Wash tip · 2026-10-15
OSHA sanitation citation: was the handwash station on site?
Placement and stocked unit photos when GCs blame the wash vendor after an audit.
Yard tip · 5 min read
Save time and money on this job
- Time: Service log when the gate is locked · photos beat a rumor in the group chat.
- Money: Event sanitation fights are cheap to prevent with a dated service shot.
- Habit: Station placed + water on · same quick ritual per festival stop.
Nightmare avoided
Audit Monday, your name Tuesday
What goes wrong: Inspector cites missing handwash capacity. GC emails say your stations were not on the north pad. You serviced Tuesday but sent nothing to the planner.
What receipts change: Dated placement proof on service finish gives the GC a forwardable defense.
Public record links
Court cases and forums (read the source)
Dinucci v. Lis (Ohio Ct. App. 2005)
Simplified outcome: Magistrate used site condition evidence on specific claims while rejecting others.
Yard lesson: Show the exact compliance beat you are defending.
Not legal advice. FieldDrop is documentation tooling only. Linked cases are public sources; outcomes depend on facts and jurisdiction. Read the original opinions before relying on them.
Wash and sink vendors get named when sanitation counts fail an audit. The fight is presence and placement on the cited week, not brand preference.
Volume lane pricing keeps per-stop proof affordable on high-count event routes.
Wide context showing station and access path beats a single tank close-up.
Wash lane proves water on site for events and GC schedules.