OSHA Inspection: RUDY'S ROOFING, INC.

Issued

Jun 29, 2016

Penalty

Initial $1,600 · Current $1,600

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 from physical, chemical, or radiation agents.  (a) Rudy's Roofing, Inc. at 9755 East Hampden Avenue, Denver, CO 80231:  On or before April 8, 2016 an employee was observed using and assisting with pneumatic nailing operations during the installation of roofing shingles.  The employee was not wearing appropriate protective eyewear.  This condition exposed employees to the hazard of flying projectiles injuring the eyes.

Issued

Jun 29, 2016

Abate by

Jul 26, 2016

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.501(b)(11):  Each employee on a steep roof with unprotected sides and edges 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above lower levels shall be protected from falling by guardrail systems with toeboards, safety net systems, or personal fall arrest systems:    (a)   Rudys Roofing, Inc. at 9755 East Hampden Avenue, Denver, CO 80231:  On and before April 8, 2016 the exposing employer did not ensure that employees removing and installing shingles on the roof of a restaurant, with a pitch of 14-in-12, were protected from injury in that a fall protection system was not utilized.  This condition exposed employees to fall hazards ranging from 12 to 20 feet.

Issued

Jun 29, 2016

Abate by

Jul 26, 2016

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 who might be exposed to fall hazards:     (a)  Rudys Roofing, Inc. at 9755 East Hampden Avenue, Denver, CO 80231:  On and before April 8, 2016 the exposing employer did not ensure that employees engaged in roofing operations was trained to recognize the hazards of working at elevation and trained in the use of fall protection.  Employees did not utilize a fall protection system while they removed and installed shingles on the roof of a restaurant that had a pitch of 14-in-12.  This condition exposed employees to fall hazards from 12 to 20 feet pending upon location on the roof.    Abatement Note:  As of January 1, 1998, Subpart M of the 29 CFR 1926 part 1926.502(d) provides that body belts are not acceptable as part of a personal fall arrest system. The use of a body belt in a tethering system or in a restraint system is acceptable and is regulated under 1926.502(e).    Abatement Note:  The employer shall assure that each employee has been trained, as necessary, by a competent person qualified in the following areas: a)     The nature of fall hazards in the work area; b)     The correct procedures for erecting, maintaining, disassembling, and inspecting the fall protection systems to be used; c)     The use and operation of guardrail systems, personal fall arrest systems, safety net systems, warning line systems, safety monitoring systems, controlled access zones, and other protection to be used;  d)     The role of each employee in the safety monitoring system when this system is used; e)     The limitations on the use of mechanical equipment during the performance of roofing work on low-sloped roofs; f)      The correct procedures for the handling and storage of equipment and materials and the erection of overhead protection; and g)     The role of employees in fall protection plans; h)     The standards contained in this subpart.