OSHA Inspection: VALLENCOURT CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.

Issued

Dec 5, 2014

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $7,000

General-duty citation text

OSH ACT of 1970 Section 5(a)(1):  The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees in that employees were exposed to struck-by hazards from displacement of slings or loads due to missing latches on hooks attached to material handling equipment such as excavators loaders:    a. On or about June 17, 2014, four legged wire rope sling was equipped with hooks that were manufactured with safety latches, the safety latches were removed exposing the employees to being struck by disengaged loads due to shock loading or slack conditions during suspension hoisting operation using a forklift attachment on a front end loader.  b. On or about June 17, 2014, the manufactured safety latch on the hook used during a suspension hoisting operation was removed from the hook attached to the excavator, exposing the employees to being struck by disengaged loads due to shock loading or slack conditions.

Issued

Dec 5, 2014

Penalty

Initial $6,000 · Current $6,000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.251(a)(6): Each day before being used, and during use, where service conditions warrant, the sling and all fastenings and attachments were not inspected for damage or defects by a competent person, and damaged or defective slings were not immediately removed from service:  a. On or about June 17, 2014, on the east side of the site, employees were using a synthetic sling that had not been inspected for damage or defects by a competent person, exposing employees to a struck by hazard.  The employees were using the synthetic sling to lift the 8 inch 14 feet long sewer pipes and the compaction machine.

Issued

Dec 5, 2014

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.251(e)(1): 29 CFR 1926.251(e)(1):  The employer did not mark or code synthetic web slings as specified in 1926.251(e)(1)(i) through (e)(1)(iii) to show: (i) Name or trademark of manufacturer; (ii) Rated capacities for the type of hitch; or (iii) Type of material:  a. On or about June 17, 2014, on the east side of the site, employees were using a synthetic sling that did not have markings to show the rated capacities, type of material, and the name and/or trademark was not legible, exposing employees to a struck by hazard.

Issued

Dec 5, 2014

Penalty

Initial $6,000 · Current $6,000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.251(e)(8): Synthetic web slings were not immediately removed from service if any of the following conditions specified in 1926.251(e)(8)(i) through (e)(8)(v) were present:  (i) Acid or caustic burns; (ii) Melting or charring of any part of the sling surface; (iii) snags, punctures, tears, or cuts; (iv) broken or worn stitches; or (v) distortion of fittings:  a. On or about June 17, 2014, on the east side of the site, employees were using a synthetic sling that had snags, punctures, tears, and cuts, exposing employees to a struck by hazard.

Issued

Dec 5, 2014

Penalty

Initial $7,000 · Current $7,000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.602(c)(1)(ii): Modifications or additions which affect the capacity or safe operation of the equipment were made without the manufacturer's written approval:  a.  On or about June 17, 2014, the pallet loader attachment used in suspension hoisting operations was used with a four legged wire rope sling that was not attached to the lift points of the pallet loader attachment, the employer slide the D ring of the sling over the right fork blade exposing employees to being struck by the suspended load due load sway, shock loading or load disengagement.

Issued

Dec 5, 2014

Penalty

Initial $3,000 · Current $3,000

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1051(a): Stairways or ladders were not provided at all personnel points of access where there was a break in elevation of 19 inches (48 cm) or more, and no ramp, runway, sloped embankment, or personnel hoist was provided:  a.  On or about June 17, 2014, on the west side of the site, an employee was climbing onto the riser of the manhole, exposing himself to a 38 inch fall hazard.

Issued

Dec 5, 2014

Penalty

Initial $70,000 · Current $43,000 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.651(j)(2): Employees were not protected from excavated or other materials or equipment that could pose a hazard by falling or rolling into excavations, or by a combination of both if necessary:    a. On or about June 17, 2014, employees were working in an 14-foot excavation, where the spoil piles were placed on the leading edge of the excavation and material such as but not limited to large chunks of clay, rock, and other excavated debris were observed rolling or falling back into the excavation, exposing employees to being struck by the material.

Issued

Dec 5, 2014

Penalty

Initial $70,000 · Current $43,000 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 paragraph (b) or (c) of this section:    a.  On or about June 17, 2014, in a 14 foot deep excavation, employees were not protected from cave-in from walls by the use of a protective system.