| Inspection Type |
Fat/Cat
|
| Scope |
Complete
|
| Safety/Health |
Safety
|
| Close Conference |
2021-11-09
|
| Case Closed |
2023-02-21
|
Related Activity
| Type |
Accident |
| Activity Nr |
1831310 |
|
| Type |
Inspection |
| Activity Nr |
1563012 |
| Safety |
Yes |
|
| Type |
Inspection |
| Activity Nr |
1562987 |
| Safety |
Yes |
|
| Type |
Inspection |
| Activity Nr |
1563020 |
| Safety |
Yes |
|
Violation Items
| Citation ID |
01001 |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
5A0001 |
| Issuance Date |
2022-05-02 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2022-05-26 |
| Current Penalty |
9426.3 |
| Initial Penalty |
14502.0 |
| Final Order |
2022-05-24 |
| Nr Instances |
3 |
| Nr Exposed |
7 |
| Related Event Code (REC) |
Accident |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1): Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which was free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees, in that employees were exposed to fall, struck-by and crushed-by hazards from structural collapse: a. On or about November 8, 2021, and at times prior, at the commercial construction site in Orange City, Florida: the sixty-six 70-foot span roof trusses were not braced to resist out of plane buckling, leaning and/or collapse due to lack of proper top chord, web member and bottom chord bracing, exposing employees to a struck-by and collapse hazard. b. On or about November 4, 2021, and at times prior, at the commercial construction site in Orange City, Florida: the crew used a 12-foot long spreader bar to hoist, fly and set sixty-six 70-foot span roof trusses, allowing the truss members to bend lateral while being installed, exposing employees to a struck-by and collapse hazard. c. On or about November 3, 2021, and at times prior, at the commercial construction site in Orange City, Florida: the crew anchored their personal fall arrest system to individual trusses, exposing themselves to a struck-by and collapse hazard. |
|
| Citation ID |
01002 |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19260501 B02 I |
| Issuance Date |
2022-05-02 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2022-05-26 |
| Current Penalty |
2828.15 |
| Initial Penalty |
4351.0 |
| Final Order |
2022-05-24 |
| Nr Instances |
3 |
| Nr Exposed |
7 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(2)(i): Each employee who was constructing a leading edge 6 feet or more above lower levels was not protected from falling by guardrail systems, safety net systems, or personal fall arrest systems: Note: If the employer could demonstrate that it was infeasible or created a greater hazard to use these systems, a fall protection plan meeting the requirements of paragraph (k) of 1926.502 should have been developed and implemented. a. On or about November 4, 2021, at the new commercial construction site in Orange City, Florida: during truss erection, the crew standing and/or sitting on roof truss components, such as but not limited to web members and bottom chord of the trusses were not protected from a 21 feet fall hazard by the use of a fall protection system. b. On or about November 8, 2021, and at times prior, at the new commercial construction site in Orange City, Florida: during framing work, the crew standing on the top wall were not protected from a 12 feet fall hazard by the use of a fall protection system. c. On or about November 8, 2021, at the new commercial construction site in Orange City, Florida: on the roof, the crew installing sheathing was not protected from a 12 feet fall hazard by the use of a fall protection system. |
|
|
