OSHA Inspection: SALVADOR RESENDIZ

Issued

Feb 23, 2016

Abate by

Mar 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $1,600 · Current $800 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop, implement, and/or maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which describes how the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) will be met:   At the residential construction site located at 16624 Bond in Overland Park, Kansas:  Employees engaged in framing activities were exposed to dermal, ingestion, and inhalation hazards from exposure to hazardous chemicals.  Employees were exposed in that the employer had not developed or implemented a written hazard communication program to ensure that employees were aware of the hazards associated with the chemicals with which they work.  Hazardous chemicals used at the site included but were not limited to gasoline.

Issued

Feb 23, 2016

Abate by

Mar 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $1,600 · Current $800 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(8): The employer did not maintain copies of the required material safety data sheets for each hazardous chemical in the workplace:   At the residential construction site located at 16624 Bond in Overland Park, Kansas:  Employees engaged in framing activities were exposed to dermal, ingestion, and inhalation hazards from exposure to hazardous chemicals.  Employees were exposed in that a copy of the required safety data sheet for gasoline was not maintained at the residential construction site.

Issued

Feb 23, 2016

Abate by

Mar 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,000 Reduced

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:  At the residential construction site located at 16624 Bond in Overland Park, Kansas:  Employees engaged in  framing activities using a pneumatic nail gun were exposed to struck-by hazards in that eye protection was not provided.

Issued

Feb 23, 2016

Abate by

Mar 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $1,600 · Current $800 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.405(g)(2)(iv): Flexible cords were not connected to devices and fittings so that strain relief is provided to prevent pull from being directly transmitted to joints or terminal screws:  At the residential construction site located at 16624 Bond in Overland Park, Kansas:  Framers working at the residential  construction site were exposed to an electrical shock hazard in that strain relief was not provided for the male plug end of the extension cord providing power to the Makita circular saw.

Issued

Feb 23, 2016

Abate by

Mar 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced

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):   At the residential construction site located at 16624 Bond in Overland Park, Kansas:  Employees engaged in residential framing activities, walking the top plates, were exposed to fall hazards of approximately 30 feet from the top plate on the west side of the residence to the ground below, in that fall protection was not utilized.

Issued

Feb 23, 2016

Abate by

Mar 15, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.501(c): When employees were exposed to falling objects the employer did not require employees to wear hard hats and did not implement measures to prevent objects from falling from higher levels as set forth in (c)(1)-(3) of this section:  At the jobsite located at 16624 Bond in Overland Park, Kansas: Employees engaged in framing activities were exposed to head injury from falling objects such as but not limited to tools, in that employees working on the ground were not wearing hard hats.