OSHA Inspection: ROTEK INC.

Issued

2016-07-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-08-13 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $7000.00 · Current $7000.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(i): Procedures were not developed, documented and utilized for the control of potentially hazardous energy when employees were engaged in activities covered by this section:    On or about June 3, 2016, The employer developed a written energy control procedure (company procedure number H-57) for the servicing and maintaining of the remote floor expander. However supervisors did not enforce the energy control procedure as employees routinely serviced and maintained the hydraulic system. Employees tasked with changing the quick connect fittings of the hydraulic ram were not protected from the release of high pressure hydraulic fluid.

Issued

2016-07-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-08-13 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $7000.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(d): The established procedure for the application of energy control (the lockout or tagout procedures) did not cover the actions listed in and was not done in sequence as required by 29 CFR 1910.147(d)(1)-(6):    a) On or about June 3, 2016, the attempted removal and changing of the quick connect hydraulic fittings resulted in the violent release of hazardous energy because the company's procedure for shutdown was inadequate and not followed. Specifically, the following control measure elements and actions were not sequentially performed in accordance with the established procedure:        - Employees were not knowledgeable about the magnitude of the energy inside the hydraulic ram and the means to control the energy as required in 1910.147(d)(1). For example, the hydraulic system in place for the remote floor expander did not contain pressure gauges or other mechanisms to measure and identify the pressure within the system.         - An orderly shutdown to avoid increased hazards, as required by 1910.147(d)(2), was not performed because the company's general procedure (H-57) was not completely implemented by personnel. Management was aware that the hydraulic pressure could not be identified by the lack of pressure gauges and other mechanisms. No effort was made to remedy the problem so an orderly and safe shutdown could be accomplished.        - All energy isolating devices that were needed to control  the hazardous energy for the remote floor expander, as required by 1910.147(d)(3), were not operated in such a manner as to isolate the equipment from the energy sources. The electric disconnect fuse box for the system (RRM-1 ES34) was not operated in a manner to isolate the energy sources. Additionally, the system and procedures did not contain a device for the isolation of the hydraulic pressure.         - Residual energy was not relieved or otherwise rendered safe following the application of tagout devices for the remote floor expander energy isolating devices in accordance with 1910.147(d)(5)(i). This action could not be performed chronologically in that tagout devices were not affixed. Additionally, the hydraulic energy was not relieved or rendered safer prior to the task being performed.          - Prior to starting work on the hydraulic ram of the remote floor expander, authorized employees did not verify, in accordance with 1910.147(d)(6), that isolation and de-energization of the hydraulic ram had been accomplished.

Issued

2016-07-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-08-04 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $5000.00 · Current $5000.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(5)(ii)(D):   Lockout devices and tagout devices shall indicate the identity of the employee applying the device(s).    On or about June 9, 2016, the employer failed to ensure that the lock applied to disconnect RRM2-ES52 for the #6 preheat (400) identified the employee who applied the device.

Issued

2016-07-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-09-02 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $7000.00 · Current $7000.00

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 requirement of this standard were being followed:      On or about June 3, 2016, the employer failed to conduct a periodic inspection of the energy control procedures within the last year. The employer was not able to provide the periodic inspection since the LO/TO program at the company was put into place in 2011. Equipment at the facility includes but is not limited to ring expanders, presses, ovens, mills, and hydraulic equipment. Hazardous energy sources include but are not limited to electrical, pneumatic, hydraulic, thermal, and mechanical.