Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,194,531Inspections Most recent open 2026-08-11 Last loaded 2026-08-14

OSHA Inspection: FER MASONRY LLC

Planned inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of FER MASONRY LLC in 1891 ORANGELAKE DRIVE, LEWIS CENTER, OH 43035 (NAICS 238140). OSHA activity number 330628769.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 FER Masonry LLC for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for FER Masonry LLC is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
FER MASONRY LLC
Site address
1891 ORANGELAKE DRIVE
City
LEWIS CENTER
State
OH
ZIP
43035
Mailing
2440 BOHNBURG AVENUE, GROVE CITY, OH 43123
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238140
Employees
5
Ownership type
A

1 citation on file for this inspection.

1926.501 B13

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Jun 30, 2011
Abate by
Jul 7, 2011
Penalty
Initial $2,040 · Current $714 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13):     "Residential construction." Each employee engaged in residential construction activities 6 feet(1.8 m) or more above lower levels shall be protected by guardrail systems, safety net system, or personal fall arrest system unless another provisionin paragraph (b) of this section provides for an alternative fall protection measure. Exception: When the employer can demonstrate that it isinfeasible or creates a greater hazard to use these systems, the employer shall develop and implement a fall protection plan which meets therequirements of paragraph (k) of 1926.502.Note: There is a presumption that it is feasible and will not create a greater hazard to implement at least one of the above-listed fallprotection systems. Accordingly, the employer has the burden of establishing that it is appropriate to implement a fall protection plan which complieswith 1926.502(k) for a particular workplace situation, in lieu of implementing any of those systems.:        a.  At the worksite, the employer did not ensure/enforce that employee(s) were protectied from fall hazards while working from the lower roof area, performing stucco task at heights greater than six feet, thereby exposing employee(s) to an approximate 11 foot fall hazard.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $714
  • · Z (S) $2040

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 330628769.

Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.