OSHA Inspection: ROSALES STUCCO & STONE LLC

Issued

Jul 30, 2014

Abate by

Sep 3, 2014

Penalty

Initial $1,020 · Current $612 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.102(a)(1): Eye and face protective equipment were not used when machines or operations presented potential eye or face injury:    (a)  Rosales Stucco & Stone LLC, at 1111 Bedford Avenue, Grand Junction, CO: On 5/23/14, Rosales Stucco & Stone LLC did not ensure that eye protective equipment was used when machines or operations presented potential eye or face injury.  Two employees were installing lath in preparation of stucco work on a multistory building.  The employees used staple guns to secure the lath to the building exterior.  The employer did not ensure that the employees used eye protection.  This condition exposed the employees to a flying object hazard.

Issued

Jul 30, 2014

Abate by

Sep 3, 2014

Penalty

Initial $1,360 · Current $816 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.451(b)(1):  Each platform on all working levels of scaffolds was not fully planked or decked between the front uprights and the guardrail supports as specified in paragraphs 1926.451(b)(1)(i)-(ii):    (a)  Rosales Stucco & Stone LLC, at 1111 Bedford Avenue, Grand Junction, CO: On 5/23/14, Rosales Stucco & Stone LLC did not ensure that each platform on all working levels of scaffolds was fully planked or decked between the front uprights and the guardrail supports as specified in paragraphs 1926.451(b)(1)(i)-(ii).  Two employees were installing lath in preparation of stucco work on a multistory building.  The employees were working upon a multilevel fabricated frame scaffold.  The second level of the scaffold was not fully planked between the guardrail supports and the front uprights.  This condition exposed the employees to an approximate 13'3" fall hazard.

Issued

Jul 30, 2014

Abate by

Sep 3, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.451(b)(3)(ii):  The maximum distance from the face for plastering and lathing operations shall be 18 inches:  (a)  Rosales Stucco & Stone LLC, at 1111 Bedford Avenue, Grand Junction, CO: On 5/23/14, Rosales Stucco & Stone LLC did not ensure that the maximum distance from the face for plastering and lathing operations was 18 inches.  Two employees were installing lath in preparation of stucco work on a multistory building.  The employees were working upon a multilevel fabricated frame scaffold.  Guardrails were not present on the front edge of the scaffold.  The distance from the face of the building to the scaffold was twenty-seven inches.  The employer did not ensure that the scaffold was no more than eighteen inches from the face of the building.  This condition exposed the employees to an approximate 13'3" fall hazard.

Issued

Jul 30, 2014

Abate by

Sep 3, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.451(c)(2):  Supported scaffold poles, legs, posts, frames, and uprights did not bear on base plates and mud sills or other adequate firm foundation:  (a)  Rosales Stucco & Stone LLC, at 1111 Bedford Avenue, Grand Junction, CO: On 5/23/14, Rosales Stucco & Stone LLC did not ensure that supported scaffold poles, legs, posts, frames, and uprights bore on base plates and mud sills or other adequate firm foundation.  Two employees were installing lath in preparation of stucco work on a multistory building.  The employees were working upon a multilevel fabricated frame scaffold.  Legs of the scaffold did not bear on baseplates and mudsills.  The employer did not ensure that all legs of the scaffold rested upon baseplates and mudsills. This condition exposed the employees to approximate 13'3" and 19.6' fall hazards.

Issued

Jul 30, 2014

Abate by

Sep 3, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.451(g)(1)(vii):  Each employee on a scaffold, not otherwise specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through (g)(1)(vi) of this section, more than 10 feet (3.1 m) above a lower level was not protected from falls by the use of personal fall arrest systems or guardrail systems meeting the requirements of paragraph (g)(4) of this section:  (a)  Rosales Stucco & Stone LLC, at 1111 Bedford Avenue, Grand Junction, CO: On 5/23/14, Rosales Stucco & Stone LLC did not ensure that each employee on a scaffold, not otherwise specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through (g)(1)(vi) of this section, more than 10 feet (3.1 m) above a lower level was protected from falls by the use of personal fall arrest systems or guardrail systems meeting the requirements of paragraph (g)(4) of this section.  Two employees were installing lath in preparation of stucco work on a multistory building.  The employees were working upon a multilevel fabricated frame scaffold. The third level of the scaffold did not have guardrails.  The employer did not ensure that there were guardrails on all open sides of the scaffolding. This condition exposed the employees to an approximate 19.6' fall hazard.

Issued

Jul 30, 2014

Abate by

Sep 3, 2014

Penalty

Initial $1,360 · Current $816 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.454(a): Employees who perform work while on a scaffold were not trained by a person qualified in the subject matter to recognize the hazards associated with the type of scaffold being used and to understand the procedures to control or minimize those hazards:    (a)  Rosales Stucco & Stone LLC, at 1111 Bedford Avenue, Grand Junction, CO: On 5/23/14, Rosales Stucco & Stone LLC did not ensure that employees who performed work while on a scaffold were trained by a person qualified in the subject matter to recognize the hazards associated with the type of scaffold being used and to understand the procedures to control or minimize those hazards.  Two employees were installing lath in preparation of stucco work on a multistory building.  The employees were working upon a multilevel fabricated frame scaffold. The employer did not provide scaffold training to the employees.  This condition exposed the employees to approximate 13'3" and 19.6' fall hazards.