OSHA Inspection: CAY INDUSTRIES, INC

Issued

2017-11-07 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $6338.00 · Current $3803.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(1): The employer did not establish a program consisting of an energy control procedure, employee training and periodic inspections to ensure that before any employee performed any servicing or maintenance on a machine or equipment where the unexpected energizing, startup or release of stored energy could occur and cause injury, the machine or equipment shall be isolated from the energy source and rendered inoperative:  On or about June 22, 2017, at the above addressed worksite, employees were performing operation, set-up, cleaning and maintenance on approximately 26 commercial printing machines, such as but not limited to; e.g. Heidelber SpeedMaster 75, Shinohara 75, Shinohara 52, Ryobi 3302, Halm Super-Jet Plus etc., for which the employer had not developed and implemented a Hazardous Energy Control program/Lock-out Tag-out program; consisting of the following minimum element: Procedures , Periodic inspection, and Training and Communication; therefore exposing employees to stored/potential hazardous energy.

Issued

2017-11-07 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $6338.00 · Current $3803.00 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:  a. On or about June 22, 2017, at the above addressed jobsite, employees were operating and performing, set-up, cleaning and maintenance on a commercial printing machine/paper drill (Challenge), which was not equipped with at least one primary safe-guard device around/at the danger zone/point of operation, nor was this machine equipped with a secondary safe-guard device around the danger zone, so as to prevent the operator from having any part of his body in the danger zone during the operating cycle, therefore exposing the operator in the machine area/danger zone to ingoing nip points/rotating parts hazards and subsequent pinch, nip, cut and amputate hazards.  b. On or about June 22, 2017, at the above addressed jobsite, employees were operating and performing, set-up, cleaning and maintenance on commercial printing machine/envelope press (Halm Super-Jet Plus), which was not equipped with at least one primary safe-guard device around/at the danger zone/point of operation, nor was this machine equipped with a secondary safe-guard device around the danger zone, so as to prevent the operator from having any part of his body in the danger zone during the operating cycle, therefore exposing the operator in the machine area/danger zone to ingoing nip points/rotating parts hazards and pinch, nip, cut and amputate hazards.  c. On or about June 22, 2017, at the above addressed jobsite, employees were operating and performing, set-up, cleaning and maintenance on a commercial printing machine/UV Coater (FMA Incorporated), which was not equipped with at least one primary safe-guard device around/at the danger zone/point of operation, nor was this machine equipped with a secondary safe-guard device around the danger zone, so as to prevent the operator from having any part of his body in the danger zone during the operating cycle, therefore exposing the operator in the machine area/danger zone to ingoing nip points/rotating parts hazards and pinch, nip, cut and amputate hazards.