OSHA Inspection: JERRY'S INC.

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Penalty

Initial $9,268 · Current $9,268

General-duty citation text

OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1): The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees by exposing employees to struck-by and/or caught-between hazards.   a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, employees were exposed to multiple hazards onsite including but not limited to struck-by and caught-in hazards while performing roadway surfacing work without a high visibility apparel. The employer did not ensure that the high visibility apparel was worn which resulted in exposure to struck by or caught in between hazards while working in live lanes of vehicular traffic.  Among other methods, feasible and acceptable methods of abatement would include:  Comply with the provisions contained within Part VI of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) for Streets and Highways, 2009 Edition, December 2009 (including Revision 1 dated May 2012 and Revision 2 dated May 2012), MUTCD: Section 6D.03 Worker Safety Considerations. " Standard: 04:  1)  All workers, including emergency responders, within the right-of-way who are exposed either to traffic (vehicles using the highway for purposes of travel) or to work vehicles and construction equipment within the TTC zone shall wear high-visibility that meets the Performance Class 2 or 3 requirements of the ANSI/ISEA 107-2004 publication entitled "American National Standard for High-Visibility Safety Apparel and Headwear" (see Section 1A.11), or equivalent revisions, and labeled as meeting the ANSI 107-2004 standard performance for Class 2 or 3 risk exposure, except as provided in Paragraph 5. A person designated by the employer to be responsible for worker safety shall make the selection of the appropriate class of garment".

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Penalty

Initial $7,945 · Current $7,945

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1):  The employer did not develop, implement, and maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which describes how the criteria specified in paragraphs (f), (g), & (h) of this section for labels and other forms of warning, safety data sheets, and employee information and training will be met, and which also includes items (i) and (ii) of this subparagraph:  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, the employer did not provide or maintain a hazardous communication program to include labels and other forms of warning, safety data sheets, and employee information and training as required.  ABATEMENT NOTE:  A written program shall include description of how the criteria for the following will be met:  1.  Labeling and other forms of warning; 2.  Material Safety Data Sheets; 3.  Employee information and training  Additionally, a list of hazardous chemicals known to be preset in the workplace must be compiled.  Methods used to inform employees of the hazards associated with non-routine tasks and the informing of contractors of workplace hazards, including a description of the labeling system used in the facility and of the availability of material safety data sheets, must also be addressed.  The written program must be made available upon request.

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1)(i): The employer did not compile a list of the hazardous chemicals known to be present using a product identifier that was referenced on the appropriate safety data sheet.  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, the employer did not develop nor maintain a chemical inventory list identifying the hazardous chemicals being used by their employees.

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Abate by

Jan 23, 2026

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.1200(f)(6): The employer did not ensure that each container of hazardous chemicals in the workplace was labeled, tagged or marked with the information specified under paragraphs (f)(6)(i) through (ii) of this section:  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, employees were exposed to hazardous materials such as, but not limited to flammable liquids (diesel fuel) which was contained in gallon sized containers that were not labeled or marked in accordance with this section.

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1): Employees were not provided effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard that the employees had not been previously trained about was introduced into their work area:  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, the employer did not provide training on hazardous chemicals to be used on the site nor did the employer provide SDS sheets for the employees to reference in case their was an exposure.

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Abate by

Jan 23, 2026

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.1153(i)(1): The employer did not include respirable crystalline silica in the program established to comply with the hazard communication standard (HCS) (29 CFR 1910.1200):  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, the employer did not provide any type of hazard communication program (including SDS information, list of hazardous substances, and training associated) for the employees at the site.  Furthermore, the employer was not able to provide a hazard communication program for review following their inspection.

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Abate by

Jan 23, 2026

Penalty

Initial $9,268 · Current $9,268

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)  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, the employer did not ensure frequent and regular inspections of the jobsite and equipment were made by a person competent in work zone safety standards which resulted in several hazardous conditions exposing employees to struck by/caught in hazards when they performed roadway paving work for the completion of a new road.

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Abate by

Jan 23, 2026

Penalty

Initial $9,268 · Current $9,268

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.21(b)(2): The employer did not instruct each employee in the recognition and avoidance of unsafe conditions and the regulations applicable to his/her environment to control or eliminate any hazards or other exposure to illness or injury:  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, the employer did not ensure employees were trained in work zone safety standards and on site specific conditions, procedures and traffic control plans/concepts which resulted in several hazardous conditions that exposed employees to struck by/ caught in hazards when they performed roadway application work for the completion of a road (final surfacing).

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Abate by

Jan 23, 2026

Penalty

Initial $7,945 · Current $7,945

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.50(g): Where employees were exposed to injurious corrosive materials, suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body were not provided within the work area for immediate emergency use:  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, the employer did not provide eye washing/flushing stations/equipment to employees working with hazardous substances requiring eye rinse/wash/flush.

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Abate by

Jan 23, 2026

Penalty

Initial $9,268 · Current $9,268

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.51(a)(1): An adequate supply of potable water was not provided in all places of employment:  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, the employer did not provide potable drinking water for employees to drink while they worked outside in the sun with temperatures reaching 101 degrees within the previous 7 days of the inspection day and 95 degrees the day of the inspection. Without potable water employees exposed to excessive heat would not have a means to mitigate heat related illnesses such as but not limited to heat stress, heat exhaustion, and/or heat stroke.

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Abate by

Jan 23, 2026

Penalty

Initial $9,268 · Current $9,268

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.95(a): Protective equipment, including personal protective equipment for eyes, face, head, and extremities, protective clothing, respiratory devices, and protective shields and barriers, were not provided:  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, employees were exposed to material and equipment greater than 230 degrees without being provided any type of protective clothing to protect their extremities when handling the material.

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Abate by

Jan 23, 2026

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.102(a)(1): The employer did not ensure employees used eye and face protection equipment when machines or operations presented potential eye or face injury from physical, chemical, or radiation agents:  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, employees were exposed to hazards associated with the eye when they sprayed CRS-1; CRS-1H; and/or CRS-2. Additionally, when employees work with hot mix asphalt, they were exposed to eye/face hazards.

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Abate by

Jan 23, 2026

Penalty

Initial $9,268 · Current $9,268

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.152(a)(1): Containers and portable tanks used for the storage and handling of flammable and combustible liquids were not approved:  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, employees were exposed to flammable liquids when the employer used 2 gallon sized drink containers which was not an approved container to carry hazardous materials such as, but not limited to flammable liquids (diesel fuel).

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Penalty

Initial $9,268 · Current $9,268

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.200(g)(1): Construction areas were not posted with legible traffic signs at points of hazards:  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, Employees were exposed to multiple hazards onsite including but not limited to struck by/ caught in hazards when they performed road application work without signs being posted for lane closure, flagger ahead, and/or road work ahead to warn of the roadway hazards ahead to errant vehicles.

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.200(g)(2): Traffic control signs or devices used for protection of construction workers did not conform to Part VI of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, 2009 Edition, December 2009 (including Revision 1 dated May 2012 and Revision 2 dated May 2012) - see 1926.6:  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, employees were exposed to multiple hazards onsite including but not limited to struck by/ caught in when the redirection of traffic from its normal path of travel to a new path did not happen. This placed employees in the direct path of on coming traffic within the work zone to perform site paving operations that did not direct the flow of traffic to prevent employee exposure to vehicular traffic according to TA-10 of the MUTCD.

Issued

Dec 23, 2025

Abate by

Jan 23, 2026

Penalty

Initial $6,621 · Current $6,621

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.602(a)(9)(i): Bidirectional machine(s) were not equipped with an operable horn, distinguishable from the surrounding noise level, which could be operated as needed when the machine is moving in either direction.  a) The intersection of Richmond Road, Beaufort Court, and Havelock Court, Millsboro, DE; on or about July 1, 2025, and at times prior, employees were exposed to caught-in/struck- by hazards when they worked adjacent to multiple vehicles without operable warning horns.