FORT BENNING, GA ·
OSHA Inspection: DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Planned inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY in 10480 EIGHTH DIVISION ROAD AMSTA_LCF-B, BLDG 5404, FORT BENNING, GA 31905 (NAICS 928110). OSHA activity number 339867293.
OSHA opens inspections for many reasons: routine scheduling under a national or local emphasis program, an employee complaint or referral, or a follow-up after a reported injury. Opening or conducting an inspection is not itself an allegation or a finding that this employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.
Where did this inspection happen?
- Establishment
- DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
- Site address
- 10480 EIGHTH DIVISION ROAD AMSTA_LCF-B, BLDG 5404
- City
- FORT BENNING
- State
- GA
- ZIP
- 31905
- Mailing
- 10480 EIGHTH DIVISION ROAD AMSTA_LCF-B, BLDG 5404, FORT BENNING, GA 31905
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Planned (H)
- Scope
- Complete (A)
- Discipline
- Safety
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- Union (A)
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 928110
- Employees
- 310
- Ownership type
- Federal government (D)
Citations
6 citations on file for this inspection.
1910.132 D01 I
- Issued
- Sep 24, 2014
- Abate by
- Oct 6, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.132(d)(1)(i): When the employer had assessed the workplace hazard(s) and determined that hazard(s) were present, the employer did not select and/or use the types of personal protective equipment that would protect the affected employee from the hazards of falling: a) Buildings 9111, 9116: The employer did not ensure employees working from elevated surfaces were protected from falling to the lower level by the use of appropriated personal protective equipment or other measures. Employees were exposed to fall hazards of approximately 7 1/2 feet.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $0
1910.184 D
- Issued
- Sep 24, 2014
- Abate by
- Oct 6, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.184(d): Each day before being used, the sling and all fastenings and attachments were not being inspected for damage or defects by a competent person designated by the employer: a) In buildings 9111, 9116, 5405, 5415, the employer failed to establish and follow a program of frequent and periodic inspections of slings to ensure structural integrity.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $0
1910.184 E03 I
- Issued
- Sep 24, 2014
- Abate by
- Oct 6, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.184(e)(3)(i): Thorough periodic inspections of alloy steel chain slings in use were not made on a regular basis: a) In buildings 9111, 9116, 5405, 5415: In addition to the inspection required by paragraph (d) of this section, a thorough periodic inspection of alloy steel chain slings in use were not made on a regular basis as determined by (A) frequency of sling use; (B) severity of service conditions; (C) nature of lifts being made; and (D) experience gained on the service life of slings used in similar circumstances.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $0
1910.184 C14
- Issued
- Sep 24, 2014
- Abate by
- Oct 6, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.184(c)(14): The employer allowed for slings without affixed and legible identification markings to be used: a) In buildings 9111, 9116, 5405, 5415, slings used in conjunction with hoisting systems, did not have legible markings that indicated information such as, but not limited to: safe working loads, grade, rated capacity, reach, and the number of legs.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $0
1960.8 A
- Issued
- Sep 24, 2014
- Abate by
- Oct 6, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1960.8(a): The Agency head did not furnish employment and a place of employment to each employee that were free from recognized hazards that caused or were likely to cause death or serious physical harm, in that; employees were exposed to struck-by hazards: a) In buildings 9111, 9116, 5405, 5415, the employer failed to establish and follow a program of frequent inspections of cranes and hoisting systems to ensure mechanical, and structural integrity.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $0
1910.178 L04 III
- Issued
- Sep 24, 2014
- Abate by
- Oct 6, 2014
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.178(l)(4)(iii): An evaluation of each powered industrial truck operator's performance was not being conducted at least once every three years: a) Wheel Division: Employees who operate forklifts had not been evaluated on their operating performance within the workplace since their initial training and evaluation.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (O) $0
More inspections at Department of the Army
View Department of the Army's full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 928110)
More inspections in GA
Source
This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). OSHA publishes its own view of this case as inspection number 339867293.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.