OSHA Inspection: MASTECH CONSTRUCTION AND INTERIORS, INC.

Issued

2013-04-12 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1200.00 · Current $1200.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.403(b)(1): The employer did not ensure that electrical equipment is free from recognized hazards that are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees:    a) Job site, Route 19, Cranberry Township, PA: On or about February 5, 2012, during metal cap installation activities on parapet walls, the employer did not ensure that electrical cords were free from recognized hazards in that an extension cord used to power batteries for cordless tools had a cut/tear in the outer jacket.

Issued

2013-04-12 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.404(b)(1)(i): The employer did not use either ground fault circuit interrupters as specified in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section or an assured equipment grounding conductor program as specified in paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section to protect employees on construction sites:  a) Job site, Route 19, Cranberry Township, PA: On or about February 5, 2012, during metal cap installation activities on parapet walls, the employer did not ensure that appropriate ground protection was provided on an extension cord used to power batteries for cordless tools in that no ground fault circuit interruptors were used, and no ground pin was in use.

Issued

2013-04-12 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2000.00 · Current $2000.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.501(b)(10): Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each employee engaged in roofing activities on low-slope roofs, with unprotected sides and edges 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above lower levels was not protectied from falling by guardrail systems, safety net systems, personal fall arrest systems, or a combination of warning line system and guardrail 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 (see Appendix A to subpart M of this part), the use of a safety monitoring system alone:   a) Job site, Route 19, Cranberry Township, PA: On or about February 5, 2012, during metal cap installation activities on parapet walls, the employer did not ensure that adequate fall protection systems/devices existed in that employees relied solely on the existing parapet walls for fall protection, which were determined to be as low as approximately 32 inches tall in some areas. No guardrails, harnesses, safety monitors or other fall protection system/devices were used, exposing workers to a fall hazard of approximately 20 feet.