OSHA Inspection: HAHN & CLAY

Issued

Apr 23, 2015

Abate by

Feb 29, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(1): The employer did not establish a program consisting of an energy control procedure, employee training and periodic inspections to ensure that before any employee performed any servicing or maintenance on a machine or equipment where the unexpected energizing, startup or release of stored energy could occur and cause injury, the machine or equipment shall be isolated from the energy source and rendered inoperative.    The employer does not provide employees with a program entailing energy control procedures, training, and periodic inspections for conducting lockout/tagout activities when performing setup and maintenance on several machines throughout the machine shop. These machines include several manual vertical lathes: King #354, King #316, King #379, King #383; Cincinnati Bickford Rotary Drill Press #304, American Hole Rotary Drill Press #120,  Giddings & Lewis Horizontal Boring Mill; and several manual metal lathes to include,   LeBlond #311, American Lathe #315, LeBlond #140, American Lathe #315, Turn-nado, Progress #119, and Tuda #336.  This violation occurred on or about April 8, 2015, and at times prior thereto, in the machine shop where authorized and affected personnel were exposed to electrical and crushed-by hazards without energy control procedures, training, and periodic inspections for the isolation of hazardous energy.      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 establish a program consisting of an energy control procedure, employee training and periodic inspections.

Issued

Apr 23, 2015

Abate by

May 8, 2015

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,150 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 guard all the rotating parts of machines to protect the operator and other employees in the machine area.         a. This violation occurred on or about April 8, 2015, in the Machine Shop on the east side, where an employee was exposed to struck-by and caught-by hazards when operating a manual LeBlond #311, serial number 017849, metal lathe without a chuck guard.      b. This violation occurred on or about April 8, 2015, in the Machine Shop on the east side, where an employee was exposed to struck-by and caught-by hazards when operating a manual American Lathe #315, metal lathe without a chuck guard.      c. This violation occurred on or about April 8, 2015, in in the Machine Shop on the east side, where an employee was exposed to struck-by and caught-by hazards when operating a manual LeBlond #140 metal lathe without a chuck guard.    d. This violation occurred on or about April 8, 2015, in Machine Shop on the east side where an employee was exposed to struck-by and caught-by hazards when operating a manual American Lathe #315 metal lathe without a chuck guard.          e. This violation occurred on or about April 8, 2015, in Machine Shop on the east side where an employee was exposed to struck-by and caught-by hazards when operating a manual Turn-nado metal lathe without a chuck guard.      F  This violation occurred on or about April 8, 2015, in Machine Shop on the east side where an employee was exposed to struck-by and caught-by hazards when operating a manual Progress #119, serial number N625, metal lathe without a chuck guard.      g. This violation occurred on or about April 8, 2015, in Machine Shop on the west side where an employee was exposed to struck-by and caught-by hazards when operating a manual Tuda #336, manual metal lathe without a chuck guard.      h. This violation occurred on or about April 8, 2015, in Machine Shop on the west side where an employee was exposed to struck-by and caught-by hazards when operating a Cincinnati Hypro #307 vertical turret lathe without a chuck guard.      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 machines that have exposed rotating parts are guarded.

Issued

Apr 23, 2015

Abate by

May 8, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $2,250 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.219(c)(3): Vertical or inclined shafting seven (7) feet or less from floor or working platform was not enclosed with stationary casing(s).    The employer does not guard vertical shafting on machines with parts seven feet or less above floors whose operation exposes employees to injury.  This violation occurred on or about April 8, 2015, in the machine shop where employees were exposed to struck-by and caught-by hazards when operating a Cincinnati Hypro #307 vertical turret lathe without a stationary casing covering the rotating vertical shafts.    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 vertical or inclined shafting seven (7) feet or less from floor or working platform is enclosed with stationary casing(s).

Issued

Apr 23, 2015

Abate by

May 8, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,500 · Current $2,250 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1904.39(a): The employer did not report the in-patient hospitalization, amputation, or loss of an eye to OSHA within twenty-four (24) hours after the in-patient hospitalization of one or more employees or an employee's amputation or an employee's loss of an eye, as a result of a work-related incident     The employer does not report the in-patient hospitalization, amputation, or loss of an eye to OSHA within twenty-four (24) hours after the in-patient hospitalization of one or more employees or an employee's amputation or an employee's loss of an eye, as a result of a work-related incident. This violation occurred on or about April 1, 2015, where an employee was hospitalized from an injury to his leg from a struck-by and caught-in on a King #354, seven foot Vertical Turret Lathe, located in the machine shop without the employer reporting the work-related incident within 24 hours.    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 in-patient hospitalization, amputation, or loss of an eye is reported to OSHA within twenty-four (24) hours after the in-patient hospitalization of one or more employees or an employee's amputation or an employee's loss of an eye, as a result of a work-related incident.