OSHA Inspection: MP TECHNOLOGIES, LLC

Issued

Oct 15, 2018

Abate by

Nov 1, 2018

Penalty

Initial $12,934 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.959(a)(2): Inspection before use. The critical safety components of mechanical elevating and rotating equipment did not receive a thorough visual inspection before use on each shift:  On or about July 9, 2018, at the jobsite where employees were exposed to struck-by and electrical hazards while using a Skylift brand easement machine without doing a thorough visual inspection of the critical safety components of the machine before each shift.

Issued

Oct 15, 2018

Abate by

Nov 1, 2018

Penalty

Initial $12,934 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.959(d)(3)(iii): Each employee was not protected from hazards that could arise from mechanical equipment contact with energized lines or equipment. The measures used did not ensure that employees would not be exposed to hazardous differences in electric potential. Unless the employer can demonstrate that the methods in use protect each employee from the hazards that could arise if the mechanical equipment contacts the energized line or equipment, the measures used did not include all of the following techniques: 1926.959(d)(3)(iii)(A) Using the best available ground to minimize the time the lines or electric equipment remain energized, 1926.959(d)(3)(iii)(B) Bonding mechanical equipment together to minimize potential differences, 1926.959(d)(3)(iii)(C) Providing ground mats to extend areas of equipotential, and 1926.959(d)(3)(iii)(D) Employing insulating protective equipment or barricades to guard against any remaining hazardous electrical potential differences:  On or about July 9, 2018, at the jobsite when employees were exposed to electrical hazards while using a skylift brand easement machine to set electrical poles without the employer ensuring employees were protected from hazards that could arise from the easement machine coming into contact with energized lines or equipment by ensuring employees were not exposed to hazardous differences in electric potential.

Issued

Oct 15, 2018

Abate by

Nov 1, 2018

Penalty

Initial $12,934 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.960(c)(1)(iii): The employer did not ensure that no employee approaches or takes any conductive object closer to exposed energized parts than the employer's established minimum approach distance, unless: 1926.960(c)(1)(iii)(A) The employee is insulated from the energized part (rubber insulating gloves or rubber insulating gloves and sleeves worn in accordance with paragraph (c)(2) of this section constitutes insulation of the employee from the energized part upon which the employee is working provided that the employee has control of the part in a manner sufficient to prevent exposure to uninsulated portions of the employee's body), or 1926.960(c)(1)(iii)(B) The energized part is insulated from the employee and from any other conductive object at a different potential, or 1926.960(c)(1)(iii)(C) The employee is insulated from any other exposed conductive object in accordance with the requirements for live-line barehand work in � 1926.964(c):    On or about July 9, 2018, at the jobsite when employees were exposed to electrical hazards while setting a powerline pole next to energized powerlines without the employer ensuring that employees did not take conductive objects closer to the energized parts than the established minimum approach distance when the employee was not insulated from the exposed conductive object.