Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,197,549Inspections Most recent open 2026-08-27 Last loaded 2026-08-31

OSHA Inspection: RANDALL'S AUTO BODY AND RENTAL, INC.

Complaint inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of RANDALL'S AUTO BODY AND RENTAL, INC. in 2994 S. COUNTY ROAD 25A, TROY, OH 45373 (NAICS 811198). OSHA activity number 339319923.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Randall'S Auto Body and Rental, INC. for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Randall'S Auto Body and Rental, INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
2994 S. COUNTY ROAD 25A
City
TROY
State
OH
ZIP
45373
Mailing
2994 S. COUNTY ROAD 25A, TROY, OH 45373
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
811198
Employees
6
Ownership type
Private (A)

9 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.106 E06 I

Serious Gravity 5 2 instances 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 17, 2013
Abate by
Nov 4, 2013
Penalty
Initial $2,000 · Current $800 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.106(e)(6)(i): Adequate precautions were not taken to prevent the ignition of flammable vapors:    a) The employer did not ensure that the 55 gallon drum containing lacquer thinner (flammable) with a flashpoint of -4 degrees Fahrenheit was grounded;    b) The employer did not ensure that the metal paint spray container was bonded when transferring the lacquer thinner from the 55 gallon drum using a metal hand pump.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $800
  • · Z (S) $2000

1910.107 B01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 17, 2013
Abate by
Nov 18, 2013
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $800 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.107(b)(1): The spraybooth was not substantially constructed of steel, securely and rigidly supported, or of concrete or masonry except that aluminum or other substantial noncombustible material may be used for intermittent or low volume spraying.    The employer did not ensure that the booth was constructed of noncombustible material in that a wood board was secured along the outer edge of the booth because the booth had rusted and adequate air flow could not be maintained.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $800
  • · Z (S) $1600

1910.107 B02

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 17, 2013
Abate by
Nov 18, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.107(b)(2): The interior surfaces of spray booths were not smooth and continuous without edges and otherwise designed to prevent pocketing of residues and facilitate cleaning and washing without injury.    The employer did not ensure the interior of the spray booth was smooth and continuous in that the interior walls of the spray booth was rusted through at the bottom.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.107 B05 I

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 17, 2013
Abate by
Nov 18, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.107(b)(5)(i): Visible gauges, audible alarms, or pressure activated devices were not installed to indicate or insure that the required air velocity was maintained:    The employer did not ensure that a visible gauge, audible alarm or pressure activated device was installed on the spray booth to ensure the required air velocity was maintained.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.107 G03

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 17, 2013
Abate by
Oct 11, 2013
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $600 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.107(g)(3): Residue scrapings and debris contaminated with residue were not immediately removed from the premises and properly disposed. Approved metal waste cans were not provided wherever rags or waste were impregnated with finishing material; and all such rags or waste were not deposited therein immediately after use. The contents of waste cans were not properly disposed of at least once daily or at the end of each shift.    The employer did not ensure that paper funnels, paper and cloth rags contaminated with lacquer thinner with a flashpoint of -4 degrees Fahrenheit were disposed in an approved metal waste can in that the papper rags and funnels were disposed of in an open plastic drum and the cloth rags were left on the workbench.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $600
  • · Z (S) $1600

1910.1200 H01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 17, 2013
Abate by
Nov 18, 2013
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $600 Reduced
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 which must include:    a) the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.1200;  b) operations where hazardsous chemicals are present;  c) location and availability of the written hazard communication program and material safety data sheets;  d) physical and chemical hazards of chemicals in the work area;  e) methods to detect the presence of hazardous chemicals in the work area;  f) measures to protect against hazards of the chemicals in the work area;    The employer did not provide training in accordance with the Hazard Communication Standard, employees were exposed to chemicals such as but not limited to lacquer thinner (flammable), Axalta White Chromaseal (flammable) and Dupont Clearcoat (flammable).
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $600
  • · Z (S) $1600

1910.107 G07

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 17, 2013
Abate by
Oct 11, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.107(g)(7): ``NO SMOKING" signs in large letters on contrasting color background were not conspicuously posted at all spraying areas and paint storage rooms.  The employee did not ensure that "No Smoking" signs were posted in the spraying area or the paint mixing area.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (O) $0

1910.134 C01

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 17, 2013
Abate by
Nov 18, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
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:    The employer did not establish and implement a written respiratory program for employees required to wear a half-mask elastomeric respirators when spray painting which included the following elements:    a) Procedures for selecting respirators;  b) Medical evaluations of employees required to wear respirators;  c) Fit-testing procedures for tight-fitting respirators;  d) Procedures for proper use of respirators in routine and reasonably foreseeable emergency situations;  e) Procedures and schedules for cleaning, disinfecting, storing, inspecting, repairing, discarding and otherwise maintaining a respirator;  f) Training of employees in the respiratory hazard to which they are potentially exposed;  g) Training of employees in the proper use of respirators including putting on and removing them, any limitations on their use and their maintenance.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (O) $0

1910.1200 E01

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 17, 2013
Abate by
Nov 18, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): Employer had not developed or implemented a written hazard communication program included the requirements outlined in 29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1)(i) and (e)(1)(ii):    The employer did not establish and implement a written hazard communication program.
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). OSHA publishes its own view of this case as inspection number 339319923.

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