OSHA Inspection: LEONARDO PEREZ

Issued

Sep 9, 2025

Penalty

Initial $2,270 · Current $2,270

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.102(a)(1): The employer did not ensure that each affected employee used appropriate eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying particles:  a)  At 313 Iris Court, Lot 322 Old Battles, Fairhope, Alabama:  On August 21, 2025; the employer allowed his employees to operate pneumatic nail guns without eye protection while performing framing activities exposing his employees to struck-by hazards.

Issued

Sep 9, 2025

Penalty

Initial $3,405 · Current $3,405

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)  At 313 Iris Court, Lot 322 Old Battles, Fairhope, Alabama:  On August 21, 2025; the employer allowed his employee to perform framing activities without using fall protection exposing his employee to a fall hazard of 12 feet to the ground below.

Issued

Sep 9, 2025

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)  At 313 Iris Court, Lot 322 Old Battles, Fairhope, Alabama:  On August 21, 2025; the employer allowed his employee to perform framing activities without first ensuring his employees were trained on the hazards associated with falls to include but not limited to inspecting and setting up  fall protection exposing his employee to a fall hazard of 12 feet to the ground below.

Issued

Sep 9, 2025

Penalty

Initial $2,270 · Current $2,270

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.1053(b)(1): Where (a) portable ladder(s) was/were 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:    a)  At 313 Iris Court, Lot 322 Old Battles, Fairhope, Alabama:  On August 21, 2025; the employer allowed his employee to use an extension ladder to gain access to the roof and the rails of the ladder did not extend three feet above the roof landing exposing his employee to a fall hazard of 12 feet to the ground below.