CENTERVILLE, OH —
OSHA Inspection: JOSE CONEJO
Planned inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of JOSE CONEJO in 2299 BRIGGS RD., CENTERVILLE, OH 45459 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 330970641.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- JOSE CONEJO
- Site address
- 2299 BRIGGS RD.
- City
- CENTERVILLE
- State
- OH
- ZIP
- 45459
- Mailing
- 6324 BAKER BLVD., RICHLAND HILLS, TX 76118
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Planned (H)
- 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
- 238160
- Employees
- 4
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
2 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.20 B02
- Issued
- Aug 18, 2011
- Abate by
- Sep 30, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $4,200 · Current $4,200
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.20(b)(2): The employer did not initiate and maintain programs which provided for frequent and regular inspections of the job site, materials and equipment to be made by a competent person(s) - Site inspections were not conducted by a competent person in that employees were working on the roof of a residential structure while not using any type of fall protection system.
Recent events (1)
- — Z (S) $4200
1926.501 B13
- Issued
- Aug 18, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $4,200 · Current $4,200
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): Employee(s) engaged in residential construction activities 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above lower levels were not protected by guardrail systems, safety net system, or personal fall arrest system, nor were employee(s) provided with an alternative fall protection measure under another provision of paragraph (b) Note: If using these systems was infeasible or created a greater hazard, the employer should develop and implement a fall protection plan meeting the requirements of paragraph (k) of 1926.502. -Employees were roofing a residential structure while not using any type of fall protection system. Potential fall height was measured to 20' with a roof pitch of 8/12.
Recent events (1)
- — Z (S) $4200
More inspections at Jose Conejo
View Jose Conejo's full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 238160)
More inspections in 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 330970641.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.