LEWIS CENTER, OH —
OSHA Inspection: JESUS GARCIA
Planned inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of JESUS GARCIA in 5702 LUDINGTON DRIVE, LEWIS CENTER, OH 43035 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 339910879.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- JESUS GARCIA
- Site address
- 5702 LUDINGTON DRIVE
- City
- LEWIS CENTER
- State
- OH
- ZIP
- 43035
- Mailing
- 460 NORTH GREENER, COLUMBUS, OH 43228
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Planned (H)
- Scope
- Complete (A)
- 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
- 238160
- Employees
- 5
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
4 citations on file for this inspection.
1903.19 D01
- Issued
- Dec 4, 2014
- Abate by
- Jan 8, 2015
- Penalty
- Initial $400 · Current $400
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1903.19(d)(1): The employer must submit to the Agency, along with the information on abatement certification required by paragraph (c)(3) of this section, documents demonstrating that abatement is complete for each willful or repeat violation and for any serious violation for which the Agency indicates in the citation that such abatement documentation is required: a. The employer has failed to submit abatement certification and documentation within ten days of the abatement date, October 4, 2014 of 29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13), citation 1, item 1, and described as follows: On the roof of the two story house where employees were installing felt paper and shingles, fall protection was not used by three of the employees. In addition, two employees who were wearing non-safety rated climbing harnesses, thereby exposing employees to a 32 foot fall hazard. b. The employer has failed to submit abatement certification and documentation within ten days of the abatement date, October 4, 2014 of 29 CFR 1926.502(e)(2), citation 1, item 2, and described as follows: On the roof of the house where employees were working, the positioning ropes were tied off to the trusses, thereby exposing employees to a 32 foot fall hazard. c. The employer has failed to submit abatement certification and documentation within ten days of the abatement date, October 4, 2014 of 29 CFR 1926.503(c)(3), citation 1, item 3, and described as follows: At the worksite where employees were working from the roof of a two story house, the employees had not retained the requisite understanding or skill of fall protection equipment and how to properly connect that equipment, thereby exposing the employees to a 32 foot fall hazard.
Recent events (1)
- — Z (O) $400
1926.501 B13
- Issued
- Sep 16, 2014
- Abate by
- Oct 4, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): "Residential construction." Each employee engaged in residential construction activities 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above lower levels shall be protected by guardrail systems, safety net system, or personal fall arrest system unless another provision in paragraph (b) of this section provides for an alternative fall protection measure. Exception: When the employer can demonstrate that it is infeasible or creates a greater hazard to use these systems, the employer shall develop and implement a fall protection plan which meets the requirements of paragraph (k) of 1926.502. Note: There is a presumption that it is feasible and will not create a greater hazard to implement at least one of the above-listed fall protection systems. Accordingly, the employer has the burden of establishing that it is appropriate to implement a fall protection plan which complies with 1926.502(k) for a particular workplace situation, in lieu of implementing any of those systems. a. On the roof of the two story house where employees were installing felt paper and shingles, fall protection was not used by three of the employees in addition to two employees who were wearing non-safety rated climbing harnesses, thereby exposing employees to a 32 foot fall hazard.
Recent events (1)
- — Z (S) $2800
1926.502 E02
- Issued
- Sep 16, 2014
- Abate by
- Oct 4, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.502(e)(2): Positioning devices shall be secured to an anchorage capable of supporting at least twice the potential impact load of an employee's fall or 3,000 pounds (13.3 kN), whichever is greater. a. On the roof of the house where employees were working, the positioning ropes were tied off to the trusses, thereby exposing employees to a 32 foot fall hazard.
Recent events (1)
- — Z (S) $2800
1926.503 C03
- Issued
- Sep 16, 2014
- Abate by
- Oct 4, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800
General-duty citation text
1926.503(c) "Retraining." When the employer has reason to believe that any affected employee who has already been trained does not have the understanding and skill required by paragraph (a) of this section, the employer shall retrain each such employee. Circumstances where retraining is required include, but are not limited to, situations where:29 CFR 1926.503(c)(3): Inadequacies in an affected employee's knowledge or use of fall protection systems or equipment indicate that the employee has not retained the requisite understanding or skill. Note: The following appendices to subpart M of this part serve as non-mandatory guidelines to assist employers in complying with the appropriate requirements of subpart M of this part. a. At the worksite where employees were working from the roof of a two story house, the employees had not retained the requisite understanding or skill of fall protection equipment and how to properly connect that equipment, thereby exposing the employees to a 32 foot fall hazard.
Recent events (1)
- — Z (S) $2800
More inspections at Jesus Garcia
View Jesus Garcia's full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 238160)
More inspections in OH
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 339910879.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.