Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
2,004,209Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-13 Last loaded 2026-07-17

OSHA Inspection: BEST IN HOMES, LLC

Planned inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of BEST IN HOMES, LLC in LANGDON STREET, MADISON, WI 53713 (NAICS 236118). OSHA activity number 339847071.

Watch Best IN Homes, LLC — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Best IN Homes, LLC is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
BEST IN HOMES, LLC
Site address
LANGDON STREET
City
MADISON
State
WI
ZIP
53713
Mailing
2405 AFTON ROAD, BELOIT, WI 53511
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
236118
Employees
7
Ownership type
A

4 citations on file for this inspection.

1903.19 D01

Deleted Other-than-serious 2 instances 7 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $400.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1903.19(d)(1): The employer must submit to the Agency, along with the information on abatement certification required by paragraph (c)(3) of this section, documents demonstrating that abatement is complete for each willful or repeat violation and for any serious violation for which the Agency indicates in the citation that such abatement documentation is required.  The employer failed to provide information documenting the abatement of the following cited hazards:  a.  Employees were exposed to the dangers of falling objects while engaged in roofing activities and were not protected by protective helmets.  b.  Employees were tearing shingles off a residential roof and were not protected from falling to lower levels.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (O) $0
  • — C (O) $400
  • — Z (O) $400

1926.100 A

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 5 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $2800.00 · Current $980.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.100(a): Employees working in areas where there is a possible danger of head injury from impact, or from falling or flying objects, or from electrical shock and burns, were not protected by protective helmets.                        On or about July 11, 2014, employees were exposed to the dangers of falling objects while engaged in roofing activities and were not protected by protective helmets.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $980
  • — C (S) $2800
  • — Z (S) $2800

1926.501 B13

Serious Gravity 10 3 instances 8 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $2800.00 · Current $980.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): "Residential construction." 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 unless another provision in paragraph (b) of this section provides for an alternative fall protection measure. Exception: When the employer can demonstrate that it is infeasible or creates a greater hazard to use these systems, the employer shall develop and implement a fall protection plan which meets the requirements of paragraph (k) of 1926.502.  Note: There is a presumption that it is feasible and will not create a greater hazard to implement at least one of the above-listed fall protection systems. Accordingly, the employer has the burden of establishing that it is appropriate to implement a fall protection plan which complies with 1926.502(k) for a particular workplace situation, in lieu of implementing any of those systems.              On or about July 11, 2014, employees were tearing shingles off a residential roof and were not protected from falling to lower levels.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $980
  • — C (S) $2800
  • — Z (S) $2800

1926.1053 B01

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 8 exposed
Issued
Penalty
Initial $2800.00 · Current $980.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(1): When portable ladders are used for access to an upper landing surface, the ladder side rails did not extend at least 3 feet (.9 m) above the upper landing surface to which the ladder is used to gain access; or, when such an extension is not possible because of the ladder's length, then the ladder shall be secured at its top to a rigid support that will not deflect, and a grasping device, such as a grabrail, shall be provided to assist employees in mounting and dismounting the ladder. In no case shall the extension be such that ladder deflection under a load would, by itself, cause the ladder to slip off its support.                  On or about July 11, 2014, employees were using portable ladders to access the upper landing of the roof and the ladder did not extend at least three feet higher than the upper landing.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $980
  • — C (S) $2800
  • — Z (S) $2800

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 339847071.