OSHA Inspection: JUAN ESPARZA

Issued

Oct 18, 2013

Abate by

Nov 14, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800

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 other provisions of paragraph (b) of this section used to provide an alternative fall protection measure:      Jobsite located at 16240 Loop Street, Omaha, NE: The employer failed to provide fall protection for employees engaged in residential construction activities. Employees of Juan Esparza Roofing were observed performing roofing installation activities and were exposed to a fall height greater than 6 feet.

Issued

Oct 18, 2013

Abate by

Nov 14, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800

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:  Juan Esparza Roofing: The employer failed to provide training to employees who job duties exposed them to fall hazards. Employees of Juan Esparza Roofing were observed performing residential construction without any means of fall protection.

Issued

Oct 18, 2013

Abate by

Nov 14, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(1): Where a portable ladder was used for access to an upper level landing surface, the ladder's side rails did not extend at least 3 feet (0.9 m) above the upper landing surface being accessed, and a grasping device was not provided to assist employees in mounting and dismounting the ladder:  On the East and West sides of 16240 Loop Street in Omaha, NE: The employer failed to ensure that the ladder used to access the roof was extended at least three feet beyond the roof line; the ladder was secured to the roof with a rigid support, however the employer failed to provide a rope or other permissible grasping device to allow for the safe access for employees mounting and dismounting the ladder.

Issued

Oct 18, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $2,000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(4): Ladder(s) were used for purposes other than the purpose for which they were designed:  On the jobsite located at 16240 Loop Street:   The employer failed to ensure that ladders were not used for purposes other than for which they were designed. On or about 5-22-2013, the employer allowed his employees to use a horizontally laid ladder to span the distance between the residences located at 16234 and 16240 Loop Street, Omaha, NE; in order to slide shingles that had mistakenly delivered to 16234 Loop Street and were intended for 16240 Loop Street; the roof being installed by his company.

Issued

Oct 18, 2013

Abate by

Nov 14, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1060(a):  The employer did not provide a training program for each employee using ladders and stairways, as necessary, which would enable each employee to recognize hazards related to ladders and stairways and train each employee in the procedures to be followed to minimize these:    Juan Esparza Roofing on the site located at 16240 Loop Street, Omaha, NE:     The employer failed to provide its employees training to recognize hazards related to the unsafe uses of ladders. During the inspection the CSHO observed employees utilizing 16 foot aluminum extension ladders on the East and West sided of the residence to access the roof that were improperly errected as well as they were using a horizontally laid ladder to span the distance between the residences located at 16234 and 16240 Loop Street, Omaha, NE; in order to slide shingles that had mistakenly delivered to 16234 Loop Street and were intended for 16240 Loop Street.