Violation Detail
Standard Cited: 5A0001 OSH Act General Duty Paragraph
Inspection Nr: 305871477
Citation: 01001
Citation Type: Serious
Abatement Date: 05/01/2003 X
Initial Penalty: $6,300.00
Current Penalty: $4,725.00
Issuance Date: 02/24/2003
Nr Instances: 1
Nr Exposed: 30
Related Event Code (REC):
Gravity: 10
Report ID: 0420600
Contest Date:
Final Order:
Emphasis:
| Type | Latest Event | Event Date | Penalty | Abatement Due Date | Citation Type | Failure to Abate Inspection |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Penalty | I: Informal Settlement | 03/18/2003 | $4,725.00 | 05/01/2003 | Serious | |
| Penalty | Z: Issued | 02/24/2003 | $6,300.00 | 04/10/2003 | 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 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 the hazard of being struck by moving motor vehicles while crossing active traffic lanes: a) during the performance of their assigned daily work activities, Security Officers must cross active traffic lanes to access the ID check station and the security building. This process was observed on or about October 9th and 17th, 2002 and December 16th, 2002 at all three Port of Tampa checkpoints manned by Fox Protective Services. Abatement Note(s): Reasonable and adequate methods to abate this hazard exist, and may include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Engineering Controls. (i) Incorporation of overhead walkways or tunnels into new or renovated checkpoint designs and construction, such as to eliminate the need to cross active traffic lanes. (ii) Installation of appropriate types of mirrors (such as parabolic) at appropriate heights and angles at the checkpoint and the security building to provide frontal visibility to both drivers of high cab vehicles and the security officer checking IDs. Appropriate placement will not cause significant glare and will reduce accumulation of dust/grime. Mirrors may also be installed to permit crossing employees to check for oncoming traffic without entering or closely approaching the lane. (iii) Additionally, installation of a barricade between the security building and vehicular traffic; demarcation of the security building with high visibility paint, cones, or stanchions; and/or, relocation of the security building so that it is not as close to the traffic lane. (iv) Communication to motorists of the potential of crossing employees by the application of crosswalk pavement markings according to MUTCD, Subpart 1A.05. Maintenance of these markings in proper condition is important to indicate crosswalk areas to motorists, employees and other pedestrians. Drivers must be warned of the locations of crosswalks and other hazards where they are not normally evident. Section 3B-18 MUTCD reads, "Since non-intersectional pedestrian crossings are generally unexpected by the motorist, warning signs (Section 2C-31) should be installed and adequate visibility provided by parking prohibitions." The traffic lanes are clearly non-intersectional. Additionally, MUTCD Section 2C-32 recommends the use of pedestrian warning signs to "assist the vehicle operator in defining the specific point of crossing. b. Administrative Controls. (i) Prohibition of employees crossing in front of any vehicles. (ii) A requirement for the security officer checking IDs not to release vehicles until the area in front of a vehicle has been cleared. (iii) Periodic inspection of the workplace by the employer to evaluate employee compliance with lane crossing work rules, with particular emphasis on achieving eye contact and proper communication before proceeding, and the implementation of effective progressive disciplinary action to correct deficiencies. This was a crucial factor in the incident which occurred at the Pindola Point Road checkpoint on October 7th, 2002.
Translate