OSHA Inspection: REDLINE INDUSTRIES INC.

Issued

May 29, 2013

Abate by

Jun 8, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 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):    At the site located at 8401 Mosley Rd. in Houston, TX; the employer did not provide adequate guards for the following machinery located in Bay # 2, exposing employees to amputation hazards:    a. Cincinnati Press Brake, model # 400H. No serial number listed on equipment    b. Cincinnati Press Brake, model # 200H. No serial number listed on equipment.    c. Atlantic Machine Shearing Press, model # HDSXI2.1/2, serial # 68912.

Issued

May 29, 2013

Abate by

Jun 8, 2013

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $1,750 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(b)(1): Unused openings in boxes, cabinets, or fittings were not effectively closed:    At the site located at 8401 Mosley Rd. in Houston, TX; employees in Bay # 1 were exposed to an electrical panel that had unused openings and were not effectively closed. This condition exposed the employees to electrical hazards.

Issued

May 29, 2013

Abate by

Jun 8, 2013

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $1,700 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(b)(2): Pull boxes, junction boxes, and fittings were not provided with covers approved for the purpose:       At the site located at 8401 Mosley Rd. in Houston, TX; junction boxes in Bay # 1 were not provided with covers. This condition exposed employees to electrical hazards.

Issued

May 29, 2013

Abate by

Jun 8, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,200 · Current $2,100 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(ii): Employee training did not include the physical and health hazards of the chemicals in the work area:     At the site located at 8401 Mosley Rd. in Houston, TX; the employer did not inform employees engaged in welding that the product they used to clean their M.I.G. welding nozzles contained methylene chloride. This condition exposed employees to health hazards.

Issued

May 29, 2013

Abate by

Jun 8, 2013

Penalty

Initial $700 · Current $350 Reduced

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:     At the site located at 8401 Mosley Rd. in Houston, TX; The employer required employees to use hearing protection, but did not implement a monitoring program to ensure employees hearing conservation was being adequately protected. This condition exposed employees to noise hazards.

Issued

May 29, 2013

Abate by

Jun 8, 2013

Penalty

Initial $700 · Current $350 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(iii): The employer did not identify and evaluate the respiratory hazard(s) in the workplace, including a reasonable estimate of employee exposures to respiratory hazard(s) and an identification of the contaminant's chemical state and physical form:     At the site located at 8401 Mosley Rd. in  Houston, TX; employees were given N95 dust mask type respirators to perform welding operations. The employer did not conduct evaluation or monitoring to ensure the N95 respirator would provide the required protection for the work being performed. This condition exposed employees to inhalation hazards.

Issued

May 29, 2013

Abate by

Jun 8, 2013

Penalty

Initial $700 · Current $400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(f)(2): Each service, feeder, and branch circuit, at its disconnecting means or overcurrent device, was not legibly marked to indicate its purpose, nor located and arranged so the purpose was evident:    At the site located at 8401 Mosley Rd. in Houston, TX; The employer did not ensure that electrical panels controlling equipment located in Bay #1 was labeled to identify the equipment each circuit controlled. This condition exposed the employees to electrical hazards.

Issued

May 29, 2013

Abate by

Jun 8, 2013

Penalty

Initial $700 · Current $400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1052(d)(1)(i): Where methylene chloride was present in the workplace, the employer did not determine each employee's exposure:      At the site located at 8401 Mosley Rd. in Houston, TX; employees used an anti-spatter product containing methylene chloride to clean M.I.G. welding gun nozzles. The employer did not conduct monitoring to assess the employees exposure to methylene chloride. This condition exposed employees to inhalation hazards.