Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,189,992Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-18 Last loaded 2026-07-22

OSHA Inspection: MAGNETECH INDUSTRIAL SERVICES, INC.

Federal Agency inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a federal Agency safety inspection of MAGNETECH INDUSTRIAL SERVICES, INC. in 701 BILL MYLES DR. W., SARALAND, AL 36571 (NAICS 811219). OSHA activity number 339076366.

What this inspection record means

OSHA opens inspections for many reasons — routine scheduling under a national or local emphasis program, an employee complaint or referral, or a follow-up after a reported injury. Opening or conducting an inspection is not itself an allegation or a finding that this employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.

Watch Magnetech Industrial Services, INC. — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Magnetech Industrial Services, INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
701 BILL MYLES DR. W.
City
SARALAND
State
AL
ZIP
36571
Mailing
701 BILL MYLES DR. W., SARALAND, AL 36571
Inspection type
Federal Agency (M)
Scope
Complete (A)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
811219
Employees
18
Ownership type
A

9 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.212 A01

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Sep 9, 2013
Penalty
Initial $7,000 · Current $5,250 Reduced
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) Main bay of facility: On or about May 22, 2013: The employer exposed employees to caught-by hazards in that the employees were allowed to operate the Clausing-Metosa C2487SS lathe without the chuck guard in place.    b) Main bay of facility: On or about May 22, 2013: The employer exposed employees to caught-by hazards in that the employees were allowed to operate the Nardini-SZ20120T lathe without the chuck guard in place.    c) Main bay of facility: On or about May 22, 2013: The employer exposed employees to caught-by hazards in that the employees were allowed to operate the Summit lathe without the chuck guard in place.    d) Main bay of facility: On or about May 22, 2013: The employer exposed employees to caught-by hazards in that the employees were allowed to operate the Colchester Triumph 2000 lathe without the chuck guard in place.    e) Main bay of facility: On or about May 22, 2013: The employer exposed employees to caught-by hazards in that the employees were allowed to operate the Colchester Mastiff 1400 lathe without the chuck guard in place.    f) Main bay of facility: On or about May 22, 2013: The employer exposed employees to caught-by hazards in that the employees were allowed to operate the Summit-50 lathe without the chuck guard in place.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $5250
  • — C (S) $7000
  • — Z (S) $7000

1910.215 B09

Serious Gravity 5 3 instances 4 exposed
Issued
Sep 9, 2013
Abate by
Sep 19, 2013
Penalty
Initial $6,000 · Current $4,500 Reduced
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) In the machine shop on the south wall of the facility: On May 22, 2013 and at times prior to; the employer failed to ensure that both tongue guards on the 6 inch "Bench Grinder" were adjusted to within 1/4 inch, exposing employees to struck-by hazards from wheel fragments of a disintegrating stone while using the grinder to sharpen lathe bits.     (b)  In the machine shop, south wall of the facility:  On May 22, 2013 and at times prior to; the employer failed to ensure that the right tongue guard on the 6 inch grinder (model 400, SN: W5-85) was adjusted to within 1/4 inch, exposing employees to struck-by hazards from wheel fragments of a disintegrating stone while using the grinder to sharpen lathe bits.     (c)  In the 4th bay: On May 22, 2013 and at times prior to; the employer failed to ensure that the right tongue guard on the 6 inch SUNEX TOOL (Mod. 5002A) pedestal grinder was adjusted to within 1/4 inch, exposing employees to struck-by hazards from wheel fragments of a disintegrating stone when the grinder is operating.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $4500
  • — C (S) $6000
  • — Z (S) $6000

1910.215 A04

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 9, 2013
Abate by
Sep 17, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
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) In the 4th bay: On May 22, 2013 and at times prior to; the employer failed to ensure that the work rest was adjusted to no more than 1/8 inch from the stone, exposing employees to caught in hazards.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $0
  • — C (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.243 C03

Serious Gravity 1 2 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Sep 9, 2013
Abate by
Sep 19, 2013
Penalty
Initial $2,550 · Current $1,913 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.243(c)(3): Abrasive wheels used on vertical portable grinder(s) (right angle head grinders) were not provided with safety guard(s) having a maximum exposure angle of 180 degrees and located between the operator and wheel:    a)    Facility: On or about May 21, 2013: The employer failed to ensure employees using a Dewalt hand held grinder had the required guard in place when it was being used to remove material to balance shafts for electric motors and other work activities exposing employees to struck-by hazards from debris particles and fragmenting wheel.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $1912.5
  • — C (S) $2550
  • — Z (S) $2550

1910.304 G05

Deleted Serious Gravity 10 3 instances 18 exposed
Issued
Sep 9, 2013
Abate by
Sep 19, 2013
Penalty
Initial $7,000 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.304(g)(5): The path to ground from circuits, equipment, and enclosures was not permanent, continuous, and effective:   a)    Rear right side of the facility near the bay door of the old bay: On or about May 21, 2013: The employer exposed employees to electrocution hazards by requiring employees to use equipment that had an equipment grounding plug with receptacles that did not maintain a continuous path to ground.   b)    Rear right side of the facility near the Bench Grinders in the old bay: On or about May 21, 2013: The employer exposed employees to electrocution hazards by requiring employees to use equipment that had an equipment grounding plug with receptacles that did not maintain a continuous path to ground.   c)    Front left side of the facility near the main office door: On or about May 21, 2013: The employer exposed employees to electrocution hazards by requiring employees to use equipment that had an equipment grounding plug with receptacles that did not maintain a continuous path to ground.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $0
  • — C (S) $7000
  • — Z (S) $7000

1910.304 G06 VI C 5

Deleted Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Sep 9, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.304(g)(6)(vi)(C)(5): The employer did not ensure that exposed noncurrent-carrying metal parts of cord-and-plug connected equipment that may become energized was grounded when the equipment was used by employees standing on the ground.   a) Rear of facility near bay door: On or about May 22, 2013: the employer failed to ensure that the noncurrent carrying parts of cord and plug connected equipment (A Fan) was grounded.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $0
  • — C (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.132 D02

Other-than-serious 1 instance 5 exposed
Issued
Sep 9, 2013
Abate by
Sep 19, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2): The employer did not verify that the required workplace hazard assessment has been performed through a written certification that identifies the workplace evaluated, the person certifying that the evaluation has been performed, the date(s) of the hazard assessment, and, which identifies the document as a certification of hazard assessment:   a) Facility Wide: On or about May 22, 2013; the employer failed to ensure that a written assessment was done where the workplace contained hazards such as but not limited to grinders, welder, and electrical hazards has could cause injury to employees without personal protective equipment.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (O) $0
  • — C (O) $0
  • — Z (O) $0

1910.178 L04 III

Other-than-serious 1 instance 16 exposed
Issued
Sep 9, 2013
Abate by
Sep 26, 2013
Penalty
Initial $1,000 · Current $750 Reduced
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:    a)    Facility: On May 21, 2013 and at times prior to; the employer failed to evaluate performance at least one time every three years, exposing operators and other employees to crushing hazards while operating a powered industrial truck to load and unload large electric motors in the facility.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (O) $750
  • — C (O) $1000
  • — Z (O) $1000

1910.303 F02

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 9, 2013
Abate by
Sep 19, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
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:   a)    Electrical panel room: On May 22, 2013 and at times prior to; the employer failed to ensure that the panel feeding the lighting and receptacle circuits for the building was marked to show what circuits each breaker fed, exposing employees and employees of contractors to electrocution and fire hazards.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (O) $0
  • — C (O) $0
  • — Z (O) $0

View Magnetech Industrial Services, INC.'s full OSHA safety record →

This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). The original IMIS detail view is available at OSHA's Establishment Search for activity number 339076366.

Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.