OSHA Inspection: GMS INDUSTRIES INC.

Issued

Oct 9, 2014

Abate by

Oct 16, 2014

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii): Procedures did not clearly and specifically outline the scope, purpose, authorization, rules, and techniques to be utilized for the control of hazardous energy, and the means to enforce compliance including, but not limited to, 29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii)(A), (c)(4)(ii)(B), (c)(4)(ii)(C) and (c)(4)(ii)(D):  On or about September 23, 2014, and at times prior thereto, the employer's lockout-tagout procedure was inadequate. The procedure did not identify multiple sources of energy, and did not contain procedural steps to be utilized for the control of all hazardous energy associated with the following equipment, exposing employee(s) to unexpected energization or machine movement, or the release of stored energy:      a)    DIDDE Web Press - DGS 860, Model 206-678, Serial No. 420-0150    b)    Allied Gear Label Printing Press machine, Model 310-8C, Serial No. 2007AP    c)     Champion 305XD Paper Cutting Machine, Model 305XD, Serial No. 06X1212

Issued

Oct 9, 2014

Abate by

Oct 16, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(6)(i): The employer did not conduct a periodic inspection of the energy control procedure at least annually to ensure that the procedure and the requirement of this standard were being followed:  On or about September 23, 2014, and at times prior thereto, annual periodic inspections of the employers energy control procedures were not conducted. Documentation provided by the employer indicated that inspections were to be performed but were never implemented. Employee(s) were exposed to unexpected energization or startup of the machines or equipment, or release of stored energy causing caught-between, struck-by or electrical shock hazards.

Issued

Oct 9, 2014

Abate by

Oct 16, 2014

Penalty

Initial $1,700 · Current $1,700

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):  On or about September 23, 2014, and at times prior thereto, four units within the DIDDE Conserver Press, Model AMCP 172-7B, Serial No. 320-0220, were missing the cylinder guards, the point of operation was not guarded, exposing the operator to caught-between and struck-by hazards.

Issued

Oct 9, 2014

Abate by

Oct 16, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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 and rotating parts:  On or about September 23, 2014, and at times prior thereto, the VIJUK-2 Folding Machine, Model FA 36/6-6K, Serial No. 52677, was missing the safety hood guards and conveyor belt side-cover guard, exposing the operator and helper to caught-between and struck-by hazards.

Issued

Oct 9, 2014

Abate by

Oct 16, 2014

Penalty

Initial $1,020 · Current $1,020

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.304(g)(5): The path to ground from circuits, equipment, and enclosures was not permanent, continuous, and effective:  On or about September 23, 2014, and at times prior thereto, in the folding machine area, two-extension cords used by employees had a broken ground pins and were not grounded, exposing employees to electrical shock hazards.

Issued

Oct 9, 2014

Abate by

Oct 16, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(b)(2): Listed or labeled electrical equipment was not used or installed in accordance with instructions included in the listing or labeling:  On or about September 23, 2014, and at times prior thereto, in the folding machine area, listed or labeled equipment was not installed and/or used in accordance with manufacturers instructions and UL White Book listing. An extension cord coming from the wall socket was used to connect a power tap into another power tap and another extension cord. This condition exposed employees to electrical shock and fire hazards.