OSHA Inspection: ELIAS PEREZ GARCIA

Issued

Jul 3, 2019

Abate by

Aug 8, 2019

Penalty

Initial $1,705 · Current $1,074 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: (Construction Reference: 1926.59):  On or about February 7, 2019, at Lot 43, 6220 Privet Way, Cumming, Georgia:  Four employees performing brick masonry work were exposed to eye, skin, and lung irritation while using COOSA Buff Type-N Masonry cement which contains chemicals which include but is not limited to Portland cement and crystalline silica when the employer did not develop a written hazard communication program.

Issued

Jul 3, 2019

Abate by

Aug 8, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(8):  The employer did not ensure that Safety Data Sheets were readily accessible during each work shift to employees when they were in their work area(s): (Construction Reference: 1926.59):  On or about February 7, 2019, at Lot 43, 6220 Privet Way, Cumming Georgia:  Four employees performing brick masonry work were exposed to eye, skin, and lung irritation while using COOSA Buff Type-N Masonry Cement which contains chemicals which include but is not limited to Portland Cement and crystalline silica when the employer did not keep copies of Safety Data Sheets onsite to inform employees how to recognize and minimize those chemical hazards.

Issued

Jul 3, 2019

Abate by

Aug 8, 2019

Penalty

Initial $2,273 · Current $1,432 Reduced

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:  On or about February 7, 2019, at Lot 43, 6220 Privet Way, Cumming, Georgia:  Three employees performing brick masonry work were exposed to struck-by hazards from falling tools and bricks from employees working above them when they worked beneath those employees without wearing hard hats.

Issued

Jul 3, 2019

Abate by

Aug 8, 2019

Penalty

Initial $2,273 · Current $1,432 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.102(a)(1): Employees were not provided with eye and face protection equipment when machines or operations present potential eye or face injury from physical, chemical, or radiation agents:  On or about February 7, 2019, at Lot 43, 6220 Privet Way, Cumming, Georgia:  a) Four employees performing brick masonry work were exposed to struck-by hazards from brick shards when using trowels to chip bricks while not wearing eye and face protection.   b) Four employees performing brick masonry work were exposed to eye irritation while using COOSA Buff Type-N Masonry Cement when they did not wear eye protection.

Issued

Jul 3, 2019

Abate by

Jul 30, 2019

Penalty

Initial $2,842 · Current $1,790 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):  On or about February 7, 2019, at Lot 43, 6220 Privet Way, Cumming, Georgia:  Two employees performing brick masonry work were exposed to a fall hazard of approximately 7-feet when they worked from the platform of a tubular welded frame scaffold that was not fully planked.

Issued

Jul 3, 2019

Abate by

Jul 30, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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:  On or about February 7, 2019, at Lot 43, 6220 Privet Way, Cumming, Georgia:  Two employees performing brick masonry work were exposed to a fall hazard of approximately 7-feet when they worked from the platform of a tubular welded frame scaffold that had its support poles set directly on the ground without mud sills.

Issued

Jul 3, 2019

Abate by

Jul 30, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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.  Crossbraces were used as a means of access.  On or about February 7, 2019, at Lot 43, 6220 Privet Way, Cumming, Georgia:  Four employees performing brick masonry work were exposed to fall hazards of approximately 7-feet to 18-feet while climbing the frame of a tubular welded frame scaffold when the employer did not install a ladder.

Issued

Jul 3, 2019

Abate by

Jul 30, 2019

Penalty

Initial $2,273 · Current $1,432 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.451(h)(1): Each employee on a scaffold was not provided with additional protection from falling hand tools, debris, and other small objects through the installation of toeboards, screens, guardrail systems, or through the erection of debris nets, catch platforms, or canopy structures that contain or deflect the falling objects.  For falling objects too large, heavy or massive to be contained or deflected, the employer did not place and secure such potential falling objects away from the edge of the surface from which they could fall.  On or about February 7, 2019, at Lot 43, 6220 Privet Way, Cumming, Georgia:  Three employees performing brick masonry work were exposed to struck-by hazards from falling bricks and tools while working beneath employees working from a tubular welded frame scaffold that did not have toe boards installed.

Issued

Jul 3, 2019

Abate by

Jul 30, 2019

Penalty

Initial $3,978 · Current $2,439 Reduced

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):     On or about February 7, 2019, at Lot 43, 6220 Privet Way, Cumming, Georgia:    Two employees performing brick masonry work were exposed to a fall hazard of approximately 10.3-feet and greater when they worked from a porch roof without using fall protection.