OSHA Inspection: WAGNER LOGISTICS

Issued

Jul 28, 2016

Abate by

Aug 17, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,600 · Current $3,600

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2): The employer did not verify, through a written certification, that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed:       A written certification verifying that the required site assessment had been performed was not completed by the employer.

Issued

Jul 28, 2016

Abate by

Aug 23, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1): The employer did not ensure that each affected employee uses appropriate eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids, chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation:    On or about 6/23/2016, the employer failed to ensure and/or enforce the use of eye or facial protection by employees task with changing out the LP cylinders of the company's fork trucks.

Issued

Jul 28, 2016

Abate by

Aug 17, 2016

Penalty

Initial $3,600 · Current $3,600

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.110(e)(4)(iii): Permanent and removable fuel containers were not securely mounted to prevent jarring loose, slipping, or rotating:     As of 06/23/2016, the clasp used to secure the (LP) gas cylinder of the company's fork truck (Mitsubishi: model # FGC25K) was broken.

Issued

Jul 28, 2016

Abate by

Aug 17, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(p)(1):  If at any time a powered industrial truck is found to be in need of repair, defective, or in any way unsafe, the truck shall be taken out of service until it has been restored to safe operating condition.       The employer failed to ensure that the company's Mitsubishi: model # FGC25,, LP fork truck was removed from service until restored to safe operations. Defects of the fork truck include, but are not limited to; one of the clasp used to secure the propane cylinder was broken.

Issued

Jul 28, 2016

Abate by

Sep 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,700 · Current $2,700

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop, implement and/or maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which describes how the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) will be met:    On or about 06/23/2016, the employer did not develop, implement, or maintain a written hazard communication program at the site. Chemicals used at the site include but are not limited; propane and adhesives.

Issued

Jul 28, 2016

Abate by

Sep 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1): Employees were not provided effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard that the employees had not been previously trained about was introduced into their work area:      On or about 6/23/2016, employees were not trained on the hazardous chemicals utilized in the workplace. Chemicals used at the site include; but are not limited to, propane and adhesives.

Issued

Jul 28, 2016

Abate by

Sep 1, 2016

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(iv): The employer did not train employees regarding the new label elements and safety data sheets format.  On or about 06/23/2016 the employer failed to provide training or information to employees working with hazardous chemicals on the details of outline in the new hazard communication standard which encompasses the Global Harmonization System (GHS).