OSHA Inspection: REFLECTIVE CONCEPTS, INC.

Issued

Jan 22, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2016

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,700 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:    (a) A written Energy Control Program (Lockout/Tagout) was not developed to ensure employee(s) who perform maintenance, repair, press set-up and other associated mechanical diagnostic procedures on but not limited to hydraulic presses, press brakes, aluminum laser cutters, shears, rivet machines and air compressor were not exposed to unexpected energizing, startup or release of stored energy from mechanical equipment.

Issued

Jan 22, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(i): Procedures are not developed, documented and utilized for the control of potentially hazardous energy when employees were engaged in activities covered by this section:   (a) Written machine/equipment specific energy control procedures are not developed, documented, and utilized for authorized personnel to follow when performing maintenance, repair, press set-up and other associated mechanical diagnostic procedures on hydraulic presses, press brakes, aluminum laser cutters, shears, rivet machines and air compressor equipment.

Issued

Jan 22, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,500 · Current $1,900 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(1)(i):     The employer did not ensure that each powered industrial truck operator was competent to operate a powered industrial truck safely, as demonstrated by the successful completion of the training and evaluation specified in this paragraph (l).    (a) Employees were allowed to operate forklifts to handle materials and press dies without being trained and/or evaluated in their safe and proper use.

Issued

Jan 22, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2016

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,700 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1): Machine guarding was not provided to protect operator(s) and other employees from hazard(s) created by unguarded foot treadles:    (a) Chicago Dries & Krump Mechanical Press Break, Serial No. 193000: Employees operated the press break with a foot treadle that was not guarded from unintended operation, and effective point of operation guarding was not used exposing employees to an amputation hazard.    (b) Chicago Dries & Krump Mechanical Press Break, Serial No. 18752: Employees operated the press break with a foot treadle that was not guarded from unintended operation, and effective point of operation guarding was not used exposing employees to an amputation hazard.    (c) Chicago Dries & Krump Mechanical Press Break, Serial No. 15226: Employees operated the press break with a foot treadle that was not guarded from unintended operation, and effective point of operation guarding was not used exposing employees to an amputation hazard.

Issued

Jan 22, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2016

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,700 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):    (a) National Rivet & MFG. C0. Rivet Machine, Model 500, Serial No. 4106: The riveting machine did not have the point of operation guarded exposing employees to a crushing and amputation hazard.    (b) National Rivet & MFG. C0. Rivet Machine, Model 500, Serial No. 394: The riveting machine did not have the point of operation guarded exposing employees to a crushing and amputation hazard.    (c) National Rivet & MFG. C0. Rivet Machine, Model 500, Serial No. 1878: The riveting machine did not have the point of operation guarded exposing employees to a crushing and amputation hazard.    (d) National Rivet & MFG. C0. Rivet Machine, Model 500, Serial No. 922: The riveting machine did not have the point of operation guarded exposing employees to a crushing and amputation hazard.    (e) National Rivet & MFG. C0. Rivet Machine, Model 500, Serial No. 441: The riveting machine did not have the point of operation guarded exposing employees to a crushing and amputation hazard.    (f) National Rivet & MFG. C0. Rivet Machine, Model 500, Serial No. 1239: The riveting machine did not have the point of operation guarded exposing employees to a crushing and amputation hazard.    (g) National Rivet & MFG. C0. Rivet Machine, Model 500, Serial No. 890: The riveting machine did not have the point of operation guarded exposing employees to a crushing and amputation hazard.    (h) National Rivet & MFG. C0. Rivet Machine, Model 500, Serial No. 1066: The riveting machine did not have the point of operation guarded exposing employees to a crushing and amputation hazard.

Issued

Jan 22, 2016

Abate by

Mar 10, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(iv):   The details of the hazard communication program developed by the employer, did not include an explanation of the labels received on shipped containers and the workplace labeling system used by their employer; the safety data sheet, including the order of information and how employee could obtain and use the appropriate hazard information:  (a) Employees in production operations and maintenance are exposed to but not limited to greases, oils, and lubricants such as but not limited to WD 40. Training was not provided regarding the new label elements (product identifier, signal word, pictogram, hazard statement(s), precautionary requirements) and new safety data sheet (SDS) format.