Customer Centres
How Do I?
Download Adobe Reader for free (required to view PDF files)
Penalties - Construction
Disclaimer: Revised November 2010
Administrative penalties are fines imposed on employers for health and safety violations of the Workers Compensation Act and/or the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. The penalties--listed under the industry sectors below--show the date the penalty was imposed and the location where the violation occurred (not necessarily the business location). The registered business name is given as well as any "doing business as" (DBA) name.
The penalty amount is based on the nature of the violation, the employer's compliance history, and the employer's assessable payroll. Once a penalty is imposed, the employer has 90 days to appeal to the Review Division of WorkSafeBC. The Review Division may increase, maintain, reduce, or withdraw the penalty. Employers may then file an appeal within 30 days of the Review Division's decision to the Workers' Compensation Appeal Tribunal, an independent appeal body.
Listed under the industry sectors below, the fines indicate the penalties imposed prior to appeal, and they may not reflect the final penalty amount.
Construction - Penalties for 2011
Archive - Prior Penalties
Recent Penalties
Company: Tony Vanzetta / Vanzetta Construction, Langford 
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 30, 2011
One of this firm's young workers suffered a head injury, as well as injuries to his wrist and leg, after falling 3 m (10 ft.) from an elevated walkway at the firm's worksite. The firm allowed its workers to use the elevated walkway, which was open on both sides, even though it did not have the required fall protection system. The firm also put its workers at risk of falling more than 12 metres from a sloped roof. The written fall protection plan that is required under those circumstances was not available. These were repeated violations of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Skylite Building Maintenance Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $15,000
Date of penalty: November 30, 2011
This firm failed to provide its workers with the information, training, and supervision they needed to ensure their health and safety when working with asbestos-containing materials. For example, the firm allowed a worker to be in a high-risk area while wearing an improperly fitting respirator. The firm also violated multiple requirements related to safe asbestos removal. These included failing to make the results of all the previous day's air samples available to the workers involved in a high-risk activity within 24 hours of collecting the samples. These were repeated high-risk violations of both the supervision requirements and the requirements for safe asbestos removal.
Company: Skylite Building Maintenance Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: November 30, 2011
This firm repeatedly failed to use asbestos abatement procedures that were acceptable to WorkSafeBC. For example, six of the firm's workers were inside a contaminated work area without wearing the required respirators or protective clothing. The containment area was not under negative pressure and the firm's work procedures were inadequate. These are only some examples of the firm's failure to provide its workers with the instruction, training, and supervision they needed to ensure their health and safety when carrying out high-risk asbestos removal work. These were repeated violations of the requirements for safe asbestos abatement, and of the requirement to instruct and train workers as needed to ensure their health and safety.
Company: Skylite Building Maintenance Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: November 30, 2011
This firm repeatedly failed to provide its workers with the instruction, training, and supervision they needed to ensure their health and safety when working with asbestos-containing materials. The firm also failed to ensure the health and safety of its workers by leaving asbestos dust and debris in a work area at the end of a shift and using inadequate asbestos-containment procedures.
Company: Skylite Building Maintenance Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 30, 2011
This firm obstructed a WorkSafeBC officer by providing him with a forged test certificate for the specialized vacuum and the negative air units the firm was using to carry out high-risk asbestos removal work.
Company: Tony Vanzetta / Vanzetta Construction, View Royal
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $3,806.98
Date of penalty: November 30, 2011
This firm's owner and one of its workers were working near the edge of the roof on a residential complex without using the required fall protection. The workers were at risk of falling 9 m (30 ft.) to the landing area below them, where concrete, rock, and building materials increased the potential for serious injury. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Skylite Building Maintenance Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: November 29, 2011
This firm put workers at risk of exposure to harmful airborne asbestos fibres by issuing clearance letters that falsely stated that all asbestos-containing materials had been removed from a house. The firm was hired to do pre-demolition asbestos abatement at the house, but asbestos-containing materials and asbestos-contaminated waste were still present when the firm finished its work. This created a health risk for any workers required to enter the house after the firm completed its inadequate abatement work. The firm also failed to ensure that asbestos-containing materials and waste-contaminated materials were put in properly sealed and labelled containers.
Company: Skylite Building Maintenance Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 29, 2011
This firm failed to ensure that its workers complied with the Workers Compensation Act and its regulations when it allowed its workers to issue a clearance letter falsely stating that all asbestos-containing materials had been removed from a house. The firm was hired to survey and remove asbestos-containing materials before the house was demolished, but remnants of asbestos-containing floor materials and insulation were still present when the firm finished its work. This created a health risk for any workers required to enter the house after the firm completed its inadequate abatement work.
Company: CR Concrete Contractors Ltd., Saanich
Classification unit: Concrete placing, finishing, surfacing, or repair
Amount: $4,625.33
Date of penalty: November 29, 2011
This firm failed to comply with WorkSafeBC orders within a reasonable time. WorkSafeBC ordered the firm to complete an annual stability test on its boom truck crane, and to have the rated capacity or rated load of the boom truck crane certified by a professional engineer within a reasonable time.
Company: Skylight Building Maintenance Ltd., New Westminster
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 29, 2011
This firm put workers at risk of exposure to harmful airborne asbestos fibres by issuing clearance letters that falsely stated that all asbestos-containing materials had been removed from two houses scheduled for demolition. The firm was hired to do pre-demolition asbestos abatement at the houses, but many asbestos-containing materials were still present when the firm finished its work. This created a health risk for any workers required to enter the houses after the firm completed its inadequate abatement work. The firm also failed to ensure that the person who assessed the risk of work activities related to asbestos was a qualified professional with experience in asbestos management.
Company: Skylight Building Maintenance Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: November 29, 2011
This firm put workers at risk of exposure to harmful airborne asbestos fibres by issuing clearance letters that falsely stated that all asbestos-containing materials had been removed from a house. The firm was hired to do pre-demolition asbestos abatement at the house, but remnants of asbestos-containing floor tile and duct tape were still present when the firm finished its work, as was waste that may have been contaminated with asbestos. Three workers from another employer were working at the site after the firm completed its inadequate abatement work. The firm also failed to ensure that its workers complied with the Workers Compensation Act and its regulations.
Company: Project 143000 Investments Ltd. / Bioblast Canada / Metalife Conservation, Coquitlam
Classification unit: Decking application or waterproofing
Amount: $700
Date of penalty: November 28, 2011
This firm failed to provide its workers with an adequate exposure control plan to protect them from the respiratory hazards they were exposed to while applying urethane and epoxy coating materials. The firm's exposure control plan lacked a definition of responsibilities, a site specific process for hazard assessment, and details on training for applicators. The firm also failed to ensure that one of its workers was wearing respiratory protection while applying a urethane deck coating.
Company: Joe's Contracting Inc., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $12,515.60
Date of penalty: November 28, 2011
This firm's principal and two of its workers were installing roofing paper and asphalt shingles on the sloped roof of a two-storey house without using the required fall protection. They were at risk of falling at least 5.5 m (18 ft.) to the asphalt, concrete, and grass surface below them. The firm failed to ensure its workers used fall protection as required. This was a high-risk, repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Edward W. Selent, Abbotsford
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 25, 2011
One of this firm's workers was working about 6 m (21 ft.) above grade on the steeply sloped roof of a two-storey house without using fall protection. Two of this firm's other workers were working without fall protection at a place from which a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more may have occurred. The firm failed to ensure its workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Super Supreme Roofing Limited, Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: November 23, 2011
This firm's principal and one of its workers were working on the sloped roof of a house at about 3.5 m (12 ft) above grade without using fall protection as required. At a later date, two of this firm's workers were working near the edge of a steeply sloped roof on a two-storey house at about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade, also without wearing the required fall protection. This firm had also received a penalty in June 2011 for repeated violations of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Peter James Witso / Thor's Hammer Roofing, Prince George
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 22, 2011
Four of this firm's workers and the firm's owner were working on a sloped roof at between about 3 and 5 m (10 and 18 ft.) above grade without using the required fall protection. This was a repeated, high risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: O'Flynn Roofing Ltd. / O'Flynn Roofing, Quesnel
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: November 22, 2011
Three of this firm's workers, including the firm's principal, were working more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade on a sloped surface as they installed a new roof without using fall protection. There were loose roofing materials, debris and tools on the roof, which could have caused the workers to slip or trip. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used fall protection as required. This was a high-risk, repeated violation. The firm received a penalty for the same violation less than three years before this recent violation.
Company: Peter Bernard Hopkins / Peter Hopkins Roofing, Mission
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,549
Date of penalty: November 18, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working near the edge of the sloped roof of a two storey house without using the required fall protection. Two other of the firm's workers and the firm's owner were also working without fall protection on the roof, which was about 7 m (24 ft.) at its peak. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Daren Dichrow / Daren Dichrow Roofing / DDR Roofing, Kamloops
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: November 15, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were installing gutters near the edge of a steeply sloped roof without using fall protection. One worker was at risk of falling about 6 m (20 ft.) and the other about 9 m (30 ft.). The firm's owner was at the site but failed to provide his workers with the instruction, training, and supervision needed to ensure their safety. These were repeated violations of both the fall protection and the training and supervision requirements.
Company: Peter John Morro / Morro Construction, Courtenay
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,594.73
Date of penalty: November 8, 2011
This firm's owner and three of its workers were at risk of falling between about 6 and 7.5 m (20 and 25 ft.) as they worked without fall protection on the steeply sloped roof a three-storey building. The firm failed to ensure its workers used the required fall protection. This was a high risk, repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: S & A Excavating Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $8,525.48
Date of penalty: November 2, 2011
This employer allowed its workers to enter unsafe excavations. In one case, its worker was in a trench with vertical sides that was about 2 m (6 ft.) deep. In another case, two of the employer's workers were in a trench that was more than 2 m (6 ft.) deep while the employer operated an excavator. The employer failed to ensure that the sides of these excavations were sloped or supported as required. These were repeated violations.
Company: S & A Excavating Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $8,525.48
Date of penalty: November 2, 2011
This employer allowed its workers to enter unsafe excavations. In one case, its worker was in a trench with vertical sides that was about 2 m (6 ft.) deep. In another case, two of the employer's workers were in a trench that was more than 2 m (6 ft.) deep while the employer operated an excavator. The employer failed to ensure that the sides of these excavations were sloped or supported as required. These were repeated violations.
Company: Cougar Rock Contracting Ltd., Lytton
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $51,383.61
Date of penalty: October 31, 2011
One of this firm's workers was injured and taken to the hospital after the rubber-tire bucket loader he was using to clean up rock stalled, then coasted over the edge of a steep embankment. The bucket loader's supplemental steering and emergency brakes also failed. A later inspection showed the bucket loader had several mechanical problems as well as an unsafe seat. The firm failed to ensure that the bucket loader was safe to operate.
Company: Red Horse Roofing Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: October 29, 2011
This firm's worker was at risk of falling 5.5 m (18 ft.) as he carried roofing tiles across a sloped residential roof without wearing the required fall protection. The worker was walking near the roof edge at the time. This was a high-risk, repeated violation by the firm of the fall protection requirements. The firm also failed to provide the worker with the level of supervision necessary to ensure his safety.
Company: Norm Rakhra Developments Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: October 28, 2011
This firm failed to use methods acceptable to WorkSafeBC when it surveyed a house for hazardous materials prior to its demolition. For example, the firm took samples only from the drywall joint compound and plaster, and not from the roof or floor materials. This was a repeated violation of the requirements for preventing workplace exposure to hazardous materials.
Company: Theodore Hermus, Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $4,771.18
Date of penalty: October 28, 2011
This firm's worker was working on the sloped roof of a new house about 3.5 m (12 ft.) above grade without wearing fall protection. He risked falling onto the hard-packed dirt and construction debris below him. The firm failed to ensure its worker used the required fall protection. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Wayne A. Gray / Lakeside Construction & Roofing, Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,000
Date of penalty: October 28, 2011
This firm's principal and his worker were working on the sloped roof of a house about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade without using fall protection. They were wearing fall protection harnesses but were not attached to anchor points. The firm failed to ensure its workers used the required fall protection. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Sears Canada Inc., North Vancouver
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $27,838.68
Date of penalty: October 28, 2011
Four workers who were working for a subcontractor of this employer were at risk of falling between about 5 and 6 m (16 and 20 ft.) as they unloaded shingles from an elevated pallet onto the sloped roof of a two-storey house. They were not using the required fall protection and were working near a mobile crane boom without wearing hard hats. The employer failed to ensure the safety of other workers at a workplace where its work was being carried out. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Norm Rakhra Developments Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $1,000
Date of penalty: October 28, 2011
This firm failed to submit a written report that showed its compliance with orders requiring it to conduct a hazardous materials survey using methods acceptable to WorkSafeBC.
Company: Adam Brett Jeffrey Deacon, Saanich
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $1,000
Date of penalty: October 27, 2011
This employer failed to ensure that three of its workers wore the required safety headgear while they were doing framing work on a construction site. This was a repeated violation.
Company: H. Paras Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $16,730.55
Date of penalty: October 25, 2011
The firm put its workers at risk through its failure to instruct, train, and supervise them as needed to ensure their safety. For example, three of this firm's workers were working on a steeply sloped roof at up to 7 m (24 ft.) above grade without using fall protection. This was a high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements. In addition, one of the workers was cutting concrete roof tiles without wearing the required respirator. The firm had previously violated the fall protection and respiratory protection requirements, as well as the requirement to provide workers with the instruction, training, and supervision needed to ensure their safety.
Company: H. Paras Roofing Ltd., Delta
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: October 25, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were at risk of falling about 6 m (20 ft.) from the steeply sloped roof of a house to the compacted dirt ground below them. The ground was covered with construction debris and concrete roof tiles and the workers were not using the required fall protection. This firm had previous high-risk violations of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Standard Plumbing & Heating Ltd., Langley
Classification unit: Plumbing, heating, vent, residential air conditioning, or central vacuum system installation or repair
Amount: $3,177.66
Date of penalty: October 21, 2011
This firm put workers at risk through its repeated failure to fulfill the requirements of a prime contractor at a multiple-employer workplace. As the prime contractor, the firm was responsible for coordinating the health and safety activities of employers, workers, and others at this residential construction site, and for establishing and maintaining a system to ensure compliance with health and safety requirements. Examples of its failure to do so included the lack of the required first aid supplies or posted first aid procedures, the lack of a qualified safety coordinator for the site, and the absence of site drawings showing the necessary safety information. There were also piles of debris left on the site and ladders that were improperly set up.
Company: Standard Plumbing & Heating Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Plumbing, heating, vent, residential air conditioning, or central vacuum system installation or repair
Amount: $4,907.70
Date of penalty: October 21, 2011
This firm put its own and other workers at risk through its repeated failure to fulfill the requirements of a prime contractor at a multiple-employer workplace. As the prime contractor, the firm was responsible for coordinating the health and safety activities of employers, workers and others at this residential construction site, and for establishing and maintaining a system to ensure compliance with health and safety requirements. Examples of its failure to do so included the lack of safety orientations or meetings, and the absence of both a designated first aid attendant and an employer representative on site. The firm also allowed workers to be on site without the required safety equipment or first aid supplies.
Company: Hans Demolition & Excavating Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $6,078.43
Date of penalty: October 21, 2011
This employer failed to ensure that a hazardous materials survey was available for review on site when a house was demolished. This violation of the demolition requirements meant the employer could not verify that samples had been taken of all the materials that workers were exposed to during the demolition. As a result, workers may have been exposed to hazardous materials, including asbestos dust.
Company: Daniel Wayne Hockey / DanHock Roofing, Penticton
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: October 14, 2011
One of this firm's workers was working more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade on the sloped roof of a house without using fall protection. The firm failed to ensure its worker used the required fall protection. It also failed to ensure that a properly trained first aid attendant was on site. Further, the firm did not provide one young worker and one new worker with health and safety orientation and training before they began work. These were repeated violations of the fall protection and first aid requirements and of the requirement to properly train and orient young and new workers.
Company: Chahat Enterprises Ltd., Castlegar
Classification unit: Plastering, lathing, or stucco work
Amount: $8,221.40
Date of penalty: October 13, 2011
One of this firm's workers was at risk of falling about 6 m (20 ft.) to the concrete pit below him. He was standing on a wooden plank on a single pole wooden scaffold without using any form of personal fall protection. No guardrails were installed on the scaffold. Another three of the firm's workers were also working without fall protection. They were standing on a sloped roof about 4 m (14 ft.) above grade as they applied stucco to an outside wall. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used the required fall protection. These were repeated violations of the fall protection requirements and of the requirement to ensure the health and safety of workers.
Company: Pro Construction Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $26,562.30
Date of penalty: October 11, 2011
This firm's worker was about 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade while installing gable ends on a building. The worker was not using any form of fall protection. This firm has repeatedly violated the same fall protection requirement.
Company: New City Stucco, Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Plastering, lathing, or stucco work
Amount: $6,710.23
Date of penalty: October 6, 2011
Three of this firm's workers were on the upper section of a wood-frame scaffold that had been erected around the outside of a two-storey house. The platform of the scaffold was narrower than the minimum required width of 50 cm (20 in.). There were also openings on both sides of the platform that were larger than the allowed 25 cm (10 in.) This created a fall hazard for workers. These were repeated violations of the regulatory requirements for scaffold platforms.
Company: Ocean West Construction Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $48,410.77
Date of penalty: October 5, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were on the roof of a high-rise without wearing fall protection as required. They were wearing fall protection harnesses but were not tied to any anchor points. At the time of the violation, both workers were on a curved section of the roof and were walking on a "standing seam." The seam of the smooth metal surface created a tripping hazard. One of the workers was at risk of falling about 4.5 m (15 ft.) to an upper floor balcony. The other worker walked up to the unguarded edge of the roof, where he was at risk of falling about 30.5 m (100 ft.) to grade. The firm's failure to ensure its workers used fall protection as required was a high-risk violation.
Company: Great Van Roofing and Drainage Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: October 5, 2011
This firm's worker was working without fall protection on a sloped roof about 5 m (17 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure its worker used the required fall protection. This was a high-risk, repeated violation.
Company: Skys the Limit Roofing Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $1,000
Date of penalty: October 5, 2011
This firm's principal was working without fall protection on the sloped roof of a garage about 4 m (13 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Jora Roofing Ltd., Port Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: October 5, 2011
This firm's principal and two of its workers were working without fall protection on the sloped roof of a two-storey house. They were between about 5.5 and 7 m (18 and 24 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure its workers used a fall protection system as required. This was a high risk, repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Newton Roofing Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 26, 2011
This firm's owner and one of its workers were working without fall protection about 6 m (20 ft) above grade on a sloped roof. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used the required fall protection. This was a repeated violation.
Prior Penalties for 2011
Company: Pacific Waterproofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Decking application or waterproofing
Amount: $22,247.72
Date of penalty: September 30, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were at risk of falling 12 m (40 ft.) to the concrete slab below them while they were near the edge of the roof that the firm was installing on a mixed-use building. The workers were not protected by guardrails. This was a high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: BCS Contractors Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $1,000
Date of penalty: September 30, 2011
This firm removed asbestos-containing materials from a house without first testing the effectiveness of the HEPA filters in its ventilation equipment. As a result, the firm's workers may have been exposed to harmful asbestos dust. This was a repeated violation of the requirement to test HEPA filters before using them in a high-risk activity.
Company: Active Roofing Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,740.55
Date of penalty: September 28, 2011
Three of this firm's workers were at risk of falling about 4 m (14 ft.) while tearing old shingles off the sloped roof of a two-storey house. The workers were wearing fall protection harnesses but were not connected to a lifeline. The firm failed to ensure its workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Exact Drywall Systems Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Drywalling or acoustic board installation
Amount: $9,920.12
Date of penalty: September 27, 2011
This employer failed to comply within a reasonable time with a WorkSafeBC order that required it to include in its health and safety program a statement of the responsibilities of supervisors and the employer.
Company: Greyback Construction Ltd., West Kelowna
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $74,944.33
Date of penalty: September 27, 2011
A worker from a firm that had been subcontracted by this employer was fatally injured when he fell through a plywood cover over a large hole in the concrete floor of a commercial construction site. The cover had been inadequately constructed by this employer and there was no barrier to prevent workers from walking on it. As a result, this employer failed to ensure the health and safety of other workers present at the workplace.
Company: All World 1419 Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: September 26, 2011
One of this firm's workers was walking about 10 m (33 ft.) above grade on the peak of a roof without wearing fall protection. This firm failed to ensure its worker used the required fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Newton Roofing Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 26, 2011
This firm's owner and one of its workers were working without fall protection about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade on a sloped roof. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used the required fall protection. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Sunmark Ventures Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 26, 2011
As the prime contractor at a multiple-employer construction site, this firm failed to establish and maintain an adequate system for ensuring the health and safety of workers. For example, it failed to ensure that the required handrails were installed and allowed a hazardous amount of construction debris to collect on the worksite. This was a repeated violation of the requirement for prime contractors to do everything practicable to ensure compliance with legislative requirements.
Company: Birdi Construction Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: September 26, 2011
This firm's owner and one of its workers were applying sheathing to a sloped roof without using the required fall protection. They were wearing fall protection harnesses but were not connected to a lifeline. They were at risk of falling 7 m (23 ft.). No fall protection plan was in place. These were repeated violations of the fall protection requirements.
Company: 0830022 B.C. Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $1,000
Date of penalty: September 26, 2011
This firm's worker was installing trusses on a building without using the required fall protection. The worker was about 3.5 m (12 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that its worker used the required fall protection. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Surjit Singh Chahal./S.K.C. Roofing, Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 26, 2011
This firm repeatedly failed to ensure that its workers used the required fall protection and as a result, exposed them to high risk of injury. For example, one of the firm's workers installed asphalt shingles on the sloped roof of a three-storey house without using fall protection. The worker risked falling about 9 m (30 ft.) to the terraced concrete walkway below. A written fall protection plan was required, but not available. In another case, the firm's principal and two of its workers were roofing at the peak of a different three-storey house, also without using any form of fall protection or having the required written fall protection plan.
Company: S & B Holdings Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 22, 2011
This firm did not follow methods acceptable to WorkSafeBC when it surveyed and reported on the hazardous materials present in a house scheduled for demolition. The firm's report was incomplete and as a result, workers may have been exposed to harmful airborne asbestos fibres. This was a repeated violation of the requirements for preventing workplace exposure to hazardous materials.
Company: Great West Coast Roofing Ltd., Langley
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $40,450
Date of penalty: September 20, 2011
Five of this firm's workers were installing shingles on the sloped roof of a two storey house without using the required fall protection. The height of the roof ranged from about 5.5 to 7 m (18 to 23 ft.). The firm failed to ensure that its workers used the required fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Friendly Construction Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $18,938.26
Date of penalty: September 20, 2011
Five of this firm's workers were working without fall protection as they installed a floor on the third level of a multi family dwelling that was under construction. They were working about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade, with one of them at the building's edge. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used the required fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: RG Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: September 20, 2011
Four of this firm's workers were working on a steep roof, between about 5.5 and 11 m (18 and 36 ft.) above grade, without personal fall protection. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used the required fall protection.
Company: Brad William Rumpel / Rumpel Construction, Langford
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $5,911.25
Date of penalty: September 16, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were at risk of falling while working more than 7.5 m (20 ft.) above grade on the sloped roof of a two-storey house. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used the required fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: CKTown Roofing Ltd., Kelowna
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 14, 2011
This firm failed, on two occasions, to ensure the use of fall protection as required and to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety. These were repeated violations. On one occasion, three workers, including a supervisor, were working without fall protection on a sloped roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. On another occasion, a worker was working without fall protection at the edge of a sloped roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. This firm also failed to comply with numerous other requirements of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. For example, it failed to implement a written fall protection plan, failed to provide a chute for the free fall of debris removed from the roof, and allowed a worker to operate a pneumatic nail gun without protective eyewear or effective footwear. These are only some of the firm's safety violations.
Company: Mr. Swirl Plumbing & Drain Cleaning Inc., Burnaby
Classification unit: Plumbing, heating, vent, residential air conditioning, or central vacuum system installation or repair
Amount: $5,157.53
Date of penalty: September 14, 2011
This firm failed to submit a written compliance report after being ordered to do so.
Company: Don B. Morris / Morris Roofing, Prince George
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: September 13, 2011
This employer and two workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. The employer failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. The employer also failed to secure two ladders, being used to access the roof, to maintain their stability during use.
Company: Badesha Roofing Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 13, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were at risk of falling about 5.5 m (18 ft.) while replacing shingles at the edge of a sloped roof. The firm did not provide guardrails or any form of personal fall protection, both of which are required by the health and safety regulation. These were repeated violations.
Company: Unique Framing Ltd., White Rock
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $4,297.68
Date of penalty: September 9, 2011
A house under construction by this framing contractor presented a high risk of injury to workers. The second floor of the house, more than 3 m (10 ft.) above the main floor, as well as a sundeck about 4.3 m (14 ft.) above grade, did not have guardrails to protect workers from falling. In addition, a stairway leading from the main floor to the second level did not have handrails as required on its open side. These were repeated violations of the fall protection and handrail requirements.
Company: Arrow Installations Ltd., Fernie
Classification unit: Power pole, powerline, or transmission line installation, service, or repair
Amount: $41,664.46
Date of penalty: September 8, 2011
This firm's worker suffered serious injuries after contacting a high voltage power line. The worker had climbed a utility pole to replace the device that, when necessary, automatically cuts off the electrical current. The firm failed to ensure that the worker maintained the minimum required distance from high voltage conductors. It failed to ensure that regular inspections of the workplace were conducted to prevent unsafe working conditions from developing. The firm also failed to provide its worker with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure his safety.
Company: Nu-Touch Stucco Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Plastering, lathing, or stucco work
Amount: $12,012.15
Date of penalty: September 6, 2011
This firm's worker was working without fall protection on a roof about 4 m (13 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. It also failed to secure an extension ladder to ensure its stability while being used to access the roof. In addition, a wooden scaffold at the construction site did not have the required guardrails, and its work platforms were not as wide as required. These were all repeated violations.
Company: Jose Luis Romero & Sonia Romero / Los Compadres Roofing, West Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $1,046.45
Date of penalty: September 2, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof about 3.4 m (11 ft.) above grade. They were wearing personal fall protection but were not connected to lifelines. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required.
Company: Coast to Coast Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $24,000
Date of penalty: September 2, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof between 4 and 4.6 m (13 and 15 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation. This firm had been found in violation of fall protection requirements and penalized six times in the last three years. The penalty amount increased in accordance with WorkSafeBC policy to reflect this history.
Company: P. Benipal & Construction Ltd., West Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: September 2, 2011
This firm's worker was working without fall protection on a house under construction, about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. This violation took place in the presence of the firm's principal, who was supervising the job. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements, and considered to be high risk in nature. This was also a repeated violation of the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety. The firm also received a prior administrative penalty in 2010, and the amount of the penalty was increased to reflect this history, in accordance with WorkSafeBC policy.
Company: Nick's Roofing Ltd., Delta
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 2, 2011
Three of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof between about 8 and 9.8 m (26 and 32 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. A fall protection plan was required but none had been prepared. It also failed to provide the workers with instruction, training, and supervision as required to ensure their safety. These were repeated violations.
Company: Ron's Insulation 2002 Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Insulation work or fireproofing
Amount: $4,004.29
Date of penalty: September 2, 2011
This firm failed to provide a proper hazardous material survey, indicating the location of hazardous materials such as asbestos, before proceeding with the demolition of a house. As a result, workers may have been exposed to hazardous asbestos dust.
Company: Triple A Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 1, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof about 3.7 m (12 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Diamond Stucco Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Plastering, lathing, or stucco work
Amount: $2,766.55
Date of penalty: September 1, 2011
The wood frame scaffold used by this firm at a construction site did not meet the design requirements, including the requirement for guardrails. In addition, one of the firm's workers was working without fall protection on the scaffold about 3.7 to 4 m (12 to 13 ft.) above grade. These were repeated violations of the fall protection and wood-frame scaffolding requirements.
Company: Dosanjh Plastering & Stucco Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Plastering, lathing, or stucco work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 31, 2011
This firm's worker was standing about 3.5 m (12 ft.) above grade on the plank of a wooden scaffold. The plank was only about half the required width. This was a repeated violation of the width requirement for scaffold platforms.
Company: Lambertus Johannes Zonderland / Bart Zonderland's Framing, Mission
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 30, 2011
A young worker employed by this firm was on the sloped roof of a house under construction, up to 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade, without using fall protection. This was a repeated violation by the firm of the fall protection requirements, including the requirement for a written fall protection plan.
Company: Anthony (Tony) Paul Harmsen / Harmsen Construction, Harrison Hot Springs
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 30, 2011
This firm's workers were working without fall protection more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade on a house under construction. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection. It also failed to provide a written fall protection plan for work done more than 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade. These were repeated violations.
Company: Saprai Construction Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,622.43 (x2)
Date of penalty: August 30, 2011
This firm's worker was working without fall protection on a sloped roof 9 m (30 ft.) above grade. He was wearing a fall protection harness but was not connected to a lifeline. On another occasion one of this firm's workers was working without fall protection more than 6 m (20 ft.) above grade on a house under construction. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required in both instances. These were repeated violations. These two penalties were imposed concurrently.
Company: Dean G. McCready, Creston
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 30, 2011
Four of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof more than 4 m (14 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: 522182 BC Ltd. / Canadian Insulation Co., West Vancouver
Classification unit: Insulation work or fireproofing
Amount: $12,215.70
Date of penalty: August 26, 2011
This firm was in continued non-compliance with the requirements to have an effective exposure control plan and an effective protective equipment program at its worksites. The firm also failed to ensure that its worksite was posted with suitable signs or placards warning workers of the hazards in the work area.
Company: V.G.I. Gutters Ltd./ Victoria Gutter Installation, Victoria
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $6,296.64
Date of penalty: August 24, 2011
This firm's worker was injured after falling from a ladder that was missing its rubber feet. The missing parts contributed to the accident. The firm failed to inspect the ladder as required before each work shift to ensure that it was safe to use. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Onni Contracting Ltd., Maple Ridge
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $8,142.18
Date of penalty: August 24, 2011
As the prime contractor of a multiple employer worksite, this firm failed to do everything reasonably practicable to ensure compliance with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. The safety violations at the construction site included the failure to use fall protection as required.
Company: Dave's Roofing Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 23, 2011
Four of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof between about 5 and 6 m (16 and 20 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: R.D.M. Enterprises Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $50,893
Date of penalty: August 19, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were in an unsafe excavation more than 1.2 m (4 ft.) deep. The firm failed to ensure that the sides of the excavation were sloped or shored as required before allowing the workers to enter it. Two excavators and a rock truck surrounded the excavation, increasing the risk of the sides collapsing.
Company: Extreme Weather Roofing Ltd., Port Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 19, 2011
This firm's principal and two of its workers were working on the sloped roof of a two-storey house without using any form of fall protection. Two of the workers were about 4 m (13 ft.) above grade and the firm's principal was about 7 m (24 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure its workers used fall protection as required and also failed to provide them with the supervision necessary to ensure their health and safety. These were repeated violations.
Company: Extreme Weather Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,436
Date of penalty: August 19, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a wet, sloped roof 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Deol Framing Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $3,346.30
Date of penalty: August 19, 2011
Four of this firm's workers were working more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade on the unguarded upper level of a house under construction. No guardrails had been installed around such areas as open stairwells where there was a risk of falling. In addition, stairs complete with a handrail were not installed prior to work beginning on the next floor level. These were repeated violations of the stairway and guardrail requirements for construction sites.
Company: New-Age Roofing Co. Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: August 18, 2011
This firm's president was working without fall protection on a sloped roof about 9 m (30 ft.) above grade. This was a violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Precision Gutters Ltd., Port Coquitlam
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $35,235.38
Date of penalty: August 17, 2011
This firm's worker was walking across a sloped roof about 8.5 m (28 ft.) above grade without using fall protection. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Sea to Sky Precision Construction Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $11,901
Date of penalty: August 17, 2011
Four of this firm's workers were working without fall protection, about 9 m (30 ft.) above grade, on a house under construction. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Arthur Moore, Surrey
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $15,000
Date of penalty: August 15, 2011
This firm failed to comply with a WorkSafeBC order to provide information relating to a safety violation at its worksite. This was a repeated violation.
Company: ACS Roofing Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 11, 2011
This firm's worker was working without fall protection on a roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation.
Company: CKTown Roofing Ltd., Kelowna
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 10, 2011
One of this firm's workers was working without fall protection on a roof over 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. The worker was wearing a fall protection harness but was not tied off to a lifeline. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required.
Company: Sunshine Vintage Restoration Ltd. / Vintage Roofing, Victoria
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $12,283.95
Date of penalty: August 9, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on an unguarded and sloped roof about 6.7 m (22 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection.
Company: Trevor McDonald / Ridge Meadows Roofing, Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: August 8, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Trevor McDonald / Ridge Meadows Roofing, Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: August 8, 2011
This firm's principal and three of its workers were working without fall protection on a roof between 4.3 m (14 ft.) and 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide the supervision necessary to ensure safety.
Company: Northwood Roofing Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,639.65
Date of penalty: August 5, 2011
This firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof about 6.4 m (21 ft.) above grade. They were wearing fall protection harnesses but weren't connected to lifelines. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection. This was a repeated violation.
Company: J & R Excavation & Demolition Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $17,713.48
Date of penalty: August 4, 2011
Three of this firm's workers were working in an unsafe excavation about 2.7 m (9 ft.) deep. The firm failed to ensure that the excavation was sloped, shored, or supported as required before allowing the workers to enter it.
Company: Manjit Singh Dosanjh & Satnam Singh Dosanjh / Brother's Framing Company, Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $3,895.10
Date of penalty: August 2, 2011
This employer's workers were working without fall protection about 3.5 m (11 ft.) above grade on the second floor of a building under construction. No guardrails had been installed where workers could fall. The employer failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. In addition, a stairway that was being used to access the second floor did not have the required treads. This was yet another violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation.
Company: Stewart Arnold Newstead / Armour Roofing, Quesnel
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: July 29, 2011
Two workers, including the firm's principal, were working without fall protection on a sloped roof about 4.3 m (14 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: S.G. Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $8,670.95
Date of penalty: July 28, 2011
Three of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof about 3 m (10 ft.) or more above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Kent Laverdure Plumbing Ltd., Campbell River
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,841.98
Date of penalty: July 27, 2011
This firm's worker entered two high-risk excavations---3.4 m (11 ft.) and 4 m (13 ft.) deep---to conduct work. The firm did not ensure that the sides of these excavations had been sloped or supported as required before allowing any worker to enter them. This was a violation of the regulatory requirements for excavations.
Company: Skylite Building Maintenance Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: July 27, 2011
This firm has failed to comply with a WorkSafeBC directive issued as a result of multiple safety violations related to the removal of asbestos-containing materials. The directive required the firm to provide asbestos removal information, including training records for workers assigned to remove asbestos-containing materials, and exposure control plans and work procedures for removing asbestos-containing materials at each of the firm's work locations.
Company: Skylite Building Maintenance Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 27, 2011
Three of this firm's workers removed asbestos-containing materials from a house slated for demolition without following proper procedures and without wearing adequate personal protective equipment. This was a repeated violation by the firm of the asbestos removal requirements.
Company: Sean Ray Staub / Shelby Roofing, Saanich
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 27, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof 9 m (30 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation that occurred after the firm received a warning letter for an earlier fall protection violation.
Company: Skylite Building Maintenance Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 27, 2011
This firm's hazardous materials assessment of a house slated for demolition did not meet a standard acceptable to WorkSafeBC. The assessment did not include enough samples to determine the extent of materials containing asbestos and other hazardous materials. In addition, the firm failed to remove all asbestos dust and debris from the work area with a vacuum cleaner equipped with a HEPA-filtered exhaust or by other means acceptable to WorkSafeBC.
Company: Skylite Building Maintenance Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 27, 2011
This firm failed to conduct an adequate hazardous materials survey for a house slated for demolition. For example, the survey did not include samples of roofing materials or mention of the asbestos-containing vermiculite found in the house. This was a repeated violation of the regulatory requirement to ensure an acceptable assessment of hazardous materials.
Company: Skylite Building Maintenance Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 27, 2011
This firm failed to conduct an adequate hazardous materials survey for a house slated for demolition. The survey did not include building materials that were subsequently found to contain asbestos. This was a repeated violation of the regulatory requirement to ensure an acceptable assessment of hazardous materials.
Company: Bhagwant Dhaliwal, North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $15,000
Date of penalty: July 27, 2011
Two of this employer's workers and the company owner himself were working without using fall protection on a sloped roof about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade. The employer failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Bhagwant Dhaliwal, Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 27, 2011
This firm has failed to comply with a WorkSafeBC directive requiring the firm to submit a valid first aid certificate.
Company: Onkar Framing & Construction Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $1,259.74
Date of penalty: July 25, 2011
This firm's workers were working more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade performing second floor framing activities on a house under construction. The firm failed to ensure that guardrails had been installed as required around the second-storey perimeter. This violation of the fall protection requirements was among several, including six repeated violations in the last three years.
Company: Ascend Concrete & Excavating Ltd., Squamish
Classification unit: Structural concrete forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 25, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof where there was a risk of falling 8.5 m (28 ft.) to grade from the front of the roof and 15 m (50 ft.) to grade from the back of the roof. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. This was a high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Choob Work Interior Finishing Ltd., New Westminster
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: July 25, 2011
This firm's worker was fatally injured after falling 4.5 m (15 ft.) from a rolling scaffold. The worker was trying to move the scaffold with another worker's help when one of the wheels fell into a 4-inch-deep recess in the floor, causing the scaffold to tip over. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used the scaffolding correctly and safely, for example, by securing it or by attaching outriggers. It failed to provide the workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision required to ensure their safety.
Company: Mercury Refrigeration Products and Services Ltd., Shawnigan Lake
Classification unit: Plumbing, heating, vent, residential air conditioning, or central vacuum system installation or repair
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 22, 2011
One of this firm's workers was working in an unsafe excavation more than 1.2 m (4 ft.) deep. The firm failed to ensure that the sides of the excavation were sloped or shored as required before allowing the worker to enter it.
Company: Hans Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 21, 2011
This firm's owner and two of its workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof between about 3.5 m and 9 m (12 and 30 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. It also failed to provide the workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: P.T.C. Construction Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Plastering, lathing, or stucco work
Amount: $5,821.65
Date of penalty: July 21, 2011
Four of this firm's workers removed asbestos-containing materials from a house slated for demolition without taking any steps to ensure that the hazardous material was safely contained and removed. As a result, the workers may have been exposed to harmful airborne asbestos fibres. The firm also failed to advise it workers of the presence of asbestos and failed to provide the workers with the supervision required to ensure their safety.
Company: Bragg Construction Ltd., Prince George
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 20, 2011
This firm's workers were not wearing safety headgear as required while building and installing the framing for a house under construction. This was a repeated violation of the requirement to use head protection when there's a danger of head injury from falling, flying, or thrown objects or other harmful contacts.
Company: ET Roofing & Renovation Ltd., Port Moody
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 19, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection near the unguarded edge of a roof about 3.5 m (12 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. It also failed to provide the workers with the training and supervision necessary to ensure their safety. These were repeated violations.
Company: Pro-Built Masonry Ltd., Langley
Classification unit: Masonry
Amount: $8,276.55
Date of penalty: July 19, 2011
The top portion of a fire separation wall collapsed onto an adjacent building. The collapse, which resulted in significant damage, had the potential to cause serious injury. This employer failed to support the wall as required during its construction.
Company: Park City Homes Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 15, 2011
This employer failed to conduct an acceptable, complete hazardous material survey for a house slated for demolition. For instance, samples of two out of the three layers of roofing material as well as samples of exterior stucco were not collected as part of the survey. As a result, workers may have been exposed to hazardous airborne asbestos fibres. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Payton Booker Buckner, Pitt Meadows
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 15, 2011
This firm demolished a house without first inspecting it for hazardous materials such as asbestos and making the inspection results, showing the locations of any hazardous substances, available at the worksite. As a result, workers may have been exposed to harmful airborne asbestos fibres. This was a repeated violation of the requirement to safely contain and remove asbestos-containing materials.
Company: Supersave Construction Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $3,357.20
Date of penalty: July 15, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a steep roof. One of the workers was about 4 m (13 ft.) above grade and the other about 6.5 m (21 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Marwest Utility Services Ltd., Williams Lake
Classification unit: Oil or gas pipeline construction or repair
Amount: $17,113.33
Date of penalty: July 12, 2011
This firm's contractor struck and ruptured an underground natural gas line. The firm had failed to accurately determine as required the location of all underground utilities before allowing a backhoe to begin excavating.
Company: Ballagan Construction & Framing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 12, 2011
Two houses under construction by this firm had only a narrow ramp, positioned at a steep angle, as access to porch decks about 1.2 m (4 ft.) above grade. A third house being renovated by the firm had no safe means of access to its main floor. This firm failed to provide safe work access to work areas as required. The firm also failed to provide guardrails as required around staircase openings in two of the houses.
Company: Diamond 11 Excavating and Demolition Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Building demolition
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 11, 2011
This firm allowed demolition work to proceed before ensuring that the hazardous materials survey results, showing the location of any hazardous substances, were available at the worksite as required.
Company: Clayton Hoff, Saanich
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 8, 2011
This firm's owner and two of its workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof up to about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required.
Company: Steven Emile Gaudet & Janie Rae Gaudet, Vancouver
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $2,932.35
Date of penalty: July 8, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection near the unguarded edge of a roof about 9 m (30 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. It also failed to provide a written fall protection plan. These were repeated violations.
Company: Steven Emile Gaudet & Janie Rae Gaudet, Vancouver
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $2,932.35
Date of penalty: July 8, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection near the unguarded edge of a roof about 9 m (30 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. It also failed to provide a written fall protection plan. These were repeated violations.
Company: Robert Sousa, Saanich
Classification unit: Masonry
Amount: $4,815.53
Date of penalty: July 6, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were not wearing safety eyewear while cutting and grinding masonry with a dry cut-off saw. Only one of these workers was wearing respiratory protective equipment. The firm failed to ensure that the workers wore safety eyewear and respiratory equipment as required to protect them against harmful levels of silica dust. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Dave L. Stauffer, Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 6, 2011
This firm's owner and one of its workers were removing asbestos-containing drywall from a house without following proper procedures. As a result, they may have been exposed to hazardous airborne asbestos fibres. The firm failed to provide the worker with the required training and supervision to ensure safety while removing the hazardous material. It also failed to ensure the use of appropriate personal protective equipment. The worker was not wearing any personal protective equipment, while the firm's owner was wearing only disposable coveralls over his clothes.
Company: Robert Sousa, Saanich
Classification unit: Masonry
Amount: $4,815.53
Date of penalty: July 6, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were not wearing safety eyewear while cutting and grinding masonry with a dry cut-off saw. Only one of these workers was wearing respiratory protective equipment. The firm failed to ensure that the workers wore safety eyewear and respiratory equipment as required to protect them against harmful levels of silica dust. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Dave L. Stauffer, Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 6, 2011
This firm's owner and one of its workers were removing asbestos-containing drywall from a house without following proper procedures. As a result, they may have been exposed to hazardous airborne asbestos fibres. The firm failed to provide the worker with the required training and supervision to ensure safety while removing the hazardous material. It also failed to ensure the use of appropriate personal protective equipment. The worker was not wearing any personal protective equipment, while the firm's owner was wearing only disposable coveralls over his clothes.
Company: SD2 Framing Inc., Burnaby
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: July 5, 2011
Three of this firm's workers, including the president, were working without fall protection on a roof about 5.8 m (19 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. This was a high-risk, repeated violation.
Company: Sears Canada Inc., Richmond
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $13,760.34
Date of penalty: July 4, 2011
This firm failed to ensure the health and safety of subcontracted workers at a workplace at which the firm's work was being carried out. Two of the workers were working on a sloped roof about 4.8 m (16 ft.) above grade, without using fall protection. A third worker was working below without wearing the required hard hat. None of the workers had documented fall protection training. This was a repeated violation by the firm of the requirement to ensure the safety of all workers at a jobsite at which that firm's work is being carried out.
Company: Active Roofing Ltd., Mission
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,870.28
Date of penalty: June 30, 2011
Four of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Super Supreme Roofing Limited, Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: June 24, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof more than 10.5 m (35 ft.) above grade. They were wearing fall protection harnesses but were not connected to lifelines. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Tornado Demolition Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Building demolition
Amount: $7,423.58
Date of penalty: June 22, 2011
This firm issued a clearance letter stating that all hazardous materials had been safely and completely removed from a house slated for demolition. However, asbestos-containing duct tape was later found in the house. As a result, workers may have been exposed to hazardous asbestos fibres. This was a repeated violation of the requirements for preventing workplace exposure to hazardous materials.
Company: Sadhu Sira, Delta
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: June 17, 2011
This employer and one of his workers were removing shingles from a roof about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade without using fall protection. They were wearing fall protection harnesses but were not connected to lifelines. This was a high-risk, repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Capital Roofing Co. Ltd., Port Moody
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $7,606.38
Date of penalty: June 16, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection near the edge of a roof about 4.3 m (14 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Skylite Building Maintenance Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: June 15, 2011
This firm's worker prevented a WorkSafeBC officer from obtaining documents, including a hazardous materials survey, as part of a worksite inspection. This was a violation of the requirement not to interfere with a WorkSafeBC officer's duties under the Workers Compensation Act.
Company: Skylite Building Maintenance Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: June 15, 2011
This firm's worker prevented a WorkSafeBC officer from obtaining documents, including a hazardous materials survey, as part of a worksite inspection. This was a violation of the requirement not to interfere with a WorkSafeBC officer's duties under the Workers Compensation Act.
Company: Peter Roofing Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: June 10, 2011
Several of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof about 8 m (27 ft.) above grade. Working alongside these workers was the firm's principal. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. WorkSafeBC imposed a penalty on this firm because of the high risk of injury and the firm's history of similar violations.
Company: M.C.K. Constructions Inc., Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,646.63
Date of penalty: June 10, 2011
This firm's principal and two of its workers were working without fall protection on a roof up to about 11 m (36 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of fall protection as required. It also failed to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety. These were repeated violations.
Company: G & J Roofing Ltd., Port Moody
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $1,000
Date of penalty: June 8, 2011
This firm failed to comply with a WorkSafeBC order requiring it to submit a written compliance report detailing the steps it was taking to address safety issues observed at its worksite. The firm's principal and one of its workers were working on a sloped roof more than 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: M.S. Punjab Excavating & Demolition Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Building demolition
Amount: $1,000
Date of penalty: June 8, 2011
This firm failed to comply with a WorkSafeBC order requiring it to submit a written compliance report detailing the steps it was taking to address safety violations. The firm failed to follow the proper procedures before allowing workers to strip asbestos-containing materials from a house. As a result, the workers may have been exposed to hazardous asbestos dust.
Company: RM Roofing Ltd., Gibsons
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $4,784.70
Date of penalty: June 8, 2011
This firm's principal was working on a roof about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade without using fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Theodore Hermus, Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $4,771.18
Date of penalty: June 6, 2011
One of this firm's workers was working without fall protection on a roof more than 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade. The sloped roof did not have toeholds as required. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Park City Homes Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: June 3, 2011
This firm allowed asbestos-containing materials to be removed from a house without following the proper procedures. As a result, workers may have been exposed to hazardous airborne asbestos fibres. This was a repeated violation of the requirement to ensure that hazardous material is safely contained and removed.
Company: Speedy Excavating Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: June 1, 2011
Four of this firm's workers removed asbestos-containing drywall from a house that was being demolished without following proper procedures. As a result, the workers may have been exposed to harmful airborne asbestos fibres. The firm failed to ensure that the hazardous material was safely contained and removed. For example, the workers did not wear personal equipment to protect them from the asbestos hazard.
Company: Nu-Touch Stucco Ltd., Delta
Classification unit: Plastering, lathing, or stucco work
Amount: $5,991.25
Date of penalty: June 1, 2011
This firm's worker was standing about 3.5 m (12 ft.) above grade on the plank of a wooden scaffold. The plank was only about half the required width. This was a repeated violation of the width requirement for scaffold platforms.
Company: Speedy Excavating Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: June 1, 2011
This firm allowed an excavator to demolish a house even after the discovery of asbestos-containing drywall in the debris pile. This was a repeated and reckless violation of the requirement to postpone the demolition work until the hazardous material could be safely contained and removed. As a result, workers may have been exposed to harmful airborne asbestos fibres.
Company: Speedy Excavating Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: June 1, 2011
This firm failed to adequately inspect the worksite for hazardous materials such as asbestos and to make the inspection results available at the worksite. These were repeated violations. As a result, workers may have been exposed to harmful airborne asbestos fibres.
Company: Island Pro Team Installation Inc., Langford
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $5,157.68
Date of penalty: May 26, 2011
This firm's worker was standing on a scaffold plank about 3.5 m (12 ft.) above grade without using fall protection. The firm failed to ensure that its worker used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Ryan Muralt Roofing Ltd., Colwood
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: May 26, 2011
This firm's owner and one of its workers were working on a roof about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade without using fall protection. They were wearing fall protection harnesses but were not connected to a lifeline. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Son Van Thai, Langford
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: May 25, 2011
Two workers and the firm's owner were working near the leading edge of a deck more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used fall protection as required.
Company: Big Sky North Holdings Ltd., Williams Lake
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $6,920.48
Date of penalty: May 24, 2011
Three of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: All Star Excavating & Demolition Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Building demolition
Amount: $11,555.85
Date of penalty: May 19, 2011
This firm's worker was working in an unsafe excavation about 3 m (9 ft.) deep. The firm failed to ensure that the sides of the excavation were sloped or shored as required before allowing the worker to enter it.
Company: All Star Excavating & Demolition Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Building demolition
Amount: $11,555.85
Date of penalty: May 19, 2011
This firm allowed demolition work to proceed before ensuring that the hazardous materials survey results, showing the location of any hazardous substances, were available at the worksite as required. This firm received two previous penalties for the same violation.
Company: Robert Repchuk, Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: May 19, 2011
Four of this firm's workers were working on a sloped roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without using fall protection. A fifth worker was also working without fall protection from an extension ladder. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used fall protection as required. It also failed to provide the workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety while doing roofing work. These were repeated violations.
Company: Sean A. Sulyok, Abbotsford
Classification unit: Drywalling or acoustic board installation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: May 18, 2011
This firm failed to comply with a WorkSafeBC order issued as a result of a safety violation at its worksite. One of the firm's workers was struck in the head with a hammer while working next to another worker. The firm repeatedly failed to respond to an officer's requests to show what it was doing to prevent a recurrence.
Company: Saab Framing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $5,736.75
Date of penalty: May 17, 2011
This firm's workers climbed to the second floor of a wood frame building under construction by means of a step ladder when a stairway hadn't been installed as required. This was a repeated violation of the requirement to install stairs to each floor before building the next one. In addition, several of the firm's workers were not wearing safety headgear as required on a construction site. This was also a repeated violation.
Company: New City Framing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: May 17, 2011
This firm failed to provide as required a first aid kit and a first aid attendant to render first aid to any injured workers. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Darrell Dean Warner, Campbell River
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: May 17, 2011
Six of this employer's workers were working without fall protection on a roof more than 3.5 m (12 ft.) above grade. The employer failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. He also failed to provide the workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety. These were repeated violations.
Company: Brar Brothers Siding & Tiles Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: May 17, 2011
Three of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a second-storey balcony about 4.5 m (15 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Hayer Homes Ltd., Prince George
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $5,962.77
Date of penalty: May 17, 2011
As the prime contractor of a multiple-employer construction site, this firm failed to do everything reasonably practicable to establish and maintain a system or process to ensure compliance with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. As a result, workers weren't given worksite orientations or informed about worksite hazards. In addition, no meetings were held to coordinate work activities and first aid.
Company: Steve Schoenfelder, Chilliwack
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $2,668.08
Date of penalty: May 17, 2011
This employer's worker was working without fall protection on a steeply sloped roof about 4 m (13.5 ft.) above grade. The employer failed to ensure that the worker used fall protection. He also failed to provide a written fall protection plan as required in the circumstances. These were repeated violations.
Company: Coast to Coast Roofing & Rubbish Removal Ltd., West Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: May 16, 2011
This firm's worker was seriously injured after falling about 4.5 m (15 ft.) from a roof to the ground below. The firm failed to ensure that the worker used fall protection as required. It failed to provide the worker with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure his safety during roofing work. The firm also failed to ensure that an extension ladder to the roof was secured and safely used. These were all repeated violations.
Company: Coast to Coast Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: May 16, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof up to about 9 m (30 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to provide a written fall protection plan as required and to ensure that the workers used fall protection. It also failed to provide its workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety. These were all repeated violations.
Company: Coast to Coast Roofing Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: May 16, 2011
Three of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof about 6.5 m (22 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated high-risk violation.
Company: Coast to Coast Roofing Ltd., New Westminster
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: May 16, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof between about 9 and 11 m (30 and 36 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Coast to Coast Roofing & Rubbish Removal Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: May 16, 2011
This firm's worker was working without fall protection near the edge of a steep roof about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that the worker used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements for work on roofs with steep slopes.
Company: Karepro Homes Construction Ltd., Langford
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $6,179.78
Date of penalty: May 13, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Nelson Stanley Hanson, Courtenay
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: May 10, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used fall protection as required. It also failed to provide the workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety. These were repeated violations.
Company: Z.Q. Roofing and Renovation Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: May 6, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working on a roof between 3 and 6 m (10 and 20 ft.) above grade without using fall protection. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Bagha Construction and Renovation Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: May 5, 2011
This firm failed to cooperate as required with a WorkSafeBC officer to arrange a meeting to discuss violations of fall protection requirements at its worksite.
Company: Scholten's Roofing Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $9,010.65
Date of penalty: May 5, 2011
This firm's worker was pressure-washing a sloped cedar roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. The firm failed to ensure that its worker used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements, including the requirement for a written fall protection plan.
Company: Friendly Construction Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $10,928.50
Date of penalty: May 5, 2011
Three of this firm's workers were working on the third storey of a condominium under construction, about 9 m (30 ft.) above grade, without using any form of fall protection. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Arthur Moore, Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: May 3, 2011
This firm did not follow guidelines acceptable to WorkSafeBC in its attempt to identify hazardous materials that would be disturbed and handled during the demolition of a house, which was later confirmed to be contaminated with asbestos. As a result, workers may have been exposed to harmful airborne asbestos fibres. This was a repeated violation of the requirements for preventing workplace exposure to hazardous materials.
Company: Arthur Moore, Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: May 3, 2011
This firm failed to comply with multiple WorkSafeBC orders requiring it to submit written compliance reports detailing the steps it was taking to address safety violations observed at its worksites.
Company: Arthur Moore, Richmond
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: May 3, 2011
This firm failed to comply with a WorkSafeBC order requiring it to notify the Board in writing of all asbestos abatement work that it engaged in between January 10, 2009, and March 1, 2010.
Company: Arthur Moore, Abbotsford
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: May 3, 2011
Seven of this firm's workers removed asbestos-containing drywall from a house that was being demolished without following proper procedures. As a result, the workers may have been exposed to harmful airborne asbestos fibres. The firm failed to implement a site-specific exposure control plan to ensure that the hazardous material was safely contained and removed. It failed to ensure that the hazardous materials inspection survey results were available at the worksite, and it failed to instruct and train its workers and to provide them with the personal protective equipment necessary to prevent exposure to asbestos.
Company: Brian E. Roberts, Abbotsford
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: May 2, 2011
This firm's owner and three of its workers were working on a sloped roof at least 4 m (14 ft.) above grade without using fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: 590270 BC Ltd./Mumm's Contracting, Burnaby
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $3,908.90
Date of penalty: April 21, 2011
Four of this firm's workers were exposed to the risk of falling about 3.5 m (12 ft.). They were replacing the roof on a house without using fall protection. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements and a violation of the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: G.D. Framing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 21, 2011
This firm's worker was exposed to the risk of falling about 6.5 m (21 ft.) while standing on top of a wall on the second floor of a house under construction. He was installing a roof truss without using fall protection. The firm failed to ensure that the worker used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: U.K. Concrete Pump Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Concrete pumping
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 20, 2011
A worker suffered fatal injuries after falling to the ground and striking his head on a piece of wood. He was holding the end hose of a concrete pump truck, pouring concrete for a sidewalk, when the hose suddenly whipped out and knocked him backwards. Concrete had stopped flowing out of the hose as the result of a blockage in the pipeline, but then the blockage cleared suddenly. This employer failed to provide the workers involved in the concrete pumping operation with adequate information, instruction, training, and supervision to ensure their safety. The workers had limited understanding of blockages and how to prevent them.
Company: Pennyfarthing Construction Co. Ltd., Maple Ridge
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $4,614.53
Date of penalty: April 19, 2011
As the prime contractor at a multiple-employer construction site, this firm failed to establish and maintain an adequate system or process to ensure the health and safety of workers. For example, the firm failed to ensure that handrails and guardrails were installed where required. Workers were also exposed to hazards from waste that had been allowed to accumulate throughout the job site. This was a repeated violation of the requirement to do everything practicable to comply with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation.
Company: L&M Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: April 19, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof about 8 m (25 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: New Tech Framing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 7, 2011
This employer was working without fall protection about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade on the second floor of a house under construction. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Mohinder Kaur Lalli, Maple Ridge
Classification unit: Masonry
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 6, 2011
This firm allowed workers to start renovating a building before ensuring that asbestos or any other hazardous materials that could be disturbed or removed by the renovations had been identified and before having the hazardous materials inspection results available at the worksite.
Company: Peter Kiewit Infrastructure Co., Powell River
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $250,000
Date of penalty: March 31, 2011
This firm's worker was fatally struck by a rock estimated to be over 1.5 m (5 ft.) in diameter. The rock rolled downhill towards the young worker as he was hand drilling a boulder to prepare it for blasting. The firm allowed work to proceed without first clearing loose material uphill that had the potential to dislodge and inflict injury. Unstable material at the worksite had been repeatedly identified in risk assessments. The firm failed to provide its workers with adequate instruction and training for the land clearing work. It also failed to ensure effective supervision at the worksite in spite of the presence of several supervisors.
Company: South-West Roof Restoration Inc., Langley
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $12,171.30
Date of penalty: March 30, 2011
Three of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof about 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to enforce the use of fall protection as required. It also failed to provide its workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety. These were repeated violations.
Company: Affiliated Roofers Ltd., Port Coquitlam
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $35,042.45
Date of penalty: March 24, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were exposed to the risk of falling about 5 m (17 ft.) while working on the roof of a house without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Gagandeep Construction Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 22, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working on a roof about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade without using any fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Garry Dohms, Abbotsford
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $9,518.85
Date of penalty: March 18, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were installing roofing material on a sloped roof about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Twin Cedar Roofing Ltd., Chilliwack
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $11,949.25
Date of penalty: March 17, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Capital Roofing Co. Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $15,283.45
Date of penalty: March 16, 2011
Three of this firm's workers were working without fall protection near the edge of a roof about 9 m (30 ft.) above grade. They were wearing fall protection harnesses but weren't attached to lifelines. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Brytar Contracting Inc., Vancouver
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $42,690.14
Date of penalty: March 15, 2011
One of this firm's workers was working without fall protection near the edge of a roof about 12 m (40 ft.) above grade. Another of its workers climbed onto a scaffold's platform about 9 m (30 ft.) above grade. The work platform did not have guardrails, and although the worker wore a harness he wasn't tied off to a lifeline. The firm failed to ensure that these workers used fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Juanjose Medina-Acosta, Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,853.48
Date of penalty: March 11, 2011
This firm's worker was exposed to the risk of falling about 6 m (20 ft.) while working on the 4:12 sloped roof of a house without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Dulai Roofing Ltd., New Westminster
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $19,208.69
Date of penalty: March 10, 2011
This firm failed, on multiple occasions, to ensure that its own workers and other workers carrying out the firm's work were protected from falling. On one occasion workers were exposed to a fall hazard of about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade, and on two other occasions workers were exposed to a fall hazard of about 9 m (30 ft.) above grade.
Company: Josip Zanic Construction & Painting Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 8, 2011
This firm failed to comply with a WorkSafeBC order requiring it to submit a written compliance report detailing the steps it was taking to address fall protection violations at its worksite. The firm failed to ensure that a worker working on a sloped roof up to 10 m (32 ft.) above grade used fall protection. It also failed to provide a written fall protection plan as required.
Company: Standard Insulation & Siding Ltd., Maple Ridge
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $9,007.80
Date of penalty: March 7, 2011
Two of this firm's workers weren't securely tied off while working from a scaffold about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. They were among several workers at the firm's construction site who weren't aware of the requirements for proper anchorage to ensure an effective fall arrest system. The firm failed to provide its workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision required to ensure their safety.
Company: Silex Restorations Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $2,754.78
Date of penalty: March 4, 2011
This firm failed to provide guardrails on the scaffolding at its construction site. It also failed to provide cages for all scaffold ladders more than 3 m (10 ft.) high. In addition, the cage installed around one of the ladders did not meet the dimension requirements. These were repeated violations.
Company: Riccardo John Divilio, Maple Ridge
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,071.04
Date of penalty: March 3, 2011
This firm failed to provide its workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their health and safety. For example, the firm failed to ensure that workers used fall protection as required while working more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. Workers were also permitted to work in and around hazards at the construction site, including unguarded openings as well as stairs with inadequate or missing handrails.
Company: Great Van Roofing and Drainage Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 3, 2011
This firm's owner and two of its workers were working without any form of fall protection while stripping and re-sheathing a sloped roof about 4.5 to 6 m (15 to 20 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Super Strong Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $6,500
Date of penalty: March 2, 2011
This firm's worker suffered serious injuries after falling about 6 m (20 ft.) from the edge of an unguarded roof. The firm failed to ensure that the worker used fall protection as required. It also failed to provide the worker with adequate supervision. These were repeated violations.
Company: Bear Roof Care Ltd., Kelowna
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,169.28
Date of penalty: February 25, 2011
This firm's worker suffered serious injuries after falling about 3.5 m (12 ft.) from a sloped roof. The firm failed to ensure that its worker used fall protection as required, to train the worker in fall protection systems, and to provide young or new worker orientation and training.
Company: Bhandal Holdings Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $3,125
Date of penalty: February 24, 2011
This firm's workers removed asbestos-containing flooring and heating tape from a house that was being demolished without following the proper procedures. The firm failed to implement a site-specific exposure control plan to ensure that the hazardous materials were safely contained and removed. This was a repeated violation.
Company: 0793750 B.C. Ltd., Nanaimo
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 23, 2011
This firm failed to pass on information that was needed at a demolition worksite to identify and control hazards. The firm also allowed demolition work to begin before making available at the worksite the inspection results showing the locations of hazardous materials.
Company: Best Canadian Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 23, 2011
This firm's worker was working without any fall protection on a sloped roof about 4 m (13 ft.) above grade. This was a violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the instruction, information, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Harold David Gaucher, Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 23, 2011
This firm's worker sustained serious injuries after falling 3 m (10 ft.) from a roof, then striking another roof before falling another 6 m (20 ft.) onto a concrete basement floor. The firm failed to ensure that its worker used fall protection as required.
Company: Brian Wade Betker, Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 22, 2011
Three of this firm's workers were working without any form of fall protection on a sloped roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: David (Jordy) Johnson, Delta
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 22, 2011
This firm's supervisor and another worker were working without fall protection on a roof that at its peak was about 9 m (30 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: NJ Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: February 21, 2011
This firm's worker was not using any form of fall protection while working on a roof about 5 m (18 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Tejinder S. Kaler, Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 18, 2011
This firm failed to submit a written compliance report detailing the steps it was taking to address fall protection violations at its worksite.
Company: West Coast Drain Tile & Services Inc., Vancouver
Classification unit: Plumbing, heating, vent, residential air conditioning, or central vacuum system installation or repair
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 16, 2011
This firm failed to comply with a WorkSafeBC order requiring it to submit a written compliance report detailing the steps it was taking to address safety issues observed at its worksite. The firm's worker was in an excavation whose sides had not been adequately sloped or shored to make the excavation safe for entry.
Company: Juan Alberto Perez Gonzalez, Anmore
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: February 15, 2011
This firm's principal and a worker were exposed to the risk of falling about 11.5 m (38 ft.) while working on a wet, steep roof without using any form of fall protection. The firm failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system and to implement a written fall protection plan as required. It also failed to provide workers with the supervision and instruction necessary to ensure their safety. These were all repeated violations.
Company: 21st Century Roofers Ltd., Ladner
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $13,870
Date of penalty: February 10, 2011
Four of this firm's workers, including a supervisor, were exposed to falls of about 6 m (20 ft.) while working without fall protection on a sloped roof. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: J. Canadian Roofing Ltd., Delta
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 9, 2011
This firm's worker was working near the edge of a sloped roof about 6 m (19 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Bhagwant Dhaliwal, Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 9, 2011
This firm's owner and two of its workers were working on a sloped roof up to about 7 m (24 ft.) above grade without using fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the instruction, information, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their health and safety.
Company: A to Z Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 8, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were exposed to falls of about 6 to 7.5 m (20 to 25 ft.) while installing roofing felt on a sloped roof. The firm failed to ensure that the workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Trevor McDonald, Maple Ridge
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: February 7, 2011
Two of this firm's workers, one of whom was a supervisor, were exposed to the risk of falling about 6 m (20 ft.) while working on the roof of a house without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Gurpal Enterprises Limited, Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $6,289.65
Date of penalty: February 2, 2011
Three of this firm's workers were exposed to the risk of falling as much as 6.5 m (22 ft.) while working on the roof of a house without using any form of fall protection. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used fall protection as required. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Black & McDonald Ltd., Powell River
Classification unit: Plumbing, heating, vent, residential air conditioning, or central vacuum system installation or repair
Amount: $70,962.46
Date of penalty: January 28, 2011
Several of this firm's workers were assigned to erect a transmission tower within a new substation compound. The substation had been fenced off, and the work crew needed to lift the steel beams for the tower over the fence with a mobile crane. As one of the largest beams was being lifted over the fence, one of the two synthetic web lifting slings broke. One end of the 3,562-kilogram (7,853-pound) beam fell onto a young worker, inflicting crushing injuries. The firm failed to provide its workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their health and safety.
Company: SPC Holdings and Construction Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $14,442.10
Date of penalty: January 27, 2011
This firm's supervisor and another worker were working on a roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. A third worker, also without fall protection, was on the same roof, working about 9 m (30 ft.) above grade. These were repeated violations of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Katarinna Baxter, North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 27, 2011
Three of this employer's workers were installing roofing material on a sloped roof about 8.5 m (28 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: G.R. Roofing Ltd., Vanderhoof
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 25, 2011
As many as six of this firm's workers were working on a roof up to 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Krzysztof Tarapata, Vancouver
Classification unit: Painting or wallpapering
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 24, 2011
This firm failed to comply with a WorkSafeBC order requiring it to submit an accident investigation report containing all the relevant information. The order was issued after the firm's worker suffered a crushed thumb.
Company: Pattar Cedar Products Ltd., West Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $6,083.10
Date of penalty: January 20, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working on a sloped roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Danilo Sambol, White Rock
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,517.19
Date of penalty: January 20, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were installing floor sheeting on the third floor of a walk-up under construction, more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade, without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Harjit Singh Judge, Maple Ridge
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 19, 2011
This firm's principal and two of its workers were not using any form of fall protection while working on a roof about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Bhagwant Dhaliwal, Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 19, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working on a sloped roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Sona Development Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: January 19, 2011
As the prime contractor of a multiple-employer workplace, this firm failed to do everything reasonably practicable to establish and maintain a system or process to ensure compliance with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. It failed to make available on site a hazardous materials survey of a house before allowing it to be demolished. It then failed to ensure that any hazardous materials were safely contained and removed. In addition, the firm allowed work to start in an excavation before getting an engineer to confirm that the excavation was safe for entry.
Company: Triple A Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 18, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were at risk of falling more than 5.5 m (18 ft.) while applying roofing materials to the roof of a house. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: RG Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: January 17, 2011
One of this firm's workers was not using any form of fall protection while working on a sloped roof. He risked falling over 6.5 m (21 ft.) to grade. This firm's violation of the fall protection requirements occurred within three years of a similar violation for which a penalty was imposed. As a result, the basic penalty amount of $2,500 was doubled.
Company: 0732746 B.C. Ltd.,/Pro-Fit Structures (2007), Abbotsford
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $9,145.60
Date of penalty: January 17, 2011
This firm's worker sustained multiple broken bones after falling about 6.5 m (21 ft.) at a construction site. The worker wasn't using any form of fall protection while standing on top of a bundle of wooden trusses. When he cut the last of the metal bands holding the trusses together, the trusses kicked out, causing him to fall to the concrete floor below. The 11 trusses, each 36 feet long, also fell onto the concrete floor, narrowly missing the worker. The firm failed to ensure that its worker used fall protection as required.
Company: Jai Singh Grewal, Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 14, 2011
This employer and his worker were working on a roof about 6 m (19 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. Work was also allowed to proceed on part of the unguarded roof where workers risked falls of about 8 m (27 ft.). These were repeated violations of the fall protection requirements, including the requirement for a fall protection plan. In addition, an extension ladder at the worksite was being used unsafely. It was not secured and did not extend adequately beyond the roof edge. It was also set up on unstable gravel.
Company: KB Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 13, 2011
This firm's owner and one of its workers were stripping cedar shingles from a roof about 5.5 to 6 m (18 to 20 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Arbutus Environmental Services Ltd., Victoria
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $13,109.88
Date of penalty: January 12, 2011
This firm's rock truck operator was injured when he lost control of the truck while driving down an incline. A WorkSafeBC investigation found that the firm failed to ensure the health and safety of its worker. The truck driver had not been adequately instructed and trained in the safe use of the truck before being authorized to operate it. The firm also failed to ensure as required that the driver demonstrate competency in operating the truck to a qualified supervisor. In addition, the firm allowed the truck operator to drive the truck without the required air brake certification.
Company: Lenard Paul Randle & Brenda Ann Houle, Halfmoon Bay
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 11, 2011
One of this firm's workers was inside an excavation 6 m (20 ft.) deep, working close to its bank, which was almost vertical. The excavation had not been sloped or supported as specified by a professional engineer, or as required by the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. This was a high-risk violation of the excavation requirements.
Company: Pro Construction Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $9,753.45
Date of penalty: January 10, 2011
One of this firm's workers was working more than 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade on the roof of a house under construction without using any form of fall protection. In addition, guardrails had not been installed in an area accessible to workers on the first and second levels of the house where workers could fall 1.2 m (4 ft.) or more. These were repeated violations of the fall protection requirements as well as the guardrail requirements for construction sites.
Company: High Ridge Ventures Ltd., Pitt Meadows
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $9,476.68
Date of penalty: January 10, 2011
Two of this firm's workers were working more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade on the roof of an aircraft hangar under construction without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Nijjer Homes Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 7, 2011
This firm's principal and four of its workers were working near a floor opening on the main level of a house under construction. The opening wasn't guarded or covered as required so the workers risked falls of almost 3 m (9 ft.) to the floor below. In addition, several of the firm's workers were not wearing safety glasses as required while using pneumatic nail guns. These were all repeated violations.
Company: Ben Jonathan Hansford, Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $10,430.60
Date of penalty: January 6, 2011
Several of this firm's workers risked falls of between 3 and 6 m (10 and 20 ft.) while working on the roof of a two-storey building. Although they were wearing fall protection harnesses, they were not attached to lifelines. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used a fall protection system as required. This was a repeated violation. The firm also failed to provide its workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Skylite Building Maintenance Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 6, 2011
This firm failed to comply with a WorkSafeBC order requiring it to submit a written compliance report detailing the steps it was taking to address safety issues observed at its worksite.
Company: Roy Dennis Roofing (2005) Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $28,500.68
Date of penalty: January 5, 2011
Two of this firm's workers risked falls of about 4.6 m (15 ft.) while working on the roof of a two-storey building. Although they were wearing fall protection harnesses, they weren't attached to lifelines. The firm failed to ensure that its workers used a fall protection system as required.
Company: Norris Rodney Laitinen & Talena Ellen Jensen, Kamloops
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: January 4, 2011
One of this firm's partners and two of its workers were working on a roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of fall protection requirements.
Construction - Penalties for 2010
Penalties for 2010 in Date Order
Company: Jaspal Singh Channa, North Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: December 31, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were framing the eaves of a sloped roof without using any form of fall protection. One of the workers was working near the roof's edge about 6.5 m (21 ft.) above grade, while the other was working from an unguarded deck about 4.5 m (15 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Michelle Elizabeth Gohn, Grand Forks
Classification unit: Traffic control
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 31, 2010
This firm's worker suffered multiple fractures after the trailer of a commercial vehicle struck and then dragged him 100 m (328 ft.) down a highway. A WorkSafeBC investigation found that the firm assigned the injured worker as well as another worker to traffic control duties without ensuring that they were adequately trained for a high-risk traffic control operation to guide traffic through a two-way road temporarily reduced to one lane. This was a repeated violation of the requirement to train traffic control persons in a manner acceptable to WorkSafeBC.
Company: Berto Contractors Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $11,229.40
Date of penalty: December 30, 2010
This firm's workers were working in an excavation about 2 m (6 ft.) deep. The excavation's sides had not been sloped or shored as specified by an engineer or as required by the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. This was a repeated violation.
Company: LNB Construction Inc., Logan Lake
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $42,236.80
Date of penalty: December 29, 2010
This firm's foreman entered an unsafe excavation between 1.5 and 3.5 m (5 and 12 ft.) deep to repair a water line. The excavation's sides had not been adequately sloped or shored, and there was no safe means of entering or exiting the excavation.
Company: Jagtar Singh Kahlon, Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 23, 2010
This firm's principal and two of its workers risked falls of about 9 m (30 ft.) while working on the sloped roof of a house. They were wearing fall protection harnesses but were not connected to lifelines. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Cei Industries Ltd., Campbell River
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,373.50
Date of penalty: December 23, 2010
This firm allowed work to continue on a building constructed of structural steel that was within the limits of approach of live high-voltage power lines. This was a violation of the requirement to maintain the minimum applicable distance between workers and live high-voltage equipment and conductors.
Company: AP Stucco Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Plastering, lathing, or stucco work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 23, 2010
This firm's worker was standing on a job-built scaffold about 5 m (17 ft.) above the bottom of a concrete stairwell without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Ryan Tubbs & Debora Douglas, Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 21, 2010
This firm failed to comply with a WorkSafeBC order requiring it to submit a written fall protection plan for its workplace.
Company: Harman Painting Co. Ltd., Prince George
Classification unit: Plastering, lathing, or stucco work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 21, 2010
This firm's workers risked falls of up to about 6 m (19 ft.) while working on wood frame scaffolding without using any form of fall protection. In addition, the wood frame scaffolding on site had multiple deficiencies. For example, it contained defective lumber, did not have guardrails, and its platforms were not as wide as required. These were repeated high-risk violations of the fall protection requirements as well as the design requirements for scaffolds.
Company: AM Roofing Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 20, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were not using any form of fall protection while applying roofing materials on a steep roof. They risked falling more than 3 m (10 ft.) to grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Red Horse Roofing Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 20, 2010
This firm's co-principal was working on a roof 4 m (13 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: L&M Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: December 20, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were landing roofing material on a roof about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Great West Coast Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $23,958.14
Date of penalty: December 14, 2010
One of this firm's workers was working on a sloped roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. At a later date, five of the firm's workers were working on a sloped roof up to about 7 m (24 ft.) above grade. They were wearing fall protection harnesses but were not connected to lifelines. These were repeated violations of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Suntan-Stone Construction Ltd., West Vancouver
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 10, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade on the roof of a house under construction. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Tejinder S. Kaler, Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: December 8, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were installing roofing material on a roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Uppal Plastering & Stucco Ltd., Prince George
Classification unit: Plastering, lathing, or stucco work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 8, 2010
This firm's worker was standing about 6.5 m (21 ft.) above grade on a wood frame scaffold at a house under construction. He was not using any form of fall protection. In addition, the wood frame scaffolding on site had multiple deficiencies, posing a high risk of injury to workers. For example, it contained defective lumber, did not have guardrails, and its platforms were not as wide as required. These were repeated violations of the fall protection requirements as well as the design requirements for scaffolds.
Company: Joe's Contracting Inc., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $6,257.80
Date of penalty: December 8, 2010
This firm principal and two of its workers were installing plywood on a sloped roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Vanco Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 8, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were installing roofing material on a sloped roof about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: SB Framing Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 8, 2010
This firm's workers were framing walls on the second level of a house under construction. An incorrectly built ladder was the only way for workers to get to this upper level. This was a repeated violation of the requirements to install stairs to each floor before building the next one.
Company: A1 Valley Roofing Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 3, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were working on a sloped roof about 7.5 m (20 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Ontop Roofing Ltd., Maple Ridge
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,415.05
Date of penalty: December 2, 2010
This firm's worker was working on an unguarded roof about 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade. He was wearing a fall protection harness but was not connected to a lifeline. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: DN Framing Limited, Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 2, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were installing plywood sheathing on a roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements. The firm also failed to comply with a WorkSafeBC order requiring it to submit a written compliance report detailing the steps it was taking to address safety issues observed at its worksite.
Company: Sidhu Concrete Pumping Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Concrete pumping
Amount: $4,974.23
Date of penalty: December 1, 2010
This firm failed to ensure that a concrete pump truck was set up as required. One of the truck's outriggers was not set up on level, stable ground, and the boards placed under the outriggers to stabilize the pump truck were too small. This was a repeated violation of the requirement to follow the manufacturer's specifications for setting up outriggers.
Company: Tanu Siding Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $2,664.30
Date of penalty: November 30, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were installing exterior siding while standing on a steep roof. They were not using any form of fall protection, and risked falling about 3 to 6 m (11 to 20 ft.) to grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Westec Framing Ltd., Delta
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 29, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were installing trusses while standing about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade on top of a wall under construction. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Rai Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: November 29, 2010
This firm's principal and four of its workers were installing roofing material on a sloped roof 3.5 m (12 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Rai Roofing Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: November 29, 2010
This firm's principal and five of its workers were working on a sloped roof between 5.5 and 7 m (18 and 24 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Peter Kiewit Infrastructure Co., Richmond
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $75,000
Date of penalty: November 25, 2010
Workers did not have access to a certified first aid attendant when a propane explosion occurred at a remote construction camp. As the prime contractor at a multiple-employer worksite, this firm failed to ensure that the required first aid services were available and coordinated. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Williams Roofing & Drainage Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $7,305.28
Date of penalty: November 25, 2010
Three of this firm's workers, including the site supervisor, were working near the edge of a roof about 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: C.B.S. Constructions Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $3,403.45
Date of penalty: November 23, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were installing trusses on a house under construction, about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade, without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: New World Roofing Ltd., West Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $4,979.50
Date of penalty: November 23, 2010
Four of this firm's workers, including a supervisor, were working on a roof about 6.5 m (22 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Permanent Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,552.45
Date of penalty: November 22, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working on a sloped roof up to about 7 m (24 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: RMG Siding & Roofing Ltd., Trail
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 22, 2010
This firm's worker was working on a roof up to about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: McPherson Construction Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $8,420.15
Date of penalty: November 22, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working between about 4 and 6 m (14 and 19 ft.) above grade, assembling the first floor walls of a house under construction, without using any form of fall protection. The firm failed to ensure that guardrails were installed where practicable to protect workers from fall hazards. It also failed to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety. These were repeated violations.
Company: Amarsingh Builders Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 18, 2010
This firm's principal and several of its workers were installing guardrails more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade on the third storey of a building under construction. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Interior Roads Ltd., Bella Coola
Classification unit: Highway maintenance
Amount: $73,305.41
Date of penalty: November 16, 2010
A faller was fatally injured at this multiple-employer workplace when he was struck by a leaning alder tree that split vertically (barberchaired) while he was falling it. Violations occurred at this workplace relating to the falling activity, first aid requirements, and supervision and instruction. As the prime contractor, this firm failed to do everything reasonably practicable to establish and maintain a system or process to ensure compliance with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation with respect to the workplace.
Company: Bryan-Yayaatulayc Excavating Ltd., Hagensborg
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 16, 2010
This firm's worker was fatally injured when he was struck by a leaning alder tree that split vertically (barberchaired) while he was falling it. The firm did not ensure that the worker was capable of safely performing his work according to the BC Faller Training Standard. The worker used incorrect falling techniques, which increased the risk of the tree splitting. There were no written safe work procedures for falling and bucking, for establishing minimum distances between workers, or for using mechanical assistance to fall the trees. Another worker was not clear of the area within a two tree-length radius of the tree that split. The firm failed to provide adequate instruction and supervision at this workplace. The firm also failed to ensure that a preliminary inspection of the workplace to identify hazards associated with falling trees close to energized high-voltage lines was conducted.
Company: Big Sky North Holdings Ltd., Williams Lake
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $6,597.65
Date of penalty: November 15, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were installing gutters on a house while standing on a work platform more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Accurate Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $12,212.17
Date of penalty: November 10, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working on a 12:12 sloped roof between about 4 m (13 ft.) and 6.5 m (22 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Canada Scaffold Supply Co. Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Scaffolding, tent, staging, or display booth rental and installation
Amount: $49,824.62
Date of penalty: November 9, 2010
This firm's worker suffered serious injuries after falling about 4 m (14 ft.) when a platform of the scaffold he was standing on gave way. One of the platform hooks had failed. The firm failed to adequately inspect and maintain the scaffold to ensure that it was safe to use. In addition, the scaffold was not assembled according to safe work procedures to ensure that all its components were properly secured. The firm failed to ensure the health and safety of all the workers at the site where its work was being done. These were all repeated violations.
Company: Sean O'Flynn, Quesnel
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $1,000
Date of penalty: November 9, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were installing shingles on a roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: H. Paras Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: November 5, 2010
Four of this firm's workers were working on a sloped roof between about 3.5 and 7 m (12 and 24 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. A ladder at the firm's construction site did not extend the required length above the roof edge to ensure safety. The ladder was also not secured as required to ensure stability. The firm failed to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety. These were all repeated violations. In addition, two of the firm's workers were not wearing any personal protective equipment when creating clouds of silica dust by cutting concrete roofing tiles with circular saws.
Company: All World Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: November 5, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working on a roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. They were wearing fall protection harnesses but were not attached to lifelines. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: H. Paras Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: November 5, 2010
Three of this firm's workers, including the principal, were working on a roof between about 3.5 and 5 m (12 and 16 ft.). They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Manny Construction Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 3, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were working on roof trusses about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Falcon Framing Co. Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,665
Date of penalty: November 3, 2010
This firm's worker was installing roof trusses while standing on top of a wall under construction about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Chisholm Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $8,711.25
Date of penalty: November 1, 2010
Three of this firm's workers, including a supervisor, were working near the unguarded edge of a sloped roof about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade. They were wearing fall protection harnesses but were not attached to lifelines. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements, including the requirement for a site-specific fall protection plan.
Company: Onkar Framing & Construction Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $4,154.53
Date of penalty: October 28, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were standing about 2.5 m (8 ft.) above grade on the top of interior walls under construction. This was a repeated violation of the requirement for work platforms to be at least 50 cm (20 in.) wide. In another repeated violation this firm also failed to provide a first aid attendant with a valid certificate at its construction site.
Company: Bhagwant Dhaliwal, Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: October 20, 2010
This firm's principal was working on a sloped roof about 8 m (27 ft.) above grade without using any fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Prince Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: October 18, 2010
Four of this firm's workers, including the site supervisor, were working on a sloped roof between 4.5 m (15 ft.) and 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without using fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: G & K Excavation and Demolition Services Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: October 15, 2010
This firm failed to ensure that asbestos-containing materials identified in the worksite's hazardous materials survey was safely removed from the worksite.
Company: Tony Le, Vancouver
Classification unit: Plastering, lathing, or stucco work
Amount: $8,847.33
Date of penalty: October 14, 2010
After being ordered to do so, this employer failed to submit a compliance report detailing the steps taken to comply with orders issued for safety violations.
Company: Gus Van Loenen, Coquitlam
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: October 1, 2010
This employer failed to comply with an order requiring it to submit a written compliance report detailing the steps it was taking to address safety issues observed at its worksite.
Company: BCRS Road Safe Inc., Delta
Classification unit: Traffic control
Amount: $14,912.18
Date of penalty: October 1, 2010
This firm's owner failed to cooperate with a WorkSafeBC officer who was attempting to inspect the firm's job site. This was a violation of the requirement to cooperate with WorkSafeBC officers carrying out their duties under the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation.
Company: A1-BTI Roofing Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,675.53
Date of penalty: September 29, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were working on a sloped roof over 9 m (30 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements, including the requirement for a fall protection plan.
Company: Brar Brothers Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 28, 2010
This firm's owner and one of its workers were installing roofing material on a sloped roof more than 6.5 m (22 ft.) above grade without using fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: J.G. Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 28, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were working on a roof more than 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements, including the requirement for a fall protection plan.
Company: Shane McCann Contracting Ltd., Quesnel
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $5,913.05
Date of penalty: September 28, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were working about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade on a house under construction. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Northwood Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,639.65
Date of penalty: September 27, 2010
Four of this firm's young workers were working on a sloped roof at least 3 m (10 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Delphina Enterprises Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $4,200.48
Date of penalty: September 24, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were working on a sloped roof between 4 and 6 m (14 and 20 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. An extension ladder at the firm's worksite did not meet the safety and stability requirements. The firm also failed to provide workers with the information, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety. These were all repeated violations.
Company: Don S. Dewar / Pacific Framing, Coquitlam
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 22, 2010
This firm's principal was working about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade on a house under construction without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games / VANOC, West Vancouver
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $75,000
Date of penalty: September 20, 2010
Workers at this firm's worksite climbed onto work platforms up to 14.5 m (48 ft.) above grade using the vertical poles of a scaffold. Suitable ladders were not provided. As the prime contractor of a multiple-employer workplace, the firm failed to coordinate the health and safety activities of employers, workers, and others at the workplace, and it failed to establish and maintain a system at the workplace that would ensure compliance with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Joandon Construction Inc., Nanaimo
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $4,756.75
Date of penalty: September 16, 2010
This firm's workers were working on a roof over 3 m (10 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. In addition, a ladder used at the worksite had been set up inside a dumpster in violation of the safety requirements. This firm failed to ensure the health and safety of its workers. These were repeated violations.
Company: J & J Framing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 10, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were working on a house under construction without using fall protection. One of the workers was standing on narrow lumber top plates 3 m (10 ft.) above grade, while the other two workers were standing on narrow lumber top plates about 6 m (19 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Ben Jonathan Hansford / BTR Roofing, Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,215.30
Date of penalty: September 9, 2010
This firm's owner and four of its workers were working on a sloped roof about 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Guy Morrall / Guy Morrall Enterprises, Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 8, 2010
This firm's principal failed to cooperate with a WorkSafeBC officer who was attempting to inspect the firm's job site. This was a violation of the requirement to cooperate with WorkSafeBC officers carrying out their duties under the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation.
Company: All Kind Roofing Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 8, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were installing roofing shingles on a roof about 5.5 to 6 m (18 to 20 ft.) above grade without using fall protection. The firm failed to provide a fall protection plan and supervision as required by the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. These were repeated violations.
Company: New Tech Framing Ltd., Delta
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 8, 2010
This firm's president and one of its workers were working on a sloped roof about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: B.Q.R. Systems Ltd., / Best Quality Roofing, Port Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $22,622.40
Date of penalty: September 8, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were removing shingles from a roof about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Nystar Developments Corporation, Vancouver
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 8, 2010
Ten of this firm's workers were removing asbestos-containing materials from a demolition site without following the proper procedures and without using appropriate personal protective equipment. The firm failed to ensure that the asbestos-containing materials identified in the worksite's hazardous materials survey were safely contained and removed.
Company: RG Roofing Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 7, 2010
This firm's worker was working on a roof about 4 m (14 ft.) above grade. He was not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Tejinder S. Kaler, Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 2, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were working on a sloped roof about 3.5 m (12 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Shaan Construction Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $4,823.10
Date of penalty: August 27, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were working on a roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. Two days later, two of the firm's workers were again found working at heights about 6 to 7.5 m (20 to 25 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. These were both high-risk violations of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Shaan Construction Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $3,231.75
Date of penalty: August 27, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: MDM Roofing Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: August 25, 2010
One of this firm's principals and three of its workers were removing roofing material from a sloped roof at least 4 m (14 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Arnold & Sons Roofing Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $13,145.66
Date of penalty: August 24, 2010
This firm's worker was working on a sloped roof about 3.5 to 4 m (12 to 14 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Penfolds Roofing Inc., West Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $145,046.98
Date of penalty: August 24, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working on a roof between 4.5 m (15 ft.) and 6 m (19 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: NJ Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: August 23, 2010
This firm's supervisor and two of its workers were working on a roof with a slope of 7:12. The supervisor was about 7 m (23 ft.) above grade while the workers were about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade. The workers were wearing fall protection harnesses, but the harnesses were not connected to lifelines or anchor points. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Great West Coast Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $3,806.45
Date of penalty: August 23, 2010
Three of this firm's workers, including a supervisor, were installing shingles on a wet and slippery roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Great West Coast Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $3,105.66
Date of penalty: August 23, 2010
Four of this firm's workers were working about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade on the roof of a house. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Diamond Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 20, 2010
This firm's owner and two of its workers were working on a roof about 5 m (16 ft.) or more above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Zenith Roofing Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $15,000
Date of penalty: August 18, 2010
This firm's worker was installing roofing material on a sloped roof between about 3.5 and 4.8 m (11 and 16 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Great Van Roofing and Drainage Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 18, 2010
Four of this firm's workers were installing roofing material on a roof between about 3.5 and 4 m (11 and 13 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Stewart Arnold Newstead, Quesnel
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: August 13, 2010
This firm's owner and two of its workers were replacing shingles on a roof about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade. They were not using adequate fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Stewart Arnold Newstead, Quesnel
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: August 13, 2010
This firm's owner and two of its workers refused to come down from the roof of a house as directed by a WorkSafeBC officer. This was a repeated violation of the requirement to cooperate with WorkSafeBC officers who were trying to inspect the workplace.
Company: Billkang Investment Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 12, 2010
This firm failed to comply with a WorkSafeBC order to stop work by allowing workers to remove asbestos-containing material from the workplace subject to the stop work order.
Company: 0748983 BC Ltd., Westbank
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 11, 2010
A young worker for this firm fell about 7 m (22.5 ft.) and suffered multiple fractures when a guardrail on a third-storey balcony failed. The firm failed to ensure that its workers were protected with a fall protection system when guardrails were removed to accommodate work.
Company: Broadway Roofing Company Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $33,560.38
Date of penalty: July 27, 2010
At least two of this firm's workers were working without any form of fall protection on the sloped roof of a house where they risked falls of up to about 7 m (24 ft.). This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Broadway Roofing Company Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $33,560.38
Date of penalty: July 27, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were stripping shingles from the sloped roof of a house about 5.5 to 6 m (18 to 20 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Theodore Hermus, North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,937.58
Date of penalty: July 22, 2010
This firm's worker was installing roofing paper on a roof about 4 m (14 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: 688682 BC Ltd., 688689 BC Ltd., 688685 BC Ltd., & 1100719 Alberta Inc., Kelowna
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $54,160.34
Date of penalty: July 21, 2010
As the prime contractor of a multiple-employer workplace, this firm failed to coordinate the health and safety activities of employers, workers, and others at the workplace, and it failed to establish and maintain a system at the workplace that would ensure compliance with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. It failed to provide the workplace supervisor with the information and training required to oversee subcontractors. As a result of the firm's failure to locate underground utilities, an excavator damaged an electrical cable.
Company: Prime Framing and Forming Ltd., Kamloops
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $18,012.34
Date of penalty: July 20, 2010
This firm's owner and one of its workers were standing near a roof edge over 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Trevor Lee Gladish, Naramata
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 15, 2010
Four of this firm's workers were not using any form of fall protection while working on a roof between 3 and 7.5 m (10 and 25 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Dosanjh Construction Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $7,660.65
Date of penalty: July 15, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were not using any form of fall protection while framing a porch roof about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Dial-A-Roof Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $4,469.30
Date of penalty: July 14, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection between about 6 and 7.5 m (20 and 25 ft.) above grade on the roof of an apartment building. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: William G. Van Oort, Agassiz
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 13, 2010
This firm's owner and one of its workers were working without fall protection on the roof of a townhouse about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. In addition, four of the firm's workers were using nail guns without wearing safety eyewear even though safety glasses were available on site. These were repeated violations of the fall protection and safety eyewear requirements.
Company: Gold Star Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 12, 2010
This firm's owner and one of its workers were waterproofing a sloped roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Daniel Joseph Dawson Cardinal, Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 12, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working near the edge of a sloped roof about 11 m (36 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Lee Andrew Huffman, Abbotsford
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: July 12, 2010
This firm's worker suffered serious injuries when he fell about 5 m (17 ft.) from a pitched roof to the ground. He was not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Only Best Framing Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $3,687.83
Date of penalty: July 9, 2010
This firm's worker was working without fall protection on a roof about 4 m (14 ft.) above grade even though fall protection equipment was available on site. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Birdi Construction Ltd., Aldergrove
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $3,073.68
Date of penalty: July 8, 2010
This firm's supervisor was working without any form of fall protection from a house under construction about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade. Later that same day, the firm's supervisor was again found working without any form of fall protection on an improperly constructed wood frame scaffold about 4 m (14 ft.) above grade. These were repeated violations of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Birdi Construction Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,758.65
Date of penalty: July 8, 2010
This firm's owner was sheathing a wet sloped roof 5 m (17 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: S.M. Roofing B.C. Ltd., West Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,729.48
Date of penalty: July 8, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were stripping a roof about 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection even though fall protection was available on site. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Vincent Edmond Harriott, Burnaby
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $20,579.77
Date of penalty: July 8, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade on the third-level decks of a multi-unit residence under construction. One deck had incomplete guardrails, while another had no guardrails. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Icon Homes Ltd., Quesnel
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $10,045.45
Date of penalty: July 8, 2010
This employer's worker was in an excavation about 3.5 m (11 ft.) deep. After the worker got out, the side of the trench where the worker had been standing caved in. The employer failed to ensure that the excavation sides were adequately sloped or supported as required.
Company: Eugene Albert Beck, Burnaby
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $15,011.86
Date of penalty: July 7, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working near the unguarded edge of a work platform about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Mega Cranes Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Crane operation
Amount: $9,143.06
Date of penalty: July 5, 2010
This firm supplied a tower crane that had several deficiencies, including improperly secured access ladders. This was a repeated violation of the requirement to ensure that the crane was set up according to the manufacturer's instructions.
Company: Atwal's Enterprises Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $10,533.25
Date of penalty: July 2, 2010
Four of this firm's workers were working without any form of fall protection on a roof between about 5.5 and 7.5 m (18 and 25 ft.) above grade. The firm's owner was on the ground at the time and could see the workers. There was also no written fall protection plan for this workplace. These were repeated violations of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Seabee Construction & Engineering Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $9,302.68
Date of penalty: June 30, 2010
This firm repeatedly refused to cooperate with WorkSafeBC officers who were attempting to inspect the firm's workplace.
Company: JR Roofing Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: June 29, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on an unguarded roof about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Macbeth Bros. Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $4,700.05
Date of penalty: June 28, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working without any form of fall protection on a roof up to about 8 m (27 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements, including the requirement for a fall protection plan.
Company: Action Roofing Ltd., Maple Ridge
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $9,746.30
Date of penalty: June 23, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were installing roofing material on a roof deck about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Peace Enterprises Ltd., Fort St. John
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $5,102.84
Date of penalty: June 17, 2010
As the prime contractor of a multiple-employer workplace, this firm failed to coordinate the health and safety activities of employers, workers, and others at the workplace, and it failed to establish and maintain a system at the workplace that would ensure compliance with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation.
Company: Samra Bros. Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $30,036.49
Date of penalty: June 17, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were installing new shingles on a roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. They were not using adequate fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: RWB Industries Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,647.96
Date of penalty: June 14, 2010
A worker was working without fall protection more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade on the roof of a building under construction. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: DC Roofing Inc., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $41,238.25
Date of penalty: June 9, 2010
This firm's worker was working on a steep roof about 10.5 m (35 ft.) above grade. He was wearing a harness but was not tied off to a lifeline or anchor. At a different worksite about two months after this violation, five of the firm's workers were observed without fall protection at heights from 3 to 9 m (10 to 30 ft.) above grade. These were repeated high-risk violations of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Tessco Inc., Kelowna
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $19,457.57
Date of penalty: June 8, 2010
Several of this firm's young workers were working at heights over 3 m (10 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety. Hoses, electrical cords, and waste material with exposed nails also presented tripping hazards throughout the worksite.
Company: Can-Tech Roofing Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $13,318.45
Date of penalty: June 8, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were installing shingles on a sloped roof about 3.5 m (11 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Tessco Inc., Kelowna
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $17,688.70
Date of penalty: June 8, 2010
As the prime contractor of a multiple-employer workplace, this firm failed to coordinate the health and safety activities of employers, workers, and others at the workplace, and it failed to establish and maintain a system at the workplace that would ensure compliance with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. The firm also failed to ensure that a contractor complied with the fall protection requirements.
Company: Whonnock Roofing Ltd., Pitt Meadows
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $12,860
Date of penalty: June 7, 2010
Eight of this firm's workers were working up to 10 m (34 ft.) above grade on the roof of a three-storey house. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety. The firm also failed to ensure the stability of a ladder used to access the roof.
Company: Lumbers MacMillan & Sons Contracting Ltd., Campbell River
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $11,797.26
Date of penalty: June 7, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were working without any form of fall protection on a roof over 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements, including the requirement to provide a fall protection plan. In addition, several of the firm's workers were in an excavation whose sides were not sloped or supported as required.
Company: Nu-Touch Stucco Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Plastering, lathing, or stucco work
Amount: $2,591.75
Date of penalty: June 4, 2010
This firm's president and one of its workers were standing about 3 m (9 ft.) above grade on a single-plank scaffold that was less than 50 cm (20 in.) wide. This was a repeated violation of the requirement for scaffold platforms to be at least 50 cm (20 in.) wide.
Company: Regan Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $18,307.63
Date of penalty: June 3, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working up to 7 m (24 ft.) above grade on the roof of a house without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Darrell Dean Warner, Campbell River
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: June 1, 2010
Six of this firm's workers, including a supervisor, were working on a roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: L&M Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: June 1, 2010
This firm's worker was working on a roof 8.5 m (28 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements. The firm also failed to provide workers with a safe means of accessing the roof and failed to provide a written fall protection plan for the worksite.
Company: John Kenneth Sutton, Chase
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: May 31, 2010
A worker suffered fatal injuries when he fell about 6 m (20 ft.) to the ground from the edge of an unguarded roof. He was not using any form of fall protection. This firm failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. It failed to provide the worker with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure his safety.
Company: Productive Construction Ltd., New Westminster
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $83,570.62
Date of penalty: May 31, 2010
This firm's worker was fatally injured at a construction site while setting up the temporary framework (falsework) for a concrete pour. The firm failed to ensure that the falsework was braced and used according to the manufacturer's instructions. As a result, the falsework collapsed, and several sheets of plywood that had been stacked on top of it fell and struck the worker. The firm failed to ensure that the falsework was capable of withstanding the weight of the plywood. The firm also failed to provide its workers with adequate information, instruction, training, and supervision to ensure their safety for installing falsework.
Company: Satnam Construction Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $8,436.55
Date of penalty: May 28, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were working on a wet roof about 7 m (24 ft.) above grade without using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Arthur Moore / AM Environmental, Surrey
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: May 27, 2010
This firm failed to cooperate with WorkSafeBC officers to provide them with information as requested. It has also failed to comply with WorkSafeBC orders.
Company: Proline Roofing Ltd. / Proline Gutters, View Royal
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $28,655.35
Date of penalty: May 25, 2010
Four of this firm's workers, including a supervisor, were working about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade on the roof of a house. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Ruskin Construction Ltd., Prince George
Classification unit: Bridge, overpass, or viaduct construction or repair
Amount: $33,855.05
Date of penalty: May 17, 2010
This firm's workers were using an excavator to lower a 12-m (40-ft.) bridge section into place over a creek. The bridge section had not been properly restrained, and one of the ineffective restraining devices broke. As a result, the bridge section shifted and pinned a worker's leg against the excavator's track, inflicting serious injuries. The firm failed to inform and instruct workers on the use of an appropriate and safe restrain system to prevent the bridge from moving.
Company: George U. Fehr / George Fehr Contracting and Sales, Vanderhoof
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: May 12, 2010
This firm's owner and two of its workers were working at least 3 m (11 ft.) above grade on the roof of a house under construction. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: New-Age Roofing Co. Ltd., Kamloops
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: May 12, 2010
Six of this firm's workers, including a supervisor, were working on a steep-sloped roof up to about 15 m (50 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. The firm failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated high-risk violation.
Company: Madge Contracting Ltd., Kelowna
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $10,988.88
Date of penalty: May 12, 2010
A worker slipped on a snow-covered roof and fell more than 9 m (30 ft.) to the ground, suffering serious injuries. This firm failed to ensure the worker's health and safety. It failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. It failed to provide a written fall protection plan for work done where workers, not protected by permanent guardrails, could fall more than 7.5 m (25 ft.). And it failed to ensure the use of toe-holds as required on steep roofs.
Company: New World Framing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $3,008.23
Date of penalty: May 7, 2010
This firm's workers were working at heights more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: 0800312 B.C. Ltd. / X-Treme Roofing, North Delta
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $9,581.48
Date of penalty: May 6, 2010
Five of this firm's workers were working on a steep-sloped roof up to about 7 m (23 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety. The firm also repeatedly failed to secure extension ladders that workers were using to access the roof.
Company: Dan-Ex Contracting Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $13,578.65
Date of penalty: May 4, 2010
Two workers were in an excavation that was about 2.5 m (8 ft.) deep. Their employer failed to ensure that the excavation sides were adequately sloped or supported as required. This was a repeated violation of the excavation requirements.
Company: W.A. Allen Custom Contracting Ltd., Qualicum Beach
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: April 21, 2010
This employer failed to ensure the health and safety of its workers. One of its workers was working without fall protection on a roof about 6.5 m (22 ft.) above grade. Another worker was not wearing safety headgear and footwear while exposed to such risks as falling objects and puncture injuries. The employer also failed to provide first aid attendants and adequate first aid equipment. These were repeated violations.
Company: W.A. Allen Custom Contracting Ltd., Parksville
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: April 21, 2010
As the prime contractor of a multiple-employer workplace, this firm failed to coordinate the health and safety activities of employers, workers, and others at the workplace, and it failed to establish and maintain a system at the workplace that would ensure compliance with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. The firm also failed to establish and maintain an adequate first aid regime. These were repeated violations.
Company: SID Aluminum Building Products Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $6,063.75
Date of penalty: April 21, 2010
This firm's worker was installing siding onto a building from a boom-supported lift. The worker was not wearing a fall protection harness tied off to the lift, even though a harness was available on site. This was a repeated violation of the requirement to wear a personal fall arrest system secured to an anchorage point while working from a self-elevating platform.
Company: Mattu Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 20, 2010
This firm's owner and three of its workers were stripping roofing material from a roof more than 4.5 m (15 ft.) above grade. There were no guardrails on the roof, and the workers were not using any personal fall protection equipment. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Bergevin Electrical Contracting Nelson Ltd., Nelson
Classification unit: Electrical work
Amount: $9,812.65
Date of penalty: April 19, 2010
This firm's owner suffered serious burns from an electrical flash while working on an energized electrical panel. This was a high-risk violation of the requirement to completely disconnect and lock out electrical equipment before working on it.
Company: Norris Rodney Laitinen & Talena Ellen Jensen / Black Sun Contracting, Merritt
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 16, 2010
This firm's two owners and three of its workers were working on a roof about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Empire Roofing Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $24,793.86
Date of penalty: April 15, 2010
This firm's worker was walking across the ridge of a sloped roof more than 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade without using any form of personal fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Dominion Roofing Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $15,000
Date of penalty: April 14, 2010
This firm's owner and three of its workers were working more than 3.5 m (12 ft.) above grade on the roof of a house. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Dominion Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $15,000
Date of penalty: April 14, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working on a roof about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Island View Construction Ltd., Colwood
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $3,512.32
Date of penalty: April 14, 2010
This firm's worker was installing siding from an unguarded platform about 6 m (20 ft.) above uneven, rocky ground. In addition, the worker was not using any personal fall protection, even though such equipment was available on site. This firm failed to meet the fall protection requirements, exposing its worker to a high risk of falling.
Company: Arthur Moore / A.M. Environmental, Delta
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 12, 2010
The written hazardous materials assessment prepared by this employer for the demolition of a house contained numerous deficiencies. The employer subsequently failed to comply with multiple WorkSafeBC requests for additional documentation to support the results in that assessment.
Company: Nanak Construction & Framing Ltd., Maple Ridge
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $5,136.60
Date of penalty: April 12, 2010
This employer's worker was working on a house under construction about 9 m (30 ft.) above grade without using any form of personal fall protection. The employer was on site at the time. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Riccardo John Divilio, Maple Ridge
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 9, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were working about 5 m (17 ft.) above grade while not using any form of personal fall protection. The firm's owner was working directly below these workers. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Bahia Roofing Ltd., Maple Ridge
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 9, 2010
This firm's owner and four of its workers were working on a sloped roof between 2.7 and 4.6 m (9 and 15 ft.) above grade without any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety at the workplace.
Company: A-1 Quality Stucco Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Plastering, lathing, or stucco work
Amount: $6,468.08
Date of penalty: April 8, 2010
This employer failed to ensure that its wood frame scaffolds were designed and installed according to the required standard. After a first inspection, the employer was instructed to make the necessary improvements to the scaffolds. However, a second inspection revealed that the employer's workers continued to use the unsafe scaffolding, risking falls from 3 m (10 ft.) or more above grade.
Company: 0701115 BC Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 7, 2010
As the prime contractor of a multiple-employer workplace, this firm failed to coordinate the health and safety activities of employers, workers, and others at the workplace, and it failed to establish and maintain a system at the workplace that would ensure compliance with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. It also failed to ensure that there were enough first aid attendants available on site and that its workers were wearing high visibility apparel while working around mobile equipment. These were repeated violations.
Company: Mann Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 30, 2010
This firm's owner and one of its workers were working about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade on the 16:12 sloped roof of a two-storey house. They were not using any form of personal fall protection even though the required equipment was available on site. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Tory Allen Charlton, Terrace
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 30, 2010
Four of this firm's workers were on the roof of a house more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Lee Andrew Huffman, Port Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: March 29, 2010
This firm's worker was on a 7:12 sloped roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. The unsupervised worker was not using any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide its workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety at the workplace.
Company: 228100 B.C. Ltd., Quesnel
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 24, 2010
This firm's worker was not wearing a seat belt while operating a bulldozer near the edge of an excavation. This was a repeated violation of the requirement to wear the seat belts on mobile equipment. In addition, the bulldozer's seat belt was difficult to access because it was jammed under the seat. This was also a repeated violation of the requirement to inspect mobile equipment for safety before operating it.
Company: Shoa Organizations Services Ltd., Nanaimo
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 23, 2010
As the prime contractor of a multiple-employer workplace, this firm failed to coordinate the activities of employers, workers, and others to ensure health and safety. It also failed to ensure regular workplace inspections to prevent unsafe conditions from developing. Tripping hazards, exposed nails, job-built ladders that did not meet the safety requirements, and missing guardrails and handrails were a few of the unsafe conditions. In addition, workers were working without fall protection at heights more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade.
Company: Shoa Organizations Services Ltd., Nanaimo
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 23, 2010
As the prime contractor of a multiple-employer workplace, this firm failed to coordinate the activities of employers, workers, and others to ensure health and safety. As a result, high-risk violations occurred. Workers were in an excavation more than 1.2 m (4 ft.) deep that was not supported, sloped, or benched. The written instructions for the excavation work were not available on site as required. In addition, workers were working without fall protection at heights more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade.
Company: SPC Holdings and Construction Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,391.53
Date of penalty: March 22, 2010
Three of the firm's workers, including a supervisor, were on a 5:12 sloped roof about 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of personal fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Calibre Ventures Inc., Chilliwack
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 19, 2010
As the prime contractor of a multiple-employer worksite, this firm failed to ensure the health and safety of its workers and subcontractors. Its violations include the following. A worker who was not using any fall protection was at risk of a fall of about 4 m (14 ft.) from a house under construction. Workers without safety eyewear were using pneumatic nail guns that lacked nose guards. The construction site was littered with debris, posing tripping hazards. Guardrails and handrails were missing where required. In addition, after a worker required medical treatment for an injury, the firm failed to immediately undertake an accident investigation.
Company: Canadian Custom Homes Centre Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 12, 2010
This firm repeatedly failed to coordinate the work of renovating a building. As a result, workers were exposed to asbestos fibres that were likely over the exposure limit. Such high-risk exposure can lead to asbestos-related diseases, many of which are fatal.
Company: Andrew Jackson Harris, North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 11, 2010
This firm's owner and one of its workers were on a roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of personal fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Bassi Roofing Ltd., Ladner
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $6,500
Date of penalty: March 10, 2010
Three of this firm's workers, including its supervisor, were working on a 12:12 sloped roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without any fall protection. On a separate inspection, this firm's president and a worker were on a sloped roof about 5 m (17 ft.) above grade while not using any form of personal fall protection. These were repeated violations of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Bassi Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: March 10, 2010
This firm's president and one of its workers were on a 5:12 sloped roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade while not using any form of personal fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: John O Curry, Nanaimo
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 10, 2010
Two workers were working on a roof between 5 and 6 m (16 and 20 ft.) above grade. They were not using effective fall protection. This firm failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Canado Building & Management Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 9, 2010
This employer erected a garbage chute near an overhead high-voltage power line, failing to maintain at least the minimum distance required between the energized line and the chute. The employer also failed to obtain written authorization from the power system's owner. The employer's owner, workers, and subcontractors were exposed to the danger of working close to the live power line. This was a high-risk violation.
Company: Can-Tech Roofing Ltd., Chilliwack
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $9,430.48
Date of penalty: March 4, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were working on a roof with a 6:12 slope at heights between 3 and 5.5 metres (10 and 18 ft.) above grade. They were not using any form of fall protection. The firm repeatedly failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur.
Company: Repp Industries Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $6,769.82
Date of penalty: March 2, 2010
Three of this firm's workers, including a supervisor, were re-roofing a house. They were not using any form of fall protection. One of the workers was seriously injured when he fell off the sloped roof to the ground about 5 m (16 ft.) below. The firm failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. It also failed to ensure that its workers were adequately trained and supervised.
Company: Gregory Robert Burdett, Tappen
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 1, 2010
A young worker injured his leg when he fell about 6.5 m (22 ft.) from a ladder while cutting roofing material. This firm repeatedly failed to maintain a record of safety meetings, to provide first aid equipment and attendants, and to provide adequate training and supervision.
Company: BS Sanghera Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 23, 2010
This firm repeatedly failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. It also repeatedly failed to ensure worker safety through proper instruction, training, and supervision.
Company: BS Sanghera Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 23, 2010
This firm repeatedly failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. It also repeatedly failed to ensure worker safety through proper instruction, training, and supervision.
Company: MDM Roofing Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 23, 2010
A worker climbed over the ridge of a 6:12 sloped roof more than 4 m (14 ft.) above grade. He was not wearing any form of personal fall protection. This firm failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: All Star Excavating & Demolition Ltd., New Westminster
Classification unit: Building demolition
Amount: $11,991.70
Date of penalty: February 19, 2010
This employer failed to ensure that inspection results showing the locations of hazardous substances were available at the worksite. Less than three years before this recent violation, the employer received another penalty for a similar violation.
Company: P. Benipal Framing & Construction Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,573.83
Date of penalty: February 17, 2010
Two workers were working about 6 m (19 ft.) above grade without adequate fall protection. This firm failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations. The firm also failed to properly secure a set of trusses so that it did not pose a risk of injury.
Company: Tri-R Development Group Inc., Chilliwack
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $13,888.25
Date of penalty: February 15, 2010
During the construction of two separate apartment complexes, this employer repeatedly failed to ensure guardrails were installed on balconies and elevated work areas accessible to workers.
Company: Bilfinger Berger (Canada) Inc., Pitt Meadows
Classification unit: Bridge, overpass, or viaduct construction or repair
Amount: $15,000
Date of penalty: February 12, 2010
This firm repeatedly failed to provide workers with effective instruction, training, and supervision. It also repeatedly failed to provide effective fall protection for work at heights well above 3 m (10 ft.).
Company: Five Rivers Stucco Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Plastering, lathing, or stucco work
Amount: $7,534.25
Date of penalty: February 12, 2010
Four workers were working about 3 m (12 ft.) above grade on a single pole wood frame scaffold that had no guardrails. The scaffold platform consisted of a single plank that was only 25 cm (10 in.) wide when the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation requires a minimum width of 50 cm (20 in.). This firm repeatedly endangered workers by violating the safety requirements for work platforms and guardrails at a construction site.
Company: 0786688 B.C. Ltd., Prince George
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 8, 2010
This employer has failed to comply with two WorkSafeBC orders within a reasonable time. It failed to submit a notice of project for its construction site and failed to provide adequate first aid equipment, supplies, and attendants for the site.
Company: David Moorman, Prince George
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: February 5, 2010
This firm's owner was working without any form of fall protection at a height of about 4 m (14 ft.) to install roof trusses. He failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Wayne A. Gray, North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 5, 2010
A worker was removing roofing material from a 5:12 sloped roof over 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. She was not using any form of personal fall protection. This firm failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Wayne Gray (dba WG Master Builder), West Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 3, 2010
One of this firm's young workers was walking up the standing truss of a 4:12 sloped roof about 4 m (14 ft.) above grade. The worker was not using any form of personal fall protection. The firm failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Select Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $8,706.26
Date of penalty: January 28, 2010
A worker without any form of fall protection fell about 3.5 m (12 ft.) from a roof onto a wooden I-beam truss. He was seriously injured. This firm failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Karen Cortner, Westbank
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 27, 2010
A young worker who was not tied off to his lifeline fell about 5 m (17 ft.) from a 7:12 pitch roof to the ground below and broke his foot. While he was being treated at the clinic, another of this firm's young workers fell about 3 m (10 ft.) from a garage roof but was not injured. The firm failed to ensure that workers used a fall protection system for work 3 m (10 ft.) or more above grade. It also failed to provide adequate information, instruction, training, and supervision.
Company: Mathieu Langelier, Kelowna
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 25, 2010
A young worker suffered a fractured elbow and a concussion when he fell from a steep-sloped roof about 10.5 m (35 ft.) above grade. There were no guardrails, and the worker was not wearing fall protection. This firm failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur, and it failed to provide the young worker with adequate supervision, training, and instruction. It also failed to provide first aid equipment, supplies, and services.
Company: Robert Joseph Gagnon, Maple Ridge
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 25, 2010
Five workers, including the employer, were on the sloped roof of a house under construction, about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. The workers wore full body harnesses but were not connected to any anchors. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations. The employer also failed to provide workers with adequate information, training, and supervision.
Company: Same Day Framing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,740.75
Date of penalty: January 21, 2010
This employer's workers were working on the second floor of a house under construction. However, a job built ladder was the only means available for climbing up to the work area. The employer failed to provide the required stairway for safe access to the second floor. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Arona Framing & Construction Inc., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $3,621.15
Date of penalty: January 19, 2010
One of this firm's workers was standing without any form of fall protection on the top plate of a house frame about 6.5 m (22 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: A.L.K. Construction Ltd., Merritt
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 14, 2010
As a prime contractor, this firm failed to coordinate the health and safety activities of employers, workers, and others at a multiple-employer worksite. It failed to take the necessary steps to comply with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. Its violations include failing to ensure the use of fall protection for work at heights over 3 m (10 ft.) and failing to ensure that workers wore safety headgear and safety footwear. It also failed to ensure that open web trusses were erected with adequate bracing.
Company: BS Sanghera Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 13, 2010
Workers were exposed to high risk of injury while working without any form of fall protection on a steep-sloped roof over 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. This employer failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system for work done where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur.
Company: Forbes Industrial Contractors Ltd., Fort St. John
Classification unit: Bridge, overpass, or viaduct construction or repair
Amount: $5,998.05
Date of penalty: January 12, 2010
This employer failed to supervise workers in the safe performance of their work. The employer and its supervisor failed to take appropriate action to correct an unsafe condition. It also failed to ensure that workers wear seat belts on mobile equipment with rollover protective structures.
Company: BL Roofing Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: January 11, 2010
This firm's principal and one of its workers were working without fall protection on a sloped roof about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Gauthier Development Ltd., Courtenay
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $1,000
Date of penalty: January 7, 2010
As the prime contractor on a multiple-employer worksite, this firm failed to maintain an effective system for complying with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. Its violations include failing to ensure the use of appropriate personal protective equipment and failing to provide workers with Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS) training. It also failed to supply material safety data sheets for controlled products and to ensure that workers were qualified to operate elevating work platforms.
Company: A & T Project Developments Inc., Kamloops
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $10,824.18
Date of penalty: January 6, 2010
A worker entered a hazardous excavation that was about 3 to 3.5 m (10 to 12 ft.) deep. The sides of any excavation that is over 1.2 m (4 ft.) deep must be properly sloped or shored. This firm failed to ensure that a far deeper excavation was adequately sloped and safe to enter. As the prime contractor, the firm failed to coordinate subcontractor safety activities on a multiple-employer worksite.
Company: 21st Century Roofers Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $5,826.45
Date of penalty: January 5, 2010
Three of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulation.
Company: Zipp Construction Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 5, 2010
One of this firm's workers was working without fall protection on a roof about 5 m (17 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulation.
Company: Gold Seal Ventures Ltd., Victoria
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 5, 2010
This firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. It also failed to provide workers with adequate supervision and adequate fall protection training and instruction.
Company: Helen Jane Macham, Chilliwack
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 4, 2010
Fatality. The lift arms of a skid-steer loader lowered unexpectedly, pinning a worker between the crossbar of the lift arms and the engine compartment. The worker suffered fatal injuries. This employer failed to provide workers with adequate information, instruction, training, and supervision for operating mobile equipment safely. The employer also failed to ensure that the loader was safe to operate.
Company: Samra Bros. Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $16,877.31
Date of penalty: January 4, 2010
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a 5:12 sloped roof about 7 m (25 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulation.
Company: Per Witso & Kristian Per Witso & Donald George Witso (dba Roofing with Wits), Prince George
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,431.18
Date of penalty: January 4, 2010
This firm's owner, a supervisor, and another worker were working on the sloped roof of a new residential building about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade without a fall protection system in place. This was a repeated violation.
Construction - Penalties for 2009
Penalties for 2009 in Date Order
Company: 1222192 Alberta Ltd., Fort St. John
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $3,749.98
Date of penalty: December 24, 2009
As the prime contractor of a multiple-employer workplace, this employer failed to coordinate the health and safety activities of the employers, workers, and others at the worksite. The employer failed to take adequate precautions to prevent injury or illness.
Company: S & A Excavating Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $17,998.80
Date of penalty: December 23, 2009
This employer dug a bulk excavation in a lot beside a house. The excavation partially collapsed, exposing a foundation wall and leaving the sidewalk near the house suspended more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. If the sidewalk had collapsed, a gas line could have ruptured or a live hydro line could have been exposed. The employer failed to carry out the excavation according to a professional engineer's written instructions. It also failed to ensure the health and safety of workers and to provide workers with adequate information, instruction, training, and supervision.
Company: European Custom Stone Inc., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Masonry
Amount: $4,630.05
Date of penalty: December 17, 2009
This employer failed to submit a compliance report after being ordered to do so.
Company: Four Corner Roofing Ltd., Westbank
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 16, 2009
A worker broke both his heels when he fell about 3 m (11 ft.) from a steep-sloped roof. This firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used, and it failed to instruct, train, and supervise it workers.
Company: Advanced Systems Roofing and Waterproofing Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $27,717.24
Date of penalty: December 15, 2009
Several of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof about 10 m (35 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Dean Roger Chartrand, Westbank
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 15, 2009
Without any fall protection, two of this employer's workers were working over 3 m (10 ft.) above grade on the roof of a two-storey house. The employer failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a high-risk violation.
Company: Shake N' Tile Steel Roofing Corp., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $14,825.98
Date of penalty: December 15, 2009
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof about 7 m (25 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Advanced Stucco Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Plastering or stucco work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 9, 2009
This employer violated the safe scaffolding requirements and exposed its workers to falls of up to 3.5 m (12 ft.). This violation posed a high risk of serious injury or death. This was the employer's second violation of the scaffolding and fall protection requirements.
Company: Chahat Enterprises Ltd., Nelson
Classification unit: Plastering or stucco work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 3, 2009
One of this firm's workers was working without fall protection on a ladder jack scaffold about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Harjap Sidhu, Burnaby
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,852.03
Date of penalty: November 30, 2009
Four of this employer's workers, including the principal, were working on the second floor of a house under construction with a large opening that had no guardrails. The employer failed to ensure the use of guardrails or other means of fall restraint. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Expert Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 27, 2009
This firm's president and a worker were working near the unguarded edge of a sloped roof, about 6.7 metres (22 feet) above grade, without a fall protection system. The firm repeatedly failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system as required by the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation.
Company: New City Framing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 26, 2009
This firm repeatedly violated the fall protection regulations.
Company: Natt Roofing Ltd., Squamish
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $43,743.30
Date of penalty: November 24, 2009
Four of this employer's workers, including the employer's principal, were not attached to a roof with lifelines or lanyards. The employer failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more might occur. In addition, it did not have a written fall protection plan for work done where workers are not protected by permanent guardrails and where a fall of 7.5 m (25 ft.) or more might occur. This employer received four previous administrative penalties for the same violations over the course of three years.
Company: Bestwest Roofing Inc., Port Moody
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 23, 2009
This firm failed to protect workers from the hazard of falling from elevations of 3 m (10 ft.) or more. This was a repeated violation.
Company: B.Q.R. Systems Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $6,205.20
Date of penalty: November 16, 2009
Six of this firm's workers were working without adequate fall protection on an 8:12 sloped roof about 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used for work done where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation.
Company: 0800312 B.C. Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: November 16, 2009
Three of this firm's workers were working without adequate fall protection on an 8:12 sloped roof about 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Bildal Construct Inc., Westbank
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 16, 2009
A worker was working without fall protection and without adequate instruction at heights over 5 m (16 ft.) above grade, contrary to the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation.
Company: H. Paras Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $1,000
Date of penalty: November 10, 2009
This firm repeatedly failed to develop and implement a fall protection plan for work at heights over 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade.
Company: H. Paras Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 10, 2009
Workers were working without fall protection and a written fall protection plan on a steep-sloped roof, contrary to the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. This was a repeated violation.
Company: H. Paras Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 10, 2009
Workers were working without fall protection on a steep-sloped roof, contrary to the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. This firm failed to provide the workers with adequate instruction, training, and supervision. These were repeated violations.
Company: Super Strong Roofing Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $4,439.75
Date of penalty: November 9, 2009
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection where a fall of 6 m (20 ft.) or more might have occurred. The firm repeatedly violated the fall protection requirements, exposing workers to a high risk of serious injury through falls.
Company: BC Pavilion Corporation, Vancouver
Classification unit: Building management, building rental, or mobile home parks and strata corporations
Amount: $68,970.57
Date of penalty: November 6, 2009
This firm failed to ensure that a 347-volt electrical distribution panel (relay) was completely disconnected and locked out before starting work on it. It also failed to provide adequate instruction, training, and supervision.
Company: Amanpreet Sandhu, North Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $3,402.30
Date of penalty: November 6, 2009
One of this firm's workers was working without fall protection on a roof about 8 m (27 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulation.
Company: Juan Alberto Perez Gonzalez, Belcarra
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 4, 2009
Two workers were working without fall protection about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade on a steep-sloped roof, contrary to the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. The supervisor was on site at the time. This firm failed to provide its workers with adequate instruction, training, and supervision. These were repeated violations.
Company: Royal Stucco Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Plastering or stucco work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 4, 2009
One of this firm's workers was using a narrow wooden plank without guardrails as a scaffold platform. The worker was not using a fall protection system even though he was at risk of falling 6 m (20 ft.). The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used for work where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. It also failed to ensure that its scaffold platform had a minimum width of 50 cm (20 in.).
Company: Duane Mervyn Genge & Lois Ann Genge, Kamloops
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 3, 2009
One of this firm's workers was working without any form of fall protection on a 5:12 pitch roof, about 9 m (16 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Hong Way Construction Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $4,456.05
Date of penalty: November 3, 2009
This firm repeatedly violated the fall protection regulations. One of the firm's workers was observed without fall protection where a fall of about 5 m (16 ft.) might have occurred.
Company: Paul Esposito Developments Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 3, 2009
This firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used for work done where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. It failed to ensure that it had the equipment, supplies, facilities, first aid attendants, and services for promptly giving first aid in case of an injury. It also failed to coordinate the health and safety activities of employers, workers, and others at the workplace. It did not do everything reasonably practicable to establish and maintain a system or process that would ensure compliance with Part 3 of the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation.
Company: All Right Trucking-99 Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Building demolition
Amount: $4,006.58
Date of penalty: November 2, 2009
Before demolition work began, this employer failed to make available at the worksite a copy of an inspection report on asbestos-containing materials and removal results. The employer is aware of this regulatory requirement because it had already received orders for failing to do this once before. Further, the employer was aware the violation was occurring when it took another firm's word that a hazardous materials inspection had been conducted. This employer did not ask for a copy of the inspection report from that other firm.
Company: Lee Andrew Huffman, Mission
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: October 28, 2009
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used for work done where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations.
Company: Trevor Brown & Carol Brown / R. Brown & Son, Rosedale
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $4,439.53
Date of penalty: October 28, 2009
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade on the roof of a house. The firm has a history of fall protection violations and has previously received a warning letter.
Company: A to Z Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: October 27, 2009
This firm violated the fall protection regulations four times within ten months.
Company: Wrabel Brothers Construction Ltd., Kamloops
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $15,666.02
Date of penalty: October 27, 2009
Three of this firm's workers were working without any fall protection at the edge of a flat roof about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Fleck Contracting Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Building demolition
Amount: $7,124.65
Date of penalty: October 27, 2009
This firm repeatedly failed to plan work and to instruct its supervisor and workers in the safe removal of asbestos-containing materials.
Company: Rite-Way Roofing Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $9,331.65
Date of penalty: October 26, 2009
A worker fell about 8 m (27 ft.) from a steep-sloped roof, sustaining injuries. This firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used for work where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Rite-Way Roofing Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $9,331.65
Date of penalty: October 26, 2009
This firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used for work where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. Two of this firm's workers were working without any form of fall protection about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Garry Dohms / NVC II Cladding Metal Wall & Roof Systems, Abbotsford
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $4,144.55
Date of penalty: October 20, 2009
Three of this firm's workers were working on a low-sloped roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without the benefit of guardrails or personal fall protection. The firm failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system for work where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. It failed to ensure a safe workplace.
Company: Tibor Gyimesi, Surrey
Classification unit: Welding services or ornamental metal installation
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: October 20, 2009
This employer operated an unsafe and uncertified mobile crane, exposing workers to the risk of injury.
Company: Five Rivers Stucco Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Plastering or stucco work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: October 19, 2009
This firm exposed its workers to the risk of falling from heights 3 m (10 ft.) or more above grade when it failed to comply with the requirements for designing and installing safe work platforms. The firm also failed to provide its workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary for installing and using a safe work platform.
Company: Affordable Roofing Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $6,292.45
Date of penalty: October 14, 2009
One of this firm's workers fell about 3.5 m (12 ft.) from a roof while working without fall protection. The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used for work where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Nanak Construction & Framing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: October 14, 2009
Two workers, one of them a young worker, were working without fall protection on a roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. They were about 0.3 m (1 ft.) from the roof's edge, and the ground below them was littered with lumber and debris. This firm failed to ensure that workers used a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. It also failed to provide a temporary stairway to a floor before undertaking any work on that floor.
Company: Jason Palmeter / Ontop Roofing, Port Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: October 8, 2009
Four workers were working without adequate fall protection on a roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. This firm was ordered to produce a notice of compliance for a previous violation but has failed to comply within a reasonable time.
Company: David Matthew Scholten / D.S. Maintenance -- Cedar Roofs Only, Abbotsford
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,875.96
Date of penalty: October 8, 2009
This employer failed to comply with orders on fall protection, despite numerous opportunities to submit a notice of compliance.
Company: Mark Wayne Schultz / C Our Roofing, Campbell River
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $4,941.11
Date of penalty: October 2, 2009
A worker was working without fall protection on a roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated high risk violation by this employer.
Company: Burnik Ventures Inc., / Burnik Drywall, Richmond
Classification unit: Drywalling or acoustic board installation
Amount: $104,067.18
Date of penalty: September 30, 2009
A worker leaned over the edge of an unguarded balcony, about 12 m (40 ft.) above grade, to discard scrap drywall. The worker was not wearing fall protection. This employer failed to provide a fall protection system for work where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Shane Agius /Agius Roofing & Contracting, Powell River
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,000
Date of penalty: September 25, 2009
This firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used for work done where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation.
Company: All World Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 24, 2009
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used for work done where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation.
Company: C.R. West Coast Roofing Ltd., Campbell River
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,611.93
Date of penalty: September 22, 2009
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof about 5 m (16 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Retirement Concepts Developments Ltd., Langley
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $148,468.07
Date of penalty: September 22, 2009
This firm, as the owner/prime contractor of a multiple-employer workplace, failed to establish and maintain a system that ensured compliance with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation.
Company: Roberto Maigler / Summit Roofing, Victoria
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 18, 2009
Three workers, including the owner, were working without fall protection on the roof of a three-storey house more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade.
Company: Hi Tech Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 17, 2009
Four of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof about 5 m (17 ft.) above grade. The firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used for work done where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Marv's Excavating Ltd., Abbotsford
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $38,063.16
Date of penalty: September 16, 2009
This firm failed to ensure that an excavation more than 1.2 m (4 ft.) deep was adequately sloped, shored, or supported according to the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation or a professional engineer's instructions before allowing workers to enter it. This was a repeated violation.
Company: David Gronow Roofing Ltd., Victoria
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $8,452.88
Date of penalty: September 16, 2009
Three of this employer's workers, including a supervisor, were working on the roof of a house more than 3 m (10 ft.) high. They were not connected to their fall protection equipment. The employer previously received a warning letter about fall protection.
Company: Fraser Valley Roofing Ltd., Chilliwack
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $18,907.84
Date of penalty: September 11, 2009
This firm failed to ensure the safety of its workers when working 3 m (10 ft.) or more above grade. It failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system, failed to develop the required written fall protection plan, and failed to provide workers with adequate instruction, training, and supervision. This was a repeated violation.
Company: 99 North Pitched & Flat Roofing Inc., Squamish
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $3,828.50
Date of penalty: September 10, 2009
Five of this firm's workers, including a supervisor, were working more than 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without any form of fall protection. This was a repeated violation.
Company: 99 North Pitched & Flat Roofing Inc., Brackendale
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $3,828.50
Date of penalty: September 10, 2009
Five of this firm's workers, including a supervisor, were working without any form of fall protection more than 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation.
Company: G K Mechanical Ltd., Grande Prairie
Classification unit: Plumbing, heating, vent, residential air conditioning, or central vacuum system installation or repair
Amount: $6,657.98
Date of penalty: September 10, 2009
This firm's workers were working in an excavation 2 to 3 m (6.5 to 10 ft.) deep with no protective structures or shoring. The firm failed to ensure that an excavation over 1.2 m (4 ft.) deep was adequately sloped, shored, or supported according to a professional engineer's instructions.
Company: Custom Pro Exteriors Ltd., Victoria
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: September 2, 2009
This firm's supervisor was working without fall protection at heights over 3 m (10 ft.). This was a repeated violation of the fall protection regulations. The firm had been issued a warning letter for a previous violation.
Company: Whonnock Roofing Ltd., Maple Ridge
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $11,271.39
Date of penalty: August 28, 2009
Several of this firm's workers were working without adequate fall protection on a roof more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. One of the workers was the firm's principal. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Atwal's Enterprises Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $4,685
Date of penalty: August 27, 2009
Two workers were on a roof at a height of about 13.5 m (45 ft.) and were not attached to their lifelines. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Pro Construction Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $4,613
Date of penalty: August 27, 2009
This firm repeatedly violated the guardrail and fall protection regulations after receiving a warning letter.
Company: Smythe Roofing Ltd., Esquimalt
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $17,804
Date of penalty: August 27, 2009
Four of this firm's workers were working without fall protection close to the edge of a roof about 4 m (13 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: 0806245 BC Ltd., New Westminster
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 26, 2009
This firm repeatedly failed to comply with the requirement to provide a fall protection system for work where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. It also failed to ensure the health and safety of its workers and knowingly provided a WorkSafeBC officer with false information.
Company: BL Roofing Ltd., Squamish
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 26, 2009
Four of this employer's workers were working without fall protection on a steep-sloped roof 6 to 7.5 m (20 to 25 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Shane Edmond Hebert, Burnaby
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $9,097
Date of penalty: August 24, 2009
This firm repeatedly violated the fall protection requirements.
Company: North Star Framing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: August 4, 2009
A worker without fall protection was standing over 5.5 m (19 ft.) above grade on the edge of a two-storey house under construction. This was a repeated violation. The employer also failed to provide the worker with a work platform.
Company: J.P.D. Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 4, 2009
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof over 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated failure to comply with the fall protection requirements.
Company: Min Environmental Services Ltd., White Rock
Classification unit: Asbestos abatement or mould remediation
Amount: $2,894
Date of penalty: August 4, 2009
During the demolition of multiple houses, this firm failed to adequately remove, contain, and dispose of asbestos-containing vermiculite and other friable asbestos-containing materials. Unprotected workers were exposed to airborne asbestos fibres.
Company: Natt Roofing Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $29,506
Date of penalty: July 29, 2009
This firm failed to protect its workers from the hazard of falling from roofs over 3 m (10 ft.) high. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Perm Roof 1 Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $11,561
Date of penalty: July 24, 2009
Two workers, one of them on his first day on the job, were working without fall protection on a roof about 10 m (32 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated high-risk violation.
Company: Moonlight Roofing Ltd., New Westminster
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 23, 2009
This firm's principal and one of the firm's workers were on a roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. They were wearing fall protection harnesses but were not connected to lifelines. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Westway Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 20, 2009
This firm failed yet again to comply with the fall protection requirements after receiving a previous administrative penalty.
Company: Coastal Steel Systems Inc., Surrey
Classification unit: Drywalling or acoustic board installation
Amount: $6,987
Date of penalty: July 15, 2009
Fatality. This employer's worker fell off a roof and then through insulation to a concrete floor 5 m (17 ft.) below. He died in hospital from his head injuries. The employer failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system for work where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. It also failed to provide its workers, including the deceased worker, with adequate information, instruction, training, and supervision to ensure their health and safety.
Company: G.R. Roofing Ltd., Delta
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 10, 2009
Two of this firm's workers were working without any form of fall protection on a 4:12 sloped roof that was about 5 m (17 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation.
Company: BL Roofing Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: June 19, 2009
This firm failed to ensure that a fall protection system was being used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could have occurred. Two of the firm's workers were working with no means of fall protection about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of fall protection requirements.
Company: Empire Roofing Ltd., New Westminster
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $14,607
Date of penalty: June 18, 2009
Three workers were working with no means of fall protection on a frost-covered, sloped roof at heights between 3 and 4.5 m (11 and 15 ft.) above grade.
Company: Sadhu Sira, Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: June 17, 2009
Two workers were working without an effective fall protection system on a steep roof about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Novo Homes Inc., Surrey
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $10,940
Date of penalty: June 17, 2009
This employer failed to ensure that a fall protection system was being used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more might occur.
Company: 597109 BC Ltd., Pitt Meadows
Classification unit: Plumbing, heating, vent, residential air conditioning, or central vacuum system installation or repair
Amount: $7,888
Date of penalty: June 16, 2009
This firm failed to comply with a Board order. On December 12, 2008, the Board found that the firm had taken prohibited discriminatory action against a worker, contrary to section 151 of the Workers Compensation Act (the Act). The firm was ordered under section 153(2) of the Act to pay the worker's wage loss no later than February 27, 2009. The firm did not pay the worker's lost wages by that date. On March 16, 2009, the Board cited the firm for failing to comply with a Board order under section 115(1)(b) of the Act.
Company: Artistic Sign Service Ltd., Kamloops
Classification unit: Sign installation, service, or repair
Amount: $11,156
Date of penalty: June 16, 2009
This firm repeatedly failed to ensure that a fall protection system is used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more might occur. It also repeatedly failed to provide workers with the instruction and supervision necessary to ensure their health and safety.
Company: B.Q.R. Systems Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,949
Date of penalty: June 9, 2009
This was a repeated violation. Workers were working without fall protection at a height over 7.5 m (25 ft.). This employer failed to adequately train and supervise workers and to ensure the use of fall protection equipment.
Company: Coast to Coast Roofing & Rubbish Removal Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: June 3, 2009
This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements. This employer also failed to provide proper instruction, training, and supervision.
Company: Authentic Roofing Inc., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: May 28, 2009
This was a repeated fall protection violation. Two workers were working 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade on a roof with a slope of 4:12, with no fall protection system in place.
Company: Smith 'N' Gordon Drywall Corp., Courtenay
Classification unit: Drywall or acoustic board installation
Amount: $7,911.15
Date of penalty: May 25, 2009
Three workers were wearing running shoes while installing drywall, risking crushing injuries if drywall had fallen onto their feet. This firm repeatedly failed to ensure that workers wore protective footwear, such as steel-toed boots.
Company: Mortlock Enterprises Ltd., Sechelt
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $6,043
Date of penalty: May 21, 2009
This employer prevented or dissuaded a worker from reporting injuries and filing compensation claims with WorkSafeBC.
Company: Apex Electric Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Electrical work
Amount: $5,306
Date of penalty: April 23, 2009
Repeated violations. This firm failed to ensure that its workers were wearing appropriate personal protective equipment. Workers were observed without hard hats and safety footwear.
Company: Tom Hayes Scott, Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 22, 2009
This employer failed to submit a compliance report after being repeatedly instructed to do so.
Company: Perry Alexander Rink, Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 20, 2009
This firm's worksite did not have adequate work platforms (only 25 cm or 10.5 in. wide when the Regulation requires a width of 50 cm or 20 in.) around the interior wall forms of a condominium building being used to place concrete. A worker was also placing concrete while walking along a narrow whaler of the forms about 0.5 m (2 ft.) above the work platforms. The work platforms were 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. The worker placing concrete was not using a fall protection system.
Company: Devon Richard Knapfl / Aces Roofing, Courtenay
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $6,067.76
Date of penalty: April 14, 2009
A worker was observed about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade on the 6:12 pitch roof of a house under construction. The worker wore a fall protection harness but was not connected to a lifeline. Later that same day, four workers, including the employer, were observed on the roof without fall protection. The roof's peak was more than 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade, but there was no written fall protection plan on site. The employer failed to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their health and safety as well as the health and safety of other workers at the workplace. This was a repeated violation and a repeated penalty with regard to fall protection requirements.
Company: Dominion Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 2, 2009
Three of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof with a 6:12 slope at about 5, 5.5, and 6 m (16, 18, and 20 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Dominion Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 2, 2009
This firm's owner was working without fall protection on a roof with a slope of 4:12 or less, about 7 m (22 ft.) above grade, and was seriously injured after falling from the roof. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Dominion Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 2, 2009
Three workers were installing asphalt shingles near a building's roof edge, about 6 to 8 m (20 to 26 ft.) above grade. The sloped (5:12) roof, which was unguarded, was wet from a light rain. None of the workers were observed using any kind of fall protection system. In addition, the ladder used to access the roof was unsecured and did not extend sufficiently above the roof edge. This firm has a history of fall protection violations, and the fall protection violation in this case was high risk.
Company: Tri-City Contracting Ltd., Cranbrook
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: This penalty decision was overturned upon appeal.
Date of penalty: March 23, 2009
This firm's workers were exposed to a hazardous substance. Despite knowing that floor tiles contained chrysotile asbestos, the firm allowed its workers to remove the tiles without the appropriate precautions.
Company: NJ Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: March 19, 2009
This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Accurate Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $10,160
Date of penalty: March 19, 2009
Two of this firm's workers were working on a roof without using fall protection. One was working 3.5 m (11 ft., 6 in.) above grade on a 4:12 slope, while the other was working at 4 m (14 ft.) above grade on an 8:12 slope. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Donovan Management Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $1,066
Date of penalty: March 18, 2009
This was a repeated violation of fall protection requirements. Two workers were stepping from an elevating work platform onto a roof that was about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. The two workers joined a third worker in stripping formwork within 4 m (13 ft.) of the roof edge. There was no fall protection system in place.
Company: Rychter P. Construction Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $5,980
Date of penalty: March 16, 2009
Repeated violations. One of the firm's workers was observed working without fall protection on the top plate of the exterior front wall of a home. The distance from the worker's position on the roof to the ground was about 7.3 m (24 ft.). The pitch of the roof where the worker was standing was about 12:12. In addition, the building's balconies about 3 m (10 ft.) above grade lacked both guards and guardrails.
Company: Nelson Stanley Hanson, Comox
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,101
Date of penalty: March 10, 2009
This employer repeatedly failed to ensure a fall protection system was used by workers exposed to the risk of a fall greater than 3 m (10 ft.).
Company: Paras Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 9, 2009
Repeated violations. The firm's principal and two workers were installing slate tile roofing 3-7 m (10-23 ft.) above grade without adequate fall protection.
Company: Taj Roofing Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 9, 2009
Three of this firm's workers were working on a 6:12 sloped roof that was about 6.5 m (22 ft.) above grade. None of the workers were using fall protection. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Paras Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 9, 2009
Repeated violations. This firm's principal and two workers were working on steep sloped roofs about 7.3 m (24 ft.) above grade without fall protection.
Company: Paras Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 9, 2009
Repeated violations. This firm's principal and two workers were working on steep sloped roofs about 7.3 m (24 ft.) above grade without fall protection.
Company: Paras Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 9, 2009
Repeated violations. This firm's principal and two workers were working on steep sloped roofs about 7.3 m (24 ft.) above grade without fall protection.
Company: Fraserview Terrace Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: March 4, 2009
This firm showed repeated non-compliance with section 20.81(1)(c) of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. It did not ensure that an excavation was certified as "safe to enter" by a registered professional engineer before allowing workers to enter into it. The excavation was about 4 m (14 ft.) deep, and there was a spoil pile beside the excavation that was about 2 m (6 ft.) high.
Company: Island Roofing Inc., Prince Rupert
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: March 4, 2009
Three of this firm's workers were working on a 4:12 sloped roof that was about 5 m (17 ft.) above grade. None of the workers were wearing fall protection. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Fraserview Terrace Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $1,000
Date of penalty: March 4, 2009
This firm showed repeated non-compliance with section 3.16(1)(a) of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. It did not take steps to address first aid requirements despite being instructed and having received numerous orders.
Company: Fraserview Terrace Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $11,326
Date of penalty: March 4, 2009
Serious injury. This firm violated section 119 of the Workers Compensation Act and section 4.55 of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. A worker sustained serious lower back injuries when he fell through an unmarked, unsecured floor opening 4.5 m (15 ft.) to the concrete floor below.
Company: Jas Construction Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $28,738
Date of penalty: March 2, 2009
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection near the unguarded edge of a building. The distance from the edge of the third floor to the ground was about 6 m (20 ft.). This was a repeated fall protection violation.
Company: Mega Empire International Enterprise Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Finishing carpentry
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: February 26, 2009
High-risk violations. Workers were performing dry grinding and cutting of granite countertops without effective respiratory protection. This activity exposed the workers to high levels of airborne crystalline silica dust, which is directly associated with the disease silicosis. The employer also exposed its workers to a high risk of injury through a lack of guarding on grinding and cutting equipment, and numerous electrical hazards.
Company: Valley Ridge Holdings Ltd., Chilliwack
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 26, 2009
Repeated high-risk violations of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. Workers without fall protection performed framing tasks 5.5-5.8 m (18-19 ft.) above grade. Other workers without fall protection were exposed to a fall hazard of 6 m (20 ft.). Workers without safety eyewear used pneumatic power nailers and power skill saws. A worker in an extended aerial lift had no personal fall arrest system. Stairways were either missing rails or lacked them altogether. The prime contractor demonstrated an ongoing failure to coordinate occupational health and safety at a multi-employer workplace. The total impact of all ongoing violations presented a high risk of serious injury or death to workers.
Company: Valley Ridge Holdings Ltd., Chilliwack
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 26, 2009
Repeated high-risk violations of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. Workers without fall protection performed framing tasks 5.5-5.8 m (18-19 ft.) above grade. Other workers without fall protection were exposed to a fall hazard of 6 m (20 ft.). Workers without safety eyewear used pneumatic power nailers and power skill saws. A worker in an extended aerial lift had no personal fall arrest system. Stairways were either missing rails or lacked them altogether. The prime contractor demonstrated an ongoing failure to coordinate occupational health and safety at a multi-employer workplace. The total impact of all ongoing violations presented a high risk of serious injury or death to workers.
Company: Valley Ridge Holdings Ltd., Chilliwack
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 26, 2009
Repeated high-risk violations of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. Workers without fall protection performed framing tasks 5.5-5.8 m (18-19 ft.) above grade. Other workers without fall protection were exposed to a fall hazard of 6 m (20 ft.). Workers without safety eyewear used pneumatic power nailers and power skill saws. A worker in an extended aerial lift had no personal fall arrest system. Stairways were either missing rails or lacked them altogether. The prime contractor demonstrated an ongoing failure to coordinate occupational health and safety at a multi-employer workplace. The total impact of all ongoing violations presented a high risk of serious injury or death to workers.
Company: Jas Construction Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $18,680
Date of penalty: February 23, 2009
One of the firm's workers sustained fatal head injuries when he fell about 8.8 m (29 ft.) from the roof of a third-storey townhouse complex. The worker had been wearing a fall protection harness but had not been secured to an anchor system. The worksite had no site-specific fall protection plan. This firm failed to provide its workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their health and safety while working.
Company: Brian David Downie, Prostarr Roofing BC Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: February 19, 2009
Two workers were standing and working close to an unguarded roof edge on a sloped roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. No fall protection system was being used. One of the workers was the firm's owner.
Company: Select Roofing Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $4,353
Date of penalty: February 12, 2009
Repeated violations. Five of the firm's workers were working about 8.5 m (28 ft.) above grade. None of these workers had fall protection at the time of the officer's inspection. These workers were not aware of the fall protection requirements, and their supervisor was not on site.
Company: S & J Framing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 11, 2009
The firm owner was observed without fall protection, standing on a single truss about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade and 0.6 m (2 ft.) from the structure's edge. This was a repeat violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: 0726784 B.C. Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 10, 2009
A subcontractor's worker suffered fatal injuries in a fall of 8.5 m (28 ft.). This prime contractor of a multiple-employer workplace failed to ensure the coordination of occupational health and safety activities of employers, workers, and other persons at the workplace.
Company: Surlang Roofing Ltd., Langley
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $32,149.90
Date of penalty: February 5, 2009
Three of this firm's workers were working on a 7:12 sloped roof that was about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. The workers were not wearing fall protection. This was a repeated violation.
Company: David Matthew Scholten, West Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,591
Date of penalty: February 4, 2009
This firm showed repeated non-compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation as related to protecting workers from falls of 3 m (10 ft.) or more and to ensuring proper instruction, training, equipment, and supervision for fall protection.
Company: David Matthew Scholten, West Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,591
Date of penalty: February 4, 2009
This firm showed repeated non-compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation as related to protecting workers from falls of 3 m (10 ft.) or more and to ensuring proper instruction, training, equipment, and supervision for fall protection.
Company: SD2 Framing Inc., Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 26, 2009
The firm owner was working on a work platform 3.2 m (10.5 ft.) above grade without any form of fall protection. Also, window openings on the main and second floors were not equipped with guardrails, potentially exposing workers to fall hazards between 3-3.7 m (10-12 ft.). This firm has a history of repeated violations of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Darren Smaill, D & D Enterprises, Coquitlam
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 20, 2009
Repeated violations. One of the firm's workers was working without fall protection on a roof that was 6 m (20 ft.) above grade.
Company: South Island Homes Ltd., Saanich
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: January 13, 2009
Repeated violations. Two workers were carrying out re-roofing work at about 7.6 m (25 ft.) above grade without fall protection. The firm had two previous orders for fall protection violations.
Company: Dave Leslie Rozzano, Port Alberni
Classification unit: Siding, awning, or gutter installation, service, or repair
Amount: $8,545
Date of penalty: January 6, 2009
One of the firm's workers was working within the limits of approach of a 25-kV overhead power line. The firm's worker had not been informed about the potential electrical hazard before being permitted to work in proximity to the energized power line.
Company: Harbour Quay Homes Inc., Port Alberni
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $5,054
Date of penalty: January 6, 2009
Repeated violations. As prime contractor for this multiple employer worksite, the firm was issued orders under section 118(2) of the Act for repeatedly failing to ensure that the health and safety activities of employers, workers, and other persons at the worksite were properly coordinated, and for failing to do everything reasonably practicable to establish and maintain a system to ensure compliance with the Act and Regulation. In this instance, a worker for one of the subcontractors on site was found within the limits of approach of a 25-kV overhead power line.
Construction - Penalties for 2008
Penalties for 2008 in Date Order
Company: CSM Developments Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 22, 2008
Repeated violation. Continued non-compliance with the requirement of a prime contractor to do everything within reason to establish and maintain a system or process that will ensure compliance with the Workers Compensation Act and the regulations.
Company: Retirement Concepts Developments Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $17,745
Date of penalty: December 16, 2008
As prime contractor, this firm repeatedly violated the requirement to coordinate health and safety activities on site.
Company: Intracorp Projects Ltd., Parksville
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $24,832
Date of penalty: December 15, 2008
This firm repeatedly failed to comply with the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation and the Workers Compensation Act. Among its violations are ones related to prime contractor responsibilities, supervision and training, personal protective equipment, fall protection, ground fault circuit interrupters, equipment maintenance, inspection records, and accident investigations.
Company: FCH Construction Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $33,233
Date of penalty: December 12, 2008
Contact with an unguarded high-voltage power line contrary to the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. The employer failed to ensure the health and safety of its workers and other workers in the workplace by failing to provide workers with adequate information, instruction, and training regarding the limits of approach.
Company: Pattar Roofing Ltd., North Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 9, 2008
This was a repeated violation of the regulation requiring the employer to ensure a fall protection system is used where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more might occur.
Company: Shane Agius, Powell River
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: December 9, 2008
High-risk violation. Three workers and the firm's principal were observed at elevations greater than 4.6 m (15 ft.) on a steep sloped roof without fall protection or a fall protection plan in place.
Company: Hall Excavating Ltd., Kamloops
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $7,583
Date of penalty: December 3, 2008
High-risk violation. The employer failed to ensure the health and safety of workers at a residential construction site with respect to excavation work. The employer's worker dug an excavation out of backfilled, loose soil, which measured, in some parts, more than 3.7 m (12 ft.) deep, with nearly vertical walls. The excavation --- which was neither shored nor engineered --- was made so that another employer's worker could install plumbing services.
Company: 617538 B.C. Ltd., Kamloops
Classification unit: Plastering or stucco work
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: December 3, 2008
The employer failed to ensure workers used a means of fall protection when working at elevations over 3 m (10 ft.).
Company: Rykon Construction Management Ltd., Kelowna
Classification unit: House or other wood frame general contracting, construction, or renovation work
Amount: $22,226
Date of penalty: December 2, 2008
Fatality. This firm failed to establish and maintain a system or process to ensure compliance with the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation. A worker was fatally injured after falling about 8 m (19 ft.) from a single-family house under construction.
Company: Forsite Construction Inc., Squamish
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $5,617
Date of penalty: December 1, 2008
A prime contractor failed to do everything within reason to establish and maintain a system or process to ensure compliance with Part 3 of the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation.
Company: Natt Roofing Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,566
Date of penalty: November 21, 2008
Multiple violations. The site supervisor and three workers were seen on the roof of a single family dwelling under construction. The site supervisor and one of the workers were not using fall protection, although it was available on site. The distance from the ground to the peak was 7.6 m (25 ft.). The distance from the edge of the roof to grade was 5.6 m (18.5 ft.). Construction debris littered the ground around the dwelling. In addition, the employer had no written requirements for fall protection.
Company: Natt Roofing Ltd., Coquitlam
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,566
Date of penalty: November 21, 2008
Repeat penalty. Two workers were seen about 7.6 m (25 ft.) above grade on a roof with an estimated 8:12 slope. One worker was wearing a fall protection harness but was not connected to a lifeline. The other worker was not wearing a harness even though one was available on site. The employer repeatedly failed to ensure that a fall protection system was used when work was being done where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more may occur.
Company: Woodtick Construction Ltd., Kamloops
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential construction
Amount: $7,497
Date of penalty: November 19, 2008
Two of this firm's workers were working without fall protection on a roof over 3 m (10 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Devon Richard Knapfl, Courtenay
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,034
Date of penalty: November 14, 2008
This firm repeatedly failed to use a fall protection system where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more might occur. Although aware of the requirements, the employer was on the edge of the roof without fall protection.
Company: Brytar Contracting Inc., Courtenay
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential construction
Amount: $9,601
Date of penalty: November 14, 2008
Repeated non-compliance. Several deficiencies were observed with regard to workers using a frame scaffold system to install siding to the exterior of a four-storey building. These deficiencies included missing cross braces, insufficient building ties, and missing connecting pins. The employer had no manufacturer's technical data or professional engineering certification showing the rated load, erection procedures, and its compliance with an applicable standard under section 13.2 of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation.
Company: Christopher Leslie Bond, Courtenay
Classification unit: House or other wood frame construction or renovation work
Amount: $10,403
Date of penalty: November 12, 2008
This firm failed to ensure its workers complied with the fall protection regulations, and also failed to ensure that its workers were provided with the information, instruction, and training necessary to ensure their health and safety at the workplace. These are repeated violations.
Company: Handy Man Contracting Ltd., Fort Saint John
Classification unit: House or other wood frame construction or renovation work
Amount: $3,208
Date of penalty: November 10, 2008
This firm repeatedly failed to ensure that its workers complied with the fall protection regulations and were provided with the information, instruction, and training necessary to ensure their health and safety at the workplace.
Company: PTC Construction Ltd., Williams Lake
Classification unit: Plastering or stucco work
Amount: $2,678
Date of penalty: November 10, 2008
Repeated violations. Inadequate construction of wood scaffolding.
Company: Gurinder Chohan Construction & Framing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: November 6, 2008
Multiple violations. Three violations within a seven-month period were identified pertaining to the failure to provide a stairway with framing, treads, and a handrail to each floor level before proceeding with construction of the next floor or deck surface.
Company: Paraline Commercial Form Work Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Structural concrete forming
Amount: $7,965
Date of penalty: November 6, 2008
This employer failed repeatedly to ensure that its workers wear personal protective equipment, particularly safety headgear wherever there is a danger of head injury. It also failed to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their health and safety.
Company: Core Pipelines Ltd., Dawson Creek
Classification unit: Oil or gas pipeline construction or repair
Amount: $64,077
Date of penalty: November 6, 2008
A tracked, flat-decked vehicle being used to transport workers spun out of control while attempting to climb a 32 to 35 percent sloped hill covered in ice. The cab spun out, the engine stalled, and without braking power, the vehicle slid downhill and struck a tree. All of the workers sustained broken bones and/or bruises. The vehicle was inappropriate for transporting workers under the conditions at the site. The firm failed to ensure the health and safety of workers as required by section 115(1) of the Workers Compensation Act.
Company: Brian Hubert Green, Powell River
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $3,250
Date of penalty: November 5, 2008
A worker was seen about 6 m (20 ft.) above the ground, working to cut and apply roofing felt to a plywood roof. The worker was not using a fall protection system, although fall protection equipment was available on site. Further deficiencies included the absence of guardrails on the second floor, thereby exposing numerous workers to a fall of about 4.6 m (15 ft.), a lack of hand rails on the stairwells to the second floor and basement, a metal frame scaffold not appropriately assembled or secured to the building, workers not wearing safety headgear while exposed to overhead hazards, workers wearing running shoes, unguarded energized electrical equipment, no designated first aid attendant, no first aid procedures, and several other violations involving orientations and training, hearing protection, and a required Notice of Project. Numerous contraventions of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation, including high-risk, repeated violations of fall protection requirements.
Company: JSN Construction Ltd., Maple Ridge
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $8,071
Date of penalty: November 4, 2008
Repeated non-compliance. The employer failed to adhere to fall protection requirements for work over 3 m (10 ft.).
Company: Quadri Projects Ltd., Chilliwack
Classification unit: House or other wood frame construction or renovation work
Amount: $6,054
Date of penalty: November 4, 2008
Two young workers were working in an unshored trench. This employer failed to properly shore a trench 4 m (13 ft.) deep, 2 m (7 ft.) wide, and 18.3 m (60 ft.) long. The employer had neither instructed nor trained the workers with respect to safe work procedures or requirements for trenching.
Company: Norco Enterprises Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $6,638
Date of penalty: November 3, 2008
This firm repeatedly violated the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation, section 20.79(1). Steps were not taken to locate underground utilities before excavating. An excavator operator working for the firm contacted a 25-kV underground electrical conduit, exposing himself and another worker to the danger of electrocution.
Company: HB Roofing Ltd., Delta
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $6,283
Date of penalty: October 28, 2008
A worker was on a ladder-jack scaffold that ranged from 2 to 6 m (7 to 19 ft.) above grade. The worker was not using any fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements and the requirement to provide workers with adequate information, instruction, training, and supervision.
Company: HB Roofing Ltd., Delta
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $8,975
Date of penalty: October 28, 2008
Two workers were on an 8:12 pitch roof about 3.5 m (12 ft.) above grade. They were not using any fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the requirement to ensure that workers use a fall protection system for work at heights of 3 m (10 ft.) or more.
Company: Halston Homes Ltd., Kamloops
Classification unit: House or other wood frame construction or renovation work
Amount: $1,758
Date of penalty: October 16, 2008
Repeated non-compliance. This employer failed to adhere to fall protection requirements for work over 3 m (10 ft.).
Company: V.S.M. Construction Ltd., Chilliwack
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $18,184
Date of penalty: October 14, 2008
Repeated violation. This firm failed to ensure two of its workers were wearing fall protection while working at a height from which a fall of 9 m (30 ft.) or more could occur.
Company: 0800312 B.C. Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: October 14, 2008
Repeated violation. This firm failed to ensure its worker was wearing fall protection while working at the edge of a roof about 4.6 m (15 ft.) above grade. The roof pitch was about 8:12.
Company: Anton Van De Pol & Berdina Van De Pol, Chilliwack
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $6,452
Date of penalty: October 9, 2008
Repeated violation. This firm failed to ensure its worker was wearing fall protection while working at the edge of a 10:12 sloped roof that was 10.45 m (34 ft.) above grade.
Company: Human Resources Capital Group Inc., Delta
Classification unit: Construction labour supply or general labour supply
Amount: $26,846
Date of penalty: September 25, 2008
Serious injury. This employer failed to ensure workers exposed to forklift traffic wore high-visibility apparel. The employer repeatedly failed to take reasonable steps to ensure the health and safety of workers, including the repeated failure to provide information, training, and supervision to ensure their safety.
Company: Leemac Electric Ltd., Courtenay
Classification unit: Electrical work
Amount: $4,847.47
Date of penalty: September 23, 2008
Two of this firm's workers were on a scissor lift, removing neon signs from a building. The electrical energy source for the signs had not been locked out as required. This was a high-risk violation. The firm failed to provide its workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
Company: Milne Roofing Ltd., Nanaimo
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $14,194
Date of penalty: September 16, 2008
Four workers were seen working without any means of fall protection on a sloped roof about 5.5 m (18 ft.) above grade. The workers had not been properly informed, trained, or supervised. This was a repeat violation.
Company: 599294 BC Ltd., Kamloops
Classification unit: House or other wood frame construction or renovation work
Amount: $1,000
Date of penalty: September 9, 2008
The owner/prime contractor of this multi-employer worksite failed to coordinate and put in place a system to ensure compliance with the regulations regarding fall protection, safety headgear, and first-aid equipment and services.
Company: Johal Roofing Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 29, 2008
Two workers were observed on the edge of a 4:12 sloped roof at heights 6 m (20 ft.) above grade with no means of fall protection. Repeated non-compliance with the fall-protection requirements and the requirement to provide workers with adequate information, instruction, training, and supervision to ensure their health and safety.
Company: B. Cheema Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,186
Date of penalty: August 28, 2008
Four workers were on a roof 4.5 to 8.5 m (15 to 28 ft.) above grade. They were not using any fall protection. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements and the requirement for a written fall protection plan where a fall of 7.5 m (25 ft.) or more may occur. This firm also failed to comply with the requirement to provide workers with the necessary information, instruction, training, and supervision to ensure their health and safety.
Company: Coast to Coast Roofing & Rubbish Removal Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 27, 2008
Repeated non-compliance with the regulation requiring the employer ensure a fall-protection system is used for work done where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more may occur. Similar non-compliance with the Worker's Compensation Act regarding the health and safety of all this employer's workers and any other workers at a workplace where that employer's work is being done.
Company: T & N Roofing Ltd., Kamloops
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,197
Date of penalty: August 20, 2008
Two workers were observed working more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade without using adequate fall protection.
Company: A-1 Jas Roofing Ltd., Anmore
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $14,086
Date of penalty: August 20, 2008
This employer's workers were working 7 to 8 m (23 to 26 ft.) above grade without fall protection. The employer failed to ensure the use of a fall protection system for work where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more could occur. This was a repeated violation.
Company: Canadian Forest Products Ltd., MacKenzie
Classification unit: Sawmill
Amount: $15,000
Date of penalty: August 19, 2008
An inspection revealed that guarding deficiencies still existed after being observed a year ago. Repeated non-compliance with safeguarding requirements and a failure to comply with previous orders in a timely manner. This employer's number of violations indicates a lack of commitment toward compliance.
Company: Nelson Stanley Hanson, Courtenay
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,731
Date of penalty: August 19, 2008
Four workers and the firm's owner were observed on a roof about 3.5 m (11 ft. 5 in.) above grade without a fall-protection system in place. Repeated non-compliance with the fall-protection requirements and the requirement to provide workers with adequate information, instruction, training, and supervision to ensure their health and safety.
Company: Mainland Roofing Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $15,000
Date of penalty: August 18, 2008
The employer failed to ensure a fall-protection system was being used for work done where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more might occur. This was a repeat violation.
Company: Day & Knight Plumbing & Heating Ltd., White Rock
Classification unit: Plumbing, heating, vent, residential air conditioning, or central vacuum system installation or repair
Amount: $2,132
Date of penalty: August 12, 2008
Repeated non-compliance with the first-aid requirements of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation.
Company: Shane Larue Petitt & Cristina Mimi Petitt
Classification unit: House or other wood frame construction or renovation work
Amount: $1,750
Date of penalty: August 12, 2008
One of the partners of the firm was observed working approximately 6 m (20 ft.) above ground level on a 6:12 pitch roof without the use of fall protection. The firm was aware that fall protection was required. The firm had been inspected approximately two months earlier, and an order was issued at that time for violation of fall-protection regulatory requirements. The violation underlying this penalty was high-risk, committed willfully or with reckless disregard of the Regulation.
Company: Mars Framing Services Ltd., Vancouver
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $5,754.35
Date of penalty: August 11, 2008
Two of this firm's workers were working without any form of fall protection at the edge of an unfinished floor 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Peter Funk, Surrey
Classification unit: House or other wood frame construction or renovation work
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 11, 2008
A worker was observed on a 12:12 sloped roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without a fall-protection system in place. Repeated non-compliance with the fall-protection requirements.
Company: Skytech Enterprises Inc., Victoria
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: August 8, 2008
This firm's worker was working without fall protection at the edge of a roof about 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. This was a repeated violation of the fall protection requirements.
Company: Roza E. Lutsenko & Simon J. Lutsenko
Classification unit: House or other wood frame construction or renovation work
Amount: $6,822
Date of penalty: August 1, 2008
Injury. A worker was injured when he fell from the top plate of a two-storey residential house wall approximately 5.5 m (18 ft.) above ground. The worker was standing on the top plate receiving trusses up to 6.4 m (21 ft.) in length and 2.4 m (8 ft.) in height without a fall-protection system in place. The employer showed non-compliance with the fall-protection requirements and repeated non-compliance with the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their health and safety.
Company: Kurtis Contracting Ltd.
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 31, 2008
A worker and the firm owner were observed working on a roof about 11 m (36 ft.) above ground without a fall-protection system in place. Repeat non-compliance with the fall-protection requirements.
Company: Nathen Poittris
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 31, 2008
Two workers and the firm owner were observed at the edge of a roof approximately 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without a fall-protection system in place. Repeat non-compliance with the fall-protection requirements.
Company: Thomas Plett and Shelter Homes Inc.
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,978
Date of penalty: July 30, 2008
The employer failed to ensure a fall-protection system for work being done where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more may occur. This was a repeat violation.
Company: Dai Chong Roofing & Construction Ltd.
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 25, 2008
A worker was observed standing on a sloped roof 4.9 m (16 ft.) above grade without a fall-protection system in place. Repeat non-compliance with the fall-protection requirements.
Company: Gurdip S. Nizher
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $5,000
Date of penalty: July 23, 2008
Repeat non-compliance with the regulation requiring the employer ensure a fall-protection system is used while work is being done at a place from which a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more may occur.
Company: A.V. Jay-Roofing Ltd.
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,750
Date of penalty: July 14, 2008
A supervisor and a worker were on a 12:12 pitch roof approximately 4.9 m (16 ft.) above the ground. Neither was using fall protection. Both the workers were using a toe board to stand on the roof. In total, three toe boards were on the roof, ranging from 2.4 to 4.9 m (8 to 16 ft.) above grade. A worker slipped and almost fell while attempting to descend from the uppermost toe board.
Company: Specialty Roofing Ltd., Kamloops
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $3,500
Date of penalty: July 10, 2008
Repeated non-compliance. A worker and the firm owner were observed working on a roof about 3.9 m (12 ft, 10.5 in.) above grade without a fall protection system in place. The employer has shown repeated non-compliance with the fall protection requirements.
Company: Dosanjh Construction Ltd.
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 10, 2008
Two workers were observed conducting framing activities on a roof approximately 7.6 m (25 ft.) above grade with no fall-protection system in place. The firm's supervisor was on site at the time of the violation. The employer has a history of non-compliance with the fall-protection requirements. The employer also failed to have a written fall-protection plan for the workplace involving work done at a height of 7.6 m (25 ft.) or more, and to provide adequate information, instruction, training, and supervision to ensure the health and safety of workers.
Company: Dosanjh Construction Ltd.
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: July 10, 2008
A worker and the firm owner were observed working near the edge of a roof approximately 6 m (20 ft.) above grade without a fall protection system in place. The employer has a history of violations of the fall-protection requirements.
Company: Manraj Framing & Construction Ltd.
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,920
Date of penalty: June 24, 2008
Repeat non-compliance with the regulation requiring a fall-protection system for work conducted where a fall of 3 m (10 ft.) or more may occur.
Company: R & D Roofing and Siding Ltd.
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $8,303
Date of penalty: June 17, 2008
A worker was working on a roof without a first-aid attendant on site. Supervision of the worker was inadequate, since the firm owner was the only supervisor on site and was working on the roof alongside the worker. Repeat violations of first-aid requirements and the requirement to provide workers with adequate information, instruction, training, and supervision to ensure their workplace health and safety.
Company: Paradise Roofing Ltd., Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $3,500
Date of penalty: June 10, 2008
Workers were exposed to fall hazards ranging from about 4.1 m to more than 7.6 m (13.5 ft. to over 25 ft.). This employer has repeatedly violated the fall protection requirements.
Company: Pedre Contractors Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $42,052.83
Date of penalty: June 5, 2008
Two of this firm's workers were in an unsloped, unshored excavation about 3 m (9 ft.) deep. The firm did not ensure that a professional engineer had approved the excavation as safe for worker entry.
Company: Marta Zilberts
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $9,973
Date of penalty: June 4, 2008
Repeat violation of Section 11.2(1)(a) of the Regulation pertaining to fall protection requirements.
Company: CCM Construction Ltd.
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential construction
Amount: $17,687
Date of penalty: June 2, 2008
A worker was working at the edge of a roof 6 m (20 ft.) above an asphalt surface without the use of fall protection. Despite having been found in violation of the fall protection regulations on several occasions in the past, the firm failed to provide the worker with adequate training, instruction, and supervision.
Company: Specialty Roofing Ltd.
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: June 2, 2008
Repeat violation for failure to ensure a fall protection system is in place and used when working 3 m (10 ft.) or more above grade.
Company: Weldworks Inc.
Classification unit: Finishing carpentry
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: May 29, 2008
Failure to ensure the health and safety of all workers working for the employer. A worker was fatally injured after falling approximately 10.5 m (35 ft.) from the fourth level of a storage racking system that was being constructed. No fall protection system was in place to prevent the fall.
Company: Masa Properties Ltd. & Dale M.R. Holdings et al
Classification unit: House or other wood frame construction or renovation work
Amount: $22,820
Date of penalty: May 29, 2008
A framer fell through the successive openings in the third- and second-level floors to the basement concrete floor below. The worker died two days after the incident. The firm failed to do everything reasonably practicable to establish and maintain a system to ensure compliance with the Act and regulations (specifically, fall protection requirements). The firm's violation in not meeting its supervisory obligations exposed workers to a high risk of serious injury or death.
Company: Community Roofing Co. Ltd.
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $20,080
Date of penalty: May 2, 2008
Failure to use a means of fall protection when working at elevations over 3 m (10 ft.). One worker and a site supervisor were working without fall protection at the edge of a roof 5.5 m (18 ft.) above ground. The firm has been found in violation of the fall protection regulations on several occasions in the past.
Company: Pro Flo Drainage & Landscape Contracting Ltd.
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $2,651
Date of penalty: April 15, 2008
This employer has failed to train, instruct, and supervise workers. This has resulted in workers being exposed to the high-risk activity of performing tasks in a trench 2 m (7 ft.) deep and 5.5 m (18 ft.) long with no shoring.
Company: Harvard Rental Corporation
Classification unit: Scaffolding, tent, staging, or display booth rental and installation
Amount: $5,114
Date of penalty: April 15, 2008
A worker was moving heavy cement blocks while wearing running shoes rather than safety-toed footwear. The firm had previously been found in violation of numerous sections of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation relating to footwear, first aid, and buildings and structures and failed to comply with previous orders within a reasonable time.
Company: Rite-way Roofing Ltd.
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,012
Date of penalty: April 15, 2008
Despite a director of the firm being on site in a vehicle that contained fall protection equipment, a worker was observed on a steep sloped roof, over 6 m (20 ft.) to grade, without using any form of fall protection.
Company: Supersave Construction Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: April 4, 2008
A pneumatic power nailer misfired, resulting in a worker nearly losing an eye. The nailer had misfired before and was not properly outfitted with a nose guard even after a worker was previously injured. This employer showed repeated non-compliance of the requirement to maintain equipment.
Company: Proline Roofing Ltd.
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $15,078
Date of penalty: April 1, 2008
Three workers without fall protection worked on a steep-sloped roof greater than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade (7.6 m or 25 ft. at the peak). The likelihood of injury, serious injury, or death in the event of a fall was high, and exacerbated owing to construction debris strewn over the ground below.
Company: Zenith Roofing Ltd., 5857 152nd Street, Surrey
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: March 31, 2008
The employer violated the fall protection regulations when applying roofing materials at heights more than 3 m (10 ft.) above grade, despite receiving several orders and warnings from various officers in the preceding year. A director of the firm injured himself when he lost his balance and fell approximately 4 m (13 ft.) from a steep sloped roof. He was not using fall protection.
Company: R & D Roofing and Siding Ltd., Careenage Quay, 216 Russell Road, Victoria
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $4,005
Date of penalty: March 20, 2008
Six workers, including the firm's owner, were observed demolishing and re-roofing a house at elevations between 3.5 and 5 m (12 and 20 ft.). Two workers were incorrectly using fall protection equipment, while the other four used none at all. The firm has a prior history of non-compliance.
Company: Scuka Enterprises Ltd., 1945 Baron Road, Kelowna
Classification unit: House or other wood frame construction or renovation work
Amount: $7,797
Date of penalty: March 19, 2008
A worker was injured when he fell 2.5 m (8 ft.) off an unsecured forklift-elevated work platform. The lift truck operator had not been trained to the required standard and the elevated worker was not wearing a personal fall arrest system when working on an elevated work platform. This was a repeat violation.
Company: LP Tile Roofing Co. Ltd., August Views, 164 Maple Drive, Port Moody
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $5,869
Date of penalty: March 17, 2008
Serious injury. A worker fell approximately 9 m (30 ft.) to grade from a residential construction roof. A site inspection revealed that this worker was not wearing fall protection, nor was there any evidence of supervision or a site-specific fall protection plan.
Company: LP Tile Roofing Co. Ltd., 22720 Westminster Highway, Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,630
Date of penalty: March 17, 2008
Three workers were observed working at elevations from 4.5 to 7 m (15 to 23 ft.), on a roof with steep slopes varying between 8:12 and 10:12. None of the workers were using fall protection correctly, nor were they able to demonstrate proper fall protection methods.
Company: Newway Concrete Forming Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Structural concrete forming
Amount: $14,135
Date of penalty: March 4, 2008
This firm failed to maintain the required safe limits of approach to 12-kV overhead power lines.
Company: Trevor Harrison Construction Ltd., 1501 10th Avenue, Salmon Arm
Classification unit: House or other wood frame construction or renovation work
Amount: $2,784
Date of penalty: March 3, 2008
The firm's director and worker were working 5 m (17 ft.) above grade, on the top plate of a second-storey wall of a house under construction, without using fall protection. The director was standing close to the edge while helping to land a load of wooden trusses.
Company: Mainland Roofing Ltd., 10455 Williams Road, Richmond
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $7,500
Date of penalty: February 29, 2008
A worker was observed on the edge of a 12:12 roof at heights between 3 and 10 m (11 and 32 ft.) above grade with no means of fall protection. Repeat non-compliance with fall protection requirements and the requirement to provide workers with adequate information, instruction, training, and supervision.
Company: Johnson Bros. Roofing Ltd., 797 Tyee Road, Victoria
Classification unit: Low slope roofing
Amount: $3,480
Date of penalty: February 28, 2008
A worker was observed installing flashing on a structure, approximately 6 m (20 ft.) above grade. The worker had combined elements of fall restraint and fall arrest systems, rendering the fall protection used ineffective.
Company: Nor-Kam's Investments Ltd., 1449 16th Avenue, Campbell River
Classification unit: Structural concrete forming
Amount: $7,372
Date of penalty: February 26, 2008
Repeat non-compliance with requirements for fall protection, work platforms, and engineers' inspections of concrete formwork. A worker was observed climbing a gang form approximately 7.5 m (25 ft.) above grade without fall protection.
Company: 625845 B.C. Ltd., Richmond
Classification unit: Industrial, commercial, institutional, or highrise residential general contracting or construction
Amount: $33,351
Date of penalty: February 25, 2008
Asbestos exposure. The employer failed to identify the friable asbestos-containing materials that were damaged during interior demolition work, thereby exposing several workers to asbestos fibres.
Company: Mandrax Enterprises Ltd., Westridge Estates, Williams Lake
Classification unit: Land clearing, excavation, or site surface preparation
Amount: $4,196
Date of penalty: February 19, 2008
Failure to adequately slope the sides of a 2 m (6 ft.) excavation. Workers were observed in an inadequately sloped excavation, dug in loose soil with fill piled several feet high on one side. In addition, a 15 t excavator was being operated near the edge of the excavation. This was a high-risk violation.
Company: Fraser Shipyard & Industrial Centre Ltd., New Westminster
Classification unit: Commercial marine vessel manufacture, service, or repair
Amount: $9,120
Date of penalty: February 13, 2008
The employer had failed to implement an effective and compliant confined-space entry program as evidenced by identifiable non-compliance with training, hazard assessment, procedures, testing frequency, rescue plans, and equipment with regard to confined-space entry work.
Company: Olde Towne Roofing Ltd., Latoria Walk, 631 Brookside, Colwood
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $2,500
Date of penalty: February 7, 2008
A worker was observed working at an elevation of approximately 9 m (30 ft.) and was not using an effective means of fall protection. The worker was exposed to a high risk of serious injury from a fall.
Company: Newway Concrete Forming Ltd., Burnaby
Classification unit: Structural concrete forming
Amount: $22,669
Date of penalty: February 6, 2008
This firm failed to ensure that a tower crane did not encroach on the safe limits of approach to energized overhead power lines. It also failed to ensure that workers were adequately instructed, trained, and supervised.
Company: Rock Construction and Mining Inc., Kamloops
Classification unit: Blasting or avalanche control
Amount: $18,436
Date of penalty: January 25, 2008
Four dangerous incidents involving fly rock have occurred at this blasting site in the last 10 months, each of which endangered people and property within and outside the blasting area. Repeated dangerous incidents involving fly rock and continued non-compliance with blasting regulations at this site.
Company: 618489 BC Ltd., 3138 Roycroft Court, Burnaby
Classification unit: Steep slope roofing
Amount: $4,292
Date of penalty: January 22, 2008
Repeat failure to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their health and safety. The employer committed ongoing violations that placed workers at risk from falls of 3 m (10 ft.) or more.
Company: Bornau Construction Ltd., Westbank
Classification unit: Framing or residential forming
Amount: $23,149.70
Date of penalty: January 8, 2008
This firm's worker was working more than 9 m (30 ft.) above grade without any form of fall protection. This was a repeated high-risk violation of the fall protection requirements as well as the requirement to provide workers with the information, instruction, training, and supervision necessary to ensure their safety.
You can return to the Top of this page