NEW HAVEN, CT ·
OSHA Inspection: AGUILAR & RAYO PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTION LLC
Referral inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a referral safety inspection of AGUILAR & RAYO PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTION LLC in 265 BRADLEY STREET, NEW HAVEN, CT 06510 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 339024739.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- AGUILAR & RAYO PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTION LLC
- Site address
- 265 BRADLEY STREET
- City
- NEW HAVEN
- State
- CT
- ZIP
- 06510
- Mailing
- 18 PROSPECT AVE APT. 8B, NORWALK, CT 06850
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Referral (C)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Safety
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- Non-union (B)
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 238160
- Employees
- 3
- Ownership type
- Private (A)
Citations
4 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.501 B13
- Issued
- Jun 7, 2013
- Abate by
- Jun 7, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): Each 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 1926.501 (b): Jobsite: The employees who were re-shingling the roof were not protected from fall hazards by the use guardrails, safety nets or personal fall arrest systems.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $2800
1926.1053 B01
- Issued
- Jun 7, 2013
- Abate by
- Jun 7, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $1,600 · Current $1,600
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(1): Where portable ladders were used for access to an upper landing surface and the ladder's length allows, the ladder side rails did not extend at least 3 feet (.9 m) above the upper landing surface being accessed: Jobsite: The extension ladders that were used to gain access to the roof did not have its side rails extended 3 feet above the landing surface.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $1600
1926.1053 B06
- Issued
- Jun 7, 2013
- Abate by
- Jun 7, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $1,600 · Current $1,600
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(6): Unsecured ladder(s) were used on surfaces that were not stable and level: Jobsite: The aluminum extension ladder that employee was installing roof shingles from was not placed on a level and stable surface.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $1600
1926.1053 B09
- Issued
- Jun 7, 2013
- Abate by
- Jun 7, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(9): The area around the top and/or bottom of (a) ladder(s) was not kept clear: Jobsite: The area around the bottom of the aluminum extension ladder that employees used to gain access to the roof was not kept clear of construction debris.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $0
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 238160)
More inspections in CT
Source
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 339024739.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.