LAKEWOOD, CO —
OSHA Inspection: ARTURO RODRIGUEZ
Planned inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of ARTURO RODRIGUEZ in 2066-2076 S. BALSAM, LAKEWOOD, CO 80226 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 331073718.
OSHA opens inspections for many reasons — routine scheduling under a national or local emphasis program, an employee complaint or referral, or a follow-up after a reported injury. Opening or conducting an inspection is not itself an allegation or a finding that this employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.
Where did this inspection happen?
- Establishment
- ARTURO RODRIGUEZ
- Site address
- 2066-2076 S. BALSAM
- City
- LAKEWOOD
- State
- CO
- ZIP
- 80226
- Mailing
- 6981 ALLAN DR., DENVER, CO 80221
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Planned (H)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Safety
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- B
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 238160
- Employees
- 6
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
6 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.100 A
- Issued
- Nov 3, 2011
- Abate by
- Nov 8, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $1,800 · Current $900 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.100(a): Employees were not protected by protective helmets while working in areas where there was a possible danger of head injury from impact, or from falling or flying objects, or from electrical shock and burns: a) On or about October 5, 2011, employees were exposed to head injuries while working at ground level while other employees were working above on the roof.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $900
- — Z (S) $1800
1910.178 L01 I
- Issued
- Nov 3, 2011
- Abate by
- Nov 28, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $1,800 · Current $900 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.178(l)(1)(i): The employer did not ensure that each powered industrial truck operator was competent to operate a powered industrial truck safely, as demonstrated by the successful completion of the training and evaluation specified in this paragraph (l): a) On or about October 5, 2011 and at times prior, the employer did not ensure that employees operating a rough-terrain telehandler forklift (JLG model 6042) at the site were trained in safe operation of the forklift.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $900
- — Z (S) $1800
1926.451 C02 IV
- Issued
- Nov 3, 2011
- Abate by
- Nov 4, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $3,000 · Current $1,500 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.451(c)(2)(iv): Front-end loaders and similar pieces of equipment were used to support scaffold platforms without being specifically designed by the manufacturer for such use: a) On or about October 5, 2011, employees were exposed to injury while being lowered from a roof on a platform consisting of a wood box with an open side which was supported by the forks and mast of a JLG telehandler forklift.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1500
- — Z (S) $3000
1926.451 G01
- Issued
- Nov 3, 2011
- Abate by
- Nov 4, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.451(g)(1): Each employee on a scaffold more than 10 feet above a lower level were not protected from falling to that lower level: a) On or about October 5, 2011, employees were exposed to falls in excess of 10 feet while being lowered from a roof in a wood box attached to a forklift with an open end. Railings or other means of fall protection were not provided.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1926.501 B13
- Issued
- Nov 3, 2011
- Abate by
- Nov 8, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $3,000 · Current $2,500 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): Employee(s) engaged in residential construction activities 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above lower levels were not protected by guardrail systems, safety net system, or personal fall arrest system, nor were employee(s) provided with an alternative fall protection measure under another provision of paragraph (b): a) On or about October 5, 2011, employees were exposed to falls in excess of 6 feet while performing roofing work without the use of fall protection systems.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $2500
- — Z (S) $3000
1926.503 A01
- Issued
- Nov 3, 2011
- Abate by
- Nov 28, 2011
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.503(a)(1): The employer did not provide a training program for each employee potentially exposed to fall hazards to enable each employee to recognize the hazards of falling and the procedures to be followed in order to minimize these hazards: a) On or about October 5, 2011 and at times prior, the employer had not provided training to all employees who were exposed to fall hazards to provide them the knowledge necessary to recognize and prevent fall hazards during roofing work.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
More inspections at Arturo Rodriguez
View Arturo Rodriguez's full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 238160)
More inspections in CO
Source
This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). The original IMIS detail view is available at OSHA's Establishment Search for activity number 331073718.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.