C.W. HOULE, INC.

According to U.S. Department of Labor enforcement records, C.W. HOULE, INC. — a industry sector 00 facility located at MULLBERRY & MCKUSICK RAVINE, STILLWATER, MN 55082 — was the subject of a formal OSHA inspection that resulted in 7 citation(s) and cumulative proposed penalties of $24,750.00. The inspection case was opened on 2000-08-30.

DOL records document workplace safety violations warranting formal citation under the OSH Act. While classified at the standard enforcement level, all OSHA citations require corrective action and may indicate areas where workplace safety programs should be strengthened.

State Context: Within MN, this facility's penalty places it at the 99th percentile among 58,337 inspected facilities. The statewide average penalty is $1,403.06.

Citation Analysis: The inspection produced 7 citations spanning 6 distinct OSHA regulatory standards. The citation breakdown includes: 4 repeat — A substantially similar violation was found during a previous inspection and the original citation has become a final order. 3 serious — A workplace hazard that could cause death or serious physical harm exists, and the employer knew or should have known about the condition.

Enforcement Timeline: Citations were issued beginning October 3, 2000 with the latest abatement deadline set for October 20, 2000. Of the 7 total citations, 7 (100%) have been marked as abated in DOL records, indicating substantial compliance with corrective action requirements.

Penalty Assessment: The cumulative penalty of $24,750.00 reflects OSHA's gravity-based penalty calculation methodology, which considers the severity of potential injury, the probability of occurrence, the employer's size, good faith, and violation history. The per-citation average of $3,535.71 falls within the standard penalty range.

The enforcement record for C.W. Houle, Inc. reveals a catastrophic breakdown in trenching and excavation safety protocols, characterized by a pattern of "Repeat" (R) violations that signal deep-seated systemic negligence. The citations under 1926.651 and 1926.652 are particularly damning, as they address the fundamental pillars of cave-in protection: adequate shoring or sloping, safe means of egress, and daily inspections by a competent person. By incurring repeat violations for these specific standards, the employer demonstrated a prior knowledge of the hazards yet failed to implement permanent corrective controls, effectively placing workers in high-risk environments where the probability of a fatal trench collapse was significantly elevated. The financial assessment, totaling $24,750 for seven citations, reflects a penalty severity that is notably high for the era, driven primarily by the triple-tiered $7,500 assessments for the repeat excavation violations. This indicates that OSHA inspectors found the facility’s recidivism to be a primary aggravating factor. Beyond the structural trenching failures, the inclusion of 1926.21(b)(2) regarding safety training and 1926.102(a)(1) concerning eye and face protection confirms that the safety culture was deficient across multiple domains. This was not an isolated lapse in judgment but a pervasive failure of the management system to enforce basic life-safety standards, suggesting that production or speed was prioritized over the rigorous engineering requirements essential for safe underground utility work.