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

OSHA Inspection: SUPERIOR PRINTING INK CO INC

Planned inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned health inspection of SUPERIOR PRINTING INK CO INC in 750 SHERMAN AVE, HAMDEN, CT 06514 (NAICS 325910). OSHA activity number 337466411.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Superior Printing INK CO INC — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Superior Printing INK CO INC is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
750 SHERMAN AVE
City
HAMDEN
State
CT
ZIP
06514
Mailing
750 SHERMAN AVE, HAMDEN, CT 06514
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Complete (A)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
325910
Employees
35
Ownership type
A

11 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.132 D02

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2013
Abate by
Apr 9, 2013
Penalty
Initial $3,000 · Current $1,500 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2):  The employer did not verify, through a written certification, that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed:    Facility: The workplace hazard assessment did not include all the tasks, such as ( but not limted to) the personal protective equipment for changing the propane tank on the fork lift.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $1500
  • — Z (S) $3000

1910.138 B

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2013
Abate by
Mar 19, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.138(b): The employer did not base the selection of the appropriate hand protection on an evaluation of the performance characteristics of the hand protection relative to the task(s) to be performed, conditions present, duration of use, and the hazards and potential hazards identified.    Facility:  The employer did not select and require employee to wear appropriate hand protection while preforming tasks, such as (but not limited to) changing the tanks of propane fuel.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.134 C01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2013
Abate by
Apr 19, 2013
Penalty
Initial $5,000 · Current $2,500 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 required respirator use.     Facility: The employer did not establish and implement a written respiratory program where     employees were required to wear supplied air respirators.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $2500
  • — Z (S) $5000

1910.134 E01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2013
Abate by
Apr 19, 2013
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 is required to use the respirator in the workplace.    Facility:  The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to the employees, who were required to use air supplied to determine the employee's ability.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.134 I01 II

Other-than-serious 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2013
Abate by
Mar 19, 2013
Penalty
Initial $7,000 · Current $1,000 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.134(i)(1)(ii): Breathing air did not meet requirements for Grade "D" breathing air as described in the ANSI/Compressed Gas Association Commodity Specification G-7.1-1989.    Facility:  The breathing air, used by employees wearing supplied air quality respirators was not tested to ensure meeting the standards of Grade "D" air.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $1000
  • — Z (S) $7000

1910.134 I05 III

Other-than-serious 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2013
Abate by
Mar 19, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(i)(5)(iii): The compressor's sorbent bed and filters were not maintained and replaced or refurbished periodically as instructed by the manufacturer.      Facility: Facility: The pertinent parts of the air compressor used to supply breathing air for the employees wearing supplied air respirators was not maintained and replaced and/or refurbished periodically per manufacturers recommendations.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.147 C01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 10 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2013
Abate by
May 18, 2013
Penalty
Initial $5,000 · Current $2,500 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.147(c)(1): The employer did not establish a program consisting of an energy control procedure, employee training and periodic inspections to ensure that before any employee performed any servicing or maintenance on a machine or equipment where the unexpected energy, startup or release of stored energy could occur and cause injury, the machine or equipment shall be isolated from the energy source and rendered inoperative:    Facility:  The employer did not establish and implement a site specific energy control program consisting of machine specific step-by-step energy control procedures, employee training and more for employees servicing and maintenance of equipment, such as (but not limited to) vertical post mixers, and  3-roll mill.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $2500
  • — Z (S) $5000

1910.147 C04

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 10 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2013
Abate by
May 19, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4): Procedures were not developed, documented, and utilized for the control of potentially hazardous energy when employees were engaged in activities covered by this section:      Facility: The employer did not establish and implement written site and machine specific step-by-step hazardous energy control procedures for employees servicing and performing maintenance of equipment, such as (but not limited to) verical post mixers and 3-roll mill.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.147 C07 I

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 10 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2013
Abate by
May 19, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.147(c)(7)(i):  The employer did not provide adequate training to ensure that the purpose and function of the energy control program was understood by employees 29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4): Procedures were not developed, documented, and utilized for the control of potentially hazardous energy when employees were engaged in activities covered by this section:      Facility:  The employees, as "authorized, affected and other" types were not provided with appropriate training and information in the hazardous  energy control lockout/tagout procedures during servicing and performing maintenance of equipment, such as (but not limited to) vertical post mixers and 3-roll mill.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.176 B

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 36 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2013
Abate by
Mar 19, 2013
Penalty
Initial $5,000 · Current $2,500 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.176(b): Material stored in tiers was not stacked, blocked, interlocked or limited in height so that it was stable and secure against sliding and collapse:    Warehouse: The employer did not ensure that a stack of cardboard pallets were stacked  to prevent collapse.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $2500
  • — Z (S) $5000

1910.134 K06

Other-than-serious 1 instance 5 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2013
Abate by
Mar 19, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(k)(6): The employer did not provide the basic advisory information on respirators, as presented in Appendix D of 29 CFR 1910.134, in written or oral format to employees who wear respirators when such use was not required by the employer.:      Facility: The employees who were voluntary wearing N95 respirators were  neither given a copy of Appendix D information nor an explanation of its contents.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (O) $0

View Superior Printing INK CO 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 337466411.

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