OSHA Cites Tool Manufacturer For Safety Hazards; Inspection Part of Targeted Enforcement Program

January 15, 2004

A Frankfort, N.Y., manufacturer's alleged failure to address machine guarding, electrical and other safety hazards has resulted in $54,200 in fines from OSHA.

Union Tools, Inc. has been cited for alleged serious and repeat violations of the Occupational Safety and Health Act following a comprehensive safety inspection conducted from November 18, 2003 to December 5, 2003 by OSHA's Syracuse area office. The inspection was conducted under OSHA's Site Specific Targeting Program, which inspects facilities with high injury and illness rates

"This enforcement action is part of the Department of Labor's innovative approach to protecting the safety and security of American workers," said Diane Brayden, OSHA's area director in Syracuse. "This approach targets significant violations in order to direct our resources where they can be most effective. It has yielded a national increase of 11 percent last year in citations for serious violations."

Five repeat citations, carrying $40,200 in proposed fines, were issued for failure to guard ingoing nip points on conveyors and a power press; inadequate point-of-operation guarding on power presses; failure to guard a belt and a pulley; failure to assure electrical grounding of equipment; and failure to cover or guard an open floor drain. OSHA issues a repeat citation when an employer previously has been cited for a substantially similar hazard and the citations have become final. OSHA cited Union Tools in 2000 for similar hazards at the company's Frankfort plant.

Eight serious citations, with $14,000 in proposed fines, were also issued. They concern the company's failure to provide adequate guarding on a saw, a fan, a rotating shaft coupling, and a portable grinder; exposed live electrical parts; a frayed electrical cord; broken or damaged electrical conduit; failure to use electrical lockout equipment; and a broken ladder.




Fatal Explosion Brings Employer OSHA Citations

A July 3, 2003, explosion of an asphalt tank at a Framingham, Mass. company that killed a worker could have been prevented if the company had taken the proper safety precautions, according to OSHA.

As a result of the agency's investigation of the fatal explosion, OSHA has issued citations alleging willful and serious safety violations to Triram Corporation, including proposed penalties totaling $52,500.

The investigation revealed that a contractor was directed to do welding work on top of a 10,000-gallon tank without being told about the tank's volatile contents.

"This was a tragedy that could have been avoided," said Richard Fazzio, OSHA's area director for northeastern Massachusetts. "The company should have followed required safety procedures and informed workers about the dangers of the hazardous materials in the workplace."

The alleged "willful" violation, which carries a proposed penalty of $35,000, charges Triram Corporation with failing to implement a hazard communication program. The company did not inform the welding contractor about hazards related to flammable vapors produced by heated asphalt and chemicals in the tank being welded.

The company is also charged with five alleged "serious" violations of OSHA safety standards for: failing to ensure containers of hazardous chemicals were labeled with proper contents and hazard warnings; failing to assure that containers of toxic or flammable substances were either filled with water or cleaned thoroughly and vented and tested prior to welding, cutting or heating; failing to equip above-ground storage tanks with a pressure release device; and exposing employees to fire or explosion from a tank that stored flammable liquid adjacent to a main building. Proposed fines for these alleged violations total $17,500.

OSHA defines a willful violation as one committed with intentional disregard or plain indifference to the requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Act and regulations. It defines a serious violation as one in which there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result, and the employer knew, or should have known, of the hazard.

Triram Corporation has 15 business days from receipt of these citations to either elect to comply with them, to request and participate in an informal conference with the OSHA area director, or to contest them before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.




Baton Rouge Company Fined $64,500 for Worker Safety Violations

The alleged failure of Total Environmental Solutions Inc. to protect employees from a wide range of safety and health hazards has resulted in citations and proposed penalties of $64,500 from OSHA.

The company was cited for 11 alleged repeat violations and one serious violation following an OSHA inspection that began Sept. 17, 2003. It covered 12 wastewater treatment sites throughout Louisiana. Total Environmental Solutions, headquartered in Baton Rouge, employs about 26 workers and provides sewer and wastewater treatment services at sewage facilities throughout the state.

"This company's failure to protect its employees will not be tolerated," said Greg Honaker, OSHA area director in Baton Rouge. "Platforms at the treatment sites were riddled with holes large enough for workers to fall into sewage pits or onto the ground. Breaker boxes were missing cover plates, exposing workers to energized wires. These types of violations were consistently found at each plant OSHA investigated."

The alleged repeat violations involved hazards for employees working around wastewater treatment units. They included failure to provide adequate railings to protect against falls into the sludge tank from the elevated working platforms, inadequate walking or working surfaces and failure to ensure adequate guardrails to prevent falls.

Other repeat citations were issued for failure to assess hazards to determine the need for personal protective equipment; not posting warning signs to inform employees about confined space hazards; lack of confined space training; failure to train employees in energy-lockout procedures when performing electrical work; failure to provide guards around moving parts such as pulleys; failure to provide and maintain cover plates on breaker panels; and failure to provide information and training about hazardous chemicals used by employees.

The repeat violations were based on prior inspections conducted in Slidell, La., and Kiln, Miss. OSHA issues a repeat citation when the same or similar violation is found for which the employer has been previously cited.

One alleged serious violation was issued for failing to provide the proper personal protective equipment to guard against exposure to sewage.

The company has 15 working days from receipt of the citations to comply, request an informal conference with the Baton Rouge area director, or contest the citations and penalties before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.




OSHA Cites New Britain General Hospital for Allegedly Exposing Employees to Safety and Health Hazards

New Britain General Hospital faces fines of $91,500 for allegedly exposing employees to a variety of workplace safety and health hazards, OSHA has announced.

OSHA began safety and health inspections of the hospital in September, 2003 according to Thomas Guilmartin, OSHA's area director in Hartford. The inspections resulted in citations for 37 alleged "serious" violations and four "other-than-serious" violations of OSHA safety and health standards.

The safety inspection resulted in 20 citations for alleged serious violations, including fall hazards, compressed gas storage hazards, confined space hazards, hazardous energy control, powered industrial truck hazards, machine guarding infractions, welding gas and electrical violations. These serious violations carry total proposed penalties of $42,000. Two other-than-serious violations with no monetary penalties pertain to minor electrical problems.

The health inspection resulted in citations for 17 alleged serious violations, with total proposed penalties of $49,500. The citations were for hazards associated with bloodborne pathogens, respiratory protection requirements, eye wash stations, lead and cadmium exposures, formaldehyde exposures, hazard communication requirements and chemical hygiene. Two other-than-serious health violations relate to the proper labeling of hazardous chemicals in the workplace.

An other-than-serious violation is a condition that would probably not cause death or serious physical harm, but would have a direct and immediate impact on the safety and health of employees.

New Britain General Hospital has 15 business days from receipt of the citations and proposed penalties to either elect to comply with them, to request and participate in an informal conference with the OSHA area director, or to contest them before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.




OSHA Cites Gelita USA For Machinery Hazards After Fatal Accident

OSHA has cited Gelita USA, a Calumet City, Ill. food preparation company for safety violations following a July, 2003 accident. One employee was fatally injured while performing maintenance on machinery at the plant as a result, and OSHA has proposed fines of $145,000.

In the July fatality, an employee was killed when his clothing became entangled in a rotating mandril at the end of an oven. The mandril is a large shaft equipped with blades or fins that break up dried sheets of gelatin.

OSHA's investigation into the accident revealed that Gelita USA did not develop written energy control procedures for locking out specific equipment while service was being performed. OSHA also cited the company for not ensuring that lockout or tagout devices were affixed while maintenance or service was performed and that equipment was not operating while barrier guards were being replaced.

Gelita USA employs some 65 workers in Calumet City and 2,500 company-wide. The company has had nine previous OSHA inspections at various locations. Several violations included lockout/tagout issues, according to Gary Anderson, director of OSHA's Calumet City area office.

The company has 15 working days from receipt of the citations to appeal before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.




OSHA Cites Company for Numerous Repeat Safety Violations Involving Overhead Cranes

Multiple repeat violations involving overhead cranes at Allegheny Rebar Incorporated have prompted OSHA to cite the Glassport, Pa. company for alleged safety and health violations and to propose $171,300 in penalties. The company employs 30 workers.

OSHA initiated an inspection in July 2003 in response to a complaint after an employee received an electrical shock while working on an electrical control panel. Citations were issued for 41 alleged repeat violations, with a penalty of $141,600; 18 alleged serious violations, with a proposed penalty of $29,700; and three other-than-serious violations, which carry no penalty.

Repeat violations include the company's failure to implement a maintenance program for overhead cranes in the facility based on the crane manufacturer's specifications; failure to make repairs and/or provide replacements for defective overhead cranes; failure to mark the rated load on overhead cranes; failure to guard moving parts and electrical parts on overhead cranes; failure to provide bridge brakes and warning alarms on two overhead cranes; failure to install a standard railing on overhead cranes; and failure to inspect overhead crane hooks and running ropes.

OSHA cited the company in January 2003 for violations of the same standard or the same hazards.

Alleged serious violations include unprotected electrical conductors entering boxes; open electrical boxes; lack of electrical weatherproof boxes in wet locations; improper use of flexible cords; the improper storage of diesel fuel tanks, improper lock out/tag out implementation (prevents inadvertent machine start-ups); defective mobile cranes, unguarded machinery; and unsecured storage of oxygen cylinders.

The company has 15 working days from the receipt of the citations to decide to comply, to request an informal conference with the OSHA area director, or to contest the citations and proposed penalties before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission




OSHA Delays Enforcement of Respiratory Protection Rule Provisions

OSHA announced that it will delay until July 1, 2004, enforcing several provisions of the respiratory protection standard for establishments required to provide respirators for protection from potential exposure to tuberculosis.

The announcement of the six-month period to allow affected employers to come into compliance with the additional requirements, follows OSHA's withdrawal last month of its 1997 proposal on tuberculosis and the revocation of a separate respiratory protection standard for workers exposed to TB.

"Requirements such as annual fit testing and medical evaluations for covered employees may be new for some employers," said OSHA Administrator John Henshaw. "We want to make sure they are aware of these new requirements and give them every opportunity to be able to successfully come into compliance."

With the withdrawal of the TB rule, OSHA announced it would begin applying the general industry respiratory protection standard for protection against the disease. This rule includes several requirements which were not as detailed in the revoked rule, such as updating the facility's respirator program, medical evaluation requirements, annual fit testing of respirators, and some training and recordkeeping provisions. During this six month period, OSHA will not cite these new requirements for establishments with workers exposed only to tuberculosis. All elements of the revoked rule continue to be enforced under the corresponding elements of the current respiratory protection standard.

To meet the requirements of the agency's respiratory protection standard, employers will need to revise their respiratory protection program, conduct annual respiratory fit testing, and perform a medical evaluation and annual training for employees using respirators.

This announcement does not affect establishments already covered under the respiratory protection rule where there is exposure to hazardous substances other than tuberculosis. All provisions of the rule will continue to be applied to those employers.