OSHA Inspection: ROGER MEJIA

Issued

Mar 31, 2017

Abate by

May 17, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,716 · Current $2,716

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:  The employer is failing to protect employees from corrosive and other chemical hazards. This was most recently documented at the jobsite located at 19325 102nd Street, Lenexa, Kansas where employees engaged in stucco activities were exposed to dermal, ingestion, and inhalation hazards from exposure to gasoline, Masonry and Portland cement in that the employer did not have a written hazard communication program.

Issued

Mar 31, 2017

Abate by

May 17, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,716 · Current $2,716

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:    The employer is failing to provide employees with a copy of the required safety data sheet for gasoline, Masonry and Portland cement maintained at the residential construction site. The violation was most recently documented at the jobsite, located at 19325 102nd Street, Lenexa, Kansas where employees engaged in stucco activities were exposed to dermal, ingestion, and inhalation hazards from exposure to hazardous chemicals in that safety data sheets were not available.

Issued

Mar 31, 2017

Abate by

May 17, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,259 · Current $3,259

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1): Employees were not provided effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard that the employees had not been previously trained about was introduced into their work area:  The employer is failing to protect employees from corrosive and other chemical hazards. This was most recently documented at the jobsite located at 19325 102nd Street, Lenexa, Kansas where employees performing stucco work were exposed to dermal, ingestion and inhalation hazards from exposure to hazardous chemicals without being provided with information and training on how to recognize, avoid and/or eliminate those hazards.

Issued

Mar 31, 2017

Abate by

Apr 26, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,803 · Current $3,803

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.100(a): Employees working in areas where there was a possible danger of head injury from impact, or falling or flying objects, or from electrical shock and burns, were not protected by protective helmets:  The employer is failing to protect employees from struck-by hazards. This was most recently documented at the jobsite located at 19325 102nd Street, Lenexa, Kansas, where employees engaged in stucco activities were exposed to struck-by hazards while walking/working under the fabricated framed scaffolding without hardhats while other employees were working overhead.

Issued

Mar 31, 2017

Abate by

Apr 26, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,803 · Current $3,803

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.451(f)(3): Scaffolds and scaffold components were not inspected for visible defects by a competent person before each work shift, and after any occurrence which could affect a scaffold's structural integrity:   The employer is failing to protect employees from hazards associated with scaffold collapse by insuring that scaffolds are inspected for visible defects by a competent person before each work shift. The violation was most recently documented at a jobsite, located at 19325 102nd Street, Lenexa, Kansas where employees were exposed to fall hazards of approximately 20 feet while working on a scaffold  that was not inspected for structural integrity before being used by employees.

Issued

Mar 31, 2017

Abate by

May 17, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,803 · Current $3,803

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.454(a): The employer did not have each employee who performed work while on a scaffold trained by a person qualified in the subject matter to recognize the hazards associated with the type of scaffold being used and to understand the procedures to control or minimize those hazards:   The employer is failing to protect employees from hazards associated with fabricated framed scaffolding. This was most recently documented at the jobsite located at 19325 102nd Street, Lenexa, Kansas where employees engaged in stucco work were not trained to recognize hazards associated with scaffolding and understand procedures to control or minimize such hazards, such as but not limited to lack of guardrails, inadequate footings and lack of ladders to access or egress the scaffolding.

Issued

Mar 31, 2017

Abate by

May 17, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.454(b): The employer did not have each employee involved in erecting, disassembling, moving, operating, repairing, maintaining, or inspecting a scaffold trained by a competent person to recognize any hazards associated with the work in question:   The employer is failing to protect employees from hazards associated with the erection and dismantling of fabricated frame scaffolds. This was most recently documented at the jobsite located at 19325 102nd Street, Lenexa, Kansas where employees engaged in scaffold erecting and dismantling were not trained to recognize hazards such as but not limited to allowing employees to work from the scaffold while being dismantled, fall protection, and lack of scaffold access.

Issued

Mar 31, 2017

Abate by

Apr 26, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,803 · Current $3,803

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):   The employer is failing to protect employees from fall hazards during residential construction activities. This was most recently documented at the jobsite located at 19325 102nd Street, Lenexa, Kansas:   a) On or about October 13, 2016, employees performing stucco work from the first and second floor balconies were exposed to fall hazards greater than 6 feet to the ground below.   b) Employees were exposed to falls of approximately 14 feet into an unfinished basement under construction adjacent to work being performed from a fabricated frame scaffold.

Issued

Mar 31, 2017

Abate by

Apr 26, 2017

Penalty

Initial $25,350 · Current $25,350

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.451(b)(1): Each platform on all working levels of scaffolds was not fully planked or decked between the front uprights and the guardrail supports as specified in paragraphs 1926.451(b)(1)(i)-(ii):  The employer is failing to protect employees from fall hazards while working from a fabricated frame scaffold. The violation was most recently documented at the jobsite located at 19325 102nd Street, Lenexa, Kansas where employees were engaged in stucco work from a fabricated frame scaffold that was not fully planked or decked.  Employees were exposed to fall hazards of approximately 20 feet from the working level of the scaffold to the ground below.

Issued

Mar 31, 2017

Abate by

Apr 26, 2017

Penalty

Initial $25,350 · Current $25,350

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.451(c)(2): Supported scaffold poles, legs, posts, frames,  or uprights did not bear on base plates, mud sills or other adequate firm foundation:   The employer is failing to protect employees from fall hazards while working from a fabricated frame scaffold. This was most recently documented at the jobsite located at 19325 102nd Street, Lenexa, Kansas where employees were engaged in stucco work from a fabricated frame scaffold with inadequate and missing mud sills and base plates. Employees were exposed to fall hazards greater than 10 feet to the ground below.

Issued

Mar 31, 2017

Abate by

Apr 26, 2017

Penalty

Initial $25,350 · Current $25,350

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.451(c)(3): Supported scaffold poles, legs, post, frames, and/or uprights were not plumb and braced to prevent swaying and displacement:  The employer is failing to protect employees from fabricated frame scaffold collapse hazards. This was most recently documented at the jobsite located at 19325 102nd Street, Lenexa, Kansas where employees were engaged in stucco work from a fabricated frame scaffolding which was not plumb and braced to prevent swaying and displacement.

Issued

Mar 31, 2017

Abate by

Apr 26, 2017

Penalty

Initial $25,350 · Current $25,350

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.451(e)(1): When scaffold platforms were more than 2 feet (0.6 m) above or below a point of access, portable ladders, hook-on ladders, attachable ladders, stair towers (scaffold stairways/towers), stairway-type ladders (such as ladder stands), ramps, walkways, integral prefabricated scaffold access, or direct access from other scaffold, structure, personnel hoist, or similar surface was not used.  Cross braces were used as a means of access:  The employer  is failing to protect employees from fall hazards while accessing and egressing fabricated framed scaffolds. This was most recently documented at the jobsite located at 19325 102nd Street, Lenexa, Kansas where employees  were using fabricated framed scaffold cross bracing to gain access and egress from working levels.

Issued

Mar 31, 2017

Abate by

Apr 26, 2017

Penalty

Initial $25,350 · Current $25,350

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.451(g)(1): Employees on scaffolds more than 10 feet (3.1 m) above a lower level were not protected from falling to that lower level by fall protection established in paragraphs (g)(1)(i)-(vii) of this section:  The employer is failing to protect employees from fall hazards while working from fabricated frame scaffolding. This was most recently documented at the jobsite located at 19325 102nd Street, Lenexa, Kansas. Employees engaged in applying stucco to an exterior wall of a house from a fabricated frame scaffold without the use of guardrails or other fall protection systems were exposed to fall hazards of up to approximately 20 feet from the working level to the ground below.

Issued

Mar 31, 2017

Abate by

Apr 26, 2017

Penalty

Initial $25,350 · Current $25,350

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.452(c)(2): Tubular welded frames and panels were not braced by cross, horizontal, or diagonal braces, or combination thereof, which would have secured vertical members together laterally:  The employer is failing to protect employees from scaffold collapse hazards. This was most recently documented at a jobsite located at 19325 102nd Street, Lenexa, Kansas. Employees engaged in stucco activities were exposed  to scaffold collapse hazards in that scaffolding frames were not fully braced with cross braces.  The scaffold lacked seven cross braces.