ZANESVILLE, OH —
OSHA Inspection: ZANESVILLE PALLET INC.
Referral inspection · Health discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a referral health inspection of ZANESVILLE PALLET INC. in 2235 LICKING ROAD, ZANESVILLE, OH 43701 (NAICS 321920). OSHA activity number 343101408.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Zanesville Pallet INC. — free
Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Zanesville Pallet INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Where did this inspection happen?
- Establishment
- ZANESVILLE PALLET INC.
- Site address
- 2235 LICKING ROAD
- City
- ZANESVILLE
- State
- OH
- ZIP
- 43701
- Mailing
- 2235 LICKING ROAD, ZANESVILLE, OH 43701
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Referral (C)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- 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
- 321920
- Employees
- 21
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
3 citations on file for this inspection.
1910.95 D01
- Issued
- Jun 11, 2018
- Penalty
- Initial $4,434 · Current $2,217 Reduced
81108111
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.95(d)(1): When information indicates that any employee's exposure may equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels, the employer shall develop and implement a monitoring program. a) The employer had not developed and implemented a noise monitoring program for the Shear Operator. The operator was exposed to continuous noise at 221% which exceeded the PEL (permissible exposure limit ) of 100%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 90 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 95.7 dBA during the 480 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. b) The employer had not developed and implemented a noise monitoring program for the Repair Line worker. The worker was exposed to continuous noise at 168% which exceeded the PEL (permissible exposure limit ) of 100%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 90 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 93.8 dBA during the 480 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. c) The employer had not developed and implemented a noise monitoring program for a building area worker. The worker was exposed to continuous noise at 156.2% which exceeded the PEL (permissible exposure limit ) of 100%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 90 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 93.2 dBA during the 467 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 13 minutes not sampled. d) The employer had not developed and implemented a noise monitoring program for a building area worker. The worker was exposed to continuous noise at 144.6% which exceeded the PEL (permissible exposure limit ) of 100%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 90 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 92.6 dBA during the 473 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 7 minutes not sampled. e) The employer had not developed and implemented a noise monitoring program for an employee working on the Repair Line. The Repair Line employee was exposed to continuous noise at 118.5% which exceeded the AL (action level) of 50%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 85 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 91.2 dBA during the 476 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 4 minutes not sampled. f) The employer had not developed and implemented a noise monitoring program for the band saw operator. The operator was exposed to continuous noise at 104.6% which exceeded the AL (action level) of 50%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 85 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 90.3 dBA during the 475 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 5 minutes not sampled. g) The employer had not developed and implemented a noise monitoring program for a shear operator. The operator was exposed to continuous noise at 92.6% which exceeded the AL (action level ) of 50%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 85.0 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 89.5 dBA during the 472 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 8 minutes not sampled.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $2217
- — Z (S) $4434
1910.95 G01
- Issued
- Jun 11, 2018
- Abate by
- Jul 16, 2018
- Penalty
- Initial $4,434 · Current $2,217 Reduced
81108111
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.95(g)(1): The employer shall establish and maintain an audiometric testing program as provided in this paragraph by making audiometric testing available to all employees whose exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels. a. The employer had not established and maintained an audiometric testing program for the Shear Operator. The operator was exposed to continuous noise at 221% which exceeded the PEL (permissible exposure limit ) of 100%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 90 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 95.7 dBA during the 480 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. b) The employer had not established and maintained an audiometric testing program for a Repair Line worker. The worker was exposed to continuous noise at 168% which exceeded the PEL (permissible exposure limit ) of 100%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 90 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 93.8 dBA during the 480 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. c) The employer had not established and maintained an audiometric testing program for a pallet building area worker. The worker was exposed to continuous noise at 156.2% which exceeded the PEL (permissible exposure limit ) of 100%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 90 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 93.2 dBA during the 467 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 13 minutes not sampled. d) The employer had not established and maintained an audiometric testing program for a pallet building area worker. The worker was exposed to continuous noise at 144.6% which exceeded the PEL (permissible exposure limit ) of 100%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 90 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 92.6 dBA during the 473 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 7 minutes not sampled. e) The employer had not established and maintained an audiometric testing program for an employee working on the Repair Line. The Repair Line employee was exposed to continuous noise at 118.5% which exceeded the AL (action level) of 50%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 85 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 91.2 dBA during the 476 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 4 minutes not sampled. f) The employer had not established and maintained an audiometric testing program for a band saw operator. The operator was exposed to continuous noise at 104.6% which exceeded the AL (action level) of 50%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 85 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 90.3 dBA during the 475 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 5 minutes not sampled. g) The employer had not established and maintained an audiometric testing program for a shear operator. The operator was exposed to continuous noise at 92.6% which exceeded the AL (action level ) of 50%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 85.0 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 89.5 dBA during the 472 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 8 minutes not sampled.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $2217
- — Z (S) $4434
1910.95 K01
- Issued
- Jun 11, 2018
- Abate by
- Jul 16, 2018
- Penalty
- Initial $4,434 · Current $2,217 Reduced
81108111
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.95(k)(1): The employer shall train each employee who is exposed to noise at or above an 8-hour time weighted average of 85 decibels in accordance with the requirements of this section. The employer shall institute a training program and ensure employee participation in the program. a) The Shear Operator had not received the required training on the Hearing Conservation Standard 29 CFR 1910.95. The operator was exposed to continuous noise at 221% which exceeded the PEL (permissible exposure limit ) of 100%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 90 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 95.7 dBA during the 480 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. b) The Repair Line worker had not received the required training on the Hearing Conservation Standard 29 CFR 1910.95. The worker was exposed to continuous noise at 168% which exceeded the PEL (permissible exposure limit ) of 100%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 90 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 93.8 dBA during the 480 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. c) A Building Area worker had not received the required training on the Hearing Conservation Standard 29 CFR 1910.95. The worker was exposed to continuous noise at 156.2% which exceeded the PEL (permissible exposure limit ) of 100%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 90 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 93.2 dBA during the 467 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 13 minutes not sampled. d) A Building Area worker had not received the required training on the Hearing Conservation Standard 29 CFR 1910.95. . The worker was exposed to continuous noise at 144.6% which exceeded the PEL (permissible exposure limit ) of 100%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 90 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 92.6 dBA during the 473 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 7 minutes not sampled. e) A Repair Line worker had not received the required training on the Hearing Conservation Standard 29 CFR 1910.95. The employee was exposed to continuous noise at 118.5% which exceeded the AL (action level) of 50%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 85 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 91.2 dBA during the 476 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 4 minutes not sampled. f) The Repair Line worker had not received the required training on the Hearing Conservation Standard 29 CFR 1910.95. The operator was exposed to continuous noise at 104.6% which exceeded the AL (action level) of 50%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 85 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 90.3 dBA during the 475 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 5 minutes not sampled. g) The Shear Operator had not received the required training on the Hearing Conservation Standard 29 CFR 1910.95. The operator was exposed to continuous noise at 92.6% which exceeded the AL (action level ) of 50%, an 8-hour TWA (time weighted average) sound level of 85.0 dBA. The employee's 8-hour TWA sound level was approximately 89.5 dBA during the 472 minute sampling period on May 3, 2018. Exposure calculations include a zero increment for the 8 minutes not sampled.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $2217
- — Z (S) $4434
More inspections at Zanesville Pallet INC.
View Zanesville Pallet INC.'s full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 321920)
Jul 16, 2026
Elijah Wholesale, LLC. · LAKELAND, FL
Jul 16, 2026
Cantarero Pallets, INC. · SOUTH HOLLAND, IL
Jul 15, 2026
Pallets Acquisition LLC · DECATUR, GA
Jul 14, 2026
Specwood Products, INC. · CLANTON, AL
Jul 10, 2026
Kelley Wood Products, INC. · FITCHBURG, MA
More inspections in OH
Jul 17, 2026
Teknol, INC. · DAYTON, OH
Jul 16, 2026
Lippert · PAYNE, OH
Jul 16, 2026
Provia · SUGARCREEK, OH
Jul 16, 2026
Greenacres Foundation · CINCINNATI, OH
Jul 16, 2026
Whirlaway Corporation · WELLINGTON, OH
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 343101408.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.