OSHA Inspection: VANTAGE PRODUCTS CORPORATION

Issued

Apr 3, 2013

Abate by

Jun 20, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,940 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 struck-by hazards associated with damaged storage racks:    On or about March 12, 2013, employees were exposed to struck-by hazards while performing work around damaged racks.  The employer failed to regularly inspect rack systems for damage and replace or repair damaged racks.  The following racks were damaged:  a.  Support posts in the Warehouse-1 racks  b.  Support posts in the Warehouse-3 racks  b.  Support posts in the Warehouse-5 racks  c.  Support posts in the Production-1 racks(mold department)

Issued

Apr 3, 2013

Abate by

May 29, 2013

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,100 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.23(c)(1): Open-sided floors and/or platforms four feet or more above adjacent floor or ground level were not guarded with standard railings (or equivalent) and toeboards:    On  or about March 12, 2013, employees were exposed to 10-20 foot fall hazards when guardrails were missing or inadequate:  a.	Mezzanine in the manual paint booth area did not have guardrails  b.	Mezzanine near the maintenance area did not have guardrails  c.	Mezzanines at the molding machines had guardrails that were not high enough when employees stood on the material hopper to access hoses.

Issued

Apr 3, 2013

Abate by

Apr 29, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,260 Reduced

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 was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:    On or about March 12, 2013, an employee using a half-mask respirator was exposed to health hazards when the employee had not been medically evaluated annually to insure that he could safety wear a respirator.

Issued

Apr 3, 2013

Abate by

Apr 29, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): Employee(s) using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator were not annually fit tested:    On or about March 12, 2013, an employee using a half-mask respirator was exposed to chemical hazards such as petroleum naphtha, xylene, and trimethyl benzene when the employee had not been fit tested annually to insure proper respirator fit.

Issued

Apr 3, 2013

Abate by

Apr 29, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,680 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.146(c)(2): The employer did not inform exposed employees, by posting danger signs or by any other equally effective means, of the existence and location of and the danger posed by the permit spaces:    On or about March 12, 2013, employees were exposed to engulfment and water hazards when confined spaces such as, but not limited to, the four blue silos, five white silos, and the water tank had no signage saying DANGER-PERMIT-REQUIRED CONFINED SPACE, DO NOT ENTER (or other similar language) to warn employees that they should not enter the spaces.

Issued

Apr 3, 2013

Abate by

Jun 20, 2013

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $2,100 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii): Procedures did not clearly and specifically outline the scope, purpose, authorization, rules, and techniques to be utilized for the control of hazardous energy, and the means to enforce compliance including, but not limited to, 29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii)(A), (c)(4)(ii)(B), (c)(4)(ii)(C) and (c)(4)(ii)(D)(h), and Appendix A:    On or about March 12, 2013, employees were exposed to struck-by and/or electrical hazards when there were no machine specific procedures for equipment such as, but not limited to, the manual paint spray system, the automatic paint spray system, the plastic grinding system, the molding machine systems, and the vacuum molding machine system.

Issued

Apr 3, 2013

Abate by

Jun 20, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(7)(i): The employer did not provide adequate training to ensure that the purpose and function of the energy control program was understood by employees:    On or about March 12, 2013, employees were exposed to struck-by and/or electrical hazards when they had not been trained for lockout/tagout on equipment such as, but not limited to, the manual paint spray system, the automatic paint spray system, the plastic grinding system, the molding machine systems, and the vacuum molding machine system.

Issued

Apr 3, 2013

Abate by

May 13, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,680 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(4)(iii): An evaluation of each powered industrial truck operator's performance was not being conducted at least once every three years:    On or about March 12, 2013, employees were exposed to struck-by hazards when the employees driving forklifts had not been evaluated for ten or more years.

Issued

Apr 3, 2013

Abate by

May 13, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(q)(7): Powered industrial truck(s) which were used on a round-the-clock basis were not examined for defects after each shift:    On or about March 12, 2013, employees were exposed to struck-by hazards when the forklifts were not inspected on each shift that used them.

Issued

Apr 3, 2013

Abate by

May 13, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,260 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.179(j)(2): The following items were not be inspected for defects at intervals as defined in paragraph (j)(1)(ii) of this section or as specifically indicated, including observation during operation for any defects which might appear between regular inspections:    On or about March 12, 2013, employees were exposed to struck-by hazards when the wire rope and hook on the crane in the molding department had not been inspected for damage (with a certification record) on a monthly basis.

Issued

Apr 3, 2013

Abate by

Jun 20, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,940 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(3)(ii): Point of operation guards were not designed and constructed as to prevent the operator from having any part of their body in the danger zone during the operating cycle:    On or about March 12, 2013, employees were exposed to struck-by hazards when employees could enter the enclosure surrounding the ram and mold by going under the doors, under the walls supporting the doors, or through the window openings in the doors that were missing Plexiglas.

Issued

Apr 3, 2013

Abate by

Jul 29, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(d)(1): When information indicated that any employee's exposure equaled or exceed the 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels, the employer did not develop and implement a monitoring program:    On or about March 12, 2013, employees were exposed to noise hazards when the employer had not implemented a monitoring program to determine if employees sawing and grinding scrap plastic parts were exposed to noise greater than 85db time-weighted average.