OSHA Inspection: J & R USED TIRE SERVICE, INC.

Issued

Feb 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,898 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.37(a)(3):  Exit routes were not maintained free and unobstructed so that no materials or equipment were placed, either permanently or temporarily, within the exit route:     On or about November 2, 2016, In the event of emergency employees were exposed to fire, smoke inhalation, slips, trips and falls hazards in Danville, Illinois because the emergency exit was obstructed with used tires.

Issued

Feb 2, 2017

Abate by

Feb 17, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,622 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(3): The employer did not ensure that each affected employee, who wore prescription lenses while engaged in operations that involved eye hazards, used protection that incorporated the prescription in its design, or wore eye protection over the prescription glasses or protective lenses with side shields.      On or about November 2, 2016, An employee operating the CM Shedder was exposed to eye hazards, and the employer did not ensure employee wore eye protection over the prescription glasses or protective lenses with side shields.

Issued

Feb 2, 2017

Abate by

Mar 6, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,622 · Current $1,811 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(1):  The employer did not establish a program consisting of an energy control procedures and employee training to ensure that before any employee performed any servicing or maintenance on a machine or equipment where the unexpected energizing, start up or release of stored energy could occur and cause injury, the machine or equipment would be isolated, and rendered inoperative in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4):       On or about November 2, 2016, Employees performing service and maintenance on equipment were exposed to caught-in and amputation hazards and the employer had not developed and implemented a comprehensive energy control program.

Issued

Feb 2, 2017

Abate by

Mar 6, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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 November 2, 2016, Employees performing service and maintenance on equipment were exposed to caught-in and amputation hazards and the employer had not developed procedures.       The procedures shall clearly outline:  a. A specific statement of the intended use of the procedure,  b. Specific procedural steps for shutting down, isolating, blocking and securing machines or equipment to control hazardous energy,  c. Specific procedural steps for the placement, removal and transfer of lockout devices and the responsibility for them, and       d. Specific requirements for testing a machine or equipment to determine and verify the effectiveness of lockout devices, tagout devices, and other energy control measures.

Issued

Feb 2, 2017

Abate by

Mar 6, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,622 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(a)(4): Modifications and additions which affect capacity and safe operation of powered industrial truck were performed by the employer without the manufacturer's prior written approval:    On or about November 2, 2016, Employees utilized a clamp attachment on a Mitsubishi forklift, and the employer did not obtain the manufacturers written approval prior to employing the device.

Issued

Feb 2, 2017

Abate by

Mar 6, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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 November 2, 2016, Employees utilized a clamp attachment on a Mitsubishi forklift, and the employer did not request that the truck be marked to identify the approximate weight of the truck and attachment combination at maximum elevation.

Issued

Feb 2, 2017

Abate by

Mar 6, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,622 · Current $1,811 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 ingoing nip points and rotating parts:       On or about November 2, 2016, employees performing operations were exposed to caught-in and amputation hazards because the CM Shredder had conveyor belts that did not have effective guarding that protected employees from nip points or other moving parts.

Issued

Feb 2, 2017

Abate by

Feb 27, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,622 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.219(d)(1): Pulley(s) with part(s) seven feet or less from the floor or work platform were not guarded in accordance with the requirements specified in 29 CFR 1910.219(m) and (o):      On or about November 2, 2016, employees operating the CM Shredder were exposed to contact with the unguarded belt and pulley at the conveyor drive motor, and the pulley nip points were not enclosed.

Issued

Feb 2, 2017

Abate by

Feb 27, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.219(e)(3)(i): Vertical or inclined belt(s) were not enclosed by guard(s) conforming to the requirements specified at 29 CFR 1910.219(m) and (o):    On or about November 2, 2016, employees operating the CM Shredder were exposed to contact with the unguarded belt at the conveyor drive motor, and the pulley nip points were not enclosed.

Issued

Feb 2, 2017

Abate by

Feb 17, 2017

Penalty

Initial $400 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1904.29(a): The employer did not use an OSHA 300, 301 and 300A Form or equivalent.       On or about November 2, 2016, The employer did not maintain a summary record logs for injuries and illnesses that was equivalent to the OSHA Form 300-A for the year 2015.

Issued

Feb 2, 2017

Abate by

Feb 17, 2017

Penalty

Initial $400 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1904.29(a): The employer did not use an OSHA 300, 301 and 300A Form or equivalent.       On or about November 2, 2016, The employer did not maintain a summary record logs for injuries and illnesses that was equivalent to the OSHA Form 300-A for the year 2014.

Issued

Feb 2, 2017

Abate by

Feb 17, 2017

Penalty

Initial $400 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1904.29(a): The employer did not use an OSHA 300, 301 and 300A Form or equivalent.       On or about November 2, 2016, The employer did not maintain a summary record logs for injuries and illnesses that was equivalent to the OSHA Form 300-A for the year 2013.

Issued

Feb 2, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:    On or about November 2, 2016, Employees operating the Mitsubishi Forklift exposed other employees to being struck by, because the examination showed a lug nut missing and was not taken out of service until it was evaluated for safe operation.