OSHA Inspection: BAUER-PILECO INC.

Issued

Nov 6, 2012

Abate by

Nov 27, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $2,700 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:    The employer does not utilize procedures for control potentially hazardous energy when employees are engaged in activities covered by this section.     a) This violation occurred on or about October 22, 2012, and times prior thereto, on the south wall in the machine shop where an employee serviced and set-up a Weisser Heilbronn manual lathe without locking out the energy source.    b) This violation occurred on or about October 22, 2012, and times prior thereto, on the west wall in the machine shop where an employee serviced and set-up a small Weisser Heilbronn manual lathe without locking out the energy source.    c) This violation occurred on or about October 22, 2012, and times prior thereto, on the exterior west side of the machine shop where employees serviced and set-up a Hyd-Mech band Saw without locking out the energy source.      Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that procedures are developed, documented and utilized for the control of potentially hazardous energy when employees are engaged in activities covered by this section.

Issued

Nov 6, 2012

Abate by

Nov 27, 2012

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 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:    The employer does not guard machines to protect operators whose operation exposes an employee to injury.     a) This violation occurred on or about October 22, 2012, and times prior thereto, on the south wall in the machine shop where an employee was exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a large Weisser Heilbronn manual lathe without a guard to protect the employee from the point of operation, rotating parts, flying chips and sparks.    b) This violation occurred on or about October 22, 2012, and times prior thereto, on the west wall in the machine shop where an employee was exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a small Weisser Heilbronn manual lathe without a guard to protect the employee from the point of operation, rotating parts, flying chips and sparks.    c) This violation occurred on or about October 22, 2012, and times prior thereto, on the exterior west side of the machine shop where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a Hyd-Mech Band Saw without a guard on the unused portion of the blade.    Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that one or more methods of machine guarding is 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.

Issued

Nov 6, 2012

Abate by

Nov 27, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $2,700 Reduced

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:    The employer does not adjust the distance between abrasive wheels and the tongue guards to a distance not exceeding one fourth inch. This violation occurred on or about October 22, 2012, and times prior thereto, where employees in the Hydraulic Shop were exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a Dayton 8 inch bench grinder without tongue guards.     Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that the distance between the abrasive wheel periphery(s) and the adjustable tongue or the end of the safety guard peripheral member at the top does not exceed one fourth inch.

Issued

Nov 6, 2012

Abate by

Nov 27, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.179(j)(2)(iii): Monthly inspections of hooks, with a certification record which includes the date of inspection, the signature of the person who performed the inspection and the serial number, or other identifier, of the hook inspected, were not performed:    The employer does not perform monthly inspections of hooks, with a certification record which includes the date of inspection, the signature of the person who performed the inspection and the serial number, or other identifier, of the hook inspected. This violation was observed on or about October 22, 2012, in the Hydraulic Shop where employees operated an ProservAnchor 25 ton overhead bridge crane without the hook being inspected and certified monthly.     Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that they perform monthly inspections of hooks, with a certification record which includes the date of inspection, the signature of the person who performed the inspection and the serial number, or other identifier, of the hook inspected.

Issued

Nov 6, 2012

Abate by

Nov 27, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.179(m)(1): A certification record which includes the date of inspection, the signature of the person who performed the inspection and an identifier for the ropes which were inspected were not being kept on file where readily available to appointed personnel:    The employer does not perform monthly inspections of ropes, with a certification record which includes the date of inspection, the signature of the person who performed the inspection and the serial number, or other identifier, of the ropes inspected. This violation was observed on or about October 22, 2012, in the Hydraulic Shop where employees operated an ProservAnchor 25 ton overhead bridge crane without the ropes being inspected and certified monthly.     Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that they perform monthly inspections of rope, with a certification record which includes the date of inspection, the signature of the person who performed the inspection and the serial number, or other identifier, of the ropes inspected.