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

OSHA Inspection: SEVERANCE FOODS, INC.

Complaint inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of SEVERANCE FOODS, INC. in 3478 MAIN ST., HARTFORD, CT 06105 (NAICS 311830). OSHA activity number 341672848.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Severance Foods, INC. — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Severance Foods, INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
3478 MAIN ST.
City
HARTFORD
State
CT
ZIP
06105
Mailing
3478 MAIN STREET, HARTFORD, CT 06120
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
311830
Employees
60
Ownership type
A

6 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.37 A03

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Oct 21, 2016
Penalty
Initial $3,741 · Current $2,619 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.37(a)(3): Exit route(s) were not kept free and unobstructed:  WAREHOUSE  On, or about, August 4, 2016, the employer failed to ensure that exits routes were not obstructed. The emergency exit for the warehouse was impeded by pallets of stacked material. The aisle width was approximately 22 inches.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $2618.7
  • — Z (S) $3741

1910.132 D02

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 12 exposed
Issued
Oct 21, 2016
Abate by
Dec 9, 2016
Penalty
Initial $4,988 · Current $3,492 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2): The employer did not verify, through a written certification, that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed:  FACILITY  On, or about, August 4, 2016, the employer did not have a written certification which verified that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed when employees were exposed to corrosive battery acid during forklift truck maintenance and required the use of chemical goggles and chemical gloves.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $3491.6
  • — Z (S) $4988

1910.133 A01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 12 exposed
Issued
Oct 21, 2016
Abate by
Dec 9, 2016
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 2310

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1): The employer did not ensure that each affected employee uses appropriate eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids, chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation:  FACILITY  On, or about, August 4, 2016, the employer did not ensure that each employee use appropriate eye or face protection such as, but not limited to, safety goggles and, or a face mask when topping off corrosive forklift truck battery fluid which contained sulfuric acid.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.138 B

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 10 exposed
Issued
Oct 21, 2016
Abate by
Dec 9, 2016
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances 2310

29 CFR 1910.138(b): The employer did not base selection of appropriate hand protection on an evaluation of the performance characteristics of the hand protection relative to the tasks to be performed, conditions present, duration of use, and the hazards and potential hazards identified:  FACILITY  On, or about, August 4, 2016, the employer did not ensure that each employee used appropriate hand protection such as, but not limited to, chemical gloves, when topping off corrosive forklift truck battery fluid, which contained sulfuric acid.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.147 C01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Oct 21, 2016
Abate by
Dec 9, 2016
Penalty
Initial $6,236 · Current $4,365 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.147(c)(1): The employer did not establish a program consisting of an energy control procedure, employee training and periodic inspections to ensure that before any employee performed any servicing or maintenance on a machine or equipment where the unexpected energizing, startup or release of stored energy could occur and cause injury, the machine or equipment shall be isolated from the energy source and rendered inoperative:   OVEN AREA  On, or about August, 4, 2016, the employer failed to establish an energy control program that included employee training, detailed lock out and, or tag out instructions and periodic inspections for employees that serviced multi-energy source equipment in the facility, including, but not limited to the Casa Herrera Toaster Oven, Model (Odyssey -34-164).
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $4365.2
  • — Z (S) $6236

1910.263 L09 II

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Oct 21, 2016
Abate by
Dec 9, 2016
Penalty
Initial $6,236 · Current $4,365 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.263(l)(9)(ii): All safety devices on the oven's were not inspected at intervals of not less than once a year by a representative of the oven manufacturer:  OVEN AREA  On, or about, August, 4, 2016, the employer failed to have the safety devices on the Casa Herrera Toaster Oven, Model (Odyssey-34-164), inspected by a representative of the oven manufacturer within the previous year.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $4365.2
  • — Z (S) $6236

View Severance Foods, INC.'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 341672848.

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