OSHA Inspection: STAINLESS TANK & EQUIPMENT

Issued

Aug 30, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,180 · Current $1,908 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.146(e)(1): Before entry was authorized, the employer did not document the completion of measures required by 29 CFR 1910.146(d)(3) by preparing an entry permit:    On May 10, 2016, and at times prior to and thereafter, the employer did not ensure the completion of an permit required confined space entry permit when employees were conducting welding operations inside tanks.

Issued

Aug 30, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,180 · Current $1,908 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(a)(5): The powered industrial truck was equipped with front-end attachments other than factory installed attachments, however the employer did not request that the truck be marked to identify the attachments and show the approximate weight of the truck and attachment combination at maximum elevation with load laterally centered:    On or about March 10, 2016, and at times prior to and thereafter, the employer had a front end attachment used to lift and suspend tank cylinders and the truck was not marked to identify the attachment and the associated truck capacity.

Issued

Aug 30, 2016

Penalty

Initial $5,300 · Current $3,180 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.184(d): Sling(s) and fastenings were not inspected each day or during use and were not removed from service when damaged or defective:    On or about May 10, 2016, slings were not being inspected each day and were not removed from service when damaged, including but not limited to, the metal mesh sling located next to Inner Barrel.

Issued

Aug 30, 2016

Abate by

Jan 20, 2017

Penalty

Initial $5,300 · Current $3,180 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):    On or about May 10, 2016, the employer did not ensure that points of operation of machinery were guarded to prevent employees from having any part of their body in the danger zone during operation.    a) The Webb Roller, Model R3LR, was not guarded to prevent employees from having their hands near the ingoing nip points of the rollers during operation.    b) the Baykal hydraulic press brake did not have an active light curtain during operation to prevent employees from having their hands near the closing forming dies during operation.    c) The Reed Roller, Model 438, was not guarded to prevent employees from having their hands  near the ingoing nip points of the rollers during operation.    d) the Di-Acro Roller, was not guarded to prevent employees from having their hands near the ingoing nip points of the rollers during operation.

Issued

Aug 30, 2016

Abate by

Nov 21, 2016

Penalty

Initial $4,240 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.215(a)(1): Abrasive wheel(s) used on grinding machinery were not used with safety guard(s):    On May 10, 2016, and at times prior to and thereafter, the employer did not ensure that pneumatic rotary tools with abrasive cut off wheels were equipped with safety guards.

Issued

Aug 30, 2016

Abate by

Sep 21, 2016

Penalty

Initial $5,300 · Current $3,180 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(ii): Employee training did not include the physical and health hazards of the chemicals in the work area:    On May 10, 2016, and at times prior to and thereafter, the employer did not provide training to the employees on the hazards associated with the chemicals, including but not limited to, Autofroth 9300A Isocyanate, and Solv-All, which contain methylene diisocyanate and petroleum hydrocarbons, respectively.

Issued

Aug 30, 2016

Abate by

Sep 21, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): The respiratory protection program was not updated as necessary to reflect those changes in workplace conditions that affected respirator use:  On May 10, 2016, and at dates prior to and thereafter, the employer's written respiratory protection program was not updated to include the respiratory requirements associated with spraying foam insulation inside the interstitial space on the insulated tanks.

Issued

Aug 30, 2016

Abate by

Oct 3, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(5): Respiratory protection retraining was not conducted annually:    On May 10, 2016, and at times prior to and thereafter, the employer did not conduct respiratory protection training annually.