RUMFORD, ME ·
OSHA Inspection: ND PAPER RUMFORD DIVISION
Planned inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of ND PAPER RUMFORD DIVISION in 35 HARTFORD STREET, RUMFORD, ME 04276 (NAICS 322121). OSHA activity number 343960878.
OSHA opens inspections for many reasons: routine scheduling under a national or local emphasis program, an employee complaint or referral, or a follow-up after a reported injury. Opening or conducting an inspection is not itself an allegation or a finding that this employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.
Where did this inspection happen?
- Establishment
- ND PAPER RUMFORD DIVISION
- Site address
- 35 HARTFORD STREET
- City
- RUMFORD
- State
- ME
- ZIP
- 04276
- Mailing
- 35 HARTFORD STREET, RUMFORD, ME 04276
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Planned (H)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Safety
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- Union (A)
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 322121
- Employees
- 650
- Ownership type
- Private (A)
Citations
10 citations on file for this inspection.
5(a)(1)
- Issued
- Jun 18, 2019
- Abate by
- Jun 26, 2019
- Penalty
- Initial $9,472 · Current $0 Reduced
General-duty citation text
OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1): The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees in that employees, when not using restraint systems, were exposed to crushing and struck-by hazards during the operation of powered industrial trucks: Finishing Department - It is the practice of operators of the new tow tractor or the "Nellie Belle" to operate it without wearing a seat belt.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $0
- · Z (S) $9472
1910.22 A03
- Issued
- Jun 18, 2019
- Penalty
- Initial $7,577 · Current $5,304 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.22(a)(3): Walking-working surfaces were not maintained free of hazards such as sharp or protruding objects, loose boards, corrosion, leaks, spills, snow, and ice: Under Track 19 - The concrete on the floor outside of the back accessway to the scrubber building was broken and cracked, resulting in a tripping hazard.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $5303.9
- · Z (S) $7577
1910.28 B03 II
- Issued
- Jun 18, 2019
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.28(b)(3)(ii): Each employee was not protected from tripping into floor holes: Kraft Mill - On the third floor, between the #4 and #5 digesters, there was a 5" diameter floor hole that was uncovered.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $0
- · Z (S) $0
1910.28 B13 I
- Issued
- Jun 18, 2019
- Abate by
- Jul 15, 2019
- Penalty
- Initial $13,260 · Current $13,260
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.28(b)(13)(i): When work was performed less than 6 feet (1.6 m) from the roof edge, the employer did not ensure each employee was protected from falling by a guardrail system, safety net system, travel restraint system, or personal fall arrest system: In the following instances, the employer did not ensure employees were protected from falling while working within 6 feet of the roof's edge of the soft wood washer roof: a) While an employee was washing down the roof. b) While an employee was opening a vent on the roof.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $13260
- · Z (S) $13260
1910.30 A01
- Issued
- Jun 18, 2019
- Abate by
- Aug 31, 2019
- Penalty
- Initial $13,260 · Current $0 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.30(a)(1): The employer did not provide training for each employee exposed to fall hazards and who used personal fall protection systems or is required to be trained as specified elsewhere in this subpart prior to May 17, 2017: Facility - The Employer did not provide training in the fall hazards associated with working on low sloped roofs and the systems or methods required to reduce those hazards.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $0
- · Z (S) $13260
1910.178 L04 III
- Issued
- Jun 18, 2019
- Abate by
- Aug 5, 2019
- Penalty
- Initial $9,472 · Current $6,630 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.178(l)(4)(iii): An evaluation of each powered industrial truck operator's performance was not being conducted at least once every three years: Facility - Each powered industrial truck operator's performance was not being evaluated every three years.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $6630.4
- · Z (S) $9472
1910.212 A01
- Issued
- Jun 18, 2019
- Abate by
- Jun 26, 2019
- Penalty
- Initial $13,260 · Current $9,282 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: In the following instances, machine guarding was not provided to protect employees in the machine area from ingoing nip point hazards: a) R10, basement, tending side, 4th press - Nip point between roll 4-2 and the felt. b) R12, basement, tending side, 2nd press - Nip point between the stretch roll and the felt. c) R12, basement, drive side, 2nd press - Nip point between the stretch roll and the felt. d) R15, fourdrenier, tending side, tension roll #3 - The guard rail providing protection from contact with the roll and wire was missing a midrail. e) R15, fourdrenier, tending side, guide roll #5 - Nip point between the roll and the wire was not guarded. f) R15, basement, tending side, bottom stretch roll - The chain and sign providing protection from the nip point between the roll and the felt was missing the sign indicating "danger". g) R15, fourdrenier, drive side - The chain and signs providing protection from the nip points between the #4 stretch roll the #6 stretch roll, the #5 guide roll and the wire were missing signs indicating "danger".
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $9282
- · Z (S) $13260
1910.215 B09
- Issued
- Jun 18, 2019
- Abate by
- Jun 24, 2019
- Penalty
- Initial $7,577 · Current $5,304 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.215(b)(9): The distance between the abrasive wheel periphery(s) and the adjustable tongue or the end of the safety guard peripheral member at the top exceeded one fourth inch: In the following instances the distance between the tongue guard and the abrasive wheel periphery was greater than one fourth inch: a) Pulp Mill Maintenance Shop - The Baldor grinder's tongue guard was over 1/2 from the abrasive wheel. b) North End Maintenance Shop - The Baldor grinder had no tongue guard for either of the two abrasive wheels.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $5303.9
- · Z (S) $7577
1910.219 E01 I
- Issued
- Jun 18, 2019
- Abate by
- Jun 26, 2019
- Penalty
- Initial $7,577 · Current $5,304 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.219(e)(1)(i): Where both runs of horizontal belts were seven (7) feet or less from floor level the guard did not extend to at least fifteen (15) inches above the belt or to a standard height: North End Maintenance Shop - Horizontal belts approximately 6' above the floor, were not guarded on one side of the Bridgeport drill press.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $5303.9
- · Z (S) $7577
1910.219 O01 I A
- Issued
- Jun 18, 2019
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.219(o)(1)(i)(a): All guards shall be rigidly braced every three (3) feet or fractional part of their height to some fixed part of machinery or building structure. Where guard is exposed to contact with moving equipment additional strength may be necessary: Line B, Basement - One of the screws that secured the CLO2 MC Pump guard was missing.
Recent events (2)
- · I (O) $0
- · Z (O) $0
More inspections at ND Paper Rumford Division
View ND Paper Rumford Division's full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 322121)
More inspections in ME
Source
This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). OSHA publishes its own view of this case as inspection number 343960878.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.