OSHA Inspection: J. BROOMFIELD & SONS CO., INC.

Issued

Mar 28, 2016

Abate by

May 11, 2016

Penalty

Initial $400 · Current $400

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1903.19(c)(1): The employer did not certify to OSHA, within 10 calendar days after the abatement date, that the cited violation had been abated:  As of March 25, 2016, the employer had not certified to OSHA that the abatement was completed for the violations from Inspection 1068862, issued on 11-10-15, with a final order date of 12-29-15.

Issued

Mar 28, 2016

Abate by

May 11, 2016

Penalty

Initial $400 · Current $400

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1903.19(d)(1): The employer did not submit to the Agency documents demonstrating that abatement is complete for each willful or repeat violation and for any serious violation for which the Agency indicates in the citation that such abatement documentation is required.  As of March 25, 2016, the employer had not certified to OSHA that the abatement was completed for the violations from Inspection 1068862, issued on 11-10-15, with a final order date of 12-29-15.

Issued

Nov 10, 2015

Abate by

Dec 7, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.37(a)(2): Exit routes were not arranged so that employees would not have to travel toward a high hazard area, unless the path of travel was effectively shielded from the high hazard area by suitable partitions or other physical barriers:    Bay exit: The employer did not ensure that employees did not have to travel toward a high hazard area in that a propane cylinder was located in close proximity to the bay exit door.

Issued

Nov 10, 2015

Abate by

Dec 29, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,000 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:    Establishment: On, or about, 06/08/2015 the employer did not ensure that the hopper basket used on the Mitsubishi forklift had the manufacturers prior written approval with the capacity, operation, and maintenance instruction plates, tags, or decals changed accordingly.

Issued

Nov 10, 2015

Abate by

Mar 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(1)(i): The employer did not ensure that each powered industrial truck operator is competent to operate a powered industrial truck safely, as demonstrated by the successful completion of the training and evaluation specified in this paragraph (l):     Establishment: On, or about, 06/08/2015 the employer did not ensure that the powered industrial truck operators were competent to operate a powered industrial truck safely, as demonstrated by the successful completion of the training and evaluation.

Issued

Nov 10, 2015

Abate by

Mar 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(4)(i): Refresher training, including an evaluation of the effectiveness of that training, shall be conducted as required by paragraph (l)(4)(ii) to ensure that the operator has the knowledge and skills needed to operate the powered industrial truck safely:     Establishment: On, or about, 06/08/2015 the employer did not ensure that an evaluation of each powered industrial truck operator's performance was conducted at least once every three years.

Issued

Nov 10, 2015

Abate by

Mar 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(q)(7): Industrial trucks were not examined at least daily before being placed in service:     Establishment: On, or about, 06/08/2015 the employer did not ensure that the forklift operator's perform daily examinations of the forklifts at least daily.

Issued

Nov 10, 2015

Abate by

Dec 7, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.215(a)(2): Abrasive wheel(s) used on grinding machinery were not provided with safety guard(s) which covered the spindle end, nut, flange projections:     Maintenance Bay: On, or about, 06/08/2015 employees were not protected from the rotating spindle ends of the Craftsman ¼ HP bench grinder by guarding.

Issued

Nov 10, 2015

Abate by

Dec 7, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:  Shop Floor: On, or about, 06/08/2015 the employer did not ensure that the work rest for the Craftsman 1/4 HP bench grinder was adjusted to a maximum of 1/8 inch from the wheel.

Issued

Nov 10, 2015

Abate by

Dec 7, 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:  Shop Floor: On, or about, 06/08/2015 the employer did not ensure that the tongue guard for the Craftsman 1/4 HP bench grinder was adjusted to a maximum of 1/4 inch from the wheel.

Issued

Nov 10, 2015

Abate by

Dec 7, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.215(d)(3): The contact surface(s) of wheel(s), blotter(s) or flange(s) on grinding machine(s) were not flat and free or foreign matter:   Shop Floor: On, or about, 06/08/2015 the employer did not ensure that all contact surfaces of the wheels on the Craftsman ¼ HP bench grinder were flat.

Issued

Nov 10, 2015

Abate by

Feb 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,000 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:    Establishment: On, or about, 06/08/2015 where employees are exposed to chemical hazards the employer did not develop and implement a written hazard communication program for those employees who are exposed to chemical hazards.

Issued

Nov 10, 2015

Abate by

Feb 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2): The employer did not verify that the required workplace hazard assessment has been performed through a written certification that identifies the workplace evaluated, the person certifying that the evaluation has been performed, the date(s) of the hazard assessment, and, which identifies the document as a certification of hazard assessment:    Establishment: On, or about, 06/08/2015 the employer did not verify in writing that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed.

Issued

Nov 10, 2015

Abate by

Feb 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c): The employer did not develop and implement a written respiratory protection program with required worksite-specific procedures and elements for required respirator use:    Establishment: On, or about, 06/08/2015 the employer did not develop and implement a written respiratory protection program for those employees required to wear tight-fitting respirators during cutting and welding operations.