Check that dust controls are actually in use at Concrete-cutting renovation site, Denver CO (2026-07-21)

Concrete-cutting renovation site, Denver CO cuts and grinds concrete and masonry, throwing off invisible silica dust that scars lungs years later. Check whether the required water or vacuum controls and respirators are really in use on each dusty task, and flag any task running dry. Standard: OSHA 29 CFR 1926.1153 respirable crystalline silica — Table 1 control verification + written exposure control plan Proof: photo of the control in use per silica task + GPS + Table 1 checklist + written-plan status + tiered findings routed to the competent person Method (OSHA 29 CFR 1926.1153 respirable crystalline silica — Table 1 exposure-control screen + written exposure control plan check, ~45-90 min): 1. Check in with the competent person; confirm a written exposure control plan exists and list the silica-generating tasks on site (cutting/grinding/drilling/chipping concrete, masonry, or stone). Observe-and-document only. 2. Match each task to OSHA Table 1 and photograph whether the specified engineering control is in use — integrated water delivery (wet cutting) or a dust-collection/HEPA shroud. 3. Verify respiratory protection matches the Table 1 requirement for the task and duration (e.g., N95 / half-mask APF-10) and that workers are wearing it; note any fit-test/medical-clearance the plan references. 4. Check housekeeping: confirm NO dry sweeping or compressed-air cleaning of settled dust — wet methods or a HEPA vacuum must be used. 5. Record the exposure zone: signage, who is inside the dust zone, and whether unprotected workers or bystanders are exposed. 6. Tier each finding against the Table 1 requirement (stop-work / correct-before-proceed / monitor) and name the responsible competent person. 7. Enter photos, GPS/address, the Table 1 checklist, plan status, and the tiered findings; sign. Route stop-work items to the competent person and any suspected exceedance to an industrial hygienist. Equipment: respiratory protection per the site exposure control plan (N95/half-mask), tablet/clipboard with the 1926.1153 Table 1 checklist, camera, note on the written exposure control plan + fit-test/medical-clearance references, flashlight Done when: Every silica-generating task on site matched to OSHA Table 1 with a photo of the control in use (or its absence); Written exposure control plan presence and respiratory-protection match recorded; Housekeeping method documented (wet/HEPA vs. prohibited dry sweep/compressed air); Every finding tiered with the responsible competent person named

Where

Concrete-cutting renovation site, Denver CO

Pay

$540 proposed

This packet is not funded yet, so this figure is a proposed price and not money waiting in escrow. If a buyer funds it, approved proof settles that price onchain. If nobody funds it, approved proof earns provable credit toward the work instead of cash. You see which before you claim, never after.

Proof

photo of the control in use per silica task + GPS + Table 1 checklist + written-plan status + tiered findings routed to the competent person

This is exactly what gets it approved. Nothing settles without it.

Level

advanced

Open until

2026-07-28

How this work is done

A documented method, so this packet comes out the same whoever does it. Typically 45–90 minutes. Method of record: OSHA 29 CFR 1926.1153 respirable crystalline silica — Table 1 exposure-control screen + written exposure control plan check

Bring

• respiratory protection per the site exposure control plan (N95/half-mask)
• tablet/clipboard with the 1926.1153 Table 1 checklist
• camera
• note on the written exposure control plan + fit-test/medical-clearance references
• flashlight

Steps

1. 1. Check in with the competent person; confirm a written exposure control plan exists and list the silica-generating tasks on site (cutting/grinding/drilling/chipping concrete, masonry, or stone). Observe-and-document only.
2. 2. Match each task to OSHA Table 1 and photograph whether the specified engineering control is in use — integrated water delivery (wet cutting) or a dust-collection/HEPA shroud.
3. 3. Verify respiratory protection matches the Table 1 requirement for the task and duration (e.g., N95 / half-mask APF-10) and that workers are wearing it; note any fit-test/medical-clearance the plan references.
4. 4. Check housekeeping: confirm NO dry sweeping or compressed-air cleaning of settled dust — wet methods or a HEPA vacuum must be used.
5. 5. Record the exposure zone: signage, who is inside the dust zone, and whether unprotected workers or bystanders are exposed.
6. 6. Tier each finding against the Table 1 requirement (stop-work / correct-before-proceed / monitor) and name the responsible competent person.
7. 7. Enter photos, GPS/address, the Table 1 checklist, plan status, and the tiered findings; sign. Route stop-work items to the competent person and any suspected exceedance to an industrial hygienist.

If it does not match the plan

• A Table 1 task running dry (no water AND no dust-collection/HEPA) -> STOP-WORK: document, clear the area, route to the competent person; do not proceed past the exposure.
• Dry sweeping or compressed air used on silica dust -> flag as a prohibited housekeeping method; route to the competent person to switch to wet/HEPA.
• No written exposure control plan, or respiratory protection below the Table 1 requirement -> flag as a program gap; route to the competent person / employer. The agent flags, never interprets exposure limits.
• Any suspected exceedance beyond Table 1 (enclosed space, high-duration cutting, bystander exposure) -> observe-and-document only; route to a qualified industrial hygienist for air monitoring. The agent never clears exposure.

What counts as done

• Every silica-generating task on site matched to OSHA Table 1 with a photo of the control in use (or its absence)
• Written exposure control plan presence and respiratory-protection match recorded
• Housekeeping method documented (wet/HEPA vs. prohibited dry sweep/compressed air)
• Every finding tiered with the responsible competent person named

Proof is measured against these, not judged by taste.