OSHA Inspection: LUCAS FRANCISCO-SINTO ROOFING

Issued

Oct 31, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,803 · Current $3,803

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): Each employee engaged in residential construction activities 6 feet or more above lower levels was not protected by guardrail systems, safety net systems, or personal fall arrest systems.                                                                                                           The employer is failing to protect employees from fall hazards associated with performing residential construction activity while exposed to falls 6 feet or greater.  The most recent occurrence of this was observed on Oct 25, 2017 at the existing residential home located at 904 Port Royal Dr. Papillion, NE where the employer has a crew of 2 employees exposed to fall hazards while re-roofing an existing residential home.

Issued

Oct 31, 2017

Abate by

Nov 20, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,716 · Current $2,716

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:  The employer is failing to provide employees with fall hazard recognition and protection training associated with performing residential construction activity while exposed to falls 6 feet or greater.  The most recent occurrence of this was observed on Oct 25, 2017 at the existing residential home located at 904 Port Royal Dr. Papillion, NE where employer has 2 inadequately trained employees exposed to fall hazards while re-roofing an existing residential home.

Issued

Oct 31, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,803 · Current $3,803

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(1):  Where (a) portable ladder(s) was/were used for access to an upper level landing surface and the ladders length did not allow the ladder side rails to extend at least 3 feet (0.9 m) above the upper landing surface being accessed, the ladder(s) was/were not secured at its top to a rigid support, and/or a grasping device, such as a grabrail, was not provided to assist the employees in mounting and dismounting the ladder:                                                                                                           The employer is failing to protect employees from fall hazards associated with improper use of extension ladders as means of access/egress while performing residential construction activity.  The most recent occurrence of this was observed on Oct 25, 2017 at the new home being built at 904 Port Royal Dr. Papillion, NE where the employer has a crew of 2 employees using an aluminum ladder set up on the roof of the garage as means of access/egress to the top roof of the home without extending the ladder a minimum of 3 feet over the upper landing surface.

Issued

Oct 31, 2017

Abate by

Nov 20, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,716 · Current $2,716

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1060(a)(1)(i):  The employer did not ensure that each employee using ladders and/or stairways had been trained by a competent person in the nature of fall hazards in the work area:  The employer is failing to train employees on the recognition of hazards associated with and use of ladders as means of access/egress while performing residential construction activity.  The most recent occurrence of this was observed on Oct 25, 2017 at the new home being built at 904 Port Royal Dr. Papillion, NE where the employer has a crew of 2 inadequately trained employees using an aluminum ladder on the garage roof to access the house peak without extending the ladder a minimum of 3 feet over the upper landing surface.