Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,193,745Inspections Most recent open 2026-08-06 Last loaded 2026-08-10

OSHA Inspection: FIRST PLASTICS CORP.

Complaint inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint safety inspection of FIRST PLASTICS CORP. in 22 JYTEK ROAD, LEOMINSTER, MA 01453 (NAICS 333249). OSHA activity number 339537383.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 First Plastics Corp. for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for First Plastics Corp. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
22 JYTEK ROAD
City
LEOMINSTER
State
MA
ZIP
01453
Mailing
22 JYTEK ROAD, LEOMINSTER, MA 01453
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
333249
Employees
45
Ownership type
A

6 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.37 A03

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 20 exposed
Issued
Jan 16, 2014
Abate by
Mar 6, 2014
Penalty
Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.37(a)(3): Exit route(s) were not kept free and unobstructed:    22 Jytek Rd, Leominster, MA    On 1/6/2014 and at times prior, two exit routes in the production area were blocked by product and not accessible.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $2450
  • · Z (S) $4900

1910.37 B04

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 10 exposed
Issued
Jan 16, 2014
Abate by
Mar 6, 2014
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.37(b)(4): Signs were not posted along the exit access indicating the direction of travel to the nearest exit and exit discharge when the direction of travel to the exit or exit discharge was not immediately apparent:  22 Jytek Rd, Leominster, MA  On 1/6/2014 and at times prior, the direction of travel along the alternate exit route from the maintenance shop was not immediately apparent or marked by signs.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.37 B05

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 10 exposed
Issued
Jan 16, 2014
Abate by
Mar 6, 2014
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.37(b)(5): Each doorway or passage along an exit access that could be mistaken for an exit was not marked "Not an Exit" or similar designation, or be identified by a sign indicating its actual use (e.g. closet):  22 Jytek Rd, Leominster, MA  On 1/6/2014 and at times prior, a door along the alternate exit route from the maintenance shop was not marked with its use or with "Not an Exit."
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.178 L01 I

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 20 exposed
Issued
Jan 16, 2014
Abate by
Mar 6, 2014
Penalty
Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.178(l)(1)(i): The employer did not ensure that each powered industrial truck operator is competent to operate a powered industrial truck safely, as demonstrated by the successful completion of the training and evaluation specified in this paragraph (l):    22 Jytek Rd, Leominster, MA    On 1/6/2014 and at times prior, some PIT operator employees had received no training or evaluation, exposing employees to struck- and crushed-by hazards.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $2450
  • · Z (S) $4900

1910.178 Q07

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 20 exposed
Issued
Jan 16, 2014
Abate by
Mar 6, 2014
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.178(q)(7): Industrial trucks were not examined before being placed in service, and/or were placed in service when examination showed conditions adversely affecting the safety of the vehicle.  Such examination were not made at least daily. Where industrial trucks were used on a round-the-clock basis, they were not examined after each shift. Defects when found were not immediately reported and corrected.  22 Jytek Rd, Leominster, MA  On 1/6/2014 and at times prior, the employer did not ensure and operators did not examine PITs for unsafe conditions daily before use or after each shift.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1904.29 A

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 16, 2014
Abate by
Mar 6, 2014
Penalty
Initial $400 · Current $200 Reduced
29 CFR 1904.29(a): The employer did not use OSHA 300, 300-A, and 301 forms, or equivalents, for recordable injuries and illnesses.     22 Jytek Rd, Leominster, MA    On 1/6/2014 at the time of inspection, the employer had not used OSHA 300, 300-A, and 301 forms, or equivalent forms, for recordable injuries and illnesses for many years.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $200
  • · Z (O) $400

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 339537383.

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