DERBY, CT —
OSHA Inspection: GLOBAL CONSTRUCTION CT, LLC
Planned inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of GLOBAL CONSTRUCTION CT, LLC in 94 OLIVIA ST., DERBY, CT 06418 (NAICS 236118). OSHA activity number 337324214.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- GLOBAL CONSTRUCTION CT, LLC
- Site address
- 94 OLIVIA ST.
- City
- DERBY
- State
- CT
- ZIP
- 06418
- Mailing
- 12 FAIRVIEW TERRACE, DERBY, CT 06418
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
- 236118
- Employees
- 3
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
8 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.25 A
- Issued
- Dec 28, 2012
- Abate by
- Jan 10, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $2,400 · Current $1,200 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.25(a): During the course of construction, alteration, or repairs, debris was not kept cleared from work areas, passageways, and stairs, in and around buildings or other structures: Worksite: The stairways and aisleways inside the building under renovation were not kept cleared from the accumulation of the construction debris, exposing the employees to trip/fall and/or puncture hazards.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1200
- — Z (S) $2400
1926.451 E08
- Issued
- Dec 28, 2012
- Abate by
- Jan 10, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.451(e)(8): Direct access to or from another surface was used when the scaffold was more than 14 inches (36 cm) horizontally and/or 24 inches (61 cm) vertically from the other surface: Worksite: The employee who was accessing the pump jack scaffold platform from the roof that was approximately 5 feet above the platform was not provided with a safe means of access to the platform.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1400
- — Z (S) $2800
1926.451 F07
- Issued
- Dec 28, 2012
- Abate by
- Jan 25, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $2,000 · Current $1,000 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.451(f)(7): Scaffolds were not erected, moved, dismantled, or altered, by trained and experienced employees under the supervision and direction of a competent person qualified in scaffold erection, moving, dismantling or alteration. Such activities were not performed only by experienced and trained employees selected for such work by the competent person: Worksite: The pump jack scaffold from that an employee was working at heights of approximately 29 to 33 feet above the ground was not erected under the supervision of a person competent in scaffold erection.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1000
- — Z (S) $2000
1926.451 G01 VII
- Issued
- Dec 28, 2012
- Abate by
- Jan 10, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.451(g)(1)(vii): Each employee on a scaffold, not otherwise specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through (g)(1)(vi) of this section, more than 10 feet (3.1 m) above lower level was not protected from falls by the use of personal fall arrest systems or guardrail systems meeting the requirements of paragraph (g)(4) of this section. Worksite: The employee who was working from the pump jack scaffold platform at heights of approximately 29 to 33 feet above the ground was not protected from fall hazards by the use of guardrails, adequate netting or a personal fall arrest system.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1400
- — Z (S) $2800
1926.452 J02
- Issued
- Dec 28, 2012
- Abate by
- Jan 10, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $2,000 · Current $1,000 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.452(j)(2): Poles were not secured to the structure by rigid triangular bracing or equivalent at the bottom, top, and other points as necessary. Worksite: The pump jack scaffold fromk that an employee was working at heights of approximately 29 to 33 feet above the ground was not braced or secured at the bottom of the scaffold poles.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1000
- — Z (S) $2000
1926.454 A01
- Issued
- Dec 28, 2012
- Abate by
- Jan 25, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $2,000 · Current $1,000 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.454(a)(1): The employer failed to have each employee who performs work while on a scaffold trained regarding the nature of any electrical hazards, fall hazards and falling object hazards in the work area. Worksite: The employee who was working from the improperly erected pump jack scaffold without fall protection at heights of approximately 29 to 33 feet above the ground was not trained to recognize the hazards associated with the type of scaffold being used.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1000
- — Z (S) $2000
1926.503 A01
- Issued
- Dec 28, 2012
- Abate by
- Jan 25, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.503(a)(1): The employer did not provide a training program for each employee potentially exposed to fall hazards to enable each employee to recognize the hazards of falling and the procedures to be followed in order to minimize these hazards: Worksite: The employee who was exposed to fall hazards of approximately 38 feet above the ground while working on the low sloped roof was not trained in fall hazards and the procedures to be followed to minimize such hazards.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1926.501 B10
- Issued
- Dec 28, 2012
- Abate by
- Jan 10, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(10): Each employee engaged in roofing activities on low-slope roofs with unprotected sides and edges 6 feet or more above lower levels, was not protected from falling by guardrail systems, safety net systems, personal fall arrest systems, or a combination of warning line system and fuardrail system, warning line system and safety net system, or warning line system and personal fall arrest system, or warning line system and safety monitoring system. Or, on roofs 50-feet (15.25 m) or less in width, each employee was not protected by use of a monitoring system. Worksite: The employee who was walking/working from the low sloped roof top at a height of approximately 38 feet above the ground was not protected from fall hazards by the use guardrails, safety nets a personal fall arrest system or a safety monitoring system.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1400
- — Z (S) $2800
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 236118)
More inspections in CT
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 337324214.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.