OSHA Inspection: CESYL MILLS, INC.

Issued

2016-07-19 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-08-19 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3500.00 · Current $3500.00

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:  Cesyl Mills, 95 West Main Street, Millbury, Massachusetts; May 4 2016;  The employer did not perform periodic inspections of the energy control procedures at least annually to ensure that the procedures were followed.

Issued

2016-07-19 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-08-19 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3500.00 · Current $3500.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(7)(iv): The employer did not certify that employee training had been accomplished and kept up to date:  Cesyl Mills, 95 West Main Street, Millbury, Massachusetts; May 4 2016;  The employer did not certify that lockout training had been provided for authorized and affected employees.

Issued

2016-07-19 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-08-12 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3500.00 · Current $3500.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(8): Lockout or tagout was not performed only by the authorized employees who are performing the servicing or maintenance:  Cesyl Mills, 95 West Main Street, Millbury, Massachusetts; May 4, 2016; Machines are locked out by employees other than those employees performing the servicing or maintenance.

Issued

2016-07-19 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $4900.00 · Current $4900.00

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:  Carding machines, Cesyl Mills, 95 West Main Street, Millbury, Massachusetts; May 4, 2016; Carding machines were not fully guarded to prevent employee access to rotating parts and in-running nip points.  a.  the main drums to several carding machines, including #2, #6, #8, #9, were not guarded to prevent access to the rotating equipment. b.  guards on the gears for carding machine #6 were insufficient, they easily moved allowing access to the rotating gears where the amputation occurred in April 2016.

Issued

2016-07-19 00:00:00

Abate by

2016-07-25 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $3500.00 · Current $3500.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1904.39(a)(2): The in-patient hospitalization of one or more employees or an employee's amputation or an employee's loss of an eye, as a result of a work-related incident was not reported within 24 hours.  Cesyl Mills, 95 West Main Street, Millbury, Massachusetts; April 29, 2016;  The employer reported an amputation that occurred on the #6 carding machine on April 25, 2016, four days after the accident.