PLAIN CITY, OH —
OSHA Inspection: JUAN MANUEL PEREZ VENEGAS
Planned inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of JUAN MANUEL PEREZ VENEGAS in 10522 OLEADER WAY, PLAIN CITY, OH 43064 (NAICS 238130). OSHA activity number 342602497.
Where did this inspection happen?
- Establishment
- JUAN MANUEL PEREZ VENEGAS
- Site address
- 10522 OLEADER WAY
- City
- PLAIN CITY
- State
- OH
- ZIP
- 43064
- Mailing
- 1881 BIG TREE, COLUMBUS, OH 43223
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Planned (H)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Safety
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- B
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 238130
- Employees
- 6
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
2 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.102 A01
- Issued
- Abate by
- Penalty
- Initial $2173.00 · Current $1521.00 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 August 31, 2017 where an employee was operating a circular saw to cut lumber, the employee's eyes were not protected from flying particles, thereby being exposed to struck-by hazards.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1521.1
- — Z (S) $2173
1926.501 B13
- Issued
- Abate by
- Penalty
- Initial $3259.00 · Current $2281.00 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 August 31, 2017 where an employee was sheathing the roof of a house, the employee was not protected from falls, thereby being exposed to a 10 foot fall hazard.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $2281.3
- — Z (S) $3259
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 238130)
FAIRHOPE, AL—2026-07-16
FRANCISCO ARES
WOODHAVEN, MI—2026-07-16
G.J. PERELLI CO., L.L.C.
PHILADELPHIA, PA—2026-07-16
URUS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
BERLIN, NJ—2026-07-16
URUS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
MERIDIAN, ID—2026-07-15
TRIPLE R CONSTRUCTION LLC
More inspections in OH
WELLINGTON, OH—2026-07-16
WHIRLAWAY CORPORATION
WAUSEON, OH—2026-07-16
WATSON WELL DRILLING INC.
SEVEN HILLS, OH—2026-07-15
STONEY ACRES BUILDERS LLC
SEVEN HILLS, OH—2026-07-15
GRB ENTERPRISES LLC
CHILLICOTHE, OH—2026-07-15
KENWORTH
Source
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 342602497.