OSHA Inspection: RM MASONRY & STUCCO, INC.

Issued

Jul 9, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,400 · Current $2,400

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.   On or about June 16, 2015, on the northeast side of a new residential building, an employee installing framing material was using a pneumatic nail guns and did not wear eye protection, the employee was exposed to the hazard of being struck in the eye and face by flying debris.

Issued

Jul 9, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.453(b)(2)(v): A body belt with lanyard attached to the boom or basket was not worn by employee(s) working from an aerial lift:  a.  On or about June 16, 2015, on the north side of a new residential construction, an employee working in an aerial lift was not protected from a 10 feet fall hazard by the use of a personal fall arrest system.

Issued

Jul 9, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.453(b)(2)(ii): An unauthorized employee was operating an aerial lift:  a.  On or about June 16, 2015,  the employer did not ensure an authorized person was operating the aerial lift, exposing employees to a fall hazard.

Issued

Jul 9, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.501(b)(1): Each employee on a walking/working surface with an unprotected side or edge which was 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above a lower level was not protected from falling by the use of guardrail systems, safety net systems, or personal fall arrest systems:  a.  On or about June 16, 2014, on the northeast side of a new construction residential building, two employees installing framing were not protected from a 25 feet 5 inch fall hazard by the use of a personal fall protection system.  b.  On or about June 16, 2014, on the northwest side of a new construction residential building, two employees installing framing were not protected from a 25 feet 5 inch fall hazard by the use of a personal fall protection system.