What happened in this inspection
Federal OSHA opened an accident inspection of Alex Praza at 1030 Quesada Avenue, San Francisco (San Francisco County) on Sep 21, 2005. It was a partial inspection focused on safety hazards. 6 employees were recorded at the site. Inspectors issued 18 citations (1 serious) and proposed $3,110 in penalties; the current total is $3,110. The case closed on Feb 5, 2019.
Citations
Each citation names the rule, its classification and the penalty as proposed and as it stands now.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 4 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 2 instances. 2 workers exposed. Abatement due Mar 23, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 2 instances. 2 workers exposed. Abatement due Mar 23, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 2 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $175, current $175. 4 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 4 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 4 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 2 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 2 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 2 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 2 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 2 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 2 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 2 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 2 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 4 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $85, current $85. 2 workers exposed. Abatement due Apr 22, 2006, completed. Read the rule.
Issued Mar 20, 2006. Proposed $1,575, current $1,575. 2 workers exposed. Abatement due Mar 23, 2006, 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 307393827. 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 307393827, 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.