CRANSTON, RI ·
OSHA Inspection: R REGO DEVELOPMENT
Complaint inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a complaint safety inspection of R REGO DEVELOPMENT in 28 PENDLETON STREET, CRANSTON, RI 02920 (NAICS 236118). OSHA activity number 344817556.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- R REGO DEVELOPMENT
- Site address
- 28 PENDLETON STREET
- City
- CRANSTON
- State
- RI
- ZIP
- 02920
- Mailing
- 74 PRESTON DRIVE, CRANSTON, RI 02910
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Complaint (B)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Safety
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- Non-union (B)
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 236118
- Employees
- 5
- Ownership type
- Private (A)
Citations
5 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.100 A
- Issued
- Aug 7, 2020
- Penalty
- Initial $1,966 · Current $1,966
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: (a) Worksite: On or about 7/2/2020, the employer did not ensure that employees working within, or around the outside edge of a structure with overhead hazards, were protected from falling debris, materials or tools by protective helmets.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $1966
1926.252 A
- Issued
- Aug 7, 2020
- Abate by
- Sep 23, 2020
- Penalty
- Initial $2,313 · Current $2,313
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.252(a): An enclosed chute of wood, or equivalent material, was not used where materials were dropped more than 20 feet to points lying outside the exterior walls of the building: (a) Worksite: On or about 7/2/2020, the employer did not ensure that a chute was used when dropping construction debris from an upper level between 24 and 26 feet in height, into a roll-off trash container below.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $2313
1926.501 B13
- Issued
- Aug 7, 2020
- Penalty
- Initial $4,048 · Current $4,048
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): Each employee 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 employees provided with an alternative fall protection measure under another provision of paragraph 1926.501(b): (a) Worksite: (1) On or about 7/2/2020, the employer did not ensure that employees were protected from fall hazards of up to 26 feet while performing demolition work on a residential structure that was partially burned from a fire. (2) On or about 7/2/2020, the employer did not ensure that employees were protected from fall hazards created by floor holes with a fall distance of approximately 10 feet.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $4048
1926.503 A01
- Issued
- Aug 7, 2020
- Abate by
- Sep 23, 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) Worksite: On or about 7/2/2020, the employer did not ensure that each employee exposed to fall hazards was properly trained in recognizing the hazards, as well as the necessary methods of protection.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $0
1926.416 E01
- Issued
- Aug 7, 2020
- Penalty
- Initial $325 · Current $325
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.416(e)(1): Worn or frayed electric cords or cables were used: (a) Worksite: On or about 7/2/2020, the employer did not ensure that a damaged flexible cord was taken out of service and repaired or replaced before employees used it to power Sawzall reciprocating saws.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (O) $325
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 236118)
More inspections in RI
Source
This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). OSHA publishes its own view of this case as inspection number 344817556.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.