Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,198,892Inspections Most recent open 2026-09-03 Last loaded 2026-09-07

OSHA Inspection: KIM'S AUTO TECH

Planned inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned health inspection of KIM'S AUTO TECH in 3715 E. ST. VRAIN STREET, COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80909 (NAICS 811121). OSHA activity number 334124021.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Kim'S Auto Tech for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Kim'S Auto Tech is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
KIM'S AUTO TECH
Site address
3715 E. ST. VRAIN STREET
City
COLORADO SPRINGS
State
CO
ZIP
80909
Mailing
3715 E. ST. VRAIN STREET, COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80909
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Complete (A)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
Non-union (B)
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
811121
Employees
1
Ownership type
Private (A)

7 citations on file for this inspection.

5(a)(1)

Deleted Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
May 18, 2012
Abate by
Jul 2, 2012
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970:  The employer did not furnish employment or a place of employment which was free from recognized hazards which were likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees in that, employees were exposed to struck-by hazards:      a)  On or about November 30, 2011, and at times prior, employees were exposed to struck-by hazards from the bursting of PVC piping that was used to deliver compressed air to areas of the body shop.  The ASTM D1785 specification for this type of PVC piping is for the distribution of pressurized liquids only and it is not for use with compressed air which contains large amounts of stored energy.  In the event of a pipe system failure, pipe shards could be launched into the shop.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.22 D01

Deleted Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
May 18, 2012
Abate by
Jul 2, 2012
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.22(d)(1):  On every building or other structure, or part thereof, used for mercantile, business, industrial or storage purposes, the loads approved by the building official were not marked on plates of approved design and securely affixed to the building:      a)  On or about November 30, 2011, and at times prior, employees were exposed to struck-by or crushed-by hazards when they entered the office area where shop materials were stored on the ceiling/roof structure.  The employer had not posted the load rating for the roof structure.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.132 D02

Deleted Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
May 18, 2012
Abate by
Jul 2, 2012
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2):  The employer did not verify, through a written certification, that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed:    a)  On or about November 30, 2011, and at times prior, the employer did not verify, through written certification, that a hazard assessment of the workplace had been performed to determine the type of personal protective equipment necessary to protect employees from such hazards as chemicals, dust,  flying chips and particles, and the use of power tools.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.134 C01

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
May 18, 2012
Abate by
Jul 2, 2012
Penalty
Initial $1,200 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1):  A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required respirator use:      a)  On or about November 30, 2011, and at times prior, the employer did not establish a written respiratory protection program and provide effective training to employees who used respirators to protect themselves from a variety of chemicals including paints, solvents and silica (from sand blasting).  Employees used elastomeric half-face respirators without being provided medical evaluations and basic training which ensured that the use of the respirators themselves did not present a health hazard to the employees.  Further, respirator selection was not based on an assessment of the air contaminants.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $1200

1910.215 A04

Deleted Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
May 18, 2012
Abate by
Jul 2, 2012
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.215(a)(4): Work rest(s) on grinding machinery were not adjusted closely to the wheel with a maximum opening of one eighth inch:    a)  On or about November 30, 2011, and at times prior, employees were exposed to cuts, bruises and other injuries produced by the breakage of abrasive grinding wheels while they used a bench grinder that was not equipped with work rests that were adjusted to provide a maximum opening of one eighth inch.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.215 B09

Deleted Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
May 18, 2012
Abate by
Jul 2, 2012
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.215(b)(9):  The distance between the abrasive wheel periphery(s) and the adjustable tongue or the end of the safety guard peripheral member at the top exceeded one fourth inch:    a)  On or about November 30, 2011, and at times prior, employees were exposed to cuts, bruises and other injuries produced by the breakage of abrasive grinding wheels while they used a bench grinder that did not have tongue guards.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.1200 E01

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
May 18, 2012
Abate by
Jul 2, 2012
Penalty
Initial $1,200 · Current $0 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:      a)  On or about November 30, 2011, and at times prior, the employer failed to fully develop and implement a written hazard communication program in order to inform employees of the health hazards associated with the chemicals used in the paint and body shop.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $1200

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 334124021.

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