Share This Article:
Sarasota, FL (WorkersCompensation.com) - A charcoal manufacturer has been cited by OSHA for an array of health and safety hazards at its facilities in Branson and Summersville, Mo. Royal Oak Enterprises was fined $339,702 for 19 serious violations at the two job sites. In Branson, the charcoal manufacturer allegedly exposed employees to hazards such as electrical, hearing, forklift, and confined spaces. At the Summersville facility, some of the alleged dangers included exposing workers to silica dust, forklift hazards, and accumulation of combustible material.
The Citation and Notification of Penalty obtained by WorkersCompensation.com, includes the following violations at the company’s Summersville facility:
- Failing to protect employees from powered industrial truck hazards. A Toyota forklift truck brake pedal anti-slip cover was missing and was in need of replacing, but was not taken out of service until restored to safe operating condition.
- Failing to protect employees from caught-in hazards caused by rotating parts and in-running nip points from unguarded conveyor belts. Employees who were in direct proximity to the conveyor belts were said to be exposed to serious caught-in hazards from in-running nip points or other serious injuries. The conveyor belts had unguarded rollers which were not covered or guarded to prevent in-running nip points from contacting the employees.
- Failing to protect employees from electrical shock and burn hazards. The workstation located next to the main incline conveyor to bagging had a damaged three outlet adapter which had been used to power lighting fixtures above the work-station.
- Failing to protect employees from electrical shock, burn and fire hazards. Lighting fixtures near the workstation next to the main incline conveyor to bagging were utilizing a flexible extension cord as a substitute for fixed wiring of the structure.
OSHA cited the following serious violations at its facility in Branson:
- Failing to protect employees from caught-in and amputation hazards associated with inadequate guarding of a sprocket wheel and chain. Employees working in the Burn Room on the back side of the Rocket Launcher were exposed to serious injuries to the fingers and hands.
- Failing to protect employees from caught-in, laceration, and amputation hazards associated with confined space entry. Employees that work in the burner room had not received adequate confined space training to acquire the understanding, knowledge and skills necessary when they routinely entered permit required confined spaces to perform work.
- Failing to verify that rescue services were available, or have the required equipment available prior to employees entering into a permit- required confined space.
- Failing to protect employees from caught-in, struck-by, electric shock, and amputation hazards associated with servicing equipment. The company had not developed written machine specific lockout tagout procedures for the Rocket Launcher a 3 hopper fabricated machine.
“Every employer is required to provide a workplace free of hazards,” said Loren Sweatt, principal deputy assistant secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, in a press release. “Employers who implement a safety and health program that includes identifying and fixing hazards can minimize the risk of worker injuries and illnesses."
It is not yet known if Royal Oak Enterprises will contest the penalties.
AI arising out of california case management case management focus claims cms compensability compliance courts covid do you know the rule exclusive remedy florida FMLA glossary check Healthcare health care iowa leadership medical medicare minnesota NCCI new jersey new york ohio osha pennsylvania Safety state info technology tennessee texas violence virginia WDYT west virginia what do you think women's history month workers' comp 101 workers' recovery workers' compensation contact information Workplace Safety Workplace Violence
Read Also
About The Author
About The Author
- WorkersCompensation.com
More by This Author
- May 14, 2024
- WorkersCompensation.com
- May 05, 2024
- WorkersCompensation.com
- May 02, 2024
- WorkersCompensation.com
Read More
- May 20, 2024
- Claire Muselman
- May 20, 2024
- Chris Parker
- May 20, 2024
- Chriss Swaney
- May 18, 2024
- Chris Parker
The Power of Language in Workers’ Compensation: Why ‘Modified Duty’ is Better than ‘Restricted Duty’
- May 16, 2024
- Claire Muselman
- May 16, 2024
- Frank Ferreri