OSHA Inspection: J&F MACHINE SHOP, INC.

Issued

Feb 6, 2015

Abate by

Mar 20, 2015

Penalty

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

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.36(d)(1): Employee(s) were not able to open an exit route door from the inside at all times without keys, tools, or special knowledge:     The employer does ensure that employees are able to open an exit route door from the inside without keys, tools, or special knowledge.  This hazard was observed on or about January 29 2015, in the production area where employees were exposed to emergency egress hazards when attempting to use an exit route door without being able to open the exit route door from the inside without keys, tools, or special knowledge.       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 employees are able to open an exit route door from the inside without keys, tools, or special knowledge.

Issued

Feb 6, 2015

Abate by

Apr 6, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 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 makes modifications to forklifts that affect its capacity and safe operation without the manufacturer's written approval. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, when employees were exposed to struck-by hazards while working on or around a Hyster forklift that had a hole cut into both forks without having this modification approved by the manufacturer.       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 all modifications made to powered industrial trucks, that can affect the capacity and safe operation, are approved in writing by the manufacturer.

Issued

Feb 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 26, 2015

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:     The employer does not protect the operator and other employees in the machine area from hazards such as those created by rotating parts and flying chips.       a. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop where an employee was exposed to caught-by and struck-by hazards when operating the #70 lathe without the lathe being guarded to protect the operator from rotating parts and flying chips.       b. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop where an employee was exposed to caught-by and struck-by hazards when operating the #72 Poreba lathe without the lathe being guarded to protect the operator from rotating parts and flying chips.       c. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop where an employee was exposed to caught-by and struck-by hazards when operating the #5 Kingston lathe without the lathe being guarded to protect the operator from rotating parts and flying chips.       d. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop where an employee was exposed to caught-by and struck-by hazards when operating the #36 Kingston lathe without using the provided guard to protect the operator from rotating parts and flying chips.       e. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop where an employee was exposed to a struck-by hazard when operating the #51 band saw without the saw being guarded to protect the operator from the rotating parts.       f. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop where an employee was exposed to caught-by and struck-by hazards when operating the Yamazak Machine Works Mazak Oil Country lathe without the lathe being guarded to protect the operator from rotating parts and flying chips.       g. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop where an employee was exposed to caught-by and struck-by hazards when operating the #8 Yamazak Machine Works lathe without the lathe being guarded to protect the operator from rotating parts and flying chips.       h. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop where an employee was exposed to caught-by and struck-by hazards when operating the Gisholt #71 lathe without the lathe being guarded to protect the operator from rotating parts and flying chips.       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 operators and other employees in the machine area are protected from hazards such as those created by rotating parts and flying chips.

Issued

Feb 6, 2015

Abate by

Apr 6, 2015

Penalty

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

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):     The employer does not guard the point of operation of machines whose operation exposes employees to injury.         a. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop the where employees are exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating the Bridgeport Drill Press #14 without point of operation guarding.       b. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop the where employees are exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating the Bridgeport Drill Press #16 without point of operation guarding.       c. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop the where employees are exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating the Bridgeport Drill Press #17 without point of operation guarding.       d. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop the where employees are exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating the Bridgeport Drill Press #18 without point of operation guarding.       e. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop the where employees are exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating the Bridgeport Drill Press #1180171 without point of operation guarding.       f. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop the where employees are exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating the Bridgeport Drill Press #99633 without point of operation guarding.       g. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop where employees are exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating the Excel CNC Mill without point of operation guarding.       h. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop where employees are exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating the Excel 810 #8 CNC Mill without point of operation guarding.       i. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop where employees are exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating the Excel PMC 10T 24 CNC Mill without point of operation guarding.       j. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in the production shop where employees are exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating the Excel 50 CNC Mill without point of operation guarding.       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 the point of operation of machines whose operation exposes employees to injury is guarded.

Issued

Feb 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 13, 2015

Penalty

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

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.242(b): Compressed air used for cleaning purposes was not reduced to less than 30 p.s.i.:     The employer does ensure that air pressure used for cleaning is reduced to less than 30 psi.  This hazard was observed on or about January 29. 2015, in the production area where employees were exposed to a struck by hazard when using compressed air to clean metal shavings from milled and lathed parts without the employer having reduced the air pressure used for cleaning to less than 30 psi.         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 air pressure used for cleaning is reduced to less than 30 psi.

Issued

Feb 6, 2015

Abate by

Feb 13, 2015

Penalty

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

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(b)(1)(ii): Unused openings in boxes, cabinets, or fittings were not effectively closed:    The employer does not effectively close unused openings in breaker cabinets where there are unused openings.       a. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in electrical panel 1 where employees were exposed to an electrical hazard when accessing the breaker panel without blanks being installed where there was unused openings.      b. This violation was observed on or about January 29, 2015, in electrical panel 3 where employees were exposed to an electrical hazard when accessing the breakers without blanks being installed where there was unused openings.       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 all unused openings are effectively closed.