OSHA Inspection: ELECTRO-MECHANO INC.

Issued

Feb 15, 2013

Abate by

Apr 16, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(1):   The employer did not establish a program consisting of an energy control procedure, employee training and periodic inspections to ensure that before any employee performed any servicing or maintenance on a machine or equipment where the unexpected energing, startup or release of stored energy could occur and cause injury, the machine or equipment shall be isolated from the energy source and rendered inoperative:  (a) The employer did not develop and implement a written lockout / tagout program.  This exposed employees to accidental/inadvertent restart up of equipment.  (b)  The employer did not establish procedures to de-energize equipment prior to performing maintenance, servicing, or set-up.  (c)  The employer did not train employees in to recognize of applicable hazardous energy sources, type and magnitude of the energy available, and the methods and means necessary for energy isolation and control.  (d)  The employer did not develop and conduct periodic inspections to ensure the procedures were correct and the skills and knowledge were adequate of the authorized employees.

Issued

Feb 15, 2013

Abate by

Apr 16, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,000 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)  The LeBlond lathe had an unguarded work-holding device (chuck) exposing employees to struck-by hazards.  (b)  The Sheldon lathe had an unguarded work-holding device (chuck) exposing employees to struck-by hazards.  (c)  The 16 in South Bend Quick Change Gear lathe had an unguarded work-holding device (chuck) exposing employees to struck-by hazards.  (d)  The Leland Motor (No. 2342284) sander had unguarded in-running nip points exposing employees to caught-in hazards.  (f)   The Sheldon Lathe was missing the work-holding device (chuck) guard which exposed employees to struck-by hazards.  (g)  The Warner & Swasey No. 3 Lathe was missing the work-holding device (chuck) guard and had unguarded belts and pulleys which exposed employees to struck-by/caught-in hazards.  (h)  The Gisholt Lathe was missing the work-holding device (chuck) guard which exposed employees to struck-by hazards.   (i)   The Harding Lathes was missing the work-holding device (chuck) guard which exposed employees to struck-by hazards.

Issued

Feb 15, 2013

Abate by

Apr 16, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,500 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):  (a) The Niagara Shear used to shear metal sheets of brass which had inadequate point of operation guarding.  This exposed employees to amputation hazards.  (b)  The Niagara mechanical punch press did not have adequate point of operation guarding.  This exposed employees to amputation hazards.  (c)  The Kearney & Trecker Corp, Milwaukee Model H (S/N:  50-3719) had four (4) single blades used to cut slots in product which were not guarded exposing employees to amputation hazards.  (d)  The Kearney & Trecker Corp, Milwaukee Model H (S/N:  42-3984) had a single blade used to cut slots in product which were not guarded exposing employees to amputation hazards.

Issued

Feb 15, 2013

Abate by

Apr 16, 2013

Penalty

Initial $1,600 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.215(a)(4):   Work rest(s) on grinding machinery were not adjusted closely to the wheel with a maximum opening of one eighth inch:  (a)  The United States Electrical Tool Co., 6 in grinder S/N:  9019, had an opening of approximately 1/2" exposing employees to struck-by hazards.

Issued

Feb 15, 2013

Abate by

Apr 16, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:  (a)  The United States Electrical Tool Co., 6 in grinder S/N:  9019, had an opening of approximately 3/4" between the tongue guard and abrasive wheel exposing employees to struck-by hazards.

Issued

Feb 15, 2013

Abate by

Apr 16, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.219(d)(1):   Pulley(s) with part(s) seven feet or less from the floor or work platform were not guarded in accordance with the requirements specified in 29 CFR 1910.219(m) and (o):  (a)  Two Bridgeport mills had exposed belts and pulley above the employee's head exposing employees to in-running nip points.  (b)   The Leland-Gifford Company, Machine Tool & Supply Company, had four unguarded belts and pulleys exposing employees to caught-in hazards.

Issued

Feb 15, 2013

Abate by

Mar 14, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.219(e)(2)(i):   Overhead horizontal belt(s) with lower parts seven -7 feet or less from the floor(s) or platform(s) were not guarded on the sides and bottom in accordance with the requirements specified at CFR 1910.219(o)(3):  (a)  Two Bridgeport mills had exposed belts and pulley above the employee's head exposing employees to in-running nip points.  (b)   The Leland-Gifford Company, Machine Tool & Supply Company, had four unguarded belts and pulleys exposing employees to caught-in hazards.

Issued

Feb 15, 2013

Abate by

Apr 16, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800

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)  A flexible (black) cord, attached to a yellow dead front cord, had a wafer front which was not permitted to be used.  This exposed employees to electrical shock hazards.  (b)  A flexible (black cord, attached to a white dead front cord, had a wafer front which was not permitted to be used.  This exposed employees to electrical shock hazards.  (c)  The Kearney & Trecker Corporation, Milwaukee, Model H (S/N:  50-3719) electrical plug had a paper wafer front which was not permitted to be used.  This exposed employees to electrical shock hazards.  (d)  The Kearney & Trecker Corporation, Milwaukee, Model H (S/N:  42-3984) electrical plug had a paper wafer front which was not permitted to be used.  This exposed employees to electrical shock hazards.  (e)  A temporary relocatable power tap, used to power 2 task lights and a battery charger, was plugged into an extension cord and not directly into an outlet exposing employees to electrical shock hazards.  (f)  A quad metallic outlet was attached to a roof beam with a zip tie and extension cords wrapped around the beam. This exposed employees to electrical shock hazards.

Issued

Feb 15, 2013

Abate by

Apr 16, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(g)(1)(i):   Flexible cords and cables were not approved or conditions of use and location:  (a)  Two white extension cords (electraCORD by Cerrowire 16/3 SJTW) were wired into the same male end of the plug and was used to power two task lights.  This exposed employees to electrical shock hazards.  (b)  Two black cords were wired together to an electrical cord coming from the LeBlond Regal Lathe used to power the Hammond and United States Electrical Tool pedestal grinders.  This exposed employees to electrical shock hazards.

Issued

Feb 15, 2013

Abate by

Apr 16, 2013

Penalty

Initial $1,600 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(g)(2)(i):   Except as elsewhere required or permitted by Subpart S of Part 1910, live parts of electric equipment operating  at 50 volts or more were not guarded against accidental contact by use of approved cabinets or other forms of approved enclosures or by any of the means identified in paragraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D) of 29 CFR 1910.303(g)(2)(i):  (a)  An outlet cover was missing exposing employees to electrical shock hazards.  The outlet powered the security, phone, outlet in the roof, and fan.

Issued

Feb 15, 2013

Abate by

Apr 4, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1):   The employer did not develop, implement, and/or maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which describes how the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) will be met:  (a)  The employer did not develop a written hazard communication program to address maintaining MSDS, labeling of containers, or training employees on the hazards of the chemicals.

Issued

Feb 15, 2013

Abate by

Apr 4, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1):   Employees were not provided effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard that the employees had not been previously trained about was introduced into their work area:  (a)  The employer did not provide training to employees who were exposed to chemicals such as but not limited to:  mineral spirits, GoJo, speedy cutting oil, etc.