Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,198,547Inspections Most recent open 2026-09-01 Last loaded 2026-09-04

OSHA Inspection: KEVIN SNIDER

Planned inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of KEVIN SNIDER in 6825 MARWYCK DR, CENTERVILLE, OH 45440 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 331102202.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Kevin Snider for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Kevin Snider is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
KEVIN SNIDER
Site address
6825 MARWYCK DR
City
CENTERVILLE
State
OH
ZIP
45440
Mailing
130 CANNONBURY CT, KETTERING, OH 45429
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
Non-union (B)
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238160
Employees
3
Ownership type
Private (A)

2 citations on file for this inspection.

1926.20 B02

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Dec 16, 2011
Penalty
Initial $1,800 · Current $1,800
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)    The employer did not ensure that a frequent and regular was conducted in that employees were exposed to fall hazards.
Recent events (1)
  • · Z (S) $1800

1926.501 B13

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Dec 16, 2011
Penalty
Initial $4,200 · Current $4,200
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13):     Each employee engaged in residential construction activities 6 feet or more above lower levels was not protected by guardrail systems, safety net systems, or personal fall arrest systems, nor  did the employer demonstrate that it is infeasible or creates a greater hazard to use these systems and develop and implement a fall protection plan which meets the requirements of paragraph (k) of section 1926.502.    Employees were engaged in a residential roofing operation and exposed to a fall hazard in excess of 10 feet while not utilizing any type of fall protection.
Recent events (1)
  • · Z (S) $4200

This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). OSHA publishes its own view of this case as inspection number 331102202.

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