Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,194,531Inspections Most recent open 2026-08-11 Last loaded 2026-08-14

OSHA Inspection: ARGO TRANSDATA CORPORATION

Complaint inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of ARGO TRANSDATA CORPORATION in 1 HERITAGE PARK RD, CLINTON, CT 06413 (NAICS 334412). OSHA activity number 338944770.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Argo Transdata Corporation for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Argo Transdata Corporation is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
1 HERITAGE PARK RD
City
CLINTON
State
CT
ZIP
06413
Mailing
1 HERITAGE PARK RD, CLINTON, CT 06413
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
Non-union (B)
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
334412
Employees
25
Ownership type
Private (A)

5 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.132 D01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
May 23, 2013
Abate by
Jun 5, 2013
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $1,120 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1): The employer did not assess the workplace to determine if hazards are present, or are likely to be present, which necessitate the use of personal protective equipment (PPE):  Facility: The employer did not conduct a site-specific workplace hazard assessment to determine the necessitate and appropriate types of PPE for employees.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $1120
  • · Z (S) $1600

1910.134 C01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 25 exposed
Issued
May 23, 2013
Abate by
Jun 5, 2013
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $1,120 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 respiratory protection program for employees who were required to wear respirators while working with urethane conformal coating.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $1120
  • · Z (S) $1600

1910.134 K

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 25 exposed
Issued
May 23, 2013
Abate by
Jun 5, 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:  Facility: The employer did not provide comprehensive training for employees who were required to wear respirators.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.134 E01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
May 23, 2013
Abate by
Jun 5, 2013
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $1,120 Reduced
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 was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:  Facility: The employer did not provide employees with a medical evaluation prior to employee use of a half-facepiece respirator while spraying urethane conformal coating.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $1120
  • · Z (S) $1600

1910.134 F02

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
May 23, 2013
Abate by
Jun 5, 2013
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $1,120 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): Employee(s) using tight-fitting facepiece respirators were not fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator:  Facility: The employer did not provide employees with a fit test prior to employee use of a half-facepiece respirator while spraying urethane conformal coating.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $1120
  • · Z (S) $1600

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 338944770.

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