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

OSHA Inspection: MAX COATING, INC.

Complaint inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint safety inspection of MAX COATING, INC. in 170 SELIG DRIVE, ATLANTA, GA 30336 (NAICS 332812). OSHA activity number 338330418.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 MAX Coating, INC. — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for MAX Coating, INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
MAX COATING, INC.
Site address
170 SELIG DRIVE
City
ATLANTA
State
GA
ZIP
30336
Mailing
170 SELIG DRIVE, ATLANTA, GA 30336
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
332812
Employees
9
Ownership type
A

5 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.23 D01 III

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Apr 26, 2013
Abate by
May 15, 2013
Penalty
Initial $2,100 · Current $1,260 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.23(d)(1)(iii): Stairway(s) less than 44 inches wide having both sides open, did not have one stair railing on each side:  a) In the powder coating department - The stairway leading to the catwalk did not have a stair railing on the right hand side. Employees access the stairs to repair the coating line and to remove any blockages, exposing employees to fall hazards.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $1260
  • — Z (S) $2100

1910.134 E01

Other-than-serious 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Apr 26, 2013
Abate by
May 15, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employees ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:  a) Throughout the facility -The employer did not provide a medical evaluation for employees required to wear the 3M NIOSH air purifying respirators and 2300 N95 dust masks, exposing employees to respiratory tract irritation.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (O) $0

1910.134 F

Other-than-serious 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Apr 26, 2013
Abate by
May 15, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(f): The employee was required to use a respirator without being fit tested with the same make, model, style and size of respirator that was to be used:  a) Throughout the facility - The employer did not provide fit testing for employees using 3M NIOSH air purifying respirators and 2300 N95 dust masks, exposing employees to respiratory tract irritation.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (O) $0

1910.134 K

Other-than-serious 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Apr 26, 2013
Abate by
May 15, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(k): The employer did not provide comprehensive, understandable training which did not occur annually and/or more often if necessary:  a) Throughout the facility - The employer did not provide any information and training regarding the proper use of respirators to employees required to wear 3M NIOSH air purifying respirators and 2300 N95 dust masks, exposing employees to respiratory tract irritation.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (O) $0

1910.1200 G08

Other-than-serious 1 instance 9 exposed
Issued
Apr 26, 2013
Abate by
May 8, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(8): The employer did not maintain copies of the required material safety data sheets for each hazardous chemical in the workplace:  a) In the powder coating department - The employer did not maintain a material safety data sheet for employees utilizing the Lubecon Series I/M 200 Lubricant, which was used to lubricate the chains of conveyors, exposing employees to the eye, skin, and respiratory tract irritations.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (O) $0

View MAX Coating, 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 338330418.

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