OSHA Inspection: PACHECO ROOFING

Issued

Mar 6, 2012

Abate by

Mar 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,000 · Current $3,000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.102(a)(1):  Eye and face protective equipment were not used when machines or operations presented potential eye or face injury from physical, chemical, or radiation agents.    a)  On or about September 17, 2011 and at times prior, Pacheco Roofing did not ensure that employees were protected from eye hazards.  Employees were using pneumatic nailers to install shingles without wearing eye protection.

Issued

Mar 6, 2012

Abate by

Mar 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,400 · Current $2,400

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.307(d)(1):  Pulley(s) with part(s) seven feet (2.128 m) or less from the floor or work platform were not guarded in accordance with the requirements specified in paragraphs  (m) and  (o) of this section:    a)  On or about September 17, 2011 and at times prior, Pacheco Roofing did not ensure that employees were protected from mechanical power hazards.  A portable compressor, used to power pneumatic nailers for shingle installation, had no guarding for the belt and pulley.

Issued

Mar 6, 2012

Abate by

Mar 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.307(e)(1)(i):  Where both runs of a horizontal belt were 42 inches (106.68 cm) or less from the floor, the belt was not fully enclosed:    a)  On or about September 17, 2011 and at times prior, Pacheco Roofing did not ensure that employees were protected from mechanical power-transmission hazards.  The portable compressor, used to produce air for pneumatic nailers, did not have guards installed over the belt and pulleys.

Issued

Mar 6, 2012

Abate by

Mar 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,200 · Current $4,200

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13):  Each employee engaged in residential construction activities 6 feet or more above lower levels was not protected by guardrail systems, safety net systems, or personal fall arrest systems, nor  did the employer demonstrate that it is infeasible or creates a greater hazard to use these systems and develop and implement a fall protection plan which meets the requirements of paragraph (k) of section 1926.502.    a)  On or about September 17, 2011 and at times prior, Pacheco Roofing did not ensure that employees were protected from fall hazards.  The crew installing the shingles was using no type of fall protection system, nor did they have a plan meeting the requirements of paragraph (k) of section 1926.502

Issued

Mar 6, 2012

Abate by

Mar 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $3,000 · Current $3,000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(1):  Portable ladders were used for access to an upper landing surface and the ladder side rails did not extend at least 3 feet (.9 m) above the upper landing surface to which the ladder was used to gain access:    a)  On or about September 17, 2011 and at times prior, Pacheco Roofing did not ensure that employees were protected from ladder hazards.  The roofing crew did not properly set  up the ladder used to access the roof.  The side rails were not extended at least 3 feet above the landing.

Issued

Mar 6, 2012

Abate by

Mar 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(6): Ladders were used on surfaces which were not stable and level:    a)  On or about September 17, 2011 and at times prior, Pacheco roofing did not ensure that employees were protected from ladder use hazards.  The ladder, used to access the roofing level, was set up on hard packed ground without being secured at top or bottom.

Issued

Mar 6, 2012

Abate by

Mar 7, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(10):  The tops of a non-self-supporting ladder were not placed with the two rails supported equally:    a)  On or about September 17, 2011 and at times prior Pacheco Roofing did not ensure that employees were protected from ladder use hazards.  The ladder, used to access the roof area, was not set with equal support from both rails due to gable end slope.