OSHA Inspection: CHAMPION BRANDS LLC

Issued

Feb 23, 2017

Abate by

Apr 11, 2017

Penalty

Initial $6,338 · Current $4,754 Reduced

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:   The employer is failing to protect employees from caught-in and electrical shock hazards.  The employer did not develop individual procedures to control hazardous energy sources such as electrical and hydraulic pressure.  Machine specific procedures were not developed for equipment in production lines 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 and 10.

Issued

Feb 23, 2017

Penalty

Initial $5,070 · Current $3,803 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.219(c)(4)(i): Unguarded projecting shaft end(s) did not present a smooth edge and end and projected more than one half the diameter of the shaft:   The employer is failing to protect employees from rotating parts of equipment.  Employees were expose to a rotating shaft end that was not guarded.  The shaft end, located on the line 10 conveyor, projected 3 1/2 inches.

Issued

Feb 23, 2017

Abate by

Mar 21, 2017

Penalty

Initial $5,070 · Current $3,803 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.219(e)(1)(i): Horizontal belts which had both runs seven feet or less from the floor level were not guarded with a guard that extended to at least fifteen inches above the belt:  The employer is failing to protect employees from in-going nip point hazards.  Guards were not provided for in-going nip points created by the belt and pulley corner guides on line 10.

Issued

Feb 23, 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)  The employer is failing to protect employees from in-going nip point hazards.  Guards were not provided for in-going nip points on the line 10 conveyor.

Issued

Feb 23, 2017

Penalty

Initial $6,338 · Current $4,754 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(b)(1)(ii): Unused openings in boxes, cabinets, or fittings were not effectively closed:  The employer is failing to protect employees from electrical shock hazards.  Employees were expose to 120 volt and 240 volt energized parts of electrical equipment in that unused openings were not closed.  Unused openings were discovered on a  receptacle in the chiller area and on the electrical panel box at column 37, line 7, that controls the case sealer and the drop packer.

Issued

Feb 23, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,802 · Current $2,852 Reduced

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:  The employer is failing to protected employees from electrical shock hazards.  The energized flexible cord providing power to the line three labeler was not provided with strain relief.

Issued

Feb 23, 2017

Abate by

Apr 11, 2017

Penalty

Initial $5,070 · Current $3,803 Reduced

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):  The employer is failing to protect employees from chemical exposure.  Unlabeled overfill tanks were discovered at the pit of the tank farm 400, 500 and 600. Employees are exposed to chemicals such as but not limited butoxytriglycol, 100W or Hydrotreated Naphta Stoddard Solvent, Hydrocarbons by having unlabeled overfill tanks.