Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,195,903Inspections Most recent open 2026-08-18 Last loaded 2026-08-21

OSHA Inspection: COMAX ENTERPRISES, INC.

Planned inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of COMAX ENTERPRISES, INC. in 83 HAMMOND STREET, BIG FLATS, NY 14814 (NAICS 562920). OSHA activity number 339570160.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Comax Enterprises, INC. for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Comax Enterprises, INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
83 HAMMOND STREET
City
BIG FLATS
State
NY
ZIP
14814
Mailing
88 TIOGA AVENUE, CORNING, NY 14830
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Complete (A)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
Non-union (B)
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
562920
Employees
7
Ownership type
Private (A)

9 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.134 D01 III

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2014
Abate by
Mar 28, 2014
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $960 Reduced
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 and identification of the contaminants chemical state and physical form:    Comax Enterprises, Inc., on or about 1/31/14:  The Employer did not evaluate the respiratory hazards in the workplace and did not determine employee exposure levels to contaminants generated when torch cutting various metals.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $960
  • · Z (S) $1600

1910.1200 E01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2014
Abate by
Mar 28, 2014
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop, implement, and/or maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which describes how the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) will be met:   a)  Comax Enterpises, Inc., on or about 1/31/14:  A written hazard communication program was not developed for the employees who work with hazardous materials including but not limited to, propane, oxygen, acetylene and various metals.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.1200 G01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2014
Abate by
Mar 28, 2014
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(1):  The employer did not have safety data sheets for each hazardous chemical in use:     a)  Comax Enterprises, Inc., on or about 1/31/14:  The employer did not have safety data sheets for each hazardous material including, but not limited to, propane, oxygen, acetylene, and various metals.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.1200 H01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2014
Abate by
Mar 28, 2014
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:      a)  Comax Enterprises, Inc., on or about 1/31/14:  Employees were not provided with information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area such as but not limited to; propane, oxygen and acetylene.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.157 G02

Deleted Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2014
Abate by
Mar 28, 2014
Penalty
Initial $1,200 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.157(g)(2): The educational program to familiarize employees with the general principles of fire extinguisher use and the hazards involved with incipient stage fire fighting was not provided to all employees upon initial employment, and at least annually thereafter:  a)  Comax Enterprises, Inc., on or about 1/31/14:  Employees were not provided with training on the use and application of fire extinguishers upon initial employment.  *ABATEMENT NOTE:  By this date the employer must either correct the alleged violation or implement a Fire Safety Policy; as outlined in 29 CFR 1910.38(a) and .39(a) which includes the evacuation requirements of 29 CFR 1910.157(b).
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $1200

1910.177 D01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2014
Abate by
Mar 28, 2014
Penalty
Initial $2,000 · Current $1,200 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.177(d)(1): The employer did not furnish a restraining device for employees to use while inflating tires on multi-piece wheels:  a)  Comax Enterprises, Inc., on or about 1/31/14:  Employees were not  provided with a restraining device to use while inflating tires on multi-piece wheels.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $1200
  • · Z (S) $2000

1910.178 L01 I

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2014
Abate by
Mar 28, 2014
Penalty
Initial $1,200 · Current $720 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):  a)  Comax Enterprises, Inc., on or about 1/31/14:  The Employer did not ensure that each powered industrial truck operator was provided with initial training.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $720
  • · Z (S) $1200

1910.219 D01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2014
Abate by
Mar 13, 2014
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $960 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.219(d)(1): Pulley(s) with part(s) seven feet or less from the floor or work platform were not guarded in accordance with the requirements specified in 29 CFR 1910.219(m) and (o):   a)  Comax Enterprises, Inc., Big Flats, NY, on or about 1.31/14:  Honeywell compressor was not provided with guarding at the in-running nip points where the belt and pulley meet.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $960
  • · Z (S) $1600

1910.219 E01 I

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Feb 21, 2014
Abate by
Mar 13, 2014
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.219(e)(1)(i): Horizontal belts which had both runs 42 inches or less from the floor level were not fully enclosed by guards conforming to requirements specified in 29 CFR 1910.219(m) and (o):    a)  Comax Enterprises, Inc., Big Flats, NY, on or about 1.31/14:  Honeywell compressor was not provided with guarding at the in-running nip points where the belt and pulley meet.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

View Comax Enterprises, INC.'s full OSHA safety record →

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 339570160.

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