OSHA Inspection: ARRINGTON SAWMILL, INC.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Mar 17, 2016

Penalty

Initial $5,400 · Current $3,240 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.22(a)(1): All places of employment, passageways, storerooms or service rooms were not kept clean and orderly or in a sanitary condition.    a) Sawmill building 1, the employer stored tools on the elevated walkway leading to the Cooper sawmill, which exposed employees to trip and fall hazards.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

Hazardous substances 8110

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(b)(1): When employees were subjected to sound exceeding those listed in Table G-16, feasible administrative or engineering controls were not utilized:     The employer did not implement feasible administrative or engineering controls when employees, who worked at the sawmills, were subjected to sound exceeding the permissible noise exposures:     a) A chipperman employee was exposed to continuous noise levels at 250.8% of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average(TWA) permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 90 dBA. The equivalent level of 250.8% is approximately 96.6 dBA. Sampling was performed for 308 minutes during one shift. Zero exposure was assumed for 172 minutes not sampled.         b) A lumber stacker employee was exposed to continuous noise levels at 231.2% of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average(TWA) permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 90dBA. The equivalent level of 231.2% is approximately 96.0 dBA. Sampling was performed for 317 minutes during one shift. Zero exposure was assumed for  163 minutes not sampled.       c) An edger employee was exposed to continuous noise levels at 250.6% of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average(TWA) permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 90dBA. The equivalent level of 250.6% is approximately 96.6 dBA. Sampling was performed for 400 minutes during one shift. Zero exposure was assumed for  80 minutes not sampled.      d)  A chipperman employee was exposed to continuous noise levels at 311.5% of the allowable 8 hour time-weighted average(TWA) permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 90dBA. The equivalent level of 311.5% is approximately 98.2 dBA. Sampling was performed for 372 minutes during one shift. Zero exposure was assumed for 108 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

Hazardous substances 8111

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(c)(1): The employer did not administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.95(c) through (o) whenever employee noise exposures equaled or exceeded an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) sound level of 85 dBA:    The employer did not administer a hearing conservation program for employees, who worked in the wooden product manufacturing area, and were exposed to noise that had exceeded an 8-hour TWA of 85 dBA:     a) A chipperman employee was exposed to continuous noise levels at 252% of the permissible 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) . The equivalent level of 252% is approximately 96.6 dBA. Sampling was performed for 308 minutes during one shift. Zero exposure was assumed for the 172 minutes not sampled;    b) A newman saw operator employee was exposed to continuous noise levels at 105.8% of the permissible 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) . The equivalent level of 105.8% is approximately 90.4 dBA. Sampling was performed for 373 minutes during one shift. Zero exposure was assumed for the 107 minutes not sampled;    c) A maintenance employee was exposed to continuous noise levels at 94.3% of the permissible 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) . The equivalent level of 94.3% is approximately 89.5 dBA. Sampling was performed for 386 minutes during one shift. Zero exposure was assumed for the 94 minutes not sampled;    d) A lumber stacker employee was exposed to continuous noise levels at 234.4% of the permissible 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) . The equivalent level of 234.4% is approximately 96.1 dBA. Sampling was performed for 317 minutes during one shift. Zero exposure was assumed for the 163 minutes not sampled;    e) A headrig sawmen employee was exposed to continuous noise levels at 114.5% of the permissible 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) . The equivalent level of 114.5% is approximately 90.9 dBA. Sampling was performed for 317 minutes during one shift. Zero exposure was assumed for the 107 minutes not sampled;    f) An edger employee was exposed to continuous noise levels at 253% of the permissible 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) . The equivalent level of 253% is approximately 96.6 dBA. Sampling was performed for 400 minutes during one shift. Zero exposure was assumed for the 80 minutes not sampled;    g) A chipperman employee was exposed to continuous noise levels at 318.9% of the permissible 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) . The equivalent level of 318.9% is approximately 98.3 dBA. Sampling was performed for 372 minutes during one shift. Zero exposure was assumed for the 108 minutes not sampled.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1): The employer did not assess the workplace to determine if hazards were present, or were likely to be present, which necessitated the use of personal protective equipment:     a) The employer did not to assess the workplace to determine if hazards were present, or are likely to be present, which necessitate the use of eye, face, head and hand protection when employees are performing work on energized electrical equipment.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.335(a)(1)(i): Employees working in areas where there were potential electrical hazards were not using electrical protective equipment that was appropriate for the specific parts of the body to be protected and for the work to be performed:     a) Sawmill building 4, employees, who performed work on energized electrical equipment, were not protected from the hazards of an arc flash by wearing rubber-insulating gloves and arc-rated clothing.  `

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.335(a)(1)(v): Employees exposed to the danger of injury to the eyes or face from electric arcs or flashes or from flying objects resulting from electrical explosion did not wear protective equipment for the eyes or face:      a) Sawmill building 4, employees performing work on energized electrical equipment were not provided with eye or face protection from electric arcs or flashes.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.146(c)(1): The employer did not evaluate the workplace to determine if any spaces were permit-required confined spaces:     a) Sawmill building 2, employees were required to enter a permit required confined space on a daily basis to clean the dust chain pit without evaluating the atmospheric and/or physical hazards associated with making the entry.     b) Sawmill building 4, employees were required to enter a permit required confined space on a daily basis to clean the dust chain pit without evaluating the atmospheric and/or physical hazards associated with making the entry.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.146(c)(2): The employer did not inform exposed employees, by posting danger signs or by any other equally effective means, of the existence and location of and the danger posed by the permit spaces:    a) Sawmill building 2, Permit required confined spaces were not marked or identified by other effective means to warn employees who were required to enter a permit required confined space to clean the dust chain pit.     b) Sawmill building 4, Permit required confined spaces were not marked or identified by other effective means to warn employees who were required to enter a permit required confined space to clean the dust chain pit.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.146(c)(4): When the employer decided that its employees would enter permit spaces, the employer did not develop and implement a written permit space entry program that complied with 29 CFR 1910.146:    a) Sawmill building 2, employees were required to enter a permit required confined space to clean the dust chain pit without using the safety procedures that would be outlined in a permit required confined space entry program.     b) Sawmill building 4, employees were required to enter a permit required confined space to clean the dust chain pit without using the safety procedures that would be outlined in a permit required confined space entry program.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 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) On or about August 27, 2015 Plant wide (Sawmill building 1 and 3, 2,4)  the employer did to establish an energy control program consisting of energy control specific procedures, employee training and periodic inspections to protect employees, who perform service and maintenance work on machines and equipment, from the unexpected release of energy, start-up or release of storage energy likely to cause injury. Equipment that employees clean, service and maintain include but are not limited to changing saw blades, servicing and cleaning conveyors and augers.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(c)(2)(viii): The employer did not ensure that only approved power-operated industrial trucks designated as DY, EE, or EX were used in locations which are hazardous because of the presence of easily ignitable fibers or flyings but in which such fibers or flyings are not likely to be in suspension in the air in quantities sufficient to produce ignitable mixtures:    a) Sawmill building 4, employees used a Toyota, 7FDU20, forklift truck in areas that contained combustible dust. The forklift truck, which was not designated as DY, EE or EX, was not approved for use in atmospheres in which combustible dust was present.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Mar 17, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(1)(ii): Prior to permitting an employee to operate a powered industrial truck (except for training purposes), the employer did not ensure that each operator had successfully completed the training required by 29 CFR 1910.178(l):    a) In Sawmill building 1 and ,3 employees operated Toyota 7FDU20 forklift trucks without having first completed training of consisting formal instruction, practical training, and an evaluation of the operator's performance in the workplace;    b) In Sawmill building 2 employees operated Toyota 7FDU20 forklift trucks without having first completed training of consisting formal instruction, practical training, and an evaluation of the operator's performance in the workplace;    c) In Sawmill building 4 employees operated Toyota 7FDU20 forklift trucks without having first completed training of consisting formal instruction, practical training, and an evaluation of the operator's performance in the workplace.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(6): The employer did not certify that each operator has been trained and evaluated as required by this paragraph (l):    a) In Sawmill building 1 and ,3 employees operated Toyota 7FDU20 forklift trucks without having first been trained and evaluated;    b) In Sawmill building 2 employees operated Toyota 7FDU20 forklift trucks without having first without having first been trained and evaluated;    c) In Sawmill building 4 employees operated Toyota 7FDU20 forklift trucks without having first been trained and evaluated.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Mar 17, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 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:    (a) On or about August 27, 2015 at sawmill building 1 and 3, during maintenance operations, at least one employee was using a unguarded Morbark 58 inch 6 knife chipper, was exposed to amputation and point of operation hazards.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.219(d)(1): Pulley(s) with part(s) seven feet or less from the floor or work platform were not guarded in accordance with the requirements specified in 29 CFR 1910.219(m) and (o):     The employer does not guard all pulleys seven (7) feet or less from the floor or working platform:     a) Sawmill building 1 and 3,  where employees were not protected from the ingoing nip-point while working near the dust chain without a guard covering the pulley.     b) Sawmill building 2, where employees were not protected from the ingoing nip-point while working near the dust chain without a guard covering the pulley.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.219(e)(1)(i): Horizontal belts which had both runs seven feet or less from the floor level were not guarded with a guard that extended to at least fifteen inches above the belt:     The employer does not guard all belts seven (7) feet or less from the floor or working platform:      a) Sawmill building 1 and 3, where employees were not protected from the ingoing nip-point while working near the dust chain without a guard covering the belt.     b) Sawmill building 2, where employees were not protected from the ingoing nip-point while working near the dust chain without a guard covering the belt.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 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.:     a) Sawmill building 1 and 3, employees used the air chucks to clean off clothing, tables, material and work areas and were exposed to eye injuries from flying objects and debris.  The dead-end pressure of the air chuck employees used to clean with was not reduced to less the 30 psi. Employees used pneumatic hand tools that operated at 80-psi on the same air lines.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.265(c)(4)(iv): Elevated walk(s) and runway(s), 4 feet or more from floor level, were not provided with a standard railing:    a) Sawmill building 1 and 3 near 58 inch Morbark Chipper machine , employees were exposed to fall hazard of approximately 4 feet 5 inches while walking and working on an elevated walkway without standard railings.     Instance "b" Deleted    c) Sawmill building 4 near Morbark Chipper machine, employees to fall hazard of approximately 5 feet while walking and working on an elevated walkway without standard railings.     d) Sawmill building 2 near Chipper machine, employees were exposed to fall hazard of approximately 4 feet 5 inches while walking and working on an elevated walkway without standard railings.     e) Sawmill building 2 near Sawyer's operator station (dust chain pit) , employees were exposed to fall hazard of approximately 7 feet while walking and working on an elevated walkway without standard railings.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.265(c)(5)(ii): Stairways were not provided with a standard handrail on at least one side or on any open side:    a) Sawmill building 1 and 3 near the Debarker machine, employees were not provided with standard handrail on at least one side or any open side on the stairway.;    b) Sawmill building 4, near the Infeed Deck large chop saw, employees were not provided with standard handrail on at least one side or any open side on the stairway.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.265(e)(2)(v)(b): Feed rolls shall be enclosed by a cover over the top, front, and open ends except where guarded by location. Drive mechanism to feed rolls shall be enclosed.     a) Sawmill building 2, employees performing gang saw operations were not protected from the infeed roller machine. Employees were exposed to  amputation, caught-in-between and struck by hazards.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(f)(2): Each service, feeder, and branch circuit, at its disconnecting means or overcurrent device, was not legibly marked to indicate its purpose, nor located and arranged so the purpose was evident:     a) Sawmill building 1 and 3, in electrical panel box 1, the breakers were not labeled;     b) Sawmill building 2, an electrical panel box near Morgan Saw , the breakers were not labeled.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.307(c)(2)(i): Equipment in hazardous (classified) location(s) was not approved for the ignitable or combustible properties of the specific gas, vapor, dust, or fiber that was or could be present:     The employer did not ensure that equipment is approved for the class of location, and for the ignitable or combustible properties of the saw dust:     a) Sawmill building 4,  Employees operated a horizontal band saws and other specialty saws  which dispensed saw dust (Class II combustible dust). The operation of the horizontal band saws and other specialty saws created the release of the saw dust intermittently throughout the day. General purpose wiring, breaker panel boxes, disconnect switches, and receptacles were not dust-tight ignition proof and approved for Class II locations.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Apr 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $6,300 · Current $3,780 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.333(a)(2): When the exposed live parts were not de-energized (i.e., for reasons of increased or additional hazards or infeasibility), other safety-related work practices were not used to protect employees who could be exposed to the electrical hazards involved:    a) The employer did not ensure that safety-related work practices were used by employees when testing or troubleshooting energized electrical circuits.

Issued

Feb 22, 2016

Abate by

Mar 17, 2016

Penalty

Initial $900 · Current $540 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1904.29(a): A log of all Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses (OSHA Form 300), and/or the Summary of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses, (OSHA Form 300-A) and/or the Injury and Illness Incident Report (OSHA Form 301) or equivalent forms were not kept by the establishment:     a) The employer did not keep OSHA 300 log for the calendar year 2015 at the establishment.