OSHA Inspection: MARTIN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

Issued

Mar 28, 2013

Penalty

Initial $1,360 · Current $1,360

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.451(c)(2)(v):     The employer used forklifts  to support scaffold platforms without ensuring that the entire platform was attached to the fork and that the forklift was not moved horizontally while the platform was occupied:Note:  Preamble to Subpart L promulgated new paragraph (c)(2)(iv) & (v) in final rule to provide guidance. Added provision requires that in the case of fork-lifts, the entire scaffold platform be secured to the forklift.    a) Packaging & Warehouse Building, Work platform:  On or about February 7, 2013, an employee was working from an elevated work platform that was supported by, but not attached to, the tines of a variable reach rough terrain forklift, exposing employee to a fall hazard of no less than 7 feet.

Issued

Mar 28, 2013

Abate by

Apr 7, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,000 · Current $2,000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.453(b)(2)(v):     A body belt with lanyard attached to the boom or basket was not worn by employee(s) working from an aerial lift.    a) Genie S-40 Boom Lift, Roof -- On or about February 7, 2013, two employees were raised to the roof of a commercial building under construction inside the basket of a Genie S-40 Boom Lift, without the use of a connected body belt or personal fall arrest harness, exposing employees to a fall hazard of no less than 16 feet.

Issued

Mar 28, 2013

Abate by

Apr 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.501(b)(10):     Each employee engaged in roofing activities on low-slope roofs with unprotected sides and edges 6 feet or more above lower levels, was not protected from falling by guardrail systems, safety net systems, personal fall arrest systems, or a combination of warning line system and guardrail system, warning line system and safety net system, or warning line system and personal fall arrest system, or warning line system and safety monitoring system.  Or, on roofs 50-feet (15.25 m) or less in width, each employee was not protected by use of a monitoring system.     a) 7547 Industrial Pkwy Macungie, PA, Roof -- On or about February 7, 2013, two employees were conducting roofing work on a low slope roof of a one-story non-residential structure along the perimeter edge without a guardrail systems, safety net system, or personal fall arrest system, exposing employees to a fall hazard of 7 and 16 feet.