OSHA Inspection: W/S MACHINE & TOOL, INC.

Issued

Dec 31, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,050 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(2)(ii): The employer did not ensure that each operator had successfully completed the training consisting of a combination of formal instruction (e.g., lecture, discussion, interactive computer learning, video tape, written material), practical training (demonstrations performed by the trainer and practical exercises performed by the trainee), and evaluation of the operator's performance in the workplace.    (a) The employer did not ensure that each employee received a combination of formal instruction, practical training, and an evaluation of the operator's performance of operating a forklift.

Issued

Dec 31, 2013

Abate by

Jan 28, 2014

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 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) Employees by-pass the safety interlocks allowing them to have the doors open to the Hass Super VF-3, which exposed them to the moving parts while cleaning out the machine during the set-up process.

Issued

Dec 31, 2013

Abate by

Jan 13, 2014

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 and implement a written hazard communication program where employees work with Tru Cool 550 coolant which is used in the CNC machines exposing employees to eye and/or skin irritation

Issued

Dec 31, 2013

Abate by

Jan 28, 2014

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 ensure that employees have been properly trained on Hazard Communication in that employees had little to no knowledge of what Hazard Communication was or on any hazards associated with chemicals that they use on site. Employee's use chemicals such as, but not limited to: Tru Cool 550.