Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,189,992Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-18 Last loaded 2026-07-22

OSHA Inspection: THE HARTFORD PROVISION COMPANY

Complaint inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of THE HARTFORD PROVISION COMPANY in 625 NUTMEG ROAD NORTH, SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074 (NAICS 424410). OSHA activity number 337448617.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 The Hartford Provision Company — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for The Hartford Provision Company is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
625 NUTMEG ROAD NORTH
City
SOUTH WINDSOR
State
CT
ZIP
06074
Mailing
P.O. BOX 1228, SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
A
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
424410
Employees
160
Ownership type
A

3 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.37 A03

Deleted Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 15 exposed
Issued
May 13, 2013
Abate by
May 13, 2013
Penalty
Initial $3,600 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.37(a)(3): Exit route(s) were not kept free and unobstructed:   Warehouse, Aisle 214, Slot 98:   On or about January, 30, 2013, a portion of the racking system was obstructing access to the emergency exit
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $0
  • — C (S) $3600
  • — Z (S) $3600

1910.132 D01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 62 exposed
Issued
May 13, 2013
Abate by
Jun 28, 2013
Penalty
Initial $5,400 · Current $3,240 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1): The employer did not assess the workplace to determine if hazards were present, or were likely to be present, which necessitated the use of personal protective equipment:      Establishment: The employer's hazard assessment did not assess the need for, nor require the use of, footwear for selectors and drivers to designed to protect against impact, compression, puncture hazards and slippery walking /working surfaces.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $3240
  • — C (S) $5400
  • — Z (S) $5400

1910.136 A

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
May 13, 2013
Abate by
Jun 28, 2013
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:      Warehouse: On or about January 30, 2013,  an employee selecting product during his shift was not wearing protective footwear while working in areas where there was a danger of foot injuries due to falling or rolling objects, or objects that could pierce the sole.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $0
  • — C (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

View The Hartford Provision Company'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 337448617.

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