OSHA Inspection: MATOS PARTNERS

Issued

2013-07-17 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1600.00 · Current $1600.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.100(a):   Employees working in areas where there was a possible danger of head injury from impact, or falling or flying objects, or from electrical shock and burns, were not protected by protective helmets:   A) Front right side of house: Employees were exposed to head injuries while working below roofing activities. The employees were not protected by hard hats or protective helmets, on or about May 22nd, 2013.

Issued

2013-07-17 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $1600.00 · Current $1600.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.102(a)(1):   Eye and face protective equipment were not used when machines or operations presented potential eye or face injury from physical, chemical, or radiation agents.   A) Lower roof of house:  An employee was exposed to eye/face injuries while using an electric saw. The employee was not protected by eye/face protection, on or about May 22nd, 2013.

Issued

2013-07-17 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2800.00 · Current $2800.00

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):    A) Upper and lower roof:  Employees were exposed to fall hazards of approximately 17,22 and 26 feet while engaged in roofing work on a residential structure. The exposed employees were not protected by any type of fall protection system, on or about May 22nd, 2013.

Issued

2013-07-17 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2000.00 · Current $2000.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(1):   Portable ladders were used for access to an upper landing surface and the ladder side rails did not extend at least 3 feet  above the upper landing surface to which the ladder was used to gain access:   A) Front right side of house -     Employees were exposed to fall hazards of approximately 17 feet while using an extension ladder to access a roof landing. The ladder that was used, did not extend at least 3 feet above the landing, on or about May 22nd, 2013.