Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,189,992Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-18 Last loaded 2026-07-22

OSHA Inspection: CHEV VOUS

Planned inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of CHEV VOUS in 2301 ATWOOD DRIVE, MADISON, WI 53715 (NAICS 453310). OSHA activity number 336810981.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Chev Vous — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Chev Vous is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
CHEV VOUS
Site address
2301 ATWOOD DRIVE
City
MADISON
State
WI
ZIP
53715
Mailing
831 WILLIAMSON ST., MADISON, WI 53714
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
453310
Employees
1
Ownership type
A

3 citations on file for this inspection.

1926.501 B13

Deleted Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Nov 6, 2012
Abate by
Nov 13, 2012
Penalty
Initial $2,800 · Current $0 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 were not protected by guardrail systems, safety net system, or personal fall arrest system unless another provision in paragraph (b) of this section provides for an alternative fall protection measure. Exception: When the employer can demonstrate that it is infeasible or creates a greater hazard to use these systems, the employer shall develop and implement a fall protection plan which meets the requirements 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 fall protection systems. Accordingly, the employer has the burden of establishing that it is appropriate to implement a fall protection plan which complies with 1926.502(k) for a particular workplace situation, in lieu of implementing any of those systems.                      Employee installing shingles on a residential roof was not protected from falling to lower levels.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $2800

1926.503 A01

Deleted Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Nov 6, 2012
Abate by
Nov 13, 2012
Penalty
Initial $2,000 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.503(a)(1): The employer did not provide a training program for each employee who might be exposed to fall hazards. The program shall enable each employee to recognize the hazards of falling and shall train each employee in the procedures to be followed in order to minimize these hazards.                          Employee installing shingles on a residential roof was not trained on fall protection hazrds prior to engaging in roofing activities.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $2000

1926.1053 B01

Deleted Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Nov 6, 2012
Abate by
Nov 13, 2012
Penalty
Initial $2,800 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(1): When portable ladders are used for access to an upper landing surface, the ladder side rails did not extend at least 3 feet (.9 m) above the upper landing surface to which the ladder is used to gain access; or, when such an extension is not possible because of the ladder's length, then the ladder shall be secured at its top to a rigid support that will not deflect, and a grasping device, such as a grabrail, shall be provided to assist employees in mounting and dismounting the ladder. In no case shall the extension be such that ladder deflection under a load would, by itself, cause the ladder to slip off its support.                    Employee was using an extension ladder to access the roof landing, of which, the ladder did not extend at least 3 feet past the eave of the roof.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $2800

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 336810981.

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