Safety fines for auto parts maker

TFO Tech Co. Ltd is being fined $51,000 by OSHA for 13 safety violations at its Jefferson, OH, facility after a July inspection was carried out under the National Emphasis Program on Amputations.

12/11/2012


ISS SourceTFO Tech Co. Ltd is facing $51,000 in fines for 13 safety violations at the company’s auto parts manufacturing facility in Jeffersonville, OH, said officials at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

The violations include a lack of machine guarding and allowing workers to perform maintenance on machinery without first isolating the equipment’s energy source. OSHA opened an inspection in July under the agency’s National Emphasis Program on Amputations after receiving a complaint. Japan-based TFO Tech employs 140 workers at its Ohio facility.

“TFO Tech has a responsibility to ensure that employees are properly protected from known workplace hazards – such as machinery becoming unintentionally energized during maintenance – that can result in amputations and other serious injuries,” said Bill Wilkerson, OSHA’s area director in Cincinnati.

Twelve serious violations involve a lack of guarding for the points of operation on automated mechanical forging presses, not having machine-specific lockout/tagout procedures, a damaged metal guard on a conveyor, inadequate strain relief and insulation for electrical cords, a lack of periodic inspections, unguarded floor openings, failing to train workers, and failing to lock out the energy sources of machinery during servicing and maintenance. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

One other-than-serious violation is failing to evaluate forklift operator performance at least once every three years. An other-than-serious violation is one that has a direct relationship to job safety and health, but probably would not cause death or serious physical harm.

This is OSHA’s sixth inspection of the company; the last inspection occurred in June 2003 and resulted in a citation for a serious violation involving a lack of machine guarding.



No comments
Consulting-Specifying Engineer's Product of the Year (POY) contest is the premier award for new products in the HVAC, fire, electrical, and...
Consulting-Specifying Engineer magazine is dedicated to encouraging and recognizing the most talented young individuals...
The MEP Giants program lists the top mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and fire protection engineering firms in the United States.
Water use efficiency: Diminishing water quality, escalating costs; Lowering building energy use; Power for fire pumps
Building envelope and integration; Manufacturing industrial Q&A; NFPA 99; Testing fire systems
Labs and research facilities: Q&A with the experts; Water heating systems; Smart building integration; 40 Under 40 winners
Maintaining low data center PUE; Using eco mode in UPS systems; Commissioning electrical and power systems; Exploring dc power distribution alternatives
Protecting standby generators for mission critical facilities; Selecting energy-efficient transformers; Integrating power monitoring systems; Mitigating harmonics in electrical systems
Commissioning electrical systems in mission critical facilities; Anticipating the Smart Grid; Mitigating arc flash hazards in medium-voltage switchgear; Comparing generator sizing software
As brand protection manager for Eaton’s Electrical Sector, Tom Grace oversees counterfeit awareness...
Amara Rozgus is chief editor and content manager of Consulting-Specifier Engineer magazine.
IEEE power industry experts bring their combined experience in the electrical power industry...
Michael Heinsdorf, P.E., LEED AP, CDT is an Engineering Specification Writer at ARCOM MasterSpec.