OSHA Inspection: LIPPERT COMPONENTS, INC.

Issued

Jan 31, 2018

Abate by

Feb 26, 2018

Penalty

Initial $6,097 · Current $2,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.95(k)(1): The employer did not train each employee who is exposed to noise at or above an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.95(k). The employer did not institute a training program and ensure employee participation in the program:    Lippert Components, Inc. - Jackson Center, Ohio: On or about November 29, 2017 the employer did not institute a hearing conservation training program for employees exposed to noise hazards associated with exposure above an eight hour time weighted average of 85 decibels; employees were not adequately trained in:   - The effects of noise on hearing  - The purpose of hearing protectors  - The advantages, disadvantages, and attenuation of various types of hearing protectors  - Instructions on selection, fitting, use, and care.  - Purpose of audiometric testing, and an explanation of the test procedures

Issued

Jan 31, 2018

Abate by

Feb 7, 2018

Penalty

Initial $12,675 · Current $7,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.184(c)(7): Slings were not padded or protected from the sharp edges of their loads:    Lippert Components, Inc. - Jackson Center, Ohio: On or about November 29, 2017, the employer did not assure that padding, or other adequate means of protection, was utilized with a nylon sling (s/n TFW27899-022) to lift chassis.  The nylon sling was not protected from damage by the chassis edges.

Issued

Jan 31, 2018

Abate by

Feb 13, 2018

Penalty

Initial $10,163 · Current $5,800 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.184(c)(9): Employee(s) were not kept clear of load(s) suspended, or about to be lifted by sling(s):    Lippert Components, Inc. - Jackson Center, Ohio: On or about November 29, 2017, the employer did not ensure that employees were kept clear of loads about to be lifted, and of suspended loads, when using an overhead hoist and two-legged chain sling to lift chassis.  Employees were immediately adjacent to, and under the suspended chassis while it was being transferred from the support horses to a wheeled dolly.

Issued

Jan 31, 2018

Abate by

Feb 20, 2018

Penalty

Initial $10,163 · Current $5,800 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.184(c)(14): Sling(s) were used without having affixed and legible identification markings:    Lippert Components, Inc. - Jackson Center, Ohio: On or about November 29, 2017, a two-legged chain sling used to lift chassis in the final paint area was not equipped with legible identifiable information.

Issued

Jan 31, 2018

Abate by

Feb 20, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.184(d): Each day before being used, the sling and all fastenings and attachments were not being inspected for damage or defects by a competent person designated by the employer:    Lippert Components, Inc. - Jackson Center, Ohio: On or about November 28, 2017, the employer did not assure that all slings were inspected by a competent person each day before use.  Slings used with damaged pads, chain slings that were not marked with rated capacities and/or slings without identifiable information used in the final paint area exposed employees to hazards associated with falling loads.

Issued

Jan 31, 2018

Abate by

Mar 15, 2018

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.184(e)(3)(i): A thorough periodic inspection of alloy steel chain slings was not made on a regular basis and/or were done at intervals greater than once every 12 months:    Lippert Components, Inc. - Jackson Center, Ohio: On or about November 28, 2017, the employer did not ensure that thorough periodic inspections of alloy steel chains, which are used to lift chassis in the final paint area, were conducted at least annually.

Issued

Jan 31, 2018

Abate by

Mar 15, 2018

Penalty

Initial $10,163 · Current $2,500 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.252(b)(2)(iii): Workers and other persons adjacent to the welding area were not protected from the rays by noncombustible or flameproof screens or shields:    Lippert Components, Inc. - Jackson Center, Ohio: On or about November 29, 2017, the employer did not ensure that welding shields/screens were used to protect employees from arc welding rays.  Employees near the welding area and those in the area to inspect parts/welds were exposed to superficial and optical burns from welding rays.

Issued

Jan 31, 2018

Abate by

Mar 15, 2018

Penalty

Initial $12,195 · Current $7,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.252(b)(3): Employees exposed to the hazards created by welding, cutting, or brazing operations were not protected by personal protective equipment in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.132:    Lippert Components, Inc. - Jackson Center, Ohio: On or about November 29, 2017, the employer did not ensure employees were adequately protected from burn injuries.  Employees that performed welding and cutting operations did not wear protective clothing for body and extremities.