OSHA Inspection: STEEL DESIGNS, INC.

Issued

May 5, 2014

Abate by

May 22, 2014

Penalty

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

General-duty citation text

OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1): The employer does not furnish to each of his employees employment and a place of employment which are free from the recognized hazards of being struck-by which are causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees:     a. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, in the first position on the east wall facing south where employees were exposed to being struck-by loads lifted with a CM 2-ton wall-supported jib crane without an annual inspection being conducted and records maintained.      b. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, in the second position on the east wall facing south where employees were exposed to being struck-by loads lifted with a CM 2-ton wall-supported jib crane without an annual inspection being conducted and records maintained.     c. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, in the third position on the east wall facing south where employees were exposed to being struck-by loads lifted with a CM 1-ton wall-supported jib crane without an annual inspection being conducted and records maintained.      d. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, in the fourth position on the east wall facing south where employees were exposed to being struck-by loads lifted with a CM 1-ton wall-supported jib crane without an annual inspection being conducted and records maintained.    e. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, in the fifth position on the east wall facing south where employees were exposed to being struck-by loads lifted with a CM 1-ton wall-supported jib crane without an annual inspection being conducted and records maintained.      f. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, in the first position on the west wall facing south where employees were exposed to being struck-by loads lifted with a CM 1-ton wall-supported jib crane without an annual inspection being conducted and records maintained.    g. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, in the second position on the west wall facing south where employees were exposed to being struck-by loads lifted with a CM 1-ton wall-supported jib crane without an annual inspection being conducted and records maintained.    h. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, in the third position on the west wall facing south where employees were exposed to being struck-by loads lifted with a CM 2-ton wall-supported jib crane without an annual inspection being conducted and records maintained.    i. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, in the fourth position on the west wall facing south where employees were exposed to being struck-by loads lifted with a CM 2-ton wall-supported jib crane without an annual inspection being conducted and records maintained.    Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing the actions that it is taking to conduct annual inspections on overhead/underhung wall supported jib cranes maintain the records for continuing evaluation.

Issued

May 5, 2014

Abate by

Jun 27, 2014

Penalty

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

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.107(c)(5): 29 CFR 1910.107(c)(5):  Electrical equipment not approved for locations containing both deposits of readily ignitable residues and explosive vapors was present in spraying area(s):     The employer does not ensure that electrical equipment not approved for locations containing both deposits or readily ignitable residues and explosive vapors are not present in spraying areas. This violation occurred on or about April 3, 2014, and times prior thereto, in the spray paint area where employees were exposed to a fire hazard when metal products were painted with a flammable primer without the electrical equipment located in the area being approved.     Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that electrical equipment not approved for locations containing both deposits of readily ignitable residues and explosive vapors are not present in spraying areas.

Issued

May 5, 2014

Abate by

Jun 27, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,200 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(a)(4): Modifications and additions which affect capacity and safe operation of powered industrial truck were performed by the employer without the manufacturer's prior written approval:     The employer does not obtain written approval from the manufacturer for additions which affect capacity and safe operation of forklifts.     a. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, in the shop where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard from a front-end attachment used on a Clark forklift operated in the shop area without the manufacturer's prior written approval.     b. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, in the shop where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard from a front-end attachment used on a Clark forklift operated in the spray area without the manufacturer's prior written approval.    Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that modifications and additions which affect capacity and safe operation of powered industrial truck is performed by the employer without the manufacturer's prior written approval.

Issued

May 5, 2014

Abate by

May 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $1,600 · Current $960 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:    The employer does not guard machines to protector the operator and other employees in the area. This violation occurred on or about April 3, 2014, on the east wall of the shop where employees were exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating a Burr King 760 belt grinder without a guard for nip points.      Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that one or more methods of machine guarding is 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.

Issued

May 5, 2014

Abate by

May 9, 2014

Penalty

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

General-duty citation text

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:    The employer does not guard abrasive wheels used on angle portable grinders.    a. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, in the northeast area of the shop where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a Bosch angle grinder without a safety guard over the abrasive wheel.    b. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, at the second to last work station along the southeast wall where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a Bosch angle grinder without a safety guard over the abrasive wheel.    c. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, at the second to last work station along the southeast wall where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a DeWalt angle grinder without a safety guard over the abrasive wheel.    d. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, at the last work station along the southeast wall where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a Bosch angle grinder without a safety guard over the abrasive wheel.    e. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, at the last work station along the southeast wall where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a Dewalt angle grinder without a safety guard over the abrasive wheel.    f. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, at the first work station along the northwest wall where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a DeWalt angle grinder without a safety guard over the abrasive wheel.    g. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, at the first work station along the northwest wall where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a Bosch angle grinder without a safety guard over the abrasive wheel.    h. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, at the second work station along the northwest wall where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a DeWalt angle grinder without a safety guard over the abrasive wheel.    i. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, at the second work station along the northwest wall where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a Bosch angle grinder without a safety guard over the abrasive wheel.    j. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, at the last work station along the northwest wall where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a DeWalt angle grinder without a safety guard over the abrasive wheel.    k. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, at the last work station along the northwest wall where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating a Bosch angle grinder without a safety guard over the abrasive wheel.     Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that abrasive wheels used on vertical or right angle grinders are provided with safety guards having a maximum angle exposure of 180 degrees and located between the operator and the wheel.

Issued

May 5, 2014

Abate by

May 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $400 · Current $240 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1904.29(a): The employer did not use an OSHA 300, 301 and 300A Form or equivalent.    The employer does not use OSHA 300, 301 and 300A Forms or equivalent.     a. This violation occurred on or about April 3, 2014, and times prior thereto, the employer did not use OSHA 300, 301, and 300A Forms or equivalent forms for the calendar year 2011.    b. This violation occurred on or about April 3, 2014, and times prior thereto, the employer did not use OSHA 300, 301, and 300A Forms or equivalent forms for the calendar year 2012.    c. This violation occurred on or about April 3, 2014, and times prior thereto, the employer did not use OSHA 300, 301, and 300A Forms or equivalent forms for the calendar year 2013.    Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that OSHA 300, 301, and 300A Forms or equivalent are used.

Issued

May 5, 2014

Abate by

Jun 27, 2014

Penalty

Initial $400 · Current $240 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required respirator use:     The employer does not establish or implement a written respiratory protection program for employees required to wear respirators. This violation was observed on or about April 3, 2014, in the paint area where an employee was allowed to wear a respirator when spraying enamel paints without a written respiratory protection program.     Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that a written respiratory protection program that includes the provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(I-ix) with worksite specific procedures is established and implemented for required respirator use.

Issued

May 5, 2014

Abate by

May 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(6): The employer did not certify that each operator has been trained and evaluated as required by this paragraph (l):   The employer does not certify that each operator has been trained and evaluated. This violation occurred on or about April 3, 2014, in the shop where employees were exposed to a struck-by hazard from two Clark forklifts being operated without the operator having certification of training and evaluation.   Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that they certify that each operator has been trained and evaluated as required by this paragraph.

Issued

May 5, 2014

Abate by

May 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(b)(2)(i): Pull boxes, junction boxes, and fittings were not provided with covers approved for the purpose:  The employer does not provide approved covers for junction boxes. This violation was observed on about April 3, 2014, on the northeast wall near the center door where an employee stored items near a junction box without a cover.   Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that pull boxes, junction boxes, and fittings are provided with covers approved for the purpose.

Issued

May 5, 2014

Abate by

May 22, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(g)(2)(ii): Flexible cords were not used only in continuous lengths without splice or tap:   The employer does not use flexible cords in continuous lengths without splice or tap. This violation occurred on or about April 3, 2014, on the NE wall where employees were exposed to an electrical shock hazard when operating a Burr King Belt Grinder Model 760, without the electrical cord being in continuous length without splices.   Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that flexible cords are used in continuous length without splice or tap.

Issued

May 5, 2014

Abate by

Jun 27, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): Employer had not developed or implemented a written hazard communication program included the requirements outlined in 29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1)(i) and (e)(1)(ii):     The employer does not develop and implement a written hazardous communication program. On or about April 3, 2014, throughout the facility employees were allowed to store and handle chemical materials without a written Hazard Communication Program in place.     Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation showing that it is in compliance with the standard, including describing the steps that it is taking to ensure that a written hazard communication program is developed and implemented including the requirements outlined in 29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1) (i - ii).