MONTGOMERY, AL —
OSHA Inspection: KINPAK, INC.
Referral inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a referral safety inspection of KINPAK, INC. in 2780 GUNTER PARK DR. EAST, MONTGOMERY, AL 36109 (NAICS 325612). OSHA activity number 341767911.
OSHA opens inspections for many reasons — routine scheduling under a national or local emphasis program, an employee complaint or referral, or a follow-up after a reported injury. Opening or conducting an inspection is not itself an allegation or a finding that this employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.
Where did this inspection happen?
- Establishment
- KINPAK, INC.
- Site address
- 2780 GUNTER PARK DR. EAST
- City
- MONTGOMERY
- State
- AL
- ZIP
- 36109
- Mailing
- 2780 GUNTER PARK DR. EAST, MONTGOMERY, AL 36109
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Referral (C)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Safety
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- B
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 325612
- Employees
- 86
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
4 citations on file for this inspection.
5(a)(1)
- Issued
- Nov 28, 2016
- Abate by
- Jan 3, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $8,730 · Current $4,250 Reduced
General-duty citation text
OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1): The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees in that employees were exposed to crush hazards while operating a forklift without a seatbelt: a) At Kinpac, Inc: On or about September 13, 2016 and at times prior; the employer failed to require and enforce the use of seatbelts for all employees operating forklifts on site exposing them to struck-by and crush hazards from being thrown from the lift. b) At Kinpac, Inc: On or about September 13, 2016 and at times prior; the employer failed to ensure the Yale forklift #21 being operated by employees had a seat belt installed site exposing them to struck-by and crush hazards from being thrown from the lift.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $4250
- — Z (S) $8730
1910.178 L01 I
- Issued
- Nov 28, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $5,300 · Current $4,250 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.178(l)(1)(i): The employer did not ensure that each powered industrial truck operator is competent to operate a powered industrial truck safely, as demonstrated by the successful completion of the training and evaluation specified in this paragraph (l): a) At Kinpac, Inc.: On or about September 13, 2016 and at times prior; the employer exposed his employees to struck-by hazards in that an employee was allowed to operate a powered industrial truck without the employer first ensuring the employee was competent to operate the equipment as demonstrated by the completion of the required training and evaluation specified in the regulation.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $4250
- — Z (S) $5300
1910.178 Q07
- Issued
- Nov 28, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $5,300 · Current $4,250 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.178(q)(7): Industrial trucks were being placed in services after the examination showed condition(s) adversely affecting the safety of the vehicle: a) At Kinpac, Inc.: On or about September 13, 2016 and at times prior; the employer exposed his employees to struck-by hazards in that employees were allowed to operate forklift #21 without a working horn. b) At Kinpac, Inc.: On or about September 13, 2016 and at times prior; the employer exposed his employees to struck-by hazards in that employees were allowed to operate forklift #20 without a working horn. c) At Kinpac, Inc.: On or about September 13, 2016 and at times prior; the employer exposed his employees to struck-by hazards in that employees were allowed to operate forklift #34 without a working horn.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $4250
- — Z (S) $5300
1910.212 A01
- Issued
- Nov 28, 2016
- Abate by
- Dec 22, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,988 · Current $4,250 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) At Blow Mold Machine #2: On or about September 6, 2016 and at times prior; the employer failed to ensure the point of operations for blow mold machine #2 was protected causing an employee to break her arm when she reached into the machine to clear a jam.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $4250
- — Z (S) $4988
More inspections at Kinpak, INC.
View Kinpak, INC.'s full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 325612)
More inspections in AL
Source
This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). The original IMIS detail view is available at OSHA's Establishment Search for activity number 341767911.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.