OSHA Inspection: PIPELINE INDUSTRIES, INC.

Issued

2012-02-27 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-03-01 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $4500.00 · Current $4500.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.200(g)(2):  Traffic control signs or devices used for protection of construction workers did not conform to Part VI of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (AMUTCD"), 1988 Edition, Revision 3, September 3, 1993, FHWA-SA-94-027 or Part VI of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Millenium Edition, December 2000, FHWA:    a)  On or about January 18, 2012, employees were not protected from traffic hazards while working near an intersection in a street where adequate controls were not in place:    1.  Employees were walking in and crossing the street outside of the established traffic control zone area.  2.  Advanced warning signs were not placed on Florida Ave. to alert motorists turning into Dudley Ct. that there was work ahead at the intersection.   3.  An adequate number of traffic control devices was not used around the work area to efectively divert traffic around the area in tha, large gaps existed in the spacing of the cones on the side facing Florida Ave. where a vehicle could drive through.  4.  A traffic control supervisor or other qualified person was not onsite at any time to oversee the set-up of the traffic control zone and implementation of the traffic control plan for the site.    Abatement Note: One acceptable and feasible method of abatement to correct this violation would be to follow Part VI of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Millenium Edition, December 2000, FHWA.

Issued

2012-02-27 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-03-01 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $2700.00 · Current $2700.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.404(f)(6): The path to ground from circuits, equipment, or enclosures was not permanent and continuous:    a)  On or about January 18, 2012, employees were exposed to electrical hazards while using an extension cord that was missing the ground pin.

Issued

2012-02-27 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-03-01 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $4500.00 · Current $1940.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.651(k)(1): Daily inspections of excavations, the adjacent areas, and protective systems were not made by a competent person for evidence of a situation that could have resulted in possible cave-ins, indications of failure of protective systems    a)  On or about January 18, 2012, employees were not protected from cave-in hazards in that, a competent person did not conduct an effective inspection of the excavation site.  The trench that employees were entering contained several hazardous conditions that should have been identified during an inspection including improper installation of hydraulic shoring, placement of spoils within 2 feet of the edge of the trench, and undermining of a sidewalk.

Issued

2012-02-27 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-03-01 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.652(c)(2)(iii): Manufacturer's specifications, recommendations, and limitations, and manufacturer's approval to deviate from the specifications, recommendations, and limitations were not in written form at the jobsite during construction of the protective system:    a)  On or about January 18, 2012, the manufacturer's tabulated data for hydraulic shoring used at the site was not available at the site or referenced during the installation of the shoring.

Issued

2012-02-27 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-03-01 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $12600.00 · Current $7000.00 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.652(a)(1): Each employee in an excavation was not protected from cave-ins by an adequate protective system designed in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.652(c):    a)  On or about January 18, 2012, employees were not protected from cave-in hazards while working in areas of a trench in excess of 5 feet in depth that were not adequately protected by the hydraulic shoring system in use as follows:    1.  The ends of the trenches in the road and in the yard area were unprotected in that no end shores or other means were used to protect these areas.    2.  The vertical shores that were in use were placed as distances in excess of what the manufacturer (Efficiency Production, Inc.) of the shoring requires for horizontal spacing.  The manufacturer also specifies a minimum of 3 shores be used in trenches longer that 8 feet; only one shore was in use in the trench located in the road while employees were working in it.  This trench was measured in excess of 8 feet in length.    Pipeline Industries, Inc. was previously cited for a violation of this Occupational Safety and Health Standard, or its equivalent 29 CFR 1926.652(a)(1) which was contained in OSHA inspection 314659467 Citation 1, Item 3a issued on October 15, 2010 and became a final order on November 18, 2010 with respect to a worksite located at 3046 S. Zenobia Street, Denver CO 80236.

Issued

2012-02-27 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-03-01 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.651(i)(3): Sidewalks, pavements, or appurtenant structures had been undermined and a support system or another method was not provided to protect employees from the possible collapse of such structures:    a)  On or about January 18, 2012, employees were exposed to cave-in hazards while working in an area of a trench in the road where a sidewalk had been undermined and not supported.    Pipeline Industries, Inc. was previously cited for a violation of this Occupational Safety and Health Standard, or its equivalent 29 CFR 1926.651(i)(3) which was contained in OSHA inspection 310589395 Citation 1, Item 2b issued on May 7, 2007 and became a final order on May 25, 2007 with respect to a worksite located at 10101 Ridgegate Parkway, Lone Tree, CO 80124.

Issued

2012-02-27 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-03-01 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.651(j)(2): Protection was not provided by placing and keeping excavated or other materials or equipment at least 2 feet (.61m) from the edge of excavations, or by the use of retaining devices that were sufficient to prevent materials or equipment from falling or rolling into excavations, or by a combination of both if necessary:    a)  On or about January 18, 2012, employees were not protected from injury in that, spoils were not kept back at least 2 feet from the edge of the trench or otherwise retained.    Pipeline Industries, Inc. was previously cited for a violation of this Occupational Safety and Health Standard, or its equivalent 29 CFR 1926.651(j)(2) which was contained in OSHA inspection 314659467 Citation 1, Item 2 issued on October 15, 2010 and became a final order on November 18, 2010 with respect to a worksite located at 3046 S. Zenobia Street, Denver CO 80236.

Issued

2012-02-27 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-03-19 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $900.00 · Current $900.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required respirator use:     a)  On or about January 18, 2012, the employer had not developed and implemented a written respiratory protection to include proper respirator selection, fit testing, maintenance, care, storage, and training program when employees were required to wear respirators (N-95 masks) when performing work acitivities in dusty environments.

Issued

2012-02-27 00:00:00

Abate by

2012-03-19 00:00:00

Penalty

Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:     a)  On or about January 18, 2012, employees were not provided with a medical evaluation prior to being required to use a respirator (N-95).