What happened in this inspection
Cal/OSHA opened a planned inspection of Granite Construction Company at 4291 Bradshaw Road, Sacramento (Sacramento County) on Dec 2, 2005. It was a complete inspection of the worksite focused on safety hazards. 88 employees were recorded at the site, with union representation. Inspectors issued 1 citation (0 serious) and proposed $0 in penalties; the current total is $0. 1 citation was contested before the Appeals Board. 11 citations were deleted on appeal and are not counted. The case closed on Oct 23, 2008. The employer has 355 other inspections on its California record.
Citations
Each citation names the rule, its classification and the penalty as proposed and as it stands now.
Issued Jan 27, 2006. Proposed $0, current $0. 1 workers exposed. Contested May 30, 2006, final order Oct 21, 2008. Abatement due Dec 2, 2005, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Jan 27, 2006. Proposed $450, current $0. 1 workers exposed. Contested May 30, 2006, final order Oct 21, 2008. Abatement due Dec 2, 2005, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Jan 27, 2006. Proposed $450, current $0. 1 workers exposed. Contested May 30, 2006, final order Oct 21, 2008. Abatement due Dec 2, 2005, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Jan 27, 2006. Proposed $450, current $0. 1 workers exposed. Contested May 30, 2006, final order Oct 21, 2008. Abatement due Mar 16, 2006. Read the rule.
Issued Jan 27, 2006. Proposed $450, current $0. 1 workers exposed. Contested May 30, 2006, final order Oct 21, 2008. Abatement due Dec 2, 2005, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Jan 27, 2006. Proposed $450, current $0. 1 workers exposed. Contested May 30, 2006, final order Oct 21, 2008. Abatement due Dec 2, 2005, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Jan 27, 2006. Proposed $450, current $0. 1 workers exposed. Contested May 30, 2006, final order Oct 21, 2008. Abatement due Feb 10, 2006. Read the rule.
Issued Jan 27, 2006. Proposed $450, current $0. 1 workers exposed. Contested May 30, 2006, final order Oct 21, 2007. Abatement due Feb 10, 2006. Read the rule.
Issued Jan 27, 2006. Proposed $450, current $0. 1 workers exposed. Contested May 30, 2006, final order Oct 21, 2008. Abatement due Feb 10, 2006. Read the rule.
Issued Jan 27, 2006. Proposed $450, current $0. 1 workers exposed. Contested May 30, 2006, final order Oct 21, 2006. Abatement due Dec 2, 2005, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Jan 27, 2006. Proposed $450, current $0. 1 workers exposed. Contested May 30, 2006, final order Oct 21, 2008. Abatement due Dec 2, 2005, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Jan 27, 2006. Proposed $450, current $0. 1 workers exposed. Contested May 30, 2006, final order Oct 21, 2008. Abatement due Dec 2, 2005, completed. Read the rule.
Your rights
If you worked at this site, the inspection file is a public record once the case closes; request it from the Cal/OSHA district office with activity number 301147492. A worker who reported the hazard, the injury or the inspection and was then fired, demoted or cut has a retaliation claim under Labor Code 6310, one year to file with the Labor Commissioner and longer to sue. Injuries themselves go through workers' compensation. Free, confidential review: (800) 371-3088.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor OSHA enforcement data, inspection 301147492, checked Nov 1, 2026. How to read a record. Back to the safety tracker.
About this data: Records come from the U.S. Department of Labor's OSHA enforcement datasets (inspection, violation, accident and accident injury tables), which carry Cal/OSHA's state-plan inspections alongside federal ones. We load every inspection of a California worksite opened since January 1, 2000 and refresh it weekly. Employer names, addresses and industry codes are as the inspecting office recorded them; similar names are grouped where they clearly refer to the same employer. A citation can be reduced, vacated or withdrawn on appeal, and an inspection can stay open for months, so a record can change. Penalties shown as "current" reflect the latest status in the federal file. This page is public information about the employer's regulatory record, not legal advice and not a statement that any person was harmed or any law broken beyond what the record states.