Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,197,124Inspections Most recent open 2026-08-25 Last loaded 2026-08-28

OSHA Inspection: ADC CUSTOM PRODUCTS

Complaint inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint safety inspection of ADC CUSTOM PRODUCTS in 5311 FULLER STREET, SCHOFIELD, WI 54476 (NAICS 333111). OSHA activity number 339863128.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 ADC Custom Products for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for ADC Custom Products is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
ADC CUSTOM PRODUCTS
Site address
5311 FULLER STREET
City
SCHOFIELD
State
WI
ZIP
54476
Mailing
5311 FULLER STREET, SCHOFIELD, WI 54476
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
Non-union (B)
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
333111
Employees
32
Ownership type
Private (A)

12 citations on file for this inspection.

5(a)(1)

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 11, 2014
Abate by
Oct 17, 2014
Penalty
Initial $2,380 · Current $1,428 Reduced
OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1): Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: the employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which was free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees that were exposed to falls:    Employees at site located at 5311 Fuller Street, Schofield, WI were exposed to fall hazards while working from a platform resting on the forks of a lift truck.  a)    The platform did not have a guardrail at a height of not less than 36 inches around its periphery.  b)    The platform did not have a mid-rail around its periphery.  c)     The toe board was less than 4 inches in height.  d)    The platform was located more than 8 inches above the upper face of the supporting fork blade.  e)    The platform was not securely attached to the lifting carriage or forks.  f)     The platform was not marked with the maximum load capacity including personnel and equipment.  g)    The weight of the empty platform was not marked on the platform.  h)    The minimum capacity of the lift truck on which the platform can be used was not marked on the platform.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $1428
  • · Z (S) $2380

1910.107 B05 I

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 11, 2014
Abate by
Oct 17, 2014
Penalty
Initial $2,975 · Current $1,785 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.107(b)(5)(i): Visible gauges or audible alarms or pressure activated devices were not installed to indicate or insure that the required air velocity is maintained:    a)    The spray booth was not equipped with visible gauges or other means to indicate when the air flow was not being maintained in accordance with the standard.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $1785
  • · Z (S) $2975

1910.107 B06

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 11, 2014
Abate by
Oct 17, 2014
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.107(b)(6): Spray booth(s) having a frontal area larger than 9 square feet did not have metal deflectors or curtains not less than 2 1/2 inches deep installed at the upper outer edge of the booth over the opening:   a)    The spray booth was not equipped with a metal deflector or curtain to keep air flow inside of the booth.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.107 B10

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 11, 2014
Abate by
Oct 17, 2014
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.107(b)(10): 29 CFR 1910.107(b)(10):  Illumination panels did not effectively isolate the spraying area from the area in which the lighting unit is located:    a)    The spray booth had one of the glass panels missing that was designed to cover the fluorescent tubes in the ORION ENERGY SYSTEMS light fixture.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.107 C02

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 11, 2014
Abate by
Oct 17, 2014
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.107(c)(2): Open flame or spark producing equipment was not kept from a spraying area nor within 20 feet, unless separated from by a partition:   a)    There was a "ener RADIANT XL" gas fired infrared heater within 20 feet of the spray booth mounted at the ceiling along the outside wall of the building.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.134 C

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Sep 11, 2014
Abate by
Oct 17, 2014
Penalty
Initial $3,570 · Current $2,142 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.134(c): The employer did not develop and implement a written respiratory protection program with required worksite-specific procedures and elements for required respirator use:    a)    The company had not developed a written respiratory protection program but did have employees using respirators at the facility.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $2142
  • · Z (S) $3570

1910.134 E01

Serious Gravity 5 2 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Sep 11, 2014
Abate by
Oct 17, 2014
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:  a)    The company did not provide medical evaluations to employees required to wear respirators on the job.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.134 F02

Serious Gravity 5 2 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Sep 11, 2014
Abate by
Oct 17, 2014
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): Employee(s) using tight-fitting facepiece respirators were not fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator:    a)    The company did not provide fit testing to employees required to wear respirators on the job.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.134 G01 I

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 11, 2014
Abate by
Oct 17, 2014
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i): The employer permitted respirators with tight-fitting facepieces to be worn by employees who have facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face or interfered with valve function:  a)    The company did not require employees to be clean shaven that were required to wear respirators on the job.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.134 K03

Serious Gravity 5 2 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Sep 11, 2014
Abate by
Oct 17, 2014
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(k)(3): Training was not provided prior to requiring employees to use a respirator in the workplace:      a)    The company did not provide training prior to employees being required to wear respirators on the job.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.179 G01 V

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 11, 2014
Abate by
Oct 17, 2014
Penalty
Initial $2,975 · Current $1,785 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.179(g)(1)(v): Pendant control box(es) were not clearly marked for identification of functions:    a)    The Custom Steel Inc. 5 ton crane was being operated with a pendant control box that did not have the crane functions clearly marked.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $1785
  • · Z (S) $2975

1910.179 L03 I

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Sep 11, 2014
Abate by
Oct 17, 2014
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.179(l)(3)(i): Unsafe condition(s) disclosed during the frequent or periodic inspection(s) required by 29 CFR 1910.179(j) were not corrected before operation of the crane(s) was resumed:  a)    The Custom Steel Inc. 5 ton crane was being operated with a pendant control box that did not have the crane functions clearly marked.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $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 339863128.

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