SHELTON, CT ·
OSHA Inspection: LATEX FOAM INTERNATIONAL LLC
Complaint inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a complaint safety inspection of LATEX FOAM INTERNATIONAL LLC in 12 COMMERCE DRIVE, SHELTON, CT 06484 (NAICS 326299). OSHA activity number 339611055.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.
Where did this inspection happen?
- Establishment
- LATEX FOAM INTERNATIONAL LLC
- Site address
- 12 COMMERCE DRIVE
- City
- SHELTON
- State
- CT
- ZIP
- 06484
- Mailing
- 510 RIVER ROAD, SHELTON, CT 06484
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Complaint (B)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Safety
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- Non-union (B)
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 326299
- Employees
- 29
- Ownership type
- Private (A)
Citations
7 citations on file for this inspection.
1910.23 E01
- Issued
- May 29, 2014
- Abate by
- Jun 4, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $3,500 · Current $2,000 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.23(e)(1): Standard railing(s) did not consist of top rail, intermediate rail and/or posts and/or did not have a vertical height of 42 inches (106.7 cm) nominal from upper surface of top rail to floor, platform runway, or ramp level. Loft storage area: The open-sided floor of the loading bay on the second floor was not guarded by a standard guardrail or an equivalent, exposing employees to the hazard of falling approximately 11 feet to the floor.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $2000
- · Z (S) $3500
1910.132 D01
- Issued
- May 29, 2014
- Abate by
- Jun 17, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $2,100 · Current $1,000 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1): The employer did not assess the workplace to determine if hazards were present, or were likely to be present, which necessitated the use of personal protective equipment: Spray Area: The employer did not conduct the Workplace Hazard Assessment to determine the necessitate and appropriate types of personal protective equipment (PPE) for the employees performing various tasks, such as (but not limited to) spray finishing and other operations.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $1000
- · Z (S) $2100
1910.132 F01
- Issued
- May 29, 2014
- Abate by
- Jun 17, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.132(f)(1): The employer did not provide training to each employee who was required to by this section to use personal protective equipment(PPE): Spray Area: The employees, required to wear personal protective equipment while performing various tasks were not provided with training and information pertaining to the Workplace Hazard Assessment for PPE.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $0
- · Z (S) $0
1910.303 B01
- Issued
- May 29, 2014
- Abate by
- Jun 10, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $2,100 · Current $500 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.303(b)(1): Electrical equipment was not free from recognized hazards that were likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees Shop: The recognized electric hazards due to lack of appropriate strain relief device at the opening through which a flexible power cord entered an electric box were not eliminated and controlled through examination and inspection.
Recent events (2)
- · I (O) $500
- · Z (S) $2100
1910.305 G02 III
- Issued
- May 29, 2014
- Abate by
- Jun 4, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.305(g)(2)(iii): Flexible cords were not connected to devices and fittings so that tension would not be transmitted to joints or terminal screws: Shop: The opening through which the flexible power cord entered the electric box of the table saw was not equipped with an appropriate "strain relief" device.
Recent events (2)
- · I (O) $0
- · Z (S) $0
1910.1200 E01
- Issued
- May 29, 2014
- Abate by
- Jun 4, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $2,100 · Current $500 Reduced
General-duty citation text
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: Facility: A written Hazardous Communication Program was not kept at the worksite for the employees required to use and work with chemicals.
Recent events (2)
- · I (O) $500
- · Z (S) $2100
1910.1200 E01 I
- Issued
- May 29, 2014
- Abate by
- Jun 4, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1)(i): The written hazard communication program did not include a list of the hazardous chemicals known to be present using an identity that was referenced on the appropriate material safety data sheet: Facility: The written Hazard Communication Program did not contain a list of chemicals that were cross referenced to MSDS / SDSs within the binder that held the MSDSs / SDSs.
Recent events (2)
- · I (O) $0
- · Z (S) $0
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 326299)
More inspections in CT
Source
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 339611055.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.