OSHA Inspection: HYCOMP, LLC

Issued

2017-02-01 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-02-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $5430.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(3)(ii): Point(s) of operation of machinery were not guarded to prevent employee(s) from having any part of their body in the danger zone(s) during operating cycle(s):     a. On or about January 9, 2017, employees were exposed to the point of operation on Fadal VMC4020 (Shop #1170). The equipment did not have a functional interlock in place, allowing doors to be opened during the machine cycle.       b. On or about January 9, 2017, employees were exposed to the point of operation on Fadal VMC6535 (Shop #1107). The equipment did not have a functional interlock in place, allowing doors to be opened during the machine cycle.      c. On or about January 9, 2017, employees were exposed to the point of operation on Fadal VMC6030 (Shop #1138). The equipment did not have a functional interlock in place, allowing doors to be opened during the machine cycle.      d. On or about January 9, 2017, employees were exposed to the point of operation on Fadal Vertical Milling Machine (Shop #1135). The equipment did not have a functional interlock in place, allowing doors to be opened during the machine cycle.      e. On or about January 9, 2017, employees were exposed to the point of operation on Fadal VMC4020 (Shop #1134). The equipment did not have a functional interlock in place, allowing doors to be opened during the machine cycle.      f. On or about January 9, 2017, employees were exposed to the point of operation on Fadal VMC4020 (Shop #1169). The equipment did not have a functional interlock in place, allowing doors to be opened during the machine cycle.      g. On or about January 9, 2017, employees were exposed to the point of operation on Fadal VMC4020 (Shop #1188). The equipment did not have a functional interlock in place, allowing doors to be opened during the machine cycle.      h. On or about January 9, 2017, employees were exposed to the point of operation on Fadal VMC4020 (Shop #1187). The equipment did not have a functional interlock in place, allowing doors to be opened during the machine cycle.      i. On or about January 9, 2017, employees were exposed to the point of operation on Fadal VMC4020 (Shop #1077). The equipment did not have a functional interlock in place, allowing doors to be opened during the machine cycle.

Issued

2017-02-01 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-02-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $9054.00 · Current $5430.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii)(D): The energy control procedures did not clearly and specifically outline the requirements for testing a machine or equipment to determine and verify the effectiveness of lockout devices, tagout devices, and other energy control:     On or about January 9, 2017, machine specific procedures developed by the company for equipment including, but not limited to mills and lathes did not specifically list steps for verification of isolation.

Issued

2017-02-01 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-02-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(6)(i): The employer did not conduct a periodic inspection of the energy control procedure at least annually to ensure that the procedure and the requirement of this standard were being followed:  On or about January 9, 2017, the employer had not conducted an annual periodic inspection of energy control procedures for equipment including, but not limited to mills and lathes.

Issued

2017-02-01 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-02-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(4)(i): The medical questionnaire and examinations were not administered confidentially during the employee's normal working hours or at a time and place convenient to the employee:  On or about January 9­­, 2017, the employer did not ensure confidentiality in that the employer maintained copies of medical evaluation questionnaires that had been filled out by employees permitted to wear half-mask air purifying respirators while mixing resins.

Issued

2017-02-01 00:00:00

Abate by

2017-02-21 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(6)(i): The employer did not obtain from the physician or other licensed health care professional (PLHCP)  a written recommendation regarding the employee's ability to use the respirator:  On or about January 9­­, 2017, the employer did not ensure written recommendation had been provided from a physician that states individual employees were permitted to wear half-mask air purifying respirators while mixing resins.