OSHA Inspection: WRIGHT PALLET, INC.

Issued

May 2, 2016

Abate by

Jun 3, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,850 · Current $3,850

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii): The procedures did not clearly and specifically outline the scope, purpose, authorization, rules, and techniques to be utilized for the control of hazardous energy, and the means to enforce compliance.    a. Wright Pallet, Inc. located in Lima, Ohio:  On or about December 2, 2015, the employer did not ensure the machine specific lockout procedures developed for the break down saws included procedures for isolating and locking out the pneumatic energy.

Issued

May 2, 2016

Abate by

Jun 3, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,850 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(6)(i): The employer did not conduct a periodic inspection of the energy control procedure at least annually to ensure that the procedure and the requirements of this standard are being followed.    a. Wright Pallet, Inc. located in Lima, Ohio:  On or about December 2, 2015, the employer did not ensure the machine specific lockout procedures were reviewed on an annual basis.

Issued

May 2, 2016

Abate by

May 11, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,850 · Current $1,925 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(5)(ii)(B): Lockout and tagout devices were not standardized within the facility in at least one of the following criteria: Color; shape; or size; and additionally, in the case of tagout devices, print and format shall be standardized.    a. Wright Pallet, Inc. located in Lima, Ohio:  On or about December 10, 2015, the employer did not ensure lockout locks used by employees to lockout the break down saws were standardized.

Issued

May 2, 2016

Abate by

May 11, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(5)(ii)(D): Lockout devices and tagout devices did not indicate the identity of the employee applying the device(s).  a. Wright Pallet, Inc. located in Lima, Ohio:  On or about December 10, 2015 the employer did not ensure lockout devices used by employees to lockout the plug end of the break down saws indicated the identity of the employee applying the lockout devices.

Issued

May 2, 2016

Abate by

May 11, 2016

Penalty

Initial $5,390 · Current $4,300 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(n)(6): The driver did not look in the direction of, and keep a clear view of the path of travel.    a. Wright Pallet, Inc. located in Lima, Ohio:  On or about December 2, 2015, the employer did not ensure employees carrying loads of pallets in the facility were traveling with an unobstructed view.

Issued

May 2, 2016

Abate by

May 11, 2016

Penalty

Initial $4,620 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(o)(1): Stable or safely arranged loads were not handled. Caution was not exercised when handling off-center loads which cannot be centered.    a. Wright Pallet, Inc. located in Lima, Ohio:  On or about December 2, 2015, the employer did not ensure employees using forklifts to move loads of pallets in the production area were handling stable loads.

Issued

May 2, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,850 · Current $1,925 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(3)(ii): The point of operation of machines whose operation exposed an employee to injury, was not guarded. The guarding device was not in conformity with any appropriate standards therefor, or, in the absence of applicable specific standards, was not designed and constructed as to prevent the operator from having any part of his body in the danger zone during the operating cycle.    a. Wright Pallet, Inc. located in Lima, Ohio:  On or about December 2, 2015, the employer did not ensure the plater machine was properly guarded to prevent employee exposures to crushing injuries between the hydraulic horizontal ram and the pallet.

Issued

May 2, 2016

Abate by

May 11, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,850 · Current $1,925 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.253(b)(2)(ii): Inside of buildings, cylinders were not stored in a well-protected, well-ventilated, dry location, at least 20 (6.1 m) feet from highly combustible materials such as oil or excelsior. Cylinders were not stored in definitely assigned places away from elevators, stairs, or gangways. Assigned storage spaces were not located where cylinders would not be knocked over or damaged by passing or falling objects, or subject to tampering by unauthorized persons. Cylinders were not kept in ventilated enclosures.    a. Wright Pallet, Inc. located in Lima, Ohio:  On or about December 2, 2015, the employer did not ensure a full compressed gas cylinder of oxygen, located adjacent to the entrance to the maintenance shop, was stored in an area where it would not be knocked over.

Issued

May 2, 2016

Abate by

May 18, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,850 · Current $1,925 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.332(b)(1): Employees were not trained in and familiar with the safety-related work practices required by 1910.331 through 1910.335 that pertain to their respective job assignments.    a. Wright Pallet, Inc. located in Lima, Ohio:  On or about December 2, 2015, the employer did not ensure employees exposed to electrical shock and arc flash hazards when working on 480 volt electrical systems were provided training on the following topics:        1. How to inspect electrical protective equipment;        2. Limitations of electrical testing equipment;        3. How to inspect electrical testing equipment.

Issued

May 2, 2016

Abate by

May 18, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,850 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.333(b)(2)(i): The employer did not maintain a written copy of the procedures outlined in paragraph (b)(2) and did not make it available for inspection by employees and by the Assistant Secretary of Labor and his or her authorized representatives.    a. Wright Pallet, Inc. located in Lima, Ohio:  On or about December 2, 2015 the employer did not develop written electrical safety procedures for electrical equipment.  Employees are exposed to electrical shock and arc flash hazards when working on equipment operating up to 480 volts.

Issued

May 2, 2016

Abate by

May 18, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,850 · Current $1,925 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.335(a)(1)(i): Employees working in areas where there are potential electrical hazards were not provided with, or did not use, electrical protective equipment that was appropriate for the specific parts of the body to be protected and for the work to be performed.     a. Wright Pallet, Inc. located in Lima, Ohio:  On or about November 10, 2015 an employee working on the 480 volt electrical system for the bandsaw was not provided with electrical protective equipment when exposed to potentially energized conductors.    b. Wright Pallet, Inc. located in Lima, Ohio:  On or about December 9, 2015 an employee working on the 480 volt electrical system for the conveyor line was not provided with electrical protective equipment when exposed to potentially energized conductors.