OSHA Inspection: QUALITY SYNTHETIC RUBBER INC

Issued

Oct 1, 2014

Abate by

Nov 11, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,000 · Current $1,950 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(c):  Personal protective equipment was not of safe design and construction for the work to be performed:      Employees working at rubber molding presses were exposed to a burn hazard from the hot molds and other parts.  Employees were required to wear protective sleeves to prevent burns but these sleeves were too short to cover their forearms.

Issued

Oct 1, 2014

Abate by

Dec 31, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2):  The employer did not verify, through a written certification, that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed:      Employees working at rubber molding presses were exposed to a burn hazard from the hot molds and other parts, and were using air guns which could blow chips into their eyes.  No certification of assessment protective equipment was prepared.

Issued

Oct 1, 2014

Abate by

Dec 31, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1): Protective eye and face equipment was not required where there was a reasonable probability of injury that could be prevented by such equipment:      Employees working at rubber molding presses were using air guns which could blow chips into their eyes.  At least one employee was not wearing safety glasses.

Issued

Oct 1, 2014

Abate by

Nov 11, 2014

Penalty

Initial $6,000 · Current $3,900 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii)(C):  The energy control procedure did not clearly and specifically outline the steps for placement, removal and transfer of lockout devices or tag out devices and the responsibility for them:      b)  The shutdown procedure for the Vision machine did not meet the requirements for a lock-out procedure in that it did not state where to apply the lockout devices.

Issued

Oct 1, 2014

Abate by

Dec 31, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii)(D):  The energy control procedures did not clearly and specifically outline the requirements for testing a machine or equipment to determine and verify the effectiveness of lockout devices, tag out devices, and other energy control measures:      a)  The shutdown procedure for the rubber molding presses does not meet the requirements for a lock-out procedure in that it did not include a verification step to assure the presses cannot restart.      b)  The shutdown procedure for the vision machine did not include a verification step to assure the vison conveyor belt cannot restart.

Issued

Oct 1, 2014

Abate by

Nov 11, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(d)(4)(i):  Lockout or tag out devices were not affixed to each energy isolating device by authorized employees:          b)  On or about 9/22/14, an employee cleaned the belt on the Vision machine without locking out the machine.

Issued

Oct 1, 2014

Penalty

Initial $4,000 · Current $2,600 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:      There was a pinch point between the ejector plate and the bottom of the rubber mold. This opens when the ejector plated is retracted and closes when the plate is raised to eject the finished parts.  This pinch point can catch employees hands or clothing when the machine is operated.