SACO, ME ·
OSHA Inspection: RUCK ROOFING COMPANY
Planned inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of RUCK ROOFING COMPANY in 315 FERRY ROAD, SACO, ME 04072 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 334820784.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- RUCK ROOFING COMPANY
- Site address
- 315 FERRY ROAD
- City
- SACO
- State
- ME
- ZIP
- 04072
- Mailing
- 68 ROSEMONT AVENUE, NORTH WATERBORO, ME 04061
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Planned (H)
- Scope
- Complete (A)
- 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
- 3
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
2 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.100 A
- Issued
- Jul 3, 2012
- Abate by
- Jul 5, 2012
- Penalty
- Initial $1,600 · Current $800 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.100(a): Employees working in areas where there was a possible danger of head injury from impact, or falling or flying objects, or from electrical shock and burns, were not protected by protective helmets: Job Site - An employee, working in an area where there was the chance of getting struck by falling roofing debris, materials or tools was not wearing a hard hat.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $800
- · Z (S) $1600
1926.501 B13
- Issued
- Jul 3, 2012
- Abate by
- Jul 5, 2012
- Penalty
- Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced
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: Job Site - Employees re-roofing a house, approximatley 13' above the ground, were not adequately protected from falling.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $1400
- · Z (S) $2800
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 238160)
More inspections in ME
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 334820784.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.