BLOOMFIELD, CT —
OSHA Inspection: ART EFFECTS, INC.
Complaint inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a complaint safety inspection of ART EFFECTS, INC. in 27 BRITTON DRIVE, BLOOMFIELD, CT 06002 (NAICS 339950). OSHA activity number 342149556.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- ART EFFECTS, INC.
- Site address
- 27 BRITTON DRIVE
- City
- BLOOMFIELD
- State
- CT
- ZIP
- 06002
- Mailing
- 27 BRITTON DRIVE, BLOOMFIELD, CT 06002
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
- 339950
- Employees
- 23
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
5 citations on file for this inspection.
1910.134 C01
- Issued
- Mar 28, 2017
- Abate by
- Jun 26, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $3,622 · Current $2,535 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required respirator use: A. On or about March 7, 2017, Spray Room: The employer had not developed or implemented a written respiratory protection program which covered employees who were required to wear respiratory protection while spray painting with catalyzed polyurethane paints.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $2535.4
- — Z (S) $3622
1910.134 E01
- Issued
- Mar 28, 2017
- Abate by
- Jun 26, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
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: A. On or about March 9, 2017, Spray Room: The employer did not ensure that employees engaged in spray painting operations who were required to wear respiratory protection had been provided a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.134 F01
- Issued
- Mar 28, 2017
- Abate by
- Jun 26, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1): The employer did not ensure that employee(s) required to use a tight-fitting facepiece respirator passed the appropriate qualitative fit test (QLFT) or quantitative fit test (QNFT):(a) (LOCATION) (IDENTIFY SPECIFIC OPERATION/CONDITION) (DESCRIBE HAZARD) A. On or about March 7, 2017, Spray Room: The employer did not require that employees wearing tight fitting facepiece respiratory protection were given appropriate fit tests prior to use.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.157 G01
- Issued
- Mar 28, 2017
- Abate by
- Jun 26, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $3,622 · Current $2,535 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.157(g)(1): An educational program was not provided for all employees to familiarize them with the general principles of fire extinguisher use and the hazards involved with incipient stage fire fighting: A. On or about March 8, 2017, Facility-Wide: Where employees were expected to fight incipient stage fires in the workplace, the employer had not documented training on the use of portable fire extinguishers.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $2535.4
- — Z (S) $3622
1910.1200 E01
- Issued
- Mar 28, 2017
- Abate by
- Jun 26, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $3,622 · Current $2,535 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop, implement, and/or maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which describes how the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) will be met: A. On or about March 8, 2017, Facility-Wide: The employer had not developed a hazard communication program which included a chemical inventory and which described how labels and other forms of warning, access to safety data sheets, or employee information and training would be met. Employees were routinely exposed to hazardous chemicals including propane, acetylene, as well as paints including but not limited to butyl acetate, 4-chlorobenzotrifluoride, methyl amyl ketone, ethyl acetate, ethyl alcohol, and methanol.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $2535.4
- — Z (S) $3622
More inspections at ART Effects, INC.
View ART Effects, INC.'s full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 339950)
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 342149556.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.