Violation Detail
Standard Cited: 5A0001 OSH Act General Duty Paragraph
Inspection Nr: 103628772
Citation: 01001
Citation Type: Serious
Abatement Date: 02/20/1999 X
Initial Penalty: $4,500.00
Current Penalty: $4,500.00
Issuance Date: 10/29/1998
Nr Instances: 1
Nr Exposed: 2
Related Event Code (REC): A
Gravity: 10
Report ID: 0626300
Contest Date:
Final Order:
Emphasis:
Type | Latest Event | Event Date | Penalty | Abatement Due Date | Citation Type | Failure to Abate Inspection |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Penalty | I: Informal Settlement | 11/20/1998 | $4,500.00 | 02/20/1999 | Serious | |
Penalty | Z: Issued | 10/29/1998 | $4,500.00 | 12/17/1998 | Serious |
Text For Citation: 01 Item/Group: 001 Hazard: STRUCK BY
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 were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees in that employees were exposed to: Employees working on and near a telescoping cable television tower were exposed to the recognized hazard of "falling from an elevated position" or being "struck by" the tower during collapse. The employer did not take adequate measures to control employee(s) exposure, in that: a) The employer's own policy concerning the climbing of towers was not fully enforced. The policy stated "under no circumstances shall anyone attempt to climb a telescoping tower in the future. Do not climb these towers under any circumstances." b) Inspection of the tower and antenna supporting structures was deficient in development, implementation and maintenance. Qualified personnel were not available to perform inspections regularly and/or prior to work activities. The potential for "falling from an elevated position" or being "struck by" was demonstrated by the following instance: On July 9, 1998 a thirty-eight foot telescoping cable television tower located in Franklin county Texas collapsed. One employee, who was secured to the top of the tower with fall protection equipment, fell with the tower as it collapsed. Among other methods, recognized and feasible means of abatement to correct this hazard include, but are not limited to: a) Full implementation of the employer's "no tower climbing" policy coupled with the use of an aerial lift, bucket truck or other similar device for any work activity associated with the tower at elevations of six feet or more above the ground. b) Development, implementation and maintenance of a regular inspection program, by qualified personnel, to inspect the tower, antenna and supporting structure as required by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Electronic Industries Association (EIA) Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) standard 222-E-1991 (Structural Standards for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting Structures), with particular attention to Section 14 (Maintenance and Inspection). IN THE ALTERNATIVE: 29 CFR 1926.20(b)(1): The employer did not initiated and maintain such programs as may be necessary to comply with this part: a) Full implementation of the employer's "no tower climbing" policy coupled with the use of an aerial lift or bucket truck for any work activity associated with the tower at elevations of six feet or more above the ground. b) Development, implementation and maintenance of a regular inspection program, by qualified personnel, to inspect towers and antenna supporting structures as required by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Electronic Industries Association (EIA) Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) standard 222-E-1991 (Structural Standards for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting Structures), with particular attention to Section 14 (Maintenance and Inspection).