Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,189,992Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-18 Last loaded 2026-07-22

OSHA Inspection: MIGUEL HERNANDEZ

Planned inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of MIGUEL HERNANDEZ in BUILDING 19 4814, 4818 AND 4822 SAINT ANDREWS DRIVE, GROVE CITY, OH 43123 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 341775708.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Miguel Hernandez — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Miguel Hernandez is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
MIGUEL HERNANDEZ
Site address
BUILDING 19 4814, 4818 AND 4822 SAINT ANDREWS DRIVE
City
GROVE CITY
State
OH
ZIP
43123
Mailing
2953 LA VISTA DRIVE, COLUMBUS, OH 43204
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238160
Employees
2
Ownership type
A

1 citation on file for this inspection.

1926.501 B13

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Oct 18, 2016
Penalty
Initial $2,272 · Current $2,272
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): "Residential construction." Each employee engaged in residential construction activities six 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 or about September 15, 2016, each employee did not have adequate fall protection while performing roofing work. One employee was working without fall protection near the peak, exposing the employee to a fall hazard of approximately 25 feet. Another employee, who was working on a lower level roof, was utilizing an inadequate fall protection system, exposing the employee to a fall hazard of approximately 12 feet.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2272

View Miguel Hernandez's full OSHA safety record →

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 341775708.

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