OSHA Inspection: SOTO SIDING

Issued

May 2, 2012

Abate by

May 17, 2012

Penalty

Initial $1,360 · Current $1,360

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.20(b)(2): The employer did not initiate and maintain a safety program which provides for frequent and regular inspections of jobsites, materials, and equipment to be made by a competent person (i.e., a person who is capable of identifying existing and predictable hazards in the surroundings or working conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to employees, and who has the authority to take prompt corrective measures to eliminate them):    Soto Siding, at 601 Stoney Brook Road, Fort Collins, CO: On 4/18/12 Soto Siding did not initiate and maintain a safety program which provides for frequent and regular inspections of jobsites, materials, and equipment to be made by a competent person (i.e., a person who is capable of identifying existing and predictable hazards in the surroundings or working conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to employees, and who has the authority to take prompt corrective measures to eliminate them).  Employees of Soto Siding were installing siding on the second level of a residential structure while standing upon the first floor's roof.  Employees utilized a ladder to access the roof.  The employer did not initiate and maintain a safety program that provided for inspections of the jobsite.  This condition exposed employees to an approximate eleven foot fall hazard.

Issued

May 2, 2012

Abate by

May 17, 2012

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

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, personal fall arrest systems, or another provision in paragraph (b) of this section which provides for an alternative fall protection measure:    Soto Siding, at 601 Stoney Brook Road, Fort Collins, CO: On 4/18/12 Soto Siding did not ensure that each employee engaged in residential construction activities 6 feet or more above lower levels was protected by guardrail systems, safety net systems, personal fall arrest systems, or another provision in paragraph (b) of this section which provides for an alternative fall protection measure.  Employees of Soto Siding were installing siding on the second level of a residential structure while standing upon the first floor's roof.  The employer did not ensure that the employees were protected from an approximate eleven foot fall hazard.

Issued

May 2, 2012

Abate by

May 17, 2012

Penalty

Initial $1,360 · Current $1,360

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(8): Ladders placed in a location where they could be displaced by workplace activities or traffic, such as in passageways, doorways, or driveways, were not secured to prevent accidental displacement, nor was a barricade used to keep the activities or traffic away from the ladder:    Soto Siding, at 601 Stoney Brook Road, Fort Collins, CO: On 4/18/12 Soto Siding did not ensure that ladders placed in a location where they could be displaced by workplace activities or traffic, such as in passageways, doorways, or driveways, were secured to prevent accidental displacement, nor was a barricade used to keep the activities or traffic away from the ladder.  Employees of Soto Siding were installing siding on the second level of a residential structure while standing upon the first floor's roof.  Employees utilized a ladder to access the roof.  The ladder, located in the driveway, was not secured to prevent displacement.  This condition exposed employees to an approximate eleven foot fall hazard.