Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
2,004,209Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-13 Last loaded 2026-07-17

OSHA Inspection: EXCEL PROFESSIONAL DETAILING & FIBERGLASS, INC.

Complaint inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of EXCEL PROFESSIONAL DETAILING & FIBERGLASS, INC. in 8940 SAN JOSE BLVD, JACKSONVILLE, FL 32257 (NAICS 336611). OSHA activity number 343925228.

Watch Excel Professional Detailing & Fiberglass, INC. — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Excel Professional Detailing & Fiberglass, INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
8940 SAN JOSE BLVD
City
JACKSONVILLE
State
FL
ZIP
32257
Mailing
293 MAPLEWOOD DRIVE, SAINT JOHNS, FL 32259
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
336611
Employees
9
Ownership type
A

6 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.134 C01

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $1449.00 · Current $869.00 Reduced
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 April 11, 2019, boat detailers were required to wear NIOSH approved, 3M brand, N95 filtering facepiece dustmask respirators during buffing, polishing, and compounding boats and the employer did not establish and implement a written respiratory protection program that addressed the worksite-specific procedures such as but not limited to employee medical evaluations, fit testing, and training on the use, maintenance and care of the respirators.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $869.4
  • — Z (S) $1449

1910.134 E01

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
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 April 11, 2019, boat detailers were required to wear NIOSH approved, 3M brand, N95 filtering facepiece dustmask respirators during buffing, polishing, and compounding boats and had not been provided with medical evaluations prior to wearing the respirators.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.134 F01

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
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. On or about April 11, 2019, boat detailers were required to wear NIOSH approved, 3M brand, N95 filtering facepiece dustmask respirators during buffing, polishing, and had not been fit tested prior to initial use of the respirators.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.134 G01 I A

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A): Respirators with tight-fitting facepieces were worn by employees who had facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face or that interfered with valve function:  a. On or about April 11, 2019, boat detailers were required to wear NIOSH approved, 3M brand, N95 filtering facepiece dustmask respirators during buffing, polishing, and compounding boats and had facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the respirator facepiece and the face.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.1200 E01

Other-than-serious 1 instance 5 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
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 April 11, 2019, the employer did not develop and implement the written hazard communication program which described how requirements of 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) would be met for employees who have exposure to hazardous materials such as but not limited to Super Cut Compound, Gel Coat Compound, xylene, and acetone.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (O) $0

1910.1200 H01

Other-than-serious 1 instance 5 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1): Employees were not provided effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard that the employees had not been previously trained about was introduced into their work area:  a. On or about April 11, 2019, employees used hazardous materials such as but not limited to Super Cut Compound, Gel Coat Compound, xylene, and acetone while detailing boats and the employer did not provide information and training on the health and physical hazards of these chemicals.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (O) $0

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 343925228.