OSHA Inspection: FURST-MCNESS COMPANY

Issued

Apr 24, 2017

Penalty

Initial $7,243 · Current $5,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.23(a)(2): Ladderway floor opening(s) or platform(s) were not guarded by a standard railing with standard toeboard(s) on all exposed sides (except at the entrance to opening) with passage through the railing either provided with a swinging gate or so offset that a person could walk directly into the opening:    a) In the loading area, on or about and at times prior to November 29, 2016, the two openings in the work platform for the ladder access was unguarded, thus exposing employees to a fall hazard of up to 7 feet.

Issued

Apr 24, 2017

Abate by

May 18, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.27(c)(6):  The step-across distance from the nearest edge of ladder to the nearest edge of equipment or structure was greater than 12 inches.  a) In the loading area, on or about and at times prior to November 29, 2016, the step-across distance from the centerline of the two ladders' rungs was 25 inches from the nearest edge of the work platform, thus exposing employees to a fall hazard of up to 7 feet.

Issued

Apr 24, 2017

Abate by

May 18, 2017

Penalty

Initial $9,054 · Current $8,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.23(c)(1): Open-sided floors and/or platforms four feet or more above adjacent floor or ground level were not guarded with standard railings (or equivalent):    a) At the Feed Mill, on or about and at times prior to November 29, 2016, employees were not fall protected when they walked on and/or worked from elevated piping and steel beams, exposing employees to fall hazards from 8- 12 feet onto concrete ground.

Issued

Apr 24, 2017

Penalty

Initial $5,432 · Current $5,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.37(b)(1): The exit route was not adequately lit so that an employee with normal vision could see along the exit route:    a) Inside the Feed Mill building, on or about November 29, 2016 and at times prior to, emergency lighting was not provided for employees who worked in the area, resulting in a life safety hazard.

Issued

Apr 24, 2017

Penalty

Initial $7,243 · Current $5,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1): Protective eye equipment was not required where there was a reasonable probability of injury that could be prevented by such equipment:    a) At the facility, on or about and at times prior to November 29, 2016, the employer failed to supply employees who remove and install propane cylinders on forklifts with eye protection (i.e. safety glasses, goggles, face shield), exposing employees to skin burns from contact with liquid propane.

Issued

Apr 24, 2017

Penalty

Initial $7,243 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.138(a): The employer did not select and require employee(s) to use appropriate hand protection when employees' hands were exposed to hazards such as those from skin absorption of harmful substances; severe cuts or lacerations; severe abrasion; punctures; chemical burns; thermal burns; and harmful temperature extremes:    a) At the facility, on or about and at times prior to November 29, 2016, the employer failed to supply employees who remove and install propane cylinders on forklifts with hand protection, exposing employees to skin burns from contact with liquid propane.

Issued

Apr 24, 2017

Abate by

May 18, 2017

Penalty

Initial $9,054 · Current $8,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(p)(1): Powered industrial truck(s) found to be in need of repair, defective, or in any way unsafe had not been  taken out of service until restored to safe operating condition(s):    a) At the facility, on or about and at times prior to November 29, 2016, the employer allowed employees to operate a Toyota propane forklift (Model: 8FG1318 S/N: 10595) with missing rubber and severe cracks on the edge of the tires, exposing employees to crush-by and struck-by hazards.

Issued

Apr 24, 2017

Abate by

May 18, 2017

Penalty

Initial $5,432 · Current $0 Reduced

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:    a) At the facility, on or about and at times prior to November 29, 2016, the employer did not develop, implement and/or maintain a written hazard communication program for employees that were handling/working with chemicals such as, but not limited to propane and grain ingredients, exposing employees to chemical hazards.

Issued

Apr 24, 2017

Abate by

May 18, 2017

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:    a) At the facility, on or about and at times prior to November 29, 2016, the employer did not provide effective information and training on hazardous chemicals such as, but not limited to propane and grain ingredients, exposing employees to safety and health hazards.

Issued

Apr 24, 2017

Abate by

May 18, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.68(b)(6)(iii): Adequate lighting, not less than 5-foot candles, was not provided at each floor landing at all times when the lift is in operation.  a) At the Feed Mill, on or about and at times prior to November 29, 2016, adequate lighting was not provided at the man lift's floor landing, exposing employees to trip and fall hazards.

Issued

Apr 24, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:  a) At the Feed Mill, on or about and at times prior to November 29, 2016, the employer failed to provide a medical evaluation for an employee that wore a tight fitting respirator (half face respirator) while mixing ingredients for the mixer/scale and during cleaning operations, exposing the employee to a respiratory hazard.