OSHA Inspection: COOL POLYMERS, INC.

Issued

Apr 11, 2013

Abate by

Apr 15, 2013

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,500 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 crushing hazards: Location: Cool Polymers, Inc., North Kingstown, RI: Employees operating powered industrial trucks were not made to wear the attached seat belts.

Issued

Apr 11, 2013

Abate by

Jul 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $0 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:    Establishment: The employer did not develop, document, and utilize machine specific procedures for the control of potentially hazardous energy in the following instances:    (a)  Zhafir 260 ton injection molding machine did not have specific procedures to control the hazards of electrical energy and pneumatic pressure.    (b)  Haitian HTW188 injection molding machine did not have specific procedures to control the hazards of electrical energy, pneumatic pressure, and hydraulic pressure.      Abatement note: An energy control procedure must clearly and specifically outline the steps to be followed by the authorized employee(s) in such detail so that they know how to safely accomplish the energy control tasks.

Issued

Apr 11, 2013

Abate by

Jul 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.333(b)(2):     While an employee was exposed to contact with parts of fixed electric equipment or circuits which were deenergized, the circuits energizing the parts were not locked out or tagged or both in accordance with the requirements of this paragraph (b) of 29 CFR 1910.333(b)(2):    Molding Department: The employer did not develop, document, and utilize machine specific procedures for the control of potentially hazardous energy in the following instances:    (a)  Zhafir 260 ton injection molding machine did not have specific procedures  for the control of the electrical hazards during maintenance and servicing.    (b)  Haitian HTW188 injection molding machine did not have specific procedures for the control of the electrical hazards during maintenance and servicing.

Issued

Apr 11, 2013

Abate by

Jul 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced

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:    Establishment: On or about 10/19/2012 the employer did not conduct a periodic inspection of the energy control procedure at least annually to ensure that the procedure and the requirements of this standard are being followed.    ABATEMENT NOTE: The periodic inspection shall be documented through a written certification that identifies the machine or equipment on which the energy control procedure was being utilized, the date of the inspection, the employees included in the inspection, and the person performing the inspection.

Issued

Apr 11, 2013

Abate by

Jul 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(8):     Lockout or tagout was not performed only by the authorized employees who are performing the servicing or maintenance:    Establishment: On or about 10/19/2012 employees not identified as authorized employees were allowed to apply lockout devices on equipment whereby the employees were not designated and trained as authorized employees.

Issued

Apr 11, 2013

Abate by

May 24, 2013

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $3,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(1)(i):     The employer did not ensure that each powered industrial truck operator is competent to operate a powered industrial truck safely, as demonstrated by the successful completion of the training and evaluation specified in this paragraph (l):    Establishment: On or about 10/19/2012 employees were allowed to operate the Toyota forklift and the Ruger Electric Pallet Jack whereby the employees did not complete training and evaluation as required by this standard.

Issued

Apr 11, 2013

Abate by

Apr 19, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(n)(7)(iii):     On all grades the load and load engaging means was not tilted back if applicable, and raised only as far as necessary to clear the road surface:    Establishment: On or about 10/19/2012 the operator did not ensure that during travel with a load the load engaging means was tilted back on the Toyota forklift.

Issued

Apr 11, 2013

Abate by

May 24, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(2)(ii):     The employer did not establish and implement those elements of a written program necessary to ensure that any employee using a respirator voluntarily was medically able to use that respirator, and that the respirator was cleaned, stored, and maintained so that its use does not present a health hazard to the user:    Compounding Department: On or about 10/19/2013, where employees are allowed to voluntarily use respirators, the employer did not develop and implement those elements of a written respiratory protection program necessary to ensure that any employee using a respirator voluntarily is medically able to use that respirator, and that the respirator is cleaned, stored, and maintained so that its use does not present a health hazard to the user.

Issued

Apr 11, 2013

Abate by

Apr 19, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(q)(7):   Industrial trucks were not examined before being placed in service:   Establishment: On or about 10/19/2012 forklift operators were operating forklifts whereby daily inspections were not performed on the Toyota forklift and the Ruger Electric Pallet Jack .