Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,198,892Inspections Most recent open 2026-09-03 Last loaded 2026-09-07

OSHA Inspection: SCOTT ARMATURE, L.L.C.

Complaint inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint safety inspection of SCOTT ARMATURE, L.L.C. in 2805 ENGINEERS ROAD, BELLE CHASSE, LA 70037 (NAICS 335312). OSHA activity number 340561356.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Scott Armature, L.L.C. for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Scott Armature, L.L.C. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
2805 ENGINEERS ROAD
City
BELLE CHASSE
State
LA
ZIP
70037
Mailing
2805 ENGINEERS ROAD, BELLE CHASSE, LA 70037
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
335312
Employees
35
Ownership type
Private (A)

4 citations on file for this inspection.

5(a)(1)

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jul 6, 2015
Abate by
Jul 19, 2015
Penalty
Initial $4,500 · Current $3,150 Reduced
OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1): 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 in that employees were exposed to being struck by a falling load from an Shaw Box Traveling Bridge Crane.    On or about 4/15/15, at the main repair shop, the Shaw Box Traveling Bridge Crane was missing a safety latch on the hook. This condition exposed employees to possible struck-by hazards from a falling load.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $3150
  • · Z (S) $4500

1910.136 A

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jul 6, 2015
Abate by
Jul 19, 2015
Penalty
Initial $3,600 · Current $2,520 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.136(a): The employer did not ensure that each affected employee uses protective footwear when working in areas where there is a danger of foot injuries due to falling or rolling objects, or objects piercing the sole, and where such employee's feet are exposed to electrical hazards.    On or about 4/15/15, in the repair shop, the CSHO observed an employee wearing unprotected, non-steel-toed footwear that did not comply with ASTM F-2412-2005, "Standard Test Methods for Foot Protection," and ASTM F-2413-2005, "Standard Specification for Performance Requirements for Protective Footwear'.  There was multiple sources of potential struck-by or roll-off hazards to the feet from heavy tools and equipment parts.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $2520
  • · Z (S) $3600

1910.212 A01

Serious Gravity 5 2 instances 1 exposed
Issued
Jul 6, 2015
Abate by
Jul 19, 2015
Penalty
Initial $4,500 · Current $3,150 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1): One or more methods of machine guarding was not provided to protect the operator and other employees in the machine area from hazards such as those created by point of operation, ingoing nip points, rotating parts, flying chips and sparks.     On or about 4/15/15, at the back portion of the repair shop, the following horizontal lathes did not have a chuck guard installed:    a) Nardini Horizontal Lathe Model 1560E    b) Kingston Horizontal Lathe Serial # 5580
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $3150
  • · Z (S) $4500

1910.1200 H03 IV

Other-than-serious 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Jul 6, 2015
Abate by
Jul 19, 2015
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(iv): The details of the hazard communication program developed by the employer, did not include an explanation of the labels received on shipped containers and the workplace labeling system used by their employer; the safety data sheet, including the order of information and how employee could obtain and use the appropriate hazard information.  On or about 4/15/15, at the site-wide facility, the employer had failed to provide employee training in accordance with the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals. The newly revised safety data sheet and labeling format changes had not been established in the employee training.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (O) $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 340561356.

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