HADDAM, CT —
OSHA Inspection: ESSEX DESIGN AND DISPLAY, INC.
Complaint inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a complaint safety inspection of ESSEX DESIGN AND DISPLAY, INC. in 1586 SAYBROOK ROAD, HADDAM, CT 06438 (NAICS 337215). OSHA activity number 341922714.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- ESSEX DESIGN AND DISPLAY, INC.
- Site address
- 1586 SAYBROOK ROAD
- City
- HADDAM
- State
- CT
- ZIP
- 06438
- Mailing
- P.O. BOX 539 1586 SAYBROOK ROAD, HADDAM, CT 06438
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Complaint (B)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Safety
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- B
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 337215
- Employees
- 6
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
9 citations on file for this inspection.
1910.134 C02 II
- Issued
- Mar 13, 2017
- Abate by
- May 26, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $2,173 · Current $1,087 Reduced
004013802460
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(c)(2)(ii): The employer did not establish and implement those elements of a written program necessary to ensure that any employee using a respirator voluntarily was medically able to use that respirator, and that the respirator was cleaned, stored, and maintained so that its use does not present a health hazard to the user: Shop: The employer did not establish and implement elements of a respiratory protection program to ensure that any employee using a respirator voluntarily was medically able to use that respirator, and that the respirator was cleaned, stored, and maintained so that its use did not present a health hazard to the user.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1086.5
- — Z (S) $2173
1910.134 E01
- Issued
- Mar 13, 2017
- Abate by
- May 26, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
004013802460
General-duty citation text
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: Shop: The employees who were using tight fitting half face air-purifying respirators were not provide with a medical evaluation.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.134 H01
- Issued
- Mar 13, 2017
- Abate by
- May 26, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
004013802460
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(h)(1): Respirators were not cleaned and disinfected using the procedures in Appendix B-2 of 29 CFR 1910.134 or equivalent procedures recommended by the respirator manufacturer: Shop: The employer did not ensure that the employees who were using tight fitting half face air-purifying respirators were cleaned and disinfected appropriately.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.134 K06
- Issued
- Mar 13, 2017
- Abate by
- May 26, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
004013802460
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(k)(6): The employer did not provide the basic advisory information on respirators, as presented in Appendix D of 29 CFR 1910.134, in written or oral format to employees who wear respirators when such use was not required by the employer: Shop: The employer did not provide the basic advisory information in Appendix D on respirators to the employees who were using tight fitting half face air-purifying respirators on voluntary basis.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.134 D01 III
- Issued
- Mar 13, 2017
- Abate by
- May 26, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $2,716 · Current $1,358 Reduced
004013802460
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(iii): The employer did not identify and evaluate the respiratory hazard(s) in the workplace; including a reasonable estimate of employee exposures to respiratory hazards and identification of the contaminant's chemical state and physical form: Shop: The employer did not identify and evaluate the respiratory hazards for the employees who were applying spray adhesive.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1358
- — Z (S) $2716
1910.178 L01 I
- Issued
- Mar 13, 2017
- Abate by
- Apr 6, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $2,173 · Current $1,087 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.178(l)(1)(i): The employer did not ensure that each powered industrial truck operator is competent to operate a powered industrial truck safely, as demonstrated by the successful completion of the training and evaluation specified in this paragraph (l): Shop: The employer did not ensure through conducting training and evaluation that the employees who were operating powered industrial forklift trucks (PIT) were competent to operate the PIT safely at all times.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1086.5
- — Z (S) $2173
1910.213 C01
- Issued
- Mar 13, 2017
- Abate by
- Mar 17, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $2,716 · Current $1,358 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.213(c)(1): Circular handfed ripsaw(s) were not guarded by an automatically adjusting hood which completely enclosed that portion of the saw above the table and above the material being cut: Shop: The 10-inch table top ripsaw was not guarded by an automatically adjusting hood which completely enclosed that portion of the saw above the table and above the material being cut.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1358
- — Z (S) $2716
1910.213 C02
- Issued
- Mar 13, 2017
- Abate by
- Mar 17, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.213(c)(2): Hand-fed circular ripsaw(s) were not furnished with a spreader to prevent material from squeezing the saw or being thrown back on the operator: Shop: The 10-inch table top ripsaw was not furnished with a spreader to prevent material from squeezing the saw or being thrown back on the operator.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.213 C03
- Issued
- Mar 13, 2017
- Abate by
- Mar 17, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.213(c)(3): Hand-fed ripsaw(s) did not have non kickback fingers or dogs so located as to oppose the thrust or tendency of the saw to pick up the material or to throw it back toward the operator: Shop: The 10-inch table top ripsaw did not have kickback fingers or dogs so located as to oppose the thrust or tendency of the saw to pick up the material or to throw it back toward the operator.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 337215)
More inspections in CT
Source
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 341922714.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.