OSHA Inspection: JORNIK MANUFACTURING CORP.

Issued

2017-01-11 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-01-31 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $6236.00 · Current $3118.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.37(a)(2): Exit routes were not arranged so that employees did not have to travel toward a high hazard area, unless the path of travel was effectively shielded from the high hazard area by suitable partitions or other physical barriers.    WORKPLACE: An appropriate safe exit route was not arranged, and employees had to go by the area where strong flammable inks and thinners were stored to get to the only one emergency exit in the rear of the shop.

Issued

2017-01-11 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-01-31 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.106(d)(3)(ii): Storage cabinet(s) for flammable liquids were not designed or constructed to meet minimal fire resistance as required:  WORKPLACE: The following storage cabinets, used to store flammable inks and thinners were not designed and/or constructed to meet the minimal fire resistance rating:      1.    Black Single wall, Office style cabinet. 2.    Gray Rubbermaid 6-foot plastic cabinet. 3.    Tan Single wall, Office style cabinet. 4.    Tan Single wall, Office style cabinet. 5.    Tan Single wall, Office style cabinet. 6.    Gray Single wall, Office style cabinet.

Issued

2017-01-11 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-01-20 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3741.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1): Protective eye or face protective equipment was not used where there was a reasonable probability of injury that could be prevented by such equipment:    WORKPLACE: The employer did not ensure that the employees working with hazardous inks and thinners during the printing process were wearing appropriate eye and/or face protective equipment at all times.

Issued

2017-01-11 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-01-24 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1): The employer did not assess the workplace to determine if hazards are present, or are likely to be present, which necessitate the use of personal protective equipment (PPE):    WORKPLACE: The employer did not perform a workplace hazard assessment to determine necessitate and appropriate types of personal protective equipment (PPE) for employees exposed to hazardous inks and thinners during the printing process.

Issued

2017-01-11 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-01-31 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $4988.00 · Current $2494.00 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:    WORKPLACE: The employees, operating the following machines were exposed the hazards of catch and pinch points, ingoing nip points, rotating parts and others due to the following deficiencies:    1.     INKPRINT Model 130 LPE Pad printing machine. No serial number, Company Number 1: The foot pedal was not guarded. The left side of this machine was missing guard.     2.     ICN 1200 Pad printing machine. No serial number, Company Number 2: The foot pedal was not guarded. The upper die had a missing guard on the right side and the guard on the left side of the machine did not prevent access into the machine.    3.     ICN 1200 Pad printing machine. No serial number, Company Number 3: The foot pedal was not guarded.  The guard on the left side of the machine as well as the cover on the rear of the machine was missing.    4.     SA Model F-130 Screen printing press, No Data plate: The foot pedal was not guarded.    5.     SA Model F1-20 Screen printing press, No Data plate: The foot pedal was not guarded.    6.     SA Model 810-12 Semi-Automatic Clam Shell press, No Data plate: The foot pedal was not adequately guarded.     7.     Mugen Seiki Model: MPC-2PS150 Pad printing machine, Serial Number: 102AHK010F1: The left side guard was damaged. The employees/operators were able to access the moving parts of the pad printer through under and/around guards.    8.     Wutung Model: PM 368 DS Printmaster two-color Pad printing machine, No Serial Number: The right side guard was damaged.

Issued

2017-01-11 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-01-20 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $6236.00 · Current $3118.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.303(b)(2): Listed or labeled electrical equipment was not used or installed in accordance with instructions included in the listing or labeling:    WORKPLACE: The dropped power cord for the permanently mounted overhead fluorescent light was plugged into one of outlets of a flexible extension cord which was plugged into one of duplex outlets on a junction box laying on the floor. The duplex outlets and the extension cords were creating a tripping hazard and exposed to physical damages as well.

Issued

2017-01-11 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-01-20 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(g)(1)(iii): Flexible cords and cables were used for purposes prohibited by subparagraphs (A) through (E) of this paragraph:  WORKPLACE: A permanently mounted and energized fluorescent light fixture was hard wired with flexible extension cord.

Issued

2017-01-11 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-01-20 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(g)(2)(iii): Flexible cords were not connected to devices and fittings so that tension would not be transmitted to joints or terminal screws:  WORKPLACE: The flexible cords, used for the following equipment were pulled away from the fittings due to missing or damaged outer sheathings, transmitting strains to internal wiring:    1.     Wutung Model: PM 368 DS Printmaster two-color Pad printing machine, No Serial Number. 2.     The Orange extension cord, used to energize a fluorescent light fixture above the ICN 1200 printing machine, No Data plate, Company Number 3

Issued

2017-01-11 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-01-24 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3741.00 · Current $1871.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1)(i): The written hazard communication program did not include a list of the hazardous chemicals known to be present, using an identity that was referenced on the appropriate safety data sheet:    WORKPLACE: The Hazard Communication program did not include a complete list of hazardous chemicals handled and used by employees in the workplace.

Issued

2017-01-11 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-01-24 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(6): The employer used written materials, such as signs, placards, process sheets, or batch tickets in lieu of affixing labels to individual stationary process containers that failed to identify the container(s) to which they were applicable and did not convey the information required by 29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(5):  WORKPLACE: The employer did not ensure that the following containers filled with washing ink thinner were labeled the contents: with the contents:    1.     Several 1-gallon plunger dispensing cans throughout the workplace.  2.     The Safety Kleen parts washer unit.

Issued

2017-01-11 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-01-24 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

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:  WORKPLACE: The employees, required to handle and work with hazardous chemicals in the workplace were not provided with chemical hazard communication information and initial training and/or when new chemicals were brought into the workplace.