Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,195,903Inspections Most recent open 2026-08-18 Last loaded 2026-08-21

OSHA Inspection: SANDO CONTRACTING

Planned inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of SANDO CONTRACTING in 956 SOUTH BEACH BLVD., BAY SAINT LOUIS, MS 39520 (NAICS 236115). OSHA activity number 341330322.

What this inspection record means

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.

Watch Sando Contracting for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Sando Contracting is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
SANDO CONTRACTING
Site address
956 SOUTH BEACH BLVD.
City
BAY SAINT LOUIS
State
MS
ZIP
39520
Mailing
706 SPANISH ACRES DR., BAY SAINT LOUIS, MS 39520
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Complete (A)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
Non-union (B)
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
236115
Employees
5
Ownership type
Private (A)

3 citations on file for this inspection.

1926.451 G01 VII

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Apr 14, 2016
Penalty
Initial $2,800 · Current $1,680 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.451(g)(1)(vii): Each employee on a scaffold, not otherwise specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through (g)(1)(vi) of this section, more than 10 feet (3.1 m) above lower level was not protected from falls by the use of personal fall arrest systems or guardrail systems meeting the requirements of paragraph (g)(4) of this section.      a) Northside of House - On or about March 14, 2016 employees removing material off the roof were lowered down from the roof on an unauthorized work platform  were not protected from falls by the use of personal fall arrest systems or guardrail systems .
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $1680
  • · Z (S) $2800

1926.501 B03

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Apr 14, 2016
Abate by
Apr 18, 2016
Penalty
Initial $2,800 · Current $1,680 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(3): Each employee in a hoist area was not protected from falling 6 feet (1.8 m) or more to lower levels by guardrail systems or personal fall arrest systems:      (a) Northside of House - On or about March 14, 2016 employees working on roof in hoist area were not protected from falling 6 feet (1.8 m) or more to lower levels by guardrail systems or personal fall arrest systems.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $1680
  • · Z (S) $2800

1926.602 D

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Apr 14, 2016
Abate by
Apr 18, 2016
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.602(d): The employer did not certify that each operator had been trained and evaluated as required by paragraph 29 CFR 1910.178(l):Note: The requirements applicable to construction work under paragraph (d) of this section are identical to those set forth at paragraph (l) of 29 CFR 1910.178.  EACH 1910 STANDARD USED MUST INCLUDE "AND AS REFERENCED BY THE NOTE CONTAINED IN 1926.602(d)" at the end of the SAVE.   (a) Northside of House - On or about March 14, 2016 employer had an employee operate the all terrain industrial truck that has not been trained and evaluated.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (O) $0

This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). OSHA publishes its own view of this case as inspection number 341330322.

Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.