Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,191,871Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-30 Last loaded 2026-08-03

OSHA Inspection: TRILLIUM SOLID SURFACE, LLC

Complaint inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of TRILLIUM SOLID SURFACE, LLC in 4618 TOMPKINS DRIVE, MADISON, WI 53716 (NAICS 337110). OSHA activity number 330975889.

What this inspection record means

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.

Watch Trillium Solid Surface, LLC for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Trillium Solid Surface, LLC is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
4618 TOMPKINS DRIVE
City
MADISON
State
WI
ZIP
53716
Mailing
4618 TOMPKINS DRIVE, MADISON, WI 53716
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
337110
Employees
4
Ownership type
A

11 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.22 A01

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 20, 2012
Abate by
Dec 3, 2012
Penalty
Initial $4,200 · Current $1,260 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.22(a)(1):     All places of employment, passageways, storerooms or service rooms were not kept clean and orderly or in a sanitary condition.    The employer did not keep the production area free of accumulation of combustible dust.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $1260
  • · Z (S) $4200

1910.134 E01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 20, 2012
Abate by
Jan 27, 2012
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1):     The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:    Where employee(s) are overexposed to particulates not otherwise regulated, the employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.134 F02

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 20, 2012
Abate by
Feb 3, 2012
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2):     The employer did not ensure that an employee using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator was fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator, whenever a different respirator facepiece (size, style, model or make) is used, and at least annually thereafter    Where employee(s) are overexposed to particulates not otherwise regulated, the employer did not ensure that employees were fit tested prior to initial use.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.134 K03

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 20, 2012
Abate by
Feb 3, 2012
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(k)(3):     Training was not provided prior to requiring employees to use a respirator in the workplace:    Where employee(s) are overexposed to particulates not otherwise regulated, the employer did not provide training to employees prior to requiring employees to use a respirator.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.305 B02 I

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 20, 2012
Abate by
Jan 27, 2012
Penalty
Initial $1,800 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.305(b)(2)(i):     Each outlet box in completed installations did not have a cover, faceplate, or fixture canopy.     An outlet in the production area of the workplace had a broken faceplate.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (S) $1800

1910.1000 A02

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 20, 2012
Abate by
Jun 5, 2013
Penalty
Initial $4,200 · Current $1,260 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(2):     Employee(s) were exposed to an airborne concentration of Particles not otherwise requlated (Total Dust) listed in Table Z-1 in excess of the 8 hour Time Weighted Average concentration of  15 mg/m^3:    A sander was exposed to 19.5 mg/m^3 of total dust which is 1.3 times the limit of 15 mg/m^3. This limit is established to prevent irritation of the eyes, skin, throat, and upper respiratory system.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $1260
  • · Z (S) $4200

1910.1000 E

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 20, 2012
Abate by
Jun 5, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.1000(e):     Feasible administrative or engineering controls were not determined and implemented to achieve compliance with the limits prescribed in 29 CFR 1910.1000(a) through (d):    A sander was exposed to 19.5 mg/m^3 of total dust which is 1.3 times the limit of 15 mg/m^3.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.134 D01 III

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 20, 2012
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(iii):     The employer did not identify and evaluate the respiratory hazard(s) in the workplace; including a reasonable estimate of employee exposures to respiratory hazards and identification of the contaminants chemical state and physical form:    Where a sander was overexposed to total dust, the employer did not evaluate respiratory hazards in the workplace.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.134 C01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 20, 2012
Abate by
Apr 2, 2012
Penalty
Initial $3,600 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1):     A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for respirator use:    Where employee(s) are overexposed to particulates not otherwise regulated, the employer did not develop a written respiratory protection program.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $3600

1910.1200 E01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 20, 2012
Abate by
Apr 2, 2012
Penalty
Initial $3,000 · Current $900 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1):     The employer did not develop, implement, and/or maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which describes how the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) will be met:    Where employees are working with chemicals including, but not limited to: LG HI-MACS Acrylic Solid Surface, the employer did not develop a hazard communication program.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $900
  • · Z (S) $3000

1910.1200 H01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 20, 2012
Abate by
Feb 3, 2012
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1):     Employees were not provided effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard that the employees had not been previously trained about was introduced into their work area:    Where employees are working with chemicals including, but not limited to: LG HI-MACS Acrylic Solid Surface, the employer did not provide training on the hazards.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

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 330975889.

Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.