OSHA Inspection: JOSE MARTINEZ

Issued

Oct 18, 2019

Abate by

Nov 27, 2019

Penalty

Initial $319 · Current $319

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1903.19(c)(1): The employer did not certify to OSHA, within 10 calendar days after the abatement date, that the cited violation had been abated:  On August 01, 2019, Jose Martinez, was issued citations and the employer did not verify, through documents that each citation was abated.  Abatement documentation was not received for the following violations:        a.    Citation 1, Item 1a     b.    Citation 1, Item 1b,     c.    Citation 1, Item 3a,     d.    Citation 1, Item 3b

Issued

Oct 18, 2019

Abate by

Nov 27, 2019

Penalty

Initial $319 · Current $319

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1903.19(d)(1):  The employer did not submit to the Agency documents demonstrating that abatement was complete for any serious violation for which the Agency indicated in the citation that such abatement documentation was required:     On August 01, 2019, Jose Martinez, was issued citations and the employer did not verify, through documents that each citation was abated.  Abatement documentation was not received for the following violations:        a.    Citation 1, Item 2a     b.    Citation 1, Item 2b

Issued

Aug 1, 2019

Abate by

Aug 12, 2019

Penalty

Initial $2,842 · Current $2,842

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.20(b)(1): The employer did not initiate and maintain accident prevention programs as necessary to comply with this part:  On or about June 5, 2019, Jose Martinez had employees exposed to fall hazards, on a residential construction site in Westville, Illinois.  The employer did not have an effective safety and health program with specific work rules, competent person oversight, and employee training to govern employees activities.

Issued

Aug 1, 2019

Abate by

Aug 12, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.20(b)(2): The employer did not initiate and maintain programs which provided for frequent and regular inspections of the job site, materials and equipment to be made by a competent person(s):  On or about June 5, 2019, Jose Martinez had employees exposed to fall hazards, on a residential construction site in Westville, Illinois.  The employer did not have a competent person conducting frequent and periodic safety inspections at the construction site.

Issued

Aug 1, 2019

Abate by

Aug 12, 2019

Penalty

Initial $3,978 · Current $3,978

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 June 5, 2019, Jose Martinez had employees exposed to fall hazards of 10 feet without fall protection, on a residential construction site in Westville, Illinois.

Issued

Aug 1, 2019

Abate by

Aug 12, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.503(a)(1): The employer did not provide a training program for each employee potentially exposed to fall hazards to enable each employee to recognize the hazards of falling and the procedures to be followed in order to minimize these hazards:   On or about June 5, 2019, Jose Martinez had employees exposed to fall hazards of 10 feet without fall protection, on a residential construction site in Westville, Illinois.  The employer did not provide construction safety training to employees, in order to provide them with the knowledge necessary to recognize the hazards of falling and the safety requirements associated with fall protection, as well as the proper work procedures to follow, in order to minimize and eliminate the fall hazards.

Issued

Aug 1, 2019

Abate by

Aug 12, 2019

Penalty

Initial $2,842 · Current $2,842

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(1): Portable ladders were used for access to an upper landing surface and the ladder side rails did not extend at least 3 feet (.9 m) above the upper landing surface to which the ladder was used to gain access:    On or about June 5, 2019, Jose Martinez had employees exposed to fall hazards of 10 feet, while accessing and exiting the roof via two extension ladders that did not extend at least 3 feet above the upper landing surface of the roof, on a residential construction site in Westville, Illinois.  These ladder instances included:   a. Garage ladder  2.5 feet and  b. House ladder  1 foot.

Issued

Aug 1, 2019

Abate by

Aug 12, 2019

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1060(a): The employer did not provide a training program for each employee using ladders and stairways, as necessary, which would train each employee in the procedures to be followed to minimize hazards related to ladders and stairways:    On or about June 5, 2019, Jose Martinez had employees exposed to fall hazards of 10 feet, while accessing and exiting the roof via two extension ladders that did not extend at least 3 feet above the upper landing surface of the roof, on a residential construction site in Westville, Illinois.  The employer did not provide construction safety training to employees, in order to provide them with the knowledge necessary to recognize the hazards related to ladders, as well as the proper work procedures to follow, in order to minimize and eliminate theses hazards.  This training would include:    a.         The nature of fall hazards in the work area,  b.         The correct procedures for erecting, maintaining, and disassembling the fall protection systems to be used, c.         The proper construction use, placement, and care in handling of all ladders, d.         The maximum intended load carrying capacities of ladders, and  e.         The standards contained in this subpart, Subpart X  Stairways and Ladders.