OSHA Inspection: GROOMERS BEST, INC.

Issued

2018-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2018-11-26 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2217.00 · Current $1250.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(1): The employer did not establish a program consisting of energy control procedures, employee training and periodic inspections to ensure that before any employee performs 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:    (a)Groomers Best, Inc. at 616 South Sioux Boulevard, Brandon, SD 57005: On or about and at times prior to July 10, 2018, the employer did not establish a program consisting of an energy control procedure and employee training to ensure that before any employee performed any servicing or maintenance on a machine or equipment where the unexpected energizing, start up or release of stored energy could occur and cause injury, the machine or equipment would be isolated, and rendered inoperative.  Circuit breakers were being used to isolate electrical energy during maintenance procedures regarding the iron worker, press brake, and band saw. The breakers were not being secured by a lockout device. Additionally, the employer did not provide authorized and affected employee training.    Abatement Note:  As part of an energy-control program, employers must:       (1)Establish energy-control procedures for removing the energy supply from machines and for putting appropriate lockout or tag-out devices on the energy-isolating devices to prevent unexpected re-energization.  When appropriate, the procedure also must address stored or potentially re-accumulated energy.       (2)Train employees on the energy-control program, including the safe application, use, and removal of energy controls; and       (3)Inspect these procedures periodically (at least annually) to ensure that they are being followed and that they remain effective in preventing employee exposure to hazardous energy.       The energy-control procedures must outline the scope, purpose, authorization, rules, and techniques that employees will use to control hazardous energy sources, as well as the means that will be used to enforce compliance.  These procedures must provide employees at least the following information:     (1)A statement on how to use the procedures;       (2)Specific procedural steps to shut down, isolate, block, and secure machines;       (3)Specific steps designating the safe placement, removal, and transfer of lockout/tag-out devices and identifying who has responsibility for the lockout/tag-out devices; and       (4)Specific requirements for testing machines to determine and verify the effectiveness of lockout devices, tag-out devices, and other energy-control measures.

Issued

2018-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2018-11-26 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2217.00 · Current $1250.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(1)(i):  The employer did not ensure that each powered industrial truck operator was competent to operate a powered industrial truck safely, as demonstrated by the successful completion of the training and evaluation specified in this paragraph (l):    (a)Groomers Best, Inc. at 616 S. Sioux Boulevard, Brandon, SD 57005: On or about and at times prior to July 10, 2018, the employer did not ensure that each powered industrial truck operator was competent to operate a powered industrial truck safety, as demonstrated by successful completion of the training and evaluation specified in 29 CFR 1910.178(l).  Several employees who operate the two forklifts in the production area have not been through any formal PIT training program and are not certified to operate.  The employer did not ensure that each employee was competent to operate the powered industrial truck safety by successfully completing a training and evaluation program. This condition exposed employees to a struck-by hazards.    Abatement Note:  Documented training shall consist of a combination of formal instruction (e.g., lecture, discussion, interactive computer learning, video tape, written material), practical training (demonstrations performed by the trainer and practical exercises performed by the trainee), and evaluation of the operator's performance in the workplace.

Issued

2018-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2018-11-26 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2956.00 · Current $1250.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(3)(ii): The point of operation of machines whose operation exposes an employee to injury, shall be guarded. The guarding device shall be in conformity with any appropriate standards therefor, or, in the absence of applicable specific standards, shall be so designed and constructed as to prevent the operator from having any part of his body in the danger zone during the operating cycle.    (a)Groomers Best, Inc. at 616 South Sioux Boulevard, Brandon, SD 57005: On or about and at times prior to July 10, 2018, the employer did not ensure employees were protected from amputation hazards in that, the Piranha Iron Worker punch was used without point of operation guarding. This hazard exposed employees to crushing and amputation hazards.

Issued

2018-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2018-11-26 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2956.00 · Current $1250.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.213(c)(1): The employer did not ensure that each circular hand-fed ripsaw was guarded by a hood which shall completely enclose that portion of the saw above the table and that portion of the saw above the material being cut:    (a)Groomers Best, Inc. 616 South Sioux Boulevard, Brandon, SD 57005:  On or about and at time prior to July 10, 2018, the employer did not ensure the blade guard for the SawStop table saw, located in the shipping and receiving area, was being used to effectively guard the point of operation. The guard had been removed and was not immediately located. This hazard exposed employees to amputation and caught-in hazards.    Abatement note: The hood and mounting of the blade guard shall be arranged so that the hood will automatically adjust itself to the thickness of and remain in contact with the material being cut but it shall not offer any considerable resistance to insertion of material to saw or to passage of the material being sawed. The hood shall be made of adequate strength to resist blows and strains incidental to reasonable operation, adjusting, and handling, and shall be so designed as to protect the operator from flying splinters and broken saw teeth. It shall be made of material that is soft enough so that it will be unlikely to cause tooth breakage. The hood shall be so mounted as to insure that its operation will be positive, reliable, and in true alignment with the saw; and the mounting shall be adequate in strength to resist any reasonable side thrust or other force tending to throw it out of line.

Issued

2018-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2018-11-26 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2217.00 · Current $1250.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.242(b): The employer did not ensure compressed air used for cleaning purposes was reduced to less than 30 p.s.i. and a chip guard used:    (a)Groomers Best, Inc. at 616 South Sioux Boulevard, Brandon, SD 57005: On or about and at times prior to July 10, 2018, compressed air used for cleaning and drying walk-in-tubs was not reduced to less than 30 p.s.i. The pressure at the nozzle tip was approximately 110 p.s.i. as measured by an compressed air gauge. This condition exposed employees to pulmonary embolism.

Issued

2018-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2018-12-28 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1): The employer did not assess the workplace to determine if hazards are present, or are likely to be present, which necessitate the use of personal protective equipment (PPE):     (a)Groomers Best, Inc. at 616 S. Sioux Boulevard, Brandon, SD 57005: On or about and at times prior to July 10, 2018, the employer did not assess the workplace to determine if hazards were present, or were likely to be present, which necessitated the use of personal protective equipment. The employer had not assessed the workplace to identify hazards associated with the production activities such as sanding stainless steel, welding, polishing, grinding, painting and hoisting operations. This condition exposed employees to hazards associated with working with tools and equipment.     Abatement Note:  When then employer has determined that hazards are present, or likely to be present, the employer shall:       (1)Select, and have each affected employee use, the types of PPE that will protect the affected employee from the hazards identified in the hazard assessment;       (2)Communicate selection decisions to each affected employee; and,       (3)Select PPE that properly fits each affected employee.       (4)The employer shall verify that the required workplace hazard assessment has been performed through a written certification that identifies the workplace evaluated; the person certifying that the evaluation has been performed; the date(s) of the hazard assessment; and, which identifies the document as a certification of hazard assessment.

Issued

2018-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2018-11-26 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.252(b)(2)(i)(A): Helmets or hand shields were not being used during all arc welding or arc cutting operations/ Helpers or attendants shall be provided with proper eye protection:  (a)Groomers Best, Inc. at 616 South Sioux Boulevard, Brandon, SD 57005: On or about and at times prior to July 31, 2018, the employer did not ensure employees were protected from damaging light radiation by not requiring the use of a helmet, shield or other protective device while MIG welding. An employee was closing his eyes as he was "spot" welding on a wash tub basin that was being manufactured. This condition exposed an employee to hazardous light radiation that could cause eye damage.

Issued

2018-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2018-11-26 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with work-site specific procedures was not established and implemented where respirators were necessary to protect the health of the employee or whenever respirators were required by the employer:    (a)Groomers Best, Inc. at 616 South Sioux Boulevard, Brandon, SD 57005: On or about and at times prior to July 10, 2018, the employer did not have a written respiratory protection program with work-site specific procedures, as specified in subparagraph (c)(1)(i) through (ix) of this section. The program was not established and implemented whenever respirators were required by the employer. This hazard exposed employees to respiratory hazards.  Abatement Note: The employer shall include in the program the following provisions of this section, as applicable:     (1)Procedures for selecting respirators for use in the workplace;     (2)Medical evaluations of employees required to use respirators;     (3)Fit testing procedures for tight-fitting respirators;     (4)Procedures for proper use of respirators in routine and reasonably foreseeable emergency situations;     (5)Procedures and schedules for cleaning, disinfecting, storing, inspecting, repairing, discarding, and otherwise maintaining respirators;     (6)Procedures to ensure adequate air quality, quantity, and flow of breathing air for atmosphere-supplying respirators;     (7)Training of employees in the respiratory hazards to which they are potentially exposed during routine and emergency situations;     (8)Training of employees in the proper use of respirators, including putting on and removing them, any limitations on their use, and their maintenance;  (9)Procedures for regularly evaluating the effectiveness of the program.

Issued

2018-10-29 00:00:00

Abate by

2018-11-26 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(2)(i): The employer did not provide voluntary respirator users the information contained in Appendix D to this section:    (a)Groomers Best, Inc. at 616 South Sioux Boulevard, Brandon, SD 57005: On or about and at times prior to July 10, 2018, the employer permitted the voluntary use of a cartridge style, tight fitting, half-mask, as well as filtering face piece respirators. The employer did not provide the respirator users with the information contained in Appendix D to this section ("Information for Employees Using Respirators When Not Required Under the Standard").  This hazard exposed employees to respiratory hazards while performing work in the following instances:  a)Stainless steel sanding and grinding operations  b)Electro-polishing operations  c)Painting operations    Abatement Note:   If the employer determines that any voluntary respirator use is permissible, the employer must provide the respirator users with the information contained in Appendix D to this section ("Information for Employees Using Respirators When Not Required Under the Standard"); as well as other information as required by 1910.134.