Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,196,249Inspections Most recent open 2026-08-20 Last loaded 2026-08-24

OSHA Inspection: FUTURE FOAM, INC.

Complaint inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint safety inspection of FUTURE FOAM, INC. in 2210 PARVIEW RD, MIDDLETON, WI 53562 (NAICS 326150). OSHA activity number 334093820.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Future Foam, INC. for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Future Foam, INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
FUTURE FOAM, INC.
Site address
2210 PARVIEW RD
City
MIDDLETON
State
WI
ZIP
53562
Mailing
2210 PARVIEW RD, MIDDLETON, WI 53562
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
Non-union (B)
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
326150
Employees
50
Ownership type
Private (A)

6 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.132 D01 I

Other-than-serious 1 instance 10 exposed
Issued
Jul 23, 2012
Abate by
Jul 26, 2012
Penalty
Initial $6,600 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1)(i):     When the employer had assessed the workplace hazard(s) and determined that hazard(s) were present, the employer did not select and/or use the types of personal protective equipment that would protect the affected employee from the hazard:    The employer did not ensure that employees operating the mandrel loader who were exposed to the hazard of mandrels being dropped on their feet were wearing protective footwear.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (S) $6600

1910.136 A

Other-than-serious 1 instance 10 exposed
Issued
Jul 23, 2012
Abate by
Jul 26, 2012
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.136(a):     The employer did not ensure that each affected employee uses protective footwear when working in areas where there is a danger of foot injuries due to falling or rolling objects, or objects piercing the sole, and where such employee's feet are exposed to electrical hazards:    Employee(s) exposed to potential injury due to dropped mandrels were not protected from foot injury by the wearing of protective footwear.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.147 C04 II B

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 20 exposed
Issued
Jul 23, 2012
Abate by
Jul 26, 2012
Penalty
Initial $5,500 · Current $2,750 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(ii)(B):     The energy control procedures did not clearly and specifically outline the steps for shutting down, isolating, blocking and securing machines or equipment to control hazardous energy.    The written lockout procedure for the Braun Peelers required dissipation of energy sources, but did not specify that the authorized lockout employee wait for the coasting of the peeler blade to cease before beginnning any servicing or maintenance activities on the peeler.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $2750
  • · Z (S) $5500

1910.147 D04 I

Deleted Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jul 23, 2012
Abate by
Jul 30, 2012
Penalty
Initial $5,500 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.147(d)(4)(i):     Lockout or tagout devices were not affixed to each energy isolating device by authorized employees:    Application of a lock on the disconnect of the Blue Baumer Peeler was not being enforced for blade changes.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $5500

1910.212 A01

Serious Gravity 5 2 instances 5 exposed
Issued
Jul 23, 2012
Abate by
Jul 30, 2012
Penalty
Initial $5,500 · Current $2,750 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1):     Machine guarding was not provided to protect operator(s) and other employees from hazard(s) created by the following machinery:    The following machines were not guarded:    a)  The projecting jaws of the chuck of the Sigma 2000 rpm Lathe are not guarded.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $2750
  • · Z (S) $5500

1910.212 A03 II

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 20 exposed
Issued
Jul 23, 2012
Abate by
Jul 30, 2012
Penalty
Initial $7,000 · Current $3,500 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.212(a)(3)(ii):     Point(s) of operation of machinery were not guarded to prevent employee(s) from having any part of their body in the danger zone(s) during operating cycle(s):    a)  The blades of the Baumer Peelers were not guarded.         1)  Blue Peeler, #8137         2)  Brown Peeler, #4280         3)  Green Peeler, #7468
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $3500
  • · Z (S) $7000

View Future Foam, INC.'s full OSHA safety record →

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 334093820.

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