BINGHAMTON, NY —
OSHA Inspection: MGM INSULATION
Unprogrammed Related inspection · Health discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened an unprogrammed Related health inspection of MGM INSULATION in 50 FRONT STREET, BINGHAMTON, NY 13905 (NAICS 562910). OSHA activity number 342235868.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- MGM INSULATION
- Site address
- 50 FRONT STREET
- City
- BINGHAMTON
- State
- NY
- ZIP
- 13905
- Mailing
- 3 SHERER ST, ROCHESTER, NY 14611
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Unprogrammed Related (G)
- Scope
- Complete (A)
- Discipline
- Health
- 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
- 562910
- Employees
- 30
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
3 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.1101 F05
- Issued
- May 16, 2017
- Abate by
- May 24, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $6,338 · Current $0 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.1101(f)(5): The employer did not notify, as soon as possible nor within 5 working days of receipt of results, each affected employee of any monitoring performed under this section: a) MGM Job trailer, on or about 4/7/17: Employees were not notified of asbestos monitoring results either individually or by posting results in an accessible location. Abatement certification must be submitted for this item.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $6338
- — Z (S) $6338
1926.1101 H02 I
- Issued
- May 16, 2017
- Abate by
- May 30, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.1101(h)(2)(i): The employer failed to implement a respiratory protection program in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.134(b) through (d) [except (d)(1)(iii)], and (f) through (m), which covers each employee required by 29 CFR 1926.1101 to use a respirator: a) Front Street Binghamton Job site, on or about 4/7/17: An employee wore a "Large" size half face air purifying respirator, but was fit-tested for a "Medium" size half face air purifying respirator. The size of the respirator worn was not the same size of the respirator fit-tested, as required by 29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2). The employee was exposed to airborne asbestos while performing class 1 asbestos removals within a regulated area. b) Front Street Binghamton Job site, on or about 4/7/17: An employee wore a "Large" size half face air purifying respirator, but was fit-tested for a "Medium" size half face air purifying respirator. The size of the respirator worn was not the same size of the respirator fit-tested, as required by 29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2). The employee was exposed to airborne asbestos while performing class 1 asbestos removals within a regulated area. c) Front Street Binghamton Job site, on or about 4/7/17: An employee wore a "Large" size half face air purifying respirator, but was fit-tested for a "Medium" size half face air purifying respirator. The size of the respirator worn was not the same size of the respirator fit-tested, as required by 29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2). The employees was exposed to airborne asbestos while performing class 1 asbestos removals within a regulated area. d) Front Street Binghamton Job site, on or about 4/7/17: An employee wore a "Medium" size half face air purifying respirator, but was fit-tested for a "Large" size half face air purifying respirator. The size of the respirator worn was not the same size of the respirator fit-tested, as required by 29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2). The employee was exposed to airborne asbestos while performing class 1 asbestos removals within a regulated area. e) Front Street Binghamton Job site, on or about 4/7/17: An employee wore a "Medium" size full face air purifying respirator, but was fit-tested for a "Large" size full face air purifying respirator. The size of the respirator worn was not the same size of the respirator fit-tested, as required by 29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2). The employee was exposed to airborne asbestos while performing class 1 asbestos removals within a regulated area. Abatement certification must be submitted for this item.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.1200 G01
- Issued
- May 16, 2017
- Abate by
- May 24, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(1): Employers did not have a safety data sheet (SDS) in the workplace for each hazardous chemical which they use: a) Front Street jobsite in Binghamton, NY, on or about 4/7/17: An SDS for Core Spray Glue was not available for employees onsite. Abatement certification must be submitted for this item.
Recent events (3)
- — F (O) $0
- — C (O) $0
- — Z (O) $0
More inspections at MGM Insulation
View MGM Insulation's full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 562910)
More inspections in NY
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 342235868.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.