Inspection 344524178 OPENED DEC 20, 2019Closed
175 Hercules Drive, Colchester, VT 05446 · Other Communication and Energy Wire Manufacturing · OSHA's record · Phone and website on Google Maps
Incident on Dec 20, 2019: Employee's arm is amputated after hand is caught in spool
At 11:20 a.m. on December 20, 2019, an employee was working for a firm that manufactured cable for communications and energy transmission. She was working as a machine operator, or "spark test" operator. She was working on the take up side of line 3510 at the firm's facility. She was operating a Sterling Davis Electric model PORA spooling machine, with serial number C3390. It ran on 480 volts. She was using it take up the firm's catalog number 3XWR5 XLE 0.327-inch-diameter (about AWG gauge 0) wire, onto spool number 974181408. The spool was 18 in. (0.46 meters) in diameter. It was 26.5 in. (0.67 meters) above the ground. She was standing approximately 6 in. (150 mm) from the spool on the take up side of line 3510. Workers generally stood some 6 to 12 in. (150 to 300 mm) from the cable. The employee was standing her distance from the spool because of her height and ability to reach the wire. She was guiding the cable by hand. Her hand was pulled into the spool. The wire continued to spool at a low rpm, while the employee was wrapped in it three times. She was stuck under the cabling machine, and her arm was amputated. She was hospitalized. The employee stated that her left hand was directly touching the wire. She stated that she had been trained to use her hand on top of the wire to guide it into place. She stated the wire was sticky and that her left hand stuck to the wire. She was unable to move her hand, and it was pulled into the spool. She was working alone at the time of the incident, and no one witnessed it. Employee interviews revealed that this practice of employees using their hands to guide cable onto the automatically turning wheels was common and expected by the employer, even though it exposed them to obvious point of operation hazards. The employee spent herentire shift in an unguarded machine area.
| Citation and rule | Type | Proposed | Current | Issued | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Citation 1, item 1a 29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1) · Machine guarding |
Serious | $11,934 | $11,934 | Jun 16, 2020 | Final |
| Citation 1, item 1b 29 CFR 1910.212(a)(3)(ii) · Machine guarding |
Serious | $11,934 | $0 | Jun 16, 2020 | Final |