OSHA Inspection: RUSTIN NEWMAN

Issued

Oct 6, 2017

Abate by

Nov 16, 2017

Penalty

Initial $305 · Current $305

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1903.19(c)(1): The employer did not certify to OSHA, within 10 calendar days after the abatement date, that the cited violation had been abated:  On July 25, 2017, Rustin Newman, dba Precision Service Co., Inc., was issued citations and the employer did not verify, through written certification that each citation was abated.  Abatement certification was not received for the following violations:            a.  Citation 1 Item 1a & b, and         b.  Citation 1 Item 3.

Issued

Oct 6, 2017

Abate by

Nov 16, 2017

Penalty

Initial $305 · Current $305

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1903.19(d)(1): The employer did not submit to the Agency documents demonstrating that abatement is complete for each willful or repeat violation and for any serious violation for which the Agency indicates in the citation that such abatement documentation is required.  On July 25, 2017, Rustin Newman dba Precision Service Co., Inc., was issued citations and the employer did not verify, through documents that each citation was abated.  Abatement documentation was not received for the following violations:                Citation 1 Item 2.

Issued

Jul 25, 2017

Abate by

Aug 23, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,716 · Current $2,716

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.20(b)(1): The employer did not initiate and maintain accident prevention programs as necessary to comply with this part:  On or about June 29, 2017, employees were exposed to fall hazards while performing roofing work and the employer did not develop and maintain an accident prevention program.

Issued

Jul 25, 2017

Abate by

Aug 23, 2017

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.20(b)(2): The employer did not initiate and maintain programs which provided for frequent and regular inspections of the job site, materials and equipment to be made by a competent person(s)  On or about June 29, 2017, employees were exposed to fall hazards while performing roofing work and a competent person did not conduct an inspection of the job site to identify and eliminate the hazards.

Issued

Jul 25, 2017

Abate by

Aug 23, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,803 · Current $3,803

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.501(b)(10): Each employee engaged in roofing activities on low-slope roofs with unprotected sides and edges 6 feet or more above lower levels, was not protected from falling by guardrail systems, safety net systems, personal fall arrest systems, or a combination of warning line system and guardrail system, warning line system and safety net system, or warning line system and personal fall arrest system, or warning line system and safety monitoring system.  Or, on roofs 50-feet (15.25 m) or less in width, each employee was not protected by use of a monitoring system.  On or about June 29, 2017, employees were exposed to fall hazards of approximately 9 feet while performing roofing activities on the west end of a commercial roof and a suitable fall protection system was not used.

Issued

Jul 25, 2017

Abate by

Aug 23, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,716 · Current $2,716

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     On or about June 29, 2017, employees were exposed to fall hazards of approximately 9 feet while performing roofing activities on the west end of a commercial roof and the A-frame ladder only extended 8 feet and did not extend at least 3 feet above the landing.