What happened in this inspection
Cal/OSHA opened an accident inspection of The Regents of the University of California-San Francisco at 1001 Potrero Ave BLDG 80-90, San Francisco (San Francisco County) on Dec 9, 2025. It was a partial inspection focused on health hazards. 7 employees were recorded at the site. The employer is a state government body. Inspectors issued 12 citations (7 serious, 1 repeat) and proposed $142,700 in penalties; the current total is $142,700. 12 citations were contested before the Appeals Board. The case is still open. The employer has 3 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 Jun 3, 2026. Proposed $10,000, current $10,000. 30 workers exposed. Contested Sep 15, 2026, no final order yet. Read the rule.
Issued Jun 3, 2026. Proposed $400, current $400. 30 workers exposed. Contested Sep 15, 2026, no final order yet. Abatement due Jul 20, 2026. Read the rule.
Issued Jun 3, 2026. Proposed $800, current $800. 2 instances. 15 workers exposed. Contested Sep 15, 2026, no final order yet. Abatement due Jul 20, 2026. Read the rule.
Issued Jun 3, 2026. Proposed $400, current $400. 3 instances. 30 workers exposed. Contested Sep 15, 2026, no final order yet. Abatement due Jul 20, 2026. Read the rule.
Issued Jun 3, 2026. Proposed $800, current $800. 3 instances. 4 workers exposed. Contested Sep 15, 2026, no final order yet. Abatement due Jul 20, 2026. Read the rule.
Issued Jun 3, 2026. Proposed $22,500, current $22,500. 7 instances. 30 workers exposed. Contested Sep 15, 2026, no final order yet. Abatement due Jun 17, 2026. Read the rule.
Issued Jun 3, 2026. Proposed $14,400, current $14,400. 4 instances. 30 workers exposed. Contested Sep 15, 2026, no final order yet. Abatement due Jun 17, 2026. Read the rule.
Issued Jun 3, 2026. Proposed $14,400, current $14,400. 4 instances. 30 workers exposed. Contested Sep 15, 2026, no final order yet. Abatement due Jun 17, 2026. Read the rule.
Issued Jun 3, 2026. Proposed $21,600, current $21,600. 12 instances. 30 workers exposed. Contested Sep 15, 2026, no final order yet. Abatement due Jun 17, 2026. Read the rule.
Issued Jun 3, 2026. Proposed $25,000, current $25,000. 24 instances. 30 workers exposed. Contested Sep 15, 2026, no final order yet. Abatement due Jun 17, 2026. Read the rule.
Issued Jun 3, 2026. Proposed $14,400, current $14,400. 6 instances. 30 workers exposed. Contested Sep 15, 2026, no final order yet. Abatement due Jun 17, 2026. Read the rule.
Issued Jun 3, 2026. Proposed $18,000, current $18,000. 7 instances. 30 workers exposed. Contested Sep 15, 2026, no final order yet. Abatement due Jun 17, 2026. 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 348637695. 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 348637695, 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.