OSHA Inspection: ORTEGA FRAMING, LLC.

Issued

May 3, 2017

Abate by

Jun 7, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,716 · Current $1,901 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.20(b)(1): It shall be the responsibility of the employer to initiate and maintain such programs as may be necessary to comply with this part.  a. On or before 30 March 2017, where an employee was using air actuated nail guns to install sheathing the roof, the employer failed to initiate and maintain a personal protective equipment program.  b. On or before 30 March 2017, where employees were sheathing the roof over the garage, the employer failed to initiate and maintain a fall protection program.

Issued

May 3, 2017

Abate by

May 15, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,173 · Current $1,521 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.102(a)(1): The employer shall ensure that each affected employee uses appropriate eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids, chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation.   a. On or before 30 March 2017, where an employee was using air actuated nail guns to install sheathing the roof, the employees eyes were not protected from flying objects, thereby being exposed to struck-by hazards.

Issued

May 3, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,716 · Current $1,901 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): "Residential construction." Each employee engaged in residential construction activities 6 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 before 30 March 2017, where employees were sheathing the roof over the garage, the employees were not protected from falls, thereby being exposed to a 12 foot fall hazard.