OSHA Inspection: WODIN INC.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

Apr 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.23(a)(9): Floor hole(s) into which persons could not accidentally walk were not protected by securely held covers:        On or about 11/19/2014, metal plates used to cover the floor holes located at the opening of upsetters 2004 and 2007 in the production area, were not securely held in place and had an opening greater than 12 inches thus exposing the operator or other employees in the immediate work area to a potential slip/trip/fall hazard.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.110 (e) (4) (iii) Permanent and removable fuel containers were not securely mounted to prevent jarring loose, slipping, or rotating:        On or about 11/19/2014, the clasp used to secure the (LP) cylinder of the company's (TCM) fork truck was broken.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 1, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(i): Procedures shall be developed, documented and utilized for the control of potentially hazardous energy when employees are engaged in the activities covered by this section:        On or about 11/19/2014, lock out procedures were not being utilized by employees tasked with completing set-up on the upsetter machinery. Applicable energy source used in the machines operation include: electrical and pneumatic energy.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 26, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $1,750 Reduced

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 11/19/2014, the employer did not ensure that annual inspections or audits of the company's lockout procedures were completed, as required. Potential hazardous energy sources used at the facility include, but are not limited to; electric, pneumatic and hydraulic energy.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 26, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(7)(i)(A): Authorized employee(s) did not receive training in the recognition of applicable hazardous energy sources, the type and magnitude of the energy available in the workplace, and the methods and means necessary for energy isolation:        On or before 11/19/2014, training in the recognition of applicable hazardous energy sources, the type and magnitude of the energy available in the workplace, and the methods and means necessary for energy isolation was not provided to employees tasked with completing routine servicing or maintenance activities at the site. Employees complete service and maintenance on equipment such as, but not limited to; the upsetter equipment, CNC machinery and mechanical power presses.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(d)(4)(i): Lockout or tagout devices were not affixed to each energy isolating device by authorized employees.        On or before 11/19/2014, the employer did not ensure that employees tasked with completing set-up(s)/die changes on upsetter machinery affixed an energy isolating device to the equipment being serviced.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(p)(1):  Where powered industrial trucks were found to be in need of repair, defective, or in any way unsafe, the trucks were not taken out of service until they had been restored to safe operating condition        On or before 11/19/2014, powered industrial vehicles (PIVs) found in need of re-pair remained in service. Equipment includes, but is not limited to, the company's (TCM) fork-truck which was defective in that, the clasp used to secure the (LP) cylinder of the fork truck was broken and the tires were extremely worn.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(q)(7):  Industrial trucks were not examined before being placed in service, or were placed in service if the examination showed conditions adversely affecting the safety of the vehicle:   Inspections of the company's powered industrial trucks were not completed by operator(s) prior to the fork truck being placed into service. The TCM fork-truck was defective in that, the clasp used to secure the (LP) cylinder of the fork truck was broken and the tires were extremely worn.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,200 · Current $2,100 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.179(j)(1)(ii)(a):  The employer did not perform frequent and periodic inspections as defined in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section:       Frequent inspections (daily to monthly intervals) of the cranes used at the facility were not being completed as required.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.179(j)(2)(iii): Monthly inspections of hooks, with a certification record which includes the date of inspection, the signature of the person who performed the inspection and the serial number, or other identifier, of the hook inspected, were not performed:   a. On or about 11/19/2014, the employer failed to ensure certified hook inspections were performed and documented      for the #18 crane located in bay 5.   b. On or about 11/19/2014, the employer failed to ensure certified hook inspections were performed and documented      for the #8 crane located in bay 3.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.179(j)(2)(iv): Monthly inspections of hoist chains, with a certification record which includes the date of inspection, the signature of the person who performed the inspection and an identifier of the chain which was inspected, were not performed:       On or about 11/19/2014, the employer failed to ensure certified chain inspections were performed and documented for the cranes located throughout the facility.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,200 · Current $2,100 Reduced

General-duty citation text

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.      On or before 11/19/2015, the employer did not ensure that various equipment or machinery used at the site was effectively guarded.  The unguarded equipment includes:     a.    The Cleveland lathe, located in the machine shop, did not have chuck guarding;      b.   The rotating chuck of (2) automatic drill presses, located in bay 3;    c.    The Haas (HL1): CNC mill did not have the door interlocked;    d.   The Mustang C-32: CNC mill did not have the door interlocked.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $1,750 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(3)(ii): The 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 before 11/19/2014, point of operation guarding was not provided for both the Rogers: 150 ton (hydraulic) arbor press and Drake: 75 ton arbor press.  Actuated by a (hand) lever, the employer failed to ensure that operators who utilized the presses were protected against having any part of their body in the danger zone(s) during operating   cycle(s).

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Penalty

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

General-duty citation text

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 to prevent the work from being jammed between the wheel and the rest, which may cause wheel breakage:         The pedestal grinder, located in bay 3 (the machine shop) of the facility did not have the right side of the work rest properly adjusted. The opening measured approximately 11/16".

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

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:     Guarding used to deflect broken fragments of the abrasive wheel away from operators should it shatter, was missing.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $1,750 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.217(b)(7)(v)(c): The two hand control system of mechanical power press(es) using part revolution clutches did not incorporate an anti- repeat feature:      The number 2084 (National Max press) located in bay five (5), was used to produce parts while operated in inch mode; this mode does not have an anti-repeat function.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.217(c)(5)(i): Mechanical power press(es) where the operator feeds or removes parts by placing one or both hands in the point of operation, and a two hand control, presence sensing device, or type B gate or movable barrier guard is used, were not equipped with a control system and a brake monitor which comply with the requirements specified in paragraphs (b)(13) and (14) of this section:       On or before 11/19/2014, the brake monitor and control reliability of press #2084 was by-passed when operated in  inch mode.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

Apr 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $1,750 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.217(b)(7)(viii): Mechanical power press(es) using part revolution clutches with clutch/brake control systems, which contained both single and continuous functions, were not designed so that completion of continuous circuits could be supervised:      The following mechanical power presses had the key left in the selector mode control switch.      a. Press #2083: Rousselle 25 ton mechanical press located in bay 1;      b. Press #2084: National Max 700 ton mechanical press located in bay 5.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $1,750 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.217(c)(3)(vii)(d): Two hand controls used with mechanical power press(es) were not fixed in position so that only a supervisor or safety engineer was capable of relocating the controls:        The pedestal mounted two-hand controls of the National Max mechanical press, located (approx.) 1-1.5 inches from the base of the feeding (slide) table to the two-hand controls was not fixed in position.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 26, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $1,750 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.217(d)(9)(i): The employer did not establish a die setting procedure for mechanical power press(es) that would ensure compliance with 29 CFR 1910.217(c):          The employer did not develop, implement and ensure that die setting procedures were established at the facility and strictly adhere to by those employees who are responsible for completing set-up and/or maintenance activities of the company's mechanical power presses. Energy sources used at the facility include, but are not limited to; electricity, gravity, hydraulic energy (etc.).

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 26, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.217(e)(1)(i): Periodic and regular inspections of each power press were not conducted to ensure that all of its parts, auxillary equipment, and safeguards, including clutch/brake mechanism, anti-repeat feature, and single-stroke mechanism, are in a safe operating condition and adjustment:          On or before 11/19/2014, monthly power press inspections were inadequate in that they did not included inspection of the single stroke mechanism or anti-repeat feature.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 26, 2015

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $1,750 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.218(a)(2)(ii): There was no scheduling and recording of inspections of guards and point of operation protection devices at frequent and regular intervals for forging machine(s):            Although the employer implemented an auditing/inspection program for the forging machinery at the facility, it was deficient in that, the records did not include the required information (e.g.: signature of the person who performed the inspection and the serial number, or other identifier of the equipment).

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.218(h)(4): Tongs were not of sufficient length to clear the body of the worker in case of kickback, and shall not have sharp handle ends:       On or about 11/05/2014, the hand tool (a 15" porta-bar) used during forging activities was of an insufficient length and did not prevent the operator from placing any part of the body into the machinery.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,200 · Current $2,100 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.219(b)(1): Flywheel(s) with parts seven feet or less above floor(s) or platform(s) were not guarded in accordance with the requirements specified in 29 CFR 1910.219(b)(1)(i) through (b)(1)(iv)(a):         The National Max press (company #2084) located in bay 5, did not have the inner flywheel guarded by a full enclosure. Operators and other employees, who access the area, were not protected from hazards created by the unguarded flywheel assembly, which measured approximately 4 ft. 8 inch from the unit to ground level.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

Apr 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.243(c)(1): Abrasive wheel(s) were used on portable grinder(s) which were not provided with safety guard(s) meeting the requirements specified in 29 CFR 1910.243(c)(1) through (c)(4):      On or about 11/19/2014, the portable hand grinder used by an employee to deburr machined parts did not have guarding.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(c)(4): Faceplates for flush-mounted snap switches. Snap switches mounted in boxes did not have faceplates installed so as to completely cover the opening and seat against the finished surface:        An electrical outlet box, located in the maintenance office, was missing the protective cover/faceplate.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 26, 2015

Penalty

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

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:         The employer did not develop, implement, or maintain a written hazard communication program at the site. Chemicals used at the site include, but are not limited to, hydraulic fluid, cutting oils, and coolants.

Issued

Apr 8, 2015

Abate by

May 4, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(5)(i): The employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged or marked with the identity of the hazardous chemical(s) contained therein:       On and before 11/19/2014, the employer did not ensure that chemicals used at the facility were properly labeled.  During the walk- around inspection 55 gallons drums containing chemicals such as, lubing oils were not labeled or marked with the chemical contained therein.