Violation Detail
Standard Cited: 5A0001 OSH Act General Duty Paragraph
Inspection Nr: 308653658
Citation: 01001
Citation Type: Serious
Abatement Date: 09/28/2006 X
Initial Penalty: $6,300.00
Current Penalty: $3,150.00
Issuance Date: 09/22/2006
Nr Instances: 1
Nr Exposed: 1
Related Event Code (REC): A
Gravity: 10
Report ID: 0636900
Contest Date: 10/16/2006
Final Order: 02/20/2007
Emphasis:
Type | Latest Event | Event Date | Penalty | Abatement Due Date | Citation Type | Failure to Abate Inspection |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Penalty | J: ALJ Decision | 02/20/2007 | $3,150.00 | 09/28/2006 | Serious | |
Penalty | Z: Issued | 09/22/2006 | $6,300.00 | 09/28/2006 | Serious |
Text For Citation: 01 Item/Group: 001 Hazard: CRUSHING
Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment free from recognized hazards that were causing, or likely to cause, death or serious physical harm to employees. On or about July 17, 2006 at a construction site located at 4380 Throne Hall Drive, Frisco, Texas, the employer failed to implement adequate measures/procedures to ensure that unauthorized person(s) are kept clear from the operating area and/or swing area of machinery such as but not limited to a Komatsu PC300LC hydraulic excavator. Among other means, some feasible and acceptable abatement methods to correct this hazard are: 1. Develop and implement procedures to ensure that operators follow manufacturer's warning labels and follow safety warnings that are provided in the manufacturer's operators manual. 2. Develop a written job hazard analysis on the safe practices of installing pipes/utilities in trenches/excavations and to include the use of safety monitors/signalmen or barricades during this process. 3. Develop and effectively implement procedures to ensure that management review/critique the safety certification/re-certification of heavy machinery operators program. Note: The employer is not limited to the abatement methods suggested above but is responsible for the selection and carrying out of an appropriate method. OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE: 29 CFR 1926.550(a)(9): Accessible area(s) within the swing radius of the rear of the rotating superstructure of an excavator were not barricaded in such a manner as to prevent employees from being struck or crushed by the excavator. On or about July 17, 2006 at a construction site located at 4380 Throne Hall Drive, Frisco, Texas, the employer did not provide barricades around the swing radius of the superstructure of the excavator.