OSHA Inspection: G&S METAL PRODUCTS COMPANY, INC.

Issued

Dec 4, 2024

Abate by

Jan 8, 2025

Penalty

Initial $11,292 · Current $7,905 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.147(c)(6)(i):The employer did not conduct a periodic inspection of the energy control procedure at least annually to ensure that the procedure and the requirement of this standard were being followed:  On or about July 18, 2024, the employer did not ensure that a periodic inspection of the machine specific procedures for equipment within the facility had taken place at least annually. Employees are tasked with service and maintenance of equipment including but not limited to power presses, blankers, box erectors, and lathes. Hazardous energies present on equipment include but are not limited to mechanical, electrical, and pneumatic.

Issued

Dec 4, 2024

Abate by

Jan 8, 2025

Penalty

Initial $11,292 · Current $7,905 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.147(c)(7)(i)(A):Authorized employee(s) did not receive training in the recognition of applicable hazardous energy sources, the type and magnitude of the energy available in the workplace, and the methods and means necessary for energy isolation.   On or about July 18, 2024, the employer did not ensure that employees tasked with the operation, service, and maintenance of the mechanical power presses of the facility had received training as authorized for the control of hazardous energies. Employees perform tasks which require the isolation of energies in order to be safely performed. Hazardous energies present on the equipment includes but is not limited to electrical, mechanical, and pneumatic. At the time of inspection operators tasked with partaking in the operation of troubleshooting of presses had not received training as authorized.

Issued

Dec 4, 2024

Abate by

Jan 31, 2025

Penalty

Initial $11,292 · Current $7,905 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 July 18, 2024, the employer did not ensure that the metal working lathe located in the machine shop contained a chuck/ chip guard to protect employees from the hazardous area. The lathe was not equipped with the guard during operation.   b) On or about July 18, 2024,  the employer did not ensure that effective machine guarding was in place on the box erector (automatic box folding machine) located in the facility. The equipment contained missing or broken barrier guards as well as broken or missing interlock mechanisms allowing employees to reach into the area of moving machine parts during operation.   c) On or about July 18, 2024,  the employer did not ensure that effective machine guarding was in place on the filler, muffin pan equipment. No guarding was in place to prevent employees from reaching into the moving machine components including pinch points.   d) On or about July 18, 2024,  the employer did not ensure that effective machine guarding was in place on the press 42 feeder system. Effective guarding was not in place to protect employees from the movement of the feeding mechanisms and table.

Issued

Dec 4, 2024

Abate by

Dec 24, 2024

Penalty

Initial $129,058 · Current $11,292 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(c)(1)(i):The employer did not provide and ensure the usage of point of operation guards or properly applied point of operation devices on every operation performed on mechanical power press(es):  a) On or about July 11, 2024, the employer did not ensure that effective machine guarding was present on the rear scrap shoot area of the minster press #46. The guard was not effective in that it contained too large of an opening which allowed employees to reach into the point of operation.  b) On or about July 11, 2024, the employer did not ensure that effective machine guarding was present on the rear area and side of the Minster press #47. The guard on the rear was not effective in that it contained too large of an opening which allowed employees to reach into the point of operation. There was no guard present on the side area (part /scrap shoot).

Issued

Dec 4, 2024

Abate by

Dec 24, 2024

Penalty

Initial $11,292 · Current $11,292

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(c)(1)(i):The employer did not provide and ensure the usage of point of operation guards or properly applied point of operation devices on every operation performed on mechanical power press(es):  a) On or about July 11, 2024, the employer did not ensure that effective machine guarding was present on the front operator area of the Minster press #45. The guard was not effective in that it contained too large of an opening which allowed employees to reach into the point of operation.  b) On or about July 11, 2024, the employer did not ensure that effective machine guarding was present on the front operator area of the Stamtec Press #49. The guard was not effective in that it contained too large of an opening which allowed employees to reach into the point of operation.

Issued

Dec 4, 2024

Abate by

Dec 24, 2024

Penalty

Initial $11,292 · Current $11,292

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(c)(1)(i):The employer did not provide and ensure the usage of point of operation guards or properly applied point of operation devices on every operation performed on mechanical power press(es):  a) On or about July 11, 2024, the employer did not ensure that effective machine guarding was present on the rear area of press #38. The guard was not effective in that it contained too large of an opening which allowed employees to reach into the point of operation.  b) On or about July 18, 2024, the employer did not ensure that effective machine guarding was present on the rear areas of the Presses 24, 25, and 26. There was not an effective guard present to prevent employees from reaching into the point of operation.

Issued

Dec 4, 2024

Abate by

Dec 24, 2024

Penalty

Initial $11,292 · Current $11,292

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(c)(1)(i):The employer did not provide and ensure the usage of point of operation guards or properly applied point of operation devices on every operation performed on mechanical power press(es):  a) On or about July 18, 2024, the employer did not ensure that a mechanical power press 19 was provided with effective machine guarding to protect employees from the point of operation. Employees were tasked with waxing operations at the first press of the progressive series of presses. Separate pullout devices or effective point of operation guarding were not provided to these operators/ employees.  b) On or about July 18, 2024, the employer did not ensure that a mechanical power press 10 was provided with effective machine guarding to protect employees from the point of operation. Employees were tasked with waxing operations at the first press of the progressive series of presses. Separate pullout devices or effective point of operation guarding were not provided to these operators/employees.

Issued

Dec 4, 2024

Abate by

Dec 24, 2024

Penalty

Initial $11,292 · Current $11,292

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(c)(1)(i):The employer did not provide and ensure the usage of point of operation guards or properly applied point of operation devices on every operation performed on mechanical power press(es):  a) On or about July 18, 2024, the employer did not ensure that a mechanical power press 14 was provided with effective machine guarding to protect employees from the point of operation. Employees were tasked with waxing operations at the first press of the progressive series of presses. Separate pullout devices or effective point of operation guarding were not provided to these operators/employees.