OSHA Inspection: CLEVELAND CEMENT CONTRACTORS INC.

Issued

May 8, 2012

Abate by

May 9, 2012

Penalty

Initial $6,000 · Current $3,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.701(b):     All protruding reinforcing steel, onto and/or into which employees could fall or come against, was not guarded to eliminate the hazard of impalement:    On or about 12/16/11 during cement pouring operations, the employer did not ensure two rows of rebar that were 3.7 feet above a working deck were guarded or covered to prevent impalement or other serious injuries.

Issued

May 8, 2012

Abate by

May 9, 2012

Penalty

Initial $4,000 · Current $2,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.701(f):     Employee(s) were applying a cement, sand, and water mixture through a pneumatic hose and were not wearing protective head and face equipment:    On or about 12/16/11 during cement pouring operations, the employer did not ensure an employee used face protection while operating a pneumatic hose from a cement pump truck.

Issued

May 8, 2012

Abate by

May 9, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $7,000

General-duty citation text

OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1):     OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1):     The employer shall furnish to each of his employees employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees.    a.  On or about 12/16/11 during the design of a shoring and formwork system for the building of a reinforced concrete parking garage, the employer did not ensure that designed for applied leg loads, allowable leg load capacities, or allowable screw jack extendsions were documented on the design drawings.    Abatement note:  ANSI AI 0.9, 2004 Section 6. Vertical Shoring, 6.1 General, 6.1.1:  The  shoring and re-shoring drawings and/or specifications shall include the maximum allowable loads for which the formwork system is designed.  For example, if screw kacks can be extended to their maximum, as in this case, this should be specified on the design drawings.    b.  On or about 12/16/11, during the erectiion of a shoring land formwork system for the building of a reinforced concrete parking garage, the employer did not ensure employees followed the design of the shoring system and built it in accordance with the design layout, absent documentation of approval by the qualified shoring designer.    Abatement note:  The Scaffolding, Shoring, and Forming Institute Recommended Frame Shoring Erection Procdedures, Section Erection of Frames:  Shoring layouts made by a qualified shoring designer must be strictly adhered to when locating frame legs.  Final Inspection of Erectyed Shoring Equipment:  Make sure that the spac ing between towers and the cross brace spacing of the towers do not exceed the spacings shown on the layout.  For example, if spacing between towers can be between 6 and 7 feet to account for field conditions, as was done in this case, make sure that this is specified ont the design drawings.    c.  On or about 12/16/11, during the erection  and maintaining of a shoring land form work system for the building of a reinforced concfrete parking garage, the employer did not ensure that there was a written report of inspections indicating approval for placement.    Abtement Note:  ABSIA10.9, 2004 Section 7.  Formwork 7.1.2: Formwork shall be inpsectyed by a competent person, prior to, during and  imm ediately after placement of the concrete.    A competent person performing these inspections shall have been approved, in writing, by an engineer.  A written report of the inspections hsall be required.  Concrete shall not be placed until the report on the erect3ed form work indicates approval for placement.

Issued

May 8, 2012

Abate by

May 9, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $7,000

General-duty citation text

1926.703(b)(6):    Base plates, shore heads, extension devices, and adjustment screws were not in firm contact, and secured when necessary, with the foundation and the form:    On or about 12/16/11 and after the collapse, it was observed that certain load bearing aluminum stringers that were part of the forming and shoring system were eccentrically loaded and that stringers used as load bearing elements, between the form work and the shoring towers, were in some places not in firm contact with and positively secured to the flat bvearing plate shore heads.  While the employer contends that the foregoing was caused by the collapse, the employer is to ensure shore heads and similar members are in firm  ontact with foundation and form, as necessary, and that loading bearing aluminum stringers that are part of the forming and shoring system are not eccentrically loaded, unless allowed by design.

Issued

May 8, 2012

Abate by

May 9, 2012

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $0 Reduced

General-duty citation text

1926.703(b)(7):    Shore heads and similar members were subjected to eccentric loading for which they had not been designed:    On or about 12/16/11 and after the collapse, it was observed that certain load bearing aluminum stringers that were part of the forming and shoring system were eccentrically loaded and that stringers used as load bearing elements, between the form work and the shoring towers, were in some places not in firm contact with and positively secured to the flat bvearing plate shore heads.  While the employer contends that the foregoing was caused by the collapse, the employer is to ensure shore heads and similar members are in firm contact with foundation and form, as necessary, and that loading bearing aluminum stringers that are part of the forming and shoring system are not eccentrically loaded, unless allowed by design.