OSHA Inspection: PREMIER STEEL SERVICES, LLC

Issued

2013-03-06 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-04-18 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2000.00 · Current $1000.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii)(D):     The written lockout/tagout procedures did not contain specific requirements for testing a machine or equipment to determine and verify the effectiveness of lockout devices, tagout devices, and other energy control measures:    On or about January 17, 2013, the specific written lockout/tagout procedures for equipment such as, but not limited to, the Big Hem Saw did not address the requirements for testing the machine to ensure the energy source(s) had been isolated prior to the maintenance or servicing operations.

Issued

2013-03-06 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-04-18 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

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 requirements of this standard are being followed:    On or about January 17, 2013, Premier Steel Services did not perform an annual review of the specific lockout/tagout procedures with the authorized employees.

Issued

2013-03-06 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-04-18 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(7)(i):     The employer did not provide training to ensure that the purpose and function of the energy control program are understood by employees and that the knowledge and skills required for the safe application, usage, and removal of the energy controls are acquired by employees:    On or about January 17, 2013, employees changing saw blades on the hemsaws, changing dies on the beam line punch, and the dies on the anglematic machine were not trained at the authorized level to perform necessary lockout/tagout operations during servicing and maintenance of machinery.

Issued

2013-03-06 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-03-14 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2400.00 · Current $1200.00 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:    On or about January 17, 2013, the Skil 3380 bench grinder was missing a tongue guard creating a gap exceeding one fourth inch exposing employees to the hazards of being struck by a shattered grinding wheel.

Issued

2013-03-06 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-03-28 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2000.00 · Current $1000.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.219(f)(3):     All sprocket wheels and chains at or less than seven (7) feet above the floor were not enclosed:      On or about January 17, 2013, employees were not protected from unguarded sprocket wheels and chains in areas such as, but not limited to the outside transfer conveyors and fit up and weld transfer station(east side) exposing employees to the hazards of being caught in the ingoing nip points.

Issued

2013-03-06 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-03-14 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1200.00 · Current $600.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.252(b)(2)(i)(B):     Goggles or other suitable eye protection was not used during all gas welding or oxygen cutting operations. Spectacles without side shields, with suitable filter lenses are permitted for use during gas welding operations on light work, for torch brazing or for inspection.    On or about January 17, 2013, employees tack welding were not wearing the appropriate protective eyewear exposing employees to the hazards of injurious light radiation.

Issued

2013-03-06 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-03-14 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.254(d)(8):     The employer did not ensure cables with splices within 10 feet (3 m) of the holder shall not be used:    On or about January 17, 2013, employees were using a carbon arc welder with a splice within 10 ft. of the holder exposing employees to the hazards of electrical shock.

Issued

2013-03-06 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-03-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1600.00 · Current $800.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1):     The employer did not provide employees with effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment, and whenever a new physical or health hazard the employees have not previously been trained about is introduced into their work area:     On or about January 17, 2013, the employer did not provide training on specific hazardous chemicals such as, but not limited to, Steel Spec Structural Steel Primer and Xylene prior to the employee performing spray painting operations using these chemicals exposing the employee to the hazards of chemical exposure.

Issued

2013-03-06 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-03-14 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1):     The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee is fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:    On or about January 17, 2013, a medical evaluation had not been performed for the employee required to wear the 3M  half mask respirator when spray painting exposing the employee to the hazards of physiological stress.

Issued

2013-03-06 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-03-14 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1):     The employer did not ensure that employees using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator pass an appropriate qualitative fit test (QLFT) or quantitative fit test (QNFT) as stated in this paragraph:    On or about January 17, 2013, a fit test procedure had not been performed for the employee required to wear the 3M half mask respirator during spray painting operations exposing the employee to the hazards hazardous chemicals.

Issued

2013-03-06 00:00:00

Abate by

2013-03-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(1):     The employer did not ensure that each employee could  demonstrate knowledge of at least the following:  i)  Why the respirator is necessary and how improper fit, usage, or maintenance can compromise the protective effect of the respirator;  ii)  What the limitations and capabilities of the respirator are;  iii)  How to use the respirator effectively in emergency situations, including situations in which the respirator malfunctions;  iv)  How to inspect, put on and remove, use, and check the seals of the respirator;  v)  What the procedures are for maintenance and storage of the respirator;  vi)  How to recognize medical signs and symptoms that may limit or prevent the effective use of respirators; and  vii)  The general requirements of this section.    On or about January 17, 2013, employees were not trained for effective respirator use, maintenance, health effects and safety requirements pertaining to the utilization of an 3M half-mask respirator while performing spray painting operations..