WASHINGTON, PA —
OSHA Inspection: BUCCOS ROOFING
Planned inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of BUCCOS ROOFING in 412 EAST MAIDEN STREET, WASHINGTON, PA 15301 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 339908378.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- BUCCOS ROOFING
- Site address
- 412 EAST MAIDEN STREET
- City
- WASHINGTON
- State
- PA
- ZIP
- 15301
- Mailing
- 259 THOMPSONVILLE ROAD, MCMURRAY, PA 15317
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
- 8
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
9 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.100 A
- Issued
- Aug 27, 2014
- Abate by
- Sep 3, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $1,600 · Current $960 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: (a) Jobsite: On or about August 19, 2014, employees who were working on the ground were not wearing hard hats when they were working below other employees who were using hand tools
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $960
- — Z (S) $1600
1926.451 G01
- Issued
- Aug 27, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $2,400 · Current $1,440 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.451(g)(1): Each employee on a scaffold more than 10 feet above a lower level were not protected from falling to that lower level: (a) Jobsite: On or about August 19, 2014, two employees were working from a pump jack scaffold and they were not protected from falling to the ground. The fall hazard was up to about 25 feet to the ground. The employees were installing soffit from the pump jack scaffold.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1440
- — Z (S) $2400
1926.451 C02
- Issued
- Aug 27, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.451(c)(2): Supported scaffold poles, legs, posts, frames, or uprights did not bear on base plates, mud sills or other adequate firm foundation: (a) Jobsite: On or about August 19, 2014, two employees were working from a pump jack scaffold and the poles were not on base plates, mud sills or other firm foundation. The ends of the pump jack scaffold poles were simply placed on the sloped yard.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1926.452 J02
- Issued
- Aug 27, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.452(j)(2): Poles were not secured to the structure by rigid triangular bracing or equivalent at the bottom, top, and other points as necessary: (a) Jobsite: On or about August 19, 2014, the two aluminum poles used as part of the pump jack scaffold were not secured at the bottom.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1926.501 B13
- Issued
- Aug 27, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $2,800 · Current $1,680 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): Each 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 employee(s) provided with an alternative fall protection measure under another provision of paragraph 1926.501 (b): (a) Jobsite, Rear Porch Roof: On or about August 19, 2014, three employees were working on the rear porch roof and they were not protected from falling. The fall hazard to the three employees was approximately 19 feet to the ground or about 9 feet to a lower roof. (b) Jobsite, Front Porch Roof: On or about August 19, 2014, an employee was working on the front porch roof and he was not protected from falling. The fall hazard to the employee was approximately 11 feet to the ground.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1680
- — Z (S) $2800
1926.503 A01
- Issued
- Aug 27, 2014
- Abate by
- Sep 9, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
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: (a) Jobsite: On or about August 19, 2014, the employer did not provide fall protection training to its employees. Employees were working from roofs and pump jack scaffolding and were not protected from falling to the ground. The fall hazard to the employees was up to about 25 feet.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1926.1053 B01
- Issued
- Aug 27, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $1,600 · Current $960 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(1): Where portable ladders were used for access to an upper landing surface and the ladder's length allows, the ladder side rails did not extend at least 3 feet (.9 m) above the upper landing surface being accessed: (a) Jobsite: On or about August 19, 2014, the 16 foot aluminum extension ladder that employees were using to access the back porch roof only extended above the roof by about 18 inches.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $960
- — Z (S) $1600
1926.1060 A
- Issued
- Aug 27, 2014
- Abate by
- Sep 9, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
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 train each employee in the procedures to be followed to minimize hazards related to ladders and stairways: (a) Jobsite: On or about August 19, 2014, the employer did not provide a training program to employees on the safe use of ladders and the procedures to be followed to minimize hazards related to the use of ladders.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1926.1053 B16
- Issued
- Aug 27, 2014
- Abate by
- Sep 3, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(16): Portable ladders with structural defects, such as, but not limited to, broken or missing rungs, cleats, or steps, broken or split rails, corroded components, or other faulty or defective components, were not either immediately marked in a manner that readily identifies them as defective, or tagged with "Do Not Use" or similar language, and were not withdrawn from service until repaired: (a) Jobsite: On or about August 19, 2014, employees were using a 16 foot aluminum extension ladder that had a smashed side rail.
Recent events (2)
- — I (O) $0
- — Z (O) $0
More inspections at Buccos Roofing
View Buccos Roofing's full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 238160)
More inspections in PA
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 339908378.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.