Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,193,745Inspections Most recent open 2026-08-06 Last loaded 2026-08-10

OSHA Inspection: SECURITY PROTECTIVE COATINGS, INC.

Programmed Related inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a programmed Related safety inspection of SECURITY PROTECTIVE COATINGS, INC. in 3321 COUNTY D, WEST BEND, WI 53090 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 330980731.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Security Protective Coatings, INC. for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Security Protective Coatings, INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
3321 COUNTY D
City
WEST BEND
State
WI
ZIP
53090
Mailing
P.O. BOX 952, WEST BEND, WI 53095
Inspection type
Programmed Related (J)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238160
Employees
8
Ownership type
A

3 citations on file for this inspection.

1926.453 B02 V

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Nov 18, 2011
Abate by
Jan 4, 2012
Penalty
Initial $2,700 · Current $1,350 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.453(b)(2)(v):     A body belt shall be worn and a lanyard attached to the boom or basket when working from anaerial lift. Note to paragraph (b)(2)(v): As of January 1, 1998, subpart M of this part (1926.502(d)) provides that body belts are not acceptable aspart of a personal fall arrest system. The use of a body belt in a tethering system or in a restraint system is acceptable and is regulated under1926.502(e).  	  (a) Two employees were exposed to an approximate 17 foot fall hazard while conducting work out of an aerial lift.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $1350
  • · Z (S) $2700

1926.501 B10

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Nov 18, 2011
Abate by
Nov 28, 2011
Penalty
Initial $3,780 · Current $1,890 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(10):     "Roofing work on Low-slope roofs." Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this section,each employee engaged in roofing activities on low-slope roofs, with unprotected sides and edges 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above lower levels shall beprotected from falling by guardrail systems, safety net systems, personal fall arrest systems, or a combination of warning line system and guardrailsystem, warning line system and safety net system, or warning line system and personal fall arrest system, or warning line system and safetymonitoring system. Or, on roofs 50-feet (15.25 m) or less in width (see Appendix A to subpart M of this part), the use of a safety monitoring systemalone [i.e. without the warning line system] is permitted.    (a) Employees were conducting roofing work while being exposed to an approximate 40 foot fall hazard without any fall protection system in place.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $1890
  • · Z (S) $3780

1926.503 A01

Serious Gravity 10 2 instances 6 exposed
Issued
Nov 18, 2011
Abate by
Jan 4, 2012
Penalty
Initial $3,780 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.503(a)(1):     The employer shall provide a training program for each employee who might be exposed to fall hazards. The program shall enable each employee to recognize the hazards of falling and shall train each employee in the procedures to be followed inorder to minimize these hazards.    (a) The employer did not ensure that employees were using fall protection when conducting work while conducting roofing work. Employees were exposed to a fall hazard of approximately 40 feet. The employer did not ensure that the employees were trained to recognize and protect themselves from fall hazards.    (b) The employer did not ensure that employees were using fall protection while utilizing an aerial lift. The employer did not ensure that the employees were trained to recognize and protect themselves from fall hazards.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $3780

View Security Protective Coatings, INC.'s full OSHA safety record →

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 330980731.

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