OSHA Inspection: RCS ROOF COVER SYSTEMS LLC

Issued

Mar 11, 2026

Penalty

Initial $3,547 · Current $2,128 Reduced

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.  a) At 725 Jessie Jewell Road, Gainesville, GA 30501, Roof: On or about 02/12/2026, the employer exposed employees to fall hazards of approximately 30 feet above the lower level while installing Thermoplastic Poly Olefin (TPO) patch at the edge of the roof. Employees were wearing full?body harnesses; however, they were not attached to the lifeline while performing roofing operations outside of the warning line system, resulting in a failure to ensure the use of required fall protection.

Issued

Mar 11, 2026

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.502(d)(6)(i): A snap hook not of the locking type was engaged (i) directly to webbing, rope or wire rope; (ii) to each other (iii) to a Dee-ring to which another snap hook or other connector is attached;(iv) to a horizontal lifeline; or (v) to any object which is incompatibly shaped or dimensioned in relation to the snap hook such that unintentional disengagement could occur by the connected object being able to depress the snap hook keeper and release itself.  a)  At 725 Jessie Jewell Road, Gainesville, GA 30501, Roof: On or about 02/12/2026, the employer exposed employees to fall hazards of approximately 30 feet above the lower level while installing a Thermoplastic Poly Olefin (TPO) patch at the edge of the roof, in that the employee's lanyard was improperly tied back to itself, resulting in the use of a non?locking snap hook configuration which is  prohibited.

Issued

Mar 11, 2026

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) At 725 Jessie Jewell Road, Gainesville, GA 30501, Roof: On or about 02/12/2026, the employer did not provide employees with adequate fall protection training to enable them to recognize fall hazards and the proper procedures to minimize those hazards. Employees were observed working approximately 30 feet above the lower level while improperly anchored, not connected at the roof edge, and incorrectly setting up and using the AES Raptor mobile anchor cart.

Issued

Mar 11, 2026

Penalty

Initial $3,547 · Current $2,128 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.502(d)(15): Anchorage used for attachment for personal fall arrest equipment was not capable of supporting at least 5,000 pounds (22.2 kN) per employee attached nor was it designed, installed and used as follows: As part of a complete personal fall arrest system which maintains a safety factor of at least two; and under the supervision of a qualified person.  a) At 725 Jessie Jewell Road, Gainesville, GA 30501, Roof: On or about 02/12/2026, the employer exposed employees to fall hazards of approximately 30 feet above the lower level while installing flashing at the edge of the roof, in that the AES Raptor mobile anchor system was improperly connected to lifting lugs that were not capable of supporting 5,000 pounds.