NATICK, MA ·
OSHA Inspection: O.B. HILL MOTOR TRANSPORT CO., INC.
Referral inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a referral safety inspection of O.B. HILL MOTOR TRANSPORT CO., INC. in 197 W. CENTRAL STREET, NATICK, MA 01760 (NAICS 000000). OSHA activity number 100982560.
OSHA opens inspections for many reasons: routine scheduling under a national or local emphasis program, an employee complaint or referral, or a follow-up after a reported injury. Opening or conducting an inspection is not itself an allegation or a finding that this employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.
Where did this inspection happen?
- Establishment
- O.B. HILL MOTOR TRANSPORT CO., INC.
- Site address
- 197 W. CENTRAL STREET
- City
- NATICK
- State
- MA
- ZIP
- 01760
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Referral (C)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Safety
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- Union (Y)
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 000000
- SIC code (legacy)
- 4212
- Employees
- 15
- Ownership type
- Private (A)
Citations
1 citation on file for this inspection.
5(a)(1)
- Issued
- Mar 3, 1995
- Abate by
- Mar 7, 1995
- Penalty
- Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced
General-duty citation text
Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees in that employees were exposed to an uncontrolled pressure vessel explosion: (a) Location: Garage Area; On 2/10/95, the end cap blew off of a pontoon which was being filled with compressed air for testing purposes. Neither manufacturer's literature providing instructions for pressure testing, nor the specifications under which the pontoon was manufactured were available. The pressure that the pontoon was manufactured to withstand was not known. The pontoon sat on the ground for thirty years and the extent of any deterioration of the metal or welds was not known. The contents of the pontoon were not known and no testing was performed to determine the contents of the pontoon. The air pressure within the pontoon was not monitored while the compressed air was being introduced. The employee performing the pressure testing had not been trained in the procedures to be followed when testing a pressure vessel. Among other means, one feasible means of abatement would be to ensure that any employee required to test a pressure vessel be properly trained and qualified, to have a qualified person inspect the pressure vessel to determine how much pressure the vessel can withstand in its current condition, to test the vessel to determine the existing contents, and to monitor the pressure within the vessel at all times while compressed air is being introduced.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $1400.00
- · Z (S) $2800.00
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 000000)
More inspections in MA
Source
This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). OSHA publishes its own view of this case as inspection number 100982560.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.