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

OSHA Inspection: ARMANDO SALMERON

Planned inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of ARMANDO SALMERON in 6505 DIETZ DR, CANAL WINCHESTER, OH 43110 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 343355251.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Armando Salmeron — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Armando Salmeron is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
ARMANDO SALMERON
Site address
6505 DIETZ DR
City
CANAL WINCHESTER
State
OH
ZIP
43110
Mailing
337 BELVIDERE AVE, COLUMBUS, OH 43223
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
4
Ownership type
A

5 citations on file for this inspection.

1926.20 B01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Sep 7, 2018
Abate by
Sep 19, 2018
Penalty
Initial $2,772 · Current $2,772
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. At the site, the employer did not maintain a safety and health program to ensure hazard detection and correction during roofing activities.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2772

1926.21 B02

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Sep 7, 2018
Abate by
Sep 19, 2018
Penalty
Initial $2,772 · Current $2,772
29 CFR 1926.21(b)(2): The employer shall instruct each employee in the recognition and avoidance of unsafe conditions and the regulations applicable to his work environment to control or eliminate any hazards or other exposure to illness or injury.  a. At the site located at 6505 Dietz Dr, Canal Winchester, OH, the employer failed to instruct each employee in the avoidance of unsafe conditions while performing construction activities.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2772

1926.503 A02 III

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Sep 7, 2018
Abate by
Sep 19, 2018
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.503(a)(2): The employer shall assure that each employee has been trained, as necessary, by a competent person qualified in the following areas:  29 CFR 1926.503(a)(2)(iii): The use and operation of guardrail systems, personal fall arrest systems, safety net systems, warning line systems, safety monitoring systems, controlled access zones, and other protection to be used.   a. At the site located at 6505 Dietz Dr., Canal Winchester, OH, the employer did not provide training to employees for the use and operation of an adequate personal fall arrest system.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.100 A

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Sep 7, 2018
Abate by
Sep 19, 2018
Penalty
Initial $2,772 · Current $2,772
29 CFR 1926.100(a): Employees working in areas where there is a possible danger of head injury from impact, or from falling or flying objects, or from electrical shock and burns, shall be protected by protective helmets.  a. At the site located at 6505 Dietz Dr., Canal Winchester, OH, head protection was not used while employees worked at the ground level below the roof tear off activities.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2772

1926.501 B13

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Sep 7, 2018
Abate by
Sep 19, 2018
Penalty
Initial $2,772 · Current $2,772
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. At the site located at 6505 Dietz Dr, Canal Winchester, OH, employees were performing tear off of the roof on a single family two story home without adequate fall protection.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2772

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 343355251.

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