OSHA Inspection: VEGA CONSTRUCTION INC.

Issued

Oct 8, 2014

Abate by

Nov 12, 2014

Penalty

Initial $440 · Current $440

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1903.19(c)(1):  The employer did not certify to OSHA, within 10 calendar days after the abatement date, that the cited violation had been abated:     Vega Construction, Inc., failed to certify to OSHA within 10 calendar days after the abatement date that each of the following cited violations had been corrected:     Citation Number                              Item Number                                    Abatement Date  01                                                           01a                                                           07/24/2014  01                                                           01b                                                           07/24/2014  01                                                           02                                                             06/13/2014     In accordance with 29 CFR 1903.19(c), abatement certification is required for this violation (using the CERTIFICATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION WORKSHEET).

Issued

Jun 6, 2014

Abate by

Jul 24, 2014

Penalty

Initial $1,760 · Current $1,760

Hazardous substances S103

General-duty citation text

Construction Reference: 1926.59 NOTE: The requirements applicable to construction work under this section are identical to those set forth at � 1910.1200 of this chapter.  29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop, implement, and/or maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which described how the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) would be met:  a) The employer did not develop or implement a written hazard communication program in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1) that would describe or include at least the following: 1) Requirement for labeling and other forms of warning; 2) Safety data sheet availability; 3) Employee information and training; 4) A list of hazardous chemicals known to be present in the workplace;  5) Methods to inform employees of the hazards on non-routine tasks; and  6) Methods to provide other employer(s) access to safety data sheet; information on any precautionary measures and the labeling system used in the workplace.  Masonry worker(s) were exposed to hazardous matter containing crystalline silica (up to 20%) while grinding out old mortar joints and tuck-pointing the open gaps between the bricks with new mortar.  Workers were replacing 2 lines of bricks, around the building.

Issued

Jun 6, 2014

Abate by

Jul 24, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

Hazardous substances S103

General-duty citation text

Construction Reference: 1926.59 NOTE: The requirements applicable to construction work under this section are identical to those set forth at � 1910.1200 of this chapter.  29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1): Employees were not provided effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard that the employees had not been previously trained about was introduced into their work area:  a)  The employer did not provide employee(s) with training regarding the health hazards of Crystalline Silica.  Masonry worker(s) were exposed to hazardous matter containing crystalline silica (up to 20%) while grinding out old mortar joints and tuck-pointing the open gaps between the bricks with new mortar.

Issued

Jun 6, 2014

Abate by

Jun 13, 2014

Penalty

Initial $1,760 · Current $1,760

Hazardous substances S103

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) The employer did not ensure that masonry worker(s) exposed to hazardous matter containing crystalline silica (up to 20%) while grinding out old mortar joints and tuck-pointing the open gaps between the bricks with new mortar used eye protection (safety glasses) to protect them against flying particulates.   None of the workers on site was observed wearing  eye protection.