Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,191,871Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-30 Last loaded 2026-08-03

OSHA Inspection: BOBCO ENTERPRISES, INC.

Complaint inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of BOBCO ENTERPRISES, INC. in 2910 GLANZMAN RD., TOLEDO, OH 43614 (NAICS 333922). OSHA activity number 338995459.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Bobco Enterprises, INC. for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Bobco Enterprises, INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
2910 GLANZMAN RD.
City
TOLEDO
State
OH
ZIP
43614
Mailing
2910 GLANZMAN RD., TOLEDO, OH 43614
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
333922
Employees
6
Ownership type
A

8 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.134 E01

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 30, 2013
Abate by
Nov 15, 2013
Penalty
Initial $1,200 · Current $600 Reduced
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:    1.) On or about April 8, 2013, the employer failed to provide employees who were required to wear tight-fitting half mask respirators with medical evaluations to determine if the employee was fit to wear a respirator.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $600
  • · Z (S) $1200

1910.107 C02

Deleted Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 30, 2013
Abate by
Oct 24, 2013
Penalty
Initial $2,000 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.107(c)(2):    Minimum separation. There shall be no open flame or spark producing equipment in any spraying area nor within 20 feet thereof, unless separated by a partition.      a) On or about April 8, 2013 The employer failed to ensure that there was no spark producing equipment within 20 feet of the spraying area.  A temporary paint spray booth was used, electrical outlets and a wall exhaust fan were in the spray area.  They were not designed for use in a Class I Division II hazardous location.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $2000

1910.1200 E01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 30, 2013
Abate by
Dec 2, 2013
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $800 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop, implement, and maintain at each workplace, a written hazard communication program which at least described how the criteria specified in paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) of this section for labels and other forms of warning, material safety data sheets, and employee information and training:             1.) On or about April 8, 2013,  The employer failed to implement the elements of a written hazard communication program.  Employees were exposed to hazards from organic vapors such as, but not limited to Xylene, Petroleum Distillates and Naphtha during painting operations.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $800
  • · Z (S) $1600

1910.1200 H01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 30, 2013
Abate by
Dec 2, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1):      Employees were not provided effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard that the employees had not been previously trained about was introduced into their work area:             1.) On or about April 8, 2013, the employer failed to train employees on the elements of a written hazard communication program including the hazards of the chemicals in their work area.  Employees were exposed to hazards from organic vapors such as, but not limited to Xylene, Petroleum Distillates and Naphtha during painting operations.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.134 D01 III

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 30, 2013
Abate by
Dec 2, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(iii): The employer did not identify and evaluate the respiratory hazard(s) in the workplace; including a reasonable estimate of employee exposures to respiratory hazards from painting operations.           1.) On or about April 8, 2013, The employer failed to evaluate the respiratory hazards for those employees who were exposed to hazards from organic vapors such as, but not limited to Xylene, Petroleum Distillates and Naphtha during painting operations.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (O) $0

1910.134 C01

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 30, 2013
Abate by
Dec 2, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1):    In any workplace where respirators are necessary to protect the health of the employee or whenever respirators are required by the employer, the employer did not establish and implement a written respiratory protection program with worksite specific procedures which includes provisions (i) through (ix) of this subparagraph, as applicable:               1.) On or about April 8, 2013, , the employer did not develop and implement a written respiratory protection program which covered employees who wore a half face respirator while performing paint spraying operations.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (O) $0

1910.134 F01

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 30, 2013
Abate by
Dec 2, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1):          The employer did not ensure that employee(s) required to use a tight-fitting facepiece respirator passed the appropriate qualitative fit test (QLFT) or quantitative fit test as stated in this paragraph;         1.) On or about April 8, 2013, the employer failed to ensure employees who were required to wear tight-fitting half mask respirators were fit tested to determine if the respirator seal was adequate.  Employees were exposed to hazards from organic vapors such as, but not limited to Xylene, Petroleum Distillates and Naphtha during painting operations.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (O) $0

1910.134 K

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 30, 2013
Abate by
Dec 2, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(k):   The employer did not provide effective training to employees who were required to use respirators:             1.) On or about April 8 2013, the employer failed to provide training on the necessity of a respirator, how to recognize the limitations and capabilities of a respirator, and how to inspect and maintain a respirator to employees who were required to wear half mask tight-fitting respirators while painting.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (O) $0

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 338995459.

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