WILTON, CT —
OSHA Inspection: H & J ROOFING, LLC
Referral inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a referral safety inspection of H & J ROOFING, LLC in 77 OLMSTEAD HILL RD., WILTON, CT 06897 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 342490539.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- H & J ROOFING, LLC
- Site address
- 77 OLMSTEAD HILL RD.
- City
- WILTON
- State
- CT
- ZIP
- 06897
- Mailing
- 8 WOODCHUCK CT., NORWALK, CT 06854
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Referral (C)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- 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
- 4
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
5 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.501 B13
- Issued
- Aug 14, 2017
- Abate by
- Aug 24, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $3,803 · Current $2,650 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). Worksite: The employer did not ensure that the employee who was working on the 8 in 12 pitched residential roof was protected from fall hazards above 6 feet by the use of guardrails, safety nets or a personal fall arrest system. On or about 7/21/2107 the employee fell approximately 17 feet 9 inches to the ground from the roof and sustained serious injuries from the incident.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $2650
- — Z (S) $3803
1926.502 D15
- Issued
- Aug 14, 2017
- Abate by
- Aug 24, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.502(d)(15): Anchorage points used for attachment of personal fall arrest equipment were not independent of any anchorage point being used to support or suspend platforms and capable of supporting at least 5,000 pounds (22.2 kN) per employee. Worksite: The employer did not ensure that each employee was provided with an anchorage point that was capable of supporting at least 5000 pounds per person.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1926.502 D16 II
- Issued
- Aug 14, 2017
- Abate by
- Aug 24, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.502(d)(16)(ii): Personal fall arrest systems, when stopping a fall, did not limit maximum arresting force on an employee to 1800 pounds(8kn) when used with a body harness, Employees were using full body harnesses as part of their personal fall arrest systems which lacked deceleration devices to limit the arresting forces. Worksite: The employer did not ensure that the employee was provided with a deceleration device that would limit the maximum arresting force on an employee to 1,800 pounds when used with a full body harness.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1926.502 D16 III
- Issued
- Aug 14, 2017
- Abate by
- Aug 24, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.502(d)(16)(iii): Personal fall arrest systems, when stopping a fall, were not rigged such that an employee could not free fall more than 6 feet (1.8 m) nor contact any lower level. Worksite: The employer did not ensure that each employee who was exposed to fall hazards above 6 feet was provided with a personal fall arrest system that was rigged to prevent the employee from free falling more than 6 feet.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1926.503 A01
- Issued
- Aug 14, 2017
- Abate by
- Sep 8, 2017
- Penalty
- Initial $3,803 · Current $2,650 Reduced
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. Worksite: The employer did not ensure that the employees who were exposed to fall hazards while working on 8 in 12 pitched residential roof at a height above 6 feet were trained in fall hazards and the procedures to be followed to minimize such hazards.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $2650
- — Z (S) $3803
More inspections at H & J Roofing, LLC
View H & J Roofing, LLC's full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 238160)
More inspections in CT
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 342490539.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.