OSHA Inspection: SIENKO PRECISION, LLC

Issued

2015-02-13 00:00:00

Abate by

2015-03-20 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3500.00 · Current $3500.00

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 the forklift in the event of a tip over which are causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees.        This violation occurred on or about January 30, 2015, and at times prior thereto, throughout the facility where employees were exposed to struck-by hazard while operating a Nissan 50 brand forklift without donning a seatbelt.      Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 1903.19, within ten (10) calendar days of the abatement date, the employer must submit documentation describing the actions it is taking to ensure that employees are not exposed to crushed-by hazards.

Issued

2015-02-13 00:00:00

Abate by

2015-03-20 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $4900.00 · Current $4900.00

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.  This violation was observed on or about January 30, 2015, in the manual machine building where an employee was exposed to caught-by and struck-by hazards when operating the Toolmex TUR-63A 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

2015-02-13 00:00:00

Abate by

2015-04-03 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3500.00 · Current $3500.00

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 30, 2015, in the new machine shop where an employee was exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating the OKK Vertical Mill #2 without an interlock to guard the point of operation.      b. This violation was observed on or about January 30, 2015, in the second machine shop where an employee was exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating the OKK MCV 660 vertical Mill #1 without an interlock to guard the point of operation.      c. This violation was observed on or about January 30, 2015, in the second machine shop where an employee was exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating the Ikegai TU30B Lathe without an interlock to guard the point of operation.      d. This violation was observed on or about January 30, 2015, in the CNC shop where an employee was exposed to a caught-in hazard when operating the Yama Seiki #19 CNC without an interlock to guard the point of operation.      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

2015-02-13 00:00:00

Abate by

2015-03-20 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2800.00 · Current $2800.00

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 30, 2015, in the middle machine shop where employees were exposed to a struck by hazard when using compressed air to clean metal shavings from milled parts without the air pressure used for cleaning being reduced 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.