OSHA Inspection: RICARDO CHOC

Issued

Aug 22, 2012

Abate by

Oct 4, 2012

Penalty

Initial $1,600 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.20(b)(2):     Programs did not provide for frequent and regular inspections of the job sites, materials, and equipment to be made by competent persons designated by the employers:    - Site inspections were not conducted by a competent person in that employees were working on the roof of a residential structure while not using any type of fall protection system.    In accordance with 29 CFR 1903.19(d), abatement certification is required for this violation (using the CERTIFICATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION WORKSHEET), and in addition, documentation demonstrating that abatement is complete must be included with your certification.  This documentation may include, but is not limited to, evidence of the purchase or repair of the equipment, photographic or video evidence, or written records.

Issued

Aug 22, 2012

Penalty

Initial $1,200 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.300(b)(2):     Belts, gears, shafts, pulleys, sprockets, spindles, drums, fly wheels, chains, or other reciprocating, rotating or moving parts of equipment shall be guarded if such parts are exposed to contact by employees or otherwise create a hazard. Guarding shall meet the requirements as set forth in American National Standards Institute, B15.1-1953 (R1958), Safety Code for Mechanical Power-Transmission Apparatus:    -The Ridgid brand air compressor was missing the guard that covered the 10" and 4" pulleys, exposing employees to at least two in-running nip points.

Issued

Aug 22, 2012

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13):     "Residential construction." Each employee engaged in residential construction activities 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above lower levels shall be protected by guardrail systems, safety net system, or personal fall arrest system unless another provision in paragraph (b) of this section provides for an alternative fall protection measure. Exception: When the employer can demonstrate that it is infeasible or creates a greater hazard to use these systems, the employer shall develop and implement a fall protection plan which meets the requirements of paragraph (k) of 1926.502.  Note: There is a presumption that it is feasible and will not create a greater hazard to implement at least one of the above-listed fall protection systems. Accordingly, the employer has the burden of establishing that it is appropriate to implement a fall protection plan which complies with 1926.502(k) for a particular workplace situation, in lieu of implementing any of those systems:    - Employees were roofing a residential structure while not using adequate fall protection systems. Potential fall height was measured to be 19' with a roof pitch of 7/12.