION MANUFACTURING, INC.

Issued

Oct 18, 2012

Abate by

Nov 9, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,950 · Current $2,950 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(a)(4):  Modifications and additions which affect capacity and safe operation of powered industrial truck were performed by the employer without the manufacturer's prior written approval.    a) Shipping and Receiving - The employer did not gain manufacturer's prior written approval prior to having employees operate a Power Industrial Vehicle with an attachment such as, the Morse Barrel Dumper which was used on the Kamatsu Forklift, SN #590711A.      b) Shipping and Receiving - The employer did not gain manufacturer's prior written approval prior to having employees operate a Power Industrial Vehicle with an attachment such as, a lift boom the Lift Boom (Manufacture unknown) which was used on the Kamatsu Forklift, SN #590711A.

Issued

Oct 18, 2012

Abate by

Nov 9, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(a)(5):  When trucks are equipped with front-end attachments other than factory installed attachments, it was not requested that the truck be marked to identify the attachments and show the approximate weight of the truck and attachment combination at maximum elevation with load laterally centered.    a) Shipping and Receiving - The employer did not ensure that the powered industrial truck such as the Kamatsu Forklift, SN #590711A that was equipped with front end attachments other than the factory installed attachments, such as Morse Barrel Dumper and a Lift Boom (Manufacture unknown) was marked to identify the attachment and show the approximate weight of the truck and the attachment combination at the maximum elevation with the load laterally centered.

Issued

Oct 18, 2012

Abate by

Nov 9, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,950 · Current $2,950 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) Milling Department - The sliding barrier / setup door on the Kitamura Horizontal Mill #13 SN #590711A set up door would not prevent entry of hands into the point of operation.  No interlock devise was installed allowing the machine to continue operating if the barrier were opened.    b) Milling Department - The sliding barrier / setup door on the Kitamura Horizontal Mill The Tower SN #42678 set up door would not prevent entry of hands into the point of operation No interlock devise was installed allowing the machine to continue operating if the barrier were opened.    c) Milling Department - The sliding barrier / setup door on the Daewoo Horizontal Mill #1 SN #AH4P0194 would not prevent entry of hands into the point of operation.  No interlock devise was installed allowing the machine to continue operating if the barrier were opened.    d) Milling Department - The sliding barrier on the Kitamura Mycenter Zero Drilling Machine #8 SN# 75400 would not prevent entry of hands into the point of operation.  No interlock devise was installed allowing the machine to continue operating if the barrier were opened.    e) Milling Department - The sliding barrier on the Kitamura Mycenter Zero Drilling Machine #4 SN# 11355 would not prevent entry of hands into the point of operation.  No interlock devise was installed allowing the machine to continue operating if the barrier were opened.    f) Milling Department - The sliding barrier on the Kitamura Mycenter Zero Drilling Machine #1 SN# 00719 would not prevent entry of hands into the point of operation.  No interlock devise was installed allowing the machine to continue operating if the barrier were opened.    g) Milling Department - The sliding barrier on the Kitamura Mycenter Zero Drilling Machine #3 SN# 00782 was missing and would not prevent entry of hands into the point of operation.  No interlock devise was installed allowing the machine to continue operating if the barrier were opened and would not prevent entry of hands into the point of operation.      h) Milling Department - The sliding barrier / setup door on the Niigata Horizontal Mill #3 SN #24040 would not prevent entry of hands into the point of operation.  No interlock devise was installed allowing the machine to continue operating if the barrier were opened.    i) Milling Department - The employer did not provide one or more methods of machine guarding that would protect employees from the point of operation, rotating parts, flying chips and sparks on equipment, such as the Walker Drill Press, SN# 11-3580.