Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,189,992Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-18 Last loaded 2026-07-22

OSHA Inspection: E.F. O'DONNELL & SONS CO.

Complaint inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of E.F. O'DONNELL & SONS CO. in 133 WILLIAMS STREET, NEW BEDFORD, MA 02740 (NAICS 238320). OSHA activity number 340081587.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 E.F. O'Donnell & Sons CO. — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for E.F. O'Donnell & Sons CO. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
133 WILLIAMS STREET
City
NEW BEDFORD
State
MA
ZIP
02740
Mailing
75 DIKE STREET, PROVIDENCE, RI 02909
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
A
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238320
Employees
12
Ownership type
A

11 citations on file for this inspection.

1926.62 D01 I

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 5, 2015
Abate by
Apr 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $1,600

Hazardous substances 1591

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(1)(i): Each employer who had a workplace or operation covered by 29 CFR 1926.62 did not initially determine if any employee was exposed to lead at or above the action level of 30 micrograms per cubic meter of air (30 ug/m3) calculated as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA):      Location:  Workplace      An employee was scraping lead-based paint, and the employer had not performed exposure monitoring to determine if the employee was exposed above the Action Level.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $1600
  • — Z (S) $1600

1926.62 D02 V A

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 5, 2015
Abate by
Mar 13, 2015
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $800 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(v)(A): Until the employer performed an employee exposure assessment as required under 29 CFR 1926.62(d) and determined actual employee exposure, the employer did not provide to employees performing the tasks described in 29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(i), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(2)(iii), and (d)(2)(iv) with appropriate respiratory protection in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.62(f):    Location:  Worksite    Employer had not performed an exposure assessment of the workplace and employee was scraping and sanding lead-based paint. Employee had not been annually fit-tested to the North half-face negative pressure respirator being worn.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $800
  • — Z (S) $1600

1910.134 F02

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 5, 2015
Abate by
Mar 13, 2015
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): Employee(s) using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator were not annually fit tested:    Location:  Worksite    Employee was wearing a North 7700 half-face negative pressure respirator and had not been fit-tested annually.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.134 K01

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 5, 2015
Abate by
Apr 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(1): The employer did not provide effective training to employees who are required to use respirators.  The training must be comprehensive, understandable, and recur annually.    Location:  Worksite    The employer did not ensure that employees were provided with comprehensive training in the use of respirators when required to wear them.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.62 D02 V B

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 5, 2015
Abate by
Apr 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $800 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(v)(B): Until the employer performed an employee exposure assessment as required under 29 CFR 1926.62(d) and determined actual employee exposure, the employer did not provide employees performing the tasks described in 29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(i), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(2)(iii), and (d)(2)(iv) with appropriate personal protective clothing and equipment in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.62(g):(a)       Location:  Worksite    Employee was scraping and sanding lead based paint off a door frame, and the employer had not provided him with foot protection so that he would not track lead dust home and expose himself and his family members.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $800
  • — Z (S) $1600

1926.62 G01 II

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 5, 2015
Abate by
Apr 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

29 CFR 1926.62(g)(1)(ii): The employer did not provide, at no cost to the employee, and ensure the employee used appropriate protective work clothing and equipment that prevented contamination of the employee and the employee's garments, including gloves, hat, and shoes or disposable shoe coverlets:      Location: Worksite      The employer had not provided the employee with boots or shoe covers to ensure the employer would not track lead dust home and contaminate nimself and his family.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.62 D02 V C

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 5, 2015
Abate by
Apr 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $800 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(v)(C): Until the employer performed an employee exposure assessment as required under 29 CFR 1926.62(d) and determined actual employee exposure, the employer did not provide to employees performing the tasks described in 29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(i), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(2)(iii), and (d)(2)(iv) with change areas in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.62(i)(2      Location: Worksite    The employee was scraping lead-based paint from a door frame, and the employer had not provided clean change areas.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $800
  • — Z (S) $1600

1926.62 I02 I

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 5, 2015
Abate by
Apr 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

29 CFR 1926.62(i)(2)(i): The employer did not provide clean change areas as an interim protection for employees performing tasks as specified in 29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2), without regard to the use of respirators:    Employees were scraping lead-based paint off a door frame, and the employer did not provide them with a clean change area.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.62 D02 V E

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 5, 2015
Abate by
Apr 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $800 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(v)(E): Until the employer performed an employee exposure assessment as required under 29 CFR 1926.62(d) and determined actual employee exposure, the employer did not provide to employees performing the tasks described in 29 CFR 1926.62(d)(2)(i), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(2)(iii), and (d)(2)(iv) with biological monitoring in accordance with 1926.62(j)(1)(i), to consist of blood sampling and analysis for lead and zinc protoporphyrin levels:    Location: Worksite      The employee was scraping lead-based paint off of a door frame, and the employer had not provided biological monitoring monitoring to the employee to determine his blood-lead levels.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $800
  • — Z (S) $1600

1926.62 J01 I

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 5, 2015
Abate by
Apr 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 1591

29 CFR 1926.62(j)(1)(i): The employer did not make available initial medical surveillance, consisting of biological monitoring in the form of blood sampling and analysis for lead and zinc protoporphyrin levels, to employees occupationally exposed on any day to lead at or above the action level:(a)         Location: Worksite    The employee who was scraping lead-based paint off the doorframe had not been offered biological monitoring to determine how much lead had accumulated in his body.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.62 L01 I

Deleted Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 5, 2015
Abate by
Apr 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $0 Reduced

Hazardous substances 1591

29 CFR 1926.62(l)(1)(i): The employer did not communicate information concerning lead hazards according to the requirements of OSHA's Hazard Communication Standard for the construction industry, 29 CFR 1926.59, including but not limited to the requirements concerning warning signs and labels, material safety data sheets, and employee information and training.  Location;  Worksite  The employee was removing lead-based paint and had not been provided information and training on lead in accordance with the Hazard Communication Program for the construction industry 1926.59.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $1600

View E.F. O'Donnell & Sons CO.'s full OSHA safety record →

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 340081587.

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