JAFFREY, NH —
OSHA Inspection: HMD, INC.
Complaint inspection · Health discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of HMD, INC. in 81 TURNPIKE ROAD, JAFFREY, NH 03452 (NAICS 339113). OSHA activity number 330290990.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- HMD, INC.
- Site address
- 81 TURNPIKE ROAD
- City
- JAFFREY
- State
- NH
- ZIP
- 03452
- Mailing
- 81 TURNPIKE ROAD, JAFFREY, NH 03452
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Complaint (B)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Health
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- B
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 339113
- Employees
- 50
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
3 citations on file for this inspection.
1910.212 A01
- Issued
- Jun 28, 2011
- Abate by
- Jul 19, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $2,100 · Current $1,000 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1): Machine guarding was not provided to protect operator(s) and other employees from hazard(s) created by INGOING NIP POINTS: a. Extrusion Department: In running nip point on machine number 4 was not guarded.
Recent events (2)
- — I (O) $1000
- — Z (S) $2100
1910.1052 D02
- Issued
- Jun 28, 2011
- Abate by
- Jul 28, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced
1730
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1052(d)(2): The employer did not perform initial monitoring to determine each employee's exposure to methylene chloride: The employer did not perform initial monitoring as required by the standard when methylene chloride was present in the workplace.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1400
- — Z (S) $2800
1904.29 A
- Issued
- Jun 28, 2011
- Abate by
- Aug 19, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $700 · Current $350 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1904.29(a): The employer did not use an OSHA 300, 301 and 300A Form or equivalent: a. Establishment - On or about 3/31/11, the employer forms used for recording injuries and illnesses were not an equivalent form for the calendar year 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011. The OSHA form 200 that was in use for 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011 was not filled out completely enough to provide the information that is required on the OSHA Form 300, and therefore was not equivalent. The classification, the number of days away from work and/or number of days on transfer or restriction, and the category of injury or type of illness for all cases was missing. b. Establishment - On or about 3/31/11, the employer did not have an OSHA form 300A (Summary of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses) or equivalent for calendar years 2008, 2009, and 2010.
Recent events (2)
- — I (O) $350
- — Z (O) $700
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 339113)
More inspections in NH
Source
This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). The original IMIS detail view is available at OSHA's Establishment Search for activity number 330290990.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.