WETHERSFIELD, CT ·
OSHA Inspection: ALFORDO CONSTRUCTION
Planned inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of ALFORDO CONSTRUCTION in 23 WILCOX STREET, WETHERSFIELD, CT 06109 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 344796404.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.
Where did this inspection happen?
- Establishment
- ALFORDO CONSTRUCTION
- Site address
- 23 WILCOX STREET
- City
- WETHERSFIELD
- State
- CT
- ZIP
- 06109
- Mailing
- 180 ROSETTE STREET, SECOND FLOOR, NEW HAVEN, CT 06501
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
- 238160
- Employees
- 12
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
5 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.416 A01
- Issued
- Oct 8, 2020
- Penalty
- Initial $3,856 · Current $3,856
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.416(a)(1): Employees were permitted to work in proximity to electric power circuits and were not protected against electric shock by de-energizing and grounding the circuits or effectively guarding the circuits by insulation or other means: A) On or about June 18, 2020, at the 23 Wilcox Street, Wethersfield, Connecticut job site: The employer permitted employees to work in such proximity to an electric power circuit that the employees could contact the electric power circuit in the course of work. The employees were not protected against electric shock by de-energizing the circuit and grounding it or by guarding it effectively by insulation or other means. Employer did not contact electric company to request a live wire protection (a free service). Employees used an aluminum extension ladder, approximately 4 feet away from the energized power lines, (220 Volts service) to the house.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $3856
1926.501 B13
- Issued
- Oct 8, 2020
- Penalty
- Initial $5,398 · Current $5,398
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): A) On or about June 18, 2020, at the 23 Wilcox Street, Wethersfield, Connecticut job site: Employees engaged in residential roofing operations were not provided fall protection. Employees were working on a steep roof, with a pitch greater than 4:12. The actual roof pitch was estimated to be 8:12. The lowest point on the roof, at the northeast corner of the structure, was approximately 13 feet to the ground level. The highest point on the roof was approximately 20 feet from ground below.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $5398
1926.503 A01
- Issued
- Oct 8, 2020
- Abate by
- Nov 27, 2020
- 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: A) On or about June 18, 2020, at the 23 Wilcox Street, Wethersfield, CT job site: The employer did not ensure that each employee had been trained, as necessary, by a competent person qualified in the following areas: 1) The nature of fall hazards in the work area; 2) The correct procedures for erecting, maintaining, disassembling, and inspecting the fall protection systems to be used; 3) The use and operation of a fall protection systems.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $0
1926.1053 B01
- Issued
- Oct 8, 2020
- Penalty
- Initial $3,084 · Current $3,084
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(1): Where a portable ladder was used for access to an upper level landing surface and the ladder's length did not allow the ladder side rails to extend at least 3 feet (0.9 m) above the upper landing surface being accessed, the ladder was not secured at its top to a rigid support that will not deflect, and a grasping device was not provided to assist employees in mounting and dismounting the ladder. A) On or about June 18, 2020, at the 23 Wilcox Street, Wethersfield, Connecticut job site: A portable aluminum ladder used by employees to access the roof did not extend at least three feet above the roof surface. Employees were exposed to falls of at least 13 feet to the ground below.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $3084
1926.1053 B21
- Issued
- Oct 8, 2020
- Abate by
- Nov 27, 2020
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(21): Each employee was not grasping the ladder with at least one hand when progressing up and/or down the ladder: A) On or about June 18, 2020, at the 23 Wilcox Street, Wethersfield, Connecticut job site: A portable aluminum ladder was used by employees to access the roof area. Employees were not grasping the ladder with at least one hand when progressing up and/or down the ladder. Employees did not maintain a 3 points of contact on the ladder when climbing and carrying equipment up to the roof.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $0
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 238160)
More inspections in CT
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 344796404.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.