OMAHA, NE ·
OSHA Inspection: RICHADALE MANAGEMENT, INC.
Complaint inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a complaint safety inspection of RICHADALE MANAGEMENT, INC. in 3002 PADDOCK ROAD, OMAHA, NE 68124 (NAICS 531311). OSHA activity number 339052458.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- RICHADALE MANAGEMENT, INC.
- Site address
- 3002 PADDOCK ROAD
- City
- OMAHA
- State
- NE
- ZIP
- 68124
- Mailing
- 10040 REGENCY CIRCLE STE 200, OMAHA, NE 68114
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Complaint (B)
- 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
- 531311
- Employees
- 3
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
5 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.21 B02
- Issued
- Aug 16, 2013
- Abate by
- Sep 12, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $5,000 · Current $2,050 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.21(b)(2): The employer did not instruct each employee in the recognition and avoidance of unsafe conditions and the regulations applicable to his/her environment to control or eliminate any hazards or other exposure to illness or injury: At Latvian Village Apartment Complex: The employer failed to provide training to employees performing work that was outside of the normal scope of their job assignment. On or about April 30, 2013 an employee of Latvian Village Apartments a complex owned by Richdale Management, Inc. was told to dig a trench. The employee had not been trained on the recognition, avoidance and regulations applicable to the work he was told to perform.
Recent events (2)
- · I (O) $2050
- · Z (S) $5000
1926.651 B01
- Issued
- Aug 16, 2013
- Abate by
- Sep 12, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $4,000 · Current $2,000 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.651(b)(1): The estimated location of underground utility installations, such as sewer, telephone, fuel, electric, water lines, or any other underground installations that reasonably may be expected to be encountered during excavation work, were not identified prior to opening an excavation: At Latvian Village Apartments: The employer failed to ensure that the location of underground utilities were located prior to digging. The employer had a groundskeeping employee excavate soil around a water hydrant for the purposes of capping the line. While the employee was digging a fiber optic cable was struck.
Recent events (2)
- · I (O) $2000
- · Z (S) $4000
1926.651 C02
- Issued
- Aug 16, 2013
- Abate by
- Sep 12, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $5,000 · Current $2,500 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.651(c)(2): A stairway, ladder, ramp or other safe means of egress was not located in trench excavations that were 4 feet (1.22m) or more in depth so as to require no more than 25 feet (7.62m) of lateral travel for employees: At Latvian Village Apartment Complex: the employer failed to ensure that employees digging / working inside of an approximately 7 foot deep trench were provided with a ladder or other safe means of egress.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $2500
- · Z (S) $5000
1926.651 K01
- Issued
- Aug 16, 2013
- Abate by
- Sep 12, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $4,250 · Current $3,400 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.651(k)(1): An inspection of the excavations, the adjacent areas, and protective systems was not conducted by the competent person prior to the start of work and as needed throughout the shift: At Latvian Village Apartment Complex: The employer failed to inspect the trench during and before work started inside of the trench. The employer did not classify soil to determine type in order to determine the type of protective system to use to protect employees.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $3400
- · Z (S) $4250
1926.652 A01
- Issued
- Aug 16, 2013
- Abate by
- Sep 12, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $5,000 · Current $4,000 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.652(a)(1): Each employee in an excavation was not protected from cave-ins by an adequate protective system designed in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.652(c): At Latvian Village Apartment Complex; The employer failed to ensure that an employee working inside of a trench was protected from a potential collapse by an adequate protective system such as but not limited to sloping or benching or a protective shield such as shoring or a trench boxes.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $4000
- · Z (S) $5000
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 531311)
More inspections in NE
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 339052458.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.