OSHA Inspection: AMIS PLASTERING, LLC.

Issued

Oct 16, 2017

Abate by

Nov 9, 2017

Penalty

Initial $1,630 · Current $0 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:  Employees engaged in EIFS activities were exposed to dermal, ingestion, and inhalation hazards from exposure to masonry and Portland cement in that a written hazard communication program was not developed and implemented.

Issued

Oct 16, 2017

Abate by

Nov 9, 2017

Penalty

Initial $1,630 · Current $0 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:   Employees engaged in EIFS activities were exposed to dermal, ingestion, and inhalation hazards from exposure to hazardous chemicals in that safety data sheets for gasoline, masonry and Portland cement were not available and/or maintained at the construction site.

Issued

Oct 16, 2017

Abate by

Nov 9, 2017

Penalty

Initial $1,630 · Current $0 Reduced

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:  Employees engaged in EIFS activities were exposed to dermal, ingestion, and inhalation hazards from exposure to gasoline, masonry and Portland cement in that effective information and training on how to recognize, avoid and/or eliminate those hazards, how to read a safety data sheet was not provided and implemented.

Issued

Oct 16, 2017

Abate by

Nov 9, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,803 · Current $0 Reduced

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):  An employee engaged in EIFS application activities were exposed to an approximate 21 feet fall hazard in that the scaffold was not fully planked.

Issued

Oct 16, 2017

Abate by

Nov 9, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,716 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.451(c)(2): Supported scaffold poles, legs, posts, frames, and uprights did not bear on base plates and mud sills or other adequate firm foundation:  Employees engaged in EIFS application activities were exposed to an approximate 21 feet fall hazard in that the scaffold supports poles did not bear on base plates to rest on the mud sills.

Issued

Oct 16, 2017

Abate by

Nov 9, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,716 · Current $0 Reduced

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 and end frames were used as a means of access:  An employees engaged in EIFS application activities were exposed to fall hazards in that the employee was using tubular welded frame scaffold cross bracing, and end frames to gain access and egress from working levels.

Issued

Oct 16, 2017

Abate by

Nov 9, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,803 · Current $0 Reduced

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:  An employee engaged in EIFS application activities was exposed to fall hazards associated with scaffold collapse in that a means to ensure scaffolds are inspected for visible defects by a competent person before each work shift was not implemented. Employee was allowed to work on a tubular welded frame scaffold that was not inspected for structural integrity as evidence by not having guardrail systems on the working platform, not fully planked, not using mud sills, not having ladder access on and off the scaffold.

Issued

Oct 16, 2017

Abate by

Nov 9, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,803 · Current $0 Reduced

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:  An employee engaged in EIFS application activities was exposed to fall hazards in that the employee was allowed to work on a tubular welded frame scaffold that was not fully guarded. The scaffold was missing guardrails on both sides of the working platform. Employee was exposed to fall hazards of approximately 21 feet from the working level of the scaffold to the ground below.